Say college tuition is made "free" in the United States. Students would still have to pay for their housing, books, foods, etc. out of their own pockets but eliminating tuition makes college more affordable for many.
1) Does this cheapen the university degree?
2) Does that even matter?
3) As an employer, would you want to hire someone who DOES NOT take advantage of this system and instead hire someone with a highschool diploma?
>inb4 muh trade school
Other urls found in this thread:
if college tuition were made free in the US, there would have to be some corporation sponsoring it, because nothing is free. whether its a private industry or the government itself, the quality of education will fall because you will only be learning what they want you to learn.
as an employer myself, i would rather hire someone without a diploma who can do the job properly, than someone with a diploma who thinks they can do the job properly.
1) Yes, but so does the changing economy. Back in the Boomers day, a highschool degree and a union job could afford a house and kids on a single income. Now, a degree or trade education is practically required to live a middle class life.
2)A large number of other developed nations have free higher education. They have a higher quality of life than us. So, no.
3) "take advantage of this system"? No, I would hire the most qualified person. The person with the education.
And just so ya know, most free college legislation proposals include trade school.
You are aware, dude that says a corporation or government would have to fund it that:
A. It would be government funding, not corporate
B. Countries as small and poor as Slovenia have free higher education.
C. Just because colleges are public funded -- their content will not change. Any accredited public college will be free. BYU doesn't have to loose its crazy-ass mormon values to get that public money.
>As an employer, would you want to hire someone who DOES NOT take advantage of this system
I don't think employers react well degrees to from other countries. Even though they are done quicker and cheaper than at home.
>if college tuition were made free in the US, there would have to be some corporation sponsoring it, because nothing is free. whether its a private industry or the government itself, the quality of education will fall because you will only be learning what they want you to learn.
I disagree. I believe courses would be offered based on the number of students who are interested in them. As a result the courses would begin to better reflect their applications to "the real world" (i.e. outside academia).
>i would rather hire someone without a diploma who can do the job properly
Fair point, but assume two equally qualified persons. One with a higher degree (Art, History, Chemical Engineering, Computer Science, etc.), the other without, who would you hire and why?
>1) Yes, but so does the changing economy. Back in the Boomers day, a highschool degree and a union job could afford a house and kids on a single income. Now, a degree or trade education is practically required to live a middle class life.
>2)A large number of other developed nations have free higher education. They have a higher quality of life than us. So, no.
Agreed.
>3) "take advantage of this system"? No, I would hire the most qualified person. The person with the education.
>And just so ya know, most free college legislation proposals include trade school.
>most qualified person
See my answer to I support proposals including trade school tuition as a component.
if college becomes free then the standards will be lowered so that everyone makes it through, meaning the degree will be worth the same exact amount as a high school diploma
certain schools will refuse to take part, choosing to only take students who can pay the full amount with no financial aid, and those schools will become the new "higher education" system
free college is every bit as fucking stupid as bussing kids to different neighborhoods because the local school sucks. it doesn't solve any real problems and makes a lot of them worse
>Question 1
No, it would not since the free tuition would still only apply for state universities and local colleges, meaning the best universities (and private ones as well) would still be able to charge people tuition
>Question 2
Nope
>Question 3
As an employer I can flat out say all we do is ask "do you have a college diploma" and if the answer is "yes" then they make it on to the next part of the interview.
When the government mandated that everyone complete high school, it set the level to having a high school degree. So, now a high school degree is useless. Kids nowadays no longer care about high school in the US, so spending money to better educate them is pointless when they don't appreciate it. Having a free college will just lower the bar even more... now a university degree is pretty mandatory, and it's evolved to where a masters is the higher-level degree. Once university is free, masters will be mandatory and having a doctorate will be the higher-level degree.
Tuition at university would never be truly free, it would be like public and private schooling is now. The potential massive increase in demand could collapse the system making competition to get in so fierce many would not get in anyway.
Harvard would never be free, the only free the university would be local colleges and those with their degrees in Liberal Arts would be unemployable as those that entered the workforce from high school would have their jobs. You don't need a fancy degree to sell real estate or cars or insurance or any of the other highly paid uneducated jobs. If anything those with liberal arts degrees will be unemployed because they won't accept the low paid jobs they are capable of doing because they think they are worth more.
It's not that someone isn't taking advantage of the system, it's not that it cheapens the value of the degree as a lot of degrees are not that valuable anyway, it's that high school should give you the basic skills to function as an adult.
