White House Proposes 2 Years Free of Community College

  • metta

    Posts: 39144

    Jan 09, 2015 2:39 AM GMT
    President Obama just proposed making two years of community college free for anyone who's willing to work for it.


    http://time.com/3660891/obama-proposes-free-community-college/



    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/barack-obama-free-community-college-114094.html

    Obama's Community College Plan To Cost $60 Billion Over 10 Years
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/09/obama-free-college_n_6444062.html
  • sothis999

    Posts: 58

    Jan 09, 2015 3:07 PM GMT
    Well with pell grants and/or state grants, it essentially is already free. I understand there are people who don't qualify for pell grants/state grants, but for those people's families community college isn't particularly expensive.



  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Jan 09, 2015 3:31 PM GMT
    sothis999 saidWell with pell grants and/or state grants, it essentially is already free. I understand there are people who don't qualify for pell grants/state grants, but for those people's families community college isn't particularly expensive.




    So this proposal will make it run more efficiently and inclusively. We need to have an educated society. It's more of a necessity than a luxury, if we want to compete globally.
  • sothis999

    Posts: 58

    Jan 09, 2015 3:50 PM GMT
    HottJoe said
    sothis999 saidWell with pell grants and/or state grants, it essentially is already free. I understand there are people who don't qualify for pell grants/state grants, but for those people's families community college isn't particularly expensive.




    So this proposal will make it run more efficiently and inclusively. We need to have an educated society. It's more of a necessity than a luxury, if we want to compete globally.


    Sure, but I don't see how this will allow people to attend community college that aren't already attending. The people who can't afford it already get grants (FAFSA is as easy as it gets), and the people who can afford it can afford it. Considering there is a surplus of people with college degrees already (see: high unemployment in college graduates), low graduation rates aren't much of an issue. In fact the U.S has a problem of people graduating in the saturated fields (humanities/teaching) while not graduating in unsaturated fields (STEM.) I think the focus should be more on structurally improving high school educations (which are what's lackluster compared to the rest of the world.) One area our high school education is behind the rest of the world is specialization. In other countries (and in private schools here) the students specialize their educational interests much earlier, and that allows them to gain the skills they are interested in, and helps prepare them for university level work. It also forces them to think about what they want to do much earlier. Of course, that is all up to the states, I suppose.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2015 4:02 PM GMT
    Typical "free" stuff for everyone, liberal mentality. Nothing is free. It's the tax payers that will have to pay for it.
    I'm for everyone getting an education if you desire to have one. If you can't afford it, go to school part-time and work full-time or part-time to pay for it. There is also a loan system available for people that can't afford to pay for it.
  • Hypertrophile

    Posts: 1021

    Jan 09, 2015 4:39 PM GMT
    To remind people that "free isn't free" is a waste of time. We all know that making community college free for anyone who wants it is being paid for by taxes. It's a dumb argument that is countered with the reality that having more Americans educated can provide big returns in innovation and entrepreneurship, making our workers not only more competitive but more valuable. It is an investment in the future. It is an idea that goes back long before Obama when Thomas Jefferson created land-grant colleges.

    Obviously I agree with this idea. I have seen my current home state lose ground because then-governor Reagan did away with "free" college for all residents.

    I would have some stipulations to this proposal before I could support it wholeheartedly, however.

    Attendance should be mandatory. A maximum number of unexcused absences should bet set.

    A minimum GPA should be required as well. Perhaps students should have to pony up tuition up front and be reimbursed if they achieve it.

    Curriculum should include classes for all students in personal finance management, managing credit and debt, logic and critical thinking, etc.

    High school curriculum should also be modified as part of this program. I think in addition to core curriculum, HS students should be in one of two tracts, one for student's planning on going into the work force after graduation with a variety of skills taught, internships and journeyman programs, etc. (which could be paid for in part by local businesses who then have a nice pool of potential employees from which to draw), and one for students planning on entering college.

    IMO the only people who should be against the presidents proposal are those Oligarchs for whom an educated populace represents a danger.
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Jan 09, 2015 4:57 PM GMT
    how are 2 year schools not inclusive Joe? 2 year schools are probably the most inclusive institutions in the country. We're not exactly talking Duke or UCLA
  • Tig3r

    Posts: 139

    Jan 09, 2015 4:57 PM GMT
    Though I agree with the "Nothing is Free" mentality, if the US Government approves to move funding from Non Mandatory spending (Such as reduction to the military budget, in the times of peace (Times when war has not been declared)), and put the saved money towards education, then tax's would not need to be increased as we paid for them already.

