RudyGarmischThe growing gap between the richest and poorest in this country is the greatest travesty of our generation,.

LOL, the greatest travesty of our generation is turning into a bunch of sniveling losers who want everything given to us while glorifying weakness.

RudyGarmischThe growing gap between the richest and poorest in this country is the greatest travesty of our generation, and it's fed by superpacs and money shot like heroin into the democratic and republican parties.

Feel the bern, trump the fatcats, but at the end of the day, burn it all down.

cobra_commanderLOL, I am the greatest travesty of our generation

True.

B1tchI'm not only a cunt, but a complete fucking waste of organic material

Yes you are,

cobra_commanderYes you are,

I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I!?

STICKS AND STONES MAY BREAK MY BONES BUT WORDS WILL NEVER HURT ME

I AM RUBBER AND YOU ARE GLUE, WHATEVER YOU SAY BOUNCES OFF ME AND STICKS TO YOU!

HP123considering I work and pay my own bills, yes it's very nice to go home to the duplex I pay for.

you're just an example of a small-minded individual that will vote for whatever "free" shit you can get your hands on. it sounds nice but when you see all of our tax dollars go down the drain it's a damn shame.

NO EVERYONE DOES NOT NEED TO GO TO COLLEGE DUMB FUCKS

Not surprisingly, I see you chose not to address my response to you...

Anyway, did you ever ask yourself, "If university becomes free, how will people get into said university?"

Do you really think that a university will just open its doors and let any & all applicants in under this new program? That's absurd. Colleges and universities have a finite number of spots for each new incoming class. If there are a finite number of spots and it's free (read: daddy can't buy Johnny's way into school anymore), entrance to the university happens based on merit (educational and/or athletic). In such a scenario, do you really think that lazy, ill motivated, stupid, and/or inept people will be the ones getting in? Entrance into the free universities will become quite competitive, naturally weeding out the less deserving. Dare I say it becomes more like the "good ol' days" of best man for the job, gets the job?

onenerdykidNot surprisingly, I see you chose not to address my response to you...

Anyway, did you ever ask yourself, "If university becomes free, how will people get into said university?"

Do you really think that a university will just open its doors and let any & all applicants in under this new program? That's absurd. Colleges and universities have a finite number of spots for each new incoming class. If there are a finite number of spots and it's free (read: daddy can't buy Johnny's way into school anymore), entrance to the university happens based on merit (educational and/or athletic). In such a scenario, do you really think that lazy, ill motivated, stupid, and/or inept people will be the ones getting in? Entrance into the free universities will become quite competitive, naturally weeding out the less deserving. Dare I say it becomes more like the "good ol' days" of best man for the job, gets the job?

Playing devils advocate here, but would that fix the problem many people are speaking out against, namely the fact that the "privileged" have an advantage in college entry based off of academic merit because they have access to better resources (personal tutors, better public and private school educations, test prep materials, etc) as well?

I feel like the part of the college accessibility complaint is the idea that the middle and upper-class students have an inherent advantage when it comes to being prepared for college and the college process. By making college "free", you are not fixing the underlying problem, the lack of better education at the base levels, but rather still perpetuating the issue at hand by saying free college is the answer to the education issues in America when in fact it may only help those who have the ability to attend better school systems.

I feel like students from rural Alabama, inner-city New York, or other impoverished areas will still be at a disadvantage to those from Greenwich, Manhattan, San Francisco, etc., and that academically, it will be almost impossible for them to compete.

Does this mean there will be a "quota" (for lack of a better term that comes to my mind) where schools will be required to take a certain % of kids from impoverished areas to help fix the issue? If not, what is the solution? Will these kids attend "lesser" schools that are not as well respected? Will that help?

.MASSHOLE.Playing devils advocate here, but would that fix the problem many people are speaking out against, namely the fact that the "privileged" have an advantage in college entry based off of academic merit because they have access to better resources (personal tutors, better public and private school educations, test prep materials, etc) as well?

I feel like the part of the college accessibility complaint is the idea that the middle and upper-class students have an inherent advantage when it comes to being prepared for college and the college process. By making college "free", you are not fixing the underlying problem, the lack of better education at the base levels, but rather still perpetuating the issue at hand by saying free college is the answer to the education issues in America when in fact it may only help those who have the ability to attend better school systems.

I feel like students from rural Alabama, inner-city New York, or other impoverished areas will still be at a disadvantage to those from Greenwich, Manhattan, San Francisco, etc., and that academically, it will be almost impossible for them to compete.

Does this mean there will be a "quota" (for lack of a better term that comes to my mind) where schools will be required to take a certain % of kids from impoverished areas to help fix the issue? If not, what is the solution? Will these kids attend "lesser" schools that are not as well respected? Will that help?