Arguably a more educated populace will produce more doctors and scientists etc. thereby pushing themselves forward with medical discoveries and developing new products to improve and extend quality of life. But making tuition free will not accomplish this, it will only continue to make more adult-children who stay with their parents into their 30s and that can't function in society because it's not exactly what they want.
>I support proposals including trade school tuition as a component.
Senator Sander's bill actually includes trade schools as part of it's tuition plan, by the way. Mayor Buttigieg and others like to play it up that "we also need to have people go to trade schools" but their plans always seem to exclude them...
>if college becomes free then the standards will be lowered so that everyone makes it through, meaning the degree will be worth the same exact amount as a high school diploma
I disagree entirely. Administration pushes student retention as a HUGE concern at university I have taught at (i.e. lower the grading scale such that students can "earn" some minimum grade in order to keep their scholarships etc. and remain at the school). If the income aspect of it is separated from grades (i.e. students who fail out of school stop paying) then I would bet you would see standards for every program INCREASE. Only the students whom want to be in a program (e.g. engineering) and can make it through their respective program would make it to the end.
>certain schools will refuse to take part, choosing to only take students who can pay the full amount with no financial aid, and those schools will become the new "higher education" system
Let them (free market and such). How is that any different than the difference between a large university (ten of thousands of students) versus a smaller university (a few thousand students). At the end of the day the larger university is more competitive and has more resources than a smaller school.
>free college is every bit as fucking stupid as bussing kids to different neighborhoods because the local school sucks. it doesn't solve any real problems and makes a lot of them worse
Meh. There are only so many seats in each classroom, have to send them somewhere. Truancy is a crime.
This is kinda true but at the same time the amount of jobs that actually need a college degree are not that many. Employers are asking for degrees as a general screening question but aren't really getting benefits from the degree.
Plenty of jobs could be filled with HS graduates and do just fine but since everyone is getting sent to college, a BS is the new HS Diploma. Meanwhile the guy who fixes your ice maker is charging $80/hr and cant find any cunts to train because everyone wants a cushy useless desk job.
>As an employer I can flat out say all we do is ask "do you have a college diploma" and if the answer is "yes" then they make it on to the next part of the interview.
pic related
It has already happened that many jobs require a degree just to get an interview.
There will always be trades like plumbing and carpentry that do not require a degree.
Also, labor intensive jobs will continue to not require a degree.
It literally took decades before the high school mandate was negated by employers seeking only college graduates (mid 80s to be precise). And the free college and trade schools is not a mandate, it's a plan to assist those who want higher education (since that is how the economy is quickly evolving towards/is already) but literally cannot afford to do so due to the high barrier of entry. It should be noted that, when the Boomers and older were going to college, tuition was either free or far cheaper than it is today (depending on school and major). My grandfather paid literally nothing towards tuition, my father "worked his way through college" while my mother "worked her way through beauty school" and me? I have a degree in computer resource management I got right before the economy crashed in '08 and I was saddled with nearly $200k in tuition debt but there was a glut in the market so hiring was slow and then the economy crashed and I'm even further behind in payments because it took me nearly 3 years to find a place that would hire me and pay me an "industry standard" wage of $56k (based on where I live). Shit sucks.
Harvard is a private school. It won't ever be free just like how private high schools aren't free.
Imagine being so economically illiterate to get a degree for 200k financed (which means it will cost almost double that once interest is accounted for) in a field that pays the same as factory work that requires 4 working limbs and at least 1 working eye.
Free != mandatory for everyone. In Europe you need to pass the enter exams to become a student. For good universities competition between candidates is huge. And then, even if you become a student, you still need to survive and dont get expelled for bad grades. In my Russian university half of student were kicked off after the first year. It was brutal, but fairn
University should by publucly funded. It is fair, logical and overall benefucial for the nation. But there must be competition for entrance exams and bad grades must lead to kicking student of the university. No softeness. Society funds your education so you can pay back in future and it is mandatory from you not to fail.
Why do they get into the interview process if their resume doesn't say they have a degree and you require it?
In my experience dealing with hiring, I've found that having a degree isn't indicative of their effectiveness in the subject they are purportedly well educated on. In fact, I've found them to use their credentials as a crutch merely for leverage in assessing their capital worth in the company, then embarrassing themselves committing simple operational mistakes all the while claiming "I'm the expert here, don't worry everything is under control".
