"The Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act"
http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/educat ... -education
As I read through this, I'm angered. Rather than the Administration asking, "How can the US Government help more people afford college?", shouldn't the question be, "How can we make a college education more affordable?"
There's a difference.
See, if BHO thinks everyone should be able to own a new Escalade, but they're bloody expensive, there's 2 ways to do it. One, you can knock down the price of the Escalade through supply & demand, or two, you can give everyone $20K towards the purchase of a new Escalade (guess which one will make GM ratchet up the price?).
[The Act] expands the existing income-based student loan repayment program. New borrowers who assume loans after July 1, 2014, will be able to cap their student loan repayments at 10 percent of their discretionary income and, if they keep up with their payments over time, will have the balance forgiven after 20 years. Public service workers – such as teachers, nurses, and those in military service – will see any remaining debt forgiven after just 10 years.
So, where's that money come from? Taxpayers. So, not only am I paying for MY kids' college, I'm paying for yours too. Why?
Why are we subsidizing ever-increasing college expenses, when they're making money hand over fist, and the Government can't pay its bills as it is?
If you go to buy something that's $100, and you intend to negotiate, you don't open your wallet to reveal five crisp twenties, do you? I mean, where's the negotiation gonna go from there? NOWHERE. You say, "I brought $75 - what can you do for me?" Then, you work it to a mutually- and agreeable number, somewhere in the middle.
I have a better idea: How about letting the companies that stand to benefit from college-degreed workers invest in education? After all, THEY'RE the ones requiring a degree, right?!?
So, what happens if the class of 2012 foregoes traditional 4-year universities en masse and decides to mob up in community college and get their first 2 years on the cheap... and then the class of 2013 and 2014 does the same? Universities will adjust their financial model to fit the new reality - that is, they'll compete for the market and the laws of supply and demand will come into play.
But if we just keep laying crisp twenties on the counter, this poorly regulated multi-trillion dollar industry will watch and wait as the stack grows, because the available funds "are there".
Universities don't NEED that additional tuition, as it's not a major revenue stream. Patents and research (and sports) are the top revenue-generating activities of most major universities. http://www.forbes.com/2008/09/12/google ... de_16.html
According the Goldwater Institute: "Between 1993 and 2007, the number of full-time administrators per 100 students at America’s leading universities grew by 39 percent, while the number of employees engaged in teaching, research, or service only grew by 18 percent. Inflation-adjusted spending on administration per student grew by 61 percent during the same period, while instructional spending per student rose 39 percent."
By the way, a humorous side-note: POTUS delivered his speech on college affordability at University of Michigan, the school with the highest paid public university president in the United States (WHOOPS - nice researching there, morons). And what a model of affordability they are! UM has done their part in cutting the costs of a college education, for sure: They cut a total of 3.9 percent out of a multi-billion dollar budget... over the past seven years.
