Happy nice time story, Robyn. I just want to clarify one thing: the University of California didn’t start charging tuition after 1966, it started charging *fees*
That means the UC system is still tuition-free, technically
Conservatives: Connecticut shouldn't spend all that money because millionaire's will move away to a Texas desert or a Florida swamp really soon because of the high taxes. Any day now.
Will no one think of the poor starving for-profit ripoff "technical colleges" that advertise incessantly on daytime TV? How will they survive when the suckers realize that they can get, for no cost, certification that is actually worth something and will help them get a real job?
This is the biggest catastrophe since their patron saint, Betsy DeVos, had to quit her job abruptly when it looked like Trump might go completely off the rails and force her, as a Cabinet member, to confront some icky 25th Amendment scenario.
I understand that 'better jobs' is a logical selling point for free education. But having more educated people doesn't create more high paying jobs. They're simply are a finite number of those kinds of jobs that More people are going to be competing for. I understand that it is a hard sell, but why not promote education simply for the Joy of learning and the benefit of having an educated populous. One that can pursue knowledge for personal reasons. Creating better informed citizens. Citizens capable of critical thinking that is seriously lacking these dats I know that is a more difficult sell than college=$$$. But all college can do is buy you a lottery ticket into that better life. Not everyone who goes to college is going to be able to grab that brass ring. I wish we could just focus on the intrinsic value of education, but I understand why we can't. Everything has to get you something tangible these days
In the 1970s, free tuition at state colleges in Illinois gave me the opportunity not only to go to school, but to get an education. I tried classes I wasn't sure about, I changed majors, I encountered innumerable novel ideas and people. My life and that of my family is richer for the education I was able to receive and grow with.
Elder care is expensive. Hopefully they can help providing happy endings for all Massachusettians by starting a MassAge program to house and feed the olds.
I've long advocated for CC's to be rolled into the public education system just for the fact that we have progressed beyond the point that high school prepares you for.
One problem with free community college is that it beckons retirees with nothing else to do. That would be okay except that a) the CCs are supposed to be training people for careers, in which retirees have no interest, and b) planting a few geezers among a bunch of 18-year-olds will drastically alter classroom sociology. For better or worse, I don't know. But if I'm right, CCs will be looking a lot different.
I guess I don’t see why that would be a problem. Are you concerned that the state would offer free tuition but not offer enough classes?
I know if it were free for me, I’d take a few courses every year for the rest of my life just for the fun of staying sharp. But I already was rocking the gray hair when I graduated anyway…
Once you turn 60 here in California, you can take CSU courses (not sure about UC) for free, or almost free, so I don't know that free community college will make things look that much different.
I went to a community college for three years while working full-time while I was in my twenties (not a geezer) in order to prepare for a different university degree than the one I had pursued. There were a LOT of people older than me in my classes because they wanted to do something different or better for themselves/their families than they had otherwise previously been able to pursue. None were "retirees" and I imagine that this isn't a never-ending "all of the classes you want forever" type of bill.
I loved that there was a mix of all sorts of people: kids whose parents were forcing them to go to school to do SOMETHING if they still wanted to live at home, younger folks who were working hard and saving money by going to community college before looking to transfer to a university, people who had messed up at university and were looking for a second chance, caregivers at eldercare who figured out that they could make way more than minimum wage if they got some sort of nursing degree, people like me - oftentimes older - who realized that their current career path was NOT what they wanted, people who had chosen to have kids early and stay at home with them until they were older who wanted something different for themselves now ... it was actually awesome.
I was the oldest person in my university program while I was pursuing my degree after community college, and I think that it actually gave a lot of the other people in my program a lot of perspective. I was working full time during that demanding program as well - I wasn't going to football games or parties or even sleeping, because I had to work. A lot of them outright told me that they really respected what I was doing and that it gave them a very different perspective than they'd otherwise have had. They had all of these dreams about what their degree would do for them, and I just kept saying "I want a job that gives me medical and dental insurance".
I'm not sure I buy the "free state university" line. Granted, Reagan was governor of California in the sixties; I went to a state college in NY state in the mid-70s. It was not expensive, but it was definitely not free. Even with a scholarship and aid package it was still about $2,800 for tuition (about $18,000 today accounting for inflation) not counting books and fees. Of course, tuition, even at a state level, has outpaced inflation.