While this is not the case universally, it is more common than you would think. And this is after being required to become indebted to a tuition or gaming the system of scholarships and grants. At the end of the day, you end up with a self-entitled man-baby that needs constant supervision and lacks any sort of motivation because they think now that they have landed a lucrative job they are entitled to it.
The best people I've hired and worked with are those without any formal education in the field they are being hired to work but has lots of on-the-job experience in their self-taught trade.
>Tuition at university would never be truly free, it would be like public and private schooling is now. The potential massive increase in demand could collapse the system making competition to get in so fierce many would not get in anyway.
If they (a prospective student) can't qualify for training in their desired program that's on them. Not everyone is cut out to be a doctor or astronaut.
>Harvard would never be free, the only free the university would be local colleges and those with their degrees in Liberal Arts would be unemployable as those that entered the workforce from high school would have their jobs. You don't need a fancy degree to sell real estate or cars or insurance or any of the other highly paid uneducated jobs. If anything those with liberal arts degrees will be unemployed because they won't accept the low paid jobs they are capable of doing because they think they are worth more.
Exactly my point, if you want to major in "Art History" then expect to be exactly as employable as a degree in "Art History" makes you. The free market decides how much your degree is worth. If only one doctor graduated from medical school each year, you bet the pay of a medical doctor would go up. As it is, teachers are a dime a dozen, and then wonder why pay is so low.
>It's not that someone isn't taking advantage of the system, it's not that it cheapens the value of the degree as a lot of degrees are not that valuable anyway, it's that high school should give you the basic skills to function as an adult.
>Arguably a more educated populace will produce more doctors and scientists etc. thereby pushing themselves forward with medical discoveries and developing new products to improve and extend quality of life. But making tuition free will not accomplish this, it will only continue to make more adult-children who stay with their parents into their 30s and that can't function in society because it's not exactly what they want.
Proof?
Making college tuition free is a horrible idea. You have to realize, there is no such thing as "free." Everything on this planet has to be paid for in some way. Even the air you breathe, you pay a tax to breathe it in the country/state/city you breathe it in.
1) Yes. It would cheapen the college educated person. Supply and demand. If there's an abundance of supply, the cost of that item will decrease. This is basic economics.
2) Yes. It matters. If everyone has a college degree in, business for example, I'm looking to hire a good candidate. I don't care which school you went to. I need someone who is smart, personable, and can fit into my culture. "But I went to X University." I don't care if you're an arrogant cunt about it.
3) I want to hire people who want it and want to work for it. I can train any position at my business. I don't want someone entitled, I don't want someone who will take the easy way. I want someone who will bust their ass for the good of the business as well as for their own life. I'll happily reward that person. (Bonuses, perks, pay, etc)
You shouldn’t blame the economy for poor decision making. If that is the industry standard wage you should have known it and known how much college would cost. Where was the breakdown? Did the expected wage drop dramatically after the economic collapse?
In Germany it's more or less free. Still nobody sponsoring.
It is true. My employer has management level jobs that require a degree. But they don't care what its for or which clown school you got it from. They just need that box ticked due to industry standards measurements. Hell a guy who is on the board is having to go back to school at 50 to get his masters so they can tick the box for board members with MBA's and higher. For a job that he has been essentially doing for 20 years.
>There will always be trades like plumbing and carpentry that do not require a degree.
They often require a certification/apprenticeship. Functionally what is the difference between that and a formal degree in a field of your choosing?
My plumber (typically) is not qualified to work on my gas furnace.
I have a ton of walk-ins.
I live in a country where college is free and it's literally the opposite. From what I've heard college in USA is easier. In my country everyone can go to college, so they make it harder for students so some will quit. I'm studying computer science and from around 200 students at beginning 30 made their bachelor.
>But there must be competition for entrance exams and bad grades must lead to kicking student of the university. No softeness. Society funds your education so you can pay back in future and it is mandatory from you not to fail.
This 100%
I went to a state school that was heavy on engineering. It was extremely competitive because the professors didn’t give a fuck. That said, I graduated into a collapsing economy and found that I couldn’t get a job because the name value of the school wasn’t much.
I retreated to a private school with a much better name and found it to be cushy af. The professors cared and grade inflation was a thing. When I graduated the second time through the economy was still meh but I got a job easily because the school had a good reputation.
