Jump to content
Paulding.com
Sign in to follow this  
Foxmeister

Would Free College Tuition Provide the U.S. with the Most Educated Workforce in the World?

Recommended Posts

The U.S. is currently ranked 6th in the world with 45% of young adults have some form of post-secondary education, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). South Korea leads the world with 67% followed by Japan and Canada both with 58%. All three of those countries charge for tuition and all three are on par with in-state tuition at public universities. The OECD average is 41% of young adults having some form of post-secondary education.

 

Norway and Sweden each have free education at public universities, but only Norway has more young adults with some form of post-secondary education (47%). Sweden is tied with the U.S. Other countries with free tuition at public universities are Finland (40%), Slovenia (37%), Germany (30%), and Brazil (15%). As you can see these countries are all below the OECD average of 41%.

 

Would free college tuition for U.S. students lead to the country having the most educated workforce in the world? Not really. It wouldn't even guarantee a better educated workforce than we have right now.

 

Source: http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/02/17/466730455/fact-check-bernie-sanders-promises-free-college-will-it-work

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The U.S. is currently ranked 6th in the world with 45% of young adults have some form of post-secondary education, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). South Korea leads the world with 67% followed by Japan and Canada both with 58%. All three of those countries charge for tuition and all three are on par with in-state tuition at public universities. The OECD average is 41% of young adults having some form of post-secondary education.

 

Norway and Sweden each have free education at public universities, but only Norway has more young adults with some form of post-secondary education (47%). Sweden is tied with the U.S. Other countries with free tuition at public universities are Finland (40%), Slovenia (37%), Germany (30%), and Brazil (15%). As you can see these countries are all below the OECD average of 41%.

 

Would free college tuition for U.S. students lead to the country having the most educated workforce in the world? Not really. It wouldn't even guarantee a better educated workforce than we have right now.

 

Source: http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/02/17/466730455/fact-check-bernie-sanders-promises-free-college-will-it-work

You can't pick and choose. There are many more variables in educational comparisons. The article even says so. At the end it says other variables account for this discrepancy. Why didn't you quote that part of the article?

 

Is it an open-and-shut fact-check case?

Maybe not. Andreas Schleicher, a top education analyst at the OECD, had some final thoughts for NPR Ed.

"It is not possible to establish meaningful relationships between the cost of higher education and attainment, as there are too many intervening variables," he said. (Translation: This armchair exercise is a bit futile.)

"However, it is clear that growth in attainment in the U.S. has been particularly low and cost is likely an impediment to this. Many European countries provide free public higher education and in virtually all of these countries taxpayers benefit from this (in the sense that the additional tax revenues paid by better educated workers far outweigh the public expenditure on higher education)."

In other words, we probably could get some more people through college by footing the bill. Not only that, it would probably pay for itself.

Schleicher also suggests that there's a cheaper way to get the same benefits: by expanding our current Pell Grant program and student loan repayment options, similar to steps the U.K. has taken. Sanders has some ideas on that too, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The U.S. is currently ranked 6th in the world with 45% of young adults have some form of post-secondary education, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). South Korea leads the world with 67% followed by Japan and Canada both with 58%. All three of those countries charge for tuition and all three are on par with in-state tuition at public universities. The OECD average is 41% of young adults having some form of post-secondary education.

 

Norway and Sweden each have free education at public universities, but only Norway has more young adults with some form of post-secondary education (47%). Sweden is tied with the U.S. Other countries with free tuition at public universities are Finland (40%), Slovenia (37%), Germany (30%), and Brazil (15%). As you can see these countries are all below the OECD average of 41%.

 

Would free college tuition for U.S. students lead to the country having the most educated workforce in the world? Not really. It wouldn't even guarantee a better educated workforce than we have right now.

 

Source: http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/02/17/466730455/fact-check-bernie-sanders-promises-free-college-will-it-work

 

The students in Sweden, Finland, Slovenia, Germany and Brazil don't start out their lives adult lives a hundred thousand dollars in debt either.

