4 ms·

I agree. Yes, it will cost a lot and yes we need to find a way to fund it, but giving all communities fair access to education is in everyone's best interest.

I agree. Yes, it will cost a lot and yes we need to find a way to fund it, but giving all communities fair access to education is in everyone's best interest. Increasing the base level of education makes everyone a more intelligent, informed citizen and voter, and will have a positive impact on the progression of our country. I think it's a bad idea to be penny pinching in this regard. I also think everyone being educated, and learning how to think for themselves (which I find is the key greatest value of getting higher education) will keep the people in power from herding everyone around like sheep, and will lead to more progress and innovation. I will gladly pay a higher portion of my salary if it means the general populous can think for themselves, has a means to climb if they wish to, and the base level of education of the people in my country increases.

QML 8y ago
I agree with a lot of your points, but the way to increasing the base level of education isn’t through making all colleges free — it’s through investing in and making community colleges free. Why? If we’re trying educate the entire populace instead of a few high achieving high schoolers, we should recognize that a majority of people can’t afford to up-end their lives, move far away, and spend 4 years getting a degree. Community colleges, emphasis on the community term, would allow for people — local people — to educate themselves without drastically affecting their livelihoods. In this way, community colleges can also potentially act as job retraining facilities. Note that I am slightly biased as a Californian.
- agitator 8y ago
  This is fair. I'm saying all higher education, so if upending your life doesn't work for you, you could choose a local school or community college. Also the regular admissions system would be in place, so higher achievers would still exclusively get into more prestigious schools, it's just that money won't be a factor.
  - paulie_a 8y ago
    While this is in the broader scope but after five years of graduation, the college you attended is irrelevant. The prestigious name is meaningless.
    - agitator 8y ago
      Personally from experience, the prestige comes with network and the network is where it's at. The connections you have definitely grease the upward escalator.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
- sahil-kang 8y ago
  Can you elaborate on the Californian bias with regard to community colleges? Is the California community college system better/worse than other states? I’m a native Californian that went straight to a 4 year, but I sometimes think about how much cheaper college would have been if I had gone to community first.
  - analognoise 8y ago
    Went to CC in California. Paid ridiculously little. All classes transferred, started with killer foundations at a fraction of the cost. Transferred to UC. Been employed 8 years. Nobody's ever asked where the first 2 years of college were from. Not even for my first job. I don't know why more people don't go that route. It's like $26 dollars a unit, the books cost more than the classes do. The professors were dope as hell - especially in the hard sciences. Plus you didn't have a lecture hall with 150, 200 kids in it - you had 30, 50 for a "big" class. The instructors always showed up to office hours, they all spoke great English, and actually cared if you understood the material - they weren't ditching class to prepare for a conference, or having a TA do the actual teaching. They genuinely liked their subjects. Going to CC is practically a secret weapon. I'd hire a CC graduate over a "bootcamp" graduate any day of the week.
  - QML 8y ago
    I believe the California community college system is better than most states. Let me elaborate. In the summer before my freshman year, I didn't really have much to do, and so I decided to take up a course. My options were to either take it at the UC where I'd attend, or to take an equivalent offering at a local CC. When I looked at the price, there was a 10-fold difference, $2000 against $200. It was a no brainer to enroll at the CC: transferring credits was easy because the UC system and the CC system already have an agreement [1]. This is in addition to the transfer agreement between the two institutions, where CC students are guaranteed admission to some of the UCs if they fulfill the requirements [2]. Before the first day, I recall having low expectations; I had bought into the mindset that a smaller tuition meant a shabbier campus and a worse experience. I was dreadfully wrong: the place was modern, and my class size numbered around 15 people. More over, its population was diverse. I didn't see only college students; there were middle schoolers, high schoolers, international students, and even parents dragging their children to camps. In general, the place had people serious enough about their education that they would spend a nice summer doing so. Here, it seemed was a greater emphasis on the community side of college. I want to mention that this is in contrast to what I've previous seen. I came from a high school which didn't focus on getting people ahead, but on only keeping them from following behind; that was the primarily the idea of summer school. I've also heard of high school students paying for private SAT/ACT tutoring, and for online AP courses. In hindsight, CCCs act as equalizers in the field of education -- I would even say they are the modern day equivalent of churches in our state. [1] http://www.assist.org/web-assist/welcome.html http://www.assist.org/web-assist/welcome.html [2] http://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/transfer/guarantee/index.html http://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/transfer/guarant...
