Should College Be Free?

Massive student debt used to fund a broken education system is the single biggest economic problem of the future. College shouldn't be free but it needs to change! This is a call to action!
My name is Jacob Clifford and I'm an economics teacher and KZbinr. I've been making economics videos for 10 years but this is different than anything I've ever done. I don't know if you're willing to fight the system, but if you are, I'm willing to help. It's your move.
Clarifications:
- When I talk about "Free College" I am referring to the government paying tuition for all public universities and colleges, not just community colleges.
Want more? Check out economist Bryan Caplan's book "The Case against Education"

[@JacobAClifford]

I don't know if you're willing to fight the system, but if you are, I'm willing to help. It's your move. #changecollege

[@austinryder9028]

This video is worth many utils

[@arjunshreekumar5948]

I'm not sure if I'm totally convinced by any of the five arguments: 1) citing "opportunity cost" exaggerates the scarcity of discretionary money. Even if you don't take into account all of the funding mechanisms proposed by supporters of free college (wealth tax, marginal tax, financial transactions tax etc.), you could very easily reorganize federal spending to make room for the policy. Whether it's ending subsidies to the fossil fuel industry or cutting defense spending, we have more than enough resources to guarantee quality education for everyone. 2) those in the middle class are still saddled with hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt. Even a family making median income struggles to support children through undergraduate studies, even more so for graduate school. Everyone from Paul Krugman to Milton Friedman (or at least his acolytes) agree that such debt is devastating to the economy. 3) "diploma inflation" is only true if you learn zero soft or hard skills in college. Because of specialized education, people are more able to compete in the fields of their choice, not just those they're forced in to by necessity. Say, for example, that I've dreamed of becoming an aerospace engineer. It's pretty clear that I would have to go to college to land a job in the field. While it's certainly true that there would be more people with degrees to now compete against, it's not like everyone who goes to the now-free public college would have gotten a degree in astrophysics. The cost of the potential of slightly higher competition is vastly outweighed by the freedom given to those who want to follow their passions. 4 and 5) We can chew gum and walk too. Because the colleges in question are public, there is still an avenue for advocacy from students (at least to the degree there's an avenue to advocate whatever alternative is preferable). Whether people want to eliminate core curricula or increase course selections or do literally anything to depart from the status quo, they can do that while still pushing for what should be a human right in our economy: a comprehensive, quality education.

[@martinbuchholz6725]

Dear Mr Clifford I finally passed my econ exam in university with one of the highest score. But it was not only due to your videos but because I changed my learning strategy! Essentialy what I did was, that I reread what my professor said and then I watched your videos to understand how the graphs work in an animated way. This helps in a great way, because looking at two pictures in a book or script of a before and after situation of, for example, the aggregate demand graph, doesn't really explain it enough. All in all I treat your videos more as a supplement to my classes, just to understand it a little bit more, rather than a complete substitution and ignoring what my professor said during classes.

[@KaboomPlaysMinecraft]

Always excited when you upload Jacob. Favorite economics KZbinr by far.

[@VeryProPlayerYesSir1122]

If education is "free" then those universities are subsidized by the state. The state are known for bad spending without fear of bankruptcy.

[@ragnhildkosmoholm4941]

Like your name

[@aapex5459]

subsidizing education only leads to inflated tuition costs, in an ever-repeating cycle. it’s why tuition has skyrocketed in respect to general economic growth. to argue that “tuition costs are already high” is being ignorant of the fact that government subsidies/demand in a watered down market has been the predominant causes. funding should be allocated to families with low income, with grants low and loans high on low interest, long term payment plans

[@question44question30]

Everything dollar the government touches goes into the pockets of politicians. Fix the corruption of the politicians and will gladly pay higher taxes.

[@braydengriffin1665]

Best video i've seen on this topic!

[@GeneghisKhan]

Would you buy a product that is all time low in value, high in price, not guaranteed to work, cannot be refunded, and possibly put yourself in debt to purchase? Well, that's college degree for you.

[@Hughjasslol1]

That's also why you work and study hard so that doesn't happen? ...

[@lu881]

At first I was like..."it should be" And then I was like..."Oh I see"

[@Trehugindrtlvr1]

I 100% learned more from your videos than from micro & macro 101. Not only did I learn from them, but you made it interesting and fun! If only I knew of you 15 years ago - coulda saved me $40,000!

[@sandymist7411]

this video really needs to go viral. very good job Mr. Clifford

[@JoLLyGymSOX]

I understand the argument, but I still think I disagree. Other countries that offer free education seem to see benefits outweighed by the negatives you mentioned. As a poor first generation college student, I think that bracketing tuition costs would be a viable solution. If we aren't going to make it free to everyone, at least make it affordable to everyone. I am already in debt, and I think most people who already went into debt for school care less about making education free and more about providing more sensible loan forgiveness and interest restructuring. The overpriced education system in America might just be a result of failure to better regulate a capitalist society. These colleges chase profits and nobody is stopping them from jacking up costs. It also doesn't help that the government profits from university loans, so the ones in charge of regulating have an incentive to keep things how they are.

[@Hughjasslol1]

Did you not get financial aid through FAFSA??

[@johnappleseed8146]

Hugh Jass hope you’re not seriously making that argument

[@JoLLyGymSOX]

@@Hughjasslol1 Sorry I didn't see the notification to reply to your comment. I do get aid through FAFSA, and while the Pell Grant and various grants do cover about half of my tuition, the rest of the aid package is a combination of loans (if we're being exact, it gave me a package with more loans than grants). Better than private loans no doubt, but it is still debt I will have to repay. As someone who greatly benefits from FAFSA aid, I will say that while it does make college a possibility for me, it is still a huge gamble. I don't believe education should be something we gamble our futures on. Not trying to sound greedy at all. The FAFSA surely has some positives, but I have an expected family contribution (ECF) of zero and it isn't like the FAFSA just lets me go for free. I think a lot of students I know who come from wealthier families confuse that idea. By no means do I have a free ride.

