Bernie Sanders: Not smart enough to understand the true price of "free" education

Here's a great article from The Daily Wire.  I can still remember my father saying the same thing to me about thirty years ago.  

Below I will explain why Sanders' idea is even worse than the author says, and how we can all have Bernie's cake and eat it too.
---------------------------------------------------------------

Sanders Wants 'Free' College For Everyone. Here's Why That's Dumb.

AP Photo/Rick Scuteri

Bernie Sanders wants everybody to go to college for free. This is a terrible idea.
Sanders wants taxpayers to foot the bill for little Jimmy’s major in Lesbian Dance Theory. Writing in The Washington Post, the socialist Vermont senator who didn’t understand why loan rates should be lower for houses than college tuition (hint: it’s called collateral) suggested that we must have “universally available public education.” Quoting that iconic American figure Rutherford B. Hayes (hint: he was the guy between Ulysses S. Grant and James Garfield), Sanders said: “An education should be available to all regardless of anyone’s station.”
Read more.  Do it this time.  It's not a long article and it's worth your time.  (Don't I always tell you when "Reading more"  isn't going to be worth your time?)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This article does a great job explaining that despite what socialists like Sanders would like you to believe, free college education for everyone will not reduce unemployment and will only decrease the quality of a college education.
Bernie's idea, however, is even worse than the author says it is.  Yes, free college will definitely reduce quality, but it will also dramatically increase the price.
"How can the price go up if it's free?"
Well, someone's gotta pay for it, Mr. Liberal, who speaks in italics.  The students might not be paying for it, but the government (us taxpayers) will be.  Did you ever notice that almost everything the government does, ends up costing more than original estimates?  Why is that?  It's because when government rather than the individual, pays for something, it severs the link between cost and the end user. 
If the consumer does not care what something costs, what incentive does the supplier have to keep prices down?  That's one of the main problems we have with healthcare in this country.  Patients usually are not paying directly for their care.  Heath insurance is provided by their employer and their out of pocket expenses are often the same regardless of the amount of health care they consume.  The only links between cost and the end user are co pays and deductibles.
Whenever you cut the link between the end user and the cost of a product or service, the cost of providing that product or service or product will dramatically increase.  When I was in college, the frat I belonged to would have beer parties at least a couple of times per month.  We went through an incredible amount of beer at those parties, but we couldn't legally charge for it, so we'd have hundreds of people drinking "free" beer.  It wouldn't have been so bad if the only beer we gave away had actually been consumed, but since it was "free" there was a lot of waste.  Spilled beer, beer dumped over guys heads, and hundreds of half full cups that people had lost track of.  (Easy to do since one plastic cup looks like another, and I can't blame people for just getting a new cup rather than risk drinking out of some cup that who knows who had been drinking from.)
One day, someone got the bright idea of charging for the cups.  A guest would pay five bucks for a cup and write his name on it with a sharpie. If he lost his cup, he'd have to buy another. This ended up making us a few bucks, reducing the wasted beer to almost nothing, and reducing the clean up time the next morning because we didn't have to go around emptying hundreds of half full cups.   All those benefits simply from linking price and the end user. (I understand that this is now just as illegal as selling the beer without a license.  Leave it to the government to force even private institutions to waste money.)
Now liberals aren't going to care about any of what written above.  They just want their free college for everyone and no amount of common sense or economics is going to change their minds, but what if, what if, we could have college be practically free for students, and eliminate about 90% of the cost to taxpayers?
Impossible you say?  Not only is it possible, we are doing it with other types of education at this very moment.  
How?  By allowing students to get credit for many undergraduate courses the same way people obtain CDL's, Haz Mat endorsements, pesticide applicator's licenses, and many other licenses.  A student could study by reading books, going on line, working with others who have experience in the field, or whatever, in any particular area.  When that student felt he was ready, he could go take an exam on a computer terminal, just like people do at the DMV. 
Obviously, this would not be possible for all types courses, and laboratory work would have to be performed on a campus, but it has already been proven that this is entirely doable.  Many colleges are already offering on line programs, but the costs are still way too high.  Most 100 and 200 level courses should only cost about the same as the price of getting a commercial driver's license.  We currently have the technology for most students to earn bachelors degrees for about $2500 and that's not per semester, that's for the whole shebang.
Don't tell me it can't be done.  The only people who would oppose this are those who are getting rich off of our current education system.  Free college education for everyone is a bad idea, but really inexpensive college education for those who want it is a great idea, and all we have to do to make it a reality is to make sure it's paid for by the end user and eliminate all the government red tape and bureaucracy that prevents it. 

2 comments:

  1. It can't be done.

    Our public educators pose as friendly, caring civil servants but in actuality they're union thugs with a lot of power and a lot of money. They have a cushy ride and you can bet they will use every means at their disposal - up to and including violence - to keep it. My brother in law is a school principal, his exwife and current girl friends are teachers and they are union slobs through and through. Taking them on like this would be political and cultural suicide.

    Liberals are all over the misdeeds of Big Oil and the Military/Industrial Complex - but the twats are completely oblivious to Big Education and the Media/Welfare Complex. Unlike the former, the latter can kill us.

    I used to think we still had a chance to avoid the tough times ahead but we seem to keep doubling down on stupid Even if Bernie was right - and you were wrong about EVERYTHING...we would still end up with an education glut. Bernie is grasping at straws, trying to keep this socialist construct going.

    If America was serious about saving itself it would start by evicting 50 million illegals, cutting off all foreign aid, and cutting back welfare and social services by at least 50%.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "If America was serious about saving itself it would start by evicting 50 million illegals"
      VOTE TRUMP!!!! After he takes care of all those illegals, maybe, with our help, he can take on the education establishment.

      Delete