5 ms·

I think Europe has an ISA program for higher ed. They call it "free college" and the ISA kicks in via a progressive tax system. Funny (sad funny) how when it

I think Europe has an ISA program for higher ed. They call it "free college" and the ISA kicks in via a progressive tax system. Funny (sad funny) how when it is put into the private sector in America it basically collapses.

xondono 5y ago
The main difference is that Europe education also comes with thousand of strings attached. In Spain for instance, it isn’t really free (though it’s cheap compared to the US, around 2.8-3k$/y) but you absolutely get what you are paying for. I know people who where on meetings deciding the country-wide “update” to the curriculum, and the main reason for vetoing new topics was that it displaced outdated topics for which college X had an expert that was “too old to learn new things, but young enough that he had at least a decade before retiring” (their words).
- igorkraw 5y ago
  "Europe" doesn't exist for these purposes, the countries vary wildly, with the only thing that stays constant being that it won't by default saddle you with crushing student debt like the US. The UK has been steadily increasing fees, while e.g. Germany, Norway and Denmark pay you for studying, with the German voters successfully lobbying against attempts to introduce fees while I was studying. The German university system at least is also quite robust and egalitarian in the sense that there are many avenues into university and it is truly free - whole also being high quality (in my opinion). Where Germany is comparatively behind I'd secondary education - the three tier system sucks and I can't wait until the Finnish system properly takes over this continent. Health care and university education are things that Europe just does systematically more efficient than the US in the sense of cheaply providing high quality to lots of people. Research I'd be open to debate and business it has to be said the US is miles ahead of e.g. Germany (I'm so jealous of California's NDA and employee IP laws)
throwawayboise 5y ago
Europe's "free" college is only available to those with the aptitude to likely be successful. Kids are separated into college-bound and vocational educational tracks somewhere around the middle school age.
- SkipperCat 5y ago
  I think that's actually a good thing. We fetishize college in America, telling everyone that it is the only path to a successful future. I think this has duped people into taking on student loan debt, only for them to find out they would have made more money as a plumber or electrician. There are plenty of vocational opportunities out there that can provide a high standard of living and also a rewarding career.
  - dghlsakjg 5y ago
    The trades can be great, but they are absolute hell on your body. It can also be pretty expensive to get set up. You don't get into making serious money until you work for yourself, which frequently involves a six-figure investment in tools and equipment. I do agree that college as a way to get ahead in life is over-sold in the US in particular. It's not a coincidence that colleges don't track student outcomes past graduation, despite their sales pitch of 'preparing students for the future'.
- SkyBelow 5y ago
  This, and similar differences, seem to be completely forgotten about when people bring up the European model for college. It gets tiring pointing it out because the normal reaction is to ignore it entirely. Rarely is useful discussion produced on what purpose a college should serve and how the European model is in contradiction to some of the underlying philosophy advocating for it (specifically around the idea of who should college be for).
- Jensson 5y ago
  Everyone can attend college in Europe, just that you might need to retake some high school courses if you didn't take them. It is exactly the same system as in USA where some students have to do 4 years of college while others can use AP credits to skip a year and finish in 3. In Europe we just make those AP credits mandatory and students have to take them at separate schools before they attend, which is also why students in Europe finish college in 3 years.
Aerroon 5y ago
"Free college" means that the 60% of Europeans who don't go to college pay for the 40% that do. This would be the poor subsidizing the rich. VAT and payroll taxes often make up a larger portion of the budget than income taxes. These usually are not progressive.
- Jensson 5y ago
  > This would be the poor subsidizing the rich. Poor people don't even pay for their own benefits, how can you say they fund education for the rich? Rich people are net payers and poor people are net benefactors, if some poor people got an education and remained poor then their education got funded by others, if some rich people got an education and remained rich then they just paid slightly less net to the system, their education wasn't funded by the poor. Under no circumstance do the poor fund the rich in this system. The main group that loses out are high income earners who didn't get a degree, and the main group that benefits are poor people who got a degree.
  - Aerroon 5y ago
    >Poor people don't even pay for their own benefits, how can you say they fund education for the rich? You're talking about the US and maybe some EU countries, but definitely not all of them. Everyone pays VAT equally regardless whether you're rich or poor. Furthermore, income taxes in most European countries aren't as progressive as in the US.
    - Jensson 5y ago
      Even when taxes aren't progressive the more you earn and spend the more you pay. You need to have an extremely equal society for people below the upper 40% to be net payers, I doubt that applies to any country in EU. And even then, net tax payers can all be considered to have paid for their own education, you never see a situation where poor people fund the education of rich people. At worst you can say that median earners fund the education of median earners who failed to leverage their education to get a better job. But it is mostly a wealth transfer from rich tax payers to poor graduates who didn't get lucrative jobs. Edit: Also at least in Sweden the worker movement lobbied hard to make education as cheap and available as possible. The cheaper and easier it is to get educated the less of a wage premium it becomes to be educated, making for a fairer society. It is a problem if poor students gets tempted to take a low wage job instead of studying just to make money sooner, it is much better for everyone if they don't have to think about that choice, which is why students gets paid to study in Sweden.
yhoiseth 5y ago
Interesting take — hadn’t thought about it that way before. There is one crucial piece missing, though: universities’ incentives. At least in Norway where I live, universities are paid the same for many STEM, humanities and social sciences programs. This causes an oversupply of e.g. historians compared to e.g. software developers, as universities are free to ignore labor market realities.

