Replies

That, and all these wasteful student loans which actually make the prices higher.

I didn't catch this the first time.

If it weren't for scholarships, grants, and student loans, I would never have been able to afford to go to college. I work and go to school full time, and I still need the student loans to help me with my living expenses. For those of us whom our parents didn't contribute in any way to our college education, student loans are a literal lifesaver.

It is a violation of my rights (including my First Amendment rights) for the government to seize my property through force (i.e. taxation) and use it to teach and promote ideas and philosophies with which I disagree.

I agree. I'd like to see absolutely no government involvement in education.

BS.

If it weren't for scholarships, grants, and student loans, I would never have been able to afford to go to college. I work and go to school full time, and I still need the student loans to help me with my living expenses. For those of us whom our parents didn't contribute in any way to our college education, student loans are a literal lifesaver.

Shortsighted view. It is the scholarship system that cause the price inflations that has now put nearly EVERYONE in the position of needing a scholarship/loan to go to on to post-secondary schools. An aggravating factor is the economics of increased arrogance where everyone thinks they have to go to college (particularly a top 10 school in US News) that further drives up the tuitions.

There was a time, not too long ago, where you could go to the state school and work your way through with part-time work in the Fall/Spring and full-time in the Summer. And I'm not talking about the financial aid jobs the school offers.

If it weren't for scholarships, grants, and student loans, I would never have been able to afford to go to college.

Public subsidies interfer with market forces. In many cases, what occurs is that a particular college able to charge X dollars raises its tuition to compensate for the public assistance with the student still paying X dollars but the state making up the difference. My cynical view is that the money is then used for administrative perks and faculty featherbedding.

That's not a blanket condemnation of the use of public money for higher (or any other kind) of education, but this is not an uncommon occurrance.