
College Unaffordable Even in Higher Income Brackets - jseliger
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/23/education/college-unaffordable-even-in-higher-income-brackets.html?mabReward=CTM&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&region=CColumn&module=Recommendation&src=rechp&WT.nav=RecEngine
======
sotojuan
In my experience the middle and higher income brackets (middle and upper
middle suburban class) is the bracket that is hurt the most by college costs.
Too rich for substantial need-based financial aid, too poor to pay without big
loans. The only answer is merit scholarships, but those can't go for everyone,
so you end up with moms taking their kids to 1000 summer activities so they're
competitive :-)

Here's a possible solution also from personal experience: I went to high
school in Texas and about 70% of the top students went to University of Texas
at Austin because a) very good school (top 10 in CS) b) at least at the time,
you got in automatically by being in the top 8% of your class, which isn't
that hard in huge Texas schools c) not cheap but not $40k a year.

Most parents realized this was a likely outcome for the kids early on (or
pretty much expected them to go there) and started to save up money since
their child was born. The result was the most unstressful college application
process I've seen!

Of course, not everyone lives in a state where the flagship public college is
a top 10 in CS and many other majors, nor can everyone save up 18 years before
the kid goes to college, but some can make it happen.

~~~
jamesroseman
That experience sounds remarkably familiar. I know here in Mass at least UMass
Amherst has a remarkably good computer science program for how cheap it can be
(if you qualify for the right tuition credit programs by scoring well on
standardized tests in high school). Though it's a poor indicator of an
undergrad program, their CS grad program was ranked #25 in the country.

While I understand your point, I take some issue with:

> the middle and higher income brackets (middle and upper middle suburban
> class) is the bracket that is hurt the most by college costs

Your points are all well made, but I'd argue that being lower class you're
entirely dependent on financial aid and tuition subsidies if you get them at
all. In the middle and upper middle class your fear (from anecdotal first hand
experience) isn't _if_ you'll go to college (which is a huge indicator today
of whether or not you'll be better than your parents -- education), but where
you'll go to college. I know a lot of peers who went to state or safety
schools because of cost. I don't know a lot of peers whose family is in that
same tax bracket that just didn't go to college. I do know many friends who
couldn't feasibly go to college at all, and it's stripped their career growth
and job opportunities. Not trying to argue, just facilitate discussion by
voicing a dissenting opinion.

~~~
sotojuan
That's definitely a good point. If you're in a low bracket and aren't able to
get a full ride or good scholarship (doesn't mean you're bad or didn't work
hard enough, but only a small % of people can get those), you're definitely
going to be wondering if you can go to college at all. And if you barely
afford to, there's all kinds of external costs associated with college (books,
for example). Sometimes scholarships only cover tuition.

At least back home in Texas though, you can go to cheap community college and
transfer to UT Austin or another UT campus. Two years is definitely better
than four.

~~~
jamesroseman
I have a lot of friends I graduated public HS here in Mass who went to Salem
State and transferred to UMass Amherst. Best part was (to my understanding)
they got full rides for their last 2 years of college because they met an
arbitrary GPA requirement (might have been straight-As).

------
jamesroseman
I think a reality that will hopefully soon catch up with societal stigma in
the United States is that college isn't right for everyone. I understand this
as a separate point from college being unattainably expensive, but it is an
important point.

I have friends who would be mechanics, Peace Corps volunteers, electricians,
or plumbers if they hadn't instead gone to a private 4-year institution,
pressured to attend the best schools possible because they did well in high
school. The permanent solution for this is either adjusted student loans or
free community colleges, or some combination of the two. People on the
opposite side of this issue I've talked to have often expressed concern that
the bachelor's degree will basically become devalued if everyone has access.
My response is always "it already IS devalued, but hardly anyone has access".
It's near impossible to get a job in a desirable field without a college
degree and relevant experience, but it's also prohibitively expensive to get a
degree. Where will the 22 year olds with $100,000 worth of debt working at
McDonald's going to be in 30-50 years? I have friends who in their early 20s
are recognizing it's worth accruing more debt at even higher education in
hopes of getting a job that will make the investment worth it.

> Unless we make college affordable for people of all financial means,
> opportunity through higher education will be a false promise.

But this is half of it, right? Plenty of people who walk out of colleges with
no debt still can't find a job because the market is changing so much. As
today's jobs move towards automation, I think most here can agree that current
careers will change forever (frequently on HN the conversation steers towards
more technological jobs). What I don't frequently see posted here is that
automation will free up creative jobs where going to college is a necessary
path. Writers exposed to other young writers can become inspired for life,
especially given the opportunities. This turned into sort of a soapbox and is
mostly anecdotal, but I think most would agree a national conversation needs
to be had about this.

