I was thinking about Elizabeth Warren’s statement that she attended a commuter college that cost all of $50 a semester. My first thought was, in those days America valued education, and thought it had a great system of higher education, so much so that it thought the country would benefit by having as many college grads as possible. Nowadays we HEAR that the US has a great system and that education is valued, but if that’s the case, why is it that education is for the most part out of question for most kids, whereas the Military, also valued, not only isn’t expensive like college, but THEY PAY YOU! If education is important, and our system is great, and the military is important we have the greatest, then why does one put you in debt for life whereas the other pays a salary from the get go?
Ain’t that America!
Little pink houses for you and me.
Well for one thing when you join the military you are providing a service ( working) and risking your life. It makes sense that you would be paid. When you go to college you are purchasing something which presumably and mostly has value in a number of ways. It makes sense that you have to pay for that. The government/society does provide incentives in the form of easy access to loans, allowing students to deduct loan interest, scholarships, and stipends for certain students and for certain areas of study that we want to promote.
I am not sure what about the current system does not make sense for you?
Well for one thing when you join the military you are providing a service ( working) and risking your life. It makes sense that you would be paid. When you go to college you are purchasing something which presumably and mostly has value in a number of ways. It makes sense that you have to pay for that. The government/society does provide incentives in the form of easy access to loans, allowing students to deduct loan interest, scholarships, and stipends for certain students and for certain areas of study that we want to promote. I am not sure what about the current system does not make sense for you?So you're saying if my daughter becomes a Nurse, she's NOT providing a service to Americans, and NOT risking her life? Moreover, she has to endure 4 years of basic training while military folks only have to go through, what, a couple months, maybe a year tops? Who has it easier? How about to make things fair, for things we say we value, let's start charging tuition for each military service and extend basic training to four years.
Well for one thing when you join the military you are providing a service ( working) and risking your life. It makes sense that you would be paid. When you go to college you are purchasing something which presumably and mostly has value in a number of ways. It makes sense that you have to pay for that. The government/society does provide incentives in the form of easy access to loans, allowing students to deduct loan interest, scholarships, and stipends for certain students and for certain areas of study that we want to promote. I am not sure what about the current system does not make sense for you?Fo one thing too many graduates reneg on their loans, even those who have good jobs and are earning good salaries. They obtain loans so they can get the education that will help them get better jobs than they would have gotten otherwie, then refuse to pay back the loans, which destroys the system for everyone else. Lois
Well for one thing when you join the military you are providing a service ( working) and risking your life. It makes sense that you would be paid. When you go to college you are purchasing something which presumably and mostly has value in a number of ways. It makes sense that you have to pay for that. The government/society does provide incentives in the form of easy access to loans, allowing students to deduct loan interest, scholarships, and stipends for certain students and for certain areas of study that we want to promote. I am not sure what about the current system does not make sense for you?Fo one thing too many graduates reneg on their loans, even those who have good jobs and are earning good salaries. They obtain loans so they can get the education that will help them get better jobs than they would have gotten otherwie, then refuse to pay back the loans, which destroys the system for everyone else. Lois The OPs argument is that they shouldn't have to pay at all because soldiers get paid for their service. The fact that some ( a minority) of students try to get out of paying back their loans doesn't really have a bearing on the original argument
Well for one thing when you join the military you are providing a service ( working) and risking your life. It makes sense that you would be paid. When you go to college you are purchasing something which presumably and mostly has value in a number of ways. It makes sense that you have to pay for that. The government/society does provide incentives in the form of easy access to loans, allowing students to deduct loan interest, scholarships, and stipends for certain students and for certain areas of study that we want to promote. I am not sure what about the current system does not make sense for you?So you're saying if my daughter becomes a Nurse, she's NOT providing a service to Americans, and NOT risking her life? Moreover, she has to endure 4 years of basic training while military folks only have to go through, what, a couple months, maybe a year tops? Who has it easier? How about to make things fair, for things we say we value, let's start charging tuition for each military service and extend basic training to four years. I don't really understand your position. A soldier goes through basic training and then spends the next two to four years paying back society for that training with his or her service. The training they get in most cases does not set them up for a high paying civilian job so it's value is minimal with a few exceptions. A nurse or a doctor gets training that allows them to get a highly respected an dwell paid position so it makes sense that they should have to pay for that. Society does not have to subsidize that education since there are plenty of students willing to pay for it. And in all fairness although there are some dangers that all of us in the health professions face I would not compare it on any level with what a soldier might face.
