4 ms·

Libertarian here as well. I am more of the opinion that the government should set rules on the cost of education for any school accepting government aid or any

Libertarian here as well. I am more of the opinion that the government should set rules on the cost of education for any school accepting government aid or any school who accepts students who pay with government loans. Want to get the price of education back in line, drop the open checkbook. The issue I take with taxing to pay for everyone's college is that apparently there is no determination what constitutes a good education or good student. As in, I do not want to see money thrown at majors that can never pay back the investment or require such skill and luck to achieve pay back relative to the cost. Then comes the student, if your just a fail student why should anyone foot your bill to stay in school? You get the same number of years as anyone else. If you don't achieve the diploma you pay back a percentage

TheCowboy 12y ago
Limiting the number of years is rather inflexible and can lock people out for mistakes or significant changes in the market place (such as graduating into a global recession). I personally have found that due to rules in my state, that I am prevented from going back and pursuing a computer science degree, because there are such limits in place. This also doesn't consider that people from worse are backgrounds tend to take longer to get through school. This can range from personal or family sickness (caring for parents is common). We always hear from the proud examples of people who overcame their circumstances, but it creates a survivor bias. From an economic perspective, we are missing out when people get locked out for life who could contribute more to the economy. That's less wealth being created. I just point that out because while it's easy for us to come up with seemingly simply solutions, but without any built-in flexibility we're back to the same place.
ameister14 12y ago
That seems more likely to create a class structure than anything else. I find that a lot of people with good jobs are not well educated; they have skills but no cultural knowledge. Often, they discount the necessity of that knowledge. Interestingly enough, that's a totally working class sentiment. If you want to move beyond that, though, and have genuine leadership and thought generated by these government funded programs, you can't limit people to studying only things that have a direct correlation with paying back the investment.
mindcrime 12y ago
As in, I do not want to see money thrown at majors that can never pay back the investment or require such skill and luck to achieve pay back relative to the cost. Good point. Paying for somebody to get a degree in, say, Medieval History, so they only job they can get post-college is "Barista at Starbucks", seems suboptimal to me.
- jordache 12y ago
  narrow-sighted logic. Diversity is what makes life. If you attach future earning potential qualifier to the free education, then you'll have a disproportionate amount of people attempting fit their square potential into a round hole. Over a long period of time, you loose out the natural diversity that would otherwise exist in the general public - of people each dedicated to skill set they are best match for. Not everything human produces ought to have an economic component. Painters, Poets, Musicians... ?
  - mindcrime 12y ago
    Yes, and this is one of the reasons I don't want the government involved in education at all. But, since they choose to be so involved, I find myself feeling that government spending on education should take the value of that education into account. But you're exactly right, in that it's hard to actually do that. In the end, there are no perfect answers to any of this, it's just a question of "which variables do you optimize for?"
    - saraid216 12y ago
      If an education produces a non-libertarian, would you consider that of higher or lower value than an education that produces a libertarian?
      - mindcrime 12y ago
        I'd say that any education that "produces" a graduate with a specific ideology has failed in a sense. I'd like to think education should be somewhat neutral, presenting a NPOV and that people would make up their own minds what they value most. Otherwise, you have to ask "is this education, or indoctrination?"
hsitz 12y ago
As in, I do not want to see money thrown at majors that can never pay back the investment or require such skill and luck to achieve pay back relative to the cost. Sounds to me then like you're in favor of "government planning" of the economy, which is essentially what it is when the government is picking and choosing which majors (and which people!) to subsidize. Strange libertarian position.
- icebraining 12y ago
  The government is already picking and choosing - there is already criteria to decide what schools should be accredited and funded. It's not unlibertarian to defend they should have better criteria.
wildgift 12y ago
Those are called "price controls."

TheCowboy 12y ago

Limiting the number of years is rather inflexible and can lock people out for mistakes or significant changes in the market place (such as graduating into a global recession). I personally have found that due to rules in my state, that I am prevented from going back and pursuing a computer science degree, because there are such limits in place. This also doesn't consider that people from worse are backgrounds tend to take longer to get through school. This can range from personal or family sickness (caring for parents is common). We always hear from the proud examples of people who overcame their circumstances, but it creates a survivor bias. From an economic perspective, we are missing out when people get locked out for life who could contribute more to the economy. That's less wealth being created. I just point that out because while it's easy for us to come up with seemingly simply solutions, but without any built-in flexibility we're back to the same place.

ameister14 12y ago

That seems more likely to create a class structure than anything else. I find that a lot of people with good jobs are not well educated; they have skills but no cultural knowledge. Often, they discount the necessity of that knowledge. Interestingly enough, that's a totally working class sentiment. If you want to move beyond that, though, and have genuine leadership and thought generated by these government funded programs, you can't limit people to studying only things that have a direct correlation with paying back the investment.

mindcrime 12y ago

As in, I do not want to see money thrown at majors that can never pay back the investment or require such skill and luck to achieve pay back relative to the cost. Good point. Paying for somebody to get a degree in, say, Medieval History, so they only job they can get post-college is "Barista at Starbucks", seems suboptimal to me.

jordache 12y ago
narrow-sighted logic. Diversity is what makes life. If you attach future earning potential qualifier to the free education, then you'll have a disproportionate amount of people attempting fit their square potential into a round hole. Over a long period of time, you loose out the natural diversity that would otherwise exist in the general public - of people each dedicated to skill set they are best match for. Not everything human produces ought to have an economic component. Painters, Poets, Musicians... ?
- mindcrime 12y ago
  Yes, and this is one of the reasons I don't want the government involved in education at all. But, since they choose to be so involved, I find myself feeling that government spending on education should take the value of that education into account. But you're exactly right, in that it's hard to actually do that. In the end, there are no perfect answers to any of this, it's just a question of "which variables do you optimize for?"
  - saraid216 12y ago
    If an education produces a non-libertarian, would you consider that of higher or lower value than an education that produces a libertarian?
    - mindcrime 12y ago
      I'd say that any education that "produces" a graduate with a specific ideology has failed in a sense. I'd like to think education should be somewhat neutral, presenting a NPOV and that people would make up their own minds what they value most. Otherwise, you have to ask "is this education, or indoctrination?"

hsitz 12y ago

As in, I do not want to see money thrown at majors that can never pay back the investment or require such skill and luck to achieve pay back relative to the cost. Sounds to me then like you're in favor of "government planning" of the economy, which is essentially what it is when the government is picking and choosing which majors (and which people!) to subsidize. Strange libertarian position.

icebraining 12y ago
The government is already picking and choosing - there is already criteria to decide what schools should be accredited and funded. It's not unlibertarian to defend they should have better criteria.

wildgift 12y ago

Those are called "price controls."