You received an education on the taxpayers dime why do you begrudge someone else getting the same thing ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think having free education is a sure indication of having a better workforce. In my opinion, it depends on the quality of education, starting at K-12 level and then continuing that quality to the college and University levels.

 

I don't know the statistics on this one and speak from my personal experience here. I was raised in the country where at the time the education was free, I've gone to high school and college in United States, raised my kids through US schools and I believe I had a much better education growing up due to curriculum. Maybe if schools were less concerned with passing the tests and ridiculous 12 step solutions to a simple problem, more young adults wouldn't think it was such a waste continuing their education past High School.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The students in Sweden, Finland, Slovenia, Germany and Brazil don't start out their lives adult lives a hundred thousand dollars in debt either.

You received an education on the taxpayers dime why do you begrudge someone else getting the same thing ?

Do those countries have a better workforce than the US? They pay a higher tax rate than what we do as well.

 

I earned my GI Bill.

Edited by El Zorro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do those countries have a better workforce than the US? They pay a higher tax rate than what we do as well.

 

I earned my GI Bill.

 

Writing traffic tickets for twenty years don't make me laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Writing traffic tickets for twenty years don't make me laugh.

17 years in Military Police and 8 years in Military Intelligence. Let's not forget I did four combat tours as well. So yea, I earned it.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't pick and choose. There are many more variables in educational comparisons. The article even says so. At the end it says other variables account for this discrepancy. Why didn't you quote that part of the article?

 

Is it an open-and-shut fact-check case?

Maybe not. Andreas Schleicher, a top education analyst at the OECD, had some final thoughts for NPR Ed.

"It is not possible to establish meaningful relationships between the cost of higher education and attainment, as there are too many intervening variables," he said. (Translation: This armchair exercise is a bit futile.)

"However, it is clear that growth in attainment in the U.S. has been particularly low and cost is likely an impediment to this. Many European countries provide free public higher education and in virtually all of these countries taxpayers benefit from this (in the sense that the additional tax revenues paid by better educated workers far outweigh the public expenditure on higher education)."

In other words, we probably could get some more people through college by footing the bill. Not only that, it would probably pay for itself.

Schleicher also suggests that there's a cheaper way to get the same benefits: by expanding our current Pell Grant program and student loan repayment options, similar to steps the U.K. has taken. Sanders has some ideas on that too, of course.

The three countries with the largest percentage of people with post-secondary education do not provide free college tuition. Their percentages are much higher than those of countries who have free post-secondary education. Norway and Sweden have free education, but look at their numbers. Norway is 2 points higher than the US and Sweden's is the same as ours. Our percentages are much higher than the other countries providing free college tuition. Free tuition is not going to provide a more educated workforce.

 

Since you support it so much, how do you propose it be paid for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The three countries with the largest percentage of people with post-secondary education do not provide free college tuition. Their percentages are much higher than those of countries who have free post-secondary education. Norway and Sweden have free education, but look at their numbers. Norway is 2 points higher than the US and Sweden's is the same as ours. Our percentages are much higher than the other countries providing free college tuition. Free tuition is not going to provide a more educated workforce.

 

Since you support it so much, how do you propose it be paid for?

Let me repeat it again.

 

Is it an open-and-shut fact-check case?

Maybe not. Andreas Schleicher, a top education analyst at the OECD, had some final thoughts for NPR Ed.

"It is not possible to establish meaningful relationships between the cost of higher education and attainment, as there are too many intervening variables," he said. (Translation: This armchair exercise is a bit futile.)

"However, it is clear that growth in attainment in the U.S. has been particularly low and cost is likely an impediment to this. Many European countries provide free public higher education and in virtually all of these countries taxpayers benefit from this (in the sense that the additional tax revenues paid by better educated workers far outweigh the public expenditure on higher education)."

In other words, we probably could get some more people through college by footing the bill. Not only that, it would probably pay for itself.

Schleicher also suggests that there's a cheaper way to get the same benefits: by expanding our current Pell Grant program and student loan repayment options, similar to steps the U.K. has taken. Sanders has some ideas on that too, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me repeat it again.

