
How Much the Government Would Have to Spend to Make Public College Tuition-Free - danso
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/01/heres-exactly-how-much-the-government-would-have-to-spend-to-make-public-college-tuition-free/282803/
======
DanielBMarkham
I gotta flag this, and it's not because I disagree with it.

Reading the title, the answer is obviously "zero". Government could by fiat
decide that college education is anything it decides it to be. No money
required at all.

But then the author comes up with this 62 billion number, which isn't the cost
to make college tuition-free, it's the current private cost of tuition, which
is a completely different animal. Hell, it might require an infinite amount of
money to pay the tuition on everyone in the country for the next four years --
demand simply outstrips supply. So the article doesn't answer the question.

Finally, the author seems to think this is all just basic math, which I find
odd after having screwed the pooch so badly thus far.

It's just a mess of a piece: linkbait headline, confusion of issues, poorly
supported thesis, and rambling ending. I don't see it contributing to an
interesting discussion on HN, and I wouldn't want to see HN full of articles
like this.

~~~
refurb
How could the gov't make it cost nothing by fiat? Professors will house
themselves and eat how exactly?

~~~
jerf
With money the government prints for that purpose. Yes, I know. Some will
claim that's a hidden tax, but then, some people will run around yelling
"Keynes!" and claiming we come out ahead anyhow, so, _shrug_. Politicians will
certainly claim this is a "free" education, so I'll just settle on that
definition of "free" as good enough for this hypothetical thing that will
never happen anyhow.

------
daphneokeefe
When I attended the University of California at Berkeley in the fun 1960's,
there was no tuition for in-state students. Zero. There were 27,000 students
at that time just at that one campus.

It would be hard to quantify the return on investment to the taxpayers, but
free quality higher education must have contributed to the thriving California
economy and culture.

Of course, our costly rival Stanford has also contributed much, to Silicon
Valley in particular. But we have twice as many Nobel laureates :)

------
iak8god
In terms of my favorite unit for this kind of discussion, that's a mere .01 -
.03 Iraq Wars[1]

[1] [http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/14/us-iraq-war-
annive...](http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/14/us-iraq-war-anniversary-
idUSBRE92D0PG20130314)

~~~
J_Darnley
The BBC used a good unit during the 2012 US presidential election: F35 fighter
jets. [1]

[1] [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-
canada-20105913](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20105913)

[EDIT] 1 F35 being $212M means this proposal would be 295 F35s

------
dkhenry
Baloney - Lets do a quick BS Detection.

""" In fiscal year 2012, public 4- year institutions and administrative
offices received 21 percent of their revenues from tuition and fees """

So What your saying is the government could foot the bill for ~20% of college
education by doubling its education spending. Also this is assuming that you
don't change the value equation of going to school by making it free. How much
more demand would you have for those public schools if you made them free ? So
lets play a quick mental game here. You make "public" schools free. That means
the demand to get into those schools increases. That also means that demand at
those private schools will decrease. Kids who would look at both a public and
private instuition and might choose to spend marginally more on the private
school will choose a public school that has an almost as good program if there
is no cost associated with it. Kids who today are getting into public schools
paying less and still getting a good education will be forced out by better
preforming peers and will either pay _more_ to go to a private school or go
without college at all. Good job you just made it so lower income students
can't go to school at all. Congratulations.

Note: If your response to this is well the states would build more capacity
remember that ~80% of public university funding already comes from the states
so every extra student they make space for is money out of their coffers.

~~~
mempko
I think you underestimate how much rich people loathe being in the same place
as the poor. You also have a bias that higher performers go to private
schools....

------
gum_ina_package
The issue then would obviously become sustainability. You'd have to institute
strict entrance exams similar to what Germany and many other European
countries do.

~~~
Zigurd
That would probably be a good thing, along with doing away with legacy
admissions.

~~~
gum_ina_package
I agree, but only if there were good/reputable/affordable technical
institutions for anyone who couldn't get into a top tier college.

------
patrickg_zill
Note that the Federal Reserve is buying $85 Billion each MONTH as a way to
prop up the banks/financial system.

~~~
eli_gottlieb
Which is bloody-stupid, since they could just be sending that money to
citizens in a helicopter drop to help them pay for loans, rent, and pizza --
all of which stimulate the economy more directly than bank bailouts have
proven to.

------
Jormundir
I'm still undecided on whether higher education should be free or not. There
is an issue that needs to be dealt with (or solved) before we should
considered making tuition free, though.

I see the sky high college tuitions as a side effect. The real problem we need
to tackle first is how these institutions are structured and what they're
spending their money on.

From what I learned of the university I attended, huge (HUGE) amounts of the
budget go towards administration, and relatively smaller slices go to teachers
and facilities.

Before we start subsidizing, or trimming degree programs and services, lets
make sure we're re-aligning our higher education institutions around the
original mission: education! Once we've gotten our schools back to providing
the best possible education, and fostering good teaching faculty, then we can
start talking about subsidizing the cost. Then we will know as a society, that
we are truly paying to make our citizens more powerful in their pursuit of
happiness.

As the state of our education system stands right now, I would not want to
subsidize it.