The standard was closer to $62k starting off in '08, it collapsed in Great Recession. But I was planning on moving to either Texas or California (briefly flirted with the idea of North Dakota) but when the economy collapsed, I had to jump in and help out with the family after my father lost his job and the pay bottomed out.
americans have really internalized the idea that they don't deserve good things, so even when people come around saying "hey, good things are possible, just look at other places in the world," they will still try to come up with random excuses about why they don't REALLY deserve it and how it wouldn't work anyway because america is just so ~special~ and ~different~
There is, indirectly through higher tax levels. German and Scandinavian countries work using the corporatism model where the companies accept higher taxes as long as the government supplies the educated workforce they need.
You ever thought about that you would have less walk-ins if you would just take 5 seconds to check if they have a degree instead of inviting them?
Competition must be getting stiff at Arby's
Same story. It felt like on first year our faculty department had a KPI to to decreas the number of students by 2.
I remember in the begining of a year we had multiple rich "golden youth" who expected to party hard in there student life. Lol. Most of them were kicked off in first semester. Those who survive actually become decent people and learn how to study hard and help others (we had a culture on a faculty to share conspects and teach each others.)
The barrier to entry is a lot lower. There aren’t any general education requirements. Your plumber didn’t have to take philosophy to get a certification. Thus they didn’t have to pay for 3 years of useless courses and it’s a lot cheaper.
$200k of debt for a $62k a year salary should have scared you off
I’m sorry about having to help out with the family. I know how that goes.
Sure government has to pay and so the people. But I prefer paying a few bucks more and having health insurance and free education than becoming ill or going to college and having ten thousands of debts.
I don't understand murricans stupid fear of socialism. Its literally just paying a little bit more for having safety and everybody being able to live a good live.
>In my experience dealing with hiring, I've found that having a degree isn't indicative of their effectiveness in the subject they are purportedly well educated on. In fact, I've found them to use their credentials as a crutch merely for leverage in assessing their capital worth in the company, then embarrassing themselves committing simple operational mistakes all the while claiming "I'm the expert here, don't worry everything is under control".
Sounds like you need to screen your new hires better to me.
My questions is if you have two equally qualified candidates (same amount of OJT, years in the business, great references, etc.) one with a degree the other without, who would you hire?
>The best people I've hired and worked with are those without any formal education in the field they are being hired to work but has lots of on-the-job experience in their self-taught trade.
Are you sure? I have a buddy who is an iron-worker with a CTS degree who sometimes gets to fuck around with fixing computer related shit in their offices for the same pay. His degree is benefiting both him and his employer despite him being hired on the "fabrication" side of things.
A degree makes you more marketable.
Most of those other places are tiny with small populations and/or have been developed for centuries before the US was even founded. For instance Austria is 8 million people with a land areas slightly smaller than Indiana. Per Capita GDP is essential the same. People living in Indiana get to keep more of their money, but Austria is "better". But a good portion of that is Austria has a large amount of buildings and institutions that go back hundreds of years. Indiana is 2 centuries old and was carved out of the wilderness.
Corporatism is the same model that the Nazis used btw.
And that is not what socialism is. Its specifically against the liberty ethos that the US is founded on.
Great discussion thread, user.
1) It may "cheapen" the overall value of one having a university degree, but I think raising the country's overall pursuit of higher education is a worthy pursuit negating any negative effect providing free tuition would cause.
2) It doesn't really matter. Many students would still differentiate themselves from the pack by pursuing additional education, experience, certifications, etc.
3) As an employer (and I have been an employer in the past both before and after college) I would be hesitant to hire those who chose not to continue their education beyond a HS diploma/GED. Experience is king, and in my mind that alone would outweigh the advantage higher formal education provides.
I always chuckle at the high volume of small business owners of Sup Forums. I have known a few small business owners in my time and I cannot imagine they would have the time to shitpost.
1) No. You are assuming private Ivy league degrees would be free? >They wouldn't.
2) Yes, the prestige of your degree will always matter on a resume.
3) Of course they won't. Just look at all the boomers that never finished high school and have been stuck their whole life in lower middle class service jobs. Those will soon be the new non-grad gen.
Over all yes, public option for college will help immensely, specially for the US to catch up with the rest of the first world.
>>I don't understand murricans stupid >>fear of socialism. Its literally just >>paying a little bit more for having >>safety and everybody being able to live >>a good live.
Because Americans is not a nation. They dont understand such concept. It is a territory with individuals living FFA life.
Europeans understand that universal education and healthcare are beneficial for their nation overall. Americans dont thing in that categories.
