[DrCaleb]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

We don't know what the effect of more educated people in the workplace will be.

Yes, we do. Unless there's a demand for more educated people then the resulting oversupply of college graduates will cause salaries to decline.

It also results in too many people obtaining degrees for fields in which they will never find work.

That's not what history shows. Finland, Germany, Sweden - all these countries offer free University tuition, and all of them are looking for skilled workers.

$1:

According to a bi-annual study of skilled worker shortages released on Tuesday, Germany is currently lacking employees in 19 sectors. These include both jobs requiring university degrees and those which do not need an academic qualification.

https://www.thelocal.de/jobs/article/th ... s-the-most

$1:

Germany Average Gross Monthly Earnings



http://www.tradingeconomics.com/germany/wages

[BartSimpson]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

That's not what history shows. Finland, Germany, Sweden - all these countries offer free University tuition, and all of them are looking for skilled workers.

They're also bringing in millions of unskilled immigrants to clean their homes, collect the garbage, and work in the trades. They're also doing the other jobs the Europeans don't want to do like raping unescorted women, terrorizing patrons at bars, murdering cartoonists, slaughtering beach goers, and killing Jews.

[herbie]

Ja, yoost like America does. But only some of zem speak Spanish.

[BeaverFever]

1. It's not true that making university more affordable will unleash a floodgate of university graduates on the job market or drain workers from other parts of the economy. The idea is ridiculous. Most people who have the grades, qualifications and desire to get into university do. Only a small percentage of them avoid it for the cost.....in Canada anyways. Tuition support programs in Canada are mainly about making university less of a financial burden on parents and students who are going to attend university regardless, not about significantly increasing enrolment. US is a different because pf absurd tuition and general lack of public funding but I still imagine the number of new applicants as a result of this program will be fairly small relative to the overall number of students

2. Some of the arguments being made in this thread that access to university is/ should be rationed BASED ON ABILITY TO PAY are wrong and absurd.

[rickc]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

1. It's not true that making university more affordable will unleash a floodgate of university graduates on the job market or drain workers from other parts of the economy. The idea is ridiculous. Most people who have the grades, qualifications and desire to get into university do. Only a small percentage of them avoid it for the cost.....in Canada anyways. Tuition support programs in Canada are mainly about making university less of a financial burden on parents and students who are going to attend university regardless, not about significantly increasing enrolment. US is a different because pf absurd tuition and general lack of public funding but I still imagine the number of new applicants as a result of this program will be fairly small relative to the overall number of students

2. Some of the arguments being made in this thread that access to university is/ should be rationed BASED ON ABILITY TO PAY are wrong and absurd.

Absurd tuition? Lets take a look at the tuition for the university in question, The State University of New York: https://www.suny.edu/smarttrack/tuition-and-fees/
They have a tuition of $6470 a year. How is that absurd? How is that unaffordable? Lets compare that tuition to some Canadian universities: http://globalnews.ca/news/1558161/heres ... in-canada/
$30 more than Nova Scotia. $146 more than New Brunswick. Cheaper than Saskatchewan, cheaper than Ontario. And so it goes. Almost every state has a state funded university system with equally affordable tuition for its residents. North Dakota State University $3462. Etc., etc. When you hear about people going hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt for a four year degree they are either going to a ivy league school, or they are an idiot. Some people get suckered into private for profit schools. Big mistake. They earn worthless degrees and amount massive debt. Thats their own stupidity. Some people choose to go out of state at triple the tuition rates and astronomical costs of living. Sometimes these out of state schools degrees carry no more weight than the in state school provides. The student just wants "the experience". Another big mistake. If you choose to drive a Bentley instead of a accent, than your debt is going to be much higher. My kid is going in state and living at home. Her scholarships for good grades are paying 90% of the cost. I pickup the rest as that was the deal if she got good grades. She will graduate next year debt free. She wants to be a teacher. Teacher salaries are determined by union contract. They will not pay you more because you have an Ivy League degree. Why take on more debt than you need too? The woman that I am seeing has a kid that wanted to go out of state to a university that carries no more clout than the one my daughter is attending. She had the same scholarships as my kid. Those scholarships are for in state use only. She lost over $30,000 in aid that she had already been awarded. She wanted to go out of state for "the experience". I hope she is enjoying the experience of working two part time jobs to keep a roof over head, and ramen in her gut. Her debt is sky high. I know she will not enjoy the experience of paying off all that debt. A few years from now she (and other snowflakes) will be demanding that the rest of us forgive her "unbearable burden" of student aid debt. I say fuck her!!! She chose to take on all that debt to go to a party school. Thats on her. Soon the party will be over. The piper will want to be paid. I did not get to join in on the party, I will be damned if I have to help pay the bill

Saying that there is a general lack of funding for post secondary education in the states is laughable. Get back to doing your homework. We pay more than you do. There is a short paragraph in this article addressing that: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/nat ... e12799013/
On a side note that others have brought up in this thread, If Canada has a higher rate of college graduates than the U.S. than why do you have a higher rate of unemployment? The U.S. is at 4.7% Canada is at 6.6%. Can you explain that?

