Cain: No Federal Money For College (People aren't entitled to advanced education)

[WillParkinson]

Cain: No Federal Money For College

"I do not believe that it is the responsibility of the federal government to help fund a college education because herein, our resources are limited and I believe that the best solution is the one closest to the problem. The people within the state, the people within the communities, ultimately, I believe, are the ones who have that responsibility. If you want an education, a college education in America, I believe that people can get it if they are determined to get it." - Herman Cain.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2011/10/cain-no-federal-money-for-college.html

[midnight]

1. But I suppose he is for federal dollars for corporations....

[Lint Head]

2. This idiot isn't entitled to run for President.

[Erose999]

6. Or dog catcher.

[Jkid]

3. What's he's really saying

Cain: College should only be available for those who are able to pay.

"I do not believe that it is the responsibility of the federal government to help fund a college education because herein, our resources are focused on those who are funding my campaign and I believe that the best solution is the one closest to the problem. The people within the state, the people within the communities, ultimately, I believe, are the ones who have that responsibility, if they can afford it. If you want an education, a college education in America, I believe that people can get it if they can afford it. Otherwise they can go straight to dead-end jobs after college." - Herman Cain.

[IndyPragmatist]

4. Actually, I agree with him

"The people within the state, the people within the communities, ultimately, I believe, are the ones who have that responsibility."

I think states should be subsidizing the cost of college more and moving away from promoting loans. We are fine with covering the cost of elementary and high school education as a community, but not college. I think this is just outdated logic. 100 years ago, it made sense. There weren't a lot of professions that needed a college education. But now, you need a college education. We need to fund colleges like we fund lower education.

The states would control the costs better in my opinion because loans are driving up the cost more than anything else. The individual may be fine with a 5% increase in the cost of tuition because he only worries about 4 (or maybe more) years of education expenses. Adding a few thousand dollars to loans that add up to 30-40k isn't a huge deal. If the cost was shifted to the community, they would look at the big picture and realize that 5% increases can really add up over the years. I think the states would put more pressure on the colleges and universities to control costs better.

[WinkyDink]

7. One HUGE problem with this nation IS STATES' RIGHTS. Education is a NATIONAL issue.

[IndyPragmatist]

8. Adding to my previous post...

Obama's plan for student loans is shifting the costs of education onto society as a whole by allowing them to be forgiven after 20 years. Except that we allow a middleman (the lending bank) to add interest to that cost. We should be cutting out the middleman and working towards more subsidization of of college education as a way to reduce the costs to students instead of allowing a bank to accept all the gains, but none of the risk. Moral hazard has shown to cause serious problems in recent years, federal backing of loans issued by private banks is only going to add to that.

[Selatius]

12. I was under the impression banks were cut out as the middleman.

When the health insurance bill passed into law, I believe somebody tacked the student reform law onto the bill in order to make it pass.

That was why the banks fought to defeat Obama's proposal back then. Under his plan, the federal gov't would issue the loans directly, instead of insuring private banks against loss if a student defaults and in the case of Stafford subsidized loans, paying interest on the student loans to the banks while the student is still enrolled.

[IndyPragmatist]

13. You are correct, my mistake

But that brings up another question. What if the Supreme Court rules against the Healthcare bill? Would that nullify that part as well?

[Viking12]

18. Your premise is FALSE!

The availability of loans has practically NOTHING to do with the rising costs of college. The main factor is cuts in top-down funding.

[hifiguy]

5. Keep digging, Hermie.

Keep digging. :eyes:

[Javaman]

9. I equate cain to a carnival barker.

enticing the stupid, playing to the ignorance and embracing the crazy...all for a buck.

[DenverDad]

10. Cain, Cain go away. . .

and don't let your "bootstraps" hit you on the way out.

[aikoaiko]

11. As it turns out the current DOE is stopping subsidized loans for graduate students.

Once you sign the paper, the interest starts accruing.

http://www.savvysugar.com/Federally-Subsidized-Loans-Graduate-Students-Taken-Away-18576179
Bad news for 82 percent of Sugar readers who are considering grad school: there will be no more federally subsidized loans for graduate or professional students as a result of the latest debt deal.

Right now, grad students are allowed to take out a maximum of $20,500 in federal loans, and up to $8,500 can be subsidized. Subsidized loans, which are only for those who qualify for this extra financial help, basically means the government will be paying interest on it while you are enrolled in school, so you don't have to. This will all change for loans taken out after July 1, 2012.

The move is estimated to cost students $18.1 billion over the next 10 years and financial experts say it will add thousands of dollars in interest to an already costly graduate student loan. Those who would be harder hit would naturally be students who are in degrees that take longer to complete.

[Kber]

14. Interesting take

According to Cain, and probably most conservatives, the government should only pay for what you are "entitled" to. According to me, and probably most liberal progressives, the government should take actions that benefit society.

I believe we all benefit from an educated society. Whether I'm "entitled" to hitter education isn't really the central issue. Better educated citizens benefit me.

However, I do feel that I'm "entitled" to live within a society that makes decisions for the collective good of us all and democracy (i.e. our government) is the instrument that we use to decide to decide how to use limited resources to provide for that collective good.

[dtexdem]

15. And society isn't entitled to economic as well as social benefits ...

of higher education and related research?

Hey, Herm, even the original Pizza Hut sits on a college campus as an "entrepreneurial" edifice. But, then, you don't care do you, because Pizza Hut is a competitor? (Note that Pizza Hut blazed the trail that other pizza chains followed.)

[Tsiyu]

16. Cain, you are an IDIOT

Plain and Simple.

Any nation that doesn't make education a priority is a NATION DESTINED TO FAIL.

"By GAWD don't let those kids LARN NOTHIN'" Sez Cain

"Let's be a nation of IDIOTS just like me!"

Cain should be ENCOURAGING kids to get educated, rather than pretending education is some impractical luxury.

What an irresponsible adult you are, Mr. Cain.

Shame on you

[Shadowflash]

17. An uneducated population is easily controlled.

That's the ultimate goal here.

[WillParkinson]

19. From your lips...

To the electorate ear.