Obama to propose 2 free years of community college

a reply to: neo96

Where's your source for that claim?

a reply to: burntheships

I am not really disagreeing with you but the thing is I have actually seen people oppose higher education on here regardless of how it was paid for because they called them liberal, commie, indoctrination factories.

It may not be a high percentage of people with that line of thinking but there are some.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: burntheships

I am not really disagreeing with you but the thing is I have actually seen people oppose higher education on here regardless of how it was paid for because they called them liberal, commie, indoctrination factories.

There are communist leaning colleges and universities, absolutely.
The great thing about paying your own way is you choose where you receive your education.

a reply to: burntheships

Again I am not really arguing with you I am just saying some may be opposed to this because of their view of college education.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Grimpachi

People with college degrees don't commit crime or go on welfare.

Second.

you really didn't type that did you. there are quite a few people with degrees in business, that committed fraud and other crimes go to prison.

here are just a couple.
Bernard Madoff, Education: Hofstra University (1960), Far Rockaway High School (1956), Brooklyn Law School, University of Alabama.
Kenneth Lay, Education: University of Houston, David H. Hickman High School, University of Missouri.
Bernard John "Bernie" Ebbers,Education: University of Alberta, Mississippi College, Calvin College.
Dennis Kozlowski, Education: Seton Hall University.

those are just a few of the big ones, there are countless other college graduates that have committed murder, fraud, drug related crimes and many others. crime knows no color, sex, education, or economic placement of ones life. it's the individual.

i personally know several college graduates that have had to go on food stamps,/snap, and have had to turn HUD for a place to live.

just cause your college educated don't mean your squeaky clean or immune to troubles.

hell i know people that quit school in the 8th grade that are doing fine and make as much money or even more that some college grads.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Grimpachi

People with college degrees don't commit crime or go on welfare.

Second.

435 members of Congress, 100 United States Senators, 1 President, 1 Vice President, 22 cabinet and cabinet level appointees, no clue how many underling dingleberries...
almost all holding college degrees
almost all criminals
all happily suckling at the welfare laden teat of the American Taxpayers.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Well hell I guess there are exceptions to the rule.

Although politicians, and bankers are in a league of their own.

Considering higher education is a necessity now a days in even getting a job interview, I say 'bravo' - do it and get the monies from the reducing military action...how much would that be...in the trillions?

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: windword

But why not 2009 or 2010?

What makes this issue more important now rather than 6 years ago?

Puzzling.

And remember .....

Your banker went to college !!!

And every financial crisis and breakdown was caused by people with higher educations.

Your doctor went to college or university.

So did the people who made the meds he prescribed like anti biotics

And the pharmacist who handed you those meds.

Not all educated people are lazy useless morons.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Grimpachi

People with college degrees don't commit crime or go on welfare.

Second.

Time to stop trolling Neo.

Wait... I thought community college was affordable. It's those 4 year universities that aren't.

I have an idea let's just make High School 2 years longer!

I mean they are already offering an optional 5th year of HS in Oregon. Let's just tack on another "free" 2 years. Students will buy into it too because they're young and stupid and we'll promise them "good" jobs!

Then they will realize they don't have good jobs, and then they will realize they only have to pay for 2 years of overpriced university college and they can go get a bachelors in 2 years! (In Actuality 3 years because let's face it those community college credits don't transfer well.) Then they will realize that Bachelors degrees are worthless and that the Masters degree is just another 2 years and you can get a Masters for what used to be the price of a Bachelors!

Nothing can go wrong. It's not like youth are known to be rebellious when you piss them off or anything.

Wait until 6 months after this happens, (hoping it never does), and then recipients will get a nice little note from dept of education, IRS, that something happened and it will all be deducted from their tax refund for the next 10 years.

Whenever a false gift is accepted from government like this, they will own you for many years, and they exclude themselves from ALL statute of limitations laws.

Beware the bearer of false gifts and their broken promises. Obama is a PROVEN bearer of false gifts. AND EVERY PROMISE HE EVER GAVE WAS BROKEN.

Obama is a freaking mobile toilet overflowing with his own special kind of sewage.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: StalkerSolent

I'm pretty sure that link has shown up here on ATS a few times actually. I'm pretty sure I've read it before too.

You bring up a good point. Because of the idea that a college degree is a must have, jobs that never required degrees require degrees now. Jobs like simple data entry and such. It's jobs like these that add to that national statistic of people unable to pay back their student loans.