 

Is it an open-and-shut fact-check case?

Maybe not. Andreas Schleicher, a top education analyst at the OECD, had some final thoughts for NPR Ed.

"It is not possible to establish meaningful relationships between the cost of higher education and attainment, as there are too many intervening variables," he said. (Translation: This armchair exercise is a bit futile.)

"However, it is clear that growth in attainment in the U.S. has been particularly low and cost is likely an impediment to this. Many European countries provide free public higher education and in virtually all of these countries taxpayers benefit from this (in the sense that the additional tax revenues paid by better educated workers far outweigh the public expenditure on higher education)."

In other words, we probably could get some more people through college by footing the bill. Not only that, it would probably pay for itself.

Schleicher also suggests that there's a cheaper way to get the same benefits: by expanding our current Pell Grant program and student loan repayment options, similar to steps the U.K. has taken. Sanders has some ideas on that too, of course.

You agree with the article that it would pay for itself? That's ridiculous because it won't pay for itself. Remember the nation is already $20 trillion in debt. The government is borrowing money now because it continues to operate with a budget deficit. Where's the money going to come from to pay for free college tuition. Expanding the Pell Grant Program will only increase the debt. The UK requires students to repay their student loans when they reach a certain income level. https://www.gov.uk/repaying-your-student-loan/overview

 

Again, I ask you how do you propose it be paid for?

Edited by El Zorro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bottom line is that there is no free lunch.

 

In my life the things I have worked hard for are what I appreciate the most.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If every high school graduate went on to receive their free degree.. Their job prospects would be exactly the same as they are now. The value of that degree would be greatly diminished, and someone still has to flip the burgers. Everyone can't be in management. That leaves no one to do the actual work. Silly humans.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If every high school graduate went on to receive their free degree.. Their job prospects would be exactly the same as they are now. The value of that degree would be greatly diminished, and someone still has to flip the burgers. Everyone can't be in management. That leaves no one to do the actual work. Silly humans.

 

That's what UGA is for.

 

:rofl:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If every high school graduate went on to receive their free degree.. Their job prospects would be exactly the same as they are now. The value of that degree would be greatly diminished, and someone still has to flip the burgers. Everyone can't be in management. That leaves no one to do the actual work. Silly humans.

 

Absolutely correct! There is a sense of entitlement that we have been taught comes with that piece of paper that doesn't coincide with reality. In the long run, we just end up with massive debt, both public and private, a bigger government entity, and job candidates refusing menial work while on unemployment.

 

Salon has good write up: http://www.salon.com/2013/11/24/millennials_rise_up_college_is_a_scam_you_have_nothing_to_lose_but_student_debt/

 

- Jamie

Edited by Jamie Weaver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the stats from other countries is relevant. What is says is there is probably less than 50% maybe a little more that would utilize the free education. I like the idea that anyone smart enough and ambitious enough can fulfill their potential in our country. I can not think of anything better our taxes could be invested in. I am sure the same was said a long time ago about public schools. How will you get educated people to work in the fields and mines. I would like us to build trade schools that are free also. The only thing this will hurt is the minimum wage market, cry me a river on that one. Education is not free, going to school, learning and getting a degree is hard work. My kids worked and supported themselves through college. I can tell you they were exhausted. Americans are obsessed for whatever reason with people having hard, the harder the better, you don't have to make sure life is hard, it is going to be hard in one way or another. I look back at just how hard it was to survive a 100 years ago and I think if the majority had said lets keep it this way. It is a backwards way of looking at things. The media might be convincing us of how horrible our lives are to keep us tuned in, but in reality we have a great life getting better due to those that embrace a better and easier way. We actually have the best market in the world to bring it to. If we don't educate, if we don't make the money, then the market of bigger and better goes away.


If every high school graduate went on to receive their free degree.. Their job prospects would be exactly the same as they are now. The value of that degree would be greatly diminished, and someone still has to flip the burgers. Everyone can't be in management. That leaves no one to do the actual work. Silly humans.

See my paragraph, who will work in the fields if we educate them. Shaking head.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do those countries have a better workforce than the US? They pay a higher tax rate than what we do as well.