[@paulstandaert2042]

At the very least, the government should not be backing the loans. Student loans are guaranteed, and what sense does it make to let someone borrow $70,000 to get an art history degree? The borrower will be hard pressed to pay that back and since the guaranteed loans essentially mean an unlimited supply of students, the universities can charge whatever the heck they want. A private lender would gladly loan money for a mechanical engineering degree because the chances of it getting paid back are very high. Loan money for a Liberal Arts or Art History degree? Yeah.... kiss that $$$$ goodbye. That is the case for countless students. I am not up for government being in control of anything more than they need to. And with a whole bunch of students using their student aid checks to invest in bitcoin and live in dormitories with Jacuzzi tubs.... yeah, no.

[@tatiaa7206]

The countries that have free education are also the countries with the highest cost of living. The reason why the costs are so high in the US, is because there are so many financial aid programs.

[@dimitardimitrov3438]

You're awesome Jacob! I stand by your message.

[@MONEYwithMARKALBERT]

Interesting thoughts Jacob. I enjoy your videos. Keep up the good work!!!

[@irregularstar2399]

This was an excellent video, much better than what I've expected. In where I live, college is free an what you've stated has became reality long ago. Your analysis and points are all well made. Great job as always.

[@fenixgenosha]

In Peru most of the public universities are full. For example in Lima there's only 4 well recognised public universities. If you want for example to study medicine and you don't have the resources you'll have to try to pass the San Marcos exam that only very few people can pass. Here the main problem is that our government doesn't pay too much attention to education, I mean we have good public universities, but really few. Other problem is that sometimes the money that is given to the public universities, are not used in a good way. I remember seeing in the news that in Arequipa the director of a public university has been acuse of corruption.

[@RitchLife2019]

100% agree with last statement. I've been saying that for years. My current college curriculum includes basic economic courses that I could just take for free online instead of the courses I really need in order to be successful in my career which would be, how to negotiate business deals or how to apply the data analyzing part of my job to the other parts.

[@RitchLife2019]

I do, however, understand why proof of my knowledge of Economics would be needed, but why not offer test out options instead of making students pay for an entire unnecessary course that is offered for free online?

[@aruthorcarly]

I think scholarship is better than free tuition. Bcs in scholarship hardworking attire is needed to be qualified, consider this as good investment for getting good grade workers for future

[@Boristien405]

You're right. Not only does it not make economic sense, but it is morally bankrupt. Forcing people to fund other people's education has nothing to do with charity and everything to do with power/influence. You'd have to ignore how poor the public education system is now to still believe that socialized education is effective or correct.

[@philodemic]

Boristien405 so should high schoolers have to pay for their schooling since our taxes allow them to go to school for free?

[@nanoelbatero57]

I’d rather spend for other people’s education than my taxes going to the military all the damn time

[@annabailey8259]

Another great video Mr Clifford, and all valid points!

[@FrankCirillo94]

@Jacob Clifford, 0:50 Many of which can pay for college*, that is a huge assumption. I see articles all the time about how college debt is worse than the credit defaults of the great recession so if you mean pay ie take on thousands of dollars in debt then yes. I've be watching you since 2012 for AP Econ and lately you are treading into politics with an economic prospective. I'm in grad school for my master of science in applied economics and live and work in D.C. and this is a really "dangerous" video. Our nations capital is full of tons of people yelling about problems. However without solutions what good does that accomplish? We have to address student debt, and as someone taking out loans for graduate school I understand the problem, however by insinuating that more people don't need to be going to college we are inadvertently dumbing down America because less students will be taking Government 101 or Philosophy 101 where the beliefs they have grown up with since a child will be challenged. Many University professors will argue that the point of a degree is not to get you a job but to make you a more rounded individual which is why they make you take the gen ed course. I agree the system must change but I also see tons of videos like this where you or whoever the presenter is doesn't state the obvious bias that by cutting the supply of college students and kinking the labor market by encouraging less students to go to college and instead enter trade school or something else, in benefits you (or the presenter) because most of them already have graduate degrees. I think a much more responsible approach to this is to look at why college tuition cost has sky rocketed so much. After adjusting for inflation, in the 60's and 70's someone working a minimum wage job could pay their way through undergrad because the cost of undergrad was much more affordable. You will counter this argument by saying that because of increased demand ie more students in college it caused the price to rise, but did it? The labor market dictates what skills employees need to have in order to get a job so are just more students going to college because that is what they are told to do or is it because most jobs that don't require a trade degree now require a college degree? I would argue for the latter. How do we address the debt issue then? Lower the cost of college, ban college athletics and require athletes to play in an amateur league or get drafted straight to the pro's like MLB does. (this doesn't even take into the argument that the NCAA has stated they have no duty to protect student athletes and that student athletes risk 4 years of play without pay for the hopes of going pro) Waive the requirement that many colleges have to live on campus for the first year, address the insanely over payed administrative divisions of colleges and require them to consolidate (for public universities), cut all no academic and nonessential student affairs departments (Students can organize their own events) and put all of these savings directly back to the students in cost of attendance. After addressing rising costs we can then readdress the idea of paying for college for "everyone" which is much more of a political question than an economic one. All of this being said I would love to see a cost break down video by you on why the price of college has risen so much.

[@chriscockrell9495]

Good points. I'm 37 and have adjunct taught 4 engineering courses. The point of a degree is academically as stated. That is not always why students attend, it is the better job opportunities and nothing else going on. More desirable to an employer, Jacob has a point there too. Industry and jobs really should be a higher priority. Based on my excitement of engineering, I've started pushing for the industry emphasis but that is easier said than don't. The status quo is very hard and slow to change. You typically don't learn specifics until graduate school. The evolution of tuition costs would be interesting. Junior Colleges are still pretty reasonable, working and saving can pay for that. I think getting high school course taught that qualify as transferable general education is part of the solution. Colleges working with High Schools to allow students to graduate with an associates (General Ed). HS being publicly funded is one way to reduce the 4 year bachelor's to two.

[@FerroNeoBoron]

@@chriscockrell9495 "I think getting high school course taught that qualify as transferable general education is part of the solution." I agree with this. My highschool is in the same state as the college I went to. Imagine my surprise when I realized I took the right AP Calculus class to skip derviative calc but not integral calc.

