Community college should be free but not universities

[s0me0nesmind1]

Agree. There is also nothing wrong with 2 years then transferring. It can save a lot of money.

Not just that, but Community college helps eliminate the retards that clearly aren't cut out for college. No - I don't want to pay for people that CLEARLY shouldn't be in universities to pay for the HIGH costs of a university to figure out that they can't handle Math 101, English 101, etc...

And as someone that went to Community college for 2 years and transferred - yeah, it's absolutely fucking beneficial. Hell, my parents could have easily paid for me to be in my university for all 4 years but I simply chose not to.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

There's no such thing as free. If you want community college to be free, it has to be paid somehow (more taxes).

The other risk you run into is that everyone goes to CC after graduation, even those who are not even serious about school and just wants to coast by (it's free, so why not).

I agree that higher education is expensive and we need to find solutions to make it affordable for folks. We also need to have programs out there for high school drop-outs and graduates who don't want to go to college - learn skill-sets that they can build a respectable career from.

The reality is that we just need cutoffs.

Everyone LOVES to give a circle-jerk to countries that have "free" college - but the reality is that every country they ever cite isn't "free college". It's "free college if you have the academic skills necessary to qualify".... Oh I'm sorry, you're too stupid to qualify, I guess consider a trade-skill.

The above quote is not something the Politically correct left ever wants to tell their stupid base when they don't qualify.

 

[Maxima1]

The reality is that we just need cutoffs.

Everyone LOVES to give a circle-jerk to countries that have "free" college - but the reality is that every country they ever cite isn't "free college". It's "free college if you have the academic skills necessary to qualify".... Oh I'm sorry, you're too stupid to qualify, I guess consider a trade-skill.

That could create a bottleneck for no good reason, thus inflating the value of degrees arbitrarily. There are A LOT of ways to reduce the costs of education. For instance, most classes can be done online or even by assessments for some of the lower division stuff that's often a repetition of high school classes already taken (Just an aside, makes no sense you can't take AP after high school) and of course it's the poorer districts that routinely don't offer cc equivalents or AP credits during high school.

Not just that, but Community college helps eliminate the retards that clearly aren't cut out for college. No - I don't want to pay for people that CLEARLY shouldn't be in universities to pay for the HIGH costs of a university to figure out that they can't handle Math 101, English 101, etc...

And as someone that went to Community college for 2 years and transferred - yeah, it's absolutely fucking beneficial. Hell, my parents could have easily paid for me to be in my university for all 4 years but I simply chose not to.

Community college is more broadly subsidized so it looks cheaper, yet they routinely offer substantially reduced class sizes (university can go upwards of multiple hundreds of students per class) or more class hour requirements for equivalent classes (e.g. 2 hr lab cc vs 1 hr lab university).

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

That could create a bottleneck for no good reason, thus inflating the value of degrees arbitrarily. There are A LOT of ways to reduce the costs of education. For instance, most classes can be done online or even by assessments for some of the lower division stuff that's often a repetition of high school classes already taken (Just an aside, makes no sense you can't take AP after high school) and of course it's the poorer districts that routinely don't offer cc equivalents or AP credits during high school.

The majority cost of college can be attributed to student loans. If government stopped offering student loans, the problem would IMMEDIATELY fix itself.

Either people would pay for their own education, or places that offer loans would only offer loans to ACTUAL qualified people. Instead, we have student loans that base it ENTIRELY on how poor ones parents are. Your parents can be loaded as fuck but ineptly stupid financially and thus not have the funds to pay for your college - Our government says: "Too bad! Your parents should have paid for you! You're responsible for educating your parents to save for your college fund".

I'm in full favor of the likes of online classes as well, but I still don't believe that to be the root of the problem

Community college is more broadly subsidized so it looks cheaper, yet they routinely offer substantially reduced class sizes (university can go upwards of multiple hundreds of students per class) or more class hour requirements for equivalent classes (e.g. 2 hr lab cc vs 1 hr lab university).

Not necessarily doubting you on that, but universities tend to cost in the thousands - whereas community college are in the hundreds. So... Not sure where you're getting your numbers from, if you could show me some facts I wouldn't mind reading it.

As I said previously, I did community college and transferred. It was a FUCKTON cheaper.

 

[fskimospy]

The majority cost of college can be attributed to student loans. If government stopped offering student loans, the problem would IMMEDIATELY fix itself.

