How to make a social safety-net for the post-covid world

From the Economist: How to make a social safety-net for the post-covid world

Excerpt:

'Nuf said above?

Especially that bit about creating social-welfare policies. And that means spending money on people who don't particularly like to work because the work is backbreaking? Perhaps we'd rather they break into homes to steal/resell our TV, then sell it to buy food? Or worse, drugs?

I think not. Most people want a good job and many would pursue the level of post-secondary education that would give them that opportunity. And that extends from Bakery Expertise right up to a Medical Doctors degree!

So, now, please tell me, why should that cost be beyond the means of a good many people on the bottom of the income spectrum. Because the cost of a post-secondary degree that will get one a better job is to damn expensive. This should be subsidized by the Federal government - and not the DoD!

To wit, The cost of studying at a university in the United States

 

Biden's "stimulus" bill has a lot of pork barrel and special-interest spending in it.

And like I argued in another thread, Covid relief bill could be very bad for economy (2021), the economy does not need more stimulus right now.


Just because there is a "need" for something, does not mean you can afford it, or that it's a good spending decision.
What's going to happen a couple or many years from now if a greater need exists than now?
The country has already borrowed money to pay for the now, which is going to necessitate a sacrifice in the future.
Any financial advisor will tell you that you don't borrow to pay for things now when the issue is you can't afford it. (And the country can't really afford it, because otherwise there would not be a budget deficit)

 

We've repeatedly talked about this before, and at this point, I feel you must be being disingenuous because you keep bringing it up, over and over again in different threads.
If everyone had post-secondary education, the question remains would there be enough opportunities for them all. The country has already seen signs that there might not. As more people became educated, the educational criteria for many jobs just increased. The question is, necessary education for what, exactly? And don't just tell me "for a better job", because that's not going to cut it here.

We've already seen the type of policies you support fuel an "Education Bubble" (many thread discussions on that already).

I'm not even going to fully delve into this argument here, because you seem to have brought up and conflated several different issues in your opening post.

The proposed spending bill is just a massive hand out to the schools, despite many of these schools not even being open right now and teaching their students online.

 

Also read this thread:
If we run deficits now, it means cuts in the future

 

There is free public education K-12. Please explain why 30-40% of them fail and/or dropout? My guess is another 10-20% are under-achievers meaning they learn almost nothing. And you wish to fund these same people with free higher education? It would be stupid to create free higher education when we are incapable of creating effective K-12 education! ALL kids ARE NOT created equal...some can gain higher education while others won't. The US should definitely fund higher education for those kids who prove themselves worthy, but others need a different path...

 

Democrats shoved policies that increases the cost of higher education. Why trust them to solve this problem?

 

The so called Biden bill that is now law has only 9 percent relief. The balance is pure pork and well into the future spending by Democrats.

 

The people that don't want to learn or pursue higher education don't have to. Just as nobody forced them to not learn in K-12. However, higher education is out of reach for many people that DO want to learn and better their chances for careers/career growth.

 

My Grandson is a prime example where my daughter and her husband paid for his university education and Facebook hired him out of college at an enormous bonus plus a salary of around $10,000 per month plus benefits.

So what is the problem again?

 

So what's the entry path to free college...just because someone 'wants to'? If there is no entry exam, or aptitude test, or some form of qualification to enroll someone in higher education, then I suggest the public college institutions will decline to the same levels as our K-12. Obtaining more in life is not supposed to be a cakewalk or entitlement...

 

Of course they would have to "qualify" for higher education. Is that in dispute?

 

Many qualified students need education subsidies...I'm all for this as long as the student maintains appropriate grades and is pursuing an educational path that has high success for finding employment...

 

My point was if 30-40% of them fail or drop out of high school, and another 10-20% learn almost nothing, how will these people be qualified for free funding to a higher education?

 

I think all of those kids want to succeed/excel at something, just not at what school has to offer. They fail because 'book learnin' as it were, aint for everyone, but that is what everyone is expected to do there. Tho I do agree, trying to offer them more of the same, no matter how 'affordable', is not going to help.

 

Generally speaking, students that drop out can pass a GED to qualify for college (usually a community college). I'm not sure I understand your argument as I'm talking about higher education being made affordable (or free) for students that want to pursue it and are qualified to do so.

 

The bottom line; all of this stuff is complex! There are no silver bullets. And anything associated with learning takes lots of time...like years. Simply having some education is not a panacea to anything. At most it might open a door but the employee must be exemplary from that point on if they wish to achieve more in life...

 

I'm not going to support public funding of colleges for people who simply 'want to' attend. For those who have any respect for obtaining a higher education, the entry bar must remain high. For those who have dropped out, why aren't they getting their GED's? Why aren't they going back to high school and graduating?

 

I've already stated that students that want to attend college will have to qualify for the college entrance examinations and admission requirements. It's not just a matter of "wanting to go".

Agreed. That is not in dispute by making higher education available to people that want to attend (and are qualified to do so).

There are many reasons that people drop out of school and don't return for their GEDs. Why are they relevant to this topic?

 

After the last Covid spending bill ($1.9 trillion), I don't think the country's going to be able to afford it.

Almost no one on the Left was looking at exactly where that money was all going to.


At some point, after you borrow too much, you can't just keep on spending.

Oh, and I can guarantee that country is never going to jack up taxes to a level high enough that they can start paying down the debt and fund extravagant spending increases at the same time.
That is not going to happen.

 

Because if they are not motivated on their own to graduate from high school, no matter when it can happen, then how can they be motivated to attend college? I agree everyone should have the opportunity, but they must earn the right to this opportunity...

 

Most of these relief bills are not based on what is affordable. Even the annual budgets are not created based on what is affordable. All of them compare the downside risk of doing too little or nothing to increasing national debt. It's easy to increase debt because everyone does it and there's no penalty for doing so. At some point, the annual service on the debt will finally be unaffordable...

 

ONLY people that FINISH high school (or pass the GED) are eligible to attend college. The unmotivated people aren't candidates for college.

 

I suspect many people who hear politicians talk about free college studies for everyone are thinking they just register for whatever classes they want no matter their qualifications. And that classes will cover everything from astrophysics to studying the social impact of the BigMac. 30-50% of our kids should be able to achieve their educational potential without worrying about the funding. The balance can take steps to qualify and/or pursue other public avenues. I never paid more than $125 per course hour, and since I was taking 12-15 hours, I could actually work during the summer or part-time and pay my way. I understand today, without scholarships or other subsidies and the high cost of decent schools, it's not as easy as I had it. And it didn't seem easy for me at the time but it was manageable and doable...surely not today. Which is why I support publicly funding those students who don't have the financial support. But I don't want to see our current college/university systems decline just to enable everyone to get free higher education...

 

Prove that statement with factual evidence! ... !

 

[QUOTE="OldManOnFire, post: 1072507246, member: 5769"Please explain why 30-40% of them fail and/or dropout? My guess is another 10-20% are under-achievers.[/QUOTE]

Their secondary-schooling was inadequate, so the failed the test.

Surprise, surprise?

Hardly. The entire educational system is a mess? Yeah, maybe ...