[@jonhanson8925]

I think one of the problems is that people view liberal arts education first and foremost as a ticket to a better job, when it seems to me that they aren't very efficient pathways in many cases. For many people they delay entry onto a career path for four years while delivering a questionable amount of practical knowledge that will help them get ahead once they enter onto the path. I think promoting apprenticeship or mentorship programs that gets people into a profitable field as soon as possible might be a better way to help disadvantaged youth who aren't interested in a STEM degree where you could argue for a tighter link between class learning and earning potential. All this said, I am a little worried that a total focus on the immediate utilitarian value of education could have unintended consequences. I know GE classes frustrated me, but I also know they helped make me a more well rounded thinker. I'm not sure I want to live in a world where education is completely focused on maximizing earning potential at all costs.

[@ethansocrates4252]

the sad thing is it never hit 100 thousand views

[@user-uz5wx7lg2s]

#3 is always my point to people that want free college for everyone. College diplomas will be as worthless as high school diplomas if everyone goes to college.

[@abacaxi4713]

i live in a country with free college and i can say you are wrong.

[@anhbayar11]

You are really pathethic.

[@soumyaroopsarkar1812]

Wow, so you want education to be a private property of some, so that only those "some" enjoy the benefit. The constraint of getting high quality education should be based on merit not money. That's it.

[@brettwilliams353]

You make some great points as always. Mr. Clifford. However, what I think you fail to see is how many businesses still value college because of the soft, and hard skills developed there. College may not always be fun, but taken seriously can allow interested students an opportunity to find out who they are and what they value. If you haven't already read Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite I highly recommend it. Where the author and you agree is on the need to radically rethink higher education. Where you part ways is what that should look like. Still, you do effectively challenge the notion that the government has the answers. Keep up the good work.

[@shermanngjazz]

This needs more views Mr. Clifford!!!!

[@SourceCodeDeleted]

This makes a lot of sense. I wonder why this isn't so popular.

[@sylvainhours]

Mr. Clifford, don't you think programs such as AP contribute to fuel that "broken" system you denounce? This is an actual question, by no means an accusation.

[@Akkesama]

My university is essentially stealing from me, so yeah, everything needs to change.

[@Akkesama]

A one legged man they make you fork up far more money for a meal plan than you will EVER use and they hike prices of everything sold on campus. They pay student workers less than minimum wage because the “environment” makes up for it.

[@chestnutmountainboys]

Don’t go

[@chestnutmountainboys]

Cash only system would be cheaper

[@acho8387]

The future is online education. Great video.

[@chestnutmountainboys]

Free College will be much more expensive than a cash only, free market system.

[@steeldoubloon19]

In the UK the student loan is quite misleading in that if you earn above 50k annually you are paying back such an amount that you actually end up paying for you’re degree, if you don’t earn much, then the loan gets deleted after a while and is basically free. So essentially if you benefit you pay and if you don’t you don’t. Although everyone ends up paying in their taxes too I guess.

[@PatrickStaight]

What are your thoughts on the need for advanced education (not necessary college) in the face of increasing automation and outsourcing?

[@savanahofficiel]

I agree on the fact that the system probably is outdated, the thing though is that on the work market, universities bring legitimacy. Let's be honest, if I put that I got an economic degree from a university on my resume, that will have way more impact than saying "I taught myself economics thanks to KZbin videos". I'm not even sure I could put that on a resume without something to prove I'm not lying. To go further into the part where I agree the most, it's the inefficiency of the lectures and lessons. And language learning is probably one of the biggest problem I've had. Not just in college but also in High School because of the way they teach us (big vocabulary list, no repetition, class working instead of individual practice which could be possible with computer and internet,...). Now, the question is, what could "I"do about that problem when the board members are usually people way older, and usually "knowing better" than me. One last thing (and I know this is an economic channel), I think College should be free mostly because even though the university diploma might replace the HS diploma, an educated population will always accomplish more. I believe that education and access to it should be free. That is why I value internet so much (and I would like to thank you because you're participating in giving a free access to knowledge).

[@isaacliu896]

I agree as long as research still gets funded

[@charleschibula8819]

I agree

[@ismailki6546]

That ping at the end was the FBI.

[@owen-nd7om]

The reason why people focus on free college and not our public education system (k-12) is because people who can go to college can vote

[@ramil17998]

Hey Mr. Clifford, great video as always! I have a video request for you. Could you describe the circumstances under which the government should be allowed to step in and break down or regulate a monopoly? At the time, Milton Friedman said that monopolies only arrise and sustain because of gov-t involvmenet (except for the diamond industry). Is it still true today with all the big tech giants? Would love to hear your analysis!

[@chestnutmountainboys]

large regulation tends to favor large corporations over small

[@THEDRAWINGSTUDIO1]

Yesss 3:30. Someone finally said it. I owe my entire science degree and music theory knowledge to KZbin. I don't agree college should be free though.

[@RachelledelaRosa]

👍👍👍additionally we also need more people in trade schools working specific skilled careers. And trade school costs less than college.

[@chasefitch2245]

Also people are getting college degrees they don’t need and other people are pursing degrees they shouldn’t need like undergrad degree for law school.

[@dunggg]

I am sad that this video didn’t get 100k yet

[@soggyslopster6800]

Jacob. Do you believe that college in its current state in the U.S. is a market failure?

[@janetbrochu1948]

Very informative!

[@tonygigliotti2210]

Many businesses are complaining that they can't find skilled workers to hire for their open positions. I think the main complaint is that workers graduating form liberal art colleges don't have the requisite technical skills to do the work for the available jobs. Perhaps it would make sense to give incentives to the businesses to train the employees to be able to do the work that they have openings for? If the investment leads directly to a job and allows us to be more productive, would that be a better use of some of our education funds?

[@khadijafayyaz6184]

So, College is free here in France and omg is it amazing !! 👌🏻❤

[@etorawa9367]

Salams habib, the only problem is that everyone has a diploma and this is where nepotism plays a huge part. En faite comme tout le pays europeens, tout tient a qui on connait...n'est-ce pas?

[@SiegfriedJeremy]

Hey Jacob you have some good points there but I somehow do disagree with you. I live in Switzerland and I am certain that the wealth of this county is strongly linked to further education and uni being free for everyone. 20% of the population has a university degree. We have the highest GDP per capita after Luxemburg and the highest rate of innovation. This obviously depends on having a good school system and universities. Anyways, you rock dude! I bought your awesome Ultimate Review Pack, love it and your videos.

