I had a grant to attend community college 20 years ago because I came from a poor background. I went 2 years and tranfered to a 4 year school. Borrowed $20 grand and got my degree.

If the poor aren't willing to sacrifice themselves somewhere along the way we are wasting money.

Overall, there are already mechanisms in place for free college. THis is just a stupid idea.

Spock;1694925 wrote:I had a grant to attend community college 20 years ago because I came from a poor background. I went 2 years and tranfered to a 4 year school. Borrowed $20 grand and got my degree.

If the poor aren't willing to sacrifice themselves somewhere along the way we are wasting money.

Overall, there are already mechanisms in place for free college. THis is just a stupid idea.

another member of the "I got mine, screw you" club

isadore;1694933 wrote:another member of the "I got mine, screw you" club

uum no. I got mine, had to do a lot extra and put some of my own skin in the game like paying school loans off over 11 years. THe money that I got for free wasn't a waste. I have paid it back 10 fold with a better job and pay a lot of taxes to the government that gave me that "free education".

My point is that we don't need this "free" program. There is already a mechanism in place.

Spock;1694934 wrote:uum no. I got mine, had to do a lot extra and put some of my own skin in the game like paying school loans off over 11 years. THe money that I got for free wasn't a waste. I have paid it back 10 fold with a better job and pay a lot of taxes to the government that gave me that "free education".

My point is that we don't need this "free" program. There is already a mechanism in place.

sir, your statement is excellent example of the "I got mine, screw you." philosophy. You think your personal experience should apply to everyone no matter what their circumstances are. If they can not make it the way you did, screw them. The mechanism is not in place for millions.

What's the benefit in paying for those who are able and willing to pay?

Con_Alma;1694940 wrote:What's the benefit in paying for those who are able and willing to pay?

gosh a ruddies another opponent of public education

Spock;1694925 wrote:I had a grant to attend community college 20 years ago because I came from a poor background. I went 2 years and tranfered to a 4 year school. Borrowed $20 grand and got my degree.

If the poor aren't willing to sacrifice themselves somewhere along the way we are wasting money.

Overall, there are already mechanisms in place for free college. THis is just a stupid idea.

So what mechanism is in place to make college affordable for the middle class?

rmolin73;1694953 wrote:So what mechanism is in place to make college affordable for the middle class?

Literally MILLIONS of middle class folk have used student loans to INVEST in themselves for well over 3 decades. The federal government already spends over $150 BILLION a year in grants and low-interest loans, or $10,000 per eligible student. And that's on top of any state aid, scholarships or other financial aid.

This is really a silly and unnecessary debate. Pretty much the only people who don't get a bunch of free money for college are the stupid rich kids.

gut;1694972 wrote:Literally MILLIONS of middle class folk have used student loans to INVEST in themselves for well over 3 decades. The federal government already spends over $150 BILLION a year in grants and low-interest loans, or $10,000 per eligible student. And that's on top of any state aid, scholarships or other financial aid.

This is really a silly and unnecessary debate. Pretty much the only people who don't get a bunch of free money for college are the stupid rich kids.

Got it student loan debt. Most of the grant money you speak of is sucked by the poor.

rmolin73;1694985 wrote:Got it student loan debt. Most of the grant money you speak of is sucked by the poor.

Many universities are very generous with scholarships. Like I said, you practically have to be a stupid rich kid to get no free money. While tuition costs have been going up significantly, so has scholarship money. One might look at that ad think the universities are already engaging in sort of wealth transfer. Put another way, the "haves" are already heavily subsidizing the "have nots", before talking about any additional federal or state aid.

http://thechoice.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/23/merit-aid-chart/?_r=0
“Need,” of course, can be defined in various ways. Last year, families making $180,000 to $200,000 got an average $23,750 in need-based financial aid from Princeton. Harvard is almost as generous.

gut;1695034 wrote:

Many universities are very generous with scholarships. Like I said, you practically have to be a stupid rich kid to get no free money. While tuition costs have been going up significantly, so has scholarship money. One might look at that ad think the universities are already engaging in sort of wealth transfer. Put another way, the "haves" are already heavily subsidizing the "have nots", before talking about any additional federal or state aid.

http://thechoice.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/23/merit-aid-chart/?_r=0
“Need,” of course, can be defined in various ways. Last year, families making $180,000 to $200,000 got an average $23,750 in need-based financial aid from Princeton. Harvard is almost as generous.

So after four years the Harvard student will have $137,000 in student loan debt. Awesome!!!!

rmolin73;1695048 wrote:So after four years the Harvard student will have $137,000 in student loan debt. Awesome!!!!

A Harvard graduate shouldn't have a problem paying that off. Should we start giving people free houses? $100k+ and more in debt doesn't seem fair, does it? This is just another spin on the class warfare bs....most people's first house will be a multiple 2-3X or more of the amount of student debt they are "burdened" with. Cry me a river.

