Education is not a commodity, and providing opportunity to achieve a higher education should be a priority of our society.
Claiming that the 'free market' should determine who goes and who does not will only generate a generation of hamburger flippers and educated slackers.

What country is your doctor from?
Your dentist?
Research scientists?

Seriously, our country needs more education, not less.
This college is on the right track, IMHO

You espouse public colleges, not having attended one. You take the position "figure out how to pay for college yourself or deal with it", not having had to do that yourself.
The high ground for sure.:rolleyes:

How many deserving but not quite scholarly children have you put through university? How many anxious nights have you spent wondering why it's taking so long for grants and scholarship results to come in?
How many children do you have who are starting life 40K dollars in debt from PUBLIC university loans? How many of them are now faced with seeing their interest rates DOUBLE?
For your part, an opinion in this area is real easy to take. You have NO skin in the game.

Till then, you are happy to be part of the problem with the mouth. OTOH, when somebody is also part of the problem, well, no so good.

I actually minimize my part in the problem by living in a city, using electric transit and not driving much, buying from relatively local co-ops.

You just flap your yap-hole and espouse a typically fatalistic Asian philosophy. The same philosophy that caused the Chinese to be ground into dust and the Japanese to end up glowing in the dark during WW II. "Let's not change or innovate because change will probably be for the worse."

Till you eliminate it, you are part of the problem.

Yes, and your yap hole is spewin roses all day long. All I have ever heard from you is big talk to impress others how tough a guy you are. I'll bet when push comes to shove, you will be sniveling like so many tough talking clowns I have seen.

FYI, they ate your lunch a long time ago and have done crap it out which is what you are regurgitating. Using them as an example looking at their recent history is, well, as stupid as it gets but not surprising considering the source.

Apparently, your college tuition was a waste. Didn't say not to innovate. I said, in simple terms, "Lets not let the drug addict have all the keys to the pharmacy".

So do you recommend promoting idiots and lazy people in hopes that something good will come out of it? If so, I'd like a job working for you. Doesn't matter that I can't stand you since I won't be doing any real work but I will cash the check you send. Prefer direct deposit.

Difference is, I'm actively reducing carbon consumption, and am supportive of further measures to do so, while you don't give a purple f**k. Almost every posting about a new idea here has been met with knee-jerk skepticism from you.

Education is a service, like any other professional service.

Those who pay more get better services. Those who provide a service in high demand usually get paid more. I talked to a welder while we were waiting for a train (train subsidized by taxpayers and an hour late) who works offshore in the oil industry. The guy is paid $3,500/wk. No union. No higher education. But has a skill set in high demand. Higher pay is a great recruiting incentive. The market puts these two interests into a common framework. No 10 year, central planning required.

This is why engineers with a BS make more money, with rare exception, then scientists with only a BS or even worse, English majors with a BS.

I'm guessing not many companies set-up recruiter booths for English majors in most universities. Engineering schools may have a problem finding space for all of the recruiters. No centralized bureaucratic, 10-yr plan required. Just a market for a particular educational skill set.

By subsidizing higher education, we subsidize every freaking major. Just how many art history majors does any given nation on Earth need, two? Three? Yet we turn out hundreds or thousands per year even without a market for the skill.

How many philosophers do we need? 1,000? So maybe one or two in each major university. I'll bet wee spew several thousand a year unto the unsuspecting public.

Why?

Because we pay the children to go pursue an education that has as much use in society as a football bat.

Then the little darlings feel betrayed when nobody in the business world, where most jobs are found, gives a shyte about art history or women's studies.

I'm not sure if I have skin in the game when I say the wife had been diagnosed with lupus and had to take a less physical job and worked 40 hrs a week, 2nd shift and some overtime and put herself thru a Masters program to be an NP. This time, there was no help from Dad and her work place would pay a few grand a year and the rest, well, you raise it as you will. Student aid? Nope. Grants? Nope. CASH ONLY.

It does make her treasure her education and more serious than many of the kids I knew of when in a state school in KY. Coming out 40K in debt isn't a big deal if you choose wisely and can get a decent, not great, decent job and some sort of stability. I'd say it is an investment one that if you have skin in the game, you would treasure.

You're absolutely correct IF:
We're paying the children. Are we? The average graduate is some 30K dollars in debt.
and IF:
Starting post grad salaries are the only metric by which the value (to the individual as well as society) of a post secondary education is measured.

Regardless, we are both part of the problem. So until you are no longer part of the problem, STFU and stop chiding others whom you deem are part of the problem.

Whatever I give or don't, both suck from the same teat.

Well, look at what we have as administrators and explain what the hope is about. Look at all the falsehoods and tell me why there is more than skepticism. When you can show me that the accounting is honest and you are not lifting Peter's wallet (not borrowing) to pay Paul and then mug Paul, perhaps there is hope.

I wouldn't say it is the only metric but it is a highly important metric. Take it this way. Let me take away everything you have and throw you out in the streets and you are unable to earn a living. Tell me what you would do. Do you worry about the next meal or do you worry about what the latest arguments are on the lessons of Sherlock Holmes?

First things first. Feed yourself. Find yourself a qualification you can have some success at AND earn your keep. So if you want to pursue being an English major, earn your living first then do it as a sideline. But if you cannot earn a living, why put yourself even $10K in the hole further?

Here is how I would decide if I were doing it all over again.

1. What are the choices for education (college, trade school, etc, etc) I can do? I have no math skills to speak of so perhaps pursuing a career as a math person is a waste, for example.

2. Of these choices, what would earn me enough to do reasonably well and not have to live from paycheck to paycheck? Should I pursue an acting career although it means I cannot pay back the loan or even find a job with reasonable ease?

When one is dumping money, perhaps one should take a pragmatic approach to things. Before you decide to enrich yourself with say pursuing a major in Sherlock Holmes, one should FIRST decide if it makes financial sense. I'd like a Rolls Royce with a couple of stripers driving me. Can I afford the payments? Would be nice if I could but I need to know if I can swing it financially. If it is a luxury I can afford? Great. If not, perhaps I need a more sensible car like say a Ford Focus that I can make payments on.

Before I take a loan out, I need to see if this is an investment or an indulgence. If it is the former, fine. If it is the latter, I need to ask "Can I afford it".

No.

Hypocrite it is. One with a big mouth, lots of tough talk but is probably little more than a sniveling wimp.Wasn't so hard, was it?

Opinions are like arseholes. Everyone has one, and you're entitled to yours even if it stinks.