Skip to comments.Colleges are full of it: Behind the three-decade scheme to raise tuition...
Posted on 06/09/2014 6:33:02 AM PDT by Loud Mime
Tuition is up 1,200 percent in 30 years. Here's why you're unemployed, crushed by debt -- and no one is helping
The price of a year at college has increased by more than 1,200 percent over the last 30 years, far outpacing any other price the government tracks: food, housing, cars, gasoline, TVs, you name it. Tuition has increased at a rate double that of medical care, usually considered the most expensive of human necessities. It has outstripped any reasonable expectation people might have had for investments over the period. And, as we all know, it has crushed a generation of college grads with debt. Today, thanks to those enormous tuition prices, young Americans routinely start adult life with a burden unknown to any previous cohort and whose ruinous effects we can only guess at.
(Excerpt) Read more at salon.com ...
Yep. Not a peep about this, because they know people will break their backs and their own finances to send their kids to college, no matter how much they raise expenses.
Of course tuition has gone up. The massive decline in state support has driven this madness as state funds continue to be rerouted to welfare programs. But hey, let’s kick education to the curb and continue the transformation to a welfare state run by organized criminals of the DC empire.
There’s a simple method to the scheme. Every single university in the nation....hired up a massive support apparatus after WW II...people who aren’t professors and don’t really provide educational support....other than paperwork or pretending to do paperwork. Since no state legislature is willing to take them on...it’s a mammoth who can only grow larger. You’d think that state legislatures would get smart and create a new university operation...with a limit of one support person to each professor, and suddenly flip the tuition episode upside down with $300 classes in existence once again.
I graduated from college in 1979, had a family, had a job, went to night school, paid for my courses as I went along, and didn’t owe a penny to anyone when I walked to my car after my last class. That was a 4-year degree at night. Didn’t owe a penny.
Then all of a sudden up comes government loans and all kinds of crap started: increased tuitions, 4-year degrees became 5 year degrees, etc.
Long past time for the government to stop subsidizing 4-year degrees in trans-gendered Aleutian folk music.
A disaster in the making. Good article.
Hey, I have a degree in Trans-Gendered Aleutian Folk Music, and I’m doing quite well, thank you very much.
Just read through the article... it’s all Reagan’s fault.
Salon is just plowing the ground for Obama’s executive order bailout of student loans. No, he has no power to spend this money, but will the GOP stop him in an election year? We all know the answer to that. And the ignorant student voters will turn out in droves to vote Democrat.
I graduated from a state college in Washington in 1975. Tuition my first year was under $450 for the year. By the time I graduated it was up to about $600 for the year. Room and board was under $1,000; and the food was excellent.
There are also two other problems:
1. Young people have been convinced that ANY/EVERYONE can succeed in college.
2. Our young people were taught to have IMMENSE self esteem at the expense of learning to read and write. With that they will CRASH AND BURN in college--and will feel good about it.
Ah, the 60's return.
If easy student loans had not been available, the universities would not have been able to raise tuition and have students.
alleged high health costs gave us the ACA . . .
what can high education cost give us ?
Another trend is to push many high school courses to the college level. The increased costs of the same course was justified by easing the requirements for a H.S. diploma.
Somehow, that makes sense to a liberal.
I think that you have something there.
Calling university tuition what it currently, unequivocally is... overpriced... is certainly not "kicking education to the curb." I'm all for education, but I'm not going to bankrupt my family to provide it. That would be stupid, with or without a degree.
Look no further than supply and demand. The economy measures “demand” in dollars. The more dollars you throw at something, the greater the demand. More money for education hasn’t meant more opportunity for education... it’s meant greater cost of education. And it’s an inelastic good... so we’ll pay it.
Step 1 of nationalizing college was student loans.
Step 2 of nationalizing college was eliminating private student loans.
Step 3 will be forgiveness of student debt via taxes.
Step 4 will be nationalizing all tuition through taxes.
Step 5 will be government colleges.
Step 6 will be the demise of the USA as a significant player on the world stage.
I’ve often wondered why America is so insignificant in end-times prophecy. It may just be that we had a moment in time on the world stage.
No question that many students do wash out. I simply offered up the biggest reason that tuition has risen so dramatically. In some cases, state support has gone from more than 80% at public institutions to less than 20%, and every year the support continues to erode. It is just one more of the rat traps to undermine education while enhancing welfare dependents.
I am not arguing your point. I simply stated the facts on state funding for higher education. I simply offered up the biggest reason that tuition has risen so dramatically. In some cases, state support has gone from more than 80% at public institutions to less than 20%, and every year the support continues to erode. Welfare, not education, is the progressive king.
The article barely touches on the government-sponsored easy credit that allows the prices to go up.
And the article neglects to mention that colleges are filled with an enormous number of favored students (mostly various minorities, Democrat grievance groups) who do not pay full freight. The current system is just another avenue of attack in the redistributionist war on White Republican clingers. At least, that is how I think the Obama crowd looks at it. I mean, their voters are not the ones whose children are graduating from college with enormous debt.
Not much worse by the time I got my MBA from Minnestoa State University in 1988: $108 per credit hour or less than $6500. for all the class credits(60) needed to complete the degree. Add $1000 or so for the cost of texts, materials and commuting expenses.
Especially when you consider the quality and usefulness of the curricula has declined significantly.
The two areas of the economy that have inflated by far the fastest are health care and education, both of which have had trillions of government money pumped into them. Hardly a coincidence.
