Obama to Propose 2 Years of Community School for 'Free'

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Price mechanisms?

The supply-demand interaction which gives something its price.

If government subsidies somehow reduce or take away the price of something, it'll pretty much undoubtedly cause over-consumption and over-production.

Taxes are near a historic low.

They're still too high.

So what are we going to cut? Social security and welfare programs? Military spending? Foreign aid, perhaps?

So what are we going to cut? Social security and welfare programs? Military spending? Foreign aid, perhaps?

All of those should probably suffer some restructuring and some cuts.

So what are we going to cut? Social security and welfare programs? Military spending? Foreign aid, perhaps?

All of those should probably suffer some restructuring and some cuts.

I'm sure they could. But that should happen before we cut taxes.

College is shit in Georgia unless you go somewhere ritzy. I'll pass.

My biggest gripe is that this move is another step towards making college essential education and ruining the value of a diploma.

The value of a diploma is already ruined when this country values who can throw a football the furthest rather than who has the best grades. And when this country puts more money into the military than education. 

Football abilities are valued because not everyone can go out on the field and throw accurately 40 yards downfield.

Any asshole can get good grades.

What exactly is wrong with having more educated people anyway?

Part of the devaluation process isn't just people having more of a certain qualification, but it's the strain placed on educational infrastructure--it essentially turns it into a continuation of mass-schooling.

What really needs to be done is an improvement of primary and secondary education.

Football abilities are valued because not everyone can go out on the field and throw accurately 40 yards downfield.

Which is going to advanced society how? Last time I checked someone throwing a football didn't invent that device you used to post that post with. 

Any asshole can get good grades.

And any asshole can throw a football. It doesn't matter how far you throw it. It's still something anyone with the motor functions can do. It's nothing special. Not everybody is going to be able to do complex math without using a calculator. So tell me. Is someone with down syndrome going to be the top of their class grade wise with the normal students?

What exactly is wrong with having more educated people anyway?

Part of the devaluation process isn't just people having more of a certain qualification, but it's the strain placed on educational infrastructure--it essentially turns it into a continuation of mass-schooling.

What really needs to be done is an improvement of primary and secondary education.

I agree with that last part but I still see nothing wrong with more people having a higher level of education.

Because the world needs more landscapers and culinary professionals with degrees in medicine and mechanical engineering.

What exactly is wrong with having more educated people anyway?

Part of the devaluation process isn't just people having more of a certain qualification, but it's the strain placed on educational infrastructure--it essentially turns it into a continuation of mass-schooling.

What really needs to be done is an improvement of primary and secondary education.

I agree with that last part but I still see nothing wrong with more people having a higher level of education.

Scarcity matters.

If more people have a masters degree, it becomes worth less. That's true in any sort of situation in which the supply of something goes up. We need to have higher levels of education as we get more and more information--of course--but we ought to do it in a way of occasionally restructuring all levels of education. Just pushing more and more people into university delays dealing with the problem and allows it to saturate and get worse and worse.

It makes me happy when I feel exactly the same as Meta so he can swoop in and explain it in a much better way.

So your point seems kind of moot.

I'm still holding out for the administration to provide more information, and I'm obviously not as knowledgeable as you about how community colleges work in the U.S.

My only point is that anything which artificially increases the supply of qualifications isn't good, and it isn't the right direction to be heading in.

In all reality is there any chance at all this will get passed?

Absolutely not. Republicans would never let something beneficial like this pass either the House or Senate.

We can't even get them in on a jobs bill for veterans they created.

Exactly how is degrading and watering down degrees beneficial? We already have a situation where current graduates have a hard time seeking a job, so the obvious decision is to add more fuel to this out of control fire. Now people will have to spend another 2-4 years getting a higher degree just to have a chance, which will cost well over $25,000 and creating even more debt issues.

Oh, and last I checked Democrats are refusing to sign the Keystone pipeline into effect which will create jobs and they passed ObamaCare which makes it more difficult for employers to hire

What exactly is wrong with having more educated people anyway?

Part of the devaluation process isn't just people having more of a certain qualification, but it's the strain placed on educational infrastructure--it essentially turns it into a continuation of mass-schooling.

What really needs to be done is an improvement of primary and secondary education.

I agree with that last part but I still see nothing wrong with more people having a higher level of education.

Scarcity matters.

If more people have a masters degree, it becomes worth less. That's true in any sort of situation in which the supply of something goes up. We need to have higher levels of education as we get more and more information--of course--but we ought to do it in a way of occasionally restructuring all levels of education. Just pushing more and more people into university delays dealing with the problem and allows it to saturate and get worse and worse.

A free two years at community isn't giving more people masters degrees. All it does is give more people a shot at an AA and a potential jump start towards a bachelors or even as you say, a masters.

So your point seems kind of moot.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.htm

The labor participation among people with an AA is around the 64% mark. That means 36% of grads can't find a job right now. Put more people into the mix and that number will increase to the point people having to shell out over $25,000 in order to get 2-4 more years of college experience, vs. having to pay less than $10,000 for a community college

What exactly is wrong with having more educated people anyway?