I went to ASU ,class of 79, I was an instate student. Paid $175.00 a semester my freshman year. I met hundreds of students from back East who said the out of state tuition was half what they paid instate on the East Coast. They moved to AZ and got instate tuition after their freshman year.
Even if it's not free, it'll at least help cover some of the now-ludicrous costs of a college education. Just as an example, I entered college 18 years ago, and the tuition then was half of what my alma mater is asking now.
I am very pleased that Massachusetts is going to offer free tuition to community colleges. Mild Jr went part time for 3 years, starting out in studio art and discovered his love of history thanks to a professor who had been in the Spanish Civil War. After that he was able to get into university in the UK, where the cost was comparable to going to UMass, even counting airfare.
Look, I really hate to be a Debbie Downer. But I do get tired of the endless refrain of "let's get people into college and all problems are solved!" Everyone things that we have to fight and struggle and when the person finally makes it in - 2 year, 4 year, doesn't matter - that's the end of the story and everyone lives happily ever after.
Well I can tell you, that's only the beginning of the story. How does the student perform? Do they have a clue what needs to be done? Someone who misses class after class because why not? Or doesn't understand assignments have deadlines? Or, more often, someone with personal problems and can't figure out how to make everything work? "Mr Doug, I had to find a condominium for my mother and that's why I couldn't do the work!"
Getting into school is only the first part. How does the next part go?
Agreed - a flip side to this coin is to support policies that require businesses to treat all employees fairly - to support unions, to increase the minimum wage, to increase prosecution of wage theft (preferably as actual theft, rather than allowing some separate kind of justice. If an employee takes $30 from the till, you can bet they are going to jail, if their boss takes $30 from their paycheck, then... what? A $25 fine?)
Also - I would like to point out, as a college instructor, there is no particular demographic that is particularly less responsible. If a student does not understand your deadlines, that is more likely the fault of the professor than the student. A student who just ditches class _for_ _no_ _reason_ is actually quite rare, and more likely to be from a white-collar background. A student who has to miss a class because they had to find a place for their mother to live is, pretty much by definition, _responsible_, and I would give them as much grace as possible.
I believe that most professors and instructors, like me, want their students to succeed and work with them to achieve success. In addition to office hours, I would reach out to students struggling with my classes, pointing them to resources available to help them both academically and personally. Those resources are pretty much a part of every community college and state university system - at least the ones I have personally interacted with (Colorado, Washington, and Oregon) and the ones I have heard of through others (Oklahoma, Indiana, California).
If that is not already a part of the system, certainly some of that money can go to increasing that support as well as tuition.
I think in this instance it's offering people an opportunity to further their overall education as well as help them get training for a particular line of work. Our education system up through high school is... okay, but it is almost entirely useless in teaching students a trade or means to support themselves once they become adults. Free college would at the very least make strides towards closing this gap.
I'm not saying it causes problems, more like it reveals problems. If the student isn't fully responsible, they will have serious problems in college. Hopefully they'll learn, or else they'll badger the instructor, the school, whatever, blaming everyone else for their problems. Getting people into school is only the first step, who addresses the next step?
I would venture to say that if college reveals such problems, the student is in an ideal place to learn and correct for them. The alternative being, I assume, this person who could not afford college, instead goes on to get a job where.. these problems never arise? In either case, who do you propose should be responsible for this problem person, and how? In college the student would correct, or fail to graduate. Without college, the student may have no avenue to correction, only failure, which could be much more catastrophic to them.
"Put one foot in front of the other ... then you'll be walking out the door"
I don't suspect that everyone taking the courses will end up graduating. That's a highly unrealistic thought. But it's a unique approach to using a tax on the insanely wealthy to give a lift to those that can (and want) to exceed expectations. Nobody said it solves all problems. There are some who will try and will fail. There are some that'll struggle through and eventually graduate and earn more money than they otherwise might not earn.
There are some for whom a Trade school should have been their focus. Maybe they aren't ideal for this program as they might earn more faster than those in a 2 or 4 year school by learning a trade. Unions everywhere are hiring those without college degrees. And there are still trade school dropouts too.
