Monthly Archive

Short answer: Because it’s subsidized, and there is an artificially created demand.

Long answer:

College is expensive for a number of reasons. The biggest reason is the State schools and Federal Aid. Private schools (the biggest offenders of huge tuition) are primarily attended by poor and extremely wealthy students because both can afford the outrageous tuition, one through the government and the other through their own deep pockets. But the middle-class kids go to their State schools because their parents have already been forced to pay some of the tuition (through taxes) and so the tuition is kept artificially low enough to go through with a minimal amount of debt.

What this means is: if your parents are relatively successful, at many private schools they (read: you) will be punished by receiving no financial aid. If they are poor, be it because of bad circumstances or true ineptitude, the government will pay their way, and if they are well-off, they can pay your way.

This article is typical of the ignorance surrounding the subject. The author even admits that she doesn’t “know much about economics,” but, regardless, calls for a cap on the price of college. As demonstrated in the 70s by the price caps during the gasoline crisis, price caps create: shortage. So maybe everyone could afford to go to college, but there wouldn’t be enough college to go around. So even if you had the money and the academics, you might not get in.

The other issue is inflated demand. With the G.I. Bill, it suddenly became important to have that degree regardless of your skills. My grandfather had worked his way up through his company with his 3.5 years of a Princeton education, but management decreed a few years after the war that his position warranted a degree. Despite having 95% of his degree and years of experience, he was demoted to a salesman’s position and struggled for the rest of his life.

This is Government playing with the market, as always, for the worse. Ever wondered what happened to Apprenticeships? College happened. Why would your future employer train you from your high school degree, despite it being more pertinent and efficient in many cases, when the government is already forcing him to pay for your college degree (through taxes)? The answer is: he won’t. And there’s no degree at the end of an apprenticeship, again driving up the demand (and therefore cost) of college.

Furthermore, the public schools herald the importance of college from elementary school onward. Many students come out with the impression that if he/she does not attend a four year university he/she will be a failure. Many of these students have no place at an institution of higher education, and non-practical and non-technical skills are, for the most part, a waste. The vast majority of journalism, film, art, and English majors to name a few are merely filling seats and driving up the cost of school for the Engineering and Science majors. But sadly, this has created a marketplace where even an irrelevant degree will help one find an employer, as many jobs list “a college degree” as a requirement, and many students with degrees like communications and philosophy will find jobs completely unrelated to their field and still be paid better than those who have not been to college.

This isn’t because they are more marketable in any way, it is merely because the market has been flooded with them, and the jobs they gain will hardly be enough of an improvement to pay off their loans if they are middle-income students. Frankly, the whole institution is a scam for many students.

But why do the public schools herald the importance of a college education? The government hands out aid because with each aid package, the politician who supported creating it gains another vote. You wouldn’t vote away your financial aid, would you? And the public school teachers tout the importance of education, especially public education, because their very jobs are at stake. I have been taught since the seventh or eighth grade that public schooling was essentially the most important innovation for civilization since the wheel. But it doesn’t make sense to teach that education is vitally important until 12th grade and then truly optional. No, the more education you can get the better.

In fact, you’re entitled to education, so the “better off” should pay the way of the “less well off,” despite the fact that private grants pay for the truly talented students.

And so every shmuck goes to college and as such “higher education” has degraded into frat parties, communications majors, and a “priceless college experience” that has little or nothing to do with what the student will be doing for the rest of his or her life in many cases.

Every person that goes to college who does not belong there drives up the cost and drives down the value of the degree that the rest are working so hard to earn.

http://www.cspan.org/Watch/watch.aspx?MediaId=HP-A-15919

If you haven’t seen it, don’t even talk to me.

[edit]

So I decided this needed some explanation after I got the first reply down there. Rush Limbaugh spoke to CPAC and it was aired on FOX a few days ago. His speech is about an hour long, and simply incredible to listen to. It is probably the first description of Conservatism that wasn’t defensive and a contrived response to the attacks of liberals that I have ever seen. He makes the likes of McCain with his talk of “reaching accross the aisle” look like squirming, sniveling little rodents. (Oh please like us, Democrats, please like us)

His talk about the “orgasmic” response to bipartisanship in the media is probably one of the best parts, and with that in mind, if you look for the speech on CNN you get this wonderful coverage:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2009/03/01/nr.limbaugh.cpac.speech.cnn

The woman in this video talks about how Republicans are trying to become “more diverse” and the fellow she’s interviewing even gives her the pleasure of doing this. I remind the viewer that the Republicans were the abolitionist party, and that the reason that many minorities flock to the Democrat party is because of a promise of handouts. This coverage, if you can call it that, is simply the most obviously biased thing I’ve watched in ages. But of course, if you hadn’t seen the video, you wouldn’t know how untruthful it is to even call the talking point “coverage.”

A good snippet. Part 8 of 10. And with the exception of the fellow who replied while this post was short: This blog is officially ad hominem free. If you don’t have a real argument, please refrain from posting your comments.