- eropple 8y ago
  > Why? If we’re trying educate the entire populace instead of a few high achieving high schoolers, we should recognize that a majority of people can’t afford to up-end their lives, move far away, and spend 4 years getting a degree. On the other hand, consider a state like Maine, which has under 1.5 million people and a bunch of good state universities for a variety of disciplines that a community college isn't equipped to teach. You don't have to move that far away (I moved two and a half hours away from where I grew up, and tbh I wish it had been further) and when you're leaving high school it's probably more common than not that your life isn't really settled enough to upend. (I think making community colleges free, too, is a very good idea.)
- dcole2929 8y ago
  Most people who go to college don't upend their life. By the numbers ~60% of students go to schools 100 miles or less from home. Obviously the numbers are far different for graduate school but I think the point still stands that subsidizing all college doesn't suddenly require people to move to the other side of the country. There's also a big difference between classes at a local community college and a university. Some community colleges are quite good, and you can always try to transfer to a 4 year university before graduation. However, it would be incredibly dishonest to pretend that the quality of education between the two is the same or that employers view a degree from a community college the same. For instance both MD and PA have notoriously few and poor community colleges. But both states have an abundance of very good colleges. Free tuition for all would mean more people could attend those schools as opposed to being forced to attend a poor CC just because that's all they can afford.
ake1 8y ago
would not increasing the base level of education decrease the chance of the currently ruling party staying in power? does not seem like a wise course of action (edit: for them).
pwdisswordfish2 8y ago
Free but not compulsory, right? You don't need higher education for a lot of jobs and many people do not wish to attend college. I also think it's wrong to imply that people who haven't attended higher education can't "think for themselves". My 2 cents.
- agitator 8y ago
  100% agree, and not the point i'm making. I'm saying it will increase the average level of individual thinking, but not saying that it's a requirement. I'm simply saying those people that forgo schooling because it's not economically feasible for them, will have the ability to do so and thus one large factor in keeping people down is eliminated.
- 326543 8y ago
  The problem I have with free college is that college, while expensive now, is already nearly compulsory for a lot of jobs that don't require it. A degree in any irrelevant thing is used as an arbitrary deciding factor. Free college will make for compulsory college as everyone will need a degree to have a chance. Then we actually lose value from the opportunity cost of people not working. Disclaimers: obviously, yes, I think education is great in general. And I actually don't mind social education. I just think it's easier to get this wrong than right.
- snikeris 8y ago
  Well, the problem with making it free is that you're making it compulsory for others to pay for it.
rayiner 8y ago
Except colleges won't make people more intelligent. For the most part, it won't even make people more informed. For many people (especially the incremental people that would go to college if it were free), college is an extended 4-year vacation, during which they immediately forget everything they learned, because they never need to use it on the job.
nostromo 8y ago
More people should read, “The Case against Education: Why the Education System Is a Waste of Time and Money” People take it a priori that more education is always good — when there’s a lot of evidence that the vast majority of higher education (in both time and dollars spent) is wasted.
snikeris 8y ago
> I will gladly pay a higher portion of my salary if it means the general populous can think for themselves, has a means to climb if they wish to, and the base level of education of the people in my country increases. No one is stopping you from doing so. Donate some money to local youth or a scholarship fund. However, it seems like you want to force everyone else to pay a higher portion of their salary to this cause.