    2012 the federal government spent a bit more than 105 billion on education.
    In that same year the US spent more than $680 billion in military expenditure. (Which is more than China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, UK, France, Brazil and India combined.)

    The money the US has spent on developing and the purchase of F-35's should go into the education budget. The US is by far the biggest military power, no reason for us to have that title and continue to be one of the most uneducated.
  • sothis999

    Posts: 58

    Jan 09, 2015 5:32 PM GMT
    Tig3r said
    2012 the federal government spent a bit more than 105 billion on education.
    In that same year the US spent more than $680 billion in military expenditure. (Which is more than China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, UK, France, Brazil and India combined.)


    Not that I disagree that a lot of the money wasted in the industrial-military complex can be spent elsewhere and better, or maybe reduce tax rates if it didn't exist, but I think the logic behind the disparity of spending is that states are responsible for most of the education spending. It is principally a state power, although not solely. If you added up all the spending by the states on education, it would probably be similar, if not more than the defense budget. Meanwhile states spend practically nothing on nation-defense since it is a federal power.
  • Tig3r

    Posts: 139

    Jan 09, 2015 5:55 PM GMT
    sothis999 said
    Tig3r said
    2012 the federal government spent a bit more than 105 billion on education.
    In that same year the US spent more than $680 billion in military expenditure. (Which is more than China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, UK, France, Brazil and India combined.)


    Not that I disagree that a lot of the money wasted in the industrial-military complex can be spent elsewhere and better, or maybe reduce tax rates if it didn't exist, but I think the logic behind the disparity of spending is that states are responsible for most of the education spending. It is principally a state power, although not solely. If you added up all the spending by the states on education, it would probably be similar, if not more than the defense budget. Meanwhile states spend practically nothing on nation-defense since it is a federal power.


    The combined amount that the US (State and Local) is estimated to spend (2015) is 942 Billion, add the 105 billion and the US in total spends about a Trillion dollars on education. The estimated military budget forecast for 2015 is close to 840 billion, Pensions 960 billion, Healthcare more than 1 trillion.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2015 7:18 PM GMT
    Physiqueflex saidTo remind people that "free isn't free" is a waste of time. We all know that making community college free for anyone who wants it is being paid for by taxes. It's a dumb argument that is countered with the reality that having more Americans educated can provide big returns in innovation and entrepreneurship, making our workers not only more competitive but more valuable. It is an investment in the future. It is an idea that goes back long before Obama when Thomas Jefferson created land-grant colleges.

    Obviously I agree with this idea. I have seen my current home state lose ground because then-governor Reagan did away with "free" college for all residents.

    I would have some stipulations to this proposal before I could support it wholeheartedly, however.

    Attendance should be mandatory. A maximum number of unexcused absences should bet set.

    A minimum GPA should be required as well. Perhaps students should have to pony up tuition up front and be reimbursed if they achieve it.

    Curriculum should include classes for all students in personal finance management, managing credit and debt, logic and critical thinking, etc.

    High school curriculum should also be modified as part of this program. I think in addition to core curriculum, HS students should be in one of two tracts, one for student's planning on going into the work force after graduation with a variety of skills taught, internships and journeyman programs, etc. (which could be paid for in part by local businesses who then have a nice pool of potential employees from which to draw), and one for students planning on entering college.

    IMO the only people who should be against the presidents proposal are those Oligarchs for whom an educated populace represents a danger.


    TJ founded the University of Virginia, which is currently confounding his desire for a university where speech, association, and ideas are free by continuing to bar greek-letter societies from functioning despite the proven baselessness of any rape allegations against one of them. Land Grant universities were not founded until the Morrill Act was passed during the Civil War. That said, your conditions make sense, although your proposal for two "tracts" might be seen by some as resigning the non-collegians to the blue collar plantation; such is the system in much of Europe, particularly Germany. And, to say that only "Oligarchs" want an uneducated populace is at odds with your recognition that business leaders would welcome a "nice pool" of educated "potential employees." Cut the class warfare rhetoric and focus on the matter at hand, which is educating and training our HS-ers and HS grads well beyond their current, often abysmal levels.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2015 7:38 PM GMT
    Huh, where are the skilled jobs for these new grads?

    If there was a skillset shortage then wages would be rising due to a shortage of skilled workers. Employers would pay more wages due to a shortage of qualified workers.

    Wages have not been rising. Median wages are 4% lower than in 2009.