Thanks! I'm getting a degree in something that I could *easily* learn with a couple years on the job. Fortunately, I'm at a liberal arts school, so I'm getting *much more* than that, but I don't think an degrees in things like architecture, journalism, accounting, manufacturing, etc. etc... Now, I think getting a degree is good, simply because I think education is a good thing, but unless you're going into something like engineering or science or higher mathematics, I don't think you need a degree. You'd learn just as well on the job. I think most companies would just as soon take on a promising 18 year old kid and teach them the tricks of the trade as read another resume and hope for the best. Not only would they learn exactly what they needed to, it would encourage community involvement/cooperation (cooperations would be trying to find the best talent instead of just colleges) and set people to *producing* stuff for four extra years. Think of all the progress that could be made by young folks *earning salaries* instead of getting into debt or breaking even for four years. That's a lot of extra wealth that can be created, and folks could get on their feet so much sooner in life.

It should be 4 years if your willing to do it and get good grades. Fail and your out or you pay for your next class.

You can still have your expensive schools for those who can afford it so capitalist education wont die.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Humm, he is still going after this?...

I am thinking this has to do with Obama, and his administration's idea to "supposedly" give some free education, but in fact if you do take part of this deal, what the progressives have in mind in return is that they want you to do mandatory community service every summer and/or on your free time. Wherever they decide to send you or whatever position they decide to put you in.

Under Section 4 in "Duties" section b, and subsection 6 you can read the following in Bill H.R. 1444.

...
(6)

Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.
...

www.govtrack.us...

Kind of an oxymoron isn't it?... FORCED labor being "fair and reasonable"?...

BTW, this type of compulsory service did not start with Obama, Clinton was one of the first to want to implement it.

There have been already at least a couple of attempts by the Obama administration and progressives in power in general to implement mandatory/compulsory community service. But their plan is to do it not only for college students, their plan has been to include such mandatory service to high school and junior high students as well.

Meanwhile college students are going to be mostly adults, and they would make the decision themselves, is it really your decision? First, such compulsory service will require you to work for the government for free in whatever they say they need you. Most often you won't be able to choose what type of "mandatory service" you want to do, unless you are one of the few lucky ones who get the first picks.

Second, for high school and junior high students the Obama administration want to take the responsibility which should ALWAYS rest on the parents, and instead the progressives want to make that decision for you.

BTW, you actually think that 100 hours a year in college will really pay for your tuition costs?... No, this is only the icing in the cake. Once this sort of "mandatory service" is implemented people will be told they need to serve more hours, and more hours. Eventually having something similar to what happens in communist countries such as Cuba, North Korea, etc.

There will be people, who like in the past, will claim that "this would be a good thing". But it never really is. Every time countries have done this type of thing they have always turned into some of the worse dictatorships ever known.

Those people who think this is a good idea are really asleep and have drank way too much of the kool-aid. Compulsory/mandatory work = slave workforce. You can't polish a turd and make it a gold nugget just by calling the turd "a gold nugget"... That's what progressives in power want to do, they are trying to polish "slave labor" by calling it "mandatory community service".

Mandatory Community Service
Jessica Parr
Advocates for Children
College Park Scholars
University of Maryland at College Park

Mandatory community service programs are increasingly becoming a standard part of the curriculum in many public schools across the country. For example, about 500 public school districts, including those in Washington D.C., Atlanta, and Detroit have adopted programs (Parenti 57). A main reason for this increase in mandatory community service programs is because President Clinton has been strongly stressing the importance of volunteerism among the nation’s students. However, despite their growing popularity, these programs have also become a center of controversy. For example, supporters of community service say that it raises students’ self-esteem and moral character and connects them to their community. On the other hand, critics of the programs say that these programs which require students to provide free labor, place the students in involuntary servitude, which is unconstitutional.

The court case Steirer v. Bethlehem Area School District provides a good example of the controversy involved with mandatory community service.
...
After performing the service and satisfactorily completing the written assignment, students will receive course credit. A student who does not complete the community service hours or pass the written component will not graduate. Lynn Steirer, a student, disagreed with the mandate. Therefore she did not receive her diploma. Steirer was a B student at Bethlehem’s Liberty High School who had a history of volunteerism. However, her argument was that everything that she did came from the heart, not from her school’s requirement. She continued to volunteer, but felt that the requirement was unconstitutional. Her lawyer, Scott Bullock, an attorney for the Institute for Justice, argued unsuccessfully in federal district and appeals courts that mandated volunteerism violates the Thirteenth Amendment, which prohibits involuntary servitude (Sauerwein 30). Bullock also claimed that such service interfered with the First Amendment right to free speech because required community service forces students to express specific beliefs. He is adamant that school districts must realize that they cannot force a student to do labor without compensation. However, the courts, along with many other people across the nation, don’t think that mandatory community service is unconstitutional. For example, lower courts, including a federal appeals court, dismissed Bullock’s Thirteenth Amendment argument and rejected the notion that required community service is modern-day slavery (Sauerwein 30). In order for the practice to be unconstitutional, the district would have to legally or physically punish students who decline to participate. Courts also rejected the Free Speech argument because the students could either choose to participate in the district’s programs or design their own (Minden 1393).
...

www.wright-house.com...

