Maggie's FarmWe are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for. |
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Categories
QuicksearchLinks
Blog Administration |
Tuesday, January 26. 2016The cost of higher ed Higher Ed is not one thing. It is many things from a nursing degree at a community college to a BA from a state college to a doctorate in Philosophy at an Ivy. It is all pretty much as expensive as the market will bear because greed is in the nature of institutions. It's never enough. What is the proper role of the federal government in higher ed? My problem with it, as you might suspect, is that government "help" always ends up with government control. That's how Leviathan rolls. The College Try Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
Here in Germany, a University education is free. In fact, parents are required by law, to pay for the support of their children (housing, food, etc.) until they're 25 or have graduated. For those parents who are financially challenged, the government does provide "kindergeld" (children's money) around €190/month to help offset costs of housing, utilities, etc. Student loans and student debt are unknown here.
Of course getting in to a German university is not easy. The final exam is called the 'Abitur' and is conducted after the 13th year of high school. This exam covers several foreign languages, math and science and includes both a written and oral exam before a board of testing officials. The 'Abitur' exams take approximately 3-days to complete and unlike the American SAT or ACT, there are no multiple choice, true/false or fill in the blank answers. Only those who can pass this very difficult exam are granted admission into our Universities. Those with a lower exam scores or who have not completed the equivalent education, may enter our colleges which are differentiated from University. Those below this level are usually enrolled into an apprenticeship program, typically lasting 3-years, which prepares them for a full time job. Of course we also have high school drop outs, and the Turks and other foreigners typically account for 40% of this rate. It is the belief of German society, that educating our people is a necessary part of contributing to a better society for everyone. And that only those who have proven themselves by academic excellence, earned through hard work and dedication, are worthy to attend University (typical graduates include engineers, doctors and other professionals). Our universities and colleges don't grant degrees in subjects such as photography, art or gender studies. We consider such subjects "hobbies", not subjects of serious academia and certainly not worthy of a diploma. But most German universities, many of which are the oldest and most prestigious in the world, offer openings to foreign students, including Americans. So you might want to put out the word that we welcome serious American students into our academia. At least to those who seek a real University education that won't put them in debt or distract them with campus 'safe places' or ridiculous sports programs. Ah, Bismarck!
That is a rational but entirely Germanic approach. It would be viewed as intolerable in the US, where all must be winners and must have prizes. Also, confirms our theory that when government pays for a thing, it controls it.
That is like serfdom, even if it is logical. Here in Germany, a University education is free.
That's the same logic that HRC and Bernie use. But guess what, it's NOT free! I'm assuming you took economics (from someone other than Marx) and really understand this and were using "free" in the sense that government pays for it with money they took from its citizens). THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH. Somebody is paying for it. The government gets its money from the taxpayers. So, what you really have in Germany is socialized education. Now, as for you comment about the value of rigorous exit exams, the worthlessness of gender or ethnic studies, the implication that there are many US students in college that have no business being there - I agree. Where we would perhaps disagree is on whether one is best served by going through an educational system designed around turning out "cogs in a wheel", that is citizens who will obediently work at their factory jobs and not ask questions (my perception of the German model) or an educational system in the mold of what the US system was in the early 1900s. Here in Germany, a University education is free.
That's the same logic that HRC and Bernie use. But guess what, it's NOT free! I'm guessing you took economics (from someone other than Marx) and really understand this and were using "free" in the sense that government pays for it with money they took from its citizens). THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH. Somebody is paying for it. The government gets its money from the taxpayers. So, what you really have in Germany is socialized education. Now, as for you comment about the value of rigorous exit exams, the worthlessness of gender or ethnic studies, the implication that there are many US students in college that have no business being there - I agree. Where we would perhaps disagree is on whether one is best served by going through an educational system designed around turning out "cogs in a wheel", that is citizens who will obediently work at their factory jobs and not ask questions (my perception of the German model) or an educational system in the mold of what the US system was in the early 1900s. To our German Friends there is an expression we use in the USA
TANSTAFFL (There ain't no such thing as a free lunch) Which applies to education as well. But there is another term in German which is current there Ewige Student (Eternal student) If you pay nothing then why not be a student forever. Lots of German youngsters are not so young when they finally enter the workforce. From what I see in the German press there is lots of pressure to change the system. In the USA the high costs are at least pressing schools to get the students finished on time and out the door. @ Dirtyjobsguy - because being a student forever doesn't pay very well. Engineering, however, pays very well as does an apprenticeship with VW, BMW or Mercedes. That and the fact you can't just "keep going" to university.
