Many Democratic candidates are pushing for free college. I’m not certain, but I get the impression that these Democrats are in favor of this as a remedy for the stagnant wages of the working class, a stagnation that has been with us for over four decades while many other sectors of the economy have risen significantly (CEO pay, the stock markets, the wealth of the .01%).
I do not agree that this is a proper remedy as it does not address the root causes as I see them, however, that is the subject of another conversation.
For those who do agree that this is a proper remedy to raise the stagnant wages of the working class, would it be prudent to limit the scope of these free college educations or should the subject matter be open to the whims and interests of the student, regardless of the probable outcome with the sort of diploma and degree that the student will be handed on gradation day in two or four years of free college?
In other words, should study in Egyptology Nannying, Puppet Arts, and comparative literature, be as free and funded by tax dollars as a degree in teaching, computer science, engineering, or nursing?
I say yes. What say you?
I’ve never quite figured out how this would work federally since there is (unfortunately IMO) no national public university, though GW tried to bequeath money to Congress for that purpose. I don’t think the state should pick and choose among majors and programs if we were to go this route. I also don’t think it will directly close the wage gap, but it will give more opportunity to more people to pursue higher paying jobs.
Free college has never had any connection at all to solving stagnant wages. There is no relationship between the bicycle market and the population of fish on Georges Bank.
Free college (or vocational training) is instead an effort to remove financial barriers that block otherwise able and willing men and women from fulfilling what has become a requirement for work.
I’m inclined to somehow use market mechanisms to align the supply of graduates with a particular degree and market demand for people with that degree. I’m personally familiar with number of attorneys whose undergraduate degree is in fine arts — especially theater and music. Something similar is true for several of the ordained clergy that I’ve had the pleasure to know.
I have no clue about what those market mechanisms might be, though. Perhaps they involve limiting incoming class sizes. Perhaps some sort of voucher system might be created.
I strongly suspect that a sustainable outcome pretty much MUST include significant public funding of university research, and perhaps more than that. The entire domain of funding and costs for higher education is dizzyingly complex and well above my own comprehension.
I agree with you that study in any field should have the same cost to students as any other. I think some fields might have less tax funding than others, much the same as overall funding for various public school subject expertise varies from subject to subject and grade to grade.
Is there anyone running on the “Free College” platform that is willing to add “Free Trade School”? That seems to be a major oversight.