 

I earned my GI Bill.

I remember when you were against the 911 GI Bill where the service members could transfer it to their kids and spouse.

17 years in Military Police and 8 years in Military Intelligence. Let's not forget I did four combat tours as well. So yea, I earned it.

Break it down in Reserve and Active Duty. :rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll go on to say that I've seen a dumbing down of our higher education system caused by the availability of scholarship money. Students become little more than a conduit to fund monies into the school. I've taken a few courses under this system. Online. Ridiculously easy. But if you channel the required number of dollars and time into the system.. you get a degree. It devalues actual education.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The political left too often leaves human nature out of the equation. We tend to appreciate what we gained through our struggles and determination, but take for granted what was given to us.

 

Whether it be the entitlement lifestyle or "free" education; it too often doesn't contribute to the ethic that is in short supply these days.

 

Even student loans don't have the desired effect until too late, that being when thy have to be paid back.

 

We'd be better off to encourage a system of more affordable education through market competition between various institutions learning. And let's be realistic; college is not for everyone. As many have pointed out in recent years; there is a sore need for better vocational training, especially in the trades.

There are many ways to pay for a higher education; you don't necessarily need government grants or student loans. I have mentioned here before that I started yet another business at 50 years old, working some nights and weekends to pay for my kid's education. She saw the sacrifice I made and was very appreciative of what I did for her, and she has done well with it. Of course, she had to hold up her end of the deal too, and she did. I expected good grades, good behavior, and she was expected to pay for her personal expenses, and her living expenses later when she moved out on her own. She worked as many as three jobs at a time while in college, and always took care of her responsibilities. She's used her education and done very well for herself.

So there are ways of getting a fine education without it being "free" or taking out student loans. But it requires things like planning and saving, taking responsibility for your family and yourself, and (gasp) working hard.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So which types of military service do you approve of?

I just get a kick out of Fox throwing all of those years out there when most of them were Reserve. BUT at the same time, my DH was Reserves for 4 years. It was hard on him. He worked nights and drill weekends were days.... So he would work 5 nights then turn around and work 2 days then back to 5 nights with no time off in between. That isn't easy working 12 days in a row each month. Add on small kids at home, makes it hard to sleep too. Now that he is Retired he works nights again. Being AD seemed easier on him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't Y'alls kids use Hope? The biggest college expense to me right now is paying for my son's apartment. Too bad he cant just live at home. Cant believe he is already starting his JR year today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no education better than from the school of hard knocks. The SHK, gives a person with a high I Q the best esducation in the world.

 

So "NO," E Z! A college education can only teach people how to get other dummies to do things. It doesn't teach them how to do things themselves. It doesn't matter if they are going to be doctors, lawyers, murchants, chiefs, or any other professional.

 

With that said, Guard Dad is right, about vocational training. A college education only makes a con artest out of a person.

Edited by The Postman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the $%^&*@$%#@ government hadn't used the excuse of "easy loan money" to reduce the funding supplied to the public college system, we'd still have a system where a person could get a degree at a reasonable price.

 

When I started college in 1980, the cost to go to Kennesaw was $600 a year + books. I think towards the end of college span that had increased to to about $1000 a year, but I could still work part time and make those payments since they were spread out over 3 quarters.

 

However, that's not a good option for kids now with it costing 5K or so a semester. How about abolishing these danged "Add on" Fees? Get rid of the bloody Football teams at every two bit school and get back to what they are there for: TEACHING.

 

If the government wants to make education available to everyone, get pricing control of the public university system first!

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the $%^&*@$%#@ government hadn't used the excuse of "easy loan money" to reduce the funding supplied to the public college system, we'd still have a system where a person could get a degree at a reasonable price.

 

When I started college in 1980, the cost to go to Kennesaw was $600 a year + books. I think towards the end of college span that had increased to to about $1000 a year, but I could still work part time and make those payments since they were spread out over 3 quarters.

