Watch: Neil Cavuto Calmly Destroys Liberal Student Demanding 'Free' College For All

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
end corporate welfare
less defense spending
more education.

win win win.

All things I am for. The problem is that is vapid if you don't have real numbers.

Its like saying, do less wasteful things and spend money on more useful things.

I am asking for numbers that make sense. To say that we spend 18% vs others 10% on healthcare and we should spend 8% less and put that into education is not really a plan. We are stupid to spend as much on healthcare as we do, but that will not translate into savings if we dont change the fundamental issues.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,785
6,187
126
I thought you were out? Did you just say you were to seem smug? You sounded really smug.

What you are trying to say is that you can just switch over to single payer and you will save 8% in the next 10 or so years. That will not work out that way. I pointed out why our system costs more, and its not because its partly private.

Here is a paper on this very issue. Look at the tables from page 29 and beyond.

http://www.nber.org/papers/w13429.pdf

What you will see is that per capita, those in the US get far more treatment. I am not saying this is better treatment, but they get more treatment. That raises the cost.

Canada has 8.8% that have high blood pressure and 84.1% get treatment. US has 13.1% high blood pressure, and 88.3% get treatment.

If you look at women and things like mammograms, 88.6% of US women have had one, while 72.3% of Canadian women have had one.

Men's prostate test. 16.4% of men have had one, and 54.2% of US men have had one.

So, single payer will not fix this if there is not a shift in what people expect. A huge part of why the US healthcare system costs so much is that we expect far more to be done. End of life care is fucking crazy in this country. A huge chunk of why our system costs so much is EOL care.

I am not saying single payer is not the right path either. What I am saying is that if it is going to save us money, we need to be more realistic about the care we expect.

I was "out for now." Friday is a work day around here :)
I am going from first principles. If other developed countries can deliver similar or better health metrics at half the cost as percent of GDP as we do, then it can be done. And the savings can be used to pay for a lot of things, including free college. Also, even your percentages are not double, but the cost is. Also, these are all prescribed by health care providers, not patients, so if they aren't adding value, then they should not be.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,200
14,875
136
Just a few points, as I am sure you think you made a great point here.

Many many people in Germany do not go to college. Many go into a trade school instead of college.

Further, not everyone is allowed to go to college, so its not free for anyone. First, you have to meet qualifications. If you were to get a HS diploma in the US, you would not qualify for free college in Germany. You must get certain certifications before you are allowed to go to college in Germany.

So, if the US wanted to exclude about 50% of the population, then we might be able to do what Germany does. That would also require we change our colleges to be much cheaper like theirs, but that is a much longer issue.

So, if you point was that Germany already does then, well then that was stupid. If that was not your point, then please explain.

That is false. Now it may be true that any one with a diploma doesn't mean acceptance is automatic but a diploma and other requirements one would achieve in high school would be enough.

https://www.daad.de/deutschland/nach-deutschland/voraussetzungen/en/6017-admission-requirements/

https://www.daad.de/deutschland/nac...ion-requirements/?id=15&ebene=2&submit=Show+»
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
That is false. Now it may be true that any one with a diploma doesn't mean acceptance is automatic but a diploma and other requirements one would achieve in high school would be enough.

https://www.daad.de/deutschland/nach-deutschland/voraussetzungen/en/6017-admission-requirements/

https://www.daad.de/deutschland/nac...ion-requirements/?id=15&ebene=2&submit=Show+»

Wait, what is wrong about what I said? Fewer people enter college in Germany than in the US. That's a fact. Many do not qualify to go to college as they have not taken or would not pass the entrance exams to suplament the fact that they took a different educational path.

What about what I said is wrong?
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,200
14,875
136
If you are arguing about not giving the corporations more money, then I 100% support that. They have been using the taxpayers to make them richer for a long time.

But, the main reason the US healthcare system costs so much more is because of what we expect from our system. If you just did single payer and did nothing else, there would be little to no cost reduction. If you were to try and do price controls, it would also not do much good, as price controls have been tried so many times and not worked. US society would simply demand just as much and expect to pay less.

We cannot have a system like Canada because they wont pay for many things we expect today.

If your argument is that we should be spending money on education vs the healthcare, the sure. But, reality does not work like that. You will never be able to take money spent there and move it over to education. Its just a fluff thing to say.

I find it odd that you want everyone to show you the details of their solutions (ala buckshot) and yet you yourself make vague and bogus claims with absolutely zero evidence to back up your claims.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,200
14,875
136
Wait, what is wrong about what I said? Fewer people enter college in Germany than in the US. That's a fact. Many do not qualify to go to college as they have not taken or would not pass the entrance exams to suplament the fact that they took a different educational path.

What about what I said is wrong?

I thought my point was pretty obvious but I'll quote your claim that is refuted by the link i posted.

If you were to get a HS diploma in the US, you would not qualify for free college in Germany. You must get certain certifications before you are allowed to go to college in Germany.

Your argument about taking entrance exams and the amount of people who would be accepted is also a red herring as it is now, not everyone is accepted into college here in the states and entrance exams are required for a lot of colleges as well and like Germany there are classes where there are no requirements.
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
I thought my point was pretty obvious but I'll quote your claim that is refuted by the link i posted.



