> not everyone takes $100ks of loans To clarify, I'm saying that college should be available to all either for free or at an affordable price. More generally,

> not everyone takes $100ks of loans To clarify, I'm saying that college should be available to all either for free or at an affordable price. More generally, I don't agree with the premises that some people deserve a better education than others, that we can determine people's worthiness at a young age, and that the only value (or even the primary value) of education is making money. Regarding our ability to determine the worthiness of young students, note that parents' wealth and/or income are the leading factors (AFAIK) in determining how much education a student receives. > previously it was 6 years, and you want to make it 16? I think many ideas for limiting education imply an abandonment of progress, that we should plan for the economy and society we had over the last 50 years instead of looking to the future and building a more educated and productive one. The society and economy of the last 50 years was built by forward thinking people before that, including those who thought education should be expanded. Perhaps if people were better educated, they would be less vulnerable to absurd political, economic, and scientific ideas. (To be clear: I'm not calling the parent's idea absurd; I'm referring to many others out there and sometimes here on HN.)