This is not accurate. While student loans are a bad idea, they likely only contribute to tuition inflation at R1 public and private universities.

Per student spending other public universities has been basically flat for years. Tuition increases there are primarily due to state and federal funding cuts.

Either people would pay for their own education, or places that offer loans would only offer loans to ACTUAL qualified people. Instead, we have student loans that base it ENTIRELY on how poor ones parents are. Your parents can be loaded as fuck but ineptly stupid financially and thus not have the funds to pay for your college - Our government says: "Too bad! Your parents should have paid for you! You're responsible for educating your parents to save for your college fund".

First, there are effectively no people who are qualified for tens of thousands of dollars in unsecured loans at the age of 18 so that’s just not a thing.

Second, student loans are not issued based on income.

I'm in full favor of the likes of online classes as well, but I still don't believe that to be the root of the problem

Not necessarily doubting you on that, but universities tend to cost in the thousands - whereas community college are in the hundreds. So... Not sure where you're getting your numbers from, if you could show me some facts I wouldn't mind reading it.

As I said previously, I did community college and transferred. It was a FUCKTON cheaper.

Community college is vastly cheaper, although due to low funding it can be difficult to find room in the necessary classes. I know this as someone who did their first two years at a community college as well.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

First, there are effectively no people who are qualified for tens of thousands of dollars in unsecured loans at the age of 18 so that’s just not a thing.

Second, student loans are not issued based on income.

Please tell me you are high as fuck when replying with this?

https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/fafsa/filling-out/dependency

It is a COMPLETE FACT that federally subsidized student loans are issued based on the income of your parents - And even if your parents say "LOL fuck you!" You have to go through a SUBSTANTIAL legal process to prove that they are not providing you with anything at all. It is virtually impossible to prove that your parents don't support you unless they completely disowned you.

 

[fskimospy]

Please tell me you are high as fuck when replying with this?

https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/fafsa/filling-out/dependency

It is a COMPLETE FACT that federally subsidized student loans are issued based on the income of your parents - And even if your parents say "LOL fuck you!" You have to go through a SUBSTANTIAL legal process to prove that they are not providing you with anything at all. It is virtually impossible to prove that your parents don't support you unless they completely disowned you.

That is not the loan itself, that is to qualify for federal subsidies. Student loans are available to everyone attending a qualifying program.

 

[Maxima1]

The majority cost of college can be attributed to student loans. If government stopped offering student loans, the problem would IMMEDIATELY fix itself.

Either people would pay for their own education, or places that offer loans would only offer loans to ACTUAL qualified people. Instead, we have student loans that base it ENTIRELY on how poor ones parents are. Your parents can be loaded as fuck but ineptly stupid financially and thus not have the funds to pay for your college - Our government says: "Too bad! Your parents should have paid for you! You're responsible for educating your parents to save for your college fund".

There would still be huge pressure for degrees because it's the lock that needs to be opened to get much better opportunities. Tuition is just part of the equation as well. Room and board sucks for many. The affluent will still be there if we took away loan subsidies. There would still be stupid spending to make the university more like what they're accustomed to.

Not necessarily doubting you on that, but universities tend to cost in the thousands - whereas community college are in the hundreds. So... Not sure where you're getting your numbers from, if you could show me some facts I wouldn't mind reading it.

As I said previously, I did community college and transferred. It was a FUCKTON cheaper.

Yes. Out here, community college can be $20-25 per semester with no credit limit (so potentially <$1 per credit). Obviously subsidized. You have to factor in several things for a comparison. As I said, community colleges do at least two things that would increase cost of tuition and both are completely unnecessary, so that's a mark against them.

Then we have to factor in that university generally means being taught by people who have research responsibilities,. I doubt anyone would argue we should do away with university research, though. But probably the most relevant difference that is a good critique is the administrative bloat and other frivolous spending universities do. But target that, not dismiss it as a lost cause.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

The reality is that we just need cutoffs.

Everyone LOVES to give a circle-jerk to countries that have "free" college - but the reality is that every country they ever cite isn't "free college". It's "free college if you have the academic skills necessary to qualify".... Oh I'm sorry, you're too stupid to qualify, I guess consider a trade-skill.

The above quote is not something the Politically correct left ever wants to tell their stupid base when they don't qualify.

