Free education - wise or folly?

[Emily]

I think people forget that an educated population will get higher salaries and will, usually, pay more taxes that can be injected back into the education system. Hell, those that claim it's going to cost the state too much should shut up as educated people will "pay back" whatever their education costed by earning higher salaries and paying more taxes.

That said, I'm not for free education, but rather affordable education. Asking tuition fees as high as in the US is simply absurd and it keeps people that would otherwise have pursued studies from doing so. Yet, you can't simply throw money at people for them to sit on their bum and broaden their mind just for the hell of it.

zoffster1 said:

Having an educated population is good, as long as the qualifications have some purpose. Sticking people on useless courses simply to lower the unemployment figures is a complete waste of time and money.

Agreed. I don't know how it is in other countries, but I think that if the state is going to subsidise superior education, it needs to promote the different venues available. As it is right now, trade school is marginalised here, so you get a lot of people in universities that shouldn't be there.

[Emily]

^ I'm considering becoming a bus driver for that very reason.

[juancarlos]

zoffster1 said:

^ that was exactly the problem in the UK.

In the end it became so bad that graduates were retraining as plumbers, carpenters etc. Simply because they could earn much more in those fields due to the shortage of skilled labour.

So, good old economics comes to the rescue!!!

[cjsdad]

Indeed.

I fail to see how gov't intervention "solved" anything.

On either side of the debate.

In the end, people need to understand that "government funds" do not exist.
The government does not "make" money. They acquire it thru taxation.

I happen to agree that the education of our children(the future) is one of the few non-wasteful government "investments" in the overall societal picture.

But WHERE does the government (read:taxpayer) burden end?

High School? University? Grad School?

At some point, the burden SHOULD be shifted to the person.

If you are willing to delay your gratification, you should also be willing to PAY for your gratification.

[catgirl]

zoffster1 said:

^ that was exactly the problem in the UK.

In the end it became so bad that graduates were retraining as plumbers, carpenters etc. Simply because they could earn much more in those fields due to the shortage of skilled labour.

Maybe this will sort people out for their ambitions to study what they really want, and not only for the sake of the money. Many people are in the wrong place...

[cjsdad]

One could argue that if it was on YOUR dime, you'd choose more wisely, miss less class, and work harder upon completion to pay off the loans you needed to get to the finish line.

Worked for me.

[Freecia]

And some people were forced to drop out of university simply because they aren't able to afford it. I don't mind using my tax dollars to educate those who are intelligent. In fact, I don't mind using my tax dollars to educate those who are in need of vocational skills. The society shouldn't discriminate those who are quote on quote, "less smart". It is my belief that we should all pitch in in educating our society as a whole, from bus driving techniques to rocket building methods.

[dela cruz]

When you pay 50% in tax to fund welfare then theres no other way than to pay for peoples education(and pay us to take an education) which is so very important for this country since there are no other opportunities than a highly educated workforce. It has definately paid off though and made it like the 4th most competitive economy in world and so many other good things. Theres a lack of qualified workforce right now and a very large group of elderly who are going to retire in the next coming years so theres not exactly going to be too much of anything.

But free education is not for all seems as if the word 'social' could make any American see red and cringe in fear. That and that it just wouldnt work even if they wanted it... i think theres too many of "why should ipay for them blacks/asians" vice versa. Free education is for homogenious places like Scandinavia and... communist countries.

[cjsdad]

freecia said:

And some people were forced to drop out of university simply because they aren't able to afford it. I don't mind using my tax dollars to educate those who are intelligent. In fact, I don't mind using my tax dollars to educate those who are in need of vocational skills. The society shouldn't discriminate those who are quote on quote, "less smart". It is my belief that we should all pitch in in educating our society as a whole, from bus driving techniques to rocket building methods.

Couldn't afford....or unwilling to use student loans to pay for it?

Student loans are pretty easy to come by.

Interest rates are amazingly low, and deferrals and consolidation is super easy.

If you ask me, the same people that can't "afford" student loans are the same people paying 18% on a credit card to buy that big screen tv they have always wanted.

It's about personal choices.

And I'm very ok with people choosing gratification rather than education.

Just don't ask someone else to bail you out.

Again, I am in FAVOR of using tax dollars for education, as I believe that an educated country is a strong country.

But somehow we need to figure out when to say "enough is enough".

You are talking to a guy that went full loans and some small grants from the start of his very long and expensive education.

It CAN be done.

The question is....does the person have the intestinal fortitude to make the commitment to education rather than other desires.

[Emily]

cjsdad said:

freecia said:

And some people were forced to drop out of university simply because they aren't able to afford it. I don't mind using my tax dollars to educate those who are intelligent. In fact, I don't mind using my tax dollars to educate those who are in need of vocational skills. The society shouldn't discriminate those who are quote on quote, "less smart". It is my belief that we should all pitch in in educating our society as a whole, from bus driving techniques to rocket building methods.

Couldn't afford....or unwilling to use student loans to pay for it?