 

However, that's not a good option for kids now with it costing 5K or so a semester. How about abolishing these danged "Add on" Fees? Get rid of the bloody Football teams at every two bit school and get back to what they are there for: TEACHING.

 

If the government wants to make education available to everyone, get pricing control of the public university system first!

 

it's the same thing that happened to our health care system. Way overpriced. And of course the liberal solution is government funding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no education better than from the school of hard knocks. The SHK, gives a person with a high I Q the best esducation in the world.

 

So "NO," E Z! A college education can only teach people how to get other dummies to do things. It doesn't teach them how to do things themselves. It doesn't matter if they are going to be doctors, lawyers, murchants, chiefs, or any other professional.

 

With that said, Guard Dad is right, about vocational training. A college education only makes a con artest out of a person.

A college education will teach my son how to save lives. :good:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

if the $%^&*@$%#@ government hadn't used the excuse of "easy loan money" to reduce the funding supplied to the public college system, we'd still have a system where a person could get a degree at a reasonable price.

 

When I started college in 1980, the cost to go to Kennesaw was $600 a year + books. I think towards the end of college span that had increased to to about $1000 a year, but I could still work part time and make those payments since they were spread out over 3 quarters.

 

However, that's not a good option for kids now with it costing 5K or so a semester. How about abolishing these danged "Add on" Fees? Get rid of the bloody Football teams at every two bit school and get back to what they are there for: TEACHING.

 

If the government wants to make education available to everyone, get pricing control of the public university system first!

 

 

The government and wall street, are one, and the same. The government only does what Wall Street tells it to do. If not they wouldn't be able to crash the market, and then get big bonuses instead of going to jail.

Edited by The Postman
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the $%^&*@$%#@ government hadn't used the excuse of "easy loan money" to reduce the funding supplied to the public college system, we'd still have a system where a person could get a degree at a reasonable price.

 

When I started college in 1980, the cost to go to Kennesaw was $600 a year + books. I think towards the end of college span that had increased to to about $1000 a year, but I could still work part time and make those payments since they were spread out over 3 quarters.

 

However, that's not a good option for kids now with it costing 5K or so a semester. How about abolishing these danged "Add on" Fees? Get rid of the bloody Football teams at every two bit school and get back to what they are there for: TEACHING.

 

If the government wants to make education available to everyone, get pricing control of the public university system first!

 

The add on fees are ridiculous. AND Hope doesn't cover them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A college education will teach my son how to save lives. :good:

 

 

And, get other people to save lives, as well.

 

His in the field, military training, is better than his classroom studies. A high IQ, along with field, and dirt work, is the best.

Edited by The Postman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember when you were against the 911 GI Bill where the service members could transfer it to their kids and spouse.

Break it down in Reserve and Active Duty. :rofl:

I was never in opposition to service members transferring their GI Bill benefits to their spouse and kids. I was opposed to how some courts were awarding the spouse the military member's GI Bill benefits as part of a divorce property settlement.

 

Obviously I had both more active duty and reserve time than you did, as well as 99% of the people living in this country. In total, I had 12.5 years active duty and the remainder in the Reserves. I have more active duty time than Cain. Do you have a problem with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My active duty was trying to keep conservatives from wanting to concerve my money, as well as their own. After about 60 years I'm still on active duty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was never in opposition to service members transferring their GI Bill benefits to their spouse and kids.

 

Obviously I had both more active duty and reserve time than you did, as well as 99% of the people living in this country. In total, I had 12.5 years active duty and the remainder in the Reserves. I have more active duty time than Cain. Do you have a problem with that?

