Graduation Speech : Education, Kander Responded, And It Is Too Expensive

At every debate and town hall event Senator Sanders has reiterated his plan for tuition-free college, and has usually been met with the same question: "How are you going to pay for it." For the sake of debate lets say Mr. Sanders is able to pay for it. Even though top economists, including democratic ones, say his math doesn't add up (you can find my cited sources at the end of the article), lets pretend that it somehow will. Let us pretend that Bernie Sanders will actually make public college tuition-free across the United States, effective immediately. Now it is time to play devils advocate, (or realist) and break down the reasons why tuition-free college would be a bad thing, not only for the economy, but every person currently pursuing a degree.

During one of his campaign programs, Presidential-candidate Bernie Sanders stood before a thousand applauding and cheering people. This man just announced, as hopeful future President of the United States, that he planned to make college free for every US citizen. Many young adults favor Bernie Sanders, and other political leaders, idea of free tuition because they believe that it will open more doors for them and allow them to not worry about the burden of student loans. However, there are many reasons that regulating free college education could hurt our society and economy that people don’t often realize. College education should not be free because it would raise taxes, it would devalue the worth of a college degree, and it would pave the way for more welfare dependency.

Greenblatt discusses solutions by both the federal government as well as the state. Since Obama has been in office, his administration has been working on repayment plans. The basic function of the repayment plan is that once the student graduates and is working, the payment plans will be refinanced according to their new income. Since Obama’s term is almost over, the article discusses the current presidential candidates’ proposals for student debt. Sanders had said that he wanted to make four years of college free for students; people opposed of this idea because taxes would go up. He explained that the federal government would pay for most of it and the state would pay for the remaining. Both Clinton and Sanders favor lowering interest rates on student loans for the borrowers. Unlike Sanders however, Clinton would like to make community college free as opposed to 4 years of college being free for students. Trump has stated that he would like to help the issue with student debt but he has not discussed what his plans

Kayla Webley states concerns around Applebaum’s plan which involves fairness. One question Webley brings to my attention is, why should taxpayers especially those who never attended college in the first place cover the cost of the borrowers education (3). On one hand Webley brings up a valid point. Why should taxpayers pay for a college tuition for someone who possibly never held a job or for that matter ever paid taxes. On the other hand though if the taxpayers vote to

On the end of the Democratic Party, both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders presented comprehensive plans to help eliminate student debt, although they vary on how to deal with the cost of education and how much the government should pay (Josuweit, 2016). Clinton created the “New College Compact,” to address both the current and future educational costs, her main focus on addressing existing debt and allowing borrowers to refinance student loans at the rates allowed to students taking out new loans, which Clinton claims would provide to relief to twenty five million borrowers (Josuweit, 2016). In addition to this, Clinton wants to reduce interest rates on new student loans which would facilitate enrollment in IDR plans (Josuweit, 2016). On future tuition, Clinton claimed she would provide help so that students never have to borrow to pay for tuition and other fees attending a four year public college in state (Josuweit, 2016).

In the recent debate regarding the implementation of free college tuition across the United States, Jon Wiener, a Los Angeles journalist for The Nation, and Kelly Field, chief Washington reporter for The Chronicle of Higher Education who covers different federal education policies, discuss why college tuition should be abolished in the United States of America and the role of both Democratic and Republican parties on the debate. In the article, “It’s Time to End Tuition at Public Universities - and Abolish Student Debt,” published by the Nation in March 2015, Jon Wiener annotates the crippling debt that college

In an article written by Michelle Goldberg who writes for The Nation (2015), includes the Governor of the State of Kansas in the article “This is What Happens When You Slash Funding for Public Universities.” (Goldberg, 2015). The moral issue is that the poor keep getting poorer, and struggle to qualify for funding for tuition, which would put them in a better position to increase their pay. According to an article in The Kansas City Star (2015), Kansas is not the only state affected by the increase in tuition. Community colleges have reduced the number of classes they offer (Hanna, 2015) and some states have opted to reach out to the upper crust by offering elite apartments to draw the students who have money to pay for college

Ron Kind believes that education is a vital importance to the country, and helping kids become successful has been a long time goal of his. Though student loan debts are a serious problem, so in 2015 he introduced the College Affordability Plan. The strategy contains five key principles: making sure government doesn’t profit from student loans, allow student loans to be refinanced like mortgages, provide tax incentives to address college affordability, make loan payments match earnings, and provide pell grants year-round. He also introduced another bill, The Healthy Kids Outdoors Act, that provides incentives to connect kids and families to the outdoors.