[@pezpeculiar9557]

1. The same argument can be made for public high school. No person who advocates for expanding social services thinks it can be provided without government spending that comes mostly from taxes. Also, tuition-free college would cost ~12% of the current military budget based on the estimates that it would be $70b/yr. It would certainly not break the bank. There is more than enough room to pay for free college and improve existing schools. 2. Many low-income people don't go to college in the first place simply because it costs too much. Take away the personal cost for those people and they are more likely to go to college and improve their skills, and become more productive workers. The upper class more often goes to private institutions, NOT public, and they already get their tuition paid through their or their parents' incomes there. But let's say they start going to tuition-free public schools-many studies have suggested that the more we try to means-test programs, the less progressive they become. In other words, it has been completely counterproductive to try to means test programs like these. We don't do it with public high schools; there is no reason to do it with public colleges. Isn't the goal to make education accessible to everybody regardless of what their income was last year or the year before? The "middle class" are by no means so well off that college is not a serious cost that can get them into debt either. 3. More people getting college degrees is a good thing, not bad! In fact, that is the goal of free college. Will it be more difficult to differentiate yourself from others? Yes! But the same could be said when we decided to have tuition-free high school. Like you taught in macroeconomics, with more people having degrees/higher education (like more people having diplomas), we are making a more productive workforce and a more informed population. Want to compete better? Get a higher degree. That isn't much different from the status quo and I think this feature of education is probably something most understand as reasonable; it's only a matter of equal access and preventing debt from hindering people's life decisions. Let the hindrance be their own determination, not their income, if we want a truly meritocratic society. 4. Unfortunately, we don't have a million Jacob Cliffords out there teaching. We have the same problem in high schools as well of teachers costing a lot of money for what some argue isn't worth it. But I think it should be mentioned that general education does have value, that's why we start it in elementary, middle, and high school-all funded by the government at no direct cost to the students! If we pay teachers and professors more, like other countries do, and perhaps have higher requirements for teachers, we can have a better education system. These aren't independent events, we can do both. (I can already hear you noting the tradeoff of higher taxes to fund government spending. However, I would argue this is worth it for stopping student debt and generating a more productive workforce; and for reaching the socially optimal equilibrium!) Finally on this point, let's be honest here: plenty of your students probably thought they got no value out of your classes in economics. Your showing comments of your viewers calling you a great teacher is what we call selection bias in statistics. But, chances are, they all became at least somewhat better informed about how society works and you added to their general education. Sure, it might not be their career goals to all become economists or small business owners, but they are now better informed voters and better thinkers. There is value in general education in this respect, ignoring that you likely inspired some kids to study Economics in college and make careers out of it, and the fact they are now more productive workers. 5. This has nothing to do with college being free, again. If students get more value out of online courses (which is empirically unsupported right now), then pay for them to get a degree online. If we want a different public education system, demand it through a combination of your vote and your action in protest, campaigns, etc.

[@gerardoixehuatl6776]

I agree 👍👍👍👍👍

[@hehezzh4591]

Tuition is crazy in North America. For international students, it is even crazier.

[@chestnutmountainboys]

That’s because the gov got involved in lending

[@kylepolizotto2539]

If you look at country's like Germany or Denmark, which do have state funded universities, the entrance requirements are much more demanding than anything in the USA. Germany also has a much different system, if you don't pass your Mittlere Reife you aren't going to university, you are going to a vocational school to learn a trade. The German and Danish systems are designed to allow only the best students into universities, because of Point #3, they don't want it to become the next HS diploma. The USA cannot have a free education system for universities without completely overhauling its k-12 system first.

[@tim_d_jong]

I agree with you Mr Clifford. well on some parts. on other parts I don't really agree and let me explain why. It shouldn't be made free because as you said the diploma would lose it's value. But it mustn't be too expensive either. Of course we need better classes where we don't get bored I totally agree on that but I'm talking about the price of college. The price should be at an "equilibrium". it shouldn't be too low or free because the quantity demanded of a diploma would get way too high and it would lose it's value. but it shouldn't be as expensive as it is today because the quantity demanded is too low. Imagine a simplified scenario. at $2 everybody wants a diploma but it won't be worth a lot. at $10 nobody wants it. and let's say the equilibrium is at $5. then for the people who can buy it, it's great. but if you only have $4 the government should give you $1. not borrow but give. so you can have a diploma and get to work. the government shouldn't give money to the people who can already buy it. the government should give the money instead of borrowing it because it's like a longterm investment for the government itself. they can give the $1 you need for your diploma so you can get to work and pay taxes. the more you're paid, the more you'll have to pay in income taxes. with a higher diploma you can get a better job, be paid more and thus pay more income taxes. so the government may lose $1 for your diploma but it can get $20 from your income taxes each year. for me, that's worth giving away the $1 for the diploma

[@PokeShadow77]

Thank you Mark Cuban, very cool

[@jonasnielsen7361]

Don't think your broken system argument is universal. In Denmark for example our universities are owned by the government, and thus can't charge a hefty fee for tuition. We also have free admission to both bachelors and masters.

[@JacobAClifford]

Thanks for the comment. My argument that the system is broken has to do with inefficiency. In Denmark are you required to take high cost classes that you don't want? Whether these are funded by individuals or taxpayers is irrelevant.

[@jonasnielsen7361]

We have courses we are required to pass, but whether you attend them or not is up to you. For instance I taught myself macroeconomics in part due to your videos. That was more a thing of time efficiency though, because I found out I could finish the work twice as fast as my lectures. Thanks for the comment though, love your videos. Also, please do a video on the solow model, because alot of European macro courses include it.

[@jonasnielsen7361]

So i guess your point is valid then 😂

[@robertbarth3476]

Some how we have to control what universities charge, the free market screws that up with greedy minds. It's not limited to universities.

[@LeliPlaysBeatSaber]

First of all good points, with that said I have to disagree. In certain countries like Malta, university is actually free of charge and students actually get a small stipend to help with school supplies. It's actually viewed as a way to invest in the labor force with the hopes of raising more professionals. By doing so, barriers of entry to college are removed and students are actually encouraged to study. It's more of an investment in the country's number of professionals.

[@JacobAClifford]

Thanks for your input. I see what you are saying, but Malta has the same population as the city of Omaha, Nebraska.

[@LeliPlaysBeatSaber]

Jacob Clifford I fail to see what you're hinting at? Would you mind elaborating?

