I don't agree with it, I am only saying I would rather see that if we had a choice. I would bet if you could swap the welfare for paid college, what you said would likely prove true and we would save a lot of money. We all know this isn't an either/or deal, so that in it self makes it bad for our country.
No doubt there are better ways to spend money than the current welfare state, but my point is threefold:
1 -- The current welfare state can't go away, because most of the folks using it aren't interested in becoming productive members of society;
2 -- "Free" removes the cost/benefit analysis that many people would otherwise consider before obtaining a college degree. As a result, I suspect that there would be a sharp increase in demand for the "free" education, but substantially less to show for it as a result. A variation of this problem is one of the criticisms leveled against higher education institutions which accept a large amount of financial aid, but which also produce a large number of graduates into fields with little opportunity for gainful employment and/or perpetually low-paying jobs;
3 -- Increased demand for the "free" education would necessarily result in an increase in the cost of providing that education, regardless of how it was funded.
A notable part of the problem with the cost of higher education is the social and political pressure for everyone to get a degree. In concert with that pressure, colleges are "enhancing" degree programs with the carrot of an advanced degree, but with added time and cost. One example is the migration of pharmacy school programs from 4 years, to 5 years, and now to 6 years; instead of a B.S., the graduate receives a PharmD, which most pharmacists will never use and don't need, but are required to pay for in order to graduate and enter the profession.
I suspect that the financial aid racket is largely a symptom rather than a cause. If the pressure to buy the product didn't exist, there would be less demand to fund it.
JKG
)
