https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/04/17/new-yorks-tuition-free-college-program-sparks-debates-and-defenses
This raises a lot of issues. Though admirable I think this law has too many flaws. The most obvious is that a young kid may find he/she just can't cut it in the major of their choice and will want to change the direction of their studies and could find themselves paying for tuition anyway.
The other issues which the article does not cover is what taxes will fund this and we know the cost of higher education keeps going up and so will NY resident's taxes.
Gotta figure Topper's happe now, hey?
As ever, the "selling" of this does not adequately represent reality. The tuition isn't free. It's more a good faith loan from the citizens of NY to the college students. You must remain in the SUNY system and then gain employment within the state for three years after graduation and only then is the "loan" absolved. Anything less then that, and the student will be on the hook for the expenses incurred.
Also, it only covers tuition. So as the plan is sold to youngsters looking for an opportunity they will still have to find finances for living and bookstore expenses which may come as a surprise to some families.
One admirable aspect of this is the attempt through the three year employment hitch to tie people to the community. Many areas of New York are a total wasteland and have suffered severe brain drain over the last three decades. Then again, many will cringe at the "big brother" aspect of dictating time and place to the youth.
I don't find the residency requirement admirable at all.
While it has it's flaws, I do commend NY on trying to target a middle income slice of the population that has been struck extremely hard by the rising costs of college. The families it targets typically do not have the $$ resources to cut a check directly to a college, but make too much to receive things like the Pell & TAP grant.
A small step, a worthy experiment.
Quote from: reinko on April 18, 2017, 11:08:33 AM
While it has it's flaws, I do commend NY on trying to target a middle income slice of the population that has been struck extremely hard by the rising costs of college. The families it targets typically do not have the $$ resources to cut a check directly to a college, but make too much to receive things like the Pell & TAP grant.
I am afraid "free tuition" allows colleges to continue to raise the price of education with no consideration for the consequences. There are still strings tied to this program.
Quote from: mu-rara on April 18, 2017, 03:32:40 PM
I am afraid "free tuition" allows colleges to continue to raise the price of education with no consideration for the consequences. There are still strings tied to this program.
Exactly right
one of the good things to come out of this, if it comes to full fruition is, new york would become a fine training ground and stepping stone in the job market to areas where the cost of living is less. they will put in their 3 years and move to states whose environment is more conducive to raising a family outside of the hamster wheel of new york city, Connecticut, jersey, et.al.
This is a bad deal for the tax paying public. Among other things it artificially distort the demand for a mediocre university system.
Quote from: mu-rara on April 18, 2017, 03:32:40 PM
I am afraid "free tuition" allows colleges to continue to raise the price of education with no consideration for the consequences. There are still strings tied to this program.
That would seem to be the case - so the state would need to have safeguards in place. Having a larger student base would certainly help in this regard. I certainly support the idea of a "free" education (a misleading term because there are conditions attached), but I also support regulations to protect all sides from abuse.
In state tuition isn't above what they could conceivably get from a Pell Grant. This would hold them in a place people are leaving and not allow them to go somewhere and possibly make more money.
Good to know New York State is interested in continuing to inflate the student debt bubble.
As a former economics major and current professional wouldn't increasing the supply of college graduates reduce the cost of hiring them (pay they would earn) thus decreasing the return on the investment (cost) of their tuition. AND wouldn't this reduce the delta between non-college graduates and college graduates increasing the opportunity cost (lost 4 years of wages) versus the increase you would receive by getting a college degree. It may even push down the earnings of non-college graduates as they could more easily be displaced by relatively cheaper college graduates.
Quote from: PBRme on April 20, 2017, 01:49:21 PM
As a former economics major and current professional wouldn't increasing the supply of college graduates reduce the cost of hiring them (pay they would earn) thus decreasing the return on the investment (cost) of their tuition. AND wouldn't this reduce the delta between non-college graduates and college graduates increasing the opportunity cost (lost 4 years of wages) versus the increase you would receive by getting a college degree. It may even push down the earnings of non-college graduates as they could more easily be displaced by relatively cheaper college graduates.
better get control of the H-1B visa abuse. might have started out as a good idea, but like many things our gubmint does, goes to hell and no one does anything about it. technically, i think it's legal, but...come on man!! this is a really sad situation that is being totally manipulated by the big dogs
Would a family making 125k or more be able to sue NY denying them, i.e their children, equal protection under the 14th amendment?
