"How would the US fund free college tuition?"

[flexy]

Citing CNN....

Clinton is also likely to raise questions about how Sanders would fund some of his proposals, including for free college tuition, the Democrat said.

Clinton is supposed to be a democrat, right?

Why is "free college tuition" then something inconceivable to her? It's said she'll probably ask Sanders how he'd fund free collage education, because for the richest nation in the world which just got a new F35 Fighter Jet (total project cost $1.4Tril and $104M/piece).."free college tuition" seems to be something unheard of.

It needs a "hardcore socialist" like Sanders to propose things which in other countries are working for ages already, countries which are less prosperous than the US.

If Clinton is about to ask Sanders "how to fund free collage education?"...does it mean this is something she'd never considered before..or something which sounds so incredibly outlandish to her that she'd need to ask Sanders how he'd perform such a miracle?

 

[glenn1]

Citing CNN....

Clinton is also likely to raise questions about how Sanders would fund some of his proposals, including for free college tuition, the Democrat said.

Clinton is supposed to be a democrat, right?

Why is "free college tuition" then something inconceivable to her? It's said she'll probably ask Sanders how he'd fund free collage education, because for the richest nation in the world which just got a new F35 Fighter Jet (total project cost $1.4Tril and $104M/piece).."free college tuition" seems to be something unheard of.

It needs a "hardcore socialist" like Sanders to propose things which in other countries are working for ages already, countries which are less prosperous than the US.

If Clinton is about to ask Sanders "how to fund free collage education?"...does it mean this is something she'd never considered before..or something which sounds so incredibly outlandish to her that she'd need to ask Sanders how he'd perform such a miracle?

Nothing is free. The honest question would be "who can you seize the money from to give someone else the funds to pay for their college"? And if they were successful in convincing those targets in an open and honest debate that doing so was something in the ultimate best interests of themselves and the country in general, then great. But don't throw out this "free" bullshit like God is just going to miracle a bunch of free college to us all.

 

[nakedfrog]

So far Sanders appears to be the only viable rival, he is therefore her enemy. Whether or not she actually believes anything she says is irrelevant.

 

[momeNt]

My guess is that we would fund it very very carefully

 

[boomerang]

[FONT=&quot]You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
[/FONT]
When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation.


[FONT=&quot]Author - unknown[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=&quot]

[FONT=&quot]College educ[FONT=&quot]ation[FONT=&quot]s that aren't free [FONT=&quot]don't seem to be serving many of our people very well right n[FONT=&quot]ow.[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot] Does Sanders have any plans to create a robust economy besides sticking his hands in the p[FONT=&quot]ockets of those he deems to [FONT=&quot]have too much?[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT] [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT] [/FONT]

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Citing CNN....

Clinton is also likely to raise questions about how Sanders would fund some of his proposals, including for free college tuition, the Democrat said.

Clinton is supposed to be a democrat, right?

Why is "free college tuition" then something inconceivable to her? It's said she'll probably ask Sanders how he'd fund free collage education, because for the richest nation in the world which just got a new F35 Fighter Jet (total project cost $1.4Tril and $104M/piece).."free college tuition" seems to be something unheard of.

It needs a "hardcore socialist" like Sanders to propose things which in other countries are working for ages already, countries which are less prosperous than the US.

If Clinton is about to ask Sanders "how to fund free collage education?"...does it mean this is something she'd never considered before..or something which sounds so incredibly outlandish to her that she'd need to ask Sanders how he'd perform such a miracle?

.... Because it's millions upon millions of dollars that the government doesn't have.

It's very republican of her to ask questions like "How do you plan to pay for that?". That's also what logical people do.... you know, instead of charging them to a credit card and saying "Ehhhhh, we will worry about it later!"

 

[mect]

[FONT=&quot]You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
[/FONT]
When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation.


[FONT=&quot]Author - unknown[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

Sounds like a red herring. Or are you really arguing that we should cease all support of public education?

 

[boomerang]

Sounds like a red herring. Or are you really arguing that we should cease all support of public education?