[@JacobAClifford]

Sorry. I was focusing on free college tuition in the US and I was suggesting that the significantly smaller size of Malta makes it difficult to compare. What works in Malta might not work in the US. @@LeliPlaysBeatSaber

[@Arlae_Nova]

@@JacobAClifford you could also look at the Scandinavian countries where it works too. Although still not US size, I think the amount of people there make it a high enough sample size.

[@ddigwell]

@@Arlae_Nova In Scandinavian countries do they allow 100% of all applicants to higher institutions of learning to enter at taxpayer expense OR is there a vetting process?

[@Theffries]

So the five takeaways I got from the video are 1. Invest in early education, which you said.... but that isn’t mutually exclusive with making higher education more accessible. 2. Increase pell grant payouts and increase the availability, to also include ex convicts. 3. He makes a logical fallacy when he says that high school diplomas are “useless because everybody else already has one.” If college is already easily accessible by the upper and middle class, making it more attainable to the lower classes will level the playing field between the wealth groups. 4. Taking gen ed classes isn’t a waste of time. I can only imagine what STEM would be like if English or communication classes were not required. Emails could be unclear, people might not know how to give proper presentations, and people may not also be able to communicate efficiently with others. Not to mention that not offering gen ed courses can lead to intellectual stagnation, as many of those courses allow for the most freedom of expression. 5. There should be regulations to hold public universities more accountable, which receive subsidies from the government anyway to ensure they are acting in the students’ best interests. Many universities nowadays are run like businesses, which can be seen particularly well by those that opened during the pandemic. I live near one of the largest community colleges in the country, with nearly (if not exceeding) 100,000 full and part time students between in person and online classes, as of last year... the president’s salary is a bit over $300,000/year. There is a university with 30,000 students in the same state, whose president is paid about $1,000,000/year.

[@siddharthajain6944]

Incentives should be given to low income background students getting good grades in a good school who enrolled through debt.

[@siddharthajain6944]

@@gnomeyg959incentive only meaning doesn't mean scholarship, it means any effective policy that brings result. Period.

[@paulstandaert2042]

Kinda ironic that I was forced to pay for math and grammar classes of which I had plenty from K-12. It was merely a review with some revisions since the rules of English vary from one teacher to another. But, if I didn't pay for those, it meant no degree. Is the gubberment going to reimburse me for my college tuition? I would want that $$$$ plus the interest that I paid for my mortgage debt. If suddenly everyone starts getting their college education for free, that just puts me behind.

[@jackcarraway4707]

We as society also need to stop glorifying college as this end all be all when it comes to success. You can get a good job in the military or learning a trade. In fact, it's getting easier to get into a trade due to the extreme shortage they're facing.

[@paulehe9581]

A shame that this video didn't gain much momentum

[@kunallobo4136]

Jacob Clifford -- how is this for a solution. The government currently guarantees student loans to the bank thus increasing the demand of college beyond the rational point (since most students are not thinking rationally about if a fringe major can be paid back). If instead, we made all student loans go through the bank without guarentees, then colleges will have to reduce their tuition to the point where it can be once again rational to attend, or simply less people will be able to get the necessary student loans from the bank to be able to. What do you think?

[@EuropeanQoheleth]

Primary and secondary school are also outdated and whatnot and a lot of people know it but nothing ever gets done about any of these.

[@User-he6zd]

I'm not sure you're statement that everyone can afford tuition stands up to scrutiny-- from my research in American uni's, you guys just get hella big loans to pay for it, so the issue is if they can afford the loan repayments-- and it is predicted that by 2023 40% of borrowers are expected to default. On the fact that they'd get less benefit due to the idea more people in general will get degrees, devaluing it, this is true, however surely there would still be a benefit in 1) Productivity for the individual (and so economy/ labour as a whole) and 2) People who get free undergrad degrees still have a financial/ income advantage if travelling outside of their country (so their labour competition is less skilled on comparison) Personally I think we should fund apprenticeships, vocational qualifications more, are these are proven to actually help educate and increase social mobility of the poor, and keep the current (UK) system in place, but offer bursaries / means tested bursaries based upon familial wealth, and pay back based on income. Fully agree with a reform in how uni's/ colleges operate though, I personally hope in the future the increase in online education and training will decrease prices, increase competition and allow uni's to better collate data of students and subjects.

[@harrychristofi6725]

Public colleges and public universities should be tuition free for everyone like in most countries. But I agree that it’s outdated, private colleges would still exist.

[@christopheriman4921]

I only really agreed with you that the schooling system should change since it is archaic, but I also think college should be free and quality, the only way you end up with a system that will allow anyone who wants an education to get it is one that makes it free for everyone and even then it's just a starting place since there are other systems within capitalism that work against these sorts of systems, like the archaic idea of having a boss that can fire you at any point with little to no reason and if you don't find another job quick you run out of money you need for necessities

[@jamilfuad4439]

Agreed

[@TheBandFiles]

Money is not a scarce resource. We can easily marshall any additional *real* resources to educate any American who wants to go to college. Federal student loan repayment is a tax, and the interest is like an onerous tax on a tax. Why are we taxing education?

[@ericschultz5839]

All of the arguments that Clifford presented in this video are absolute garbage lol

[@100happythoughts]

Jacob Clifford, I found a way to fight the system by attending the "University of the People." Students still pay for classes and testing fees, but it is much cheaper than a traditional college. Investigate the price, quantity content, and accreditation. Why pay more? Scarcity, waste less.

[@waikanaebeach]

Education, whether academic or technical, should be seen by the state as an investment in giving people the tools to make better decisions, greater flexibility in a changing world and improved wellbeing. Currently, the 20-30 year olds will be generally POORER than their parents at the same age. This is the first time EVER that has happened. It is an investment as poorer less well educated people tend to make great demands on the state whereas education leads to higher incomes that pay taxes to the state. The free market (if there ever was one) has never delivered outcomes that ensure fair and equitable distribution regarding education. I agree the all levels incl. university and qualification system is broke, however I cannot see how the latent conservatism that exists in government and education is going to fix it.

[@waikanaebeach]

A one legged man Government investment is not a business, it is for the greater good of society.