[BeaverFever]

The tuition for SUNY that you report is reasonable, however the fact remains university tuition in the US OVERALL is generally higher than in Canada and this is in large part due to the fact that US approach has been to subsidize loans and grats rather than tuition.

I don't understand the question at the end of your post about unemployment rates, what does that have to do with anything?

[rickc]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

The tuition for SUNY that you report is reasonable, however the fact remains university tuition in the US OVERALL is generally higher than in Canada and this is in large part due to the fact that US approach has been to subsidize loans and grats rather than tuition.

I don't understand the question at the end of your post about unemployment rates, what does that have to do with anything?

We have way to many for profit schools that are diploma mills. I will give President Obama props for disallowing federal student aid to ITT. They were one of the worst. They would hang outside of unemployment offices looking for fresh meat to sign up. The government would insure the loan. The kid would rack up debt that they could never repay. The credits from the school were not transferable to other schools. The degrees did not carry as much weight as an Associates degree from a community college. We have to many people who think that they need to attend an Ivy league school. I have nothing against Ivy league schools. If someone gets accepted and has a scholarship close to full ride/or full ride, parents are paying, etc., than go for it!!! Depending on the major, one can write their own ticket with a degree from an Ivy league school. Just don't go into lifelong debt at an Ivy league school to be a social worker, teacher, women's studies whatever, journalist, etc. Know what your career pays. If a lifetime of work in your chosen career will not pay off your student loans, than you need a cheaper school. If you like tech. and MIT accepts you, than go!!! The cost will be well worth your demand when you graduate.

People in the thread were addressing how higher rates of people with degrees might affect the job market. You were stating that it would have no effect whatsoever. The article that I posted stated that Canada's higher college degree rate was helping with the unemployment rate of Canadian youth. I find it strange that Canada has a higher rate of people with a college degree than the states, yet has a higher unemployment rate. I am not drawing any conclusions on the matter, just throwing it out for debate. Any thoughts?

[Lemmy]

rickc rickc:

If you like tech. and MIT accepts you, than go!!! The cost will be well worth your demand when you graduate.

It's possible to live a meaningful life without going to MIT, but I'm not sure how.

rickc rickc:

People in the thread were addressing how higher rates of people with degrees might affect the job market. You were stating that it would have no effect whatsoever. The article that I posted stated that Canada's higher college degree rate was helping with the unemployment rate of Canadian youth. I find it strange that Canada has a higher rate of people with a college degree than the states, yet has a higher unemployment rate. I am not drawing any conclusions on the matter, just throwing it out for debate. Any thoughts?

Canada has a higher unemployment rate than the US only because we calculate the statistic differently.

[bootlegga]

I'm not a big fan of free tuition, as I feel that when people are given something with no effort, there is less incentive to respect it.

I'd far prefer a system where people go to school and the state paid their tuition AFTER they graduated, providing the had good marks, attendance and so on. That would prevent any abuse a free tuition system might create.

Another option might be to only offer free tuition in fields where there are labour shortages, such as STEM. That seems like a win-win to me too.

[Lemmy]

I'm not sure what you mean by "abuse", but the biggest change with free tuition, I predict, would be that a lot more will try out university without completing it. For that reason I agree with you that reimbursement should come afterward. Another idea I've heard is that 1st year costs be on the student and if they make it through freshman year, the rest of their tuition would be covered. We already weed out slackers in first year to cull the herd as it is. But we need first-year dropouts to fund the system! We milk those slacker-rich kids' families to subsidize the rest.

That "weeding out" task would surely be bigger if tuition were "free" but I seriously doubt that a lot more students would graduate from university just because its costs are subsidized. The greatest factor in whether a student graduates isn't the cost but the student's own effort and ability. And if costs go down, effort level will certainly go down. I've observed the opposite of that effect over my time in the business. As tuition has climbed over the past 20 years, academic performance, overall, has too. Students can't afford to fuck around and party like I and my peers did as undergrads.

40% of freshman who arrive on campus each Sept don't graduate as it is. Make tuition cheaper and that number's going way up. I see "free tuition" increasing the number of students on the input side, but I doubt it'd change much on the output end.

[BeaverFever]

rickc rickc:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

The tuition for SUNY that you report is reasonable, however the fact remains university tuition in the US OVERALL is generally higher than in Canada and this is in large part due to the fact that US approach has been to subsidize loans and grats rather than tuition.

I don't understand the question at the end of your post about unemployment rates, what does that have to do with anything?

