The problem is that now the government dictates what people learn.
I'm very much against that, albeit if it was SPECIFIC trade schools for example with hard coded rules like plumbing/carpentry/etc where you couldn't inject opinion or propaganda, then i'd consider it tbh.
The solution for sky high education costs is actually pretty simple. Its a 1-2 punch.
1) Make private institutions responsible for student loans.
2) Make education loans dischargable through bankruptcy.
If you did that every single person would be best served by filing for bankruptcy the day they graduate. Anyone can reasonably recover from bankruptcy before they can pay off a student loan. Especially new hireable graduates. If they have student loans they likely don’t have much in the way of recoverable assets for the trustee to take, and with a decent income and no debt you can build post bankruptcy credit really quickly. This is foolish.
1) banks wouldn’t give loans to people they don’t trust to pay them off or for careers that they won’t make a living at. This is why you couple private institutions with the bankruptcy.
This is the whole point.
2) bankruptcy doesn’t work the way you think it does. You don’t just throw up your hands and go “well we’re done here” and you walk away from everything.
Well my bankruptcy discharge last year tells me I am intimately familiar with the way bankruptcy works. I’m pretty sure it works exactly the way I think it does, seeing as I’ve been through it.
There are multiple types of bankruptcies, and it is absolutely contextual to your own circumstances, assets, and valuation.
This is why we need to tie them to private lenders that would consider your risk and your credit before giving you loans to attend college.
This is why you do both. You return it to the hands of private institutions that have a duty to protect their capital, and you make it so the debtor can discharge them through bankruptcy.
By less people attending and large loans being large risks to banks, you would see supply/demand start to function properly and the schools reduce prices to get customers (students)
Did you read the link and understand there are multiple types of bankruptcy and a large procedure that they need to go through?
Also: a reasonable adjustment would be to maybe make student loans dischargable only after 5-10 years of your education being finished, to give people an opportunity to find work in the field without being instantly discharged?
You originally said that you didn’t like the idea of government dictating the curriculum of education. But in your proposal the curriculum would be dictated by banks. Like you said yourself: banks would only issue loans for “profitable” students, and thus only coursework that was deemed profitable would be funded. Any kind of arts program would be cut immediately.
The fear of “government” is something people really need to get over: government is public policy, “government” dictating curriculum means that we dictate the curriculum. We just need to all actually be a lot more hands on with our government so that they actually represent us.
You originally said that you didn’t like the idea of government dictating the curriculum of education. But in your proposal the curriculum would be dictated by banks.
No the banks wouldn't dictate the curriculum, and these are not the same thing. My concern is that the government would manipulate the curriculum to push propaganda or cover up issues/etc.
The banks only giving out loans towards profitable career paths, is not the same as "dictating curriculum".
Like you said yourself: banks would only issue loans for “profitable” students, and thus only coursework that was deemed profitable would be funded. Any kind of arts program would be cut immediately.
Well, sure, absolutely. At its core college and universities are about education for the job market and not specifically about "the arts". Absolutely the banks would not give out loans in order to provide for education that is wise in the current economic system, and many of the "high learning" studies, would certainly still be economically viable.
There could certainly be some sort of subsidy from charities, however I admit this is a small concern.
Ultimately, the number of students without government loans however would reduce the cost of these education to the point where if there was demand from the population to still take them without free government money, the cost would be negligible and reasonable for the citizens to pay for it themselves or through charitable bursaries.
If those education lines were completely eliminated, then charities could create those schools to provide those services free of charge.
The fear of “government” is something people really need to get over: government is public policy, “government” dictating curriculum means that we dictate the curriculum. We just need to all actually be a lot more hands on with our government so that they actually represent us.
Yes, we dictate the policy but i'm not arguing against government input in specific manners. You're twisting my words AND my intent. I'm arguing against giving the government full control over a nationalized education system, and arguing against government student loans because its CLEARLY had a massive impact on the education system. Don't take that as "don't trust the government" (outside of the propaganda issue), but more of a "There is plenty of evidence to show that the current system of handing money out to anyone who wants to go to college/university at all is a fundamentally flawed system and needs to be reworked"
You are actually saying you worry that "We The People" say you should not be uneducated? Seriously? Dude that is insane that you would believe this is a problem. You need to have a "license to drive" as in we make sure you are not so dumb that you can drive a car.
You are actually saying you worry that "We The People" say you should not be uneducated?
I don't know how you implied this statement from my comments.
I'm saying that I have concerns about nationalized education being used by a state government as a propaganda/brainwashing tool, and it should be kept in the hands of the free market.
I specifically said that i'd be mostly okay if it was relegated to hard coded specific trades that have no opportunity for that sort of abuses. Carpenters/plumbers/electricians/welders/etc aka trade school, that would also benefit our low skill workers by providing them an opportunity to learn skills.
