Random Politics & Religion #00

Socialism is expensive. Denying the costs doesn't do you any good. You're better off trying to explain why it's worth the high price tag instead of pretending it doesn't exist.

I am not. He is accusing me of misquoting him, which he obviously said "No you" in his response.

Oh come on don't play dumb, you know perfectly well how you manipulated this argument KN..just stop it, there's no need.

This one.

Another stunning counterargument by Jet. Again, why are we pretending that what Bernie is offering isn't going to cost a lot of money? It's the very nature of the platform. You spend a lot, you get a lot. He's not the type of guy that would get us out of debt.

Ignoring Seha's accusations...

Nobody wants to pay the bill, and raising taxes has historically proven counterproductive in the medium/long term in terms of growth and tax revenue.

People seemed to have ignored how lowering taxes actually increased tax revenue from 1990-2008...

Ad-hominem aside, never said that he wouldn't cost money, nor that we need to get out of debt. Nor was what I said a "counterargument" it was merely an answer to his question.

It's probably best to ignore the flamebaiters today. They are in a mood and know that they will get away with baiting people into negative responses.

But yeah, I don't see how increasing spending by 40% will decrease debt. Maybe somebody will reasonably explain it?

Which is a perfectly fine argument to make. People can disagree with it, but "we're going to give you value for your money, in an attempt to take care of everyone" isn't the worst approach to governance.

Why would anyone try to claim that this is going to reduce spending? That's not an argument that can be reasonably made, and you already have an argument that appeals to people, so just double down on that.

Really?

I would be all for giving free college education to everyone, if it wasn't for the following issues:

A) College degrees will become a minimal requirement for minimal wage jobs. Since college is considerably harder than primary, with retention rates in the 40-60% in the first year alone, that will greatly undercut the working force and the ability to get an actual job.

B) If everyone can get a college degree, then those with degrees already will have a highly reduced value of worth. What's worse, graduate and doctorates will also have a reduced value (probably not as high as bachelor's) because it still requires an even greater standard than simple bachelor degrees.

Free college is great, but all it will do is make master degrees the new bachelor's, doctorates the new masters, and then we will have something higher than doctorate invented. Not really solving anything, don't you think? Except forcing people to have 4 more years of school.

I don't wanna say completely free, but there's no defending the cost of american higher education.

The aim should be to educate as many people as possible, not curbing.

That's a no no because even the advocates know they cannot sell the idea that the government can give you better value than he market.

Oh wow. I forgot the new season started.

Never mind that every estimate of a government entitlement NEVER costs less than at least twice the initial projection.

I'd like to see a resurgence of trade schools, actually. Not everyone needs a bachelor's. But a one/two year program to get really good at <insert skilled labor position here>? Gets people into the workforce faster, with a marketable skillset and less debt (either theirs or ours).

I learned almost nothing relating to my actual career in college, so I might have a lower opinion on a degree's value in the first place.

The more money government mandates available to the sector (through near infinite loans) the higher the price goes.

Simple supply and demand.

I agree, we should make it more open to people, but not in the form of grants/scholarships/loans.

The reason why I say this is because it is impossible to get enough grants and scholarships (unless you are a very talented athlete in a sports oriented school) to pay for the entire term of your education, and some degrees require longer terms than others (accounting is a minimal 5 years if you are going for your CPA licence, as an example).

Also, given the fact of the retention rates are so horrible for the first year, most of those grants/scholarships get wasted on people who don't even put the effort to improve themselves.

Those are a few things that continue to increase the cost of education in America (and around the world by default).

I wouldn't mind if the government focuses more on associate's degrees or tradesmen certifications for their "let's give everything away free" tirade they are doing right now...

And those are specifically the programs he's targeting, not bachelor's and arts degrees.

Anyone actually warming to fiorina? I want to but I've heard her play the woman card on more than one occasion and it just instantly revolts me.

You're assuming everyone would go, or that everyone would even be capable of being able to graduate. If anything you'd see an increase in first- and second-year students, but the bottom line is that given the way student loans have been handed out willy-nilly for the past 20 years, most people who wanted to go are already going.