As to the age of students who enter the workforce, you have to understand that a bachelors in engineering, for example, is of little value here. So every engineer gets their MS or as we call it "diplom ingenieur" which is very highly respected. As in the US, the next step would be a PhD, but they're not so common unless they pursue research and development. Having said that, the few extra years of study does provide our workforce the advantage of maturity and the fact they are generally better educated when they show up. The flip side is we don't have an equivalent to "silicon valley" or the entrepreneur mentality that has worked so well in the US. You have to understand the German economy is a bit more conservative, less willing to take risks and to be honest, a bit more old school. But it's worked for us quite well so far. But yes, you are correct. There is a movement to change the German system closer to the American system. Not everyone is happy about it either. As with our medical system, the costs of university are strictly controlled by the government because medicine and education are not considered "for profit" institutions. Costs are therefore much lower and have been supported by tax revenue for over 100-years. Actually our social health system goes back to 1890's and was implemented by Bismark to ensure workers were cared for. Consider Germans have been paying for insurance since then and we have a century of insurance premiums and tightly controlled costs structure going for us which is why our social health care system works so well. . KH:
Yes, Bismarck as I mentioned earlier. Despite our American similarities to Germans in many ways, our history and traditions prefer to keep government out of as much as possible. That is a major cultural difference. Americans generally view government as a necessary evil, not as a benefactor or source of wisdom. Not only government control as we see with K-12 and increasing in higher ed, but also public funding of college is a taking from the poor, or those likely to have lower earnings to subsidize the children of the wealthy or those who will be the future higher earners. Assuming college is a benefit to a student's future earnings.
It is all pretty much as expensive as the market will bear because greed is in the nature of institutions.
I guess you either flunked Econ 101 or attended one of those Marxist Ivy League schools. How much do you charge for your services? Whatever it is, I propose that some people would claim it is TOO MUCH. The price that the market will bear - that is the price where the buyer and seller both agree that they are getting what they want in exchange for what they have - is a fair price. As far as it being the nature of "institutions", I've never met an institution, have you? I've met plenty of INDIVIDUALS employed by institutions, small and large, and they (like every human on this planet) do what's in their own self interest. The cause of the "high" prices you complain about is not the human nature of the individuals employed by these institutions, it's the subsidies provided by the federal government that shift the supply and demand curves such that the equilibrium price is raised. This is something you should have picked up in freshman economics - I'm just not sure if I should blame your or your college for failing to grasp this. When something is subsidised, it distorts the market, as you say. To claim that the resulting price is "the price that the market will bear" seems a contradiction.
Let's say Jeffrey would be willing to pay $30 for a shirt. However, he can get a $50 subsidy from the National Shirt Protective Administration. He hopes to get a free shirt, with some credit toward another one. However the shirt-sellers are in on the deal and now charge $80 for a shirt. You can call that $80 the price that the market will bear, I suppose, in a strictly technical sense. And if the subsidies went on for a few decades, people might indeed come to believe "That's an $80 shirt." Yet I think anyone could defend the notion that it's a $30 shirt, as determined by the market. The rest is a bizarre additional set of transactions which Jeffrey is being dragged along in. I can see where I was unclear. My point was exactly as you describe. Further, it is important to recognize who benefits from the subsidy (and it's not the students).
External sources like UV light (which can break DNA strands and cause incorrect repairs), toxins, or even pathogens
can increase the rate at which mutations occur. It uses extreme energy from x-rays to kill those cancer cells. The pace of growth from the cancer could be determined by Skilled pathologists by examining the biopsy taken in the cancerous tumor. I would argue your comment that public funding of universities takes away from the poor. How about public parks, public libraries, public pools, etc.? I hate to scare you by using this term, but those are very "social" concepts which are clearly very much a part of American society.
And how is the idea of public University any different than a public elementary school, or public high school? Why do you provide "free" education only up to the 12th grade? As with the examples above, using taxes to provide advanced education is no different than paying taxes for other public services which everyone is "free" to use (e.g. roads, highways, libraries, parks, pools, etc.) You could argue a poor child who doesn't have the smarts would never benefit since he wouldn't get into college in the first place. But that's like arguing people who choose not to walk through a public park or not use a public library are being forced to pay for something they don't use. Of course there will always be a few won't benefit, that is clear. However the larger society in general does benefit from public parks, public schools, public libraries, and public education. Consider that couples without children in the US are still required to pay school taxes, which obviously doesn't benefit them, but it does benefit other children, thus society in general. Perhaps the term 'free" isn't the best one to use, but compared to US students being indebted to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars upon graduation, German universities come very close to "free". . |