TANSTAAFL

If you genuinely believe that a college education is the key to a secure economic future, as President Obama clearly does, his latest proposal is a good first step:

Today, the President unveiled a new proposal: Make two years of community college free for responsible students across America.

In our growing global economy, Americans need to have more knowledge and more skills to compete — by 2020, an estimated 35 percent of job openings will require at least a bachelor’s degree, and 30 percent will require some college or an associate’s degree. Students should be able to get the knowledge and the skills they need without taking on decades’ worth of student debt.

Hat tip: memeorandum

If, on the other hand, you believe as I do that the president is mistaken and the key to a secure economic future is more jobs that pay better wages the president’s plan is a misuse of funds. There are some sectors in which what the president believes is true. For example, in many government jobs there are tier and lane pay systems in which the degrees or college credits you have, the higher your pay. But that’s not true for most of the economy and it is most especially not true for the jobs that have been created during the Obama presidency. A burger-flipper with a PhD will be paid the same as one that hasn’t graduated from high school. The money being spent would be much better devoted to technical training and apprenticeship programs, things to which other developed countries devote far more attention than we do.

However, let’s consider the press release a little more closely. The only way the program would be free would be for the teachers and staff of these community colleges to donate their time. Otherwise somebody else will pay for it either via tax dollars or whatever consequences there might be for the federal government simply to extend its own credit as has been the case for between half and a third of federal spending for some time now.

I have no objection to free education or free healthcare for that matter and I believe that professionals, e.g. physicians, lawyers, college professors, have an ethical obligation to donate at least some of their professional efforts to the needy.

However, referring to something that’s paid for by somebody else as “free” is a debasement of language. Let’s call it what it would be: a gift or a benefit or a subsidy. Or just call it being on the dole.

10 comments… add one
  • Tano Link

    One doesn’t go to community colleges to get a PhD. One goes to get the technical training that you seem to agree is useful.

    The statement you quote refers to making the two years “free for responsible students”. That is not an abuse of language, it is actually an accurate statement. No one is claiming that it is “free” for everybody. Free for the student – meaning the rest of us pay for it. I think everyone can understand that.

  • Guarneri Link

    1). I think it’s even worse. Most community colleges first two years curriculum is really what one used to come out of high school having mastered. Taxpayers are paying twice.

    2). Just because someone is responsible does not make it less “free,”or a “gift” etc.

    3). It in no way surprises me that government pays for pieces of paper, not capabilities.

    4). I would far prefer subsidizing a machining class than Psychology 101. Try to find a good machinist these days.

  • Tano Link

    They teach machining classes at my local community college. Also auto repair, bricklaying, construction management, electronics, HVAC, etc etc.
    Are you not aware of what community colleges are, or do?

  • TastyBits Link

    The college degree push is no different than the housing push. It is about the financing. There is a pool of money that needs to be lent, and there are colleges that intend to get as much of that money as possible.

    When it comes time to get asses into seats, college professors will run a line of shit as well as any other hustler. On the street corner, in the corner office, or atop the ivory tower, the game is the same. Well, there is one difference. A street hustler knows he is a hustler.

  • steve Link

    “you believe as I do that the president is mistaken and the key to a secure economic future is more jobs that pay better wages”

    Since you don’t think education is necessary, what kinds of jobs do you see kids with high school educations getting that will pay better wages? How will they prepare for those jobs?

    Steve

  • Since you don’t think education is necessary

    That’s not an accurate characterization of my position. My view is that higher education of itself does not produce jobs that require higher education and there’s already a scarcity of jobs that require higher education. The reality is that rather than qualifying young people for jobs higher up the value chain, higher education gives young people a competitive advantage for jobs that don’t require higher education and don’t pay as though they require higher education over people who don’t have higher education.

    In this country higher education has historically played two roles. It has provided a mechanism for the children of the rich to network and it has provided pre-professional education. Consistent with that, something like 25-30% of young people are actually prepared to do college-level work. If the rest of the world is any gauge, the highest proportion of young people who will be able to graduate from a four year college program is 50-60%.

    What happens to the rest of the people?

    In answer to questions higher up in this comment thread, if the president’s proposed program is tailored to vocational courses and is characterized as a benefit or a grant, I wouldn’t have many complaints about it. I think that German-style apprentice programs would be better but you can’t have everything.

    Perhaps the community colleges are different elsewhere but hereabouts you don’t prepare for a job as a carpenter, electrician, plumber, or HVAC guy by taking courses at the community college. You apprentice. I know quite a few people in the trades and I don’t believe any of them have ever attended a community college. The courses that I see in the syllabus of my local community college seem to be more tailored for people who want to become contractors.

    As to how we create more, better-paying jobs, contrary to the derisive comments in the OTB thread, I think that do it by having a tighter market for labor. Unions don’t create jobs–they largely raise wages by artificially tightening the labor market.

    I’ve written here pretty regularly on the ways that we create jobs so I don’t want to recap that here. Basically, we do it be fixing our financial, trade, immigration, etc. systems.

  • TastyBits Link

    I agree with @Tano. The Community College around here used to be a vocational school, but I do not know if it still is. Drafters, welders, pipe fitters, machinists, electricians, carpenters, and other trade people need math and science that is more advanced than high school but not as advanced as engineering.

    A pipe fitter needs to understand basic trigonometry when running pipe. Trust me. You do not want the tool pusher on your ass because you just f*cked up several thousands of dollars of pipe with the wrong angle, and if you blew the schedule, just run.

  • Andy Link

    The devil is always in the details:

    The requirements:

    – What students have to do: Students must attend community college at least half-time, maintain a 2.5 GPA, and make steady progress toward completing their program.

    – What community colleges have to do: Community colleges will be expected to offer programs that are either 1) academic programs that fully transfer credits to local public four-year colleges and universities, or 2) occupational training programs with high graduation rates and lead to in-demand degrees and certificates. Community colleges must also adopt promising and evidence-based institutional reforms to improve student outcomes.

    – What the federal government has to do: Federal funding will cover three-quarters of the average cost of community college. Participating states will be expected to contribute the remaining funds necessary to eliminate the tuition for eligible students.

    Read more at the White House fact sheet here:

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/01/09/fact-sheet-white-house-unveils-america-s-college-promise-proposal-tuitio

    How many community colleges can meet those requirements? How many CC vocational certificate programs can meet those requirements? How many states can – and are willing to- afford covering 1/4 of the expense?

  • ... Link

    Andy, that’s very interesting that Obama wants to fob off 25% of the funding to the states, who are mostly strapped as it is.

    And it would typically cost more than that, at least for in-state students, as public colleges and universities typically subsidize prices for in-state students. It would also be interesting to know how this would work for out-of-state students.

    Also, I don’t see this proposal going ANYWHERE politically. Is Congress really going to fund this? Is the President just going to pretend Congress doesn’t matter again? Has he laid ANY groundwork for getting this into Congress, with his own party at least? And if this idea was such a good one, why is he only having it now, in the last quarter of his Presidency, with a hostile Congress?

    OTOH, maybe if this does go through I can go back to college and learn how to weld!

    Actually, one other problem: What counts as a community/junior college? A lot of them down here in Florida have been transitioning to four year institutions over the last ten to twenty years.

  • jan Link

    Here’s an interesting twist to Obama’s generous college plan: The Community College Subversion?.

Leave a Comment