even city college and university?

Then who would pay for it? If the colleges were financed by the government, the quality of education would be absolutely terrible. (Just look at public schools)

Not necessarily. Education is largely free here (there are lots and lots of universities and colleges that are public but you are allowed to put up a private one. You'll even get state support.)

And it certainly keeps at a relatively high niveau. There are a lot of private collages that supposedly suck though. :hmm:

Never heard anything but good words on Norwegian education, really. Except those few private colleges.


Ah, and yes; education should be free. It ensures good social mobility(i.e. it "oils the American dream" as one could say)

i've heard that college is free in europe. i think it should be free here too

Originally posted by 302Riz
Then who would pay for it? If the colleges were financed by the government, the quality of education would be absolutely terrible. (Just look at public schools)
Many colleges are financed by the gov't.:nice:

Most of them still charge a nominal tuition --yes several thousand $$ a year for a university grade education is nominal compared to the cost of a private university-- but most of the fees are heavily subsidized by Uncle Sam.

In some states the subsidizing is a little higher, for instance I've been told that states in the midwest offer university tuition practically free to residents. I've also heard that the calibre of many of the students there is equivalent to JC's out here in CA.

Some money should be charged, if nothing else, but to keep people focused on achieving their goals. Make it affordable, but don't make it absolutely free.

BTW the number 1 school in the US, arguably the world according to a number of reports is UC Berkeley -- a public school.:nice:

Yes.

I believe that good education for as many people as possible is the best way to solve social problems.

You invest in education and save money that otherwise goes to wellfare, police, prison's and so on.

I think to a level, it should be NEED BASED FREE. Which, in California, up until our budget crunch, was the case for community colleges. NEED BASED is the key.

Public schools, in California, are CHEAP, when looking at the community college and UC system.

Going to a 2 year school (JC) and then 2 years at a UC, you'd come out, having spent 15-20K on tuition/books/supplies. If you stuck to it.

That is WITHOUT any financial aid/grants/scholarships of which there are THOUSANDS.

15-20K, for an average increase of 10K/yr in income, isn't a bad trade off, let alone, need based financial aid, which is plentiful.

Originally posted by jadatrack
i've heard that college is free in europe. i think it should be free here too
- Heh, Europe is a lof of countries. It varies.

Originally posted by Manu
I think to a level, it should be NEED BASED FREE. Which, in California, up until our budget crunch, was the case for community colleges. NEED BASED is the key.
- "Need based" means loads of money wasted on beurocracy. Trust me on this! And it often ends up serving those who know how to cleverly fill out paperwork more than those who really need it.

Besides; education is work, let's not deny it. And you serve society by getting educated. Why should you have to pay for it?

Originally posted by I don't know

- "Need based" means loads of money wasted on beurocracy.

Yes

Besides; education is work, let's not deny it. And you serve society by getting educated. Why should you have to pay for it?

No

Why shouldn't you pay for it? Nothing is free, professors & admin. need to be compensated for their time & expertise, no?

The "service to society" is an undetermined value. Many would challenge the assertion based on the more-than-contrary behaviour of many "educated" citizens...at least here in the US. I'm hard to convince anything remotely productive to our society comes from Vasser, Smith or Cornell University, quite the opposite in many cases.

I Don't Know-

I will make a simple statement, and let me know if you agree or disagree

"If education was entirely free, the quality of top universities would suffer"

"If education was entirely free, the quality of top universities would suffer"

Not necessarily, assuming no change in current federal/state funding levels.

Make it free, but make it hard, so that money is spent only on the really capable and willing.

You may want it to be free to those attending but certainly it would not be 'free' to taxpayers unless you guys have a secret printing press somewhere that I can borrow from.

I personally don't want the governments involvement in any additional bureacracy mishmash. Now if individual states were to keep the cost of community based colleges at a reasonable cost, or if very very very low interest loans were made more readily available then there could be greater opportunity for more to attain higher education

Yes it should. And available to all who seek higher education.

And who should pay for it? The rich of course. In fact, why not compel people who attend public universities to pay a portion of their earnings to subsidize these schools?

Univeral and free through taxation from primary to tertiary level. Perhaps with the introduction of a graduate tax (career dependent) to take into account the higher earnings of graduates and the real economic value of a degree.

In terms of social equality, you'd probably want to put the emphasis at the primary level.

