Free College - For all or a cap?

Paying for College
21

In Chicago, Community College is free for 2 years if you have a B avg… I would expand that to any student with a C avg. Start a program to help kids with a special program to get them into community College if their GPA is lower, so everyone has a chance. Then, those Community colleges should be feeders to 4 year colleges (for the last 2 years). Those that aren’t community College savy, then technical school waivers.

So many schools have lower student enrollment. So many Lacs having a hard time gaining students. Here’s your solution.

Free 4 year college won’t work on any level. Who’s paying for the amazing world class Professors? Research? Etc.

So… Expand financial aid to $250,000
I am not saying free for families that make this much. But make it easier to pay for college. This would make it much less expensive on everyone including our taxes.

Freeze schools tuition. If free money for financial aid you don’t want schools to falsely raise their price structures.

Schools that have X Billion dollars have to use X amount for tuition reductions.

Included in this is free Healthcare for college students… Maybe up to X amount? Let’s face it… What percentage of your kids actually used their Healthcare to any meaningful way? Besides colds, flu etc. I am sensitive that some have for serious illnesses, but can’t believe it is a very large number.

I will have my team evaluate the “X” in the above… Lol. Running 2020… ???.

22

SUNYs aren’t free.

The NYS Excelsior Grant pays UP TO ~$7500 toward the ~$25k/year cost of attendance. If a family qualifies for a $6000 federal Pell Grant, the student only gets $1500 Excelsior Grant, so the total grant amount is still $7500. And there are a lot of very strict rules that have to be followed. It’s not an easy grant to keep.

23

OP, I don’t know what you mean about “ending all freebies, lowering college cost for all and a college repay income percentage tax for everyone who wants free college.” You want colleges to quit giving grants to lower income families and use that money (and billions more) to subsidize upper income families? Why would they do that?

24

Yes, we tax the rich more. Here is the thing. People are wealthy through two ways. One is high salaries and bonuses. These are the result of the people at the top of every corporation taking a cut from the profits generated by everybody else in the company. That means that they benefit from the use of roads, utilities, and other government services by every single person in the company. So their overall benefits from tax-supported services is far far beyond what the lower paid worker benefit.

The second way is through capital gains. Here they get money that is generated by an even larger segment of the population. Again, they benefit from the services that are utilized by everybody in every corporation for which they own stock. yet they pay far less in taxes for their capital gains than do the people who are actually responsible for their gains.

The people who make millions on grain and stock futures are not the farmers who grow the produce, or the drivers who bring it to market, or any of the people who actually are doing the work.

So the “fair share” owed by the wealthiest Americans in taxes is far far more than what they are now paying.

Here is something else - most of the money that the top 0.01% make is through capital gains, on which they pay less than you pay on your paycheck. So, despite paying a large chunk of their paycheck in taxes, the taxes that they pay on their total income is less than at least half the middle class

If they taxed capital gains at the same level they taxed salaries, and closed the various loopholes which allow people whose wealth is mostly in stocks to end up paying less tax on their income than their tax rate, we’d have enough money for free college for the bottom 50% of the country by income, have enough money to pay for summer meals for the 16 million kid who are on free meals at school, and maybe do something about the healthcare system.

25

The other thing is, it is in the interest of everyone, including the top 10%/1%/0.1% in income and wealth, for there to be opportunity for all, no matter where they landed in the parental birth lottery. As inequality becomes more and more inherited (rather than earned), more waste of talent occurs, leading to a smaller economy and greater resentment that leads desperate people who see no hope in the system to embrace extremist ideologies like racism or communism.

As it is now, college attendance and outcomes are determined by parental money as much as or more than student achievement.

26

Numbers are from 2016.

The top 1% of income earners totalled 2 trillion dollars in income (this of course includes capital gains). They paid under 27% in taxes or over 500 billion dollars in taxes on that income. They paid 37% of all personal income taxes.

What’s their fair share? If we took ALL OF THEIR INCOME we’d have an additional 1.5 trillion a year to spend. If we doubled their taxes to about 54% we’d get an additional 500 billion in taxes.