> You have to realize, there is no such thing as "free." Everything on this planet has to be paid for in some way. Even the air you breathe, you pay a tax to breathe it in the country/state/city you breathe it in.
The "payment" is the overall increased benefit to society as a whole by having a more educated populace.
>1) Yes. It would cheapen the college educated person. Supply and demand. If there's an abundance of supply, the cost of that item will decrease. This is basic economics.
I agree with supply and demand. The vast majority of people are not (and will not) ever be able to become nuclear engineers as such the pay will reflect that. If any retard with a wrench can change tires (or bag your groceries) then the pay will reflect that too. Basic economics.
>2) Yes. It matters. If everyone has a college degree in, business for example, I'm looking to hire a good candidate. I don't care which school you went to. I need someone who is smart, personable, and can fit into my culture. "But I went to X University." I don't care if you're an arrogant cunt about it.
That's on you how you want to run your business. Not recognizing that a larger university (compared to a small one) provides more resources for their students (ideally making their education more comprehensive) is retarded.
>3) I want to hire people who want it and want to work for it. I can train any position at my business. I don't want someone entitled, I don't want someone who will take the easy way. I want someone who will bust their ass for the good of the business as well as for their own life. I'll happily reward that person. (Bonuses, perks, pay, etc)
How does someone having a degree (or not) change this in any way?
Don't care, my parents are rich
>The barrier to entry is a lot lower. There aren’t any general education requirements. Your plumber didn’t have to take philosophy to get a certification.
True
>Thus they didn’t have to pay for 3 years of useless courses and it’s a lot cheaper.
No university has you take three years of general education requirements. If you do end up doing this, you have seriously fucked up somewhere along the way with your education.
This is more a question of the internal policies and requirements at a company. Outside of these restrictions, you don't need a degree to prove yourself worthy of doing many other jobs you are skilled with, unless there is a certification mandate at the local government level in order to carry out some kind of trade work.
At my company I wear many hats, and others do too. But our company does not care about official titles as we have been burned with that many times. Practical skill and experience is what we look for, but even more importantly that they can keep their cool and are willing to learn more. Our business is fast-growing and I continue to make new products that need new skills faster than we can hire people to manufacture / manage / market / ship them.
1) That's a benefit. Not a payment. Things cost money to operate. Salaries need to be paid. Buildings need to be built/maintained. You can't do these things with "free." So, where is the money coming from?
2) I agree with your statements. But my meaning was that if everyone has a college degree, I don't have to pay a premium salary for it.
3) Disagree. That's the illusion that colleges tell you.
4) It's the arrogance that comes along with college degrees. More often than not, college educated candidates are arrogant in their degree and are entitled. They (generally) don't work as hard as someone scratching and clawing for it.
>Great discussion thread, user.
Thanks buddy
>1) It may "cheapen" the overall value of one having a university degree, but I think raising the country's overall pursuit of higher education is a worthy pursuit negating any negative effect providing free tuition would cause.
I agree.
>2) It doesn't really matter. Many students would still differentiate themselves from the pack by pursuing additional education, experience, certifications, etc.
100% agree.
>3) As an employer (and I have been an employer in the past both before and after college) I would be hesitant to hire those who chose not to continue their education beyond a HS diploma/GED. Experience is king, and in my mind that alone would outweigh the advantage higher formal education provides.
1000% agree. The idea of college is to create "lifelong learners". You should WANT to better yourself everyday, if you do this you will never be disappointed with where you are at since it is only a stepping stone to the next "better" thing you are after. Motivation is key.
hot take - there is no reason college tuition shouldn't be free, this isn't the 1900s anymore, colleges aren't taking the tuition to pay their teachers, the tuition they receive from paying students barely covers the electricity. they make millions of dollars from football and are only "paying" the players tuition costs (and star players about $50,000). they pay a lot for these coaches though (nick saban makes $10million a season).
even still, with that heavy cost, Alabama will make $4 million for attending the citrus bowl, that's on top of all the money they make from merchandise and general ticket sales during the season ($20/ticket admission, 80,000 attendance/game - $1.5m/home game). LSU is getting $20 million for their playoff game, and another $20 million if they win that, winner of the football championship gets $30 million bonus. and that is just football, baseball, basketball, and even female sports have payouts, while not as lucrative, similar.
instead of schools being for profit, if they invested the sports money back into education, every kid could attend for free.
in perspective, a grant to a professor for work in their field of study is only about $50-100k
It has NEGATIVE impact on the system. Massess are allowed to go to universities and the overall level gets lowered. Higher Education gets more and more less prestigious. It also gives very negative impact on the economy and the job market..