My post was an attempt to point out the folly of thinking that taking from rich people is the answer to our problems.

 

[mect]

My post was an attempt to point out the folly of thinking that taking from rich people is the answer to our problems.

So again, are you saying you oppose free k-12 education?

We are currently funding higher education at the lowest levels in at least 60 years. Everyone seems to think that tuition keeps going up because of faculty and administration salaries. The real source is decreasing funding from the states. Apparently funding prisons is a higher priority in our country than funding education.

 

[boomerang]

Sanders' Gimmick Persuades Sluggish Thinkers

A question for the socialist senator from Vermont: would he prefer that that there was no proliferation of millionaires and billionaires, and that all Americans were equally mired in poverty? If not, then let’s stop talking about poverty as if it were an inequality problem.

Sanders is employing one of the most popular gimmicks inequality alarmists use to get Americans fired up about income disparities: he is conflating hardship and comparative differences. Here’s how it works:

Step 1: Point to people facing a genuine hardship, like poverty.

Step 2: Point to people who are enjoying above-average success.

Step 3: Imply that the problem is the gap between the two, not the hardship itself. (Bonus points if you can suggest that the one group’s success is the cause of the other group’s hardship.)

Step 4: Advocate closing the gap by bringing down the high fliers.
Whenever you see this sort of argument, you can be sure that the goal of the speaker is not to end the hardship, but to smash the successful.

 

[boomerang]

So again, are you saying you oppose free k-12 education?

We are currently funding higher education at the lowest levels in at least 60 years. Everyone seems to think that tuition keeps going up because of faculty and administration salaries. The real source is decreasing funding from the states. Apparently funding prisons is a higher priority in our country than funding education.

No, that's not what I said although you have made it clear that that is the interpretation you choose to apply to it. I have nothing for you. Find someone else to have your silly argument with.

Better yet, start a thread about the injustices associated with our educational system. You can cite yourself as an example.

 

[mect]

No, that's not what I said although you have made it clear that that is the interpretation you choose to apply to it. I have nothing for you. Find someone else to have your silly argument with.

Better yet, start a thread about the injustices associated with our educational system. You can cite yourself as an example.

Since you apparently lack the reading comprehension to grasp this, the injustices associated with our educational system is precisely what this thread is about.

 

[mect]

As the OP pointed out, it wouldn't be that difficult to cover. Total tuition costs in the US are $70 billion. If the US just stopped a bunch of the gimicky education funding they support that would cover a sizeable chunk of that cost. Stop enforcing drug laws (particularly for marijuanna) and that would cover a bunch. Stop our policing of the world, and that would cover the cost several times over. It isn't that its not feasible, the problem is morons that think any kind of support of the public good beyond their own pet projects is anti-capitalistic Robin Hooded communism.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Marijuana sales duh!

 

[MajinCry]

Tax the rich. Easy.

 

[tracerbullet]

Hypothetically speaking, could additional college graduates enter the work force, earn additional money, the country overall benefits, and from that the money ends up being repaid? It's a stretch, I know.

I'm just not buying into the idea there is a finite amount of money that has to move from person A to person B (i.e. "tax the rich"). Just help person B get a job, become a tax paying american, and you should get at least some return on investment, no?

 

[Sonikku]

Do what Denmark does. Done and done.

You'd think America was pioneering some unbelievable concept that has neither been attempted or done before to hear some people tell it.

 

[OverVolt]

Skills testing would be required like in Germany and Japan.

Open access or low cost. Pick 1.

For awhile, we got away with FAFSA/Student loans/Student aid as an effective in-between measure. But that has inevitably just led to inflated costs by throwing loans at the universities.

 

[flexy]

Nothing is free. The honest question would be "who can you seize the money from to give someone else the funds to pay for their college"?

Yes, stating the obvious. Not that I don't hear "nothing is free" every day lots of times.

HOWEVER..the question for me is why folks' shouting "Nothing is free!" pretty much ALWAYS when it comes to things related to social, education etc...but barely ever whether it's ok what they pay on taxes for the military or Obama's vacations.