~~~
throwawaysocks
_> I think a reality that will hopefully soon catch up with societal stigma in
the United States is that college isn't right for everyone_

The idea that this stigma exists is mostly a conservative pundit talking point
used to justify cutting education budgets. If you look at labor market data,
it's unsubstantiated. And if you visit middle America, you'll find plenty of
people with disdain for college degrees.

The United States doesn't have an over-abundance of people with tertiary
degrees.

The USA in the bottom half of the developed-world pack for 25-34 year olds,
less than half of whom obtained ANY form of post-highschool education --
including community college.

More importantly, many high-growth fields are also high-tech and require
tertiary education or exceptional self-teaching.

The problem isn't an over-supply of college educated workers. Rather, the
problem is an unwillingness to subsidize tertiary education together with the
misconception that college without accompanying training in employable skills
is a worthwhile investment.

~~~
niftich
What do tertiary degrees get you? If you're an employer, why would you want to
employ these people?

~~~
antisthenes
Most notably computational finance and research in the natural sciences
(material, biochem, physics) all require tertiary degrees since those courses
are simply not available at the undergraduate level.

The benefits of hiring these people by the financial and the pharma sector
should be obvious.

~~~
niftich
Sure, but these fields are known for being selective, and objectively
requiring a very high level of domain-specific knowledge. Presumably, they
will remain this way in the future, despite the cost of education rising.

Notably, if the field doesn't objectively require a very high level of domain-
specific knowledge, but rather a general baseline command of a broad topic,
eg. software development?

~~~
throwawaysocks
_> Sure, but these fields are known for being selective_

Lots of fields that aren't so selective also require a tertiary (= post-
highscool) education of some form. Most notably, a huge swath of jobs in
health care that involve patient contact.

 _> Notably, if the field doesn't objectively require a very high level of
domain-specific knowledge, but rather a general baseline command of a broad
topic, eg. software development?_

It's of course possible to become a competent software developer without a
tertiary education. I know, I did it (programming job offers right out of high
school).

But it's not _common_ , and the secondary education system in the USA isn't
set up to enable that sort of thing at scale. IMO it should, but it doesn't,
and subidizing tertiary education is far more likely to succeed, and at lower
cost, than such a drastic reform to such a huge sprawling institution.

------
rm_-rf_slash
My partner and I - both well-educated and well-employed professionals -
sketched out our long-term financial plan recently. The only way we envisioned
owning property would be to build our own a considerable distance away from
our small city's center. That alone proved to be a significant part of our
budget, which is already under considerable pressure from student loans and
car payments.

We estimated the expenses for future children and the picture was not pretty.
Then we factored in higher education, assuming costs rise at the same rate as
the last 30 years - roughly our lifetimes - and concluded that by the time our
future kids are at college age, they will likely be paying for most of it
themselves, with debt they may hold their entire lives.

So we aren't having any.

EDIT: Just to be clear, I am not simply saying that I am forgoing children
because their college costs would be too high, I'm saying EVERYTHING is too
expensive, and college in 20-30 years, assuming current rates, will be
forbiddingly so.

~~~
atarian
Why not send your future kids to community college and then have them
transfer?

~~~
quaffapint
That's the plan for our son who will be going in a couple years. He doesn't
know what he wants to do, so why pay much more (not that its super cheap, but
cheaper than many other options). I myself transferred schools multiple times
- the greatest thing is the credits transfer, but the gpa does not, so if you
screw up a few classes in the beginning, you can reset that.