~~~
baddox
I think you've got things backwards. College tuition has risen so rapidly
_because_ of the vast amount of subsidization from the federal government.

~~~
Jormundir
I think you've missed my point. -- I'm saying before even beginning a
conversation about subsidies (for or against, doesn't matter), we need to
resolve the systemic structural problems of universities. Perhaps also move
forward the debate of what constitutes a good education, so we have clearer
targets to work towards.

~~~
baddox
I disagree with your point. If the subsidies go away, those structural
problems quickly go away.

~~~
Jormundir
hah, your point is completely oversimplified.

------
digitalengineer
I agree the way things are set up now the for-profit sector cashes in big
time. (Quite a succesful lobby, I suppose). But would the costs not rise if
attending college became free? Wouldn't everyone want to get in?

~~~
rhizome
_Wouldn 't everyone want to get in?_

I'm having trouble thinking of a downside to this.

~~~
digitalengineer
Good remark. I was thinking the costs would rise quickly.

~~~
rhizome
Isn't there existing data based on highly-subsidized university attendance
programs in e.g. the EU?

------
winstonx
I am disappointed by the shallow analysis of the article. It doesn't consider
the monopsonistic effects that would result from 100% government-paid
education.

~~~
danso
Isn't public K-12 school paid by the government (i.e. taxes)? How would the
effects be different, including the role of private schools, compared to the
collegiate level?

~~~
stefan_kendall
The pedigree required to work at Starbucks goes up, indeed. Half of my friends
with degrees do not have jobs in their respective fields.

Easy federal loans got them into an upside down situation from which they may
never recover.

I got paid to go to a public university through scholarship, with money on top
of free housing and tuition. I could have paid for college, or probably
convinced someone to give me a loan given my career track.

There's way too many people who are destroying value by attending college
right now, and the bubble will pop. 12 years to get an art history PHD and
manage a gas station is not an efficient use of time or work energy.

~~~
aestra
HALF?

I'd say I only know of 1 person I knew in high school who went to college and
now works in the field they got their degree in. 1. (Except me!)

The rest of my friends do random stuff you don't need a degree for and earn
very little money.

------
calcsam
...plus cost of living for students...

------
codex
Free post-secondary education is a reasonable idea for the advanced economies
of today. However, if the public pays for post-secondary education, then the
allocation of majors should be in the public interest. Graduating a surplus of
English majors does nobody any good.

~~~
Zigurd
In a post-labor economy, poets might be the only people left with a job.

------
sliverstorm
This confuses costs. Tuition costs are only part of the cost of attending
college...

------
marincounty
I went to college years ago, and felt 80-90% of my classes were better than
working, but not worth paying for--I only took them because the college
required them for the degree.

If I had a kid I would make sure they were introduced to programming(including
web developement) and the financial markets at an early age; We would also go
to church. Yea--I think church matters. The world has enough Trumps and
Zuckerburg's(yes--I think he stole the idea, but college taught me we all
steal it's called Behaviorism, but I feel Mark went farther than
subconsciously thinking he came up with a good idea. ). I think I flunked
grammer though?

One more thing about school. I went to Chiropractic School and lasted a little
over a year. With in a few months I realized I made a huge mistake(their are
no Subluxations, well maybe a handful of real subluxations caused by
accidents). I had one teacher tell the class, "there are over 17 different
upper cervical techniques,--And they All work equally well". I was floored. It
works on a placebo level. I went home had a break down, and dropped out. Paid
back the 12 grand to the government. I has a break down for other reasons than
the lie of Chiropractic School, but What always amassed me was the amout of
denial among the students.

I couldn't figure out if they didn't know about the Placbo Effect, didn't want
to admit they were duped, didn't care as long as it was legal, or they just
wanted to be called Doctors?

I had one classmate die of a stroke while biking on a Sunday. He was a nice
Midwestern kid. He was going to Chiro school along with his wife, but she was
beyond cool. The ironic and sad part of his early death is I think he was
seeing a Chiropractor weekly, and getting "adjusted" by a technique called a
Rotary(snap your neck ligaments--Gases escape?), but patient believes bones
are moving. This is what Sharon Stone was having done to her when she had an
extremely rare bilateral stroke. I heared the only reason she is alive is
because by luck, a visiting vascular surgon happen be in San Franciso on
attending a conference? Some how the hospital got him to repair the vessels.

I was looking for some "truths" while I went to college, and all I took away
from the experience was summed up too well in the movie Superstar, by Molly
Shannon, "a bunch of cliff notes, and a lot of drinking". That was an extreme
statement, and I think finishing a bachler's degree in anything is important,
especially for low income families. Rich kids can fall back on their parents,
or use their parents connections--usually.

I'll stop. I'm still confused, and just venting, and praying I have a few more
healthy years.

~~~
tdfx
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSUXXzN26zg](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSUXXzN26zg)