As stated above free bachelor’s degrees for everyone might cost 360 billion per year. Is that where we should be spending the richest people’s money?

Medicaid for all has been estimated at between 30 and 40 trillion dollars over 10 years, thus doubling our federal expenditures and at an additional 3 to 4 trillion a year potentially costing us more than the entire income of the top 5% of individuals (3.5 trillion).

Student loan forgiveness 1.6 trillion. One time fee

Guaranteed income, $1,000 a month for every adult over 18, 3 trillion per year.

Universal child care for low income families, 1.7 trillion over 10 years.

Universal Pre-K, 26 billion a year.

Of course our national debt keeps going higher and higher. The interest payment on that debt for this year will approach 600 billion dollars. That’s just the interest. That doesn’t pay down the debt that our children now owe.

Where do we stop? The US has a severe spending problem. Imagine if this was your family budget.

So when people can’t afford a private college we steer them towards affordable alternatives but here we are pushing our country further and further in debt instead of cutting costs and looking at cheaper, more realistic alternatives.

The fact is there’s only so.much money to go around. It’s a great topic that could be discussed until the end of times and be looked at a thousand different ways. In the end what’s the right solution? Do we just take all the money from the rich and imagine everything in the future if I’ll just be great?

In my mind that’s just not a real viable solution. Maybe everything shouldn’t be free. Maybe, just maybe, people should have to work for things.

https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2018-update/

27

I am confused by one thing - is most crippling student debt from public colleges or from pricey private colleges? If kids chose to attend the pricey private instead of a more cost reasonable public why are we supposed to forgive their loans. I’m wondering if I’m missing something, I know several students at my kids schools who are going to pricey LACs and not getting the FA they were hoping for. So they will graduate with huge debt. Seems foolish to me but I’m not their parent so I keep quiet. But I’m not sure I want my taxes to go up to get them out of debt in 4 years.

28

So take my plan above and expand free to $100,000 and under and financial aid to $250,000 like I said and the rest… This way it’s not free for everyone. The people that have wealth are still paying. This really just helps the rest of us poor saps. Making college more attainable, kids with less debt. Not bankrupting our system.

29

I don’t like means-tested things like this. Why should the family of 5 with 2 in college that earns $105k lose out when next door the family of 3 with one in college that earns $98k gets free tuition.

if anything, it should be a sliding scale that takes immediate family size into consideration (not grands/relatives or adult children), number in college and income/assets.

But then things become too complicated, too much tracking to do, too much cheating involved…so really best not to means test at all. Treat it like K-12.

I wouldn’t worry about the more affluent people because they’re the ones who’ll more likely opt for private colleges …and the “free college” won’t apply to those.

keep in mind, that once public colleges are “free,” they will likely have more difficult admissions.

30

If you want to invest in human beings, do it at the other end. End poverty. Finance universal preschool. Give free parenting classes. Make the K-12 system even better.

College should be for motivated, achieving students with a passion for learning. There can be full scholarships for the best and brightest students with financial need, such as are currently funded by many of the top colleges; maybe the state can fund more of these, too.

Many students do not like school and struggle to finish twelfth grade. Free college may move the bar, making four more years “expected” of everyone. For the students who don’t love school, it may become a four year “party” away from home— or longer if they have trouble passing classes— at taxpayer expense, while lowering college class quality for everyone else because they are disengaged class members. People value what they pay for. The last thing colleges need are students just going through the motions.

Also, models where tuition is free for families, but room and board are not free, are really subsidizing the middle class, not the poor. Poor families cannot afford the room and board. Underfunded colleges may skimp on room and board aid for the truly poor if they are having trouble meeting expenses because they have to provide free tuition to the children of CE0s, lawyers, and doctors.

The idea of paying for upper middle class and upper class kids who are mediocre students to spend four years partying is a terrible one. Deserving— i.e., highly motivated, academically high-achieving— poor and lower middle to middle class kids should win scholarships based on their merits.

