3 ms·

I don't see how your comment is relevant to the topic. This isn't a public vs private debate. If anything it's a debate between federal loans and state approp

by ende 10y ago

I don't see how your comment is relevant to the topic. This isn't a public vs private debate. If anything it's a debate between federal loans and state appropriations, or an issue of administrative mismanagement. There is another kind of ideology, however, which may be at play here: an automatic reaction to pour public money on problems. Public institutions can be irrational actors that cator to narrow interests just as private ones can. The public sector needs to be regulated as well, and it largely is not.

hackuser 10y ago
> This isn't a public vs private debate We might be referring to different forms of "private". The article says that as public funding was pulled back, tuition was increased to fill the gap. Tuition is private funding, though by many (mostly) wealthy people rather than a few uber-wealthy. With funding coming from that private source, wealthy customers, educational institutions need to focus on pleasing them and invest in fancy amenities rather than educational resources. > The public sector needs to be regulated as well, and it largely is not. It is regulated by voters and their representatives - very imperfectly, and we should improve it and not be satisfied, but I've yet to find a large human endeavor for which that wasn't the case. > There is another kind of ideology, however, which may be at play here: an automatic reaction to pour public money on problems Given the radical cuts in government budgets on the federal and local level, I don't see that approach having much influence currently so I'm not worried about it. Also, spending public money is a strategy, not an ideology. Democratic socialism is an ideology, and I do dread dogmatic ideologues of all stripes, but that one also isn't a threat right now.