Obama to propose 2 free years of community college

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: Aazadan

Using that logic, what is the point of the K-12 public school system?

Education is key to the survival of a country.

I'm well aware that it's key, but throwing money at the problem without also having regulations to control costs simply makes education spending spiral out of control. 2 years also isn't nearly enough, Associates degrees (which most don't complete in 2 years) are completely worthless.

I have no idea how this will be funded. Public education is already in a state of desperation because of lack of budget, where will the states pull that 25% from?

Additionally, what is to stop these community colleges from hiking tuition 50% to pad their margins knowing that the government will be forced to pay it? Isn't that essentially what happened to the University system? Federal subsidization in the form of federal aid and loans has just incentivize schools to shoot up tuition because hey, the government will just increase aid in response. More money for them.

The real problem here, as in most things, is unwarranted government influence.

originally posted by: Pants3204
Additionally, what is to stop these community colleges from hiking tuition 50% to pad their margins knowing that the government will be forced to pay it?

They've already done such a thing due to student loans. The community college I went to charges as much per credit hour these days as a 4 year university does.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

With the protections in place now and continuing forward to protect the administration and take away the rights of parents to know how to raise their own children, for instance the school boards meeting in private to discuss how sending students to school in sub zero temps would be "safer" for them and assure that they get at least warm place to stay for the day and a couple hot meals... tells me that the hierarchy of the system is not in favor of the Students and their rights but an indoctrination into a controlled environment.

I do not trust this and know how hard it is to even gain a seat at one of the Universities today without a huge financial backing regardless of your GPA. 4 years of College today is equivalent to a high school diploma in my era.

So much to add but this is getting to long to read and making me feel frustrated and angry.

a reply to: Aazadan

That is because of the Gov grants and the ability for the rich to send their kids abroad to study in America. It will only get worse and for Obama to say that as long as they maintain a certain GPA is as uninformed as he can be. I think that they throw the rotten apples into the barrel to contaminate the rest. Highschool Junior/senior year is now first 2 years community college.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Here is an idea. Put a box on your tax return that allows you to fund:

A: The military industrial complex and corporate welfare.

B: Free college

I think a lot of people would check B. I know I would.

Giving away 2 years free college is going to cause more poverty and increase debt. You have to have JOBS. Going to college does not create jobs. Tired of this idiot government in control of all this money and they come up with the most worthless programs. This video speaks for itself... There is enough brain power in that strip club to send a crew to Mars, but they all gotta work at a strip joint? This is all across America which is about a click away from total Anarchy. Oh well who cares lets have King Obama blow more smoke up our @#$.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Typical Democrat: Awfully free with our money....

I don't know of it is still going on but Alabama had a fantastic program. Their state lottery procedes would pay the tuition at any state university for any high school graduate who had maintained grades of x (forget but it was not horribly stringent) and maintained a grade point average of y while in college.

I really liked that plan. Totally voluntary to participate in the paying as well as in the receiving of the benefits.

Really beats being robbed at gun point by the federal govt or going into debt to get a child educated.

a reply to: openminded2011

Is there a none of thee above? I'll take that option.

a reply to: bbracken677

Yes but see a single state figured it out on its own without the Feds and Obama didn't get to look good for it.

We can't have that. It might show people that the Federal Government does not always do things best.

originally posted by: bbracken677
...
I don't know of it is still going on but Alabama had a fantastic program. Their state lottery procedes would pay the tuition at any state university for any high school graduate who had maintained grades of x (forget but it was not horribly stringent) and maintained a grade point average of y while in college.
...

There are similar programs in many other states, the same in Florida. Because of my grades in High School i was able to get a free 2 year scholarship for Miami-Dade Community College, back when that used to be it's name. There were other students in my class who were also able to get free scholarships because we graduated with honors. If people studied hard they could get similar scholarships, but these days too many people just want to earn pretty much everything free without working at all for it. Too many feel entitled to get "free stuff", but these people don't understand that somehow that "free stuff" has to be paid for, and you must work hard to get it. However, involuntary servitude is never the way to go.

Even if you think that it will be good for you, or your children, there are parents who don't think like you and don't want this to happen... But of course, there are way too many leftwingers with "their much superior IQs" who think they always know what's best for everyone else, and will force you to do it...

You really have to question the IQ of people who think this plan by progressives is a good idea...

Progressives made it possible for the Federal reserve and the IRS to exist as it is...the Fed, the international bankers, have stolen trillions of dollars from U.S. taxpayers, and from other countries as well in case some people don't know this, and to this day you still get people believing that the progressive agenda such as this one to force people to work for free for the government is a good idea...