Your argument about taking entrance exams and the amount of people who would be accepted is also a red herring as it is now, not everyone is accepted into college here in the states and entrance exams are required for a lot of colleges as well and like Germany there are classes where there are no requirements.

I have often wondered what a US student would face when applying to a German university. I haven't done much research on the topic.

But I do know this, the Abitur is no joke. I have several German friends, some just went to Realschule, others when to Gymnasium and didn't pass the Abitur, others did and still failed out of school. From what they tell me, it is *much* more difficult there, especially as they weed out people at such a young age, your parents have to be utterly committed, as well as the student.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
110,511
29,094
146
All things I am for. The problem is that is vapid if you don't have real numbers.

Its like saying, do less wasteful things and spend money on more useful things.

I am asking for numbers that make sense. To say that we spend 18% vs others 10% on healthcare and we should spend 8% less and put that into education is not really a plan. We are stupid to spend as much on healthcare as we do, but that will not translate into savings if we dont change the fundamental issues.

And yet we have all sorts of wonderful examples of how to do this, though. It is called: All of the world that isn't the US.

Honestly it's a stupid question to ask how to do it and then treat people like children for giving the obvious answer, when those challenging simply don't want to do it for pettiness and ignorance.

It's like the dude in the video--he understands as little if not less about the cost of running universities than that girl does. Tuition really isn't a factor. Funding is the factor, and that is what drives major universities. This is followed by endowments/gifts. Tuition pays for certain student services: meals and maybe required laptops and crap like that, but has nothing to do with the salaries of nearly all of the faculty, staff, and support services.
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
And yet we have all sorts of wonderful examples of how to do this, though. It is called: All of the world that isn't the US.

Honestly it's a stupid question to ask how to do it and then treat people like children for giving the obvious answer, when those challenging simply don't want to do it for pettiness and ignorance.

It's like the dude in the video--he understands as little if not less about the cost of running universities than that girl does. Tuition really isn't a factor. Funding is the factor, and that is what drives major universities. This is followed by endowments/gifts. Tuition pays for certain student services: meals and maybe required laptops and crap like that, but has nothing to do with the salaries of nearly all of the faculty, staff, and support services.

Tuition is 25% of the University of Minnesota's budget, up from 15% in 2000.
 

HamburgerBoy

Lifer
Apr 12, 2004
27,112
318
126
And yet we have all sorts of wonderful examples of how to do this, though. It is called: All of the world that isn't the US.

Honestly it's a stupid question to ask how to do it and then treat people like children for giving the obvious answer, when those challenging simply don't want to do it for pettiness and ignorance.

It's like the dude in the video--he understands as little if not less about the cost of running universities than that girl does. Tuition really isn't a factor. Funding is the factor, and that is what drives major universities. This is followed by endowments/gifts. Tuition pays for certain student services: meals and maybe required laptops and crap like that, but has nothing to do with the salaries of nearly all of the faculty, staff, and support services.

I'm curious what this is based on. Just to pick UCSD arbitrarily, a large university also with a large endowment, you're looking at a $750 million endowment, vs 25,000 students * $12,000 annual tuition (assuming 100% are in-state which obviously isn't the case) and you're still looking at another $300 million. If you pick a lower-tier university, tuition could easily be on par.

I'm not sure what your point is to begin with.
 

BigDH01

Golden Member
Jul 8, 2005
1,630
82
91
Attending college doesn't necessarily make you educated. Just look at the ~half of students that drop out before completing their degree. Germany can do it in part because they have half the number of college graduates per capita, which is ensured by more rigorous examinations to get into college. So do we...

1. Allow sub-par students a free ride, potentially by feeding them through diploma mills to make room for packed quality universities, to increase our number of "college educated" students even further?

or

2. Restrict those students entirely from ever setting foot in college, actually decreasing our number of college graduates, while giving the above average students a free ride?

2, with some additions.

1) We need to admit that college isn't for everyone and that's ok. College should be for the sciences and maybe only then for those that intend to do original research in the sciences. This means a high degree of selectivity, but the state funds most of the education.

2) Cheaper trade schools that start before 18. Why not give students who don't care to go to college the option of starting a trade school while still in high school? My high school offered programs like this and I knew kids who graduated HS with 40k/yr jobs waiting for them.

It's obvious that current higher education in the US is a joke for many reasons. Too many people are going into college which has turned it into HS++, the feds see it as a way to put young people into a holding pattern to inflate employment numbers, 18 year olds take on way too much debt not entirely understanding how it's going to hurt their future (I know I am a lot wiser now than I was at 18), and the universities themselves have no skin in the game so they keep peddling worthless degrees. It's a terrible system and simply throwing more money at it will solve nothing.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,200
14,875
136
2, with some additions.

1) We need to admit that college isn't for everyone and that's ok. College should be for the sciences and maybe only then for those that intend to do original research in the sciences. This means a high degree of selectivity, but the state funds most of the education.

2) Cheaper trade schools that start before 18. Why not give students who don't care to go to college the option of starting a trade school while still in high school? My high school offered programs like this and I knew kids who graduated HS with 40k/yr jobs waiting for them.

