Matt Bruenig's The Case Against Free College

First of all, it is not actually free someone has to pay for it. If there were did have free tuition colleges, the state and federal government would have to make a few changes. The changes could include raising taxes, decreasing military budget, closing tax loopholes, increasing taxes more for the wealthy, new taxes on speculative Wall Street transactions, and diverting student financial aid to tuition free colleges (Should College Be Free? Pros, Cons, and Alternatives). It would affect the taxpayers of America the most, because they would have to be

“Free public college is a great political talking point, but it is a flawed policy.” [Kelly,1] As mentioned by Andrew p. Kelly, tuition-free college merely shifts the cost of education from the group of taxpayers to all the taxpayers. Technically, free college isn’t really free. Someone does have to pay for it. The only option to cover tuition cost is to increase the tax rates or cut services for elsewhere. It is not fairer to cut other services just to make students pay for educations. Why would one pay more tax if they are rich? People who are rich did something to accomplish it. They were not innate wealthy. Most of the wealthy person have worked their way up and worked their entire lives to get where they are. Thus,

If college was free students would have to want to continue their education and get a degree. While free would make college affordable, those receiving the benefit would need to have stipulations for the free classes they are attending. Michael J. Petrilli is the president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute and research fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. Petrilli states, “… just 40 percent of 12th graders are college-ready, even though nearly 70 percent already head straight into college.” He is correct that many high school graduates are not prepared to transition to college. Many don’t have the attention span to sit in longer classes. Students are used not study over a time period, but rather cram the night before the due assignment. Some stipulations would be; you have to finish and get a degree, you have to keep your GPA up, and if you drop out without a good reason you have to pay back the money you used.

Imagine a world where college was completely free. Tuition is completely paid for, no book fees, housing fees, everything is one-hundred percent paid for by the government. Unfortunately, the only downfall to that is that the people fund the government. Taxpayers, which should be almost all of America, are the ones who give the government the money to do every day necessities. The government will not be able to afford to pay for every student to have free college on their own, all of that money will have to come from us, the people. This means that college really isn't free. The government should not pay for everyone's college because it is unfair to those who can easily afford it, taxes will go through the roof, and will inhibit a lesser education if it is free for everyone.

According to dissent magazine, Bruenig (2015 ) states “ The main problem with free college is that most students come from disproportionately well-off backgrounds and already enjoy disproportionately well-off futures, which makes them relatively uncompelling targets for public transfers” with that being stated . I feel like no one should get a free handout especially those who are of the well-off status. Why should they get everything so easy? Make them work for it. By making tuition free you would just basically be handing them a degree without having to work hard for it. when there is money at hand, (tuition) college is taken seriously.

One of the largest reasons many people oppose that college in America should become free for its first two years is the cost. “By White House estimates, the total expenditure would be about $60 billion over a 10-year period.” (Free Community College) Two factors are at question with this kind of money. First, why not use this money in other areas of our nation? 60 billion dollars could be put towards our public high schools to increase education at a younger level. It could also be put towards creating new jobs. Even if America has become more educated doesn’t mean that an abundance of

There are rich people too and making college education free for everyone would almost certainly mean giving far more money to students from richer families than from poorer ones.” If we want to make college education accessible and affordable to low and moderate income families then stronger need based financial policies and well-structured borrowing are a far better strategy” (Hill). Education might be made less expensive but can never be made free. “I’m lucky that I’m receiving such an amazing education and at a state-level cost. But if we stop paying tuition, who picks up the burden? It is not possible to rely on donations, so will the state of Virginia then foot the bill? Or will the federal government pay? Neither the federal nor state government is in any financial shape to add the debt of abolishing just one school’s tuition, never mind all of the public institutions. To do so would only hurt us, the young students, in the long run because we would be seeing the effects of this debt later in life when our taxes raised exponentially as we try and pay off loans, start families, and buy cars and houses”.(

In the United States there are already a few different states that are offering free college tuition. Those states being, Rhode Island, Tennessee, San Francisco, New York, Oregon and a few others. Let’s focus on the state of San Francisco a little more. In the article “San Francisco will offer free college tuition to residents” Amanda Hoover states, “Mayor Ed Lee announced an agreement to budget $5.4 million in tuition for the college Monday. Officials say that will cover tuition for current students and allow the school to expand enrollment by 20 percent. Low-income students who qualify will also see the cost of their books covered in small grants.” This will give hope to those which don’t have enough money to afford

College should be free for low income students. Many students don’t have an education cause by the money and everyone should have a career to have a better life.

It is important to consider who truly benefits from free college tuition, as it is not low-income students. In fact, free college tuition creates a larger rift between the dollar values low-income students have in comparison to high-income students. According to a study from NPSAS (Chingos, 2012), a government-funded, student-study organization, rich students will receive 24% more in dollar value if the establishment of free college tuition. This is interpreted as a tradeoff; free college tuition will eliminate tuition, but out-of-pocket costs for low-income families will increase to $17.8 billion dollars annually which grants cannot cover. Rich students would be able to pay off these costs because of that increase in dollar value. Therefore, it is impossible to ignore that low-income students truly would not benefit from free college tuition, as they do not have the same privileges as rich students do.

Higher education should, without a doubt, be free and available for all. Imagine if you were a high school student with good grades and you weren’t able to go to college because of the high expenses; how would you feel? The costs have just gotten out of hand for students. Some kids have had no other choice but to enter the work field making little money. When this happens, people are unable to support themselves and are living paycheck-to-paycheck. To avoid situations like poverty,

Although, looking from a different perspective free college tuition will allow colleges to keep their standards and be just as selective. Students who have a free higher education will help the students to strive academic prosperity and maintain it.

For my introductory reason, free college education would help poor students get educated. Indeed, some people are very poor. There are so many parents in the world that are poor, so that makes children unable to get education easily. According to my pro article, “They see it as both a private and public benefit. “ This quote means that it will benefit private and public schools. Poor children usually have to move to public schools, considering that they are free. If college is free, poor children would be able to get a job they want, because they can be educated on the job that they want to take part in. Some parents do not have any money, and they don't have jobs. They would not be able to earn enough money for their child to get educated. Free college will help solve this issue if they are old enough for college. It can make some parents thrilled, that their child is finally getting an education. Additionally, to quote trade-schools.net, it says “A better-educated population could result in smarter decision-making at every level of society, which could lead to faster progress in solving our most difficult,

College, in our everyday world, is considered to be something that uplifts or elevates a person's opportunity in life and is widely regarded as a huge reward on completion. However, is taking away some of the risk in this achievement, the correct thing to do? Changing an integral part of American society, such as college, could have many life changing and societal negative effects and is overall not worth it. College should not be free the first two years due to a necessity to raise taxes to accommodate the "free college", academic and educational quality being hindered due to more teachers being needed, and apathy among students if college became risk free.

First, having free tuition for two to four years can really benefit low income families. According to the United States Census Bureau, “between the ages of 18 to 21 there are 17.2% that live in 100% poverty.” The young adults of age 18 are the ones coming right out of high school. “In 2013 there were 48% of high school students who attended public and private colleges, which leaves 52% of students who did not enroll in college courses.” That is over half of the student body in 2013. Personally, I am a part of the 52% who did not