[@CaptainBeardedLlama]

If you cut off a year and only take classes in your intended major you get an associate degree - which have value, but maybe not as much as they should. Also, I don't know if I buy the idea that English classes are useless to chemistry majors. Like, show me one job that doesn't require the ability to communicate effectively through writing.

[@davidzajicek7738]

The argument that free tuition means that university diploma becomes new high school diploma neglects the fact that there are other relevant discrimination factors at play. Not everyone is capable enough to finish university. The difficulty of the program can be increased or decreased and therefore only the capable will receive their diploma.

[@davidzajicek7738]

Part of the reason why university diploma doesn't hold that much weight in labor market is precisely because having one means firstly that you had money to attend one, and only secondly that you are capable enough to finish it.

[@gabrielwing1227]

Why does this video have so few views?

[@JacobAClifford]

Tell me about it :)

[@RickTheGreatestPosterEver]

We should send everyone to college who wants to learn because it’s AN INVESTMENT IS OUR ECONOMY, one that creates jobs. We need to shift from the victimhood narrative of students are being exploited and start saying “Hey, it’s been a while since we’ve had an Albert Einstein, Nicola Tesla our Benjamin Franklin… Wouldn’t our stupid society benefit from higher education?” No, we shouldn’t forgive private college debt and we need caps in place to prevent universities from ripping off taxpayers by overcharging. A Peter Theil Libertarian think tank did a study on paid community college and and concluded that it would cost $60B and would pay for itself in 6 years. We just sent that much to Ukraine and what has it got us? 80% of the weapons end up in the hands of Nazis or on the black market. The fact is, there are vast economic benefits of having an educated population, just look at China. Anyone who says otherwise is not an economist, but a fraud... Yes, I’m talking about you, Jacob. I am one of the many millions of people WHO NEED IN-PERSON LEARNING. I don’t learn from videos and you’re over here acting like the Internet is some revolutionary new thing and that we all need to immediately switch to online courses and eliminate in person learning. That’s reckless and idiotic. Certain elements of the classroom are already moving online and they’re moving at a safe pace… nobody is going to become a doctor from an online course. The more you speak, the more you show how little you’ve studied this. Talks about “revolutions” and nonsense about getting a million Likes make you sound like a used car salesman. Oh and the absurd claim that you “didn’t monetize this video because I’m doing this to help you” is absolute nonsense. How are you going to lead this revolution without capital? I thought you were an economist.

[@Ram-re5em]

If college is free then everyone can go? I want to just take a few classes and don’t want a degree. Can i got to Harvard and just clog up the class room.

[@molininicolas]

In my country we have the UBA, is the largest university in Argentina and it's free. The education is good, but only the 5% of the students gets a degree. I think it's a waste of money and its inefficent, because the poor people didn´t even finish the high school, its very sad to be true.

[@Kassouffle]

I agree that university should not necessarily be free, but I do think that tuition fees in some countries are totally out of proportion. As a German person studying in the Netherlands, I pay about 2000 euros tuition fees per year. This is manageable and I am happy to pay as I receive something really good in return. But having to get into huge debt in order to finance your education is really not okay and when I look at tuition fees in countries like the US (or Australia, UK,..), it amazes me that people are actually paying that. Sure, you guys are used to it and I get it that you want to go to uni, but the fees you have to pay are honestly ridiculous and something needs to be done about this.

[@connierosenbalm5822]

I'd bet part of the answer is skilled labor in all disciplines.

[@eugenehicks3859]

The problem is people go to college for money and jobs. Not the pursuit of intellectual and personal growth and development. This present model is obsolete.

[@JacobAClifford]

Agreed. If people want to go to college only for intellectual and personal growth they CAN go for free. Anyone, anywhere can audit any college course for free. You could go to Harvard right now and sit in any class.

[@Akkesama]

How about you still have to apply (illustrating intention rather than trying to prove yourself better than everyone else) for college to get in free, rather than handing out guaranteed automatic admission and tuition.

[@mariabravo7113]

Clifford for president 2020

[@cristiandavidmillergonzale710]

I think the system is broken, College is like a magical bubble that has almost nothing to do with reality, the only thing I disagree with this video is because of the opportunity cost, I believe it is not a problem in the USA where government spend billions in army (more than the next 10 together approximately)

[@cristiandavidmillergonzale710]

@Eagle Claw well, I thought this channel was a place where people interested in economics could debate without insulting others, but it seems like rat kids are everywhere, that's the huge difference between you and me, I don't need push others down to express my thoughts. It is really sad that a good channel with a valuable information, have ignorants like you attacking other's opinions, moreover, I'm not Mexican but I don't like to fall into stupid games, so Have a good day

[@reginawilkerson4339]

The more money the government pays the more money in the market.

[@Sebastian-jg9tx]

I still believe university tuition should be free... Yes, university is not very useful at giving you the necessary skills for the job market- but that's irrelevant. People want to consume university not because they can learn a kill, but because it differentiates them from others. Saying "I learnt spanish on an online course" doesn't sound as good as "I have a degree in Spanish". People who go to university consistently have a higher paid job at the end of it. We should be trying to reduce the number of university graduates, in order to make it more competitive- so a degree actually means more. The way to do that is by making it free, and then allowing the government, not the free market, to decide who goes to university. Countries such as Sweden that have free university actually have fewer people going to university than the USA. Secondly, it addresses the imbalance in wealth between the young and old, and addresses the crippling debt due to student loans. Yes, it's an opportunity cost. But why can't we increase funding for lower education , health, infrastructure etc AND abolish tuition fees? Besides- we can make the wealthiest 1% pay for it, which surely benefits the majority of people.