It's obvious that current higher education in the US is a joke for many reasons. Too many people are going into college which has turned it into HS++, the feds see it as a way to put young people into a holding pattern to inflate employment numbers, 18 year olds take on way too much debt not entirely understanding how it's going to hurt their future (I know I am a lot wiser now than I was at 18), and the universities themselves have no skin in the game so they keep peddling worthless degrees. It's a terrible system and simply throwing more money at it will solve nothing.

I'd say the issue is the quality of education in k-12 that isn't adequate enough to create quality applicants.

Fix lower education and reduce loan availability for private schools and increase the number or the size of public colleges and public vocational schools to better compete with the private colleges as well as have more or better oversight of private schools and not only will quality increase across the board but costs will drop due to increased competition.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
I find it odd that you want everyone to show you the details of their solutions (ala buckshot) and yet you yourself make vague and bogus claims with absolutely zero evidence to back up your claims.

I literally linked a research paper. Is that no backing up my claim with data?
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
I thought my point was pretty obvious but I'll quote your claim that is refuted by the link i posted.



Your argument about taking entrance exams and the amount of people who would be accepted is also a red herring as it is now, not everyone is accepted into college here in the states and entrance exams are required for a lot of colleges as well and like Germany there are classes where there are no requirements.

I said you need to get further qualifications beyond a HS diploma. You cannot get into college in Germany with just a US diploma. In the US you can. You might have to take extra classes if you missed some classes in HS.

I still don't know what it is that you think I have wrong.
 

Blue_Max

Diamond Member
Jul 7, 2011
4,227
153
106
Why would we pay taxes for our kids to take free-but-worthless 'social' courses?

Make the productive/STEM/trades cheap-as-free to create more working taxpayers and feed the economy.

The super-liberals can pay for their own poli-sci & gender studies 'degrees'.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
And yet we have all sorts of wonderful examples of how to do this, though. It is called: All of the world that isn't the US.

Honestly it's a stupid question to ask how to do it and then treat people like children for giving the obvious answer, when those challenging simply don't want to do it for pettiness and ignorance.

It's like the dude in the video--he understands as little if not less about the cost of running universities than that girl does. Tuition really isn't a factor. Funding is the factor, and that is what drives major universities. This is followed by endowments/gifts. Tuition pays for certain student services: meals and maybe required laptops and crap like that, but has nothing to do with the salaries of nearly all of the faculty, staff, and support services.


I am not defending the current system. I have no problem with it being for profit. The problem is that most colleges get tax money. Our colleges are filled with shit that is not in other countries. They have fewer classes to take for a degree. German culture stops its colleges from being like ours.

In a real market, there is a feed back loop that would deal with this. The problem is that the way we do things is to tax everyone and those that typically go to college are middle class and above.
 

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,475
6,896
136
So I noticed some folks in this thread are using the same schtick that Cavuto used in his interview with that hapless college student to argue in Cavuto's favor. lol Now that's entertainment.

That student in Cavuto's interview obviously didn't know how she was going to be exploited by one of FOX's minions. A hard lesson for her to learn, but she's young, she'll be all the wiser for it.

A more experienced pundit like Bill Clinton would have been able to see Cavuto's well-worn lame trap a mile away, armed himself accordingly and would have kicked Cavuto's ass into next Tuesday.

Picking on a patsy to entertain their viewers with doesn't seem to make a convincing argument to me. All I saw was a big bully isolating his victim and tearing into it just for the sport.

There wasn't anything substantial or noteworthy that came out of that interview. It was the same old tired ass thoroughly discredited FOX talking points being rehashed and served up with some fresh meat.
 
Last edited:

HamburgerBoy

Lifer
Apr 12, 2004
27,112
318
126
fwiw, if I'm one of them, I didn't bother watching the interview and don't even know who Neil Cavuto is.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,200
14,875
136
I literally linked a research paper. Is that no backing up my claim with data?

Your claim that because we get more tests done means we have better care is a dubious one. Furthermore the data from your study doesn't show that the money spent in the US is proportional to how much better care/health the US receives versus canada.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,200
14,875
136
I said you need to get further qualifications beyond a HS diploma. You cannot get into college in Germany with just a US diploma. In the US you can. You might have to take extra classes if you missed some classes in HS.

I still don't know what it is that you think I have wrong.

The link I provided to you days otherwise. Did you read it? I even linked to the specific page that deals with internationals from the US.
 
Nov 25, 2013
32,083
11,718
136
Why would we pay taxes for our kids to take free-but-worthless 'social' courses?

Make the productive/STEM/trades cheap-as-free to create more working taxpayers and feed the economy.

The super-liberals can pay for their own poli-sci & gender studies 'degrees'.

You really should consider moving to Oklahoma. You'd fit in wonderfully.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,200
14,875
136
Why would we pay taxes for our kids to take free-but-worthless 'social' courses?

Make the productive/STEM/trades cheap-as-free to create more working taxpayers and feed the economy.

The super-liberals can pay for their own poli-sci & gender studies 'degrees'.

This why you are right up there with Michael1980 and John Connor.