In other countries those costs are covered for example by interest-free loans especially for students.
Also, books don't costs nearly as much in other places of the world.
As an employer I would only care about the skills of the employee.
>That's the illusion that colleges tell you
The quality of education at large universities (being better) vs small universities?
Honestly I thought the same way as you, but having gone to a large (and small) school myself it simply is not the case. This is especially true for STEM degrees.
My undergraduate university (~6,000 students) had one 25 year old NMR machine and some other basic lab equipment. My graduate university (~40,000 students) had an entire floor dedicated to NMRs with several different kinds for different applications. I never ever heard of a Mass Spec. before graduate school.
Simply said a larger university can afford more expensive toys for the students to be trained on. More experience (on more things) makes for a better education.
>in perspective, a grant to a professor for work in their field of study is only about $50-100k
That depends, my group just got a $600,000 grant at a relatively small school from NSF. That being said the university still takes about a third (i.e. $200,000) off the top as "overhead" that I will never see.
I meant what the colleges/universities will pay to their professors to put their names on things, a grant from National Science Foundation is different, like you said, they even skim that
tuition (and housing and food) is lowest form of income for any university
The idea that college should be free is fuckin retarded. How in the rat fuck do you propose the staff be paid? How the shit do you propose the sports programs be funded? The arts and humanities? If the entirety of the collegiate system were fuckin free? The government? Yeah because for decades now we’ve proven how well that works for the k-12 public school system. I’ll tell you what the real issue is. Since it’s inception, college was never meant for the masses. And even today, not required to get a job. The problem is you retarded young people feel entitled to a degree so you can be 22 years old and live in the yuppie condos and have all the things. Are you fuckin retarded? You know what I did while apprenticing to be an electrician when I was 22 years old? I lived in a basement apartment in some dudes house in Massachusetts, ate ramen and went to the movies once a month. At least I had free cable though. I didn’t go to college because I couldn’t afford college. Instead, I went to a fuckin trade school. So what the FUCK do you mean college should be free? Because you’re a lazy piece of shit who wants free shit? FUCK do you mean, inb4 muh trade school? Wtf do you think most people do for work in this country? You think everyone who graduated college works for tech startups and earning 80K? You think everyone works in fuckin sales? YES, I think this ridiculous shot cheapens university degrees. If everyone had one they wouldn’t be worth shit. Which is why competition for entry level office jobs in cube farms at tech companies is so high. Because everyone wants to drive a 2-series and go on trips every weekend. Why should everyone be allowed to do this? Most of you are lazy pieces of handout seeking niggers. Fuck you people. Learn a trade. Or star poor. You’ll NEVER see free college. NEVER EVER.
Being this retarded
ISHYGDDT
>I meant what the colleges/universities will pay to their professors to put their names on things
I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean by this still.
Stay mad faggot!
Why not take a look at Northern European countries that have this policy and see how it works?
You’re the one who thinks college should be free and you think I’m the retarded one? Okay bud. Good luck with that.
Super whacky that out of all these replies, no one seems to remember that community college was free in multiple states, california being the biggest success with the longest running state program for free college starting in 1868. It wasn't until Ronald Reagan became governor of California in 1966 that he cut the education budget, fored a shitload of teachers, then started charging people to go to the new and freshly gouged UCB.
Amazing how a program can go for 100 years uninterrupted and just fucking fine until a dipshit republican puts their greasy palms on it.
The krauts have a dual track system, with trade schools and traditional colleges. The trades have great respect over there.
Ok zoomer. Complain about never affording a house but eat $15 avocado toast and buy $7 coffees on your $1200 iPhone with 7 different streaming subscriptions
It’s this kind of shit right here that made me switch to the GOP. You people are fuckin crazy.
if I get published for poetry or short stories, my college gives me a $10,000 to 25,000 bonus (depending on which publication), the limit is $100,000 for my department, in amount increases with tenure (I'm only a 2nd year professor)
What a weak troll. There isn't even any bait, this is just a rusty hook you mook.
We're not crazy, you just have a learning disability and the republicans are easier to understand. They aren't all hung up on the math. We know how hard counting is for you.
