Investing in Education Higher education is a very good investment. The United States has one of the highest “rates of return” on college degrees in the world. OECD data shows that the “net present value” of a higher education—its estimated long-term value, minus total costs—is higher in the United States than it is anywhere else in the world except Portugal. Free higher education is an affordable dream. As Jeff Bryant of the Education Opportunity Network points out in his “free public higher education” petition, free higher education is not an unaffordable fantasy. If public colleges and universities were to be made available to qualified students without charging tuition, the total cost would be an estimated $62.6 billion. And, as [fellow at the Campaign for America’s Future] Richard Long notes, approximately $69 billion is spent each year on government aid to students. There is some overlap between the two figures. Some of that student aid goes to tuition for public colleges and universities. But much of it goes to private universities, at levels of quality that range from Ivy League elite to fly-by-night predatory. We are currently spending nearly $70 billion per year in student aid. Let’s not kid ourselves: Doing this the right way would require increased government spending. It would also call for better coordination between state budgets and federal expenditures, which can be achieved in a number of ways. But it would be money well spent. Higher income for individuals equates to higher spending, and therefore to economic growth. What’s more, debt is also an enormous drag on the economy. We are currently experiencing a student debt crisis of vast proportions—and it’s getting worse. Federal Reserve data tables show that the total student debt outstanding in this country is now $1.225 trillion. What’s more, that figure has risen by nearly $400 billion over the last four years [since 2010], or nearly a hundred billion dollars a year. Imagine the stimulus effect that $400 billion might have had in these post-financial crisis years. Imagine the even greater stimulus effect that we might have experienced if there were a massive write-down on the overall $1.2 trillion. That kind of policy initiative should also be on the table. How much will it cost? We can’t know. We are currently spending nearly $70 billion per year in student aid. Even if that figure were to double—which is by no means inevitable—it would be more than paid for by Rep. Jan Schakowsky’s Fairness in Taxation Act, which increases tax rates for millionaires and billionaires on a graduated basis to a modest top rate of 49 percent for billionaires. (It was 91 percent under Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower.) That bill would raise $872 billion over a 10-year period. Another way to cover the cost is by closing corporate tax loopholes. That would bring in an estimated $1.24 trillion over the next 10 years. Going forward, a system of free higher public education would eliminate the lion’s share of student indebtedness. Billions in new funds would return to general circulation each year. Graduates would earn higher incomes, unencumbered by debt. It would be a win-win. – 2-The Moral Imperative Economically, free public higher education is an achievable goal. And one wonders why the deficit scolds, who profess such concern for young people in there trying to cut Social Security, seems so disinterested in helping them get an education, find jobs, or fulfill their destinies. But the fundamental argument in its favor is moral, not fiscal. That moral imperative becomes even stronger when we consider the massive injustice we have perpetrated by forcing graduates into an economy that has reached historically awful levels for new entrants into the job market. That alone is an abandonment of our national obligations—both to young people and to our future. Compounding that misery with record-high student debt is nothing short of disgraceful. Free public higher education is a clean and ethical solution. Elite private institutions will undoubtedly survive, and there’s no reason why grants might not be offered in certain cases for students who can only receive the education they need in specialized institutions. At the other end of the spectrum, many of today’s diploma mills would undoubtedly go under. But that, by all the evidence, wouldn’t be a loss and might even be a net social gain. But, while the economic arguments are impressive, it’s important not to base this debate on numbers alone. The 2012 platforms of both political parties argued that education initiatives must be geared toward teaching skills that will get graduates hired by America’s corporations. That’s certainly valuable for students who have chosen that as their educational goal. The American educational tradition has never been strictly utilitarian. Public institutions of higher learning shouldn’t exist merely to provide free employee training for the private sector. Colleges and universities must also produce the musicians, writers, philosophers, scientists, and visionaries of tomorrow. We must stay true to the vision of educational philosophers like John Dewey, who recognized that the primary purpose of education at all levels is to produce fully realized citizens in a democratic society. The ability to participate fully in all aspects of democratic life has always been the American dream. Free higher education is essential to realizing that dream, and it’s an idea whose time has come. Write a response to two reading Paragraph 1 what is the main idea , evidence and purpose. Paragraph 2 It the article effective or ineffective , what piece of evidence did you find most effective. why was this evidence effective or not . Paragraph 3 How does this article relate to the class? What key concepts vocabulary. How does this article relate to class discussion
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]