Nobody would challenge that observation.

Lately we've seen the growth of for-profit universities, with an equal growth in tuition scams and abuse of loan programs, degrees that don't meet even part of their promise.

It was rumored at my campus in Virginia that economic departments reduce their PhD output in number of graduates when the market is bad for PhD economists. In other words, they simply increase their selection criteria or raise the standard. Often, you could see this temporary policy from the way they handle more persistent students who can at least pass all the exams. One professor told me that University of Chicago kept him scrambling for 12 years on his dissertation until they finally granted him the degree.

What might be best is a system that prepares students generally for the world, or providing them self-learning skills, while offering education in specific skills for specific jobs, as one might find in a trade-school.

"Shake hands with the man on your left. Shake hands with the man on your right. One of these people will not be here next year." Everybody remembers the script-line from "Paper Chase", when John Houseman tells Timothy Bottoms:

"Hart? Here's a dime. Call your mother. Tell her there is serious doubt about your becoming a lawyer."

Trade schools shouldn't work like that. And quite frankly, that was the way things worked in the '60s and '70s. In the public institutions, they had a simple rule-of-thumb: Fail half of the freshman class; fail a quarter of the sophomore class. If you made it through your junior year, you were fairly sure of finishing your degree.

Today, we have "consumer education" institutions. Professors can be let go for pushing the students too rigorously. We have wealthy celebrities buying entrance for their kids into prestigious schools. We have veterans being scammed for tuition and overwhelmed with loans, when it was once possible to get through school on the GI Bill.

 

[Moonbeam]

The unexamined life is not worth living. True or false. The answer changes everything

For example, what if a person with a worthless level of self understanding becomes a nuclear bomb maker of tremendous proficiency. He will have a very marketable skill and civilization may die as a result. Hope I didn't rain on anybody's parade.

 

[cytg111]

I’d absolutely be for this. I’m watching last nights debate and one lady (not sure of her name) mentioned that and I think it’s a wonderful idea. We’d be incentivizing people for learning skills that will actually earn them money, not every is made for 4 year colleges. It would help on income inequality in my opinion, instead of simply having no marketable skills we would have the opportunities for them to change that.

Funneling people into 4 year colleges who don’t belong here don’t do anyone any good except for the pocketbooks of the colleges themselves. It lowers the caliber of the student base and strains resources at the universities. All for a misguided idea that they even need to be there in the first place. By going to a community college and learning practical skills and not wasting several years where many would eventually drop out and have lost that income earning time as well.

Yet a day later this poser posted this

I’m not as optimistic as you on how big, will definitely depend on the Dem candidate. Trump still has a very large and very passionate following. He’s definitely drove many away but I think if the D candidates start getting out there promising to increase spending by many trillions of dollars that will absolutely drive people away and towards him. Who knows.

I don’t like some of what he’s done but I do love and appreciate how he’s come in and ripped the political paradigm to shreds. The country needed it. I loved Obama too, he had mistakes as all do but I thought he was overall a very good president. But it was time to wreck shop and shake things up and Trump certainly did that and honestly he country overall is doing pretty great right now.

 

[brycejones]

Funneling people into 4 year colleges who don’t belong here don’t do anyone any good

First hand knowledge on your part?

 

[Sunburn74]

I'm for making CC free. However I'm under the impression for most state schools room and board makes up like 1/2 the cost of college even though many of these schools are in towns where presumably real estate is not that expensive?

 

[Wuzup101]

I'm for making CC free. However I'm under the impression for most state schools room and board makes up like 1/2 the cost of college even though many of these schools are in towns where presumably real estate is not that expensive?

I would assume (and have done no research on this specific statistic) that you probably are correct. Housing (including all necessary utilities) and food are generally always the two biggest expenditures for anyone. Transportation is obviously up there, but is more situational. I'd imagine that most students can get by walking or with a bike at most colleges / universities and supplement that with uber/lift, taxis, rentals, etc. when absolutely needed. Even if real estate prices are REALLY cheap, housing/food certainly isn't free. That's still going to cost thousands of dollars per year.

I went to PSU (which is technically a land grant school, and is more expensive than the normal Pennsylvania state schools), so I just quickly did some googling. In state tuition is ~18,500/year, and housing if living on campus is ~11k a year. Figure ~2k for books, and another ~5k in living expenses. ESU, a state school in PA, is like 10k for in state tuition. But as above, room and board is like 8,500, and when you add in books and other expenses, it's definitely more than 50% of the total cost.