I don't know how you deal with the repressive aspects of such institutions though - and the mind numbing boredom of a lot of "education".

Originally posted by Manu
I Don't Know-

I will make a simple statement, and let me know if you agree or disagree

"If education was entirely free, the quality of top universities would suffer"
- Well, no. I don't think so. Like said, some of the schools here that are really famous for being rotten are the private ones. There are no private universities though...
(define what you mean by "entirely free", I'm not for outlawing private schools.)

I'm not really sure how you mean the high quality universities would suffer. There'll always be some that are more prestigious(?) than others and professors thend to be an idealistic bunch, so few of them are really in it for the money.
Originally posted by jonnyofthedead
Not necessarily, assuming no change in current federal/state funding levels.

Make it free, but make it hard, so that money is spent only on the really capable and willing.
- Well, depends on what you mean, Jonny. Do you mean "really hard to get in to" or do you mean "really tough corricculum"?

Why shouldn't you pay for it? Nothing is free, professors & admin. need to be compensated for their time & expertise, no?
- Well, yes, but what's your point? The student isn't alone at the recieving end of his education. A well educated people is good for society.

And, of course, there's my most important point; that of social mobility and progress.

Remember that the next possible Einstein or Newton isn't necessarily someone with a lot of savings or a talent for other labour.
The "service to society" is an undetermined value. Many would challenge the assertion based on the more-than-contrary behaviour of many "educated" citizens...at least here in the US. I'm hard to convince anything remotely productive to our society comes from Vasser, Smith or Cornell University, quite the opposite in many cases.
- Well, I have heard quite a lot of bad things about US education. But I don't know much about it, really, so I don't have anything constructive to reply to that.

No Norwegian universities have a particularily bad reputation, though. (and they're all private) Maybe it's a method thing :hmm:

I don't know how you deal with the repressive aspects of such institutions though - and the mind numbing boredom of a lot of "education".
- LoL, you spoiled little brat :D education is good for you.

- Well, depends on what you mean, Jonny. Do you mean "really hard to get in to" or do you mean "really tough corricculum"?
Tough curriculum. Make successful completion of a couple of proper maths courses a necessary prerequisite for passing the first year. :)

Or just make every course hard enough to ensure that only those who are both bright and dedicated enough to make it through can stay on beyond the first term.

Originally posted by jonnyofthedead

Tough curriculum. Make successful completion of a couple of proper maths courses a necessary prerequisite for passing the first year. :)

Or just make every course hard enough to ensure that only those who are both bright and dedicated enough to make it through can stay on beyond the first term.
- That's one of those things that typically regulate themselves. As a subject becomes more popular; the higher grades you need to go on, and the higher grades you need to go on, the higher understanding you need to have of your corriculum, and the higher understanding you need to have of your corriculum the more you have to look outside of it to understand it.

See, It's perfectly simple :D

State Colleges are relativlely inexpensive for residents and there are many scholarships and grants availible to help out even more.

The government does more than enough to help out with higher education and no more burden should be placed on the tax payers.

Higher education is a priveldge not a right, the world needs plenty of ditchdiggers and menial laborers.

- That's one of those things that typically regulate themselves. As a subject becomes more popular; the higher grades you need to go on, and the higher grades you need to go on, the higher understanding you need to have of your corriculum, and the higher understanding you need to have of your corriculum the more you have to look outside of it to understand it.

Or alternatively, the more popular it gets, the more "academic" institutions start sprouting courses in it, more incompetent students start studying it, and the more useless the whole field of study starts to appear by association.

Originally posted by Nick
State Colleges are relativlely inexpensive for residents and there are many scholarships and grants availible to help out even more.

The government does more than enough to help out with higher education and no more burden should be placed on the tax payers.

Higher education is a priveldge not a right, the world needs plenty of ditchdiggers and menial laborers.
- What is a privelage(sp?) and what's a right is completely up to ourselves :) I believe this should be a right simply because of all the beneficial effects it has on society.

Originally posted by jonnyofthedead
Or alternatively, the more popular it gets, the more "academic" institutions start sprouting courses in it, more incompetent students start studying it, and the more useless the whole field of study starts to appear by association.
- :hmm: I guess that's the advantage of having a small country. I think we only have three or four universities here in Norway.

That's the obvious disadvantage too, I guess.