I don’t think I agree with the author:
“Let me repeat, as a fact of some significance, that the great tuition price spiral began in 1981. That was the same year in which Ronald Reagan brought his jolly band of deregulators to Washington, in which Congress enacted the landmark Kemp-Roth tax cut, and in which the air-traffic controllers union went down to humiliating defeat...
...But in retrospect I think the answer is obvious. It happened then because these things are all related: deregulation, tax cuts, de-unionization and outrageous tuition inflation are all part of the same historical turn.”
I’m not buying the “It is Ronald Reagan’s fault” line...
Club Ed is now a resort business.
The problem is state appropriations for higher education have dropped dramatically, forcing more costs onto students in the form of higher tuition.
State of Michigan Higher Education Appropriations vs. tuition:
Causes not blamed in this article:
* Cost shifting, charging middle class students more to subsidize “diversity” candidates
* The increasing in utterly useless departments like women’s studies and the bureaucracy to support it
They did touch on administration and government regulation, but not the massive bloat where each drives the growth of the other.
You're talking nonsense.
Thomas Frank presents a casebook example of muddled liberal thinking.The government comes in with classic third-party payer-victims (aka taxpayers) through a guaranteed and subsidized student loan scheme, and Frank doesn’t come close to identifying its role in the spiraling prices. Instead he bizarrely and without evidence tries to pin it on “tax cuts”.
And the solution is rather easy and simple, and has already been adopted by many Chinese universities.
Get rid of nonsense courses and nonsense majors. In the US, this is the job of state legislatures, and only a few of them have made any tentative steps to do so.
“The University of South Carolina Upstate eliminated the center that sponsored a gay culture symposium this spring as part of $450,000 in cost cuts for next year. School leaders said that sponsorship did not lead to the 15-year-old centers demise.
“Meanwhile, state senators voted Tuesday to require Upstate and the College of Charleston to spend nearly $70,000 to teach the Constitution and other U.S. founding documents. That is the same cost as the colleges paid for gay-themed books that they assigned to freshmen last fall.”
In more general terms, all it takes is a single state legislator to start with the axiom that, “The purpose of the state subsidizing higher education is so that students can get better jobs as graduates than if they were high school graduates, thus benefiting the state.”
Then he holds of a list of majors offered by the state universities, compared to how many graduates of those degrees were placed in degree specific employment within six months after graduation.
At the top of the list are Nurses, Criminal Justice, Education, etc. And at the bottom are race and gender studies, sports, basket weaving, Star Trekking, etc.
Then he asks the simple question: Why is the state subsidizing the turkeys? Why are taxpayers paying for degrees with no effective return? Why can students impoverish themselves to support these scams?
Why don’t we stop?
And the facades of the ivory towers fall off. In the first year alone it could save a single state a billion dollars or more.
Exactly. One wonders why this so-called "expert" does not pick up on that key point.
Remember when the federal government decided to weigh in on the switch to digital broadcast TV? It sent everyone a $50 certificate for a converter box. Magically, these boxes went for sale at *surprise!* $50. The box was a very simple circuit with no moving parts other than a switch or two. At the same time, Best Buy was also selling cheap DVD players (moving parts, a laser, many buttons) for $25. This was a great lesson on how government subsidies grossly distort prices.
Make college ‘required’ for everything, make loans real easy to get, indoctrinate the young skulls full of mush, take government control of the loans, make a repayment deal for votes...
Some of the people here simply don’t like the numbers. The welfare state is our new slave-master. Thank you for posting the graphic.
See graphic above.
Also hypnotize employers, who still seem to believe that colleges turn out perfectly adapted employees for their businesses with zero training cost to the employer.
Huh? Seriously? We should be subsidizing college even more?
If not for easy to get loans, the demand would much less at current prices.
The inelasticity is not a straight line.
There is also an indifference curve to consider, as well as opportunity costs.
Maybe I am dumb, but how would tax cuts negatively impact private colleges? Their prices have skyrocketed too, maybe more than public colleges.
It cost me a total of $2400 in tuition money to get from Freshman to MSChE. in the early sixties.
Of course, for $2400 you could also buy a brand new Ford Mustang in those days.
Geez, the gov’ wants to price-control every gawbdamned thing, minimum wage, oil, how much CEO’s make, how much sports figures make, and on and on, and yet they can’t put a big damper on Universities?
“Of course, for $2400 you could also buy a brand new Ford Mustang in those days.”
I have no idea what a new Mustang costs. $30,000??? That’s less than a year and a half of state university. Look no further than the housing crash (brought on by easy loans, the idea that everyone should own a home, etc.) to see where this ends up.
My lib sister was talking about some friend who got rich in computers then went broke trying to sell high-end cars. “But, now that they are broke the government will pay for there daughter’s college!” (SERIOUSLY!!!!????)
I simply offered the explanation of facts. You can interpret however you wish. Perhaps you think money spent on welfare is the answer. You might consider that public education has been around for more than 2 centuries and has played a role in making us a world power; most importantly, the sciences, math, and engineering programs.
I'm amazed that a rational person operates on the premise that the two (govt. college subsidies and welfare) are NOT mutually exclusive. You can reduce both. Accusing me of "thinking money spend on welfare" is a solution is both disingenuous and absurd.
You are the one that thinks that collegiate welfare (The massive decline in state support has driven this madness as state funds continue to be rerouted to welfare programs) is somehow the answer.
Please explain why you thing public money is needed for Americans to be educated.