New way to finance college

Here's what I suggest. Right now instructional cost represents around 20% of a Universities total cost. Other educational cost represent around 30% of costs and non educational cost are around half of total costs. My solution is to reverse that to 50% spent on instructional cost, 30% on other educational cost and cap non educational cost at 20%. Universities that spend more than 20% on non educational cost lose an equivalent amount of public funding and are prohibited from raising tuition. Universities that spend more on instructional cost would be eligible for an equivalent amount in public funding if they don't raise tuition.
 
Last time I checked, college costs had outpaced the normal rate of inflation by 400%. What's up with that?
 
cawacko said:
I posted two articles on this company. It has nothing to do with banks. It's about a tech fund trying to disrupt this market that the contribution of gov't involvement has made college immensely expensive.
Click to expand...
And that's the flaw in your premise...that the govt. caused price hikes.
 
Sailor said:
You are being unduly chastised for bringing up a good subject. There has to be other ways to keep higher education affordable right? Anyone commenting on this thread have any solutions?
Click to expand...
Yea...simply admit that college isn't the answer for every student. A bigger problem is that the majority of students in this county leave high school virtually illiterate.
 
cawacko said:
So all these posts Althea and you have nothing to say about the company and you think the cost of tuition isn't an issue. Great insight. Thank you.
Click to expand...
No. Many of us are saying that this idea isn't much different than programs that already exist. Teachers can have all/most of their loan forgiven if they teach for 5 years in certain low income regions. Doctors can do the same by practicing in certain regions that are desperate for doctors.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Here's what I suggest. Right now instructional cost represents around 20% of a Universities total cost. Other educational cost represent around 30% of costs and non educational cost are around half of total costs. My solution is to reverse that to 50% spent on instructional cost, 30% on other educational cost and cap non educational cost at 20%. Universities that spend more than 20% on non educational cost lose an equivalent amount of public funding and are prohibited from raising tuition. Universities that spend more on instructional cost would be eligible for an equivalent amount in public funding if they don't raise tuition.
Click to expand...
Great idea in principle, but then everyone would complain that those damned professors are making too much money.
 
Bigdog said:
Last time I checked, college costs had outpaced the normal rate of inflation by 400%. What's up with that?
Click to expand...
Million dollar salaries for administrators, luxury dorms, luxury amenities, facilities for field hockey, soccer, and 300 other sports. Go talk to a University administrator as they never saw a building or facility or program they just had to have no matter how unrelated to education it is because it will enhance the educational experience and attract top students from top families who can afford to pay for these luxuries. This is the shit that needs to be reigned in and what drives up cost so dramatically.
 
Althea said:
And that's the flaw in your premise...that the govt. caused price hikes.
Click to expand...
You might as well beat your head up against a wall than think Wacko would believe that government is the cause of all problems and those wonderful self sacrificing businessmen who only care about bettering all of society have the solution to all our problems.

That certainly was an asinine thing to say. Our Universities and their administrators are the primary cause of the run away cost of education and have aggressively fought all efforts by the public, including government and the business sector, to control costs and make a Public funded education affordable for all qualified students.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Let them bitch as long as it brings cost down and lowers tuition.
Click to expand...
What you say about amenities is true. Many schools reap huge rewards via their sporting events. It would be nice if windfalls were used to bring down the cost of housing/meals etc.
 
Althea said:
What you say about amenities is true. Many schools reap huge rewards via their sporting events. It would be nice if windfalls were used to bring down the cost of housing/meals etc.
Click to expand...
It's not though. It's used primarily to attract students from families that can afford the higher costs. The end result is they're making a University level education unaffordable for all but the upper middle class and even for them it's super painfully expensive.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Here's what I suggest. Right now instructional cost represents around 20% of a Universities total cost. Other educational cost represent around 30% of costs and non educational cost are around half of total costs. My solution is to reverse that to 50% spent on instructional cost, 30% on other educational cost and cap non educational cost at 20%. Universities that spend more than 20% on non educational cost lose an equivalent amount of public funding and are prohibited from raising tuition. Universities that spend more on instructional cost would be eligible for an equivalent amount in public funding if they don't raise tuition.
Click to expand...

Public funding? You mean taxes paid by those that don't attend those universities?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top