This would just ease the burden on those people and maybe let some truly poor, but capable, individuals attend as well.

Just because someone has the opportunity to go to college for free doesn't mean they'll actually be able to handle doing so, or that they'll utilize the opportunity.

Though maybe you're right. Maybe everyone-goes-for-free isn't appropriate. I can see some level of drawbacks, if not the same/the extent you're describing. But maybe what we need is a system where you fund your education via traditional means and then once you've graduated you get reimbursed, or at the very least pay back your loans interest-free, or get some sort of significant tax credit or refund beyond the joke that is currently provided on your student loan interest.

Not that she was *** awful for the company she's best known for (much like Trump, really) and drove it into the ground, and cherry picks stats like "she doubled the size of the company," but that was only done via a merger?

Frankly I think Trump hates her because she reminds him a little of himself. Except she ovulates.

I would say the aim should be to curb the costs of education as a whole without devaluing too much the current post high school education people already have.

For example, have a BA cost significantly less, BS cost a little less, Masters a bit cheaper, and so on.

The key is finding the right balance as to not diminish the value of current degrees, or at least compensate them somehow.

The retention issue imo is also partly to blame on the education system itself(and I mean lower levels too).

Obviously I can't speak for the US, but the issue exists in my country too and it is my opinion that a big culprit is in highschool. There's a huge sinkhole that separetes hs from university, kids get out of hs knowing nothing about how to move into the world which means the slowest to adapt end up dropping out.
Yes, everyone needs to grow up etc, but helping with the formation wouldn't hurt. Students in hs(and earlier)shuldn't only learn subjects, but also be taught how to move with bureaucracy, how to handle the stress of exams of that of a completely new and unfamiliar environment, and a good method of study.
In my country at least all of that is non existant. For example teachers spoonfeed assignments and really don't help students learn how to apply a study method that will help in university, where professors won't even look at you if you're bleeding in your desk.

edit: also no orientation. Most students chose the wrong degree cause they didn't even know what they were getting into(me included)

Oh yeah, there's trade schools too. Perhaps make them affordable through their respective industries somehow. Almost like an invest from the business on future employees they would need.

Education is one of the few topics where I only have broad ideas at best. :/

College isn't solely about learning things related to your degree. It's more about transitioning from that immature post-HS life in an environment dedicated to learning and expanding one's horizons - if you so choose. A place where you can travel abroad, meet new people, learn new things or just loaf about and do ***. It's the sample platter that you don't even know is a sample platter.

-Elective classes
-Internships
-Clubs
-Study Abroad

What separates the college graduate from the typical HS grad is the exposure to things outside your comfort zone, things that are supposed to influence the rest of your life. Be it moving out of your small town to mingle with people outside of your circles to being skewered in a class by a professor that upends your beliefs or simply learning to balance work/life in a place surrounded by others in similar situations.

People who go full-time straight out of HS often have neither the time nor incentive to push themselves in such directions. Before you know it, you've got big responsibilities and little time to do much else.

To distill it all down to money is to miss the purpose of what college is supposed to be about, creating more well-rounded person. And I do agree that college isn't for everyone but really that's a decision that a person has to make similar to going the military route.

I had a professor who made his son work for a few years before going to college if he wanted to go on his dad's dime and I think it was the most brilliant thing he could have done.

College immediately after high school really has one boon: it keeps you in the rhythm of education. But fresh out of secondary education you're still young, unsure of yourself, you don't know nearly enough about yourself or the world -- both financial and in general -- and you don't know what you're getting yourself into. Which I think is evident by the amount of major changes you see among year 1-3 university students.

I think taking a couple years between HS and university to really know what it is you want and what you're capable of -- and how you feel doing real work -- is a really great idea and I wish I had done it.

I have to agree on the trade school part. If we ever have to front the costs for some form of "free" college education, I'd much rather see it go to degrees that provide easy entry into the work force instead of watching the costs pave the way for Johnny to play the tuba for four years.