In the end people really only look what you list on your resume - not the
first x years, but where you graduated from and how well you did at the end.

~~~
ruste
My transfer credit was included in my GPA. :( It isn't too bad, but still.

------
noonespecial
So long as the government guarantees students that they can get the loan, and
guarantees lenders that it will be paid back (mostly by making the debt
lifelong and not dischargeable through bankruptcy) the cost of education will
simply be set at whatever the maximum available loan is.

This will cause the value of the education to be transferred away from the
student and to the administrators of the institutions. The student will be
allowed to keep a small percentage of this value for his/her trouble, a
sharecropper of their own education.

------
nine_k
College may become unaffordable, but education should not.

With price pressure like this, I suspect online and other forms of post-high-
school education will become more and more valuable. Employers will start
looking at them with more attention, and definitely certificates of passing
serious exams will become (more) valuable.

Of course, these exams certificates are not going to be free, and even the
online courses are not going to be free. But they are going (and currently
are) _massively_ less expensive than a college, while possibly giving
comparable levels of knowledge. (Also, the "buy new books" racket will
hopefully be gone with online courses + relatively independent exams.)

~~~
niftich
College/University has not solely been about education in a long time. It's
about signalling [1][2], and therefore it's a competitive advantage. The
accessibility of signalling is inversely proportional to its value -- it's no
longer exclusive. This happens with certifications too.

[1]
[https://www.jstor.org/stable/1882010](https://www.jstor.org/stable/1882010)
[2]
[http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2014/04/bryan_caplan_on.htm...](http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2014/04/bryan_caplan_on.html)

~~~
nine_k
As signalling becomes too costly, it can become separated from skill
certification.

Much like a diploma from Yale now is not a signal of exceptionally good
knowledge but a signal of financial ability and having the right connections,
going to _any_ full-time university can become such a signal.

------
cheald
And yet, college enrollment continues to trend upward. The price continues to
climb, but it's clearly not _unaffordable_ yet.

[http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d15/tables/dt15_302.60.as...](http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d15/tables/dt15_302.60.asp?current=yes)

~~~
nine_k
It's financed by debt. That is, it's _probably_ already unaffordable because
the debts are going to be crippling, but it's not felt yet.

It's like you're already severely poisoned but are not yet feeling the
effects, and more people around see you and consider the poison for
themselves.

~~~
cheald
Sounds like the solution might be to ease back on guaranteed student loans and
tighten up available credit so it goes to qualified borrowers who are likely
to be able to pay back what they borrow, rather than mandating that everyone
who wants to goes to college without any consideration for ability to repay
what they've borrowed.

But then, that would result in decreasing enrollment rates and hysterics in
the headlines about how kids can't afford education, and we can't have that.
We've worked ourselves into a corner - by subsidizing education so heavily in
pursuit of increased attendance rates, we've driven prices sky-high, and now
can't cut those subsidies without hanging some people out to dry.

We'll know that college is truly unaffordable - or at least the college
premium reaches the point where it's not worth the cost - when enrollment
rates start trending downwards. Until then, it's a giant ball of subsidies and
relief programs and reforms and restructurings that work to maintain a system
that is empirically affordable, even if it's extremely painful.

~~~
chipotle_coyote
_by subsidizing education so heavily in pursuit of increased attendance rates,
we 've driven prices sky-high_