    Liberals: Obama is grubering you.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Jan 09, 2015 7:40 PM GMT
    mx5guynj saidHuh, where are the skilled jobs for these new grads?

    If there was a skillset shortage then wages would be rising due to a shortage of skilled workers. Employers would pay more wages due to a shortage of qualified workers.

    Wages have not been rising. Median wages are 4% lower than in 2009.

    Liberals: Obama is grubering you.

    Now that unemployment is down wages are projected to increase in 2015.
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Jan 09, 2015 8:37 PM GMT
    lol Joe swallows the mass media bullshit

    real median wages haven't increased for 30 years man
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2015 8:39 PM GMT
    PGHguy082 saidTypical "free" stuff for everyone, liberal mentality. Nothing is free. It's the tax payers that will have to pay for it.
    I'm for everyone getting an education if you desire to have one. If you can't afford it, go to school part-time and work full-time or part-time to pay for it. There is also a loan system available for people that can't afford to pay for it.

    Yeah, god forbid one of the stupidest first world countries tries to do anything to help people get smarter.
  • Hypertrophile

    Posts: 1021

    Jan 09, 2015 8:56 PM GMT
    Physiqueflex said
    MGINSD said

    TJ founded the University of Virginia, which is currently confounding his desire for a university where speech, association, and ideas are free by continuing to bar greek-letter societies from functioning despite the proven baselessness of any rape allegations against one of them. Land Grant universities were not founded until the Morrill Act was passed during the Civil War. That said, your conditions make sense, although your proposal for two "tracts" might be seen by some as resigning the non-collegians to the blue collar plantation; such is the system in much of Europe, particularly Germany. And, to say that only "Oligarchs" want an uneducated populace is at odds with your recognition that business leaders would welcome a "nice pool" of educated "potential employees." Cut the class warfare rhetoric and focus on the matter at hand, which is educating and training our HS-ers and HS grads well beyond their current, often abysmal levels.


    Thanks for setting me straight on the land grant colleges. I thought I had heard Thom Hartmann attribute them to TJ, but I must be mistaken as he is one of the smartest guys in media and rarely wrong.

    As far as class warfare goes, it sounds like you're in denial. Class warfare in being waged, but not by me. Opposition to the president's proposal will be, IMO, as much as anything else a matter of "classism", which, also IMO, is what most racism in this country is in reality. Also, I don't associate most job creators with the Oligarchy that is running, and ruining, this country. In fact, the so-called "One Percent" (it's really a fraction of one percent) who control an inordinate and exponentially-growing portion of the nation's wealth in this country are not the true job creators.

    BTW I also reject your use of the term "blue collar plantation" as a negative. Subtle race bait aside, I come from a blue collar family and a blue collar town, and am a self-employed blue collar worker. And proud of it. Blue collar workers are essential. A nation can only make money out of thin air for so long before the economy collapses.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Jan 09, 2015 9:04 PM GMT
    PGHguy082 saidTypical "free" stuff for everyone, liberal mentality. Nothing is free. It's the tax payers that will have to pay for it.
    I'm for everyone getting an education if you desire to have one. If you can't afford it, go to school part-time and work full-time or part-time to pay for it. There is also a loan system available for people that can't afford to pay for it.

    Or just be born rich. It's so much easier to make a million when you're starting with a billion. And those connections are priceless. I'm not sure why everyone doesn't do what Paris Hilton did. It's so simple!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2015 9:08 PM GMT
    PGHguy082 saidTypical "free" stuff for everyone, liberal mentality. Nothing is free. It's the tax payers that will have to pay for it.
    I'm for everyone getting an education if you desire to have one. If you can't afford it, go to school part-time and work full-time or part-time to pay for it. There is also a loan system available for people that can't afford to pay for it.


    +1, agreed, like really? Next thing you know, they will try to pass a law to get a free education at a 4-yr university. If you want something, work for it.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Jan 09, 2015 9:19 PM GMT
    LAXWill10 said
    PGHguy082 saidTypical "free" stuff for everyone, liberal mentality. Nothing is free. It's the tax payers that will have to pay for it.
    I'm for everyone getting an education if you desire to have one. If you can't afford it, go to school part-time and work full-time or part-time to pay for it. There is also a loan system available for people that can't afford to pay for it.


    +1, agreed, like really? Next thing you know, they will try to pass a law to get a free education at a 4-yr university. If you want something, work for it.

    What if we want a country of educated people to compete in a global market? This every man for himself attitude doesn't take into account that we are a social species, and we need civilization and society to survive.