[@megibega3628]

Good points 👏👏

[@calculon000]

*1. There's no such thing as a free lunch* This is a common response when someone erroneously refers to a socialized service as “free”. Of course you can point to parts of government funding that have eroded over time and say the money could be better spent there, but I would argue that funding both college and primary education to a better level would give you a greater economic bang for your buck than, say, defense spending that only benefits a few contractors for a smaller return to the overall economy per dollar. *2. The people that benefit the most are the upper and middle class * You say that “higher education is disproportionately consumed by the upper and middle class”. Yes, and the reason WHY that is the case is because tuition costs money out of pocket for the student. This being the current situation is actually a reason to argue FOR more socialized education, not a reason against it. *3. The people that benefit the least are those that get free tuition * You would move the differentiation you have from your fellow job seekers from how wealthy you (or more often your parents) are, to how much merit you have in your field. A diploma would become more valuable as an actual indicator of ability, rather than wealth, if you were to level the economic playing field of potential students. This would make the economy more efficient, as employers would be more likely to hire someone who was actually talented in their field if they have a given educational certification. *4. Don't fund a broken system * You don't really make a compelling case that changing where college funding comes from would harm or help the ability to reform that system. *5. If you don't stand up, who will? * It's economic inequality that a lot of these young people are protesting, and access to education for all is one method of addressing that. You yourself admit “I don't have a comprehensive list of solutions, but that's because I haven't spent much time thinking about it.”, so how can you be so sure that the problems you see aren't a result of the extent to which the college system in the United States is privatized? Saying “The current system sucks so don't fund it.” isn't a very compelling argument that “More public funding wouldn't make the system better.”

[@JacobAClifford]

Great points. I'm going to sleep right now, but I promise to address each of them in the morning.

[@JacobAClifford]

Actully, first address the easiest one. Point #2. Will more poor people attend college if it is free, yes. Will the poor ever go to college at the same rates as the rich and middle class? No. Even if tuition is free, poor students will always have additional obstacles that prevent them from attending college. They might not be able to afford transportation or housing. They might have financial or health relegated obligations at home. The only way to get the poor to attend college at higher rates than the rich is to provide additional services and funding to overcome these other obstacles, which is not analyzing. We are just looking at public funded tuition. Free college for all will disproportionately benefit the rich because they will always be more likely to attend college. Do you agree?

[@calculon000]

@@JacobAClifford You're right in that there are more reasons than just the cost of tuition that prevent the poor from attending college at the same rate as the rich, but I think that the cost of tuition is self-evidently a much bigger obstacle for the poor vs. the rich. The poor need not to surpass attendance rate of the rich to still be able to partially catch up and benefit more from the policy than the rich. For the sake of argument, if the rich go from a 50% to 60% rate, and the poor go from a 10% to 40% rate, the policy still benefited the poor three times as much.

[@JacobAClifford]

I see what you're saying but again if the goal is to help the poor then why should the rich get free tuition at all?

[@jonhanson8925]

Your first reply doesn't seem to address Jacob's actual point. He's says he's not arguing against "free college tuition" because taxpayers will actually have to pay for it, he's arguing that it might not actually be the best way to spend taxpayer money. I think he seems open to increased education spending, he just wants us to think about how that money should be spent in order to achieve the best return on investment possible.

[@Barry1337G]

in germany it is, u pay about 300 euros for every semester

[@canaannoah4712]

Do they teach it in English or German .

[@Barry1337G]

@@canaannoah4712 it depends, but most likely in german

[@squid0g]

I dont see how a college degree will become as valueless as a high school diploma because they have to be specialized. One cannot get a highschool degree in engineering. A college degree in gender studies is much less valuable to the market than a science major. More people will go to college meaning higher competition and less of a chance at a job but atleast the playing feild is more fair. I agree that the system is inefficient also but this does not surmount my perception that a more equitable economy is one that allows for higher education to be available to all. We can both fund it through taxes and make it more efficient

[@camilabaxter2543]

squiddles this may not be related but if everyone is a doctor who will do the jobs no one likes to do like garbage truck drivers, etc

[@satheeshkadiam2136]

Overpriced, irrelevant system has no value. Just like emperor's clothes. It needs to be exposed

[@nicholasdecespedes1698]

Satheesh Kadiam get out of here socialist

[@satheeshkadiam2136]

@Eagle Claw I'll not be distracted from an important global issue by racist rants and neither should you.

[@etorawa9367]

@@satheeshkadiam2136 Not everything is racist. Come on man, you can do better!

[@satheeshkadiam2136]

@@etorawa9367 eagle claw's comment is deleted long back. I think you have not seen that comment.

[@ragnhildkosmoholm4941]

I think that many parts of 'murica is broken, and it is difficult to change the educational system alone... I see there are some fellow Scandinavians down in the comments here. Norwegian here, Americans probably see us as communists. Yes, you are the land of Amazon, Netflix, Apple, Google and Microsoft. But these are the "tops", and it is far from the top to the bottom. Education is the best way out of poverty. I think that giving the population an education decreases crime (I believe there have been many studies), increases peoples understanding of how the society works, "broadens their minds"... Over here we have public and private schools, where most students choose public (free). The private schools create competition, so that the public schools needs to step up their game, so I see a place for the private ones as well . Public schools can be just as good as private, at least here in Norway. Everyone over here, rich or poor, can borrow money from a public "bank" (cannot do anything else than borrow money from school, and pay it back again after. Interests start "running" after you are done studying, and the interests are quite low.. Aprox 2% as we speak). When you graduate 40% of the loan is paid back to the student (must complete in the normal time, 3 years for bachelor). This loan makes it possible to not work while we study. (Some do work, because they want to pay for alcohol and fancy vacations ;)) We do have some boring classes that everyone has to attend. But I also think it is OK to learn that everything is not super fun and interesting, as long as the subjects does not take precedence over the interesting subjects. You are mentioning that you can learn things online. But how one person be measured up against the other if they have learned "stuff" online without a test, exam, hand in, presentation, paper, degree, etc. to show for his/hers knowledge? I have a masters degree in computer science, and after that degree I had 35-35k USD in student loans. Gotta love communism. After my masters, while working full time as a developer, I am pursuing a degree in administration/economics. For free as well. Found your channel while learning public finance!