Great question. Hard to say what will happen in the States since it's very theoretical still, but speaking from my experience over here is that the secondary education systems get their act in gear as well. In order to make it work end to end, the education system itself needs an overhaul, not just at the university level. It's a long term fix, so I would imagine that for the first few (?) years there would still be a lot of privilege in place. So, I would also imagine that there is, like you say, a "quota" in place that helps get underprivileged people into better school systems, probably very similar to what happens currently.

Also, Bernie (to my knowledge) isn't looking to make all university free, just state & community colleges- private universities would very much exist for those who want to go to them.

onenerdykidGreat question. Hard to say what will happen in the States since it's very theoretical still, but speaking from my experience over here is that the secondary education systems get their act in gear as well. In order to make it work end to end, the education system itself needs an overhaul, not just at the university level. It's a long term fix, so I would imagine that for the first few (?) years there would still be a lot of privilege in place. So, I would also imagine that there is, like you say, a "quota" in place that helps get underprivileged people into better school systems, probably very similar to what happens currently.

Also, Bernie (to my knowledge) isn't looking to make all university free, just state & community colleges- private universities would very much exist for those who want to go to them.

I know, it is something I have long wondered about, seeing as the biggest thing I saw in my four years at University was the wide variation in levels of preparedness for college classes, even among students with similar socioeconomic backgrounds.

To me, the issue is not lack of college educated students, but rather lack of educated students in general. Too many kids come out of high school unable to write a proper paper, form a coherent argument, or understand the scope of material beyond its basic application in the classroom.

I would prefer the lower levels of education to be fixed before the higher ones. I could be wrong, but I think there was a study done on something like this with black students in the 1960s or 1970s that examined this. I unfortunately forget the results. Perhaps that will give us a small case-study about what may happen.

If a quota is to be required, I see a lot of backlash coming Sander's way, in both public and congressional support, as it puts "underachieving" (Not that I think these students would be inherently underachievers, but on paper they may be) in a situation to succeed where more "capable" students are being placed aside in the name of "equality" or "equal chance". It is a tough pill to make people swallow.

I think he wants to make state and community free, but that then may push students and possibly professors towards private education because it may have a higher level of prestige (not that it is too different now) and frankly more $$$ for professors.

Again, like you, I am just throwing idea's out there and seeing what may stick.

.MASSHOLE.I would prefer the lower levels of education to be fixed before the higher ones. I could be wrong, but I think there was a study done on something like this with black students in the 1960s or 1970s that examined this. I unfortunately forget the results. Perhaps that will give us a small case-study about what may happen.

So 100% agree

The public school system is a nightmare.

onenerdykidGreat question. Hard to say what will happen in the States since it's very theoretical still, but speaking from my experience over here is that the secondary education systems get their act in gear as well. In order to make it work end to end, the education system itself needs an overhaul, not just at the university level. It's a long term fix, so I would imagine that for the first few (?) years there would still be a lot of privilege in place. So, I would also imagine that there is, like you say, a "quota" in place that helps get underprivileged people into better school systems, probably very similar to what happens currently.

Also, Bernie (to my knowledge) isn't looking to make all university free, just state & community colleges- private universities would very much exist for those who want to go to them.

Best man for the job does not jive with acceptance quotas for under achieving applicants.

californiagrownBest man for the job does not jive with acceptance quotas for under achieving applicants.

Implying that people who currently cant afford college are under achieving.

Think of all the potential future leaders of America or geniuses that never came to fruition because they came from disadvantaged backrounds.

Granite_StateImplying that people who currently cant afford college are under achieving.

Think of all the potential future leaders of America or geniuses that never came to fruition because they came from disadvantaged backrounds.

Maybe I misread, but orange name was referring to kids coming out of bad secondary schools with lesser resumes being given acceptance over kids coming out of great secondary schools with better resumes... Under the pretext of free tuition.

I'm a fan of the idea of affirmative action (not neccisarily the way its implemented sometime). It just is not at all compliant with the "best man for the job", meritocratic philosophy.

californiagrownBest man for the job does not jive with acceptance quotas for under achieving applicants.

Which is why I said "more like" rather than "100% is". It's definitely a step closer to achieving that than the current scenario.

onenerdykidWhich is why I said "more like" rather than "100% is". It's definitely a step closer to achieving that than the current scenario.

Likely in a few generations that'd be the case. But the idea of affirmative action is pretty much the antithesis to a meritocratic college acceptance system haha. That's not neccisarily a bad thing, but its a tough pill for folks to swallow- voluntarily giving advantages to strangers while taking away advantages from their kin.