    Think of society as a sport's team. Sure, there are star players, bench warmers, and everyone in between, but we have to have everyone show up to practice for the strength of the team. We're all in it together.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4865

    Jan 09, 2015 9:45 PM GMT
    Physiqueflex saidTo remind people that "free isn't free" is a waste of time. We all know that making community college free for anyone who wants it is being paid for by taxes. It's a dumb argument that is countered with the reality that having more Americans educated can provide big returns in innovation and entrepreneurship, making our workers not only more competitive but more valuable. It is an investment in the future. It is an idea that goes back long before Obama when Thomas Jefferson created land-grant colleges.

    Obviously I agree with this idea. I have seen my current home state lose ground because then-governor Reagan did away with "free" college for all residents.

    I would have some stipulations to this proposal before I could support it wholeheartedly, however.

    Attendance should be mandatory. A maximum number of unexcused absences should bet set.

    A minimum GPA should be required as well. Perhaps students should have to pony up tuition up front and be reimbursed if they achieve it.

    Curriculum should include classes for all students in personal finance management, managing credit and debt, logic and critical thinking, etc.

    High school curriculum should also be modified as part of this program. I think in addition to core curriculum, HS students should be in one of two tracts, one for student's planning on going into the work force after graduation with a variety of skills taught, internships and journeyman programs, etc. (which could be paid for in part by local businesses who then have a nice pool of potential employees from which to draw), and one for students planning on entering college.

    IMO the only people who should be against the presidents proposal are those Oligarchs for whom an educated populace represents a danger.


    In general, I agree. However, teaching critical thinking skills should begin in grade school and not be delayed until college. That should also, as you say, include classes on finance management, credit, and and debt. It should also include the study of propaganda techniques and how we can be fooled by them.

    Moreover, there is a serious lack of scientific understanding. From reading posts on several Internet sites, it is clear that many people lack even a very basic understanding of chemistry and physics. At both the secondary and tertiary levels, chemistry, physics, and a life science should be required subject.

    Of course some students will go into the work force upon being graduated from high school. However, some of them, after working for a while, will decide that they really want to get a college degree. It should be possible for them to do so. I myself got my degree 11 years late.

    For those in countries in which high schools are often called colleges, that is not true here in the U.S. Here, a college is a tertiary school, similar to a university, but smaller with a more limited variety of subjects and which does not offer degrees beyond a bachelor's degree.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4865

    Jan 09, 2015 9:49 PM GMT
    sothis999 said
    Tig3r said
    2012 the federal government spent a bit more than 105 billion on education.
    In that same year the US spent more than $680 billion in military expenditure. (Which is more than China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, UK, France, Brazil and India combined.)


    Not that I disagree that a lot of the money wasted in the industrial-military complex can be spent elsewhere and better, or maybe reduce tax rates if it didn't exist, but I think the logic behind the disparity of spending is that states are responsible for most of the education spending. It is principally a state power, although not solely. If you added up all the spending by the states on education, it would probably be similar, if not more than the defense budget. Meanwhile states spend practically nothing on nation-defense since it is a federal power.


    It is interesting to campare high tax states with low tax states. Generally, high tax states have higher per capita incomes and higher average education levels. It appears that, in general, people in high tax states are getting something for their money.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4865

    Jan 09, 2015 9:58 PM GMT
    HottJoe said
    mx5guynj saidHuh, where are the skilled jobs for these new grads?

    If there was a skillset shortage then wages would be rising due to a shortage of skilled workers. Employers would pay more wages due to a shortage of qualified workers.

    Wages have not been rising. Median wages are 4% lower than in 2009.

    Liberals: Obama is grubering you.

    Now that unemployment is down wages are projected to increase in 2015.


    Even so, the gap between rich and poor has been increasing for the last few decades and is now too great to be acceptable. However, I expect it to be a temporary problem. During the "gilded age" or "robber baron era", the gap between rich and poor was also very excessive but was corrected when the voters finally became fed up. Probably that will happen again.

    One can learn more about this by reading the biographies of the Captains of Industry who lived between the end of the Civil War and about 1900. I recommend reading the biographies of J.D. Rockefeller, Jay Gould, J.P. Morgan, Cornelius Vanderbilt, Andrew Carnegie, the Astors, and a few others. Those biographies cover things not covered by economics classes, including the complete lack of business ethics that was prevalent during that era. It also makes very interesting reading.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4865

    Jan 09, 2015 10:01 PM GMT
    smartmoney said
    PGHguy082 saidTypical "free" stuff for everyone, liberal mentality. Nothing is free. It's the tax payers that will have to pay for it.
    I'm for everyone getting an education if you desire to have one. If you can't afford it, go to school part-time and work full-time or part-time to pay for it. There is also a loan system available for people that can't afford to pay for it.

