Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
As for fees, you need a house, you need to eat, whether or not you go to college.

True, but if you are a student you need time to attend classes and to study for those classes. Too much time spent working defeats the purpose of attending college by resulting in poor grades and employment prospects for many.

For UCLA the numbers come from their web site.

For the University of Arizona the numbers are from here.

All of these things could be fixed by taxing those who have the money: the wealthy and the big financial institutions. But we have just been through forty years of public instruction in Neo-Classical Economics that has succeeded in teaching a majority that it is not really possible to tax the wealthy. Over 90% of all US graduates with one or more degrees in economics believe this. NCE is the language in which they express their thoughts, the air they breathe.

Of course it is all self serving bull shit, but try and explain that to a majority of the population. That is our task. You are one of those for whom the spell has been broken.

As for the cost of public education, the University of California and the California State University systems were enormous bargains when our son was attending. He lived at home while obtaining both his bachelor's and master's degrees and left school without debt. In order to do that today I would first have to find work in California, and school construction has virtually collapsed in the last two years.

Having hamstrung themselves by allowing the creation of requirements for super-majorities in the state legislature for budgets, the only way the State of California has been able to respond to the dramatic drop in state revenues is to transfer more and more of the cost of education at state universities to the students.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 05:43:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That link took me to estimated expenses and not charges.

In other words, that's no UCLA that is charging the amount beyond University fees. That is simply a notice of what they imagine will be required to feed and clothe a student living with parents. The parents nor the child pay that money to UCLA for the privilege of living and eating at home.

As for work, I don't think 15 hours of work outside university is unreasonable. I did it. And in the summers, I earned up to $5,000.

We are in partial agreement. I do agree that one might take on onerous debt and really put their future in hock, as is evident in Jeffersonian's post. I myself am in hock, but that was because I could not abide by the $12,000 salary I was asked to live on as a grad student (I could have lived on it, but I chose not to). My undergrad was paid for by the redistribution of funds from the rich to myself (i.e. I received grants in aid 90% from my university and the rest was work-study--I even pocketed my summer employment).

I still think $15-20k is not too much debt, and that in my experience, students who pay seem to appreciate their education more. With Pell Grants and Work Study, a student from the lower middle class starts off the year with $12,000. Tuition is $5,000 to $7,000. Summer work could bring in $4,000. A student loan brings in another $5,000. That means a student has resources of $21,000 a year without tapping into their parents at all. That money minus tuition must meet their housing, food and book needs.

I'm actually much more concerned with the massive recent cuts in higher education. I think now is the time when the system might be dismantled.

by Upstate NY on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 06:31:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Occasional Series