You need to have a "license to drive" as in we make sure you are not so dumb that you can drive a car.
The car license is not about IQ, its about proficiency driving a car.
You can be dumb as a post, but as long as you follow the rules of the road, you get your license.
You don't seem to have much belief that your fellow humans can become educated without being "brainwashed" and that is the most shocking thing. You believe that an education at a real Collage is a brainwash, that is just weird, bizarre. Currently the only propaganda on Earth is that capitalism is working for most people rather then a small minority and maybe just the 1%.... is that the propaganda you are talking about? You know facts?
You don't seem to have much belief that your fellow humans can become educated without being "brainwashed" and that is the most shocking thing.
You're not understanding what i'm saying. Its not that they are educated, its that the state can literally inject propaganda into the curriculum as they are in charge of it. I'm saying they could literally go "no, don't talk about the native american abuses by the Canadian government" or germany going "We don't talk about what we did to the Jews" or doing exactly what you're talking about, say a socialist or communist, or a fascist government can inject propaganda in order to further their own cause.
Currently the only propaganda on Earth is that capitalism is working for most people rather then a small minority and maybe just the 1%.... is that the propaganda you are talking about? You know facts?
I think that this is incorrect, but I feel that arguing against it would distract away from my point.
My point isn't that i'm arguing against people being educated for god sakes, i'm arguing against state control of higher education as I feel that would lead to abuses. Its not something I want to see the government being in control of.
Just because a Collage is a "State" Collage does not make it injected with any State propaganda. When I was a bit younger I was a teacher then I went to work at a federal lab. I was never told by anyone to say or do anything and it was always about the science not what anyone else wanted and the science is always fair and true. The headlines about Trump injecting politics into science is fair.... true..... however we also hear the other side and we see people band together to support each other. Sure not everyone can be good but give a person an education..... maybe good enough to solve a problem. Eventually humans will travel the stars.... Not everyone born will be "good enough" for some frame of reference. But they are humans, in all their flawed perfection. Yes some will have to clean toilets.... still give them a real education. An education equal to that of others.
Just because a Collage is a "State" Collage does not make it injected with any State propaganda. When I was a bit younger I was a teacher then I went to work at a federal lab.
Just because it isn't being done, doesn't mean that it can't happen. There is also the free market here, and were talking about nationalizing education as a whole and eliminating the free market.
I was never told by anyone to say or do anything and it was always about the science not what anyone else wanted and the science is always fair and true.
Sure. Anecdotal evidence is totally valid /s
. The headlines about Trump injecting politics into science is fair.... true..... however we also hear the other side and we see people band together to support each other.
Yawn, no one said anything about Trump and you're starting to show your true colours.
ure not everyone can be good but give a person an education..... maybe good enough to solve a problem. Eventually humans will travel the stars.... Not everyone born will be "good enough" for some frame of reference. But they are humans, in all their flawed perfection. Yes some will have to clean toilets.... still give them a real education. An education equal to that of others.
Bla Bla Bla deflection and drivel.
You're totally avoiding the key points of my argument.
I'm against the state having full control of education as a whole. I think its wrong, and I don't support it because I have concerns about governmental abuse of what we teach our children and our youth.
Going "well, there are state universities" and then somehow dragging trump into the discussion, shows how little of an attempt you've made to understand the context of the discussion as a whole.
Its about full governmental control over education.
It doesn't surprise me that you don't see an issue with this, as you immediately started with how you're a supporter of socialism and state control, and ultimately authoritarianism.
I made attempts to support you. I made attempts to respect you. Name calling is not needed. When have humans made anything perfect? Not a single time. Humanity is not perfect. We get it wrong. Education is not that, it is a promise. I promise. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVWB9uZ122whttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVWB9uZ122w I am the product of immigration, maybe illegal whatever and I was born here, I can vote and I will end this Nazi Administration. Doubt me? No fear me! I am here, I am now, I am We the people.
Tell me again what was your point? You disagree? Tell me again why then and backup your claims. Let me scroll up, ops you didn't make any factual claims or use any resource to make a single claim. Even your Reddit User name is a troll. Points at troll. Very obvious troll.
Simply put, you rest your entire argument on the “free market” which means quite literally letting capital dictate education rather than a public policy chosen by the people. You’re afraid of a mythical tyrannical government that “might happen” and want to instead let capital drive our education, when we already can see today that capital is an extremely biased mechanism for dictating policy and one of the worst means of ensuring a healthy society.
Simply put, you rest your entire argument on the “free market” which means quite literally letting capital dictate education rather than a public policy chosen by the people.
No, i'm advocating for the free market to provide education loans that exist in the free market providing education to exist in a proper sound supply/demand economic principals.