    Yeah, god forbid one of the stupidest first world countries tries to do anything to help people get smarter.


    Some people want the U.S. to be a classist culture like that of England as well exemplified by the BBC series "Upstairs Downstairs" and "Downton Abbey".
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4865

    Jan 09, 2015 10:05 PM GMT
    Physiqueflex said
    Physiqueflex said
    MGINSD said

    TJ founded the University of Virginia, which is currently confounding his desire for a university where speech, association, and ideas are free by continuing to bar greek-letter societies from functioning despite the proven baselessness of any rape allegations against one of them. Land Grant universities were not founded until the Morrill Act was passed during the Civil War. That said, your conditions make sense, although your proposal for two "tracts" might be seen by some as resigning the non-collegians to the blue collar plantation; such is the system in much of Europe, particularly Germany. And, to say that only "Oligarchs" want an uneducated populace is at odds with your recognition that business leaders would welcome a "nice pool" of educated "potential employees." Cut the class warfare rhetoric and focus on the matter at hand, which is educating and training our HS-ers and HS grads well beyond their current, often abysmal levels.


    Thanks for setting me straight on the land grant colleges. I thought I had heard Thom Hartmann attribute them to TJ, but I must be mistaken as he is one of the smartest guys in media and rarely wrong.

    As far as class warfare goes, it sounds like you're in denial. Class warfare in being waged, but not by me. Opposition to the president's proposal will be, IMO, as much as anything else a matter of "classism", which, also IMO, is what most racism in this country is in reality. Also, I don't associate most job creators with the Oligarchy that is running, and ruining, this country. In fact, the so-called "One Percent" (it's really a fraction of one percent) who control an inordinate and exponentially-growing portion of the nation's wealth in this country are not the true job creators.

    BTW I also reject your use of the term "blue collar plantation" as a negative. Subtle race bait aside, I come from a blue collar family and a blue collar town, and am a self-employed blue collar worker. And proud of it. Blue collar workers are essential. A nation can only make money out of thin air for so long before the economy collapses.


    Actually, some blue collar people are very well educated and intelligent. A plumber who did some work on my house had a degree. A neighbor hired a carpenter who had been a university professor. Moreover, some people who have not been formally educated past high school are better educated than some people with degrees because they have done a lot of reading.
  • sothis999

    Posts: 58

    Jan 09, 2015 11:22 PM GMT
    FRE0 said
    It is interesting to campare high tax states with low tax states. Generally, high tax states have higher per capita incomes and higher average education levels. It appears that, in general, people in high tax states are getting something for their money.


    This is only true if you cut out a lot of data and if you ignore cost of living. It is also true that you must look at the marginal benefit, which is time-dependent.

    Do notice that there a many low tax states with high average income and high average education levels.

    Here is the top and bottom ten states by high school graduation and their sales + highest income tax rates (although it is usually property taxes that determine school quality, and that varies by county.)

    Highest High School Graduation Rates

    New Jersey - 7% sales + 8.87% income

    Minnesota - 6.875% sales + 7.85% income

    Alaska - 2-5% sales + 0 income

    New Hampshire - 0 + 0

    Vermont - 6% sales + 8.95%

    Montana - 6.9% income

    Iowa - 6% sales + 8.98 income

    Hawaii - 4% + 11%

    Utah - 4.47% sales + 5 % flat income tax

    Maine - 5.5% + 8.5 %

    Average Sales + Income: 10.9%


    Lowest High School Graduation Rates

    Texas - 6.25% sales tax

    Mississippi - 7% Sales tax + 5% Highest Income Tax

    California - 6.25 - 10% Sales Tax + 13.3% Income Tax

    Kentucky - 6% Sales Tax + 6% Income Tax

    Alabama - 4% Sales Tax + 5% Income Tax

    Louisiana - 4% Sales Tax + 6% Income Tax

    Arkansas - 6.5% Sales Tax + 7% Income Tax

    New Mexico - 5.125 Saltes Tax + 5.3% Income Tax

    West Virginia - 6% Sales + 6.5% Income

    Tennessee - 7% Sales Tax (6% on Food)

    Average Sales + Income = 11.22%