Part of the devaluation process isn't just people having more of a certain qualification, but it's the strain placed on educational infrastructure--it essentially turns it into a continuation of mass-schooling.

What really needs to be done is an improvement of primary and secondary education.

I agree with that last part but I still see nothing wrong with more people having a higher level of education.

Scarcity matters.

If more people have a masters degree, it becomes worth less. That's true in any sort of situation in which the supply of something goes up. We need to have higher levels of education as we get more and more information--of course--but we ought to do it in a way of occasionally restructuring all levels of education. Just pushing more and more people into university delays dealing with the problem and allows it to saturate and get worse and worse.

A free two years at community isn't giving more people masters degrees. All it does is give more people a shot at an AA and a potential jump start towards a bachelors or even as you say, a masters.

So your point seems kind of moot.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.htm

The labor participation among people with an AA is around the 64% mark. That means 36% of grads can't find a job right now. Put more people into the mix and that number will increase to the point people having to shell out over $25,000 in order to get 2-4 more years of college experience, vs. having to pay less than $10,000 for a community college

Or y'know.... make more jobs, rather than outsourcing shit overseas and blaming it on there being too many people with an education.

Sometime something "Free market"

FYI to get a good job anywhere you already need a degree of some sort. It's not going to devalue the diploma any more than it already is. Plus that implies that everyone passes and gets it.

What exactly is wrong with having more educated people anyway?

Yeah, you need a degree now because people keep pushing the idea that somehow to be successful, you need a piece of paper saying you were able to stay awake for a certain amount of hours. I would love it so damn much if we can go back a couple of decades where anybody could be middle-class, have a simple high school diploma, and be a manager at a department store or wherever

There's a difference between education and flooding the market 

FYI to get a good job anywhere you already need a degree of some sort. It's not going to devalue the diploma any more than it already is. Plus that implies that everyone passes and gets it.

What exactly is wrong with having more educated people anyway?

Yeah, you need a degree now because people keep pushing the idea that somehow to be successful, you need a piece of paper saying you were able to stay awake for a certain amount of hours. I would love it so damn much if we can go back a couple of decades where anybody could be middle-class, have a simple high school diploma, and be a manager at a department store or wherever

> Manager at a department store

We're really reaching for some careers here.

What exactly is wrong with having more educated people anyway?

Part of the devaluation process isn't just people having more of a certain qualification, but it's the strain placed on educational infrastructure--it essentially turns it into a continuation of mass-schooling.

What really needs to be done is an improvement of primary and secondary education.

I agree with that last part but I still see nothing wrong with more people having a higher level of education.

Scarcity matters.

If more people have a masters degree, it becomes worth less. That's true in any sort of situation in which the supply of something goes up. We need to have higher levels of education as we get more and more information--of course--but we ought to do it in a way of occasionally restructuring all levels of education. Just pushing more and more people into university delays dealing with the problem and allows it to saturate and get worse and worse.

A free two years at community isn't giving more people masters degrees. All it does is give more people a shot at an AA and a potential jump start towards a bachelors or even as you say, a masters.

So your point seems kind of moot.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.htm

The labor participation among people with an AA is around the 64% mark. That means 36% of grads can't find a job right now. Put more people into the mix and that number will increase to the point people having to shell out over $25,000 in order to get 2-4 more years of college experience, vs. having to pay less than $10,000 for a community college

Or y'know.... make more jobs, rather than outsourcing shit overseas and blaming it on there being too many people with an education.

We would all love to see jobs brought back to America, but many of them that are outsource require no degree in the first place so it's redundant to have a degree in order to take phone calls at a office. On top of that, what do incentives do we even give companies in the first place? Because raising taxes to pay for this idea isn't helping one single bit

I would love it so damn much if we can go back a couple of decades where anybody could be middle-class, have a simple high school diploma, and be a manager at a department store or wherever

People back then also weren't nearly as educated. But sure, go ahead and travel back in time. I'm sure you'd fit in perfectly.

Yep, just 20 years ago people were running around in nothing but a loin cloth and throwing rocks at animals to see what would be a better tool for hunting. Seriously, would it be any harm for you to think for once? If anybody would fit perfectly with cavemen it would be you

I would love it so damn much if we can go back a couple of decades where anybody could be middle-class, have a simple high school diploma, and be a manager at a department store or wherever

People back then also weren't nearly as educated. But sure, go ahead and travel back in time. I'm sure you'd fit in perfectly.

Yep, just 20 years ago people were running around in nothing but a loin cloth and throwing rocks at animals to see what would be a better tool for hunting. Seriously, would it be any harm for you to think for once? If anybody would fit perfectly with cavemen it would be you

Twenty years ago, there was no internet for the general consumer. Phones were still tethered to a wall with a 20ft cable. Hell, have you seen their fashion?

It may only have been 20 years ago, but the world was quite different.

