Bush proposed a $2.9 trillion budget. What if we used that money to send all high school graduates to college?

Question

Assuming a steady population of high school graduates yearly and increasing cost of college, for how many years would we be able to send all high school graduates to 4-year colleges with that amount of money (if they choose to attend)? When answering, please show the figures used (such as average cost of college, percentage increase in cost yearly, number of high school graduates) and sources for the figures used. Ignore community/2-year colleges for the purpose of this question. Ignore the variable of some graduates choosing not to go to a 4-year college. Also, feel free to include calculations with differing variables.

I would like to clarify that this is more of a math question than a political question or statement.

Again, I would like someone to answer the question that I asked from a mathematical standpoint. I do not want to be bombarded with political or philosophical rhetoric. Thanks.

Answer 1

If only we could use a small portion of the Iraq money to develop a substitute to Arab oil, it would do wonders for our economy and help to employ all the chemists losing their jobs due to massive outsourcing. We are very quickly shutting down all our chemical plants and moving them to India and China, and will never be able to fight any war without their permission, two countries that would never support us in time of peril. Why can't we spend a small portion of this money and develop an alternative to importing foreign energy from known sources of terrorism? Do you think Bush is smart enough to figure this out?

Answer 2

I'll save you some trouble, in reality you couldn't send all high school kids to college because there are not enough colleges and college professors and dorm rooms and textbooks to handle them all.

This is an important point -- Utopians get caught up in wanting to solve all the world's problems by throwing infinite amounts of money at them. But the limitation is never really MONEY, it is the limited amount of HUMAN and PHYSICAL RESOURCES available to meet demand. The US college educational establishment has spent hundreds of years evolving to the point where it can graduate about 1/4 of Americans moving through the education process. You can't suddenly quadruple capacity overnight by just saying college is paid for by the tooth fairy.

Also, even playing this game, you are not going to get accurate calculations -- the vastly increased demand for education and the strain on limited resources would make the costs of education balloon massively to some unpredictable degree. You can't just extend current costs to cover 4 times as many students.

Finally, you should know that this course of action would so utterly flood the market with college graduates that wages for people who have mere bachelors degrees would plummet to the current wage for -- you guessed it -- high school grads.

Answer 3

I think that we need to focus less on hypotheticals and use our energy to actively work for what we need, rather then focus on how the government will provide for us.

Additionally, sending everyone to college is an idealistic proposal, but would fail miserably in the real world.

If the government offers free education, free medical and free stipends for everyone, we will unfortunately become a nation of slackers who can easily live off of the government without contributing in any manner.

We need to instill the idea into people that hard work and diligence, not government hand-outs, can lead them to their own little promise land.

I agree that we can instill this concept through education. However, a college education only gives people knowledge, not wisdom.

I think that we should instead lead by example. If you lead an exemplary life, you may be able to instill that attitude in others.

Let's not look to the government to absolve us of our individual responsibilities. If we each contribute our part, we could solve most of the problems that our country faces today.

Answer 4

via regulation, baby help stops at 18. If the parent paying the help needs to proceed, then s/he can, in spite of the incontrovertible fact that it is not legally mandated. It relatively would not matter in case you have a valedictorian, or a drop out. help stops whilst it became into ordered to provide up. If there are underlying motives for the parent to proceed paying, then they are going to be ordered to proceed paying. regularly that happens whilst the youngster has scientific issues that choose interest & funds. Your son is authorized to take out a pupil mortgage, you be attentive to. If he's accountable approximately it, and in basic terms takes out the very minimum he desires, and works on his breaks and pays in the previous he's done with college, then he can leave college with little or no debt, and have a stable quantity paid off in the previous it starts off to incure interest. And no, you haven't any longer have been given any criminal leg to stand directly to take your ex to courtroom inquiring for college help funds. you may gain this a lot extra appropriate happening on your ex and pleading your case, and inquiring for contribution in direction of your son's college expenses. regularly, this variety of ingredient is agreed on in the unique custody contract- something like each and each parent contributes an equivalent quantity in direction of education.