College student wants free college&15 Dollars min wage has no idea how to pay for it

[Redasurc]

This is reality in scandinavia. Free college and free money if you have to move out of town. Ontop of that you get an extremely beneficial student loan if you want.

You americans are not very smart if you dont vote for Sanders.

[Emjay18]

there's only several dozen other countries doing a better job at this than the usa. those opposing Sanders seem to be in this fantasy world where everyone else on the planet has failed. it's the same nonsense with healthcare.

It isn't about being right or wrong to those people -- that isn't the game they're playing.

Being in a fantasy world isn't about shielding yourself from being wrong, rather it is about not having to answer/be accountable in the first place. The massive hypocrisy isn't about being on the 'right side' of the debate, it's about total obsfucation in order to keep the issue at bay, in the limelight and out of congress, until you no longer have to deal with it. See: global warming.

It's how, for example, you end up with someone who joins the armed forces, gets his GI bill and absolute LOADS of evul gubmint welfare money in a multitude of different ways, and then begins to rant about welfare moochers, taxpayer handouts, and so on and so forth. The hypocrisy is clear, but it isn't the point -- it's about getting yours and fuck everyone else. Sure, no one will ever want to be in a relationship with you being such a self centered jerk, but you got the money!

[Axphism]

It isn't about being right or wrong to those people -- that isn't the game they're playing.

Being in a fantasy world isn't about shielding yourself from being wrong, rather it is about not having to answer/be accountable in the first place. The massive hypocrisy isn't about being on the 'right side' of the debate, it's about total obsfucation in order to keep the issue at bay, in the limelight and out of congress, until you no longer have to deal with it. See: global warming.

It's how, for example, you end up with someone who joins the armed forces, gets his GI bill and absolute LOADS of evul gubmint welfare money in a multitude of different ways, and then begins to rant about welfare moochers, taxpayer handouts, and so on and so forth. The hypocrisy is clear, but it isn't the point -- it's about getting yours and fuck everyone else. Sure, no one will ever want to be in a relationship with you being such a self centered jerk, but you got the money!

The primary motivating argument I typically see/hear from people that are opposed to free/cheap college is that they "don't want to pay more taxes so lazy entitled people can go to college on my dime."

It's obviously not an opinion/feeling restricted to the USA, and definitely not one they all share, but it's definitely one I commonly hear from Americans.

It's pretty unfortunate.

[Elim Garak]

When it comes to tertiary education, the only country that has a plausible claim to providing the same level of quality is the United Kingdom. Every other country's universities are inferior to state schools in the United States (see UNC Chapel Hill, Michigan Ann Arbor, and UT-Austin, and UW-Madison for some examples) and grossly inferior to the elite private institutions. There are no ranking systems that disagree with this assessment. American and British universities are significantly better than those in other countries.

Those rankings have nothing on the quality of education. Come on. You don't even need to go to university to get the best education. You go to university to get the paper that says that you have the education and the higher the rank of the university that issued the paper the better your job opportunities.

[Spectral]

Looking at the QS World University Ranking for my field (Computer Science), ETH Zurich is 8th and University of Toronto is 11th on the overall score. I'm not sure I'm really seeing them being grossly inferior to even the top US/UK universities. Especially when it comes to undergraduate studies, I'm not sure university rankings matter overly much past a certain point, and that's when they aren't so biased as to be useless.

In any case, I'm pretty sure the person you were responding to was talking about the cost of higher education and how a lot of other countries are doing better, not the quality of the universities.

So, what percentage of the top ~50 schools are American or British? For anyone curious, the rankings you reference are here. No other country has as many schools in the top echelon as California alone.

- - - Updated - - -

Those rankings have nothing on the quality of education. Come on. You don't even need to go to university to get the best education. You go to university to get the paper that says that you have the education and the higher the rank of the university that issued the paper the better your job opportunities.

Is your actual position that there's nothing better about the education at Harvard or Cal Tech?

