|
Post by Kliquid on Oct 24, 2011 19:27:46 GMT -5
But you're arguing that if they pulled out college costs will go down. When they weren't in the loan business college was still expensive. Education was not anywhere NEAR as expensive in the 60's as it is today. It's gone WAY past the rate of inflation.
|
|
|
Post by Kurt Burton: Script Doctor! on Oct 24, 2011 20:12:50 GMT -5
But you're arguing that if they pulled out college costs will go down. When they weren't in the loan business college was still expensive. Education was not anywhere NEAR as expensive in the 60's as it is today. It's gone WAY past the rate of inflation. The issue there is more or less corruption within the institutions. For instance, a local public university to me raised tuition, after enrollment dropped significantly and professors were denied merit raises, while the president of the university banked a 50K bonus.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Oct 24, 2011 20:21:00 GMT -5
But you're arguing that if they pulled out college costs will go down. When they weren't in the loan business college was still expensive. Education was not anywhere NEAR as expensive in the 60's as it is today. It's gone WAY past the rate of inflation. Doesn't change the fact that college education was too expensive then. Even if it just kept up with the rate of inflation, it would still be too expensive. That's all I'm saying.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Oct 24, 2011 21:00:47 GMT -5
Education was not anywhere NEAR as expensive in the 60's as it is today. It's gone WAY past the rate of inflation. Doesn't change the fact that college education was too expensive then. Even if it just kept up with the rate of inflation, it would still be too expensive. That's all I'm saying. People could afford to go to college without loans back in the day. That almost never happens now.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Oct 25, 2011 10:15:29 GMT -5
Doesn't change the fact that college education was too expensive then. Even if it just kept up with the rate of inflation, it would still be too expensive. That's all I'm saying. People could afford to go to college without loans back in the day. That almost never happens now. Costs of college were going up before federal loans kicked in though.
|
|
|
Post by Kurt Burton: Script Doctor! on Oct 25, 2011 10:38:01 GMT -5
People could afford to go to college without loans back in the day. That almost never happens now. Costs of college were going up before federal loans kicked in though. Due to a lot of corruption in the system, businessmen began treating education as a business. They look at it and go, "If demand on college education is rising, we must raise tuition to what the market will bear."
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Oct 25, 2011 12:37:10 GMT -5
There's nothing wrong with treating education as a business. If it's being treated as a business, the costs should be LOWER because colleges should be competing for your money while also providing increasingly better products. You can see this in practically any industry (unless again, the government has stuck its nose in it and skewed the market). The problem is created when people are essentially told "you have to do this or you'll never be given a job," then they are given "free money" (a loan -- not really free money, but you don't pay for it for a long time) and they neglect the point that they will eventually need to pay it back. If education wasn't being ed up by the government, people would pay cash for their education as they did in the past. But when the government gets involved by "backing" loans, prices are allowed to shoot up dramatically and people don't realize it until they're forced to pay it back. There has been a truly mind-boggling increase in college tuition since 1960. For example, law school tuition has risen nearly 1,000 percent after adjusting for inflation: around 1960, “median annual tuition and fees at private law schools was $475 … adjusted for inflation, that’s $3,419 in 2011 dollars. The median for public law schools was $204 … or $1,550 in 2011 dollars … in 2009 the private law school median was $36,000; the public (resident) median was $16,546.â€- www.bastiatinstitute.org/2011/05/25/mind-boggling-increase-in-tuition-since-1960-even-as-students-learn-less-and-less/
|
|
|
Post by Kurt Burton: Script Doctor! on Oct 25, 2011 14:26:25 GMT -5
There's nothing wrong with treating education as a business. If it's being treated as a business, the costs should be LOWER because colleges should be competing for your money while also providing increasingly better products. You can see this in practically any industry (unless again, the government has stuck its nose in it and skewed the market). The problem is created when people are essentially told "you have to do this or you'll never be given a job," then they are given "free money" (a loan -- not really free money, but you don't pay for it for a long time) and they neglect the point that they will eventually need to pay it back. If education wasn't being ed up by the government, people would pay cash for their education as they did in the past. But when the government gets involved by "backing" loans, prices are allowed to shoot up dramatically and people don't realize it until they're forced to pay it back. There has been a truly mind-boggling increase in college tuition since 1960. For example, law school tuition has risen nearly 1,000 percent after adjusting for inflation: around 1960, “median annual tuition and fees at private law schools was $475 … adjusted for inflation, that’s $3,419 in 2011 dollars. The median for public law schools was $204 … or $1,550 in 2011 dollars … in 2009 the private law school median was $36,000; the public (resident) median was $16,546.â€- www.bastiatinstitute.org/2011/05/25/mind-boggling-increase-in-tuition-since-1960-even-as-students-learn-less-and-less/Actually, hate to pick bones, but as private banks offer student loans as well as the government, no, it wouldn't. Also, there are three things that should never be treated as a business. Education, Health Care, and Government. If you notice, when these three things started being treated as businesses, everything went all to hell.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Oct 25, 2011 16:52:50 GMT -5
There's nothing wrong with treating education as a business. If it's being treated as a business, the costs should be LOWER because colleges should be competing for your money while also providing increasingly better products. You can see this in practically any industry (unless again, the government has stuck its nose in it and skewed the market). The problem is created when people are essentially told "you have to do this or you'll never be given a job," then they are given "free money" (a loan -- not really free money, but you don't pay for it for a long time) and they neglect the point that they will eventually need to pay it back. If education wasn't being ed up by the government, people would pay cash for their education as they did in the past. But when the government gets involved by "backing" loans, prices are allowed to shoot up dramatically and people don't realize it until they're forced to pay it back. There has been a truly mind-boggling increase in college tuition since 1960. For example, law school tuition has risen nearly 1,000 percent after adjusting for inflation: around 1960, “median annual tuition and fees at private law schools was $475 … adjusted for inflation, that’s $3,419 in 2011 dollars. The median for public law schools was $204 … or $1,550 in 2011 dollars … in 2009 the private law school median was $36,000; the public (resident) median was $16,546.â€- www.bastiatinstitute.org/2011/05/25/mind-boggling-increase-in-tuition-since-1960-even-as-students-learn-less-and-less/Actually, hate to pick bones, but as private banks offer student loans as well as the government, no, it wouldn't. Also, there are three things that should never be treated as a business. Education, Health Care, and Government. If you notice, when these three things started being treated as businesses, everything went all to hell. Government has never been treated as a business. If it was there wouldn't be a bajillion dollars in debt hanging around. No successful business runs that way.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Oct 25, 2011 17:08:01 GMT -5
Actually, hate to pick bones, but as private banks offer student loans as well as the government, no, it wouldn't. Explain how lower costs wouldn't come from the government not artificially inflating the market with people who would otherwise not get loans. Also, there are three things that should never be treated as a business. Education, Health Care, and Government. If you notice, when these three things started being treated as businesses, everything went all to hell. 1. (Our) Government has never been treated as a business. It may have lobbyists and people trying to sway it, but that's not "operating as a business." 2. Education and Health Care are businesses because they are PEOPLE'S OCCUPATIONS. Like it or not, any time that someone does something, they are taking up their time, which is limited. You have to pay these people, thus it is a business. 3. How do you expect there to be innovation if there is no incentive to be better than anyone else? Competition creates innovation. Always has, always will. Non-innovation in the education and health care areas will put our country into a depression.
|
|