2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumBenefits of Sanders’s College Plan Bigger for Wealthy, Analysis Finds
The analysis undercuts a central theme of Mr. Sanderss Democratic presidential campaign, which has called for shifting tax benefits from the rich to the beleaguered middle class and poor. Brookings contributor Matthew Chingos says the Sanders plan would actually be tilted toward the wealthy, a charge that has been made by the senators chief rival, Hillary Clinton.
Specifically, dependent students from households in the top half of U.S. earners would get $16.8 billion in tuition relief under the free-college plan, Mr. Chingos concludes. Students from households in the bottom half would get $13.5 billion.
The Sanders campaign called the analysis deeply flawed, saying that under its own analysis, 70% of the benefits would go to those making less than $100,000 a year. Unlike, the Clinton plan, Senator Sanders is clear on who will benefit from his plan: everyone who has the ability and the desire to receive a higher education, Warren Gunnels, the campaigns policy director, said in an email. Mrs. Clinton has proposed allowing making college debt-free for students, rather than tuition-free.
Mr. Chingoss explanation is simple. The Sanders plan would relieve students of paying any tuition at public colleges and universities, both at more-selective schools that tend to be more expensive, and less-selective schools that tend to be cheaper. (Mr. Sanders would levy a tax on Wall Street trading to pay for it.) At public four-year colleges, dependent students from higher-income families tend to attend more expensive institutions, he writes. As a result, they would get most of the aid if college tuition were free.
Lower-income students tend to go community colleges and less-expensive public schools, and thus would receive less aid.
Mr. Chingos points out that making college tuition-free would still leave students on the hook for rent, transportation and books, which often comprise the biggest costs for students.
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/04/21/benefits-of-bernie-sanderss-free-college-plan-bigger-for-wealthy-analysis-finds/
merrily
(45,251 posts)But more lower income people would go to both, if they were free.
Every possbile group is being pitted against every other group while Party unity is supposed to be the goal.
RandySF
(58,898 posts)Check out tuition at UC, Bekeley, UCLA or the University of Michigan.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Poster, please.
And it seems as though it takes one disagreeing post before some posters go ad hom. Telling.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)poorer students not go there?
hack89
(39,171 posts)Giving an advantage to students from affluent areas with better public schools.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Right?
hack89
(39,171 posts)And is a much bigger impediment to poor people than access to college. We need a system more like Germany where there is a path to good jobs other than college.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)in educational opportunity across the board, and stop with this divisive crap attack on expanding public education from k-12 to k-16.
The strategy of making these programs "all in" rather than "means tested" is essential to making them broadly popular and immune to the inevitable counter attack from the right.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)#HillaryLogic
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)bobbobbins01
(1,681 posts)Everybody panic!
jfern
(5,204 posts)And also, billionaires can get free K-12 like everyone else.
Jitter65
(3,089 posts)Once college is "free" that number will almost triple! There is no plan put forward by Bernie that would cover the cost of free tuition for the number of new students enrolling in college if tuition is free.
jfern
(5,204 posts)surrealAmerican
(11,361 posts)... that the top half of US households are "wealthy"?
You cannot afford college in this country at slightly more than the median income. That's not what wealthy is.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)lower income students would continue to opt for now slightly less expensive but significantly lower quality institutions. Really stupid assumption, or a deliberately dishonest one.
Once all public institutions are affordable to all students quality would dominate the selection process.
thesquanderer
(11,989 posts)The argument completely falls apart there. Obviously, today, if you have less money, you tend to go to a less expensive school. But if all the public options are the same price (free), then that distinction no longer exists. "Mr. Chingoss explanation is simple" indeed, if you use the definition of simple as in simple-minded.
jack_krass
(1,009 posts)The law isnt written yet, details and plugging loopholes still need to be worked out.
Sadly, this probably all academic. Maybe your Queen $hillary will abolish free K-12 as that also helps the rich.
You people make me sick
Response to RandySF (Original post)
cyberpj This message was self-deleted by its author.