In response to:

Price of Obama's 'College Affordability'

LarBob1969 Wrote: Sep 16, 2012 3:15 PM
Nothing in this article addressed the over-inflating of the price of tuition. Universities are being badly managed but everyone is being told that the only way to succeed is with an education. I hope the libertarians are right and we can return to a time when apprenticeships are recognized by employers as viable routes for education. Maybe then a market based approach will create enough competition for colleges and universities to clean their financial houses.
Boopboopadoo Wrote: Sep 16, 2012 7:05 PM
re: "Nothing in this article addressed the over-inflating of the price of tuition."

Thirty years ago department heads taught classes. Now this is rare.
Thirlty years ago professors had heavy class loads. No more.
Thirty years ago, the most heavily enrolled majors required four years of high school math. No longer.
Thirty years ago, there were no gender studies, ethnic studies, hatred studies, etc.
Thirty years ago, there weren't dozens of gender, diversity or "collective" administrators on every state campus.

University presidents, angry that their unreasonable request for hundreds of millions of dollars in new state aid is denied, threaten not deny state students admission and admit more foreigners (pay higher tuition).
"No family should have to set aside a college acceptance letter because they don't have the money," President Barack Obama told the Democratic National Convention as he accepted his party's nomination in Charlotte, N.C., this month.

That sentence -- key in Obama's "college affordability" agenda -- says everything about this administration's approach to selling itself to the American voter.

What's wrong with the message? Let me count the ways.

--It ignores reality. There is no reason a qualified poor kid cannot get into college in the United States simply because of money.

Richard J. Vedder, director of Ohio University's Center for College Affordability and Productivity,...