It is worth pointing out that community colleges _are_ trade schools. Want to become a welder? Machinist? Medical Assistant? Dental Assistant? Etc. Take a look at what your local community college offers - and tell anyone who is interested that they would do better to go to that public resource than _any_ private institution (DeVry, Heald, etc.) as - even with tuition - it is cheaper, and has more resources.
And yes - there are people who would not do well in _any_ academic setting, which just highlights why (as I said above), we should also work to ensure that all jobs pay at least a living wage!
And a lot of community colleges provide training in things that are sort of "trade-school" equivalent. Basic courses for a certificate that prepares someone for a job as electrician or a medical lab technician or an LPN that will give them a huge leg up versus someone who didn't have those training.
So many posts to "Like" today! Not sure I can handle all this good stuff. I'll have to watch the Mets game tonight just to bring me back down to earth again.
Oh, by the way, with that second GIF from what's obviously an old Reese's commercial.....
Who the heck walks around with an open jar of peanut butter?
It's depressing that the millionaire tax is taking in more than expected, that means that millionaires are making more than expected, and we should strongly discourage that.
The bone-chilling terror and abject desperation in Drumpfenfuehrer's voice is just all too obvious. There is a frantic, enraged, petulant tone underscoring every syllable the fat fucking fascist is excreting at the moment.
So how long until everyone notices that this "laboratory of democracy" is doing much better than places that aren't taxing millionaires?
How long until they take the state to scotus to have this banned just because it makes people's lives better?
Happy nice time story, Robyn. I just want to clarify one thing: the University of California didn’t start charging tuition after 1966, it started charging *fees*
That means the UC system is still tuition-free, technically
Conservatives: Connecticut shouldn't spend all that money because millionaire's will move away to a Texas desert or a Florida swamp really soon because of the high taxes. Any day now.
That is a very nice time. Remember it matters when Democrats are in office!
Maryland: We Offer Free Community College To Our Less-Than-Rich Residents.
Also Maryland: We Send Andy Harris To Congress Every Two Years.
Me: [Head explodes]
Will no one think of the poor starving for-profit ripoff "technical colleges" that advertise incessantly on daytime TV? How will they survive when the suckers realize that they can get, for no cost, certification that is actually worth something and will help them get a real job?
This is the biggest catastrophe since their patron saint, Betsy DeVos, had to quit her job abruptly when it looked like Trump might go completely off the rails and force her, as a Cabinet member, to confront some icky 25th Amendment scenario.
I understand that 'better jobs' is a logical selling point for free education. But having more educated people doesn't create more high paying jobs. They're simply are a finite number of those kinds of jobs that More people are going to be competing for. I understand that it is a hard sell, but why not promote education simply for the Joy of learning and the benefit of having an educated populous. One that can pursue knowledge for personal reasons. Creating better informed citizens. Citizens capable of critical thinking that is seriously lacking these dats I know that is a more difficult sell than college=$$$. But all college can do is buy you a lottery ticket into that better life. Not everyone who goes to college is going to be able to grab that brass ring. I wish we could just focus on the intrinsic value of education, but I understand why we can't. Everything has to get you something tangible these days
> ... the benefit of having an educated populous.
An educated populous is not a benefit for politicians who want to manipulate the poorly-educated into supporting them.
true
In the 1970s, free tuition at state colleges in Illinois gave me the opportunity not only to go to school, but to get an education. I tried classes I wasn't sure about, I changed majors, I encountered innumerable novel ideas and people. My life and that of my family is richer for the education I was able to receive and grow with.
Elder care is expensive. Hopefully they can help providing happy endings for all Massachusettians by starting a MassAge program to house and feed the olds.
And rub them down.
Don't shaft the elderly -- reach around and give them hope.
Ronnie Raygun and his Goon Squad with ANOTHER fuck over America tale.
I've long advocated for CC's to be rolled into the public education system just for the fact that we have progressed beyond the point that high school prepares you for.
One problem with free community college is that it beckons retirees with nothing else to do. That would be okay except that a) the CCs are supposed to be training people for careers, in which retirees have no interest, and b) planting a few geezers among a bunch of 18-year-olds will drastically alter classroom sociology. For better or worse, I don't know. But if I'm right, CCs will be looking a lot different.