At least for me, the relationship you're implying between subsidies and
educational costs needs some explanation. If, say, three-quarters of a
college's students are having 25-50% of their fees subsidized, what about
those subsidies _forces_ the college to raise their fees disproportionately to
their costs?

~~~
cheald
Nothing forces them to; basic economics tells us that their prices will rise
to the point that consumers will bear, and that subsidy increases the price
that consumers will bear.

Recent research
([http://www.nber.org/chapters/c13711.pdf](http://www.nber.org/chapters/c13711.pdf))
bears out subsidy as a cost driver, as well.

------
davidwparker
I'm a little surprised that no one has suggested joining the military.

When I was in high school, my parents had no money for me for College. We were
middle class, and my grades weren't competitive enough for me to get a
scholarship.

So I did what I thought would work well (in 2002)- I joined the USAF as an
enlisted "Computer Programmer". Fortunately, _did_ have a good education, so
my ASVAB (military job test to determine what jobs you could be) score was
relatively high. Joining as a computer programmer opened up the world to me
like I couldn't imagine.

Ultimately, I ended up taking night and weekend classes while in the USAF and
finished my bachelor's degree shortly before getting out. Later I would go on
to get my Master's with my GI Bill because I didn't want it to go to waste.

I felt honored to serve my country and to contribute how I could and I
graduated both undergrad and grad school with zero dollars of debt.

I think more people should consider this option, at least if they have a
decent education and good military jobs open to them. Understandably, if
someone joins as say, infantry, in the Army, it may not be so easy to go to
school (though I have plenty of friends who did and took online classes!)

It's not for everyone, but it's definitely an option.

------
Steeeve
This just isn't true. Compared to most of the U.S. I make a lot of money
(Software Engineer in Silicon Valley). I have kids a few years from college,
so this topic weighs on me. I ran my financials through Stanford's cost
calculator (Stanford is among the most expensive schools), and my expected
contribution would be under $10K / year. Yes, it costs $65K+ / year for
tuition, housing, etc., but the reality is that those costs are not nearly as
terrifying when you factor in financial aid programs that are available.

I remember how terrified I was of my student loans in my day. I also remember
how awesome it felt when they got paid off. This has turned into a political
topic and whenever that happens logic and facts go out the window in favor of
emotion triggering pseudo-statistics.

~~~
devishard
1\. Stanford is an outlier in terms of financial aid--they provide far more
financial aid than most schools.

2\. Good luck getting into Stanford.

~~~
Steeeve
I just ran through the same calculator at UC Berkeley. The difference in
expectations is minimal.

I then ran through the CSU calculator. The cost is actually doubled for CSUs,
which have a lower total cost, but no grant/scholarship programs offered
directly through the university financial aid office. My own experience with
that environment tells me there are plenty of grant/scholarship options.

~~~
devishard
I'm not sure why you think looking at three California University calculators
for one year's tuition is any more a representative sample than your previous
anecdotes. You're disagreeing with national surveys of the cost that people
actually pay over four years. You're disagreeing based on a limited sample of
promotional calculators of one year cost from one area of the country.

~~~
Steeeve
Because out-of-state tuition costs are dramatically higher. I could look at
other Ivy's, but they would be very similar to Stanford. The CSU calculator is
for all CSUs (~20 schools). All UCs will have similar costs and financial aid
scenarios.

If I lived in Alabama, my income wouldn't be relevant. I have no idea what I
would make in that part of the country.

What I do know, and what is plainly obvious, is that this topic is fueled by
fear mongering.

Tuition costs have risen and will continue to rise. College is a tough
financial investment and has been for generations. As somebody who is going
through the process in the very near future, I have to look at the reality and
not the press snippets and public discourse that arises from them. This
particular study completely ignores the availability of scholarships and
grants in the private and public sectors. The UC and Stanford calculators I
pointed out took that into consideration. The CSU calculator did not.

I wouldn't exactly call them promotional calculators.

~~~
devishard
> Because out-of-state tuition costs are dramatically higher.

Yes, true... which doesn't expand your sample size in any way.

> I could look at other Ivy's, but they would be very similar to Stanford.

You could look at the list of Ivy's and find that Standford is not an Ivy.

You could also look at the list of Ivy's and discover that they are not
similar to other Ivy's.

You could also look into how these places calculate your income and discover
that your income is very different from the amount that you put into the
calculators.

You could also send a kid there and discover that there are lots of costs a
simplistic calculator doesn't include.

You could also send a kit there and discover that cost changes from year to
year, and usually goes up.

You could also read my previous post and acknowledge that your anecdotal
experience which of putting numbers into a calculator is completely irrelevant
to the many experiences of people in different parts of the country who
actually go to schools and pay for them.

> What I do know, and what is plainly obvious, is that this topic is fueled by
> fear mongering.

The fact that smart people disagree with you is strong evidence that your
assertion is not obvious.

~~~
Steeeve
I'm sure you consider yourself very smart. I see that you are vested in this
argument. I can only surmise that my position doesn't match your political
views. Get outside, go relax. This discussion isn't worth the strain it's
putting on you.

~~~
devishard
If you don't want to debate, you can just stop debating. You don't have to
condescend the person you're debating with. Is that really the person you want
to be?

