There are a couple of costs to the universities that have gone up far more than inflation. First, is that universities have far more administrative staff than they did 20, 30, 40 years etc. Many of those administrators make significantly more money than the professors who teach the students. Beyond that, each of those administrators are covered by health insurance. Another cost that has far outpaced inflation. Part of that is on us as we are demanding more services and our governments have demanded more accountability in areas we weren’t as interested in in the past. The facilities are much larger, they have had to keep up with technology which changes much more rapidly than in the past. Residential facilities are much nicer today than they were in the past as are dining options. All of these add to costs. For many colleges and universities the sports teams also contribute (though I suspect at the elite sports schools the major programs support themselves). I suppose there are a lot of other things that contribute as well.
That’s exactly the problem where I live.
More pickle ball courts, medication that expires faster than it’s consumed, and funds for pet climate projects, less state appropriation for the in state schools.
If your state is run by Republicans, it’s probably the same overall, but the pet projects might differ. I think pickle ball is bipartisan.
Students don’t need to attend a “private” undergraduate institution to get a great education. For most kids the state flagship is their best educational bargain and, in most states, the cost is fairly reasonable.
If that’s true, then why do people who earn AMI need federal aid to afford it (in-state public)?
Not sure I understand your comment. I am referring to a number of people I know who live in large houses, drive luxury cars, talk about expensive vacations, etc. (not a jealousy thing, we are very fortunate and have lots more than we need) who claim they are “taxed to death” and vote for politicians who constantly want to cut taxes. The people who lived in an excellent school district and benefited from that, but as soon as their kids are out of the schools want the taxes for schools (including state higher education) cut.
Please note I am not referring to people who are genuinely struggling financially.
Not sure what the reference to pickleball means, but they don’t want to pay taxes for public parks/recreation, either.
Public universities used to be funded at a much higher rate than they are now. Education as an investment in a better future for society as a whole doesn’t seem to be a priority.
It’s not at all a new problem that paying for college is very dependent on parents being able and willing to pay.
As a student, it seems like the same options are available now as were available then…military service to pay for college, pay as you go community college, find an employer who funds education (expect this is not as common now). To finish my degree, I had to wait years until I could be considered an independent student, then took out loans and worked full time while going to school full time. TBH, that was about as far from the ideal college experience as I could imagine.
If a high school education has no pathway to a living wage job, then I would think it would be a social good to extend the educational pathway for everyone (K-12+ subsidized higher education of some sort). It’s not like this would be a revolutionary concept, there are dozens of countries we could look to as a model for this kind of system.
I am speaking only to state legislature appropriations, not the financial decisions of individual consumers.
It is true that, nationally, state legislatures have appropriated less funding as a proportion of the total state budget to public colleges and universities than they did two or three decades ago.
This lack of adequate appropriation has led to infighting between various public university factions regarding who gets how much of the ever-reducing slice of the state pie.
This has happened regardless of which political party is in each state’s leadership. It’s a reflection of demographic shifts that have occurred over those time periods and the voter priorities that align with them.
Appropriations for public colleges and universities is, by their very nature, political. Absent appropriations, they don’t exist.
There are already a good amount of PSLF programs. Trouble is…some of these indebted students don’t want to work in priority often low income areas where these are offered.
Reminder that politics is only discussed in the political forum.
Exactly!
This whole thread topic is political: How to bring college costs down for everyone?
Should the thread be moved there?
Yes, if people want to talk specifically about politics, red state/blue state, and policy, a new thread needs to be started in the political forum.
Other comments can continue here.
Since the Political Forum is a closed group, I’m not going to move the entire thread.
Why does it need to be political?
Legislative funding is only one factor.
Pickleball.
Then why financial aid exists?
And underprivileged students who get free education in current system, they want to go to underprivileged areas?
I’m missing the point of this thread. I’m especially missing the point if the OP answers every post with “Yeah, but …”
So in addition to not delving into politics, I will remind users that this is not a debating society.
I don’t know if this post is allowed or not, but it makes the point I was trying to make. We have to look at the breadth of the problem in order to come up with potential causes and solutions:
It’s there to help the neediest students as determined by the college. Unfortunately, some families aren’t going to qualify for aid because, in the eyes of the school, they make too much. This is most likely to affect people who live in high cost of living areas. Unfortunately, some kids can’t afford to go to Harvard (if they can get in - which is a long shot) - either because their parents can’t afford it (and they don’t qualify for aid) or they don’t want to spend that much. Attending an elite school is like owning a luxury car -nice to have but not necessary to get you from point A to point B.