Don't be so sure. Giveaways make the Democrat Party/looter/moocher circle go round.

Excuse me, but I will not permit further mooching at the expense of me, my job, my university, and other producers!

Yes. By subsidizing traditional education, they may accidentally hasten the development of new mechanisms of education.

Interesting article. Human nature hasnt changed. I read an analysis of various powerful cultures over time, and the conclusion was that 250 years was the average time a culture lasted before it declined. The reason was that people forgot what made the culture great, and started to use the government to give them goodies they didnt earn.

Why don't we simply boycott Killary and Trumph and all political crap called plans? Time to shrug.

Thanks, I think ;^)
Problem is that power corrupts, and the power that is wielded by the president today (extra-constritutional, power) is far too much to entrust to anyone.
I read an interesting article today that comments on this specific problem:
http://www.libertyunbound.com/node/1575

Yes, it's a Sanders rip-off. $350 billion? Hah! I'd be willing to bet that it will achieve Bernie's $700 billion before the program gets too much older.

The way government betters public schools is by throwing money down rat holes. The thing that would be most beneficial to the public schools is to support the concept of the family; encourage fathers to be present in the family and perform more than just DNA donor functions. My father was a school teacher. When he started teaching in the early 1960s most kids went home to find their mother there. She would ask what homework there was, help the kids do the homework and check it before it was considered done. The kids went to school after having a good breakfast. They were well groomed, confident and respectful. By the time he retired many of his students went home to an empty house. The father was not present. Mom was either working two menial jobs to make ends meet, or spending time in the evening looking for the next step dad, or DNA donor, as the case may be. The early 60s kids generally performed well, even with the lack of all the whizbang technological learning aids; their mom was a more effective learning aid than a computer on every desk.

you would make a better president than any of them...

I think the government should just get OUT of schooling altogether. They do a terrible job, and with the student loan guarantees, they just boosted the college tuition such that it makes no sense nowadays to even GO to college at the rates they are charging

Hildebeast is a political windsock. She just offers our money to get HER votes. She is a terrible administrator and should be fired from government service, and NEVER allowed to be president.

H.L. Mencken once called American elections "advance auctions of stolen goods." He meant that our politicians attempt to outbid each other by promising goodies to the electorate to be funded by future theft from taxpayers. Hillary's plan is a great example of this tactic. How stupid and venal must people be to fall for this? That's a rhetorical question.

No, she wants it funded by the feds from federal tax revenue if I understand her crazy plan correctly.

The federal government has ruined higher education several different ways. First they meddle in it with no constitutional authority. Then they force adoption of race and gender quotas and destroy most sports via Title IX. Then they drive the cost through the roof by enacting student loan and grant programs. Then they demand outrageous speech policies that ban debate on most controversial topics. And now they demand an outrageously low standard of proof to railroad guys out on "sexual misconduct" charges.

I wouldn't go to college today anywhere in the US. And I'd think twice about hiring anybody who did.

I think the subject should be blown off.
She is not the president and even if she were this give-a-way program would not fly.

I agree Circuit,the idea of education is "learning". The "Education Establishment" has defined degrees as something special, so those who get it, think they are superior to those who do not. It started after WW2 when the GI bill allowed a huge influx of "educated" people into all the various industries, that they then transferred that concept into reality and it became fact. "If I needed it, then you must" is the new paradigm. The whole idea of "learning" got distorted and became a cottage industry. My employer (Intel) requires a degree of all their engineers and engineering techs, I did 20 years in the Navy as a Submarine Sonar Technician, and was given "credit" for a 2 year degree by them. So, I got on the bandwagon, let Intel pay for a 4 year degree (Internet Technology UOP, graduated Magna Cum Laude with little effort), got GI Bill for 48 months and rode the wave. It made little difference in my job, other than the HTML classes were useful. The rest was pretty much BS. I would never go 30K in debt to have such a degree, but I see most colleges as 4 year party houses, just based on the various interviews where students are asked basic HS questions and have no clue. You are right that if it were a cost/benefit thing, it would fail miserably.

"You can get as good an engineer or technician from OJT and in house training,"
I think OJT is way under-rated. I got more out of my master's than undergrad mainly because I had worked for a few years before the masters. If I had never heard of our current college system and someone explained it, I'd think it's crazy: "So for four years of your adult life you go live a modest middle-class life but do hardly any paid work and focus just on education. Your parents pay for it and/or you borrow against future earnings. Of course future earnings aren't collateral, so the loan has to be subsidized and under special laws that make it not bankruptable." It's been going on long enough, though, that it sounds normal.

Unless gov't props it up, I think the current system will change in the next few years. My kids are 12 years away from this. We're fortunate to be able to blow money on this, but I want to be careful that there for first adult experience not be on how to blow money. I'd rather them buy a house or execute a well-thought-out business plan with the money than just mindless go to college b/c it's the next step in life.

It's like the OWS people said, "I just did what I was told." They said that still not having figured out doing what other people tell you without question is a very bad idea. Things get done when you move fast, break things, and do things the world isn't quite ready for, stuff people might tell you not to do.

Sorry for the long rant. I just think we have such a bad system. I believe in formal education, and I believe in gov't subsidizing it in a reasonable way for the poor, but NOT in this model where you don't analyze the cost/benefits under the mantra "but it's education," as if that phrase means turn off your business judgment.

I agree, I can see credits for outstanding students to encourage excellence. I do not see anything but colleges having to devise some manner of carrying the costs and letting students pay them back. Make it a business proposition and they will figure it out. It has gotten so blatent a degree is considered required for employment at McDonalds. You can get as good an engineer or technician from OJT and in house training, as you can from any degree program. IMHO, of course.

It's a shameless attempt to get Sander's supporters. The "problem" of paying for education would solve itself if the gov't got out of the way.

The "problem" is it's hard for the average middle-class person to stop working for four years and focus on undergrad. I did it, and in retrospect except for the intense last year of it, it was a colossal waste of my parents' money. A few years later I did my master's part time, paid for by a company and by teaching analog electronics. That was much more beneficial because I was getting knowledge for coursework and related paid work at the same time, and I was not blowing through money by living a reasonable lifestyle while not working.

If gov't must "do something" I say improve the public high schools, which are already gov't-run, so that they provide marketable skills.

To me paying for people's schooling is just one more good cause the gov't should not be taking up.

Nice plan..if only we had a government with the interests of the people at it's core...

Better solution:
Stop inflating the currency by repealing the federal Reserve Act, and return the means to pay for education to people by repealing the 16th amendment and closing the IRS. No government funding for college education loans will lower the tuition cost dramatically and stop enslaving the young to banksters. Of course that would also increase competition in the slightly free market, and that is the opposite of the goals of the corruptocracy.