An excellent K-12 education, health care, enough food, and decent shelter should be considered universal “rights.” College? No.

31

110% this. Well said.

32

Also maybe there should be a military component to this. In Israel you have to serve 2 years and you learn valuable skills. Maybe this is in exchange for the free schooling. Maybe the first 2 years can be done in the military. Read https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6885191-start-up-nation

Lots of people use what they learned to create successful businesses. Maybe the military should be where wind, solar, turbine is being taught. After 2 years you have a great useful skill. Others will go on to a 4 year college. Maybe they take pre med or pre engineering there. Maybe there is a coding track? Don’t know just some ideas.

In Chicago there was talk if you couldn’t prove after high school what you were doing like a gap year or community college or trade school then the national guards /military was for you. Much better then joining a gang and maybe learn the discipline for going to college…??

33

There are ROTC scholarships and GI Bill, same can be done for other professions. What seems like biggest waste of money is giving free aid for pre-Med/MD or BS-MD as all of them earn well but don’t pay back for their education nor go back to serve poor or rural communities. There should be a 2-3 year mandatory service.

34

@CupCakeMuffins where is all this “free aid” for doctors?

The programs I know about DO require mandatory service in underserved areas.

@WayOutWestMom knows all the programs.

35

Universal rights are things that DO NOT depend on the work of others to provide.

Life

Liberty

The pursuit of happiness

When someone else’s labor has to provide for you that shouldn’t be a “universal right”.

Why should a doctor, farmer, teacher, carpenter, etc labor for free to provide for others?

Almost everyone is capable of contributing to their own needs. Yes, there should be charity for some but there should be a work ethic for many, many more.

I’m sure this is an unpopular opinion but if we continue to just give more and more we are continuing to grow the massive dependency by large groups. Don’t we want our kids to be strong and independent? Why don’t we want the same for all of our citizens?

Again, people should get a hand up but they should also put in effort for themselves.

As for college payment. Why not require some sort of post graduate service to pay back the money that society provides for college costs? If you want something work hard for it.

36

I would first look at improving the middle school and high school education for these students before we even think of providing “free” college education to the masses. For example, LA unified school districts doesn’t graduate 25% of its HS class, 10% don’t even get past 9th grade.

Let’s improve the quality of the secondary education and get graduation rates close to 100%.

Also, more students should be learning a trade and not wasting time at college. Many jobs don’t require a formal college education.

Lastly, the community colleges are extremely affordable, especially if one lives at home and then you can transfer to a state college. This is a very affordable option for lots of students (4 of 5 of my siblings did just that). You can get a great and affordable college education without having it be “free”.

37

Not everybody lives near a community college.

38

@knowstuff @CupCakeMuffins, How many of your kids have you made enlist in the military before sending them to college?

39

@CupCakeMuffins

There are only 2 programs that pay for a medical education: HPSP and NHSC.

HPSP requires 4-6 years of payback service in one of the branches of the military or as a commissioned officer in the Public Health Service. HPSP recipients must complete a military residency and choose a specialty based upon the needs of the military at the time they enter residency. Service payback begin only after residency has been completed.

NHSC requires a 1-for-1 service payback for any scholarships awarded. (NHSC offers 2, 3 and 4 year scholarships). Scholarship recipients are required to complete a residency in a primary care specialty (FM, IM, peds, or OB/GYN) and work full time in federally designated medically unserved area.
NHSC also caps the amount of med school tuition it will pay (IIRC, ~$45K/year). Tuition above that amount means the scholarship recipient will also need to take loans to cover any shortfall.

BA/MD students are not eligible either NHSC or HPSP. (Or at least aren’t eligible to participate until AFTER they have been formally accepted into medical school–which only comes after college graduation.)


If you want to complain about money going to waste--Congress should stop offering federal student loans to people attending off shore medical schools. 

The vast majority of off shore med students either never graduate or never find a US residency and thus are unable to repay their hundreds of thousands in student debt.
40

Well thats a life choice not to live where you kids can get a good college education locally for a reasonable price. The alternative is to actually save for college if you know there is no good community college options.