QML 8y ago

I agree with a lot of your points, but the way to increasing the base level of education isn’t through making all colleges free — it’s through investing in and making community colleges free. Why? If we’re trying educate the entire populace instead of a few high achieving high schoolers, we should recognize that a majority of people can’t afford to up-end their lives, move far away, and spend 4 years getting a degree. Community colleges, emphasis on the community term, would allow for people — local people — to educate themselves without drastically affecting their livelihoods. In this way, community colleges can also potentially act as job retraining facilities. Note that I am slightly biased as a Californian.

agitator 8y ago
This is fair. I'm saying all higher education, so if upending your life doesn't work for you, you could choose a local school or community college. Also the regular admissions system would be in place, so higher achievers would still exclusively get into more prestigious schools, it's just that money won't be a factor.
- paulie_a 8y ago
  While this is in the broader scope but after five years of graduation, the college you attended is irrelevant. The prestigious name is meaningless.
  - agitator 8y ago
    Personally from experience, the prestige comes with network and the network is where it's at. The connections you have definitely grease the upward escalator.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
sahil-kang 8y ago
Can you elaborate on the Californian bias with regard to community colleges? Is the California community college system better/worse than other states? I’m a native Californian that went straight to a 4 year, but I sometimes think about how much cheaper college would have been if I had gone to community first.
- analognoise 8y ago
  Went to CC in California. Paid ridiculously little. All classes transferred, started with killer foundations at a fraction of the cost. Transferred to UC. Been employed 8 years. Nobody's ever asked where the first 2 years of college were from. Not even for my first job. I don't know why more people don't go that route. It's like $26 dollars a unit, the books cost more than the classes do. The professors were dope as hell - especially in the hard sciences. Plus you didn't have a lecture hall with 150, 200 kids in it - you had 30, 50 for a "big" class. The instructors always showed up to office hours, they all spoke great English, and actually cared if you understood the material - they weren't ditching class to prepare for a conference, or having a TA do the actual teaching. They genuinely liked their subjects. Going to CC is practically a secret weapon. I'd hire a CC graduate over a "bootcamp" graduate any day of the week.
- QML 8y ago
  I believe the California community college system is better than most states. Let me elaborate. In the summer before my freshman year, I didn't really have much to do, and so I decided to take up a course. My options were to either take it at the UC where I'd attend, or to take an equivalent offering at a local CC. When I looked at the price, there was a 10-fold difference, $2000 against $200. It was a no brainer to enroll at the CC: transferring credits was easy because the UC system and the CC system already have an agreement [1]. This is in addition to the transfer agreement between the two institutions, where CC students are guaranteed admission to some of the UCs if they fulfill the requirements [2]. Before the first day, I recall having low expectations; I had bought into the mindset that a smaller tuition meant a shabbier campus and a worse experience. I was dreadfully wrong: the place was modern, and my class size numbered around 15 people. More over, its population was diverse. I didn't see only college students; there were middle schoolers, high schoolers, international students, and even parents dragging their children to camps. In general, the place had people serious enough about their education that they would spend a nice summer doing so. Here, it seemed was a greater emphasis on the community side of college. I want to mention that this is in contrast to what I've previous seen. I came from a high school which didn't focus on getting people ahead, but on only keeping them from following behind; that was the primarily the idea of summer school. I've also heard of high school students paying for private SAT/ACT tutoring, and for online AP courses. In hindsight, CCCs act as equalizers in the field of education -- I would even say they are the modern day equivalent of churches in our state. [1] http://www.assist.org/web-assist/welcome.html http://www.assist.org/web-assist/welcome.html [2] http://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/transfer/guarantee/index.html http://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/transfer/guarant...
eropple 8y ago
> Why? If we’re trying educate the entire populace instead of a few high achieving high schoolers, we should recognize that a majority of people can’t afford to up-end their lives, move far away, and spend 4 years getting a degree. On the other hand, consider a state like Maine, which has under 1.5 million people and a bunch of good state universities for a variety of disciplines that a community college isn't equipped to teach. You don't have to move that far away (I moved two and a half hours away from where I grew up, and tbh I wish it had been further) and when you're leaving high school it's probably more common than not that your life isn't really settled enough to upend. (I think making community colleges free, too, is a very good idea.)
dcole2929 8y ago
Most people who go to college don't upend their life. By the numbers ~60% of students go to schools 100 miles or less from home. Obviously the numbers are far different for graduate school but I think the point still stands that subsidizing all college doesn't suddenly require people to move to the other side of the country. There's also a big difference between classes at a local community college and a university. Some community colleges are quite good, and you can always try to transfer to a 4 year university before graduation. However, it would be incredibly dishonest to pretend that the quality of education between the two is the same or that employers view a degree from a community college the same. For instance both MD and PA have notoriously few and poor community colleges. But both states have an abundance of very good colleges. Free tuition for all would mean more people could attend those schools as opposed to being forced to attend a poor CC just because that's all they can afford.

ake1 8y ago

would not increasing the base level of education decrease the chance of the currently ruling party staying in power? does not seem like a wise course of action (edit: for them).

pwdisswordfish2 8y ago

Free but not compulsory, right? You don't need higher education for a lot of jobs and many people do not wish to attend college. I also think it's wrong to imply that people who haven't attended higher education can't "think for themselves". My 2 cents.

agitator 8y ago
100% agree, and not the point i'm making. I'm saying it will increase the average level of individual thinking, but not saying that it's a requirement. I'm simply saying those people that forgo schooling because it's not economically feasible for them, will have the ability to do so and thus one large factor in keeping people down is eliminated.
326543 8y ago
The problem I have with free college is that college, while expensive now, is already nearly compulsory for a lot of jobs that don't require it. A degree in any irrelevant thing is used as an arbitrary deciding factor. Free college will make for compulsory college as everyone will need a degree to have a chance. Then we actually lose value from the opportunity cost of people not working. Disclaimers: obviously, yes, I think education is great in general. And I actually don't mind social education. I just think it's easier to get this wrong than right.
snikeris 8y ago
Well, the problem with making it free is that you're making it compulsory for others to pay for it.

rayiner 8y ago

Except colleges won't make people more intelligent. For the most part, it won't even make people more informed. For many people (especially the incremental people that would go to college if it were free), college is an extended 4-year vacation, during which they immediately forget everything they learned, because they never need to use it on the job.

nostromo 8y ago

More people should read, “The Case against Education: Why the Education System Is a Waste of Time and Money” People take it a priori that more education is always good — when there’s a lot of evidence that the vast majority of higher education (in both time and dollars spent) is wasted.

snikeris 8y ago

> I will gladly pay a higher portion of my salary if it means the general populous can think for themselves, has a means to climb if they wish to, and the base level of education of the people in my country increases. No one is stopping you from doing so. Donate some money to local youth or a scholarship fund. However, it seems like you want to force everyone else to pay a higher portion of their salary to this cause.