xondono 5y ago

The main difference is that Europe education also comes with thousand of strings attached. In Spain for instance, it isn’t really free (though it’s cheap compared to the US, around 2.8-3k$/y) but you absolutely get what you are paying for. I know people who where on meetings deciding the country-wide “update” to the curriculum, and the main reason for vetoing new topics was that it displaced outdated topics for which college X had an expert that was “too old to learn new things, but young enough that he had at least a decade before retiring” (their words).

igorkraw 5y ago
"Europe" doesn't exist for these purposes, the countries vary wildly, with the only thing that stays constant being that it won't by default saddle you with crushing student debt like the US. The UK has been steadily increasing fees, while e.g. Germany, Norway and Denmark pay you for studying, with the German voters successfully lobbying against attempts to introduce fees while I was studying. The German university system at least is also quite robust and egalitarian in the sense that there are many avenues into university and it is truly free - whole also being high quality (in my opinion). Where Germany is comparatively behind I'd secondary education - the three tier system sucks and I can't wait until the Finnish system properly takes over this continent. Health care and university education are things that Europe just does systematically more efficient than the US in the sense of cheaply providing high quality to lots of people. Research I'd be open to debate and business it has to be said the US is miles ahead of e.g. Germany (I'm so jealous of California's NDA and employee IP laws)

throwawayboise 5y ago

Europe's "free" college is only available to those with the aptitude to likely be successful. Kids are separated into college-bound and vocational educational tracks somewhere around the middle school age.

SkipperCat 5y ago
I think that's actually a good thing. We fetishize college in America, telling everyone that it is the only path to a successful future. I think this has duped people into taking on student loan debt, only for them to find out they would have made more money as a plumber or electrician. There are plenty of vocational opportunities out there that can provide a high standard of living and also a rewarding career.
- dghlsakjg 5y ago
  The trades can be great, but they are absolute hell on your body. It can also be pretty expensive to get set up. You don't get into making serious money until you work for yourself, which frequently involves a six-figure investment in tools and equipment. I do agree that college as a way to get ahead in life is over-sold in the US in particular. It's not a coincidence that colleges don't track student outcomes past graduation, despite their sales pitch of 'preparing students for the future'.
SkyBelow 5y ago
This, and similar differences, seem to be completely forgotten about when people bring up the European model for college. It gets tiring pointing it out because the normal reaction is to ignore it entirely. Rarely is useful discussion produced on what purpose a college should serve and how the European model is in contradiction to some of the underlying philosophy advocating for it (specifically around the idea of who should college be for).
Jensson 5y ago
Everyone can attend college in Europe, just that you might need to retake some high school courses if you didn't take them. It is exactly the same system as in USA where some students have to do 4 years of college while others can use AP credits to skip a year and finish in 3. In Europe we just make those AP credits mandatory and students have to take them at separate schools before they attend, which is also why students in Europe finish college in 3 years.

Aerroon 5y ago

"Free college" means that the 60% of Europeans who don't go to college pay for the 40% that do. This would be the poor subsidizing the rich. VAT and payroll taxes often make up a larger portion of the budget than income taxes. These usually are not progressive.

Jensson 5y ago
> This would be the poor subsidizing the rich. Poor people don't even pay for their own benefits, how can you say they fund education for the rich? Rich people are net payers and poor people are net benefactors, if some poor people got an education and remained poor then their education got funded by others, if some rich people got an education and remained rich then they just paid slightly less net to the system, their education wasn't funded by the poor. Under no circumstance do the poor fund the rich in this system. The main group that loses out are high income earners who didn't get a degree, and the main group that benefits are poor people who got a degree.
- Aerroon 5y ago
  >Poor people don't even pay for their own benefits, how can you say they fund education for the rich? You're talking about the US and maybe some EU countries, but definitely not all of them. Everyone pays VAT equally regardless whether you're rich or poor. Furthermore, income taxes in most European countries aren't as progressive as in the US.
  - Jensson 5y ago
    Even when taxes aren't progressive the more you earn and spend the more you pay. You need to have an extremely equal society for people below the upper 40% to be net payers, I doubt that applies to any country in EU. And even then, net tax payers can all be considered to have paid for their own education, you never see a situation where poor people fund the education of rich people. At worst you can say that median earners fund the education of median earners who failed to leverage their education to get a better job. But it is mostly a wealth transfer from rich tax payers to poor graduates who didn't get lucrative jobs. Edit: Also at least in Sweden the worker movement lobbied hard to make education as cheap and available as possible. The cheaper and easier it is to get educated the less of a wage premium it becomes to be educated, making for a fairer society. It is a problem if poor students gets tempted to take a low wage job instead of studying just to make money sooner, it is much better for everyone if they don't have to think about that choice, which is why students gets paid to study in Sweden.

yhoiseth 5y ago

Interesting take — hadn’t thought about it that way before. There is one crucial piece missing, though: universities’ incentives. At least in Norway where I live, universities are paid the same for many STEM, humanities and social sciences programs. This causes an oversupply of e.g. historians compared to e.g. software developers, as universities are free to ignore labor market realities.