So you’re saying if my daughter becomes a Nurse, she’s NOT providing a service to Americans, and NOT risking her life?I would say that if your daughter is in school for four (or more) years learning to be a nurse, no, she's not providing a service to anyone and unless she lives or goes to school in a bad neighborhood, she certainly isn't risking her life like a soldier in, say, Afghanistan. How ridiculous. I think ALL American citizens should have a mandatory two or three years of military service before they are allowed to attend college.
I think ALL American citizens should have a mandatory two or three years of military service before they are allowed to attend college.This was actually proposed by President Eisenhower during his time in office. Remember also that it was a time of the largest peacetime draft in American History stretching from the end of World War II through to the end of the Vietnam conflict so any male 18 or older with no exemptions, I.e. Attending a college or university etc., was automatically drafted into service. During Kennedy's admin. service orgs. we're created, e.g. Vista and the Peace Corps. A buddy of mine joined and dug water wells in Niger for two years as alternatives to military service. As to the stress on education v. the military, the proposed 2015 budget for defense is $521 billion and for education, $67.1. You do the math. It is now becoming increasingly harder for a middle class student to afford an education beyond high school as tuition is consistently rising due to state and Federal budget cuts, and education BTW always takes it on the chin when discussing cutting spending. This means fewer resources for teachers and professors, layoffs and salary cuts. Meantime we build more aircraft carriers and produce jet fighters far in advance of any other country. We have the best equipped and trained military in the World but lag far behind even second World countries in education, also those who do manage to finish with a university degree have literally years of debt hanging over them. Anecdote, it took me 10 years to pay off my masters degrees, and that's with two incomes, both mine and my wife's. Cap't Jack
You bring up a separate but related issue with the cost of education. I was discussing this with a college dean recently. With three kids recently in college and getting annual increases that were double the inflation rate I was at a loss to understand the why college costs were spiralling upward so fast. The conversation went on for some time but the two reasons that he felt were causing most of the increases were... 1) Colleges now have to compete for students in a way they never had to in the past. That means they have to have the newest and fanciest facilities and amenities to keep up with or stay ahead of their competitors. Its essentially an arms race that no one can ever win and this adds a huge cost not only in building but also in staffing and maintaining those facilities. Take a look at some of the athletic facilities at colleges these days. Many of them rival the most expensive gyms and sport facilities out in the real world. The campus pub was an inviting dive hole in the wall when I went to school. Now they are high style entertainment venues with gourmet food. 2) Cheap money - The government has made it so easy for kids and their parents to get all the money they need for school loans that many don't flinch at the price. To the kids its just a number and parents are guilted into thinking that if they don't spend the money for the more expensive education little johnny or sue isn't going to get the big job when they get done with school. I'm sure there is more to it than these two reasons alone but from an economic standpoint it seems to make sense that this is part of the problem.I think ALL American citizens should have a mandatory two or three years of military service before they are allowed to attend college.This was actually proposed by President Eisenhower during his time in office. Remember also that it was a time of the largest peacetime draft in American History stretching from the end of World War II through to the end of the Vietnam conflict so any male 18 or older with no exemptions, I.e. Attending a college or university etc., was automatically drafted into service. During Kennedy's admin. service orgs. we're created, e.g. Vista and the Peace Corps. A buddy of mine joined and dug water wells in Niger for two years as alternatives to military service. As to the stress on education v. the military, the proposed 2015 budget for defense is $521 billion and for education, $67.1. You do the math. It is now becoming increasingly harder for a middle class student to afford an education beyond high school as tuition is consistently rising due to state and Federal budget cuts, and education BTW always takes it on the chin when discussing cutting spending. This means fewer resources for teachers and professors, layoffs and salary cuts. Meantime we build more aircraft carriers and produce jet fighters far in advance of any other country. We have the best equipped and trained military in the World but lag far behind even second World countries in education, also those who do manage to finish with a university degree have literally years of debt hanging over them. Anecdote, it took me 10 years to pay off my masters degrees, and that's with two incomes, both mine and my wife's. Cap't Jack