I see in the future the Obama administration and progressives in general "trying" to repeal the 13th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which CLEARLY states that it is unConstitutional to require mandatory service.

People do community service plenty... But it is something that must be freely given, not "mandatory"... When it becomes mandatory that government is forcing you into slave labor.

13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

The 13th Amendment to the Constitution declared that "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." Formally abolishing slavery in the United States, the 13th Amendment was passed by the Congress on January 31, 1865, and ratified by the states on December 6, 1865.
...

www.loc.gov...

Similar programs have been implemented in some of the world worst dictatorships.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

WOW.

I wonder how many people know about this.

Sneaky Obama.

Always with the hidden agendas.

I think back in the day CUNY was free but that may have been just a NY thing, quite a few influential folks of meager means came out of that system,example Colin Powell came to mind,so yeah why not bring back the system and spread it,this would be great for poor rural communities especially down south.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse



There will be people, who like in the past, will claim that "this would be a good thing". But it never really is. Every time countries have done this type of thing they have always turned into some of the worse dictatorships ever known.

Those people who think this is a good idea are really asleep and have drank way too much of the cool-aid.

Compulsory/mandatory work = slave workforce. You can't polish a turd and make it a gold nugget just by calling the turd "a gold nugget"... That's what progressives in power want to do, they are trying to polish "slave labor" by calling it "mandatory community service".

This could be a great thing for the USA, especially if citizens are given the option of technical training also.

The student loan system has created a population who are essentially under an indentured servitude...so I really do not where you are going with that rant.

Are you sure you haven't been drinking the special kool-aide?

originally posted by: jrod

This could be a great thing for the USA, especially if citizens are given the option of technical training also.

The student loan system has created a population who are essentially under an indentured servitude...so I really do not where you are going with that rant.

Are you sure you haven't been drinking the special kool-aide?

Since when it is a good idea to have force labor? That is essentially what it would be. Not to mention that the government would need "NEW TAXES" if they intend for people to do mandatory service for 100 hours a year which would equal 12.5 days of work hours in an 8 hour a day job which is very unlikely to be able to pay for college tuition.

How about this instead. Have the Federal Reserve, an idea implemented by Democrats and progressives, return the over $16 trillion U.S.D. that they stole from the U.S. taxpayers (that's only from 2007-2010?)and "redistributed" to other "national banks" and into the coffers of the international bankers who own the Federal Reserve. Not to mention that who knows how many trillions of dollars they have been siphoning from the U.S. taxpayer to "redistribute wealth to other national banks" since 2010...

Use those $16 trillion U.S.D. to improve the economy and bring back good jobs to the U.S. Then people would not have to be part of this new "progressive idea" to force even more labor on U.S. citizens...

I think there is more to this issue than is apparent.

What really needs to be asked is “Ok so the government pays for 75% what strings are attached?”
Like Michelle Obama's School lunch program. The schools don't have to go along with the program. But if they don't the school gets its federal funding cut.

What finical gun will be held to the states head if they don't endorse the program?
Do they get their federal funding for roads and other services cut?

Everything Obama does has a political motivation. Is this program pay back to the teachers union?
Will only two year colleges that have teachers unions get funded?

Colleges are already struggling to find qualified teachers. Where are all the new teachers going to come from?

The Obama Administration is already enforcing the “Gainful Employment rule” on private schools
and Career college programs. Basically this rule says that

“Under the final regulations, which will take effect July 1, 2015 about 1,400 programs (99 percent of which are housed at for-profit colleges) serving 840,000 students would not currently pass. Students will not be able to use their financial aid dollars for programs that fail under the regulations, which will occur if a program's graduates have annual loan payments greater than 12 percent of their total earnings and greater than 30 percent of their discretionary earnings. Programs will fall into a warning zone if graduates have loan payments between 8 percent and 12 percent of their total earnings, or between 20 percent and 30 percent of their discretionary earnings.”

This in effect will kill career centered schools like Devry, Argosy, Art institutes etc. Granted a lot of them are very predatory on students and they need tighter regulations. I taught at one for a year and I think they had more recruiters than teachers. They basically funnel money from the federal government into their own bank account. The student gets a federal student loan, pays that money to the school for tuition and the student has to pay the Government back. The school essentialy gets the money for free.

So all these private colleges will be dead and gone in a few years.

The other problem is a lot of kids are coming out of High School completely unprepared for college.
I think it will be lucky if even 10% manage to finish the program they start.
I'm not kidding when I say I meet kids that couldn't tell me how many sides a real world box has.
Or couldn't read a simple bar graph.

So the money that is spent on kids that don't finish will be wasted. Whats even worse is the fact that colleges now are essentially useless. There is a ton of knowledge out there now for any one that wants to go look for it. Kids now would be better of going through an apprenticeship program learning under some one that is actually working in the field they want to go into.
Also what jobs are these 2 year associate degrees going to get?