Home | About | Donate

'New Era of American Prosperity': Sanders Calls for Free Higher Ed for All


#1


#2

It's not like we haven't been there before, in the 60s (last century) tuition in state schools was free or a nominal amount of several hundred per semester. We paid our room and board and books. My entire cost for a BA was around 12K. The ease and proximity of higher education gave us all a feeling of prosperity. We all felt rich! That was then, but now we all feel poor under the political choices of the Nixons, Reagans, Bushes, Clintons, etc. Bad choices, bad leadership.


#3

This would help a lot of people, particularly those unfortunate enough to be living in states with public universities that have raised tuition well above $10,000 per year. But people from the lower income levels as a whole would still have trouble competing. The problems start with prenatal care and go through pre-school up to high school. Their chances of graduating high school are lower, of being accepted to a four-year college are lower, and graduating a four-year college are lower. And, for undergraduate education, the best colleges and universities in the US are mostly private. When it comes to getting the better jobs the graduates of Ivy League schools and other elite private institutions of higher education have a big advantage. So while free tuition for public higher education would be helpful it will take much more to level the playing field.


#5

It's not a giveaway, it's an investment.


#6

This could be a game changer for Bernie. If every young person got behind Bernie , Hillary would be swept away.


#7

Unless Sanders has a secret plan for ending America's Permanent War, every givaway he promises is pure BS. America's obscene military spending is why we don't have free college and free healthcare like a civilized nation.

Sanders' record shows his real priorities. He never fails to vote in favor of re-funding our countless ongoing wars, and his pet project, the F-35 fighter-jet, is turning into a trillion-dollar money pit...and it doesn't even really fly.

The Pentagon allows the Sanders candidacy because they want to mollify and confuse left-ish voters, and they know that in the end they can count on him.


#8

Even in the late 1970's. Full-time tuition and fees, dorm accommodations and meals were just $2100 for an entire school year at Virginia Tech. Maybe $9000 for a degree if textbooks and supplies (also much cheaper) are thrown in.


#10

Plenty of time for Clinton to climb on-board this bandwagon, for her "independent" super-PACS to spend a billion dollars propagandizing the US electorate to believe that she has this great idea about free higher ed...

Expect her to sound a lot like Sanders going forward, regarding University and College tuition.


#11

Knew that some Sanders hater would try to turn a discussion about college tuition into a discussion of their favorite anti-Sanders propaganda point.

You cherry pick his record and mischaracterize his votes. A vote for a budget bill becomes a vote for war. Trying to get F-35's based in Vermont to improve the local economy becomes support for "a trillion dollar money pit."

And you keep repeating the same nonsense no matter how often you're called on it.

Instead of attacking the only progressive with a shot at the White House why don't you attack Hillary the NeoCon? Or any or the Republicans who want to make Bush look like Gandhi in comparison to what they'll do?

No.

Even in a thread about college tuition you'll repeat your anti-Bernie bs.

Any excuse will do.


#13

Wang Doodle, who, exactly who should we vote for if not Bernie? Please pass on your profound wisdom.


#14

In the 1960s & 1970s California public universities were basically tuition free. It brought an energy for creation and later served as a counterweight to the cutting back on DoD spending after Vietnam. Despite Reagan's efforts to push a nativist agenda, the young kept coming. Now, 40 years later, that state is home to many major growth sectors in the economy. It is minority-majority white; imo, a very good thing for inclusionary policies building potential growth. That was a very inexpensive way to invest and grow an economy for the long haul, really. The trouble with Bernie and Hillary and all the big planners; is the political economy is controlled by special interest groups who don't want to invest in options to the status quo or want retrograde nonsense , and hence, there are not nearly enough jobs no matter how many degrees and how much education a person may have. All over this country there is much to be done but the pay offered is also atrocious. too. And, if rent, food, transportation, medical and recreational costs are $1700-2000 a month, after all the tax take outs, most people who need the education will need to work more and study less. Just the opposite of what's needed and intended. USains need a big raise, an investment in this country and not bombs in the MENA or 1000 military bases all over the planet. We're at the point of not being able to have it both ways. The bullshit is thinking we can have a " guns and butter " approach to every political/economic issue we face. The plain truth is that is not true and merely, public relations bullshit, bullshit, bullshit. And, more bullshit.


#15

I might vote Green, I might write in my dog's name, or maybe no one. But I won't vote for Bernie or Hillary. Because even though I might think I am simply voicing my fear or disgust for the Republican candidate, the message they will hear is simply: 'Bombs away!'

The Democrat lovey-dovey talk is just a tactic to get libs to sign onto the Permanent War, which libs fell for big time with Obama.

Democratic rule is, for all practical purposes, the same as Republican rule, except the Democrats sing Kumbaya when they are bombing the sh!t out of the world. A choice between a Democratic candidate and Republican candidate is therefore a meaningless choice, and getting wound up because for the next four years a Republican president will be brutalizing the world and selling out American workers, instead of a Democrat president, is damn silly.


#17

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#18

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#19

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#21

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#26

Did you happen to notice the topic of the thread?

Think that every mention of Sanders requires an immediate knee-jerk response of the same anti-Sanders foreign policy talking points regardless of the topic of the thread?

The anti-Sanders fanatics don't care about the relevance of their remarks. Any time Sanders is mentioned they're going to chew up bandwidth repeating the same biased nonsense.

It borders on the pathological.


#27

What you say about public financing of campaigns, of course, is true. But, what means do GPers have to introduce that legislation in the House or Senate? Which representative of the Greens will push that legislation? Take as long as you want to answer, name names, please. And, Bernie was on Jimmy Kimmel's show last night, has been endorsed by Bill Maher on his show, etc. FYI- That's called introducing your candidate to the nation. Most people at CD have already voted, your bunch particularly; but most voters still don't know Sen. Sanders and his progressive policy proposals. And, Hillary and Donald Trump are getting all the free MSM air time they need just for being involved in nefarious and slippery/slimy things. For all the spin of the MSM, Hillary is still being called out on her handling of the deaths of 4 members of the State Dept. And, the CIA keeps popping up in the questions, answers and at the scene of the alleged crime. That's bad for her, any way you cut it, if you get my drift. If you're patient, Hillary and the Clintonistas will hang themselves, without our help. So, the GPers would be wise to quit trying to hang Bernie. They just look small in doing so; ya know, sort of like their membership. :wink:


#28

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#31

Assuming by "young person you mean 18 to 30, then this represents about 15% of the US population.