Birthright College Education


Last night I listened to Barack Obama’s quasi-victory speech. He was extremely well-spoken, motivating, and downright scary to any capitalist and Constitutional originalist. One of the most disturbing things he said was

“the chance to get a college education should not be a privilege for the few, but a birthright of every American.”

Cap, Diploma, Books, and Shamelessly Confiscated Tax Money

So now it’s life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and a college education? In fairness, he did say “the chance to get a college education,” but don’t we already have that? Not everyone goes to college; not everyone can get into or afford college. But we all have the chance. Nobody holds us down and prevents us from attaining the grades and loans necessary to attend college. Programs like FAFSA already ease the economic burden, and extremely low-interest student loans are readily available.

How does Senator Obama propose to ensure that every American can get into and afford college? Paying for it is the easy part. I’m sure it involves massive tax collection from those mean rich people that employ everyone and produce all the products we buy. That’s expected, and I’m not going to dwell on it.

But how does he deal with admissions? I only see three options

-Ensure every student in America achieves an academic standard that will ensure they are admitted to college.rand

As long as humans are human this is not going to happen. You can’t force people to learn. To quote an smart Russian lady this requires “production from those who can’t produce.”

-Force private institutions to lower standards.

Scary, but almost feasible. This will simply make education from those institutions worth less and less…kind of like our existing public school systems.

-Create a federal college system.

This is by far my favorite option. We long ago became accustomed to creating government entities not authorized by the Constitution, so why stop now? Maybe we could even get another department to go with it: The Department of Post-Secondary Education. Hey, it would create jobs, which is apparently something that Americans think the federal government is responsible for.

Guaranteed college education for everyone sounds great, but the only way to guarantee an expensive and difficult achievement to all Americans is to confiscate more money from those Americans and lower the bar for that achievement. The Constitution protects our right to pursue happiness, but not to attain it.

Information and Links

Join the fray by commenting, tracking what others have to say, or linking to it from your blog.

Information
June 4th, 2008
6 Responses
Feeds and Links
Comment Feed
From This Author
Del.icio.us
Digg
Technorati
Categories and Tags
website

Other Posts
Hannity’s Logic: Six Months Too Late
Nine Rules for Retail and Service Businesses

Write a Comment

Take a moment to comment and tell us what you think. Some basic HTML is allowed for formatting.




Reader Comments

Comment Number:
1
Written by:
unknown
Posted on:
June 4, 2008 at 10:07 pm

I have to disagree with you on obtaining a college education. Obama was right it is a privilege. Although the gov gives grants of offset the cost of college, it still depends on income. We are currently paying 1700 a month for my son’s college. Student loans? No they’re not like they used to be. Many lenders are now requiring a cosigner for newly freshman college student. If you dont have one, then you cannot secure a loan. Yes…you have to be very rich to pay for a college education.

Comment Number:
2
Written by:
mary
Posted on:
June 4, 2008 at 11:44 pm

Well said; however, the scariest aspect of Obama’s goal is that when liberals say “education” it’s really just a euphemism for “liberal indoctrination,” else it would not produce people ignorant enough to vote for an Obama-esque liberal. “Liberal” itself has ceased to mean what it used to in America and is now merely a euphemism for “socialist.”

Comment Number:
3
Written by:
Jason Yates
Posted on:
June 5, 2008 at 5:58 pm

Barring the utterly ridiculous doom and gloom scenarios. I don’t see how investing in our nations greatest natural resource, the American people, is a bad idea.

Whether you’ve realized it our not, we’re in the 21st century. College is the new high school, and our country needs highly skilled, college educated workers for us to compete in the global economy. I think you’re viewing this fundamentally the wrong way. It is not, taxes and big government! Oh my! It is instead China, India, Europe, and globalization! Oh my! Just like corporations reinvest in their workers. Our country needs to do the same. In 1944 the GI Bill provided college and vocational education for returning veterans in WW2; and in return according to studies, gave the government a seven fold return. There isn’t a downside here, other than to your absolutist libertarian sentiment.

Technology and innovation move at an exponential rate, and our country has to keep up. We need public policies that reflect this. I’d rather have people getting educated, going to college, and learning new skills; than taking in unemployment and social welfare.

Comment Number:
4
Written by:
Jeff Barnett
Posted on:
June 5, 2008 at 9:29 pm

I hardly think asking the question “How are you going to pay for that or even make that feasible?” is doom and gloom. Do you have an alternative scenario of how to pull this off?

I agree that I’d rather pay for education than welfare. I also agree with the desired end of what you’re advocating, but not the means.

Veterans pay into the GI Bill. For the first 12 months of our service we voluntarily pay $100 per month. We have the option to decline the GI Bill and pay nothing. We can also “buy up” by paying up to an extra $600 for a corresponding increase in benefits. I am told (and I can’t quickly find evidence to support or refute it) that GI Bill funding is self-sufficient. Enough veterans do not use it that their $1200 is enough to cover everybody that does use it.

The point? The GI Bill is not government-dictated redistribution of wealth. It’s a voluntary investment that service members can choose to make that pays one hell of an APR.

Taxes and big government doesn’t address the challenges of globalization, nor will it fix the widening education divide in America. You can’t force people to succeed.

Comment Number:
5
Written by:
BattleItch
Posted on:
June 6, 2008 at 7:10 am

“Oh my! It is instead China, India, Europe, and globalization!” Jason Yates

One thing that you are forgetting about is that if you are a company looking for the cheapest labor of college graduates you would look at China & India. If the United States had more college graduates do you think those graduates would work for the same salary as the graduates from India and China? I think we all know the answer to that question.

Comment Number:
6
Written by:
Mikeulus
Posted on:
June 11, 2008 at 3:56 pm

Jason, Some things both sides just won’t disagree on: 1. Better education is good 2. More widespread education is good 3. Cheaper education is good.

Nobody’s arguing that. Now the only thing we get to bicker over are how we achieve these ends. I happen to observe that a freer market brings prices down, choices increase, and quality goes up. You can also observe that if you subsidize something with public funds the price goes up, the choices go down, and the quality usually goes down.