3 ms·
It's not "free". Someone is paying for it? It's either people whop didn't gain the benefit of either, or it's you later on, only instead of a transparent loan,
by jbb555 10y ago
It's not "free". Someone is paying for it?
It's either people whop didn't gain the benefit of either, or it's you later on, only instead of a transparent loan, it's opaque taxes so you don't realize you are paying.
- yourareanidiot 10y agoYes I win less money because my employer pay tax. But on this way it's cheaper for everyone and everyone get health care and education. No matter they are rich or poor. If I get sick one day I can benefit from this system. And if i'm not someone else benefits.
- damptowel 10y agoGov can still be considerably cheaper depending on the structure of the underlaying circuit, how much intrest does the gov charge vis a vis the banks, I'm sure for profit institution charge a lot more, leading to a higher fraction of income going into repayments, depressing overall demand, thus GDP, thus higher gov debt ratio. etc ...
- basch 10y agobuuut really, what is the cost to record the best roman history lecture in the world and put it on youtube. OR pay an editor to edit together all the best courses into a metacourse/documentary. what percent of college education is either lecture or textbooks? if curriculum includes video lectures, and can serve millions instead of hundreds per year, the cost should be drastically reduced. lecture portions can be reused from year to year. now college costs should just be discussion/lab/feedback/etc by clinging to live lectures, they can limit supply and control price. no matter how you spin it, college is overpriced, compared to how it could be if there were incentive to serve everyone and distribute all the information. its an exclusive club people pay to enter.