Mass Senate unveils plans for free community college for all

[robr2]

Originally Posted by Boston_Burbs

Side note: Is it possible to get a B.S. in engineering at night anymore? I have met a lot of curmudgeons old engineers that did. But does any school offer it? Northeastern dropped theirs

This goes with the employer paid for my college comment. Yes, a lot pay for grad school but I dont think there are many that will pay for a undergrad degree.

UMass Lowell offers evening and weekend classes but I can't specifically find it for engineering undergraduate. Graduate programs would be easier to find.

Those curmudgeon old engineers probably went to the old Northeastern which was the blue collar commuter school. I don't think students today would really want to grind away for 6-8 years to earn a BS.

[bostongymjunkie]

Originally Posted by Boston_Burbs

The best part of this is the scammy, small, highly UN Selective private colleges are going to fail. RIP Lasell, Curry, Merrimack, Elms, AIC, Baypath, etc. To me, these schools are the most responsible for crushing students with debt while actively throwing state schools under the bus.

Curry and Merrimack and AIC are four year colleges. I don't see how this will hurt them at all. Merrimack and Curry aren't anymore scammy than any other university in current times. Merrimack is a small Catholic college with a good reputation. Curry has an established niche in public safety and an ROTC program. Baypath is in a completely different category, and AIC has been around for a ling time. They are still offering something that some people want, and that they clearly don't think they are getting from community colleges now. Community colleges are cheap as it is. Yet, some students continue to skip over them for those other private schools. I don't see that changing dramatically. Same goes for Lasell. They don't compete with Bunker Hill. Smaller schools have been hurting as it is as tuition has risen. But I don't see those students going to community colleges they are going to other 4 year schools.

[rodentraiser]

Originally Posted by Charlie&Rose

My inlaws put 4 kids through college, both worked two jobs. They didn`t go on fancy vacations, buy new cars, or even Starbucks. What about them?
Why have people become so lazy.....always looking for FREE.

When California community colleges were free (we still had to pay for parking and books), I was able to start a court reporting program. It was the only 4 year certificate class offered - all the rest were 2 year courses.

Since the state test was given at 200 wpm, the school wanted us to be able to transcribe at 220 wpm. I had just passed my 180 wpm tests when California decided to start charging tuition at the community colleges. It wasn't just a small increase. It was a huge increase, from about $30 a semester to almost $500 a semester. I was working for about $6 an hour and living in my truck. Going to college anymore just wasn't feasible.

That was almost 30 years ago. I always wonder how much more money I'd have earned over the years if I could have finished those courses. How much I'd have in savings today. How I maybe could have bought a house instead of living in a trailer. How much more retirement money I'd have now. How much more I could have contributed to the infrastructure and other establishments that depend on the taxes of its citizens. How much the state could have saved if I hadn't had to depend on food stamps.

We're not lazy and we're not looking for free everything. Your in-laws were lucky they could do what they did. My parents could have, but they were like you - they didn't want to and look what it cost everyone. Many other parents can't. The fact is, if you allow people to be educated, they will return that money in taxes and other benefits that outweigh what it costs to educate them. It does this country no good to throw away half its population for want of spending money to educate them.

[MrDee12345]

With a program like this, there has to be a proper return on investment.

With more people going to community college, we'll have an educated workforce with no place to live. If the state truly wants to benefit from this program, then they'll have to ensure that local young people can afford housing.

It would be a disaster if our local young people took their "free" educations and utilized them in other states that don't have such benefits.

[MrDee12345]

Originally Posted by rodentraiser

When California community colleges were free (we still had to pay for parking and books), I was able to start a court reporting program. It was the only 4 year certificate class offered - all the rest were 2 year courses.

Since the state test was given at 200 wpm, the school wanted us to be able to transcribe at 220 wpm. I had just passed my 180 wpm tests when California decided to start charging tuition at the community colleges. It wasn't just a small increase. It was a huge increase, from about $30 a semester to almost $500 a semester. I was working for about $6 an hour and living in my truck. Going to college anymore just wasn't feasible.

