In article , Alun
writes:

Still, the effective result was that almost any kid who was smart
enough to get in could go to college and get a degree. The rich ones
paid their way and the rest got various forms of help but did not have
to start out their professional lives way in debt.

Correct

That's a good thing!

However, now they are phasing out grants and bringing in loans. This
is also a big mistake.

Actually, I think loans make sense *IF* they are reasonable and the job
situation is such that they can be paid back in a short period of time.

True.

I'm not sure whether those couple of IFs hold true in the UK as I'm not
there. An engineer's starting salary over there would not have been enough
to pay back a loan when I graduated (it was barely enough to live on), but
I think things have improved since then.

If that's the case, then I share your opinion that loans aren't a good idea at
all.

As for the US, the problem is more the size of the fees rather than the
size of the paychecks. That and finding a job.

Exactly.

The big question nobody wants to answer is "why does a year of college
cost so much?"

Here in Radnor Township, we spend a bit over $10,000 per year per
student in the public schools. And that's one of the highest outlays in
the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, if not the whole country. Why should
a year of college tuition cost more than that? The college school day
and school year are shorter, the classes bigger, and the college
students pretty much provide their own supplies and/or pay lab fees.
College students also usually provide their own transportation, don't
need special ed services, etc.

So why does college cost so much?

I don't know. It's a puzzle. I don't think it's big salaries.

Some years back the local paper did a series of stories on my alma mater and
the tuition explosion. Two things were obvious cost-increasers: big jump in the
number and ratio of nonteaching administrators, and a building boom.

Still, the local school district built a new elementary school a few years ago
without breaking the bank. We're not top-heavy with administration by any
means, either.

I would think that primary and secondary education are actually more complex
and costly than college, for a number of factors ranging from classroom hours
to diversity of student needs.

Our governments need to invest more in putting people through higher
education. It doesn't really matter whether they do it by giving money
to the colleges or to the students, provided the former results in
lower fees, but they need to do it. An educated workforce is the most
important thing they could be putting their money into.

I agree 100%. It's an investment in the future.

Public education (meaning universally-available, publicly funded
education) was recognized as a necessary function of government from
the very beginning of this country. Nowadays that means either college
or some form of post-high-school specialized training.

Money well spent.

Responsibility to the next generation. What a concept.

73 de Jim, N2EY