- - - Updated - - -

Rankings are often made out of how many scientific articles each University publish, afaik it doesn't take into account the amount of shit articles also written. And I wouldn't be surprised if these rankings are bought like buying marketing on Google.

QS, which is the most friendly to other countries (other rankings systems are even more dominated the US and UK), has their methods here. For their publications metric, they ignore the number of total papers published and instead focus on citations:

This indicator aims to assess universities’ research impact. A ‘citation’ means a piece of research being cited (referred to) within another piece of research. Generally, the more often a piece of research is cited, the more influential it is. So the more highly cited research papers a university publishes, the stronger its research output is considered.

The biggest component they use (40%) is academic reputation, which they gather thusly:

Academic reputation is measured using a global survey, in which academics are asked to identify the institutions where they believe the best work is currently taking place within their own field of expertise. The aim is to give prospective students a sense of the consensus of opinion within the international academic community.

For the 2015/16 edition, the rankings draw on just under 76,800 responses from academics worldwide, collated over a five year period. Only participants’ most recent responses are used, and they cannot vote for their own institution. Regional weightings are applied to counter any discrepancies in response rates.

So if the rankings aren't accurate, it's a result of people in academia just being flatly wrong about institutions. I do not see a reason to expect academics in Asia and Europe to express a pro-American bias here. The reputations of these schools is just better than their international counterparts.

But it's true that your ELITE private schools are better, we mostly read articles written on Harvard in my courses. That said, i haven't used money from a bank account or pocket to pay for the education and i get 300 dollars a month for studying (can loan 600 dollars extra at 0% interest, which i do). And my school have consistently been ranked in the top 50s at least.

So it's not shit but it's no Harvard.

Harvard's nearly free for low income or high performing students. This is true for the majority of schools in the United States as well. So yeah, you can do about as well as a typical top-tier state school if you go to the best school in the country in some other nations, but there's no plausible argument that college education in the United States isn't the best of the best.

[Elim Garak]

Is your actual position that there's nothing better about the education at Harvard or Cal Tech?

For a person who wants education just for the sake of it? Nothing. They don't even need to attend any of those.

Now for someone who wants to pursue the path of a scientist - that's completely different matter.

And of course for those who seek the job application booster - it is way better to get it at Harvard than at your Localville University of Middleofnowhere.

The educational material is the same. 2 + 2 = 4 at any uni or at home. You aren't implying that the science is different at different Uni, are you? Teachers might differ (in the way they do the teaching), but from my experience at uni level teachers only give you directions for your own self-education. It's not a school.

[Spectral]

The educational material is the same. 2 + 2 = 4 at any uni or at home. You aren't implying that the science is different at different Uni, are you? Teachers might differ (in the way they do the teaching), but from my experience at uni level teachers only give you directions for your own self-education. It's not a school.

This is simply wrong. The rigor of classes at elite institutions is much higher than that at mediocre schools. Students at CIT are held to significantly higher standards and have significantly more opportunity to gain technical experience while enrolled. I really don't know where you're getting the idea that everything's the same. The materials rise a bit above 2+2=4.

[Elim Garak]

This is simply wrong. The rigor of classes at elite institutions is much higher than that at mediocre schools. Students at CIT are held to significantly higher standards and have significantly more opportunity to gain technical experience while enrolled. I really don't know where you're getting the idea that everything's the same. The materials rise a bit above 2+2=4.

So you are claiming that CIT uses different science books that contain better science?
Or what? I don't get what you are trying to say?
Just because they have higher standards doesn't mean they teach better it only means they have higher standards for issuing job application boosters, because their boosters are in high demand. Students still study on their own to meet the standards. No? Does something stop people from having high standards while studying at home? No.
The value of CIT - is science that scientists do at it. Not the students who are after the paper - and we are talking about the paper.

[Spectral]

So you are claiming that CIT uses different science books that contain better science?
Or what? I don't get what you are trying to say?
Just because they have higher standards doesn't mean they teach better it only means they have higher standards for issuing job application boosters, because their boosters are in high demand. Students still study on their own to meet the standards. No? Does something stop people from having high standards while studying at home? No.
The value of CIT - is science that scientists do at it. Not the students who are after the paper - and we are talking about the paper.