I grouped General Ed Requirements with out of major courses. I would say I took about a years worth of in major courses. Be picky if you want but my point stands.
You had the ability to make any strawman you wanted and the one you picked is still less entitled than a boomer.
Boomers had, vcrs, tvs,DVD players, landlines, car phones and Jesus christ so much. My dad out of high school was pulling 100k a year (adjusted for inflation) throwing bags onto a plane, yall went out to eat weekly and paid a baby sitter, they had firebirds at 21 and still bitch how wanting a education and Healthcare makes zoomer entitled. Fuck off.
>if I get published for poetry or short stories, my college gives me a $10,000 to 25,000 bonus (depending on which publication), the limit is $100,000 for my department, in amount increases with tenure (I'm only a 2nd year professor)
University? Because not gonna lie, I downright do not believe you on this.
I have published with a Nobel laureate and no university that I know pays for publications as an incentive to publish more. Even if they do, the rate you are giving is absolutely ludicrous.
So which is your college? Sauce or gtfo
I'm gonna fuck your women
I'm gonna fuck your women
I'm gonna fuck your gods
I'm gonna fuck this canoe
Honestly if tuition was free and I was a bookstore/student housing owner I’d jack up the prices by at least double since everyone will be able to enroll with disposable income.
Screening is usually done by a third party. Whoever makes it through gets to HR, which then goes into the interview. Are you new at this or something?
>I grouped General Ed Requirements with out of major courses. I would say I took about a years worth of in major courses. Be picky if you want but my point stands.
All I can say is maybe research the school you choose before you go there. You have a choice in what school you choose to pay money to get an education from.
I just looked over my undergraduate transcript (5 years):
Gen Ed. Credits:36
Total Credits: 179
Gen. Ed. requirements accounted for approximately 20% of all of my credits taken (i.e. one year worth). Everything else was within my program of study (~18 credits/semester).
You forgot one "I'm gonna fuck your women" and one "I'm gonna fuck your dog" user.
>paying a little bit more
That's the problem.
is that lil dicky on the right
Kek
If you truely think that the government would be giving more money to universities without controlling them even more you are absolutely insane. They absolutely would have a hand in EVERYTHING the school does if they become fully funded by a government. From them being able to only fun certain programs to outright removing degrees.
Your naive if you believe this won't happen. IN EVERY case where the government has fully funded something they directly control it.
Program of study isn’t the same thing as in major.
>If you truely think that the government would be giving more money to universities without controlling them even more you are absolutely insane. They absolutely would have a hand in EVERYTHING the school does if they become fully funded by a government. From them being able to only fun certain programs to outright removing degrees.
False, accreditation agencies exist for various programs which REQUIRE certain criteria be met for a program of study (e.g. ACS, ASBMB, IEEE, etc.). The government has little to no say in what criteria these agencies require for accreditation.
>Your naive if you believe this won't happen. IN EVERY case where the government has fully funded something they directly control it.
The government already funds a LARGE portion of research done in this country through grants. Write a proposal for research you want to do, submit it to the various government funding agencies available (DOD, NSF, etc.) and if you make a good case for why your research should receive funding you get it. Not once have I ever been approached "Hey we will give you $1,000,000 to do research into X and X only.".
The reality is sometimes research doesn't work out and needs to be shifted from the scope of the original proposal (because what you find is different from what you expect).
We got free higher education over here in Germany,
and the State basicly gives Students a loan that helps with costs of living:
No really, unless your born with a silver spoon in your mouth and dont have to work and study at same time its hard to get your degree. Compared to the last 35-40 years back the number of kids from a working class background that got a university degree dropped from around 24 % to barely 7%, they simply cant affort it to support a send a kid to university.
When it was affortable for the working class kids to go to the university there were plent who got practical STEM degrees, now where mostly upper class kids are in Uni you got more genderstudy , liberal arts etc ....useless folks
If somebody thinks his paperwork is proof for qualification enough while a highschooler offers me even just one week intern time i will give the highschooler the job if the supervisors give him a good enough review.
>Program of study isn’t the same thing as in major.
Oh for fucks sake, what difference does it make.
I got two degrees (B.S. Biology and B.S. in Chemistry). I even had to take additional Gen. Ed. classes because I was a double major.
In Germany a Plumber is a " Gas- und Wasserinstallateuer" and actually does all the indoors gaspipes and furnaces.
Most Crisis resilant Job ever ...Water or Gas, somehow (((they))) allways shower :-D