Did someone ask you whether you want to pay taxes to fund, say, the F35? Why no outrage and "wondering where to take the money?" for this stuff...but then outrage and obvious stating how "nothing is free" as soon as sane projects like education etc. are on the agenda?

Do you see the hypocrisy here...and/or do you see where I have a problem following?

Stop enforcing drug laws (particularly for marijuanna)

Or that. I mean you get the drift. The US is (still) the wealthiest nation, I just find it awkward that such questions do even come up. TLDR: I am very certain that the US wouldn't have a problem funding free college tuition.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

As the OP pointed out, it wouldn't be that difficult to cover. Total tuition costs in the US are $70 billion. If the US just stopped a bunch of the gimicky education funding they support that would cover a sizeable chunk of that cost. Stop enforcing drug laws (particularly for marijuanna) and that would cover a bunch. Stop our policing of the world, and that would cover the cost several times over. It isn't that its not feasible, the problem is morons that think any kind of support of the public good beyond their own pet projects is anti-capitalistic Robin Hooded communism.

Have to call bullshit on that claim. It's more like $400 billion. And that's just tuition costs alone for students that currently attend college. If we made college free for any and all who wanted to attend the cost would be much higher.

I'm not saying it couldn't be done even at the higher costs, but making lowball claims does you no favors in your argument.

 

[BoberFett]

Do what Denmark does. Done and done.

You'd think America was pioneering some unbelievable concept that has neither been attempted or done before to hear some people tell it.

Oh of course. Just do something that another country which is nothing like the US has done, and it will work out exactly the same.

Good thinking. Why hasn't anybody else thought of that.

http://nypost.com/2015/01/11/sorry-liberals-scandinavian-countries-arent-utopias/

https://www.quora.com/Is-Denmark-some-kind-of-utopia

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/27/scandinavian-miracle-brutal-truth-denmark-norway-sweden

 

[mect]

Have to call bullshit on that claim. It's more like $400 billion. And that's just tuition costs alone for students that currently attend college. If we made college free for any and all who wanted to attend the cost would be much higher.

I'm not saying it couldn't be done even at the higher costs, but making lowball claims does you no favors in your argument.

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2013/2013183.pdf

See page 7.

 

[OverVolt]

Have to call bullshit on that claim. It's more like $400 billion. And that's just tuition costs alone for students that currently attend college. If we made college free for any and all who wanted to attend the cost would be much higher.

I'm not saying it couldn't be done even at the higher costs, but making lowball claims does you no favors in your argument.

Half of them shouldn't be there. The graduation rate will need to go from 50% to 90%+.

 

[alcoholbob]

The cost of college is also bid upwards by foreigners who can't get into a college in their home country because their home country has a more meritocratic system where as people come from all other world into the US college system since you can either buy your way into a US college or get in because of you are the right ethnicity.

 

[glenn1]

Yes, stating the obvious. Not that I don't hear "nothing is free" every day lots of times.

HOWEVER..the question for me is why folks' shouting "Nothing is free!" pretty much ALWAYS when it comes to things related to social, education etc...but barely ever whether it's ok what they pay on taxes for the military or Obama's vacations.

Did someone ask you whether you want to pay taxes to fund, say, the F35? Why no outrage and "wondering where to take the money?" for this stuff...but then outrage and obvious stating how "nothing is free" as soon as sane projects like education etc. are on the agenda?

Do you see the hypocrisy here...and/or do you see where I have a problem following?

Or that. I mean you get the drift. The US is (still) the wealthiest nation, I just find it awkward that such questions do even come up. TLDR: I am very certain that the US wouldn't have a problem funding free college tuition.

I didn't get asked because we have a representative democracy to weigh in on things like that. And if some politician asked for my opinion on the F35 I'd argue against it, both as an individual budget line item and as a logical candidate to reduce the larger overall total defense spending.

I'd put "free college" in the same category; a defensible idea that provides social benefits unequally towards too small a segment of the population. Plus it further subsidizes an industry that doesn't need additional demand stimulation while completely mooting any appropriate value tradeoff calculation by the supposed beneficiaries.