I do have a problem with people that make it look like they did 25 years AD in the military when it was far less than that. Just tell the truth and not try to make yourself look better. My DH did way more time than you ever did. 21 years AD and 4 years Reserves, I never try to hide that fact. The courts would never make the AD duty member transfer over his 911 GI bill to an ex wife. NEVER! That is his/her decision to make. Not that many women bother to join the military, and I did. I got out to have children thus the reason I didn't make a career of it. Out of DH's 25 years in the military, I was married to him for 24 years of it. And now I am a Blue Star Mother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The Post 9/11 GI Bill is therefore a significant asset that can potentially benefit either spouse or their children. Unlike leave pay and retirement pay, however, Post 9/11 GI Bill Benefits may not be treated as marital property, or the asset of a marital estate, subject to division in a divorce or other civil proceeding. See 38 U.S.C. § 3020(f)(3). In other words, a military spouse cannot ask the court to award a service member’s Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits as an asset in a divorce. The Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits simply cannot be included in equitable distribution."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do have a problem with people that make it look like they did 25 years AD in the military when it was far less than that. Just tell the truth and not try to make yourself look better. My DH did way more time than you ever did. 21 years AD and 4 years Reserves, I never try to hide that fact. The courts would never make the AD duty member transfer over his 911 GI bill to an ex wife. NEVER! That is his/her decision to make. Not that many women bother to join the military, and I did. I got out to have children thus the reason I didn't make a career of it. Out of DH's 25 years in the military, I was married to him for 24 years of it. And now I am a Blue Star Mother.

 

Most of the Lifers I knew in the military stayed in because they knew they couldn't make it in civilian life. I met an old Staff Sergeant that was a raging alcoholic who tried a couple of times but kept coming back for his three hots and a cot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Answer to OP, no it would not. The work force is already saturated with worthless degrees in worthless subjects. What we need is more technical training. The economy can only support so many non-productive occupations. We need to outlaw unions, get our manufacturing base back, invest in manufacturing and technical skills and quit raising a bunch of entitled couch potatoes who all want a office job making $200k a year and not producing JS that you can put in your hand and attach a value to. You look at the 50's arguably the peak of US economic and quality of life. We out produced every body by a mile with products that you could put in your hand not some electronic freaking cloud that only exist on some damn microchip somewhere. Our prodigy and us have gotten lazy as hell with no work ethic. Of course there are exceptions so I don't need a bunch of replies about your grand kids and children. If they are successful I am very happy for them. Over all I think I am spot on.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do have a problem with people that make it look like they did 25 years AD in the military when it was far less than that. Just tell the truth and not try to make yourself look better. My DH did way more time than you ever did. 21 years AD and 4 years Reserves, I never try to hide that fact. The courts would never make the AD duty member transfer over his 911 GI bill to an ex wife. NEVER! That is his/her decision to make. Not that many women bother to join the military, and I did. I got out to have children thus the reason I didn't make a career of it. Out of DH's 25 years in the military, I was married to him for 24 years of it. And now I am a Blue Star Mother.

How many years have I been posting here at pcom? I have never made my reserve military duty a secret. In fact I have been quite open about it. The fact is, I have 25 years, 3 months, and 22 days time in service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Answer to OP, no it would not. The work force is already saturated with worthless degrees in worthless subjects. What we need is more technical training. The economy can only support so many non-productive occupations. We need to outlaw unions, get our manufacturing base back, invest in manufacturing and technical skills and quit raising a bunch of entitled couch potatoes who all want a office job making $200k a year and not producing JS that you can put in your hand and attach a value to. You look at the 50's arguably the peak of US economic and quality of life. We out produced every body by a mile with products that you could put in your hand not some electronic freaking cloud that only exist on some damn microchip somewhere. Our prodigy and us have gotten lazy as hell with no work ethic. Of course there are exceptions so I don't need a bunch of replies about your grand kids and children. If they are successful I am very happy for them. Over all I think I am spot on.

I agree with you. The value of a bachelor's degree and even a master's degree has decreased over the years as more people have obtained them. There are a lot of college graduates who are working as clerks in retail stores or have taken other entry-level jobs that have never required a college education. I have seen many reports how there are severe shortages of workers with skilled trades education, and these jobs pay much higher wages than many jobs requiring a bachelor's degree.

 

I am currently writing a research paper addressing free college tuition for an economics class. My first hypothesis is "A national program allowing American students to attend a public university will not result in the best educated workforce in the world" My second hypothesis is, "Providing free tuition to American college students will create a financial burden upon public universities, the states, and the federal government, resulting in increased taxes that will have an adverse effect on the national economy."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...