Is there a bingo card with a square for "Retired people taking free CC classes and altering classroom sociology?"
Continuing education is a good thing. For one it can lead to people being less credulous towards the President Klan Robes of the world.
I guess I don’t see why that would be a problem. Are you concerned that the state would offer free tuition but not offer enough classes?
I know if it were free for me, I’d take a few courses every year for the rest of my life just for the fun of staying sharp. But I already was rocking the gray hair when I graduated anyway…
Once you turn 60 here in California, you can take CSU courses (not sure about UC) for free, or almost free, so I don't know that free community college will make things look that much different.
I went to a community college for three years while working full-time while I was in my twenties (not a geezer) in order to prepare for a different university degree than the one I had pursued. There were a LOT of people older than me in my classes because they wanted to do something different or better for themselves/their families than they had otherwise previously been able to pursue. None were "retirees" and I imagine that this isn't a never-ending "all of the classes you want forever" type of bill.
I loved that there was a mix of all sorts of people: kids whose parents were forcing them to go to school to do SOMETHING if they still wanted to live at home, younger folks who were working hard and saving money by going to community college before looking to transfer to a university, people who had messed up at university and were looking for a second chance, caregivers at eldercare who figured out that they could make way more than minimum wage if they got some sort of nursing degree, people like me - oftentimes older - who realized that their current career path was NOT what they wanted, people who had chosen to have kids early and stay at home with them until they were older who wanted something different for themselves now ... it was actually awesome.
I was the oldest person in my university program while I was pursuing my degree after community college, and I think that it actually gave a lot of the other people in my program a lot of perspective. I was working full time during that demanding program as well - I wasn't going to football games or parties or even sleeping, because I had to work. A lot of them outright told me that they really respected what I was doing and that it gave them a very different perspective than they'd otherwise have had. They had all of these dreams about what their degree would do for them, and I just kept saying "I want a job that gives me medical and dental insurance".
I'm not sure I buy the "free state university" line. Granted, Reagan was governor of California in the sixties; I went to a state college in NY state in the mid-70s. It was not expensive, but it was definitely not free. Even with a scholarship and aid package it was still about $2,800 for tuition (about $18,000 today accounting for inflation) not counting books and fees. Of course, tuition, even at a state level, has outpaced inflation.
I went to ASU ,class of 79, I was an instate student. Paid $175.00 a semester my freshman year. I met hundreds of students from back East who said the out of state tuition was half what they paid instate on the East Coast. They moved to AZ and got instate tuition after their freshman year.
Even if it's not free, it'll at least help cover some of the now-ludicrous costs of a college education. Just as an example, I entered college 18 years ago, and the tuition then was half of what my alma mater is asking now.
I am very pleased that Massachusetts is going to offer free tuition to community colleges. Mild Jr went part time for 3 years, starting out in studio art and discovered his love of history thanks to a professor who had been in the Spanish Civil War. After that he was able to get into university in the UK, where the cost was comparable to going to UMass, even counting airfare.
Look, I really hate to be a Debbie Downer. But I do get tired of the endless refrain of "let's get people into college and all problems are solved!" Everyone things that we have to fight and struggle and when the person finally makes it in - 2 year, 4 year, doesn't matter - that's the end of the story and everyone lives happily ever after.
Well I can tell you, that's only the beginning of the story. How does the student perform? Do they have a clue what needs to be done? Someone who misses class after class because why not? Or doesn't understand assignments have deadlines? Or, more often, someone with personal problems and can't figure out how to make everything work? "Mr Doug, I had to find a condominium for my mother and that's why I couldn't do the work!"
Getting into school is only the first part. How does the next part go?
Agreed - a flip side to this coin is to support policies that require businesses to treat all employees fairly - to support unions, to increase the minimum wage, to increase prosecution of wage theft (preferably as actual theft, rather than allowing some separate kind of justice. If an employee takes $30 from the till, you can bet they are going to jail, if their boss takes $30 from their paycheck, then... what? A $25 fine?)
