Colleges/Universities should be free because of tax dollars received?

[MC Paul Barman]

I have no horse in this race.... only because I'm too ignorant to understand everything involved.

Should colleges and universities be free because of the tax dollars they receive? I've heard this view quite a few times as of late. Is it as simple as that? Is the tuition that a student pays just more cash in the college's pocket that is not necessary? Or, if colleges/universities were solely funded from taxes (no student tuition) would the taxes have to be jacked up even higher in order to afford it?

 

[PainIsLIfe]

I have no horse in this race.... only because I'm too ignorant to understand everything involved.

Should colleges and universities be free because of the tax dollars they receive? I've heard this view quite a few times as of late. Is it as simple as that? Is the tuition that a student pays just more cash in the college's pocket that is not necessary? Or, if colleges/universities were solely funded from taxes (no student tuition) would the taxes have to be jacked up even higher in order to afford it?

I don't know if they should be free, but we certainly have an issue in what we consider not-for-profit.

Schools have huge stadiums and charge students large fees that go toward athletics, coupled with the large endowments and some of the large salaries of administration (and coaches) one should certainly take pause and ask why school is so expensive.

 

[Lustercross]

It's not even about free college. The main thing that we need on public universities is price controls.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Subsidized Universities and colleges are cheaper than private ones so I would imagine those tax dollars are helping the students save some money.

 

[klnOmega]

No. Schools are out buying 30 million rec halls with multiple Olympic sized swimming pools and building stadiums that span several city blocks. Fuck subsidizing all that.

We should just give the Khan academy guy a couple hundred thousand per year to keep his site up, and new content going, and tell the universities to fuck off. If people want to learn, then can do it for free online.

 

[panamaican]

I'll find the link and add it later. But the math/tax payer argument is fairly straightforward.

Public universities received ~$63 billion in tuition from all students attending in 2012. The federal government gave students ~$68 billion in non-loan federal aid in 2013.

If government simply used the money it gave to students to pay for college and paid the public universities directly, it would actually cost the tax payer ~$5 billion less.

 

[SODACKER]

No. Schools are out buying 30 million rec halls with multiple Olympic sized swimming pools and building stadiums that span several city blocks. Fuck subsidizing all that.

We should just give the Khan academy guy a couple hundred thousand per year to keep his site up, and new content going, and tell the universities to fuck off. If people want to learn, then can do it for free online.

Every time I've seen one of those built it is done through student fees and private donations. Not taxes.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I'll find the link and add it later. But the math/tax payer argument is fairly straightforward.

Public universities received ~$63 million in tuition from all students attending in 2013. The federal government gave students ~$68 million in non-loan federal aid in 2014.

If government simply used the money it gave to students to pay for college and paid the public universities directly, it would actually cost the tax payer ~$5 million less.

Is that $68 million to all students or just students attending public universities? I think that's a relevant difference.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

I'll find the link and add it later. But the math/tax payer argument is fairly straightforward.

Public universities received ~$63 million in tuition from all students attending in 2013. The federal government gave students ~$68 million in non-loan federal aid in 2014.

If government simply used the money it gave to students to pay for college and paid the public universities directly, it would actually cost the tax payer ~$5 million less.

63 million seems low - mind sourcing that?

 

[InvestigatorIL]

Is that $68 million to all students or just students attending public universities? I think that's a relevant difference.

I guarantee that number is a hell out of a lot higher than 68 million. Lets say each student paid just $15,000 to attend 4 years at a public university (which is low as hell) that means only 4,533 students got federal money for college. That number is way off. It could be 68 BILLION as that would send over 4 million kids to school (@15K per year) which was just a number I pulled out

 

[klnOmega]

I'll find the link and add it later. But the math/tax payer argument is fairly straightforward.

Public universities received ~$63 million in tuition from all students attending in 2013. The federal government gave students ~$68 million in non-loan federal aid in 2014.

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=98

There are 20.6 million college students in the US. Are you saying that average tuition rate in the US is $3?

 

[panamaican]

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=98

There are 20.6 million college students in the US. Are you saying that average tuition rate in the US is $3?

I might have meant billions, lol.

 

[panamaican]

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=98

There are 20.6 million college students in the US. Are you saying that average tuition rate in the US is $3?

63 million seems low - mind sourcing that?

Definitely meant billions, I'll edit.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business...d-to-make-public-college-tuition-free/282803/

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2013/2013183.pdf

 

[IIIIIIII]

if you believe there is a difference in professors and their ability to teach students, then it seems there will always be a hierarchy in tax-paid universities. the better professors will be sought out, and they will ask for a higher wage. the better students will want to go to those colleges, and you'll still end up with a similar system that we have now, where it costs more money to go to a public university like ucla, over a community college.

i think we should get away from traditional colleges, and young people should focus their skills on work they want to do. the traditional bachelors and masters degrees need to go. they're a waste of time and money for students. companies won't give a shit about your grades on the works of shakespeare, if you're not able to solder steel beams at your construction gig.

 

[panamaican]

Is that $68 million to all students or just students attending public universities? I think that's a relevant difference.

$68 billion to all students regardless of where they attended. Of that $21 billion goes to state schools already.

So, private universities would lose out on approximately $40 billion of federal money.

 

[klnOmega]

Definitely meant billions, I'll edit.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business...d-to-make-public-college-tuition-free/282803/

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2013/2013183.pdf

So that $60 million in Federal Student Aid isn't going to come close to covering everyone's tuition, no matter how you bend the numbers. You'll have to a couple zeroes to that figure to even get into the ballpark.

EDIT: Now I fudged my billions and millions.

 

[panamaican]

So that $60 million in Federal Student Aid isn't going to come close to covering everyone's tuition, no matter how you bend the numbers. You'll have to a couple zeroes to that figure to even get into the ballpark.

EDIT: Now I fudged my billions and millions.

Billions for both, not just tuition. Billions in aid, billions in tuition. nvm, understandable mistake.

 

[usmctanker242]

if you believe there is a difference in professors and their ability to teach students, then it seems there will always be a hierarchy in tax-paid universities. the better professors will be sought out, and they will ask for a higher wage. the better students will want to go to those colleges, and you'll still end up with a similar system that we have now, where it costs more money to go to a public university like ucla, over a community college.

i think we should get away from traditional colleges, and young people should focus their skills on work they want to do. the traditional bachelors and masters degrees need to go. they're a waste of time and money for students. companies won't give a shit about your grades on the works of shakespeare, if you're not able to solder steel beams at your construction gig.

Pretty much 100% accurate and well put. Trade schools are something tax-payers should be enthused about contributing to, but I'm not so sure that normal degrees are the way to go. I understand the colleges concept that students should be well-rounded, but match that against anybody who has gone to school and how much of that liberal arts bullshit do they still remember or care about? I spent 3 years doing bullshit courses along side my STEM courses and it was a chore, a ball-ache, and with the exception of a few language and history courses, it was a waste of time, energy, and money.

 

[MC Paul Barman]

I'll find the link and add it later. But the math/tax payer argument is fairly straightforward.

Public universities received ~$63 billion in tuition from all students attending in 2012. The federal government gave students ~$68 billion in non-loan federal aid in 2013.

If government simply used the money it gave to students to pay for college and paid the public universities directly, it would actually cost the tax payer ~$5 billion less.

Does "non-loan federal aid" mean grant??

 

[MC Paul Barman]

Every time I've seen one of those built it is done through student fees and private donations. Not taxes.

So the state won't fund facilities like that? I'm not arguing... I sincerely don't know.