What's the alternative? How would you fix the system?I think ALL American citizens should have a mandatory two or three years of military service before they are allowed to attend college.This was actually proposed by President Eisenhower during his time in office. Remember also that it was a time of the largest peacetime draft in American History stretching from the end of World War II through to the end of the Vietnam conflict so any male 18 or older with no exemptions, I.e. Attending a college or university etc., was automatically drafted into service. During Kennedy's admin. service orgs. we're created, e.g. Vista and the Peace Corps. A buddy of mine joined and dug water wells in Niger for two years as alternatives to military service. As to the stress on education v. the military, the proposed 2015 budget for defense is $521 billion and for education, $67.1. You do the math. It is now becoming increasingly harder for a middle class student to afford an education beyond high school as tuition is consistently rising due to state and Federal budget cuts, and education BTW always takes it on the chin when discussing cutting spending. This means fewer resources for teachers and professors, layoffs and salary cuts. Meantime we build more aircraft carriers and produce jet fighters far in advance of any other country. We have the best equipped and trained military in the World but lag far behind even second World countries in education, also those who do manage to finish with a university degree have literally years of debt hanging over them. Anecdote, it took me 10 years to pay off my masters degrees, and that's with two incomes, both mine and my wife's. Cap't Jack
You're kidding of course. So helping sick people is not a service? And are you saying all or even most soldiers are in dangerous places like Afghanistan? I'd like to see statistics on how many are actually in harm's way. I'll bet a very small percentage.So you’re saying if my daughter becomes a Nurse, she’s NOT providing a service to Americans, and NOT risking her life?I would say that if your daughter is in school for four (or more) years learning to be a nurse, no, she's not providing a service to anyone and unless she lives or goes to school in a bad neighborhood, she certainly isn't risking her life like a soldier in, say, Afghanistan. How ridiculous. I think ALL American citizens should have a mandatory two or three years of military service before they are allowed to attend college.
Well for one thing when you join the military you are providing a service ( working) and risking your life. It makes sense that you would be paid. When you go to college you are purchasing something which presumably and mostly has value in a number of ways. It makes sense that you have to pay for that. The government/society does provide incentives in the form of easy access to loans, allowing students to deduct loan interest, scholarships, and stipends for certain students and for certain areas of study that we want to promote. I am not sure what about the current system does not make sense for you?Fo one thing too many graduates reneg on their loans, even those who have good jobs and are earning good salaries. They obtain loans so they can get the education that will help them get better jobs than they would have gotten otherwie, then refuse to pay back the loans, which destroys the system for everyone else. LoisHow do you know they are reneging and not just unable to pay them back?
Well for one thing when you join the military you are providing a service ( working) and risking your life. It makes sense that you would be paid. When you go to college you are purchasing something which presumably and mostly has value in a number of ways. It makes sense that you have to pay for that. The government/society does provide incentives in the form of easy access to loans, allowing students to deduct loan interest, scholarships, and stipends for certain students and for certain areas of study that we want to promote. I am not sure what about the current system does not make sense for you?So you're saying if my daughter becomes a Nurse, she's NOT providing a service to Americans, and NOT risking her life? Moreover, she has to endure 4 years of basic training while military folks only have to go through, what, a couple months, maybe a year tops? Who has it easier? How about to make things fair, for things we say we value, let's start charging tuition for each military service and extend basic training to four years. I don't really understand your position. A soldier goes through basic training and then spends the next two to four years paying back society for that training with his or her service. The training they get in most cases does not set them up for a high paying civilian job so it's value is minimal with a few exceptions. A nurse or a doctor gets training that allows them to get a highly respected an dwell paid position so it makes sense that they should have to pay for that. Society does not have to subsidize that education since there are plenty of students willing to pay for it. And in all fairness although there are some dangers that all of us in the health professions face I would not compare it on any level with what a soldier might face.My position is, if the US actually valued education and thought it had the best system in the world, we'd want as many kid's going through that system as possible. And the easiest way to do that would be to make it free. Moreover, if we valued our citizens like everyone claims, we want them to get the best education possible so that all could benefit. Let me ask you this: if you were a doctor and had medicine that you claimed healed the common cold better than any other doctor's medicine. Would you charge your own kids or would you give it to them for free?