How much someone wants to spend on college and where they go and what they study is a personal choice. Their debt stemming from poor choices should not be the taxpayer's burden (no different than someone buying too much house and defaulting).

LMAO...I like the housing analogy. We sometimes hear "that amount of debt is a housing payment!". OK, so this really isn't about paying for their college but buying them a house?!? So you get a big student loan and have to buy a smaller house. So what?

rydawg5;1694767 wrote:I know so many people who owe over 50K in loans and while they manage it, it severely lowers their discretionary income which hugely impacts the economy.

And now you're potentially raising their taxes to pay off this scheme and burdening them even further, no?

isadore;1694944 wrote:gosh a ruddies another opponent of public education

I love and support the public education we have. Your deflection of the questions I have asked is telling.

Con_Alma;1695107 wrote:I love and support the public education we have. Your deflection of the questions I have asked is telling.

If we truly want equality, we should really just start arranging marriages by lottery. Because smart people tend to be successful, and marry other smart, successful people...and have smart children. While stupid people tend to have stupid children.

You can't fix stupid. But you CAN pander for their vote.

gut;1695057 wrote:A Harvard graduate shouldn't have a problem paying that off. Should we start giving people free houses? $100k+ and more in debt doesn't seem fair, does it? This is just another spin on the class warfare bs....most people's first house will be a multiple 2-3X or more of the amount of student debt they are "burdened" with. Cry me a river.

How much someone wants to spend on college and where they go and what they study is a personal choice. Their debt stemming from poor choices should not be the taxpayer's burden (no different than someone buying too much house and defaulting).

LMAO...I like the housing analogy. We sometimes hear "that amount of debt is a housing payment!". OK, so this really isn't about paying for their college but buying them a house?!? So you get a big student loan and have to buy a smaller house. So what?

Did you even read what's being done in Tennessee?

rmolin73;1695127 wrote:Did you even read what's being done in Tennessee?

Yeah. So what? Subsidies have been shown to inflate tuition. Simply a wealth transfer from the taxpayer (ok, using lotto funds...which could be used elsewhere so same thing) to the universities. And it's not like 2-yr community colleges are that expensive to begin with, nor is it a degree considered particularly skilled or in-demand by most employers.

This is simply a handout. To people who, presumably, would be middle class or above with the degree. I don't see the need to give them a handout. The idea that people can't get money for college is complete and total bullshit.

The program makes sense for trades. There's a shortage there, and plenty of people probably being incorrectly funneled to 4-yr degrees that should be pursuing a trade.

The program makes sense for trades. There's a shortage there, and plenty of people probably being incorrectly funneled to 4-yr degrees that should be pursuing a trade.

This.

justincredible;1695096 wrote:And now you're potentially raising their taxes to pay off this scheme and burdening them even further, no?

Logically, you are right.

The last 2 presidents have spent ridiculous amounts of money for various causes.

Please site 1 example, other than payroll tax cut expiring, where any new spending program caused an increase in tax on the federal level.

I am not sure there has been one, so unless this is the "one" that finally starts the domino effect, I'm not buying it anymore.

I did believe this sentiment for the last 8 years just not so much anymore.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

rydawg5;1695157 wrote: Please site 1 example, other than payroll tax cut expiring, where any new spending program caused an increase in tax on the federal level.

Easy answer: Obamacare

Plus, given the burden this places on the states for their portion some (many?) would almost certainly have to increase taxes to pay for it. Don't see this getting through Congress, though....but it's one of those things that most Reps don't have the stomach to vote against even when they know they should.

Con_Alma;1694940 wrote:What's the benefit in paying for those who are able and willing to pay?

I guess you oppose public education where we pay for schools for many people whose families have the ability to finance a public education.

isadore;1695172 wrote:I guess you oppose public education where we pay for schools for many people whose families have the ability to finance a public education.

You guess wrong. I have stated that I don't understand the benefit in doing so.

I don't understand the benefit of doing so. You are taxing middle class to pay for those who are able and willing.

What's the benefit in that? Can you explain that or will you deflect again?

Want a free education. Join the military.

I haven't really looked into any details of this but what happens if they decide not to work? Who pays the college tuition back?

Con_Alma;1695206 wrote:You guess wrong. I have stated that I don't understand the benefit in doing so.

I don't understand the benefit of doing so. You are taxing middle class to pay for those who are able and willing.

What's the benefit in that? Can you explain that or will you deflect again?

gosh a ruddies many middle class people have the resources to send their children to private school, but chose to send their children to public school. You and members of the middle class are taxed to support these schools. You don't see the benefit of paying for people to go to those schools who could afford to go elsewhere.

America benefits from an educated and skilled population. People are unable to afford post secondary education. It should be provided to them without cost as primary and secondary education are.