We have way to many for profit schools that are diploma mills. I will give President Obama props for disallowing federal student aid to ITT. They were one of the worst. They would hang outside of unemployment offices looking for fresh meat to sign up. The government would insure the loan. The kid would rack up debt that they could never repay. The credits from the school were not transferable to other schools. The degrees did not carry as much weight as an Associates degree from a community college. We have to many people who think that they need to attend an Ivy league school. I have nothing against Ivy league schools. If someone gets accepted and has a scholarship close to full ride/or full ride, parents are paying, etc., than go for it!!! Depending on the major, one can write their own ticket with a degree from an Ivy league school. Just don't go into lifelong debt at an Ivy league school to be a social worker, teacher, women's studies whatever, journalist, etc. Know what your career pays. If a lifetime of work in your chosen career will not pay off your student loans, than you need a cheaper school. If you like tech. and MIT accepts you, than go!!! The cost will be well worth your demand when you graduate.

People in the thread were addressing how higher rates of people with degrees might affect the job market. You were stating that it would have no effect whatsoever. The article that I posted stated that Canada's higher college degree rate was helping with the unemployment rate of Canadian youth. I find it strange that Canada has a higher rate of people with a college degree than the states, yet has a higher unemployment rate. I am not drawing any conclusions on the matter, just throwing it out for debate. Any thoughts?

Unemployment rates depend on a large number of economic factors, many of which cannot be controlled. There is no one single factor that guarantees low unemployment but having a more highly educated and skilled population certainly helps attract and retain employers and those jobs generally pay much more and are much less precarious than low skill/low education jobs.

[BeaverFever]

Lemmy Lemmy:

I'm not sure what you mean by "abuse", but the biggest change with free tuition, I predict, would be that a lot more will try out university without completing it. For that reason I agree with you that reimbursement should come afterward. Another idea I've heard is that 1st year costs be on the student and if they make it through freshman year, the rest of their tuition would be covered. We already weed out slackers in first year to cull the herd as it is. But we need first-year dropouts to fund the system! We milk those slacker-rich kids' families to subsidize the rest.

That "weeding out" task would surely be bigger if tuition were "free" but I seriously doubt that a lot more students would graduate from university just because its costs are subsidized. The greatest factor in whether a student graduates isn't the cost but the student's own effort and ability. And if costs go down, effort level will certainly go down. I've observed the opposite of that effect over my time in the business. As tuition has climbed over the past 20 years, academic performance, overall, has too. Students can't afford to fuck around and party like I and my peers did as undergrads.

40% of freshman who arrive on campus each Sept don't graduate as it is. Make tuition cheaper and that number's going way up. I see "free tuition" increasing the number of students on the input side, but I doubt it'd change much on the output end.

First let's note that under this NY state proposal the grant for "free" tuition converts to loan if you don't graduate or if you move out of state. That's totally fair and at the same time it's a retroactive penalty instead of a retroactive benefit which is more fair to those who follow the rules.

Assuming your 40% number is correct, you have to wonder how many of those dropped out because university was too expensive for them, as opposed to not being expensive enough for them to take seriously.

[Lemmy]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

First let's note that under this NY state proposal the grant for "free" tuition converts to loan if you don't graduate or if you move out of state. That's totally fair and at the same time it's a retroactive penalty instead of a retroactive benefit which is more fair to those who follow the rules.

Assuming your 40% number is correct, you have to wonder how many of those dropped out because university was too expensive for them, as opposed to not being expensive enough for them to take seriously.

I'm guessing those two scenarios represent a very small portion of the 40%. Most drop out, I believe, simply because they don't want go to school. They didn't like highschool and only went on because it seemed the thing they were supposed to do. Making it cheaper, I hypothesize, will increase that effect: coaxing people to go who don't really want to.

[BeaverFever]

Lemmy Lemmy:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

First let's note that under this NY state proposal the grant for "free" tuition converts to loan if you don't graduate or if you move out of state. That's totally fair and at the same time it's a retroactive penalty instead of a retroactive benefit which is more fair to those who follow the rules.

Assuming your 40% number is correct, you have to wonder how many of those dropped out because university was too expensive for them, as opposed to not being expensive enough for them to take seriously.

I'm guessing those two scenarios represent a very small portion of the 40%. Most drop out, I believe, simply because they don't want go to school. They didn't like highschool and only went on because it seemed the thing they were supposed to do. Making it cheaper, I hypothesize, will increase that effect: coaxing people to go who don't really want to.

Yeah but then why did they bother getting the good grades and program admission prerequisites in high school in the first place? I think a lot of the ones who drop out of first year for non-financial can't manage the newfound freedom of adulthood, especially when they're not living at home and/or had highly sheltered and/or structured lives as teenagers.

[martin14]

Coach85 Coach85:

It's a similar situation to what we have in Ontario. So many university and college grads working entry level jobs outside of their field of study because so many people are entering the workforce with that level of education.

While it's great to have an educated population, that piece of paper doesn't matter much anymore because everyone has one.

Giving everyone a 'free' education will saturate the market with graduates and the value of that piece of paper will continually be in decline.

This is already happening, so obviously the solution is to crank out even more

'university educated' people who can't do shit.


Not to worry, seems it isn't all it's cracked to be:

http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2017/04/ ... llege-plan