4 ms·

> There might be a "value" in it but why shouldn't they pay for it? It is called an investment. Society invests in an individual education because in the long

by kartan 10y ago

> There might be a "value" in it but why shouldn't they pay for it? It is called an investment. Society invests in an individual education because in the long run that individual is going to be able to contribute more positively to society, returning a greater value than the initial investment. A better educated society takes better decisions, is more creative, adapts faster to change... Why shouldn't countries invest in its own future? If citizens have to pay for that education maybe they are not going to be able to afford it, or just are not going to do that investment because they lack the education to understand the benefits. The situation becomes a loss for the individuals, but also for the country. To treat education as an expense is a mistake. That same happens with, for example, infrastructure. If you treat it just as an expense, why do the government build roads? The reality is that a country without infrastructure is as badly prepared as one without educated citizens.

scarface74 10y ago
It is called an investment. Society invests in an individual education because in the long run that individual is going to be able to contribute more positively to society My CS education at an unknown state college costed 10-25% of what a liberal arts degree costs from a "prestigious" private college. So why should I pay for people who want a liberal arts degree that is not as valued by society? If we made large student loans harder to get, colleges would have to adjust. Maybe even to the point of making a liberal arts degree cost less than a computer science degree.
- kartan 10y ago
  > If we made large student loans harder to get That's a different discussion. The problems is that the White House is removing protections for the people that already have that big loans. Easy to get loans and harsh penalties for defaulting is the worst of the combinations. Making student loans harder to get is a good solution to reduce the burden of debt and even to reduce prices. But at the same time it makes education to become a privilege of the wealthy. So it has an important downside. > So why should I pay for people who want a liberal arts degree that is not as valued by society? Is not as valued by society or is not as valued in the job market? This are two different things. I can earn more than a doctor thanks to my long experience as software engineer, but I will not jump to the conclusion that I'm more valuable to society than a doctor (or a janitor for example). I have meet too much people with high salaries that do more damage than good to companies to believe that "salary" is a measure of "been valuable".
  - scarface74 10y ago
    At the time I went to the state college I went to. People were paying for school almost completely out of pocket working minimum wage jobs and staying at home with their parents. A pell grant plus a minimum loan can pay for someone to go to a two year college. In my state, if they work hard enough during the first two years, get a 3.0 GPA they can get their tuition paid at any state college to finish their four year degree. Of course they can get all four years paid if they did well in high school. But students are still racking up debt to go to private schools and go out of state.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

by kartan 10y ago

scarface74 10y ago

It is called an investment. Society invests in an individual education because in the long run that individual is going to be able to contribute more positively to society My CS education at an unknown state college costed 10-25% of what a liberal arts degree costs from a "prestigious" private college. So why should I pay for people who want a liberal arts degree that is not as valued by society? If we made large student loans harder to get, colleges would have to adjust. Maybe even to the point of making a liberal arts degree cost less than a computer science degree.

kartan 10y ago
> If we made large student loans harder to get That's a different discussion. The problems is that the White House is removing protections for the people that already have that big loans. Easy to get loans and harsh penalties for defaulting is the worst of the combinations. Making student loans harder to get is a good solution to reduce the burden of debt and even to reduce prices. But at the same time it makes education to become a privilege of the wealthy. So it has an important downside. > So why should I pay for people who want a liberal arts degree that is not as valued by society? Is not as valued by society or is not as valued in the job market? This are two different things. I can earn more than a doctor thanks to my long experience as software engineer, but I will not jump to the conclusion that I'm more valuable to society than a doctor (or a janitor for example). I have meet too much people with high salaries that do more damage than good to companies to believe that "salary" is a measure of "been valuable".
- scarface74 10y ago
  At the time I went to the state college I went to. People were paying for school almost completely out of pocket working minimum wage jobs and staying at home with their parents. A pell grant plus a minimum loan can pay for someone to go to a two year college. In my state, if they work hard enough during the first two years, get a 3.0 GPA they can get their tuition paid at any state college to finish their four year degree. Of course they can get all four years paid if they did well in high school. But students are still racking up debt to go to private schools and go out of state.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]