Texsox Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 I've been thinking about the the idea of paying for a couple more years of public education. Which, btw, we already do for any students are held back a year or two. What I would like to see is add two years. That will be the potential for college for most kids, but if you waste a year or too getting through the traditional first 12, those are the years used. Kids who work hard in high school and take advanced placement classes could finish the 14 years very close to a MA or MA degree. This avoids the kid who blows off school and doesn't earn credits at the correct pace then gets two more years. Instead of HS +2 it would be an accumulative total. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 Free college IMO is actually a good idea. But I guess it's socialist so it can't be accomplished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 (edited) It's a stupid idea unless you bind it to a bunch of rules limiting freedom...which we don't do here. We sell dreams. The only way this would work is if it's tied to a culture in which we only pay for degrees and skills society actually needs. And yes, we need artists, but not nearly in the numbers that attend art schools. You need a ROI with such programs, not just a blanket "college is free"...even for the totally useless degrees most of you want, because it's your dream to learn about . I know, I'm vicious...but stupid degree denied. If you want "free" college, you'll study X, Y or Z, with these performance requirements bound to the "free". Fall behind, you're done. Want to study something useless? Pay for it yourself. Edited February 24, 2016 by Y2HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted February 25, 2016 Author Share Posted February 25, 2016 Our society has gotten to the point where if you aren't valuable to a wealthy corporation or individual you are worthless. Our education system is in place to benefit the 1%. Uniquely human things like art and history do not have value to corporations so society at large can't support it. How have we decided that we will pay for 13 years of school but no more? Why not 10? The last battle was over free kindergarten. Why not take that away and add it to the other end? One year of free community college? And let's stop the worthless programs in colleges like sports. Society doesn't need sports, why are we investing in sports teams in colleges if they aren't necessary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 I agree. Any college whose sports programs can't support themselves shouldn't have them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 The sports part of this is actually interesting because I don't think it'd be a difficult plan to implement. It would obviously make scholarships obsolete, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 25, 2016 -> 11:59 AM) Our society has gotten to the point where if you aren't valuable to a wealthy corporation or individual you are worthless. Our education system is in place to benefit the 1%. Uniquely human things like art and history do not have value to corporations so society at large can't support it. How have we decided that we will pay for 13 years of school but no more? Why not 10? The last battle was over free kindergarten. Why not take that away and add it to the other end? One year of free community college? And let's stop the worthless programs in colleges like sports. Society doesn't need sports, why are we investing in sports teams in colleges if they aren't necessary? when i was working in DC in the early 90's, there was a group, i really can't remember who they were. they were trying to improve on a bill for education. i remember some calling them elitist, socialist. but it went something like this. affordable colleges for the first 2 yrs, based on the results of tests and strict administration of the results.... want to continue college, those who can maintain a B will be given every opportunity to get free college for the last 2 yr and until graduation while maintaining a B avg. for the last 2 yrs, many collegians will need to work, so that is why the "until graduation ". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted February 26, 2016 Author Share Posted February 26, 2016 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Feb 25, 2016 -> 06:05 AM) I agree. Any college whose sports programs can't support themselves shouldn't have them. That would eliminate everything but men's basketball and football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 That would eliminate everything but men's basketball and football. I mean programs as a whole. If your overall revenue can't support all of the sports, then don't have sports. Very few athletic programs are self-sufficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Feb 26, 2016 -> 08:46 AM) I mean programs as a whole. If your overall revenue can't support all of the sports, then don't have sports. Very few athletic programs are self-sufficient. When you actually delve into the numbers this issue becomes much, much more complicated. You are correct that very few athletic programs fully fund themselves, but a big part of that also comes down to how stadium costs are booked. If the state or the school has fully funded the stadium and the athletic department is not paying for it, then on paper those departments are well in the black. If the state is picking up interest or providing low interest municipal bonds to finance a stadium, something similar can be set up. That is the first major complication. But then beyond that, you can't just look at "is an athletic department's budget balanced on its own" and call that 100% of the picture. There are a number of easily understood examples here: 1. How much money from alumni is generated due to good will from the sports teams? They're not likely to call me this week, but let's be honest here, if Indiana wins their next 2 games and someone were to call me that week, they'd get something out of it. 2. how much money is generated from licensing their logos? Would I have nearly as many Indiana items around my place if it weren't for the basketball team? I think that one is pretty obvious. Me buying Indiana gear at the bookstore or having parents buy it as XMas gifts is money going to the university for licensing that isn't going directly to the Athletic department, but you better believe I'm wearing red next Tuesday. 3. And finally, the hardest to calculate - how much good will and marketing do these programs generate? If you had to make people know your 40,000 person university is out there and generate good will and good applicants to your program, "hey and you can get tickets to Assembly Hall for the Maryland Game" is one helluva tool. Having your team appear on ESPN is literally a free day's worth of commercials for your university every time they have a big game. And let's be honest, if I could ever find a stable enough job to reproduce, the 2nd outfit that kid is wearing is going to be crimson. If you're trying to find good students for a 10,000 person class, both the experience and just seeing the darn school on TV is important as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts