Democratic debates

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

A major problem with free college is that it inherently devalues education. From an economical standpoint, education is a differentiating factor. Those motivated and able spend their time and resources on college education knowing it provides an advantage. Once it is free much of that advantage disappears. We will shift a major part of the young and able bodied out of the workforce into non-working roles for a period of time that they're are basically required to do because going without would be a major disadvantage. Meanwhile we'll also foster an even greater classification of the work force as surely those with the means would attend the "better" tuition based colleges. We end up in the same place and spent a bunch of money to do it. Free college doesn't solve the problem. It sounds fantastic but it is solves nothing.

the point of college is to learn a real world profession, not to prove you're better than someone else. this makes no sense. america isn't a vacuum or the entirely of the world population. if we had more homegrown scientists and engineers, we wouldn't be importing them. college can include vocational skills too like plumbing or auto mechanics or whatever else the market has a shortage of.

[JoeRedskin]

Not pretending that others aren't taking big bucks from influential donors, but dear lord this woman just doesn't get it.

Clinton defends Wall Street speaking fees: ‘That’s what they offered’

[Hog1]

Sadly, it is a significant section of the American people that.........don't get it. She is also is NO friend of Wall Street.....right?

[JoeRedskin]

$675K for three speaking engagements.

She is JUST the person to fix income inequality.

[BaltimoreSkins]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

A major problem with free college is that it inherently devalues education. From an economical standpoint, education is a differentiating factor. Those motivated and able spend their time and resources on college education knowing it provides an advantage. Once it is free much of that advantage disappears. We will shift a major part of the young and able bodied out of the workforce into non-working roles for a period of time that they're are basically required to do because going without would be a major disadvantage. Meanwhile we'll also foster an even greater classification of the work force as surely those with the means would attend the "better" tuition based colleges. We end up in the same place and spent a bunch of money to do it. Free college doesn't solve the problem. It sounds fantastic but it is solves nothing.

Many colleges are recognizing and attempting to eliminate or at least limit the current socioeconomic bias of the college application process. The SAT bias is well documented and many institutions are beginning to devalue it's role in determining whether a student will be able to succeed collegiately. You are also seeing the with the AP exams. Colleges are willing to offer the advanced placement but many are realizing that the test favors those from socioeconomic means. One of the biggest reasons Harvard and MIT have begun to offer their classes online for free is it gives them a chance to find untapped talent that would get over looked in the current admissions process. While they look like the good guys in providing this free education they in reality are benefitting greatly from it.

[BaltimoreSkins]

Originally Posted by That Guy

as far as free college - the studies on the original GI bill showed that every $1 spent on getting GIs degrees resulted in adding $7 back into the economy. if done right, free college can actually be a net gain.

To piggy back on this the saving are seen by offering early childhood education as well.

Impact of North Carolina’s Early Childhood Initiatives on Special Education Placements in Third Grade

The above is a research article that looked at the social and economic savings in Durham, NC by state funded Pre K. A brief synopsis is that they found a 42% reduction in the need for special services in school by the third grade. In NC the average spent per a pupil in a typical classroom is $8,000 in the third grade while a student that requires accommodations either via an IEP or a 504 the state ends up spending around $16,000 per a pupil. While the savings might be consistent for elementary education the difference between the two would decrease in middle and high school but would still be much higher than a student without accommodations. By investing in education for 2 years before kindergarten the state can end up saving money during a 10 year schooling of a student.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Not pretending that others aren't taking big bucks from influential donors, but dear lord this woman just doesn't get it.

Clinton defends Wall Street speaking fees: ‘That’s what they offered’

These "speaking fees" are simply a loophole for Wall Street to put straight cash into Clinton's pocket. Seriously, fuck that cunt rag. No way in hell I would ever vote for her. Truthfully, she should be running on the GOP ticket more so than the current candidates. She's a war hawk that loves banks and spending money on military industry.

[MTK]

She's still a better option than anyone on the right. Granted the bar is set extremely low.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by MTK

She's still a better option than anyone on the right. Granted the bar is set extremely low.

Rubio is a genuine threat if he can get past the BS crazies.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Rubio is a genuine threat if he can get past the BS crazies.

Rubio is the man. If he goes with Kasich as his running mate, it could be a wrap folks! Hillary cant beat Rubio in a general election.

I was getting my oil changed yesterday and I walked in the waiting area with a Grandma and this Hispanic dude just crushing Hillary. Grandma was saying, "how can anybody vote for Hillary, she should be locked up!" Hispanic dude was saying she doesn't care about the middle class...bring up wall street.

here some proof:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...n-in-november/

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by MTK

She's still a better option than anyone on the right. Granted the bar is set extremely low.

That is entirely the point. She's a moderate. Not a progressive. She most likely would be a shoo in on the GOP ticket. I believe most moderates would vote for her before any douche nozzle currently on the GOP ticket.

[MTK]

Rubio is still a distant 3rd, not really buying him as much of an upgrade over the other two maniacs.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by MTK

Rubio is still a distant 3rd, not really buying him as much of an upgrade over the other two maniacs.

gotta love politics

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by MTK

Rubio is still a distant 3rd, not really buying him as much of an upgrade over the other two maniacs.

If command of the issues doesn't matter to you, then I guess.

Trump flat out has no idea how anything really works except for international trade. Especially not foreign policy. He comments in depth on trade policy with China, everything else is either amazing, incompetent, great, or stupid.

Cruz is just an asshole and would get beat in a national election. Nobody wants to vote for an asshole. But Santorum was the Iowa winning asshole in 2012 and everyone's favorite Romney ended up winning the nomination. Cruz won't win the nomination.

[MTK]

Compared to Trump and Cruz, Rubio is legit, but again that's not saying much. It's like saying Grossman was an upgrade over Beck. Well yeah, but he still sucks.