Subject:
|
Re: Costs and Benefits
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 26 Jun 2004 11:27:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
389 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur wrote:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Don Heyse wrote:
> > > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur wrote:
> > > > If the cost is $3,400 per household, what is the value of the benefits?
> > >
> > > Doesn't sound right. That figure is tiny compared to some of the
> > > ideas proposed here, such as free university tuition.
> >
> > Tiny? Really? Ok, what {would} "free university tuition" cost per household?
> > What would the benefits be?
> >
> > Compare {that} to this war.
>
> The way I figure it, you should only be looking at an individual's consumption
> and 'payback.' I'll use what I consider pretty conservative figures so that the
> fact that I'm just making numbers up won't paint a rosier picture than is
> reasonable. So assuming that many more Americans would go to college if it were
> "free" we might get up to the point where the average American would attend for
> three years.
That does not have to be the case.
> If we imagine that this costs $15K per year, then we have the
> average American sucking $45K out of the system.
Don’t forget a means tested term-time subsistence grant.
> That same average American is
> a tax payer for something like 40 years. Neglecting interest (under the
> assumption that there isn't any) and inflation (because we're talking about 2004
> dollars anyway) it seems like the average American would be paying back $1125
> per year for this system.
>
> Golly! I'd been imagining that it would be cheaper. On the other hand, the
> average American doesn't attend for anywhere near three years and it could cost
> somewhat less than $15K per year. If we drop it to two years at $12K per, the
> taxpayer burden drops to $600 per year.
I'm really talking about 4 year degree courses. If we set a target of 50% of the
population going to Uni, then the average would be two years.
> But, presumably, our GDP and spending
> power would rise with a more educated populace. Presumbably.
Two Points:
How much extra taxable income do graduates earn?
Would more educated Americans mean the USA would rely less on immigrants?
Scott A
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Costs and Benefits
|
| (...) Well, sure. I wrote that I was making up the numbers. What exactly do you mean? (...) What's that mean? (...) Well, yeah, so you're agreeing with my number? (...) Right. I don't know. And I don't know how much it would change as the university (...) (20 years ago, 26-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Costs and Benefits
|
| (...) The way I figure it, you should only be looking at an individual's consumption and 'payback.' I'll use what I consider pretty conservative figures so that the fact that I'm just making numbers up won't paint a rosier picture than is (...) (20 years ago, 26-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
10 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