As a response just to the general post, I'm also for making CC free. I think college prices in general are way over inflated. I think student loans, as well as not educating our high school graduates on personal finance is to blame for this. Many people go to school, kill themselves with debt, only to find out after they graduate that paying back that debt is a HUGE burden. I wish more people went to CC first for 2 years to figure out what they wanted to do. I also wish the trades weren't so stigmatized towards being for "the dumb." The fact is, unless you are going to a 4 year university and getting an in-demand degree (and yes, I'm going to say that this is generally STEM), you probably should be going to a trade school. Most of the trades are going to make more money and will have far less debt than a basket weaving degree from a 4 year institution.

 

[Vic]

The reality is that we just need cutoffs.

Everyone LOVES to give a circle-jerk to countries that have "free" college - but the reality is that every country they ever cite isn't "free college". It's "free college if you have the academic skills necessary to qualify".... Oh I'm sorry, you're too stupid to qualify, I guess consider a trade-skill.

The above quote is not something the Politically correct left ever wants to tell their stupid base when they don't qualify.

Can you provide an example of this? I've never seen anyone on the "politically correct left" whose opinion actually matters say that "free college" would also entail dropping academic standards for admissions.
But hey, you're doing a great job of arguing against your own straw men, as usual.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Can you provide an example of this? I've never seen anyone on the "politically correct left" whose opinion actually matters say that "free college" would also entail dropping academic standards for admissions.
But hey, you're doing a great job of arguing against your own straw men, as usual.

Where did I say "dropping the standards for admissions"? You're the only one with the strawmen little boy.

The point is I WANT to pay for well-qualified students that want to major in a useful fields like STEM, Business, etc... Anything where there is a substantial job market for it.

I don't want to pay for someone to go to go to Evergreen college, for-profit college, or any fucking retarded art college.

I also don't want to pay for someone to get a degree in the likes of psychology, sociology, philosophy, etc unless they are at minimum prepared to go for a doctorate in these fields. On top of that, I don't want to pay for joke degrees that only stupid fucking lefties would major in such as gender studies, lesbian basket weaving, etc... Anything that doesn't really have a job market other than "continuing to teach the degree to the next group of idiots"

 

[Vic]

Where did I say "dropping the standards for admissions"? You're the only one with the strawmen little boy.

The point is I WANT to pay for well-qualified students that want to major in a useful fields like STEM, Business, etc... Anything where there is a substantial job market for it.

I don't want to pay for someone to go to go to Evergreen college, for-profit college, or any fucking retarded art college.

I also don't want to pay for someone to get a degree in the likes of psychology, sociology, philosophy, etc unless they are at minimum prepared to go for a doctorate in these fields. On top of that, I don't want to pay for joke degrees that only stupid fucking lefties would major in such as gender studies, lesbian basket weaving, etc... Anything that doesn't really have a job market other than "continuing to teach the degree to the next group of idiots"

So you're ranting against something that no one has said they wanted. Got it.

 

[cytg111]

So you're ranting against something that no one has said they wanted. Got it.

One way of regulating those "useless" degrees is to make access criteria ultra high... That is how its done elsewhere in "the socialist west".

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

So you're ranting against something that no one has said they wanted. Got it.

I...never said someone "wanted" a particular thing. This is something called a discussion - or debate if you will - I never once inferred what other people's thoughts were in my post. I gave you my opinion on what I feel is the best way to implement making college reasonable/affordable/free.

You have a retarded form of arguing kid, have you considered going back to school yourself? Is that why you're so passionately butt-hurt on this topic because your 1 IQ point away from being legally retarded?

 

[mindless1]

Where did I say "dropping the standards for admissions"? You're the only one with the strawmen little boy.

The point is I WANT to pay for well-qualified students that want to major in a useful fields like STEM, Business, etc... Anything where there is a substantial job market for it.

I don't want to pay for someone to go to go to Evergreen college, for-profit college, or any fucking retarded art college.