FYI to get a good job anywhere you already need a degree of some sort. It's not going to devalue the diploma any more than it already is. Plus that implies that everyone passes and gets it.

What exactly is wrong with having more educated people anyway?

Yeah, you need a degree now because people keep pushing the idea that somehow to be successful, you need a piece of paper saying you were able to stay awake for a certain amount of hours. I would love it so damn much if we can go back a couple of decades where anybody could be middle-class, have a simple high school diploma, and be a manager at a department store or wherever

> Manager at a department store

We're really reaching for some careers here.

Not everyone can be an astrophysicist. Someone's gotta provide them with material goods and access to said goods. Managerial positions aren't a bad job, and always have the prospect of moving from department to location to district.
Any higher, and yeah... you'll need that paper that people like to substitute for experience and common sense.

FYI to get a good job anywhere you already need a degree of some sort. It's not going to devalue the diploma any more than it already is. Plus that implies that everyone passes and gets it.

What exactly is wrong with having more educated people anyway?

Yeah, you need a degree now because people keep pushing the idea that somehow to be successful, you need a piece of paper saying you were able to stay awake for a certain amount of hours. I would love it so damn much if we can go back a couple of decades where anybody could be middle-class, have a simple high school diploma, and be a manager at a department store or wherever

> Manager at a department store

We're really reaching for some careers here.

Not everyone can be an astrophysicist. Someone's gotta provide them with material goods and access to said goods. Managerial positions aren't a bad job, and always have the prospect of moving from department to location to district.
Any higher, and yeah... you'll need that paper that people like to substitute for experience and common sense.

Exactly - managerial jobs are something most people can do without a college career. That doesn't make it a good career.

Sometime something "Free market"

Protectionism is the opposite of free-market. . .

I'm free-market, Kinder isn't.

EDIT: Fuck me, didn't realise what you were saying, now I look like an idiot.

FYI to get a good job anywhere you already need a degree of some sort. It's not going to devalue the diploma any more than it already is. Plus that implies that everyone passes and gets it.

What exactly is wrong with having more educated people anyway?

Yeah, you need a degree now because people keep pushing the idea that somehow to be successful, you need a piece of paper saying you were able to stay awake for a certain amount of hours. I would love it so damn much if we can go back a couple of decades where anybody could be middle-class, have a simple high school diploma, and be a manager at a department store or wherever

> Manager at a department store

We're really reaching for some careers here.

Not everyone can be an astrophysicist. Someone's gotta provide them with material goods and access to said goods. Managerial positions aren't a bad job, and always have the prospect of moving from department to location to district.
Any higher, and yeah... you'll need that paper that people like to substitute for experience and common sense.

Exactly - managerial jobs are something most people can do without a college career. That doesn't make it a good career.

Because to qualify as a "good career" a position must require a college degree... right...

I will say, however, that outsourcing is pretty much universally good.

So, yeah, that's not really debatable in the economics world.

FYI to get a good job anywhere you already need a degree of some sort. It's not going to devalue the diploma any more than it already is. Plus that implies that everyone passes and gets it.

What exactly is wrong with having more educated people anyway?

Yeah, you need a degree now because people keep pushing the idea that somehow to be successful, you need a piece of paper saying you were able to stay awake for a certain amount of hours. I would love it so damn much if we can go back a couple of decades where anybody could be middle-class, have a simple high school diploma, and be a manager at a department store or wherever

> Manager at a department store

We're really reaching for some careers here.

Not everyone can be an astrophysicist. Someone's gotta provide them with material goods and access to said goods. Managerial positions aren't a bad job, and always have the prospect of moving from department to location to district.
Any higher, and yeah... you'll need that paper that people like to substitute for experience and common sense.

Exactly - managerial jobs are something most people can do without a college career. That doesn't make it a good career.

Because to qualify as a "good career" a position must require a college degree... right...

No - something that qualifies as a "good career" means the career, along with pay and benefits, will easily be able to sustain an adequate, modest lifestyle for you (and your loved ones), preferably being something you enjoy doing.

Of course, this is my definition. You may think otherwise.

Reasons to never take Kinder seriously

Exhibit A:

Yep, just 20 years ago people were running around in nothing but a loin cloth and throwing rocks at animals to see what would be a better tool for hunting. Seriously, would it be any harm for you to think for once? If anybody would fit perfectly with cavemen it would be you

You sound pathetically upset

For the fat cats on top, sure.
For the general public? It means getting a decent job is that much harder.

It also means goods can be bought cheaper. Outsourcing isn't the problem, a poor welfare and educational system is.

We should want these jobs to be outsourced, because it's the kind of work that doesn't need developed infrastructure to support--it gives income to people in the third world, and increases consumer surplus for people here. It isn't just a game of wage-rates for the "fat cats", you have to consider crime and other socioeconomic factors around your business. When they outsource, it really is because American labour is too expensive.

In saying that, the solution is again to restore trust in the mandatory educational system and maintain the equilibrium between the value of qualifications. Not just shunting more people into higher education and causing their new-found qualification to decrease in value.