------
Mz
I dropped out of college after two years, in part because I personally knew
two people with a Bachelor's degree in hand who delivered newspapers for a
living, both of whom had pretty pathetic lives. At age 18, my boyfriend
delivered newspapers. I was very familiar with the terrible hours and pay. I
felt extremely clear that I could deliver newspapers without a degree and my
life would be vastly better if I did so without first being saddled with a
mountain of debt.

We sell people on the idea that college is The Ticket to a serious career with
good pay. It isn't that cut and dried. We really need to stop promoting that
idea.

I later returned to school when I had a better idea of what I wanted to do
with my life. One of my positive experiences was with community college in
California. The in state rates are surprisingly low. I wrapped up my AA and
this inspired my husband to start going to college. As a military member, he
got 75% of his tuition covered. His out of pocket tuition expenses were
substantially less than the cost of textbooks.

The community college system in California is one of its little known
strengths. Many four year colleges have agreements in place with community
colleges that make it easy to do your first two years cheaply and then
transfer to a prestigious four year program. California Virtual Campus is also
an amazing resource.

------
massysett
"a college education is being priced out of the reach of middle-class and even
upper-middle-class families."

If this were true, we would see one of two things: (1) colleges would be empty
and closing their doors, or (2) we'd have an enormous debt bubble.

(1) is obviously false.

(2) is more interesting and, indeed, debt levels may be high. However, in a
development that most pieces like this ignore, the federal government now has
significant loan repayment forgiveness programs, along with income-sensitive
repayment plans.

So no, with huge programs that will wipe student debt clean, I laugh in the
face of a headline that asserts that college is "unaffordable even in higher
income brackets."

Look here:

[https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/repay-
loans/understand/plans/in...](https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/repay-
loans/understand/plans/income-driven)

"Most federal student loans are eligible for at least one income-driven
repayment plan. If your income is low enough, your payment could be as low as
$0 per month."

So $0 a month is unaffordable??

~~~
sedachv
The income-sensitive repayment plans come with a lot of caveats. My wife took
that route before we married and it was mostly just a huge debt trap with
interest piling up and she still struggled to make payments. I have not done
the math with median debt/income/compound interest over X years but it seems
to me that a lot of people who go that route will wind up with debt they will
never be able to repay in their lifetimes. After we married it turns out the
income part is based on household; my income is much larger than hers, and
while hers has gone up since she still has trouble paying the new monthly
rates based on our joint income from her salary alone.

~~~
massysett
The income is based on the tax return. It may be to your advantage to file
separate returns.

Absolutely, it may be debt you will never pay off. If after several years you
don't repay it, it is wiped clean. What a deal.

~~~
sedachv
> If after several years you don't repay it, it is wiped clean. What a deal.

I had to check this as I had not heard of that before. "Several years" is 25
years under income-based repayment (years before you switched to income-based
repayment do not count). The loans are not "wiped clean" \- whatever balance
is forgiven after 25 years is counted as taxable income, so actually you would
be in a worse off position after getting your loans forgiven. Source:
[http://www.finaid.org/loans/ibrfaq.phtml](http://www.finaid.org/loans/ibrfaq.phtml)

All this of course only applies to federal student loans. About half of my
wife's loan balances are from private lenders and from what I hear this ratio
is common.

~~~
massysett
How is paying a percentage of the loan balance as taxes worse than paying the
entire loan balance?