That was almost 30 years ago. I always wonder how much more money I'd have earned over the years if I could have finished those courses. How much I'd have in savings today. How I maybe could have bought a house instead of living in a trailer. How much more retirement money I'd have now. How much more I could have contributed to the infrastructure and other establishments that depend on the taxes of its citizens. How much the state could have saved if I hadn't had to depend on food stamps.

We're not lazy and we're not looking for free everything. Your in-laws were lucky they could do what they did. My parents could have, but they were like you - they didn't want to and look what it cost everyone. Many other parents can't. The fact is, if you allow people to be educated, they will return that money in taxes and other benefits that outweigh what it costs to educate them. It does this country no good to throw away half its population for want of spending money to educate them.

Perfect answer. Thanks!

[FordBronco1967]

I know Tennessee has this, but Tennesseans voted to use a regular budget surplus to pay for it, so it wasn't exactly forced on them. Will Massachusetts do the same?

Also, will this not devalue the value of a college education, just as guaranteed high school graduation has devalued a high school diploma?

I'm not anti-education at all. But I question whether this is a good thing. #1: Will this cause the cost of community college to skyrocket, as the taxpayers are picking up the tab? #2: Will this cause people to need a special type of degree, like a masters, to stand out from other competition, meaning more money to be spend on secondary and post-secondary education?

If the taxpayers are paying for this, how exactly is this "free"? And if students who work while in school are also paying taxes, then does this still count as "free" education for them? It just seems like the burden of one's schooling is being shifted from the student to every taxpayer, including those that didn't attend college. Of course, this is also the case with K-12 schooling, but this feels different, in my opinion.

[msRB311]

I'm also not sure how Curry and Merrimack are mixed into this. They aren't particularly competitive colleges to get into, but they are not bad colleges. As far as sports go Merrimack is D1 for hockey (they've had players go on to the NHL) and maybe lacrosse. They have a great nursing program too.

They aren't cheap schools, but there are many similar colleges like this across the state and the country. Why should they take the blame for someone having debt?

[CaseyB]

Originally Posted by massnative71

I agree to this, as well as the need for mechanisms to prevent outsiders from coming in and abusing the MA taxpayer (ie. should have live here at least a year). But we know that will never happen, seeing the abuse going on with the emergency shelter thing.

You took the words out of my mouth.

[simplexsimon]

Originally Posted by FordBronco1967

I know Tennessee has this, but Tennesseans voted to use a regular budget surplus to pay for it, so it wasn't exactly forced on them. Will Massachusetts do the same?

Also, will this not devalue the value of a college education, just as guaranteed high school graduation has devalued a high school diploma?

I'm not anti-education at all. But I question whether this is a good thing. #1: Will this cause the cost of community college to skyrocket, as the taxpayers are picking up the tab? #2: Will this cause people to need a special type of degree, like a masters, to stand out from other competition, meaning more money to be spend on secondary and post-secondary education?

If the taxpayers are paying for this, how exactly is this "free"? And if students who work while in school are also paying taxes, then does this still count as "free" education for them? It just seems like the burden of one's schooling is being shifted from the student to every taxpayer, including those that didn't attend college. Of course, this is also the case with K-12 schooling, but this feels different, in my opinion.

As mentioned earlier, the new 4% surtax will be funding this.

[Boston_Burbs]

Originally Posted by msRB311

I'm also not sure how Curry and Merrimack are mixed into this. They aren't particularly competitive colleges to get into, but they are not bad colleges. As far as sports go Merrimack is D1 for hockey (they've had players go on to the NHL) and maybe lacrosse. They have a great nursing program too.

They aren't cheap schools, but there are many similar colleges like this across the state and the country. Why should they take the blame for someone having debt?

Because they are all marketing BS about "small class sizes" and an "intimate setting" but a high price when you get a financially failing school and a very small alumni base. But man, what a nice student center. With tiny endowments their aid is garbage too.

Ideally we end up with a college landscape that is free community college, affordable state universities, and highly selective need blind schools that are free for families making under $150k per year.

Its the colleges stuck in the middle that are selling the snake oil. With a shrinking student population, a lot with fail, rightfully so.