Clinton: "I honestly believe that my plan to make college affordable..."

[TheProgressive]

Saying that "I honestly believe that my plan to make college affordable..." means that Clinton will not offer America's future (i.e. college graduates) tuition-free college & universities.

What Clinton is saying is that students will still have tuition costs. There might be financial assistance for some, but in general, students will pay tuition.

Ok, why?

Several reasons I can think of:
1. Sanders wants to pay for this with a stock tax - remember, Clinton is beholden to Wall St so no way will Clinton allow a tax on her Wall St buddies.

2. Clinton does not believe in taxes, especially high earners income tax.

3. The more indebted American youth are the better to "control them".

4. The Establishment prefers an ignorant society - easier to brainwash.

What would you want for your college bound young adult? Sanders: tuition-free college paid by Wall St tax or
Clinton: we'll see how we can make it 'affordable' for your kids...


I forgot to add: Senator Sanders is only beholden to..... We the People.

From CNN Transcripts, 2/23/2016 SC Democratic Townhall:

And let me say a word about student debt, because I honestly believe that my plan to make college affordable and to help you pay down your student debt is a very effective way of doing what I know must be done, particularly with student debt.

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1602/23/se.01.html

[Wilms]

1. Honestly?

Really?

[tk2kewl]

8. No.

I'm pretty sure that she if starts a sentence with "I honestly believe" that she doesn't.

She "honest believed" Iraq had WMD too

[merrily]

2. Her campaign surrogates have begun saying again that she and Bernie are the same, except that she

can get stuff done. No, they are not the same and he has more of a record of getting stuff done than she has. She, however, does have a great record of claiming she gets things done, even if someone else got them done.

[arcane1]

3. The same deceit used when she says "universal health coverage" instead of "universal health care"

One other point about her college plan: Some of the PACs that are endorsing her get funding from the student loan industry.

[TheProgressive]

5. Words do have meaning...

[senz]

31. Good point. Universal health "coverage" is an insurance industry goal.

Coverage = profit. Universal coverage = universal profit.

"Care" is what the insurance industry has to pay out.

"Care" cuts into profit.

"Coverage" good. "Care" bad.

For Bernie, healthcare is a human right.

(Just fleshing out your very good point, arcane1)

[azmom]

4. She's so full of it. She just wants to tweak what is already

in place. Not good enough, by a long shot.

[Fuddnik]

6. She'll make it affordable for Chelse, the Trumps, The Dimons, The Blankfeins.

Everybody else, get your job at Walmart or flippin' burgers.

[jeff47]

7. Apparently she is unaware of some of the basics of lending.

Her plan revolves around lowering interest rates on student loans.

You lower the rate, you can afford to borrow more money. So tuition can go up until the same monthly payment is reached. Instead of graduating with $100k in debt, students can graduate with $150k in debt. Progress!

[Progressive dog]

9. Hillary actually explained why she didn't think it should be free

CLINTON: And then on the affordability side, I do disagree with Senator Sanders, with his plan about, you know, free college, because I want to have debt-free tuition, but I don't believe that my family or Donald Trump's family or a lot of other families that can afford it should have the advantage of free college. I think they should be contributing on behalf of their children.

So I want...

CUOMO: Secretary...

CLINTON: -- I want this to be a program where we have affordability and I have a particular commitment to the historically black colleges and universities, because both the public and the private HBCUs do so much good.

[tk2kewl]

12. So poor kids gotta pay 'cause rich kids gotta pay

Education should be considered a human right...

In a Hillary world we need to create a whole beuracracy to decide who deserves assistance and who doesn't - pitting people on either side of that boundary against one another. Maybe we can even outsource the beuracracy to Lockeed or Citi Bank.

[TheProgressive]

13. I say, free-tuition to everyone - no means testing. Period

[Progressive dog]

53. When you run the country,

I'm sure you will implement it, but it is unlikely to last without cost controls.
California had tuition free college for a while, so did the city run colleges in NY. There probably were others, but they are gone. The cost of college has gone up 1120% in the last 30 years, way more than the CPI increase of 138%. That explains why these colleges no longer are tuition free.

