This is taxpayer money used for grants and isn't that unfair to all those that didn't decide to go to college? Wouldn't it be better to just have the gov't back student loans? Right now stafford loans do not cover much, unless you go to a state school. Wouldn't it be cheaper for taxpayers and better for the students if the gov't stopped giving out free money to students and just backed a larger amount of federal grants, maybe up to $15k per year. Of course it isn't a perfect plan because it would cost the gov't more to pay back loans that students default on, but i'm sure something could be worked out. What is wrong with making students, like myself, pay in cash or take out loans to pay for school? College is a privilege, not a right.
2007-03-16 08:46:47 · 7 answers · asked by Matt 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
You are right College is a Privilege not a right. Below College levels, like HS and Elementary, kids have to go to school, to gain at least those 13-14 years of schooling. K-12-13. It should be up to the High school graduate to pursue further education to get a career, get a job, gain more skills academically. Nothing wrong with you paying cash, taking out loans to pay for school. College/University/Trades school is expensive. Not everyone can afford to go, that would love to go, without taking out student loans, grants, bursaries, scholarships.
You need the drive, to excel to your best of ability. Be passionate about what you believe in or what you'd like to do, or else it will be a waste. I have a friend that took a course in Child Care, and she ONLY took it because her SISTER took it. Not because she wanted to. I have a feeling it would be a waste, she isn't doing to well in her studies anyways. She got a student loan..to cover all the costs...
2007-03-16 09:01:46 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
What is the difference in paying out grants or backing student loans? It is not like the Congress is going to dip into their personal checking accounts and pick up the tab! We, the taxpayers will. Who pays for all the defaults on those government backed student loans? It would be cheaper for tax payers if the government stopped paying for immigrants and people's life decisions (welfare). Seeing the government do something with education is one of the best things they have going!
2007-03-16 08:56:34 · answer #2 · answered by Terrie 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
College is a scam meant to put people in debt now. It's very hard to get a job now even with two degrees. You should not look at it that gov't should pay for college, rather college institutions should stop extorting and raping families and students.
2007-03-16 08:52:20 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
What does the Constitution say about that? Can you help me find the clause that speaks about giving out educational grants?
And if there isn't such a clause, then how can such a suggestion not run afoul of the 10th Amendment?
[Ahhh, why the hell do I continue, against all evidence, to hope that people understand and support the Constitution, and see today's bloated government as a betrayal of the Constitution, and a betrayal of the freedoms, liberties and rights that were our birthright?]
2007-03-16 09:13:05 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think it is absurd that students have to pay in the first place. A education is one of the best investments for the country`s future.
2007-03-16 08:52:21 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
No, they shouldn't there are soooo many private organizations that give out scholarships its crazy. Thing is for those scholarships you have to actually work to get them, not just stick your hand out most of the time.
2007-03-16 08:58:06 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
it would be better yet to make all schooling free.
2007-03-16 10:04:38 · answer #7 · answered by ati-atihan 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