Colorado DoE Working to Kill Bill Providing Free College Tuition to Decorated Combat Vets Posted: 8 months ago by 2manyusernames
A bill that would grant Colorado residents who were awarded Purple Heart or higher medal free college tuition is under fire as too costly by people such as David Skaggs of the Dept of Education. The same David Skaggs who proposes having tax payers pay a large percentage of illegal alien's tuition.
Comments: 5 Score: [-] 289 [+].
< 1 >
Posted: 8 months ago by 2manyusernames:
This is such bulls**t.
First of all granting in-state tuition rates to people who are in the country illegally, who feel they are above the law is far more costly than granting the small number of veterans that would qualify for this. There are far more illegals than decorated veterans.
Secondly, it isn't really accurate to say that giving them free tuition will cost the schools $216,720.
It doesn't cost the school any extra to add another handful of students to their classes.
The fact that they would lose out on the regular tuition isn't the same as it would "cost" them. It wouldn't cost them anything or at least very little. If the class consists of 30 students or 30 students plus a couple of veterans the expenses are still the same.
If the handful of veterans wounded in action only went to college because it is free, than there is no money lost.
To be fair, the same can be said about illegal aliens. Giving them reduced tuition only "costs" the taxpayers if the people were going to go to college anyhow. The difference is far more illegal aliens would go to college and pay the out of state tuition than the few veterans that would.
Score: [-] 102 [+].
Posted: 8 months ago by DerAlt1:
« 2manyusernames : This is such bulls**t.
First of all granting in-state tuition rates to people who are in the country illegally, who feel they are above the law is far more costly than granting the small number of veterans that would qualify for this. There are far more illegals than decorated veterans.
Secondly, it isn't really accurate to say that giving them free tuition will cost the schools $216,720.
It doesn't cost the school any extra to add another handful of students to their classes.
The fact that they would lose out on the regular tuition isn't the same as it would "cost" them. It wouldn't cost them anything or at least very little. If the class consists of 30 students or 30 students plus a couple of veterans the expenses are still the same.
If the handful of veterans wounded in action only went to college because it is free, than there is no money lost.
To be fair, the same can be said about illegal aliens. Giving them reduced tuition only "costs" the taxpayers if the people were going to go to college anyhow. The difference is far more illegal aliens would go to college and pay the out of state tuition than the few veterans that would. There are 28,838 wounded since the start of hostilities, 532 from Colorado, a bit more than a handful.
When I was in business, not getting income from freebies was the same as losing money. Occupying my staff with non paying work at the loss of paid jobs is certainly a loss not even counting the unreimbursed materials used.
It's noble to want wounded veterans to receive benefits instead of illegal aliens but that doesn't make the cost go away. Many of the wounded veterans have survived massive injuries and will require more care and special services at the schools than regular students. The cost of that will be much higher than normal.
With the total of almost 29,000 veterans to deal with it seems impossible for the entire country to emulate Colorado, if indeed Colorado can afford it. We're having problems just affording proper medical care for these people.
This war will continue to plague us for many years to come.
Score: [-] 64 [+].
Posted: 8 months ago by 2manyusernames:
« DerAlt1 : There are 28,838 wounded since the start of hostilities, 532 from Colorado, a bit more than a handful.
When I was in business, not getting income from freebies was the same as losing money. Occupying my staff with non paying work at the loss of paid jobs is certainly a loss not even counting the unreimbursed materials used.
It's noble to want wounded veterans to receive benefits instead of illegal aliens but that doesn't make the cost go away. Many of the wounded veterans have survived massive injuries and will require more care and special services at the schools than regular students. The cost of that will be much higher than normal.
With the total of almost 29,000 veterans to deal with it seems impossible for the entire country to emulate Colorado, if indeed Colorado can afford it. We're having problems just affording proper medical care for these people.
This war will continue to plague us for many years to come. It is probable that not all of the 532 veterans would take advantage of it. Let's assume that they would. 532 is still a handful compared to the total number of students. This number is even less if you average out to the number of classes. There would be very few "freebies" in any one particular classroom.
I still say that the college wouldn't "lose" money. I am assuming that books and other materials would not be free. Only the tuition is free. I wouldn't agree to giving away free materials. The profit from the materials, dorm fees, other fees, etc would help pay for a small amount of lost tuition. Also there is the revenue from the sale of clothing, food, beverages, etc, etc. Of course I know not all of that is directly given to the university. Some may be concessions that pay the university rent. Perhaps some vendors pay a percentage of profits which again would help make up for any "lost" revenue.
Do professors get paid per student? I don't know, but I assume they don't. Adding a couple of students to the classroom doesn't increase payroll costs. The aids, and other hourly employees aren't going to have a significant increase in work load for the few extra students.
These are public colleges that often times have large classes. I could see the problem if it was a small college with limited enrollment slots. Taking up a slot would cause the university to lose money. Such is not the case here, at least not as I understand it.
Compare it to someone being given a free seat at the movies, a play, a concert, etc. Provided the event was not standing-room-only there is no additional expense incurred by the arena. Yes, there is not the income that could have been produced but that isn't the same as a "cost". It isn't whether they can "afford" to give them free tuition.
Yes, giving them free tuition would cause the university to lose money for those that would have gone to college at the regular tuition. Obviously that percentage is far lower than 100%.
Also any additional care or special services that are required by the service people should not be given free. Tuition and tuition alone can be afforded to be given free to those that qualify.
Now if they want to make arguments that there isn't the need to give them free tuition, that it isn't "fair", that they already have benefits to help with college expenses, or any of a dozen other reasons, I may or may not agree with them, but it appears to me that they would carry more weight than the claim that the university can't afford it.
Score: [-] 13 [+].
Posted: 8 months ago by 2manyusernames:
furthermore any "loss" of revenue would be lessened or even turned into a profit by the great PR this would generate. It could very well increase donations as well.
Score: [-] 13 [+].
Posted: 8 months ago by DerAlt1:
Well, if the only thing that's free to a wounded veteran is the tuition, then there will only be a handful of vets able to take advantage. Many of these vets are severely wounded, with loss of limbs, mobility etc. How will they pay for all the materials, food, room and board, and any special medical/physical assistance that they require? These people will create an enormous responsibility that the collages will have to cope with and that usually means money.
If you put asses in seats that would otherwise be paying clients then you are losing money. Unless of course, this is the Ronald Regan school of economics.
Pie in the sky programs are not what we need. I'm not stating this from a personal point of view. I don't have an axe to grind here. What I am saying is that it's not just bulls**t as you remarked.
There are folks who are responsible to make sure programs that are instituted at the state level are feasable, sustainable and can be available to all who qualify because they are wounded.
A program that tends to cherry pick those vets that are physically fit enough or have enough personal finances is not a good use of taxpayers money.
Hoping that good things will happen and that supportive donations will materialize is not intelligent economic planning.
Score: [-] 31 [+].
< 1 >