I really don't know what you're trying to argue at this point. Students at elite institutions are in classes with higher levels of academic rigor, surrounded by better peers, with opportunities to do independent research that simply doesn't exist at mediocre schools. The superior education is rewarded by employers that want to snap up the best, brightest, highest human-capital individuals. I mean, your opening was pretty silly:

Those rankings have nothing on the quality of education. Come on. You don't even need to go to university to get the best education. You go to university to get the paper that says that you have the education and the higher the rank of the university that issued the paper the better your job opportunities.

I think everyone knows there's signaling value to education, but the idea that rankings have nothing to do with quality of education is absurd on its face.

[Elim Garak]

I really don't know what you're trying to argue at this point. Students at elite institutions are in classes with higher levels of academic rigor, surrounded by better peers, with opportunities to do independent research that simply doesn't exist at mediocre schools. The superior education is rewarded by employers that want to snap up the best, brightest, highest human-capital individuals.

That's a myth perpetuated by elite institutions so they can remain elite institutions and earn lots of money.
Just think on your own. Can you get the same education on your own? Yes, you can. You just cannot prove that you have it, because you don't have the paper that says that you have it, and employers are not going to exam you at the job interview to see if you really have it - they will just skip you.

I think everyone knows there's signaling value to education, but the idea that rankings have nothing to do with quality of education is absurd on its face.

http://www.topuniversities.com/unive...gs-methodology

When uni is ranked they don't look at the quality of education, because it's IMPOSSIBLE to measure, not to mention ridiculous at uni level. It's not a school. At uni's students study on their own. Those who fail at it - get booted.

[Tojara]

There is no 'free' when it comes to anything, the money has to come from somewhere. That said, you can certainly have 'free' tuition if you shift your tax dollars elsewhere, and it's certainly possible to achieve that.

I read numerous posts in this thread by people using the military route to get the government to pay for their college, which is funny because these are typically the same type of people who don't want handouts, or their tax dollars wasted, when it's essentially just that. For some it's simple as wasting some weeks in the summer, or the occasional weekend every couple of months, which in the end will amount to your tuition being paid. Sounds like handouts to me, and tax dollars going to some peoples free tuition.

My sister and her husband did essentially the same thing, went into the military and everything is paid for. In my sisters case she just had to go to some stupid shit for a weekend every couple of months. It's hilarious having conversations with them about people being moochers and stuff, and how tax dollars shouldn't be paid here and there, when in fact I wouldn't want my tax dollars going to them (when it is).

I don't really have anything against that route though, what annoys me is that aside from some really nice scholarships or government tax dollars through the military, you aren't going to get free tuition. For most of the population who has an interest in post secondary education that doesn't want to go the military route, or isn't top of their class, well, be prepared to barely make a dent in your tuition as you work your entire summers away and/or try to squeeze in a part time job while studying throughout your semesters. Even with all that you won't be able to pay your tuition.

It's not even some magical trick with smoke and mirrors, there are plenty of countries around the world that have working models in place. You don't need exact carbon copies, but you also don't need to stick your fingers in your ears pretending that it's not possible either.

All of that said, a lot of college/university courses and degrees are absolute scams or at the very least not worth the investment at all. The likelihood of landing a job because you majored in Celtic studies for example is probably the same as winning the lottery, and the best part is you will still owe 40 000 dollars at least for that amazing investment.

[teddytous]

Big deviation, but as someone who had to work his way up to get a decent job (that is entry level for someone with a degree) - when the gov starts handing out billions of dollars worth of education - what do the kids who don't goto college get? The.... finger?

[solinari6]

It amazes me how we can spend trillions of dollars overseas blowing up countries and no one bats an eye ... but try to spend some money back home to better ourselves, and people freak out. "HOW WILL WE PAY FOR THAT!?!?!" Indeed...

