2014-01-23, 05:20 AM
I think [MENTION=8755]Sardines[/MENTION]; has a point, though some of the economic repercussions go over my head. Assuming there is notice of the implementation of this program and that it doesn't occur retroactively to erase current debt, what are the likely outcomes? Obviously it will no longer treated as a commodity since it won't exist, but wouldn't that just shift investment elsewhere? There's already a lot of instability in the student debt market due to defaults especially with students that flunk out or graduate and are unable to find work. Now that I think about it, these people are probably driving up the cost of education by inflating loan interest rates to recoup the loss from defaults.
There seems to be very little discussion of the changes to public university entrance. If it becomes free, but enrollment remains constant due to locking in current funding levels, what exactly is going to change? We already completely fund tuition and living expenses for low income students. They will continue applying just as before. High income students will likely trend more towards private universities as they already do. Their would be relatively little change in their financial status due to eliminating tuition at public universities.
The real changes will be for middle class families. These families do not currently qualify for much if any financial aid and incur the greatest amount of debt. On the other hand, they are also the best performing demographic academically, mostly due to parental involvement. This means that public universities will likely see an increase in applications and enrollment of middle class students who are often the best qualified to attend. Now this could easily change from current performance due to decreased motivation since they no longer have the financial pressure to succeed. But it could simultaneously reduce financial stress and work hours which would correspondingly increase performance. I have no idea which trend would win out and I'm sure there are flaws with this reasoning, but I'd like to generate more discussion on it.
I'm not really getting where people predict graduation entitlement. We already have that. Check some of Colorado's laws regarding teacher fault when students receive failing grades. We already have a social problem where employers require degrees for everything and individuals think everyone belongs in college. Making university free may encourage this trend, but the increased standards for enrollment which I believe are an essential consequence should mitigate it. If the standards are strict enough, it may even reverse the trend.
PS. [MENTION=6823]Polantaris[/MENTION]; The US doesn't exactly have a history of balanced budgets so I see no reason to expect one after implementing this plan. Why would we be cutting anything? If you believe the original author (I don't), we'd be spending exactly the same amount of money.
There seems to be very little discussion of the changes to public university entrance. If it becomes free, but enrollment remains constant due to locking in current funding levels, what exactly is going to change? We already completely fund tuition and living expenses for low income students. They will continue applying just as before. High income students will likely trend more towards private universities as they already do. Their would be relatively little change in their financial status due to eliminating tuition at public universities.
The real changes will be for middle class families. These families do not currently qualify for much if any financial aid and incur the greatest amount of debt. On the other hand, they are also the best performing demographic academically, mostly due to parental involvement. This means that public universities will likely see an increase in applications and enrollment of middle class students who are often the best qualified to attend. Now this could easily change from current performance due to decreased motivation since they no longer have the financial pressure to succeed. But it could simultaneously reduce financial stress and work hours which would correspondingly increase performance. I have no idea which trend would win out and I'm sure there are flaws with this reasoning, but I'd like to generate more discussion on it.
I'm not really getting where people predict graduation entitlement. We already have that. Check some of Colorado's laws regarding teacher fault when students receive failing grades. We already have a social problem where employers require degrees for everything and individuals think everyone belongs in college. Making university free may encourage this trend, but the increased standards for enrollment which I believe are an essential consequence should mitigate it. If the standards are strict enough, it may even reverse the trend.
PS. [MENTION=6823]Polantaris[/MENTION]; The US doesn't exactly have a history of balanced budgets so I see no reason to expect one after implementing this plan. Why would we be cutting anything? If you believe the original author (I don't), we'd be spending exactly the same amount of money.