5 ms·

In most other Western countries the universities are pretty much the same as American ones, just without the crippling costs. U of T charges $10K USD annually f

by guyzero 12y ago

In most other Western countries the universities are pretty much the same as American ones, just without the crippling costs. U of T charges $10K USD annually for tuition, for an undergrad science degree, for a Canadian. McGill charges Quebec residents a stunning $2,000 a year for a science degree. There is no significant difference between U of T or McGill and any American university you care to name. Student costs are similar in France and Germany, if not a lot lower. It's simply a question of the US government spending money on things other than educating its citizens.

ma2rten 12y ago
Similar? I don't know about France, but in Germany it's free, in Holland you even get money from the government to study.
- Retric 12y ago
  My old University in the US charges in state students 7,000$ per year for tuition 2014-2015 it's 10,200/year out of state. Plenty of people come up with most or all of that as working students. And one of my roommates came from Europe because it was cheaper than any school in his country though this was a while ago. My little sister got into a school that charges (ED: 43.2k tuition/year 2015-2016) which she wanted to go to. But, decided to go somewhere else for obvious reason. Some collages in the US charge a lot because they can find students willing to pay that much money, but there plenty of reasonable options.
  - cozzyd 12y ago
    "Good" private schools (Harvard, Stanford, MIT etc.) charge a lot for tuition then redistribute funds so that people from less affluent backgrounds get need-based scholarships. I think this pressures other private schools to raise costs in order to seem competitive, even though they don't often have the same generous financial aid. In some cases, going to Stanford may be more affordable than going to Berkeley even if you're in-state. The strange consequence of this is that it is almost better (from a selfish viewpoint), if you are not rich, to not have money saved for college if you send your kid to Harvard, because they'll take any money you do have. The room and board cost is mostly based on cost of living (Boston and the Bay area are more expensive than Madison, Wisconsin), but financial aid will often cover that too.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
wtbob 12y ago
I wonder how the total costs (to the student and the government) differ. I'm sure that the U.S. is still way more expensive. I wonder, too, how much freedom students have to choose their schools; my suspicion is that students have too much here, and consequently chase fancy dorms and amenities, driving costs up as schools seek to one-up one another.
brownbat 12y ago
> In most other Western countries the universities are pretty much the same as American ones, just without the crippling costs. The sticker price is misleading though. There are scholarships for merit and grants for need. Work study (often in makework jobs with ample downtime for studying) for almost anyone who seeks them out. Even after that, employers in competitive fields offer loan repayment as a starting bonus, or doled out over time for retention. Work in public service makes some eligible for loan forgiveness. Even without that, the loan companies have provisions for indefinite deferment during unemployment and automatic forbearance during enrollment in any other academic program. Income based repayment is a standard option. Essentially, if you wanted to break the system, you could pay full price for a ridiculously priced private school degree then probably go work at starbucks and send them $20 a month for a while, then go take four years off to study pottery at a community college to pay $0 a month while the fed pays all your interest. Oh, then even after that, even if you are actually personally paying interest on a loan, historically the rates have been competitive (though that flipped a few years back), and there are tax credits for education spending, and deductions that kick in even when you're just repaying school loans. The most surprising feature of the American system to me is not the price, but how hard it works to camouflage all its progressive and meritocratic features. http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/04/college-is-cheaper-than-you-think/?emc=eta1 http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/04/college-is-chea...
- nickonline 12y ago
  > The sticker price is misleading... There are scholarships... Work study... employers... offer loan repayments... public service makes some eligible for loan forgiveness Most of these (scholarships, work study) are available in other countries without the sticker price in the USA. Employers don't need to offer loan repayment as a starting bonus in other countries because the sticker price isn't so ridiculous. It worries me how you rationalize this away - what happens if you don't get a scholarship or that loan repayment as a starting bonus and don't want to work for the government? If you just want to work for a mid-tier accounting firm then your education could be costing you an astronomical portion of your paycheck.
  - 12y ago
mblevin 12y ago
This is actually the most insidious misperception that a wide swath of people appear to have about American education. It's not that the government spends too LITTLE money - it's because it spends too MUCH without any in the form of cheap student loans with no risk based pricing. Any 18 year old with no credit history can go and and take out over a $200k of student loans ($57,500 / year) from the government, without any regards to school or risk. Barely graduated high school and majoring in underwater basketweaving at BoneHead U? As long as it's an "accredited school" (a sham process in and of itself), here's your money - at 3.5% interest! Nothing secured against the loan, no evaluation of your ability to repay, nothing - just free money with the not-so-insignificant fact that these loans are mostly non-dischargeable in bankruptcy or in some cases even death[1] Majoring in computer science at Stanford? Here's the same loan at the same terms! Now tell me which student is more likely to default and which is the better risk? It's ABSOLUTELY because loans are underwritten by the US government willy-nilly in the name of "education for all" that we're in this mess, with universities building movie theaters and lazy rivers[2] at taxpayer expense. It's a trillion dollar bubble waiting to pop. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_loans_in_the_United_States#Discharge_of_student_loans http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_loans_in_the_United_Sta... [2]http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/21/fashion/college-recreation-now-includes-pool-parties-and-river-rides.html http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/21/fashion/college-recreation...
- guyzero 12y ago
  In most other countries universities are effective nationalized and loans are unnecessary because tuition is set by government fiat. Why loan money tot he student to pay it to the university? Why not just pay it directly to the school and charge the student some nominal amount? There's academic entrance requirements either way.
- vacri 12y ago
  So, here's the crazy thing. Back-of-the-envelope, but it gives a picture. Harvard has 20,000 students, give or take. Plucking a number from the air, let's say that one year of study is $50,000. Across 20,000 students, that's $1B in tuition fees. Harvard's endownment is $36B. For less than 3% of their endowment, they could give 'free education'. Obviously the whole picture is a little more complex, but it does add some context around funding.
totony 12y ago
Quick correction, it's ~2000$-2300 per SEMESTER, so ~4000 per year (McGill)

by guyzero 12y ago

ma2rten 12y ago

Similar? I don't know about France, but in Germany it's free, in Holland you even get money from the government to study.