[@feynstein1004]

#1 Nothing is free. Absolutely agree. If anything is free, there's a good chance people will exploit it and won't have a feeling of ownership (tragedy of the commons). Having said that, however, education is a very important commodity for the progress of society and tuition fees shouldn't be so absurdly high that people have to spend decades to pay off their debts. Imo this not only gives people an incentive to be uneducated but it also hurts the economy because if people are spending most of their income paying off their student loans, then they have less money to spend on goods and services. I propose a middle ground. Let tuition fees exist but be cheap/affordable. This will deter anyone trying to waste educational resources and make people more responsible with their studies, while simultaneously not punishing them for choosing education or pushing them into debt for years to come. I think tuition should cost only as much as students can earn during their studies. Thus, when they are finished studying, they won't have to worry about staying afloat, especially if they can't find a good job immediately. #2 Agree with this one. Education is especially important for poorer people because it can help them improve their economic status. The solution I described in #1 should take care of that but we could always provide scholarships to poor students based on their socioeconomic condition too. #3 I disagree a bit with this one. Just because college is free doesn't mean everyone will want to join it. There's still the opportunity cost of having a full-time paying job. And in my experience, most people actually don't like learning. They just force themselves through it in hopes of securing a better future for themselves. I agree that it would increase the competition because more people would have the same degree but the alternative is to have the same competition post high-school with less educated people. And that's much worse imo. One way or another, we will have competition and I'd rather it be between educated, reasonable adults than less educated, emotional teenagers. The only real solution to this is to either decrease the population or to have large economic growth to create more opportunities for everyone. And since the former isn't ethical and the latter is unlikely, we're stuck with the situation I described above. #4 and #5 I strongly agree. The internet and the digital revolution have rendered colleges completely obsolete and irrelevant. Why do we need to pay teachers to teach people the same thing over and over again when we can easily record the lectures and show them to students instead? Yes, students will have questions/comments which they will want to consult with the teacher, but this can be done by asking the teacher to video chat for 10-15 minutes after the lecture, instead of spending the entire time speaking there. And we can even streamline this process by making a note of the most frequently asked questions and incorporating them into the lecture itself. We would need drastically fewer personnel and none of the gargantuan infrastructure, which would reduce the costs to practically nothing (I know there are always some costs and nothing is free, but there's a huge difference between paying 100 dollars a month and paying 2000 dollars a month)

[@piaojiru]

No offense, but I suppose Mr. Clifford had never been boring in his classes, in his many years of teaching classroom Econ.

[@laurens.2503]

No, no, no. Needs to be cheaper though.

[@braddaniel4886]

I love #3 & #5. - Thank you

[@leopard6554]

No comments...!!!

[@kirkjohnson9353]

Your number four reason is the top reason I think . The current system of education is no longer affordable because it is horribly corrupt. The answer is not to throw even more money at it. First fix the system.

[@JuliRodriguez-uh5ce]

still not convinced lol the pros outweigh the cons.

[@MrZinko-hw7uk]

Where I live college is free

[@ddigwell]

Q: Where is that? Q: Is it free or is it paid by taxpayers? Q: Is there a vetting process or can EVERYONE attend?

[@chestnutmountainboys]

It’s probably really expensive and is mediocre

[@Victork1997]

I have watched your video, but I don't agree with you. I'm from Denmark where all educations are ''free'' and we get payed around 200 $ if we live at home and around 800 $ if we live by ourselves each month while we study. When you say free education benefits the upper classes more than lower classes I disagree, because when education is free people from lower classes will be able to ''afford'' taking an education too and nowadays when jobs are getting more and more complex it's necessary for people to have good educations to become valuable in the job market. Education has great positive externalities on society and it gives everyone equality of opportunity no matter who their parents are, therefore I think it should be free (or at least very subsidized) Though I do agree our system isn't perfect because we (students) get a bit spoiled here, so it's common to take gap year(s) after high school, take educations that aren't so relevant for the job market, etc. But in general I think the perks outweighs the disadvantages.

[@ddigwell]

Does Denmark provide for 100% of all those applying to attend college? Or does your country vet applicants and pay for those who show a proclivity towards academic success? Also for those who do not show such academic prowess, do they attend vocational schools or just a generic education like high schools in the USA?

[@Victork1997]

@@ddigwell The state provides for all educations so it doesn't matter if it's university, academy, trade school etc. you'll get your education payed by the government and receive a small salary while studying (for a certain number of years)

[@ddigwell]

@@Victork1997 Like Denmark, high school in the U.S. (Denmark's Secondary education) is paid for by the taxpayer and is not a point of contention. According to the Danish Ministry of Higher Education and Science, Specific entry requirements attendance at an institution of Higher Education and Science requires that: “Like applicants with Danish qualifications, you must meet the specific entry requirements that apply to the individual study programme. Specific requirements typically include the level of the subjects passed, marks (grades) obtained in individual subjects and the overall average of marks (grade point average).” (Danish Ministry of Higher Education and Science, 2018) The prefatory statement “Like applicants with Danish qualifications ...” indicates that not all can attend a Danish institution Higher Education and Science and therefore college is not “free” to all. It is paid by taxpayers to those who show an ability to be successful at it. Danish Ministry of Higher Education and Science (2018) Admission to Danish higher education for holders of foreign qualifications. ufm.dk/en/education/recognition-and-transparency/recognition-guide/admission-he

[@Victork1997]

@@ddigwell Yeah you could say that it's payed by the taxpayer so it's not free, but to the students it's free, we pay nothing to enter or to study at university (or any other educational institution). The only thing we have to buy ourselves is books for the course, but we get so much payed from the government that's meant for books and living expenses so that's fair enough.

[@extremeobservr1]

So you use Samsung phone.

[@robertmainville4881]

Needless to say that I wholeheartedly disagree with the content of this video (which at least serve as a very good example of everything that is wrong with the field of economics). A few observations. 1 - If higher-education is used by affluent to rich kids, why is student debt such a problem (and a drag on the economy)? I thought they could afford it... 2 - Why is free college education working in many other countries (or is at least WAY more affordable than in the US)? 3 - Why is applying the "rich-are-using-it-more-thus-making-it-free-is-a-subsidy-to-the-rich" argument only reserved to higher education? Why not apply this logic to, say, streets and roads, since rich people can afford more cars and more gas to travel these streets and roads? And while on this path, why not applying that "logic" to trash collection as well, since rich people are consuming more goods, thus throwing more used goods in the trash? 4- Aren't rich people supposed to pay more taxes anyway? In a progressive tax system, they would pay their fair share of the taxes allocated to free-tuition, no? 5 - Finally, if you think that education is expensive, you can always try ignorance...

[@Hughjasslol1]

Lol then why do so many foreign people apply to American colleges ?

[@robertmainville4881]

@@Hughjasslol1 And your point is ???

[@chestnutmountainboys]

Tuition wouldn’t be as high as it is today if the federal government would’ve stayed out of it. They effectively got in the business of lending and shouldn’t have. We need more free market concepts, choices and competition.

[@reginawilkerson4339]

College isn't for everyone