I also don't want to pay for someone to get a degree in the likes of psychology, sociology, philosophy, etc unless they are at minimum prepared to go for a doctorate in these fields. On top of that, I don't want to pay for joke degrees that only stupid fucking lefties would major in such as gender studies, lesbian basket weaving, etc... Anything that doesn't really have a job market other than "continuing to teach the degree to the next group of idiots"

So where is the problem? You can hand money to any college students you want to, right now, tomorrow, and a week from Tuesday.

OH, you mean everyone should pay, but only for what you want the money to go to instead of what others want the money to go to? If that's the case, it's a problem.

I do agree that some majors are far more beneficial to society than others, but am against subsidizing students any more so than they get going to their state school or through existing scholarships/etc. At the same time the cost of an education needs reigned in, universities need to get back to core functions and stop acting like they're their own government with means and goals they can fund through tuition income instead of just making ends meet.

As far as academic standards for admission, they are already far, FAR too low at the less selective schools. If education became publicly funded, I would at least want those standards RAISED from their current levels.

 

[Vic]

I...never said someone "wanted" a particular thing. This is something called a discussion - or debate if you will - I never once inferred what other people's thoughts were in my post. I gave you my opinion on what I feel is the best way to implement making college reasonable/affordable/free.

You have a retarded form of arguing kid, have you considered going back to school yourself? Is that why you're so passionately butt-hurt on this topic because your 1 IQ point away from being legally retarded?

I'm looking forward to the day when you're able to engage in an argument here without projecting your emotions onto others. Not holding my breath though.

 

[Sunburn74]

As far as academic standards for admission, they are already far, FAR too low at the less selective schools. If education became publicly funded, I would at least want those standards RAISED from their current levels.

Personally I disagree. People who don't get a great high school education can still make their way through a college education if they are focused and disciplined. There are many reasons why someone can struggle in high school and find out in college their capability for learning stabilizes. One such reason can be parental issues (parental substance abuse, parental mental and physical health, home and neighborhood violence, food insufficiency etc). Kids move away from those issues and things just kind of stabilize particularly if they have any sort of idea what sort of job they want. I can personally attest to this.

 

[Maxima1]

Community colleges can be filled with nonsense even if they seem practical. For example, sooner or later, all states will require some sort of program to be a pharmacy technician which is a joke. The national examination can be completed by a retard with little study time and go on to be techs. One to two years of unnecessary classes is laughable. Credential inflation is definitely a problem. And so are employers who don't want to spend even one hour training someone. They want it handed to them by the government.

 

[DrunkenSano]

I believe there instead of separating community colleges and universities, there should be a bridge between them. Community colleges should be free, 100%. Then, when the student finishes community college, if he did well academically and then is able to provide a solid plan for his future in the field he studied at CC, then he should have a full scholarship given to him where his housing and tuition is covered.

Our high school curriculum needs a complete overhaul as well. Humanities are fine and all but there are some absolutely crucial subjects that are not covered, at least not when I was in High School and I have not heard if being covered now in many of the schools. High school juniors and seniors should have classes in balancing a budget, how loans works, be taught about their personal finances in the future, be taught about the different career paths which includes heavy introduction to trade schools (that shows how much they can potentially make in that career path) and what community colleges can offer.

Our high schools should no longer be graded on how many students they can jam into universities and ivy league schools but how well the students graduate high school on those new courses that will prepare them for the future. They should not be allowed to graduate without learning those key life lessons, it would do more harm than good if they are pushed into life and worse, into insanely high cost universities without preparation.

 

[bill1024]

Free free free, who pays for all this free "stuff"? Do the professors teach for free? Is the electric donated by the power company for free? Maintenance staff going to work for free?
Custodians clean the school for free? Contractors going to build this school and dorms for free?...
My land and school taxes are way too high as it is now. You live in a state where they are 4-800 a YEAR for your taxes a little more may not hurt too bad. I have a small house and our taxes here are over 500$ a MONTH. My in-laws have a much bigger house in a better aria and theirs is 1100$ a MONTH. Better find a better way to pay for it, waiting on tables, flipping burgers, mowing lawns.
How about teaching the kids what they need to learn in grade school. Trade school in high school.
Shorten the Summer recess and add a hour or two to the school day. Cut back on all the holiday's the kids have off.
I can not wrap my head around how people think they have a right to have someone else pay for your "stuff" be it higher education, healthcare, housing, and the whole host of other FREE STUFF.
There is no free lunch. You have no right to other people money.