Well for one thing when you join the military you are providing a service ( working) and risking your life. It makes sense that you would be paid. When you go to college you are purchasing something which presumably and mostly has value in a number of ways. It makes sense that you have to pay for that. The government/society does provide incentives in the form of easy access to loans, allowing students to deduct loan interest, scholarships, and stipends for certain students and for certain areas of study that we want to promote. I am not sure what about the current system does not make sense for you?Fo one thing too many graduates reneg on their loans, even those who have good jobs and are earning good salaries. They obtain loans so they can get the education that will help them get better jobs than they would have gotten otherwie, then refuse to pay back the loans, which destroys the system for everyone else. LoisHow do you know they are reneging and not just unable to pay them back? What does "unable" mean? I know several young people who are out of college and working at decent jobs. They are "unable" to pay their college loans, but they have been "able" to buy expensive cars, big screen televisions, sound systems and top of the line computer systems. "Unable" seems to be a relative term. i wonder if they ever think of planning ahead. My own kids had college loans and they managed to pay them off. Two were married before the loans were paid off and their wives had loans to be paid off, too. They drove low-level used cars for years. That's not to say i don't think the system could be better, especially for very expensive education, such as for doctors. I don't think it should necessarily be free, though. Once it's free it loses value and people take it for granted and waste it. Lois
My position is, if the US actually valued education and thought it had the best system in the world, we'd want as many kid's going through that system as possible. And the easiest way to do that would be to make it free. Moreover, if we valued our citizens like everyone claims, we want them to get the best education possible so that all could benefit. Let me ask you this: if you were a doctor and had medicine that you claimed healed the common cold better than any other doctor's medicine. Would you charge your own kids or would you give it to them for free?If we had a shortage of college educated workers that might be true but outside of the STEM fields it seems to me that we are already educating more of our citizens than we should be. Many kids go to college only to come out and get jobs that they could have gotten without ever going to college. As I said above I am not sure the problem is too little support and it may in fact be that ther eis too much support in the form of cheap money that is driving the cost of college ever higher. Its only the government's job to help kids pay for college if there is a need for more college educated kids. The government does subsidize and fund college education in many ways through reduced tuition at state and community colleges, through low interest loans and grants, and by making the interest on student loans tax deductible. Unless you can show that the current governmental supports are insufficient to provide enough college educated students to meet the countries needs I don't see how you can justify spending even more to make it easier for a greater number of students to go to college. I don't get your analogy at the end either. I am a doctor but are you implying that we should give a free education to all American kids? Why? Why should we as a taxpayers pay even more than we currently do to educate someone who will then earn a higher income from that education if they are perfectly willing and able to pay for it themselves? As I stated above. If there was a shortage of something that would make sense but absent such a shortage there is no reason for the government and taxpayers to intervene.
What’s the alternative? How would you fix the system?There's no easy nor quick fix but if I had my druthers I would first elect state representatives who are pro education and would be willing to increase the education budget by assisting ALL colleges and universities in building and maintenance projects, granting more scholarships and partial scholarships to deserving students with high ACT (SAT) scores; I would use the European method of tracking students and give those with the aptitude a path to a university OR a technical school with a bridge school if they choose later to apply for admission to a university, and grant state and National loans with a lower interest rate so that the graduate won't be yoked with a debt that may take as long as twenty years to pay off. These loans would be strictly monitored to ensure that the money is being used for educational purposes and violators would lose the funding for an infraction. Also, for a state loan, the graduate must agree to work within that state for a period of time depending on his/her degree, e.g. Physicians, engineers, etc. of course this is just a wish list as in many states education has only a nominal value. The technical college where I teach is part of a state wide system of 34 campuses offering 134 careers. Our system just suffered a state budget cut in order to freeze tuition to encourage a greater student enrollment. That means a limit on expansion and professor's salaries and benefits, including retirement which the state is considering lowering BTW. Cap't Jack
My position is, if the US actually valued education and thought it had the best system in the world, we'd want as many kid's going through that system as possible. And the easiest way to do that would be to make it free. Moreover, if we valued our citizens like everyone claims, we want them to get the best education possible so that all could benefit. Let me ask you this: if you were a doctor and had medicine that you claimed healed the common cold better than any other doctor's medicine. Would you charge your own kids or would you give it to them for free?If we had a shortage of college educated workers that might be true but outside of the STEM fields it seems to me that we are already educating more of our citizens than we should be. Many kids go to college only to come out and get jobs that they could have gotten without ever going to college. As I said above I am not sure the problem is too little support and it may in fact be that ther eis too much support in the form of cheap money that is driving the cost of college ever higher. Its only the government's job to help kids pay for college if there is a need for more college educated kids. The government does subsidize and fund college education in many ways through reduced tuition at state and community colleges, through low interest loans and grants, and by making the interest on student loans tax deductible. Unless you can show that the current governmental supports are insufficient to provide enough college educated students to meet the countries needs I don't see how you can justify spending even more to make it easier for a greater number of students to go to college. I don't get your analogy at the end either. I am a doctor but are you implying that we should give a free education to all American kids? Why? Why should we as a taxpayers pay even more than we currently do to educate someone who will then earn a higher income from that education if they are perfectly willing and able to pay for it themselves? As I stated above. If there was a shortage of something that would make sense but absent such a shortage there is no reason for the government and taxpayers to intervene.I think I see the basic problem. You think of education as a want not a need. So if it's a want, like a nice car, then your thinking makes sense...why should the government and taxpayers buy people cars. I don't see it that way. I see education as a need, as in a right, granted to every citizen. No different from the right/need for free speech, etc. And you probably consider the military a need, as in the country needs to be defended therefore it's ok to pay soldiers. I would agree with you AND that education is no different. Having an uneducated public IS a national security threat no different from any other, other than being more subtle. And this is actually pretty obvious if you consider voting a right. If it is, then I assume you mean educated citizens make for more effective voting. Where there's voting there needs to be education, otherwise it's just stimulus and response (yes I know we're sort of there already, but you get my point).
