Denouncing Free College in the Name of the Poor

[Jefferson23]

March 12, 2016

By Amber A'Lee Frost

Although corporate media outlets have blasted presidential candidate Bernie Sanders for “living in an economic fantasy world,” his proposed plan for free tuition in public universities is hardly radical. To be funded by a modest financial transaction tax—0.5 percent on stock transactions and 0.1 percent on bond transactions—it’s essentially an older policy being reinstated to create revenue for a social program.

Many countries, including the UK, France, Japan, India and Taiwan, already have similar taxes and the US had one until 1966. And a number of industrialized nations, like Germany, Slovenia, the Czech Republic and the Scandinavian countries, have instituted free college tuition without evident chaotic societal breakdown.

And yet a flurry of media “experts” have rushed to denounce not only the financial tax as a means to fund college tuition, but the prospect of socialized higher education as a concept.

Oddly enough, they present their fight against free higher education as advocacy for the poor.

At the Washington Post (2/23/16), education writer Jeffrey J. Selingo capped off “The False Hope of Free College” with “expertise” from the right-wing American Enterprise Institute, concluding with touching concern for students in poverty: “Free tuition fails to change the college-going patterns of low-income students and quickly becomes an entitlement for those students who need it the least.”

http://fair.org/home/denouncing-free-college-in-the-name-of-the-poor/

[Kalidurga]

1. There are people in both parties who are afraid of an even playing field

Even though free college wouldn't even the field for at least two generations.

[Baobab]

9. Jobs are going away as technology saves labor, so the education/skills bar to getting jobs is rising

very rapidly

So people really do need a much better education. If there is a very high cost, people wont risk it because the chances of getting a good job even with a four year degree wont be good. People will have to really love what they do and be naturally very good at it before they get hired for their first paying gig, and jobs will be scarce because domestic firms will need to automate to get even government contracts, except in exempted areas like national security.

Everything else will be bid out and US firms wont win, unless they automate, they will be unable to compete with the low wages paid by foreign contracting firms to their employees.


here is a good overview of GATS Mode Four.. imagine this on steroids. thats what is coming.. with the defaults being everything included, all service sectors and modes of supply.

http://www.global-labour-university.org/fileadmin/Papers_Wits_conference_2007/Group_B1/kemekliene_paper.pdf

[djean111]

2. It is only a false hope because the 1% and the Third Way make too much money

from tuition and interest fees.

[Jefferson23]

3. That is evident in the Clinton rhetoric of "realistic"...aka I am compromised

so don't expect much.

[Baobab]

10. The developing world expect the US to make good on the promise of jobs as part of services liberalis

They are getting ready to help us with our skilled labour shortage

[That Guy 888]

4. I remember when shrub ran for governor of TX against Ann Richards

She had just pushed through emissions testing for vehicle inspections. When shrub got in, they eliminated emissions testing for the same reason: this will hurt poor people. I live in Texas, believe me the horrible air quality hurts "the poor" worse than having emission checks on your vehicle.

The only time "the rich" are concerned with economic inequality is when they're trying to make sure it stays unequal.

[Jefferson23]

5. They're exceedingly consistent on that score, that's for sure. n/t

[Baobab]

7. Elites claim that to have more educated people is not necessary in a post industrial society.

seriously.

they argue that it gives people unrealistic expectations that could never be filled. They also want to privatize all education and health care and drmatically lower wages so they reflect world norms.

Going by the watch what they do not what they say rule, that is consistent with the official US trade policy, pushing that point of view.

[Baobab]

6. Lots of informative news stories from India which inform this debate- WHY? here's why

Because when joining the WTO india was suspected to give up the right to education - to "liberalize' their market so that corporations could have a level playing field. That in the WTO seems to be interpreted to mean they had to give up their right to education because they have some private schools.

See the results of the following search

https://www.google.com/search?q=supplied+neither+on+a+commercial+basis%2C+nor+in+competition+with+one+or+more+service+suppliers&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

[Jefferson23]

8. Thank you for the link. n/t