It would all be due at once (offhand I don't know what sorts of payment plans
IRS has) so it could be worse that way.

~~~
sedachv
> How is paying a percentage of the loan balance as taxes worse than paying
> the entire loan balance?

The IRS is much more aggressive about collections and will seize your property
and garnish your wages:

[https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-
employe...](https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-
employed/understanding-a-federal-tax-lien)

[https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-
employe...](https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-
employed/levy)

When that 25 year forgiveness kicks in the tax money will be due all at once.
Even with a payment plan the IRS collection schedule is 3-5 years. 30% of a
lot of fake income is still a ton of money. This "debt forgiveness" will force
a lot of people into bankruptcy, which btw does not discharge all tax
obligations ([http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/will-bankruptcy-
stop-...](http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/will-bankruptcy-stop-irs-
collecting-tax-debts.html))

------
hdx
I went to college and graduated with a Computer Engineering degree from SJSU
without any financial help from my parents, the government or anybody else. Oh
and I had to support my child from the second year on as well. It took me
about 30% longer to finish it, and I was sleep deprived most of those years
due to having to work AND go to school, but I graduated with $0 debt.

------
sadface
I'd be interested in seeing how a "single payer" approach to college financing
would work.

High level - The government pours many billions of dollars into colleges and
universities every year, but because the money is disseminated via millions of
individual loans to individual students, any buying power (and downward
pressure on prices) that the government could provide is effectively
eliminated. For a university this is a best case scenario: sell a "necessary"
product to millions of individual customers with infinite money.

If instead, the universities could only "sell" to the government, the
government would be able to actually demand meaningful concessions in price.

I'm thinking something like:

1\. Students -$-> Gov't -$-> Universities (many more sellers than buyers)

Instead of:

2\. Gov't -$-> Students -$-> Universities (many more buyers than sellers)

Easy to see how case 1 would keep prices lower in an ideal world...

------
getgoingnow
I dropped out of college (computer science) few months ago. Ahhh, the sense of
freedom and gaining my sanity back. I don't even know why I enrolled; plus I
hated teachers and most students. When I was there, I rarely attended lectures
and instead watched them online, read books and did practical things on my own
- so it didn't even make sense to be enrolled. At least I won't be a debt
slave.

------
Shivetya
College at its current cost is too expensive for America, period. It has gone
up faster than inflation. I still think any college accepting money backed by
the federal government should be required to offer courses for a set amount
per credit hour. People seem to have no issue with government dictating how
much medical procedures and supplies cost, why not college.

------
tw04
I'd say a bigger problem is parents encouraging their kids to go to college to
do what they enjoy instead of encouraging them to go to college for a
profession that will pay the bills. If you want to "do what you enjoy" for a
living, and it pays $25k/year in salary... maybe don't spend $100k on
college...?

------
bdcravens
Perhaps the key is something between a boot camp (I mean the coding kind, not
the military kind) and a 4-year school? A lot of time and money is wasted on
the culture of college (sports, activities, partying, Greek life, etc....) and
it seems there's a lot of room for disruption.

------
Glyptodon
I'd have guessed most families sending kids to college were making upwards of
$100K anyway. The headline felt a little misleading because I thought it was
already taken for granted that it was hard to afford for most sub-$90k
households, particular if they have multiple kids.

------
fiatmoney
It's almost like a government-encouraged oligopoly is maximizing the amount of
value they can seize from people regulatorily encouraged / forced to buy their
product.

------
beatpanda
Why is every other advanced economy in the world able to deal with this, but
America can't? People who respond in discussions like this that the real
problem _must_ be so many greedy kids wanting things like a good job,
financial stability, etc need to first confront the fact that this is a
uniquely American problem.

------
dingbat
interesting article but was it necessary for the authors photograph to be as
large as the entire text itself?

------
squozzer
Solutions --

1) Wait for the bubble to pop and see if prices reach a new equilibrium. 2)
Double-down on current solutions, i.e. more subsidies. 3) Impose a head tax on
everyone a la Obamacare.

~~~
bmmayer1
Don't more subsidies put upward pressure on prices?[1][2][3]

Also, how would a head tax improve the cost of education?

[1][http://college.usatoday.com/2015/08/20/report-federal-aid-
ri...](http://college.usatoday.com/2015/08/20/report-federal-aid-rising-
tuition/) [2][https://fee.org/articles/student-loan-subsidies-cause-
almost...](https://fee.org/articles/student-loan-subsidies-cause-almost-all-
of-the-increase-in-tuition/)
[3][http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2015/09/08/student_loans...](http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2015/09/08/student_loans_drive_up_college_costs_what_should_we_do_about_it.html)

~~~
squozzer
Yes they do. I didn't say the solutions would actually WORK. But this is
America, so we'll deal with this problem the way we've dealt with health care.

------
dougmany
Well with Over 675,049 California ballots remain uncounted. Bernie could still
win the state.

[http://vote.sos.ca.gov/unprocessed-ballots-
status/](http://vote.sos.ca.gov/unprocessed-ballots-status/)

~~~
civilian
You remind me of myself in 2008. #RonPaul2008