BTW, did I mention that Cuba has a similar program, and it is not what so many leftwingers think it is?... My two sisters would cry their hearts out asking my parents not to allow the regime to take them to the hard labor camps, which was the way that they would pay for the so called "free education", but since it was in the law that 'the state knows better than the parents what's best for the children, and any parent who refuses to allow the state to indoctrinate the Cuban children to be good "revolutionaries"; then custody of the children would fall completely to the state. So my parents could not stop the communist regime from taking my sisters away in the most deplorable conditions you can imagine every summer to work in their "community service programs".

Of course in the U.S. at least at first it won't look so bad, but FORCED/involuntary servitude is never a good idea...

This plan from the progressives is taken directly from the socialist/communist handbook.

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Typical Democrat: Awfully free with our money....

I don't know of it is still going on but Alabama had a fantastic program. Their state lottery procedes would pay the tuition at any state university for any high school graduate who had maintained grades of x (forget but it was not horribly stringent) and maintained a grade point average of y while in college.

I really liked that plan. Totally voluntary to participate in the paying as well as in the receiving of the benefits.

Really beats being robbed at gun point by the federal govt or going into debt to get a child educated.

Many states have those programs, just about every state with a lottery requires some of the proceeds to go towards the education budget. The problem is that budgets are fluid, when you add a source of education funding all it means is that the state can spend less taxpayer money on education and instead send that money elsewhere so that in the end it only maintains current spending on education while increasing spending in other areas.

originally posted by: sean
Giving away 2 years free college is going to cause more poverty and increase debt. You have to have JOBS.

I believe in a capitalistic system like yours it are the entrepreneurs who are expected to create jobs. Instead they get richer and richer whilst unemployment rises. In fact, it may be debated if it are JOBS we need - we seem to need income.

After two years of college, maybe some American kids will be able to read and write at a European 9th grade level.....

I almost never post around here, but this just needs to be said.

Everyone thinks free education is a good idea.

While this looks good at first glance, the over-taxed, almost-extinct middle class will bear the brunt of this "free" ride.
From what I have read, reforms to tuition have thus far only made college even less affordable to most.

In my state, property tax pays for community college.
And, in fact, is already a large part of the annual tax.
We cannot afford another of Obama's attempts at legacy.
We cannot afford his botching of healthcare.

Not many nails left to put in the coffin of the once proud middle-class.

If I was President, I would put a 700% tax on college and take away public education too because # the poor people. Those assholes. If they were smart they'd have been born rich like the rest of you.

What do they need to know anything for anyway. If they were worth anything they wouldn't be poor!

This is one of the best decsion made by Obama Gvt.

originally posted by: StalkerSolent

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: StalkerSolent

I'm pretty sure that link has shown up here on ATS a few times actually. I'm pretty sure I've read it before too.

You bring up a good point. Because of the idea that a college degree is a must have, jobs that never required degrees require degrees now. Jobs like simple data entry and such. It's jobs like these that add to that national statistic of people unable to pay back their student loans.

Thanks! I'm getting a degree in something that I could *easily* learn with a couple years on the job. Fortunately, I'm at a liberal arts school, so I'm getting *much more* than that, but I don't think an degrees in things like architecture, journalism, accounting, manufacturing, etc. etc... Now, I think getting a degree is good, simply because I think education is a good thing, but unless you're going into something like engineering or science or higher mathematics, I don't think you need a degree. You'd learn just as well on the job. I think most companies would just as soon take on a promising 18 year old kid and teach them the tricks of the trade as read another resume and hope for the best. Not only would they learn exactly what they needed to, it would encourage community involvement/cooperation (cooperations would be trying to find the best talent instead of just colleges) and set people to *producing* stuff for four extra years. Think of all the progress that could be made by young folks *earning salaries* instead of getting into debt or breaking even for four years. That's a lot of extra wealth that can be created, and folks could get on their feet so much sooner in life.

I disagree slightly. I can see the need for say an English degree if you are going to go into professional writing or journalism. There certainly are useful liberal arts degrees; it's just that they are easier to obtain than technical degrees and therefore become the low hanging fruit that most unexperienced people reach for. So the market for those degrees becomes over-saturated.

a reply to: sean

College degrees don't equal jobs.

I never graduated from college, make close to $90k a year in my day job, own a business (2yrs old) and make about $30k a year right now from it, only because it is basically part time.

College is over-rated. And expensive.