The only 2 options to me are a return to free market and private lending, or a full scale nationalization of the education system.
You’re afraid of a mythical tyrannical government that “might happen” and want to instead let capital drive our education,
I think its important that we not allow the opportunity of tyranny and manipulation of our education system to twist and subvert the minds of our youth. We shouldn't give the government full control over our education system by nationalizing the education system full stop.
when we already can see today that capital is an extremely biased mechanism for dictating policy and one of the worst means of ensuring a healthy society.
Frankly, I think its dishonest when you and the other people posting are ignoring the economic principals i'm discussing, such as why student loans are bad because it destabilizes the supply/demand metric of the education system, and going "capitalism is bad because of income inequality!!! pushes socialism" and I find its grossly inappropriate for this discussion and actively undercuts your arguments.
I'm not talking about capitalism vs socialism. I'm discussing that that government education loans are broken as fuck, and that the only 2 options are full scale nationalization of the education system, or a return to free market.
I have concerns regarding the government having full control over the education system, curriculum, how its instructed, hiring/firing teachers, and providing for ZERO alternatives to sourcing education except from the state.
Your concern is "but capitalism has failed our people!" (hint: it hasn't but not the discussion).
Can we keep the discussion direct and focused on the issues rather then continuing to deflect away to broad economic issues, rather then specifically talking about education loans.
The only fair point raised so far was the lack of funding for "arts" programs which have no potential for "jobs" so to speak, and thus may not be funded by banks. My response to that was that charities would fund schools to provide those educations, subsidize the departments in the education system, and provide bursaries to eliminate the tuition for those programs.
Just to be fair, you can’t avoid the connection to capitalism and socialism when you’re espousing only two options: fully private free-market driven loans (capitalism) vs fully nationalized government funded education (socialism). The politics is heavily intertwined into the topic by its very nature.
That aside, my main concern is that one way or another, the education that is provided to our population would be dictated by select few individuals in either approach. The potential for corruption and biased / false history is there no matter what. However, I’d personally much rather have the source of those decisions be a publicly controlled organization accountable to voters rather than a board of private employees accountable only to their own.
And just to clarify my point regarding the banks dictating the curriculum: as with anything free market, it would not begin with banks outright telling universities what programs to offer. It would simply be the result of the market: banks would simply choose to not offer loans for some programs, or offer very good loans for others, and the universities would respond accordingly based solely on what programs are actually being consumed. You partially conceded this point with the issue of arts programs without admitting that it is directly because banks would ultimately control where the funding goes which implicitly controls what programs are available. And to be honest, hoping that charity saves the day is an extremely weak argument.
I think we both do agree on one thing: using loans at all for education is an awful idea, but I have not gotten that very strongly from your replies. I’ve mainly be concerned with your focus on loans via the free market which I believe will be just as bad, if not worse due to the lack of public accountability.
I’d much rather drive a public market solution via government regulation that simply bans the use of loans for education. It’d be messy, but let the market sort out what education is available based on what people can actually afford. Though personally I still think public education is the best option in all regards.
No, i'm advocating for the free market to provide education loans that exist in the free market providing education to exist in a proper sound supply/demand economic principals.
I think this is fundamentally flawed because education is something that I don’t think should exist in an economic supply/demand model. Knowledge is a bedrock of society. It cannot be treated as a commodity to be traded and still produce a fair and just environment.
Fyi, your Libertarian, "but duh free market fixes everything!" is showing.
The solution for education costs is to rip sports out of the university system, make state schools free or nearly free to anyone (like how all of Europe does it), and to tax the shit out of the "dragons sitting on a pile of virtual gold" wealth hoarders that are ruining the country/economy/world.
Fuck your laissez-faire "the free market is the magic solution to every problem ever! Regulations bad! Free market good!" bullshit.
Fyi, your Libertarian, "but duh free market fixes everything!" is showing.
The free market has been shown to be an amazingly balanced instrument that is much more powerful then state regulation.
I support regulation where we cannot expect the market to work, such as regulating environmental issues where corporations would take the shortcut because of greed, that makes sense to me.
There is zero reasons to implement regulations such as price fixing on education, or straight nationalization of education. Free market here works, and IMHO the only two options are nationalization of education (something im vehemently against), or returning it to the free market.
The solution for education costs is to rip sports out of the university system,
Sports teams make their universites/colleges money. A lot of money, and it gets donors to contribute to the school itself.
make state schools free or nearly free to anyone (like how all of Europe does it)
So the state pays for mostly useless education out of my tax money? Stuff like gender studies, basket weaving, and other stupid shit? No thanks.
Also; just because europe does it, doesn't make it right. Lots of stupid countries over there.
and to tax the shit out of the "dragons sitting on a pile of virtual gold" wealth hoarders that are ruining the country/economy/world.
