Posted on 05/24/2016 8:17:22 AM PDT by Academiadotorg
Who knew that the Trump campaign would be getting involved in higher education policy this year? Sam Clovis, a tenured economics professor and Trump campaign co-chair, recently noted that their objectives include getting the government out of student lending, requiring colleges to share in student loan risk, and discouraging borrowing by liberal arts majors.
Clovis told Inside Ed that the mere mention of these policy proposals has sent some Washington graybeards into a swivet, and "he expects some higher education leaders to react the same way when Trump outlines these ideas during the fall campaign."
Some of the ideas under consideration could be "revolutionary," Clovis said. Among the proposals currently being prepared are the following:
• A complete shift of the current federal student loan system to a market-based and market-driven system that would be run by private banks
• Remediation programs for those unprepared for college-level work would be renamed "student success programs"
• Colleges would subject applicants to greater scrutiny and only admit those who show promise of graduating and finding jobs within a reasonable time frame
• There would be less emphasis on parent contributions and the Free Application for Federal Student Aid and more of "a partnership" between the student, the bank and the college
Saying that all colleges should have skin in the game and share the risk associated with student loans, Clovis noted that many in Congress already voiced support for that idea, adding that "the risk needs to be substantial enough to change the way colleges decide whether to admit students, and which programs they offer."
You obviously didn’t get my sarcasm in the question “WHY?”.
I have had the misfortune to know one philosophy prof and two sociology profs.
They were; all three of them, the most outstanding examples of LIBERAL, DEMOCRAT, MORONIC, IDIOTS I have ever met in my entire life.
Just as a matter of interest the Philosophy Prof is my son in-law.
My daughter had moved out (finally), several years before meeting and and getting married to the MEATHEAD.
Needless to say there has not been a lot of communication between us for about the last ten years.
Well, I guess if you say so.
Don't forget, the "market" here is the consumers of education.
Do you really want government telling us what we can learn?
Why should taxpayers pay to have retards "trained" to be nothing beyond professional deadbeat commie Democrats, and then be expected to support said deadbeats, either with magically created government jobs for their worthless degrees, or with permanent welfare?
I understand your point but the post I was originally responding to (10) advocated restricting the degrees a college could offer even after the government got out of the loan gaurantee business.
If the government is involved I have a problem with them deciding which are the "approved" majors. What a political football.
Who, exactly, determines what's approved and what would keep the list from changing with each administration?
As a fan of free markets I don't like governent picking winners and losers, which is exactly what you're advocating. Further, I wager there are many graduates with the degrees you mentioned who are high-performing, tax-paying, contributing members of society. Who are you (or me or the government) to say their chosen career path was wrong?
gaurantee=guarantee
How many non-government job openings can you find for any of the worthless degrees I listed?
None of those degrees are required to serve coffee, French fries, or beer, or to drive taxis, or any other jobs where these useless degree holders end up.
Sorry, but I prefer to have the individual make the decision about what kind of education they want, not the government.
You might have a point if you could show that certain majors defaulted on their loans at a higher rate, and that was the critereon the government used to decide to guarantee the loan or not, but I sense you're just basing it on your idea of what's a worthy field of study.
As long as the government is guaranteeing loans they should be neutral as to major. Again, who decides what majors are "government approved"?
Again, taxpayers should be able to decide how their money is spent or wasted. Little Snowflake does not have the right to demand someone else pay for his/her four-year party while pursuing transgendered art history or psychedelic platitudes.
Individuals already can make the decision about what kind of education they want. They just have no right to demand degrees from taxpayer-funded schools for their idiocy. They have no right to demand taxpayers create a job for their brain-damaged pursuits. They have no right to claim permanent disability payments from taxpayers for their own self-inflicted retardation.
I'd guess you are one of these precious snowflakes.
I knew you wouldn't answer my question. Who decides what fields of study are "government approved"?
Never mind.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.