"Should policymakers make college free or better support institutions?" by Matthew M. Chingos is an article based on the endless debate about college prices. In the article, Chingos is explaining very clearly the Democratic Party platform, the alternatives, the impact of the increased spending or reducing tuition and what would be the result if any of these platforms would pass.

Wanting college to be cheaper is not a new idea. However, over the past couple of years, the conservation regarding the expensiveness of colleges, has slowly turned into a debate. The media aggregates this topic and it is no longer just an opinion. Now it is a political, economic, and social justice issue. For instance, the Democratic and Republican parties include the state of higher education in their political agenda. The Obama administration made it exceptionally clear that community college should be free, and at all costs. The Trump administration has swung the pendulum the other direction, under President Trump’s lead. Citing Rules Committee Print 115 Congress has increased the Pell Grant amount by $105 and reinstated summer Pell Grants. Yet, the Trump administration has made it painstakingly clear no attempt to decrease the expensiveness of college will be made any further. Even though Pell Grant amounts are at an all-time high, more support needs to be given to students. Ultimately the best thing schools, states, and the federal government could do to help students locked out of the middle class is to make public college tuition-free.

Devos understands that even some of the most creative, influential, and clever minds do not get the chance to go to college or live out their dreams do to financial problems. Creating a free public secondary education, not only will decrease the amount of newly graduated college students trying to pay off copious amounts of debt but will also increase the amount of well educated, qualified employees entering the workforce. Many complain that “free college is not actually free.” Though this is true, Devos has already addressed this problem during her confirmation hearing. Devos stated, “there’s nothing in life that is truly free — somebody is going to pay for it.” She wants to work to minimally increase taxes as well as work with public colleges to spread out scholarships over all the students in order to provide them all with free education. Some worry that increasing the tax rate will lower the quality of life for most Americans, but this is highly unlikely to be the case. Looking at countries, such as Denmark, where taxes are higher, but socialistic services, such as college, are free can prove that this will increase the quality of life rather than decrease it. Danes are known to have a very high quality of life do to have little to no college loans which makes it easier for them to be able to afford things, such as houses and cars. All in all, Devos’s efforts to make college education

In the article “Free college? We can afford it”, author Katrina Vanden Heuvel believes that higher education should be free because the cost has risen and many students are no longer able to attend. Students cannot afford a college education. Low paying jobs are some of the reasons why people have a hard time finding a 2-4 year college degree institute. Why increase the amount of tuition for students? The author also mentioned that decreasing student funding restrains them from attendance. Katrina’s statements are agreeable because free education will expand opportunities for the youth.

“The benefits of post secondary education are well documented and have major implications for economic growth, equality, and social mobility” (Dominguez). This was reported by the white house on January 2014. Many others can agree education is the key to a healthier economy. But lately, students throughout the United States have been struggling to pay the expensive tuition fees that tag along with having a college education. These expensive college costs have been largely debated and constantly listed as a national concern for middle class families all around the US. Many believe free tuition is the solution to our country’s trillion debt problem, but with our economy on the

Those who oppose free higher education claim the government will not be able to finance such a project and raising taxes would be equally as unsuccessful. Believing that limiting deductions for upper-income tax filers will only, “raise the cost of college even further and shift the burden to hardworking taxpayers” (Meckier and Mitchell). However, it has been proven that when the government invests in free education it generates more profit. The GI Bill that authorized the free education of two million veterans led to high

This is the mindset that I choose to declare in that education should be free of charge for anyone that is willing to study hard, dedicate time and commitment to better themselves in a desire to service the public. Education is critical for the survival for one's academic, social, and if necessary, political career. It requires a massive amount of money that it becomes an obstacle for many. According to Trade Schools, College, and Universities, more than $80 billion is spent each year by the federal government on post-secondary financial aid. In the 2012-2013 school year, that represented over 70 percent of all student financial assistance in the higher education sector. Indeed,