Student loans are pretty easy to come by.

Interest rates are amazingly low, and deferrals and consolidation is super easy.

If you ask me, the same people that can't "afford" student loans are the same people paying 18% on a credit card to buy that big screen tv they have always wanted.

It's about personal choices.

And I'm very ok with people choosing gratification rather than education.

Just don't ask someone else to bail you out.

Again, I am in FAVOR of using tax dollars for education, as I believe that an educated country is a strong country.

But somehow we need to figure out when to say "enough is enough".

You are talking to a guy that went full loans and some small grants from the start of his very long and expensive education.

It CAN be done.

The question is....does the person have the intestinal fortitude to make the commitment to education rather than other desires.

Many students here don't have access to student loans because their parents bring in "too high" of a salary. Yet, these same students don't receive any assistance from their parents. I know of a few students that DID have to abandon their studies due to lack of funds. And you couldn't get any more frugal than them.

I think state and student have to meet halfway. If education is free, students will take it for granted and we'll be throwing money away. I say responsabilise students, make them pay an amount that will make them think twice about fooling around with their studies, but make the amount reasonable enough so that education is within reach.

zoffster1 said:

I think it should be free but places should be limited for those who are worth educating.

In my opinion free education is not the problem, it's that there are simply too many places available.

How do you deem those who are worth educating, though? I agree with your approach, there are too many students just dicking around in university because it's the normal path to choose or it's the only way they'll be allowed to stay with mommy and daddy. But how can you effectively decide who gets to study or not? Also, are you only speaking of a student's receptiveness to college-level education/maturity or are you also referring to a student's marketability?

[cm]

cjsdad said:

freecia said:

And some people were forced to drop out of university simply because they aren't able to afford it. I don't mind using my tax dollars to educate those who are intelligent. In fact, I don't mind using my tax dollars to educate those who are in need of vocational skills. The society shouldn't discriminate those who are quote on quote, "less smart". It is my belief that we should all pitch in in educating our society as a whole, from bus driving techniques to rocket building methods.

Couldn't afford....or unwilling to use student loans to pay for it?

Student loans are pretty easy to come by.

Interest rates are amazingly low, and deferrals and consolidation is super easy.

If you ask me, the same people that can't "afford" student loans are the same people paying 18% on a credit card to buy that big screen tv they have always wanted.

It's about personal choices.

And I'm very ok with people choosing gratification rather than education.

Just don't ask someone else to bail you out.

Again, I am in FAVOR of using tax dollars for education, as I believe that an educated country is a strong country.

But somehow we need to figure out when to say "enough is enough".

You are talking to a guy that went full loans and some small grants from the start of his very long and expensive education.

It CAN be done.

The question is....does the person have the intestinal fortitude to make the commitment to education rather than other desires.

A bunch of generalized statements, especially the credit card statement.

Education should be free as long as it eventually leads to a job in a sector where there is demand.

Sure it CAN be done. But why should a poor person have to work harder than some rich f***?

f*** that s***. It's all about freedom of opportunity. Financial aide levels the playing field and makes sure students from poor families don't have to work 2 jobs for their education.

If it means some rich motherf***er paying more taxes then be it. If that bitch has a problem paying taxes, then GTFO of the US and move to some anarchy like Mexico where you can do whatever you want.

There's a reason why the top nations in the world are socialized...and why the emerging economies are pretty much hands free, all for out.

[long]

"There's a reason why the top nations in the world are socialized...and why the emerging economies are pretty much hands free, all for out."

Hmm, I'm not sure I'm buying this one. Are we living on the same planet?

"But why should a poor person have to work harder than some rich f**k?

f**k that sh*t. It's all about freedom of opportunity."

Freedom of opportunity doesn't imply that the poor won't have to work harder to get ahead. Actually I think those on the opportunity side of equal opportunity vs equal outcomes debate are generally right-wing laissez-faire types.. But yeah.. how come all the hot, successful studs get all the finest trim, when all I get is a whole lotta rosie?

Some rich people are pretty nice...

edit: oh yeah, free education is a pretty thoughtful thing to give to the less privileged - I approve.

[halfbreed]

This does my head in. So many things to consider!

[halfbreed]

seejayeff said:

Sure it CAN be done. But why should a poor person have to work harder than some rich f**k?

Why should rich f**ks have to support poor people?

chakkaphak said:

free education is a pretty thoughtful thing to give to the less privileged - I approve.

Would you be willing to pay for it, though? (you'd be getting nothing in return)

[juancarlos]

halfbreed said:

seejayeff said:

Sure it CAN be done. But why should a poor person have to work harder than some rich f**k?

Why should rich f**ks have to support poor people?

chakkaphak said:

free education is a pretty thoughtful thing to give to the less privileged - I approve.

Would you be willing to pay for it, though? (you'd be getting nothing in return)

Hmm, "getting nothing in return". Not exactly. The less educated tend to generally have less healthy lifestyles. When they're dying of heart disease in the charity ward, who do you think pays their bills?