Many here seem to be confusing a job with a commodity. Entering the military is a job, for which a certain amount of money is paid for the service, the labor and the hazard. The military, as one of its benefits, offers education that can be used to further a military career or a non military one. Going to college or university is not a job and the only benefit is the education that is purchased. You don’t go into a hardware store and expect it to provide you with an education along with the nails and screws you buy. You don’t go into a supermarket and expect educational benefits with your groceries. Why should you expect to get a free or subsidized education just because you are working toward something and may one day provide a service or goods to someone else for a price? When you are in the military you ar already providing a service. You aren’t providing a service to the school. You are buying a service. Even a nurse or doctor are not providng services while they are learning their craft. Some services may be part of the education being purchased, and that often decreases the cost of tuition, even if it’s hidden. In a better, fairer world, taxpayers would contribute more to post secondary education but don’t confuse it with a job you are paid for and receive benefits for. You are buying something when you go to college. You are not providing a service. Education is already subsidized in many ways. In countries with “free” college educations, taxes are much higher than they are here parents pay those high taxes and when the student graduates and gets a job, he or she, too, will have to pay the higher taxes, so, in a sense, students ARE paying for their education, just in a different way. There is no such thing as a free lunch and there is no such thing as a free education. Both get paid for one way or another by the students, their families and all other taxpayers. And not everyone gets to go to college and study what they please in most socialized countries. They have to show that they are well-qualified to get in and must maintain good grades in order to stay in and get the “free” education. There is a lot less slacking off.
Lois
I think I see the basic problem. You think of education as a want not a need. So if it's a want, like a nice car, then your thinking makes sense...why should the government and taxpayers buy people cars. I don't see it that way. I see education as a need, as in a right, granted to every citizen. No different from the right/need for free speech, etc. And you probably consider the military a need, as in the country needs to be defended therefore it's ok to pay soldiers. I would agree with you AND that education is no different. Having an uneducated public IS a national security threat no different from any other, other than being more subtle. And this is actually pretty obvious if you consider voting a right. If it is, then I assume you mean educated citizens make for more effective voting. Where there's voting there needs to be education, otherwise it's just stimulus and response (yes I know we're sort of there already, but you get my point).I agree with you to a point. A basic education should be the right of every individual and is important to the country. That's why we have a free guaranteed education for every citizen through grade twelve. A college education is a very different thing though and I do not believe citizens should feel entitled to a free (read "someone else pays for it) college education for several reasons 1) We don't need a population where everyone has a college education. Many of the jobs that need to be done don;t require a college education and are performed no better by college educated individuals. 2) A college education may but does not necessarily make for a more informed voter or a stronger democracy. In your example there is little if anything that occurs during a nursing education that would make that person a better informed voter. If an informed electorate is the goal then perhaps we should be spending more of our efforts on history, science, and government studies in K-12 since not everyone will go to college even if its free. 3) Not everyone has the ability required to study at the college level. Making college free ( again, free is never free it just means someone else pays for it) for everyone will force those who don;t go to pay for those who do. 4) There is no shortage of kids going to college. We have no need to lower the cost in order to incentivize more of them to go. 5) We already spend a lot to subsidize the cost of college in many ways.