[TheProgressive]

54. First, by definition, these are my educated opinions...

Means testing is a means to deny education and is totally unacceptable no matter how much
one makes. I imagine that the rich will send their silver-spooned child to Harvard or Yale or some private fancy university anyway.

The requirement I would recommend is that the student must maintain a certain grade point average (like a C+ average) and is working on a specific degree.

Yes, California did have tuition-free public college - I attended a CA St University when CA had free tuition. Then came Gov Reagun who was tired of all those students protesting so he initiated a 'fee' that later became tuition and is here today.

The 'cost of college' has gone up for the same reason everything goes up - greed. I want our teachers and professors to make a very decent living, everything else must be analyzed for cost vs benefit.

[Progressive dog]

57. How, exactly, does means testing deny education?

Do you mean that someone who could afford to go without help, chooses not to?

College tuition has gone up much faster than everything else has gone up. It has gone up even faster than health care. By your logic, the greed of educators must be without equal.
5/31/2013 The Atlantic

Swedish colleges and universities are free. Yep. Totally free.

But students there still end up with a lot of debt. The average at the beginning of 2013 was roughly 124,000 Swedish krona ($19,000). Sure, the average US student was carrying about 30% more, at $24,800.

[TheProgressive]

58. No offense, but throwing shit up against a wall to see if it sticks doesn't cut it with me...

I will not further comment on your posts in my thread...

I prefer intelligent and thoughtful conversations.

[Progressive dog]

59. I won't comment on the thoughtful intelligence of

that post.

[DJ13]

15. I don't believe that my family or Donald Trump's family..should have the advantage of free college.

What an empty statement.

The children of privilege wouldnt be going to a state university where the tuition would be paid for anyway.

They would be going to a private college (Yale, Harvard, Stanford, etc.) where their parents would still be paying their tuition because there's no exclusivity in their kids graduating with the masses.

[hifiguy]

41. And anyone who pretends not to understand that

is lying through their teeth.

[notadmblnd]

27. Do you feel the same about public k-12 now?

Because I really don't see it as being any different. I think everyone should be able to at least attain an Associates regardless of income.

[Progressive dog]

48. They don't let most k-12 students vote

because they are not considered to be adults. So there is a difference between k-12 children and people who are supposed to be adults.

[notadmblnd]

49. so that is why kids need to pay for college?

because they can vote?

[Progressive dog]

50. There is a difference between an example and a

definition. The point is that at some time, children have to grow up and assume some adult responsibility.
Besides, 20% of American children do not graduate from high school. They certainly won't be able to take advantage of a free college education, but if they're lucky to get a job, could be paying taxes so that others could go free.
So fairness is another reason why "kids" need to help pay for college.

[notadmblnd]

51. No one said it should be mandatory

But should a minimum of an Associates be offered tuition free? Yes, I think so. Those that want to take advantage should be able to. Those that don't- can go about their merry way.

Or are you really saying that because you had to pay for yours- everyone else should have to also?

What would you think if I told you that I know of a public high school where many of it's students do indeed graduate with their Associates? What if I told you this school was in a very affluent community? Would you begrudge them their degree? Would you demand they pay for their last two years in public high school?

[Progressive dog]

56. Bernie's proposal is for 4 year colleges

not for associates. If you just want community colleges to be tuition free, President Obama has proposed that. He wants it to apply to both nontraditional and part time students, to apply to both associates degrees and certificates. The plan would require students to maintain a 2.5 GPA. Of course, since education is a local and state responsibility, the states would have to opt in and would be responsible for 25% of the cost.
BTW Many schools offer AP course for college credit earned in high school. Our school district offers classes from the local community college and theoretically an associates degree can be earned simultaneously with graduation.

[Vote2016]

10. Hillary has a tell. She says "honestly" as a predicate to many knowing lies. Read some

transcripts- the tell is unmistakable.

[smiley]

22. her tell is.....

Whenever she opens her mouth.