Also - I would like to point out, as a college instructor, there is no particular demographic that is particularly less responsible. If a student does not understand your deadlines, that is more likely the fault of the professor than the student. A student who just ditches class _for_ _no_ _reason_ is actually quite rare, and more likely to be from a white-collar background. A student who has to miss a class because they had to find a place for their mother to live is, pretty much by definition, _responsible_, and I would give them as much grace as possible.
I believe that most professors and instructors, like me, want their students to succeed and work with them to achieve success. In addition to office hours, I would reach out to students struggling with my classes, pointing them to resources available to help them both academically and personally. Those resources are pretty much a part of every community college and state university system - at least the ones I have personally interacted with (Colorado, Washington, and Oregon) and the ones I have heard of through others (Oklahoma, Indiana, California).
If that is not already a part of the system, certainly some of that money can go to increasing that support as well as tuition.
I think in this instance it's offering people an opportunity to further their overall education as well as help them get training for a particular line of work. Our education system up through high school is... okay, but it is almost entirely useless in teaching students a trade or means to support themselves once they become adults. Free college would at the very least make strides towards closing this gap.
Gee, if you put it that way, it's almost like providing free community college tuition causes more problems than it solves.
I'm not saying it causes problems, more like it reveals problems. If the student isn't fully responsible, they will have serious problems in college. Hopefully they'll learn, or else they'll badger the instructor, the school, whatever, blaming everyone else for their problems. Getting people into school is only the first step, who addresses the next step?
I would venture to say that if college reveals such problems, the student is in an ideal place to learn and correct for them. The alternative being, I assume, this person who could not afford college, instead goes on to get a job where.. these problems never arise? In either case, who do you propose should be responsible for this problem person, and how? In college the student would correct, or fail to graduate. Without college, the student may have no avenue to correction, only failure, which could be much more catastrophic to them.
"Put one foot in front of the other ... then you'll be walking out the door"
I don't suspect that everyone taking the courses will end up graduating. That's a highly unrealistic thought. But it's a unique approach to using a tax on the insanely wealthy to give a lift to those that can (and want) to exceed expectations. Nobody said it solves all problems. There are some who will try and will fail. There are some that'll struggle through and eventually graduate and earn more money than they otherwise might not earn.
There are some for whom a Trade school should have been their focus. Maybe they aren't ideal for this program as they might earn more faster than those in a 2 or 4 year school by learning a trade. Unions everywhere are hiring those without college degrees. And there are still trade school dropouts too.
It is worth pointing out that community colleges _are_ trade schools. Want to become a welder? Machinist? Medical Assistant? Dental Assistant? Etc. Take a look at what your local community college offers - and tell anyone who is interested that they would do better to go to that public resource than _any_ private institution (DeVry, Heald, etc.) as - even with tuition - it is cheaper, and has more resources.
And yes - there are people who would not do well in _any_ academic setting, which just highlights why (as I said above), we should also work to ensure that all jobs pay at least a living wage!
I full agree, especially on earning a living wage.
And a lot of community colleges provide training in things that are sort of "trade-school" equivalent. Basic courses for a certificate that prepares someone for a job as electrician or a medical lab technician or an LPN that will give them a huge leg up versus someone who didn't have those training.
So many posts to "Like" today! Not sure I can handle all this good stuff. I'll have to watch the Mets game tonight just to bring me back down to earth again.
Oh, by the way, with that second GIF from what's obviously an old Reese's commercial.....
Who the heck walks around with an open jar of peanut butter?
It was a 60's thing, and yes, it did involve drugs.
Hmm. I am considering the sexual innuendo of "You stuck your chocolate into my jar of peanut butter, and oh, my, it was good!"
So I have to say, who does that? Shameless hussies, that's who!
Jelly roll Morton?
It's depressing that the millionaire tax is taking in more than expected, that means that millionaires are making more than expected, and we should strongly discourage that.
It's Massachusetts. I'm from theah, and we can be WICKED smaht enough to make a lotta money....
The bone-chilling terror and abject desperation in Drumpfenfuehrer's voice is just all too obvious. There is a frantic, enraged, petulant tone underscoring every syllable the fat fucking fascist is excreting at the moment.
Panic absolutely consumes him.
I muted the t.v. as soon as they showed him, but oh, am I glad to hear that hahaha!!