Quote from: muwarrior69 on April 20, 2017, 09:04:27 PM
Would a family making 125k or more be able to sue NY denying them, i.e their children, equal protection under the 14th amendment?
All sorts of states, not to mention the federal government, gives out means based financial aid. This is no different.
Quote from: Sultan of Slap O' Fivin' on April 20, 2017, 09:31:52 PM
All sorts of states, not to mention the federal government, gives out means based financial aid. This is no different.
So the 4 kids from a family of 6 whose parents make 130k have to go into debt to get a college degree, but the only child whose parents make a 110K gets a free ride. Does not seem to me at least to pass the smell test of what the 14th amendment intended.
Quote from: muwarrior69 on April 21, 2017, 11:43:04 AM
So the 4 kids from a family of 6 whose parents make 130k have to go into debt to get a college degree, but the only child whose parents make a 110K gets a free ride. Does not seem to me at least to pass the smell test of what the 14th amendment intended.
I don't have a JD but your understanding of equal protection seems off. Can any of our resident legal experts weigh in?
Quote from: muwarrior69 on April 21, 2017, 11:43:04 AM
So the 4 kids from a family of 6 whose parents make 130k have to go into debt to get a college degree, but the only child whose parents make a 110K gets a free ride. Does not seem to me at least to pass the smell test of what the 14th amendment intended.
All sorts of benefits (such as certain tax deductions) are income dependent.
Seems to be not as hard a some are trying to make it.
Some here speculate on the "fairness" or other aspects of this would-be law. My guess is that the law will be more than one or two sentences and all of these factors will be weighed and judged.
Typical of this board, we get a ton of what-ifs.
Quote from: Jockey on April 21, 2017, 04:47:56 PM
Seems to be not as hard a some are trying to make it.
Some here speculate on the "fairness" or other aspects of this would-be law. My guess is that the law will be more than one or two sentences and all of these factors will be weighed and judged.
Typical of this board, we get a ton of what-ifs.
Ain't that part of what makes discussions and debates what they are supposed to be? A free expression of thoughts and opinions? If there was a one size fits all or everyone agreed upon everything, might as well live in venezuala or something, oy vey
Quote from: Lazar's Headband on April 21, 2017, 01:54:23 PM
I don't have a JD but your understanding of equal protection seems off. Can any of our resident legal experts weigh in?
Happy to, and you're right. Laws are rarely able to be applied equally across the board. As long as a law is rationally related to a legitimate government purpose, it will pass muster under the 14th amendment. The exceptions are when there's a fundamental liberty interest (e.g. speech, religion, etc) or a suspect classification (e.g. race) at issue - then it's given "strict scrutiny," which is a much higher bar to meet in order to be deemed constitutional.
Here, the law apparently "discriminates" on the basis of income. That doesn't implicate a fundamental liberty interest or a suspect class. After all, the law has to draw a line somewhere in terms of eligibility. Whether that's the appropriate line is a matter for debate, but the equal protection clause isn't - it's not relevant.
Quote from: Babybluejeans on April 22, 2017, 08:45:00 AM
Happy to, and you're right. Laws are rarely able to be applied equally across the board. As long as a law is rationally related to a legitimate government purpose, it will pass muster under the 14th amendment. The exceptions are when there's a fundamental liberty interest (e.g. speech, religion, etc) or a suspect classification (e.g. race) at issue - then it's given "strict scrutiny," which is a much higher bar to meet in order to be deemed constitutional.
Here, the law apparently "discriminates" on the basis of income. That doesn't implicate a fundamental liberty interest or a suspect class. After all, the law has to draw a line somewhere in terms of eligibility. Whether that's the appropriate line is a matter for debate, but the equal protection clause isn't - it's not relevant.
So individual rights are determined by ones income?
Quote from: muwarrior69 on April 22, 2017, 09:10:02 AM
So individual rights are determined by ones income?
You do realize that all sorts of government laws are income based right? Income tax brackets for instance. So you may believe that this violates the equal protection clause, but there is a great deal of case law and other evidence that disagrees with you.
Quote from: muwarrior69 on April 22, 2017, 09:10:02 AM
So individual rights are determined by ones income?
Free tuition isn't a right so it isn't covered under the law the same way speech or gun ownership is.
Quote from: muwarrior69 on April 22, 2017, 09:10:02 AM
So individual rights are determined by ones income?
You are confusing rights with privileges.
Thanks to BBJ for the post. Very good explanation.