Retric 12y ago
My old University in the US charges in state students 7,000$ per year for tuition 2014-2015 it's 10,200/year out of state. Plenty of people come up with most or all of that as working students. And one of my roommates came from Europe because it was cheaper than any school in his country though this was a while ago. My little sister got into a school that charges (ED: 43.2k tuition/year 2015-2016) which she wanted to go to. But, decided to go somewhere else for obvious reason. Some collages in the US charge a lot because they can find students willing to pay that much money, but there plenty of reasonable options.
- cozzyd 12y ago
  "Good" private schools (Harvard, Stanford, MIT etc.) charge a lot for tuition then redistribute funds so that people from less affluent backgrounds get need-based scholarships. I think this pressures other private schools to raise costs in order to seem competitive, even though they don't often have the same generous financial aid. In some cases, going to Stanford may be more affordable than going to Berkeley even if you're in-state. The strange consequence of this is that it is almost better (from a selfish viewpoint), if you are not rich, to not have money saved for college if you send your kid to Harvard, because they'll take any money you do have. The room and board cost is mostly based on cost of living (Boston and the Bay area are more expensive than Madison, Wisconsin), but financial aid will often cover that too.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]

wtbob 12y ago

I wonder how the total costs (to the student and the government) differ. I'm sure that the U.S. is still way more expensive. I wonder, too, how much freedom students have to choose their schools; my suspicion is that students have too much here, and consequently chase fancy dorms and amenities, driving costs up as schools seek to one-up one another.

brownbat 12y ago

> In most other Western countries the universities are pretty much the same as American ones, just without the crippling costs. The sticker price is misleading though. There are scholarships for merit and grants for need. Work study (often in makework jobs with ample downtime for studying) for almost anyone who seeks them out. Even after that, employers in competitive fields offer loan repayment as a starting bonus, or doled out over time for retention. Work in public service makes some eligible for loan forgiveness. Even without that, the loan companies have provisions for indefinite deferment during unemployment and automatic forbearance during enrollment in any other academic program. Income based repayment is a standard option. Essentially, if you wanted to break the system, you could pay full price for a ridiculously priced private school degree then probably go work at starbucks and send them $20 a month for a while, then go take four years off to study pottery at a community college to pay $0 a month while the fed pays all your interest. Oh, then even after that, even if you are actually personally paying interest on a loan, historically the rates have been competitive (though that flipped a few years back), and there are tax credits for education spending, and deductions that kick in even when you're just repaying school loans. The most surprising feature of the American system to me is not the price, but how hard it works to camouflage all its progressive and meritocratic features. http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/04/college-is-cheaper-than-you-think/?emc=eta1 http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/04/college-is-chea...

nickonline 12y ago
> The sticker price is misleading... There are scholarships... Work study... employers... offer loan repayments... public service makes some eligible for loan forgiveness Most of these (scholarships, work study) are available in other countries without the sticker price in the USA. Employers don't need to offer loan repayment as a starting bonus in other countries because the sticker price isn't so ridiculous. It worries me how you rationalize this away - what happens if you don't get a scholarship or that loan repayment as a starting bonus and don't want to work for the government? If you just want to work for a mid-tier accounting firm then your education could be costing you an astronomical portion of your paycheck.
- 12y ago

mblevin 12y ago

This is actually the most insidious misperception that a wide swath of people appear to have about American education. It's not that the government spends too LITTLE money - it's because it spends too MUCH without any in the form of cheap student loans with no risk based pricing. Any 18 year old with no credit history can go and and take out over a $200k of student loans ($57,500 / year) from the government, without any regards to school or risk. Barely graduated high school and majoring in underwater basketweaving at BoneHead U? As long as it's an "accredited school" (a sham process in and of itself), here's your money - at 3.5% interest! Nothing secured against the loan, no evaluation of your ability to repay, nothing - just free money with the not-so-insignificant fact that these loans are mostly non-dischargeable in bankruptcy or in some cases even death[1] Majoring in computer science at Stanford? Here's the same loan at the same terms! Now tell me which student is more likely to default and which is the better risk? It's ABSOLUTELY because loans are underwritten by the US government willy-nilly in the name of "education for all" that we're in this mess, with universities building movie theaters and lazy rivers[2] at taxpayer expense. It's a trillion dollar bubble waiting to pop. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_loans_in_the_United_States#Discharge_of_student_loans http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_loans_in_the_United_Sta... [2]http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/21/fashion/college-recreation-now-includes-pool-parties-and-river-rides.html http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/21/fashion/college-recreation...

guyzero 12y ago
In most other countries universities are effective nationalized and loans are unnecessary because tuition is set by government fiat. Why loan money tot he student to pay it to the university? Why not just pay it directly to the school and charge the student some nominal amount? There's academic entrance requirements either way.
vacri 12y ago
So, here's the crazy thing. Back-of-the-envelope, but it gives a picture. Harvard has 20,000 students, give or take. Plucking a number from the air, let's say that one year of study is $50,000. Across 20,000 students, that's $1B in tuition fees. Harvard's endownment is $36B. For less than 3% of their endowment, they could give 'free education'. Obviously the whole picture is a little more complex, but it does add some context around funding.

totony 12y ago

Quick correction, it's ~2000$-2300 per SEMESTER, so ~4000 per year (McGill)