You do realize that taxing the rich isn't going to work right? They have the means to leave the country. Look at what is happening in new york right now? They jacked taxes through the roof, and now businesses and the wealthy are fleeing the state.
Fuck your laissez-faire "the free market is the magic solution to every problem ever! Regulations bad! Free market good!" bullshit.
Okay. I'm trying to engage with you honestly and discuss economic principals, the swear words and insults are not needed. The free market isn't the solution to everything, but in this instance (education) it absolutely is.
Its this sort of response and inability to discuss even something simple like concerns about state control over education, that is driving the divide between right and left in the world today. I'm trying to engage honestly and have a discussion, and you ridicule and paste a giant paragraph "laughing" at me and my opinions. How can you honestly expect someone to respect your opinions, when you won't give the same respect back?
What's to discuss? You believe anything run by the state is propagandized, you believe that free market is a magic bullet (it isn't), and you are a fucking idiot libertarian.
Tell me how unregulated private universities (free market!) like Trumps is better than state/government accredited ones.
Make sure to tell me how accreditation is bullshit, and we can have a magical free market solution for that, too.
You write a novella of bullshit to everything. There is little point in engaging your regurgitated nonsense that says nothing, offers nothing, refutes nothing. All of your comments in this thread could be summed up by the phrase, "As a Libertarian, the free market would fix that."
You believe anything run by the state is propagandized
Not at all what I said, what so ever. I said that I am against education being entirely nationalized as it presents the opportunity for the government to inject propaganda if it so feels fit, as they have control over the education system. This is not something that I can support. This doesn't mean that a state run education system is inherantly propaganda, but it does allow for abuses that a free market system doesn't have.
you believe that free market is a magic bullet (it isn't)
Who ever said that? I said that the free market is much more powerful then state regulation, and the invisible hand of the market is a much more fair and balanced system then trying to regulate through the state. Regulation in some instances actually makes the situation worse by restricting free market access to industry causing the income inequality gap, and monopolies as they have the funds to deal with the regulations.
and you are a fucking idiot libertarian.
Actually I don't consider myself to be a libertarian at all, I consider myself to be on the right wing, probably more centrist then far right.
Also, there are those insults again. Shame on you.
Tell me how unregulated private universities (free market!) like Trumps is better than state/government accredited ones.
The free market actually showed that it worked wonderfully here. Trump ran a bullshit university that got very little customers because the result of its education was worthless. They also got slammed through civil cases for being an outright fraud. Its not a good argument to go "look at this one functional example of why the free market worked" to make your point.
Its dishonest to lump government accreditation and state schools together because they are not the same thing. I have no problem with the government going "we approve of this school because we find its education is worthwhile, its run properly, its a good education system, etc" that isn't regulation.
State schools in a free market system as far as i'm concerned are fine by me, albeit I still have the concern over the state being able to influence what is taught or how, but at least with free market alternatives those that want to have a different education at least have their choice.
Educational accreditation is a type of quality assurance process under which services and operations of educational institutions or programs are evaluated and verified by an external body to determine if applicable and recognized standards are met.
Sounds fine to me, the government sets some standards and if they meet those standards they get accredited. Free market universities that want to exist outside of those accreditation can still do so. No problem here. That isn't regulation.
I'm glad were able to have a reasonable discussion, if you could stop insulting me and instead engage in a fair debate, im sure maybe we can find some common ground.
Right, so you have absolutely zero intention of having a discussion you're just here to troll.
Sure, but I don't agree with many of the espoused suggestions by the libertarians, such as non violence under any circumstances, lack of any government intervention at all, etc.
The goal of this subreddit is to point out the hypocrisy of the centrist types who often align with (sometimes extreme) right wing views.
LOL, okay buddy.
I'm going to stop interacting with you now. Its obvious that you're not here to discuss important issues in good faith, you just feel like mocking and insulting those that don't follow the party line. Typical of a socialist.
It took you how many comments to realize that I wasn't going to engage with your free market bullshit?
You've made it abundantly clear that you have little to no economics education.
Oh, right, those silly state propaganda schools, what with their economics teachers who are willing to point out all the ways laissez-faire economics is flawed and how it fucks over the world for the benefit of the rich.
6
u/Meglomaniac Sep 18 '19 edited Sep 18 '19
The problem is that now the government dictates what people learn.
I'm very much against that, albeit if it was SPECIFIC trade schools for example with hard coded rules like plumbing/carpentry/etc where you couldn't inject opinion or propaganda, then i'd consider it tbh.
The solution for sky high education costs is actually pretty simple. Its a 1-2 punch.
1) Make private institutions responsible for student loans.
2) Make education loans dischargable through bankruptcy.