[dsc]

11. only 2/3 of his plan, if that, is paid by the stock tax

it should be noted that most countries that have instituted those taxes haven't seen that much revenue from them. But again, lets assume his tax will collect that much. 1/3 will come from state taxes which are close to uniformly regressive. So you would be using regressive taxes to pay tuition for people who are on average wealthier than their states as a whole. You would be literally taxing fast food workers on their purchases to pay the tuition of the children of lawyers and doctors.

[TheProgressive]

14. Got some sort of data to back your claim?

If it doesn't cover the entire cost, then add a 1% tax on the rich like TheNation noted.

http://www.thenation.com/article/want-debt-free-college-tax-the-rich/

[dsc]

16. His own bill, the one he points to and says is his plan

He expects the states to pay 1/3 of the bill, his very own bill. Is that good enough for you?

[TheProgressive]

18. No, I prefer to be looking at what you are looking at to make your statement...

[dsc]

21. Here is a USA today article

with a link to the bill. I expect a response since you made me get this link for a matter of public record. http://college.usatoday.com/2015/05/19/bernie-sanders-issues-bill-to-make-4-year-colleges-tuition-free/

Under the plan, the Federal Government would cover 67% — $47 billion dollars each year — of the costs.

States would be required to produce the remaining 33% of the costs, or 23 billion dollars.

and again, the text of the bill can be found via a link provided at that site.

[TheProgressive]

24. Thanks, dsc, for the link and info...

First, there is nothing wrong for a poster to ask for sources. For us Democrats, we base opinions on facts. Now to your original comment...

1. You are correct, of course, that the Feds will cover 67% and states 33%.

2. "... it should be noted that most countries that have instituted those taxes haven't seen that much revenue from them." - First, bull. Second, One sets the speculation tax appropriately to fund the percentage.

3. ' 1/3 will come from state taxes which are close to uniformly regressive' - did you just make that up? Your entire premise is baseless. States collects taxes based on income.

Also, one point you missed, the student or the parents of the student will now not have to pay tuition which is a huge savings to the student or parent.

Finally, why would anyone fight public funded tuition for higher learning? It makes our entire country smarter.

[dsc]

25. you are dead wrong on point 3

Several states have no income tax whatsoever (WA, FL, NH for example) many others have no progressisivity to their income tax at all or only due to exemptions (Ie a flat tax rate). NC is one of those. Even those with income taxes that are progressive nearly always raise a significant portion of their income from sales taxes which are entirely regressive and property taxes which are often regressive.

The people who currently have to pay tuition are often wealthier than their states as a whole. Thus this would be an income transfer from the poor and lower middle classes to the upper middle class and rich.

[TheProgressive]

29. Well, I don't accept your claims of regressive taxes...

And I do not accept your claim that "The people who currently have to pay tuition are often wealthier than their states as a whole. Thus this would be an income transfer from the poor and lower middle classes to the upper middle class and rich. ".

Your post is all speculation.

I prefer the 'yes we can' position on tuition-free college. Every single governmental program goes thru
growing pains. If there are any negative issues - we simply fix them.

I am tired of "no we can't".

Thanks for this conversation.

[dsc]

30. They are regressive

you can wish that way all you want but they are. Here is just one, of the many, many sources to back up that claim.

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/04/why-do-progressive-states-have-regressive-tax-codes



I realize that being a Bernie supporters means math doesn't matter or something. But the fact, not the opinion, not the theory, but the fact state taxes aren't progressive is well known and has been well known for decades.

[TheProgressive]

33. "I realize that being a Bernie supporters means math doesn't matter or something"

I'll repeat some important points:
1. Tuition-free college will be massively beneficial to middle to lower class people
2. People are already paying these taxes - right or wrong.
3. We, as a 'yes we can' Sanders Administration can address tax inequality.
4. Problems with funding can also be fixed if necessary.

And finally, the lowest incomes sill pay less in combined taxes...


Since you have decided to insult me with such pettiness, I will
not respond to anymore of your posts in this thread. Since you tried to have
a respectful conversation in the beginning, I will not place you on Ignore
despite the insult.