[Shahad]

So, what percentage of the top ~50 schools are American or British? For anyone curious, the rankings you reference are here. No other country has as many schools in the top echelon as California alone.

Not really sure how this is relevant. You said that "Every other country's universities are inferior" which is not the case. That's besides rankings being often meaningless, especially when it comes to the quality of the education a person is getting. I know for a fact that at least 2-3 institutions in Quebec offer a better engineering education than McGill, yet they won't ever show up in rankings because they're French schools.

Heck, looking at MIT, I'm not really seeing all that much that is different from my own school when it comes to the curriculum or how it is taught at the undergraduate level. Seems to be mostly about opportunities in research and being surrounded by very smart peers. While that's nice, it really doesn't change much to what you learn.

[Tuesdays]

Conceptually "educate our citizens to better improve our country" sounds like a great idea. I'm not entirely sure why certain people are scared of knowledge being made more readily available unless your're a feudal lord hearing stories of the printing press.

I wouldn't say people are scared of knowledge, but afraid of debt. Back when college was very affordable, good jobs were plentiful, so it was I want to do this specifically vs I have to work in order to provide for my family.

Today college is a high stake gamble, unless your parent pays your way. A terrible way to start life on your own is to be in debt day 1.

[Elim Garak]

I wouldn't say people are scared of knowledge, but afraid of debt. Back when college was very affordable, good jobs were plentiful, so it was I want to do this specifically vs I have to work in order to provide for my family.

Today college is a high stake gamble, unless your parent pays your way. A terrible way to start life on your own is to be in debt day 1.

There are two ways:
1. You have rich parents or you go debt - and go to college.
2. You apply for an entry level of an entry position of an entry tier at some company and by the time the guy from point 1 makes it out of a college - you will be their manager.

The requirement for point 2 to work though: you need above average brains
Point 1 can work for average brains, but rich parents are preferred in such a case.

[Tuesdays]

There are two ways:
1. You have rich parents or you go debt - and go to college.
2. You apply for an entry level of an entry position of an entry tier at some company and by the time the guy from point 1 makes it out of a college - you will be their manager.

The requirement for point 2 to work though: you need above average brains
Point 1 can work for average brains, but rich parents are preferred in such a case.

If you have rich parents, chances are you don't need to work.

Companies are killing both entry level jobs, as well as college grad jobs. They want people who need zero training, and have tons of preexisting experience for the job. Not only do they want that, they also give you a laundry list of other duties, that used to be separate job titles of 2-3 other people.

Just pop open the Sunday paper, and read this shit, it's almost comical... But it is not, because they are serious.

[Sierra85]

put a cap on the profit margin of big companies and see how quickly we can raise the quality of life for everyone.

[enragedgorilla]

put a cap on the profit margin of big companies and see how quickly we can raise the quality of life for everyone.

Let's rub a lamp and see if we get 3 wishes while we are at it ....
Good...luck with that in the US.

[Spectral]

Not really sure how this is relevant. You said that "Every other country's universities are inferior" which is not the case.

This is a weird thing to say. You're looking at a list of rankings that are pretty clear about the relative superiority of American universities, right?

That's besides rankings being often meaningless, especially when it comes to the quality of the education a person is getting.

I'm sure you'd hold that position if the rankings were consistent with what you'd like to believe instead
I know for a fact that at least 2-3 institutions in Quebec offer a better engineering education than McGill, yet they won't ever show up in rankings because they're French schools.

- - - Updated - - -

That's a myth perpetuated by elite institutions so they can remain elite institutions and earn lots of money.
Just think on your own. Can you get the same education on your own? Yes, you can. You just cannot prove that you have it, because you don't have the paper that says that you have it, and employers are not going to exam you at the job interview to see if you really have it - they will just skip you.

Believing that an autodidactic education will equal what someone gets from MIT is pretty silly. But sure, universities are all just a conspiracy to defraud people

If that's the case, I guess we don't need free college though.