[senz]

34. Bernie's plan is FULLY PAID FOR by Wall Street speculation tax.

Don't try to mislead people.

[dsc]

36. No it isn't

He own bill, the bill he says represents his plan, says in clear, unambiguous terms, that 1/3 of the funds will be coming from states and not his tax. Words means something, even when they are written by St. Bernie of Vermont.

[senz]

37. This "bill" you're deflecting with is NOT Bernie's presidential plan.

Don't pretend it is.

Bernie's plan for free tuition at public colleges, as laid out on his website, would cost about $75 billion a year and would generate about $300 billion in revenue.

If you have an honest interest in how it works, you can read the details here:

http://www.peri.umass.edu/fileadmin/pdf/ftt/Pollin--Heintz--Memo_on_FTT_Rates_and_Revenue_Potential_w_references----6-9-12.pdf

[Recursion]

23. FFS it's Sanders's own bill: the states pay 33%

He never addresses how to make them do that, though.

[senz]

35. Sanders says NOTHING about "states pay 33%."

If the only way your candidate can win is through lies, then she is the wrong candidate.

[dsc]

43. there is a liar here but it isn't us

the fact is his own bill, the bill he said on more than one ocassion is his plain, states in crystal clear language that states would pay 1/3 of the cost of his plan.

[senz]

44. This "bill" has NOTHING to do with Sanders' platform.

Why do refuse to discuss his actual platform?

Are you trying to mislead people?

READ:

https://berniesanders.com/issues/how-bernie-pays-for-his-proposals/

[dsc]

45. He put for the bill after he announced for President

I know in Bernie land math is evil, words have no meaning, and all of that. But this is his plan. His plan, his bill, it is ridiculous to say it is dishonest to hold him accountable for what he actually proposes.

[senz]

46. No. Bernie's plan is what Bernie SAYS his plan is.

YOU don't make up Bernie's plan for him.

Once again: read it.

https://berniesanders.com/issues/its-time-to-make-college-tuition-free-and-debt-free/

https://berniesanders.com/issues/how-bernie-pays-for-his-proposals/

[senz]

32. FULLY PAID FOR by imposing a tax on Wall St. speculators.

The cost of this $75 billion a year plan is fully paid for by imposing a tax of a fraction of a percent on Wall Street speculators who nearly destroyed the economy seven years ago. More than 1,000 economists have endorsed a tax on Wall Street speculation and today some 40 countries throughout the world have imposed a similar tax including Britain, Germany, France, Switzerland, and China.

https://berniesanders.com/issues/its-time-to-make-college-tuition-free-and-debt-free/

Do not lie about Bernie Sanders' proposals.

[hifiguy]

40. China?

Holy shite. Even the freaking Chinese see the wisdom of something HRH cannot see, or is PAID not to see. My money's on option 2.

[gyroscope]

17. She wants to make college affordable for who?

that is the question.

[TheProgressive]

19. I think the translation is: 'make college lucrative for Wall St'

[Warren Stupidity]

20. Wall Street demands another generation of debt slaves.

[senz]

26. The average American's "quality of life" doesn't even register for Hillary.

When she's not running for president, she's running with the 1%. That's where she spends her time, that's who she serves.

[hifiguy]

39. And what Wall Street wants, Herself will deliver.

On a silver platter.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. Tepid, at best.

[hifiguy]

38. What is all of the above, Alex?

[Beartracks]

42. Back in the Clinton years, I recall that....

.... "affordable" usually just meant "you get a tax credit."

Of course, a) the saved taxes would nowhere offset the cost of whatever activity you had engaged in to qualify for the credit, and b) if you didn't happen to earn enough to pay taxes, then the credit wouldn't even apply to you.

At least, that was my impression back then. Looking back at it now, it seems that may be when I first became aware that Democratic centrism prefers to only apply band-aids to economic problems, rather than directly address rising inequality.

=============

[H2O Man]

47. Recommended.

Well done! Thank you.

[thereismore]

52. She honestly believes she has never lied (or tried to) to the American people. Ponder that. nt

[Fearless]

55. She is useless.