Edwards: COLLEGE FOR EVERYONE!!!

[Pale Rider]

Edwards plans big for presidency



Candidate: Sacrifice must be priority, too

By LAUREN R. DORGAN
Monitor staff


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

October 26. 2007 1:25AM



DAN HABIB / Monitor staff
John Edwards

John Edwards says if he's elected president, he'll institute a New Deal-like suite of programs to fight poverty and stem growing wealth disparity. To do it, he said, he'll ask many Americans to make sacrifices, like paying higher taxes.

Edwards, a former Democratic senator from North Carolina, says the federal government should underwrite universal pre-kindergarten, create matching savings accounts for low-income people, mandate a minimum wage of $9.50 and provide a million new Section 8 housing vouchers for the poor. He also pledged to start a government-funded public higher education program called "College for Everyone."

"It is central to what I want to do as president to do something about economic inequality. I do not believe it is okay for the United States of America to have 37 million people living in poverty," he said in a meeting with Monitor reporters and editors this week. "And I think we need, desperately need, a president who will say that to America and call on Americans to show their character."

At every stop, Edwards said, he tells voters he'll ask them to sacrifice. Asked to describe what he means, he described his plan for increases in capital gains taxes, saying taxes on "wealth income" should be in line with those on work income.

"I think if we want to fund the things that I think are important to share in prosperity, then people who have done well in this country, including me, have more of a responsibility to give back," he said. Later, he added: "There are no free meals."

Like other Democrats, Edwards named his top three priorities as ending the war in Iraq, enacting universal health care and overhauling the American energy system. "Those are three things instantly I would do," he said.
Edwards also ripped fellow Democrat Sen. Hillary Clinton, who leads most polls nationally and in New Hampshire by a wide margin, for taking campaign contributions from federal lobbyists and for her recent vote in favor of naming Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist group. Edwards barely mentioned Sen. Barack Obama.

Both Edwards and Clinton have proposed universal health care plans that mandate insurance for everyone, while Obama has proposed a plan that requires coverage only for children. Edwards, who was first to propose a plan, called Clinton's a "carbon copy" of his but said he is better positioned to negotiate because he has the "clean hands of not taking money from lobbyists."

"Senator Clinton has over the years has taken millions of dollars from lobbyists and defends the status quo system," he said. "She just basically says the system works and her argument is, 'I'm experienced, I can operate within the system.' "

Clinton spokeswoman Kathleen Strand questioned the line Edwards has drawn. He takes money from state lobbyists and from a variety of industry groups; according to a Washington Post roundup, he's taken more than $8 million this year from lawyers and law firms, including some that also employ lobbyists.

"It is disappointing that instead of taking the opportunity to lay out his ideas to New Hampshire voters, John Edwards is consistently choosing to engage in misleading, desperate attacks against Senator Clinton," Strand said.

Edwards called the Iran vote made by Clinton and others "a signal" to President Bush about what's permissible.

"Are we going to hear six months from now, Bush invades Iran, 'If only I had known then what I know now?' " Edwards said. "How long does it take to learn this lesson? There's a very hard lesson that I've had to learn from Iraq."

As a senator, Edwards voted to authorize the war in Iraq, as did Clinton. Since then, Edwards has apologized and called the vote a mistake, while Clinton has not, saying that she "takes responsibility" for her vote and she would end the war. Edwards has often criticized Clinton for stopping short of an apology.

Edwards said he would pull combat troops out of Iraq within 10 months, while leaving behind a strike force in the region and limited troops in Iraq with missions like protecting the American embassy. He said it's impossible to predict the future of the country.

"No one knows what's going to happen in Iraq. We're in a bad place, the choices are ugly," he said. And we have to make the best choices under the circumstances to maximize the chances for success, but there are enormous risks in Iraq. And a lot of it is out of our hands."

Edwards billed himself as a "rare combination": The most progressive of the major candidates as well as "the most electable." He pointed to the fact that he was elected to the Senate from a "red state" and that he comes from a rural area, two factors that he said prove his electability.

Edwards said the time has passed for "poll-driven, careful, cautious ideas."

"I think you have to say, 'There's something rotten in Denmark,' " he said. "The system needs to be fixed."

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071026/FRONTPAGE/710260384

[typomaniac]

If paying higher taxes means not having to save for college tuition, most families wouldn't see that as a problem, would they?

[Pale Rider]

If paying higher taxes means not having to save for college tuition, most families wouldn't see that as a problem, would they?

So people that don't have kids should have to pay for others kids to go to school?

[Nukeman]

So people that don't have kids should have to pay for others kids to go to school?

Future tax payers Pale....Future tax payers..... Without them we all go in the toilet.

The higher educated the better your job and the more they can tax you!!!

edwards has his plans. Tax the hell out of the middle class so they can make a wealthier class to pay even more taxes....

[Pale Rider]

Future tax payers Pale....Future tax payers..... Without them we all go in the toilet.

The higher educated the better your job and the more they can tax you!!!

edwards has his plans. Tax the hell out of the middle class so they can make a wealthier class to pay even more taxes....

I guess that should have been obvious... :laugh:

[Trigg]

This makes me think that the taxes would go up, but the people eligable for the "free college" would be low income/minorities.

Which means I would still be saving for my kids AND paying extra for someone else.

I could be wrong, but somehow the middle class always ends up getting screwed.

[AFbombloader]

Future tax payers Pale....Future tax payers..... Without them we all go in the toilet.

The higher educated the better your job and the more they can tax you!!!

edwards has his plans. Tax the hell out of the middle class so they can make a wealthier class to pay even more taxes....

I guess I won't have to work after I retire from the Air Force in a year after all!

Let me see if I get this correct? I won't have to worry about medical anymore, I can get out of my mortgage, and now they are going to pay for my college too!!! What a country!

Wait a minute.....who is going to pay for this? I guess I will have to work, probably two jobs!

(For those of you without a sarcasm detector, there was a bit of it in this post.)

[typomaniac]

So people that don't have kids should have to pay for others kids to go to school?

There's no such thing as a tax that benefits everyone equally. I couldn't join up because I'm 4F, and yet I still get taxed to pay the military's salaries. That's life.

Aside from which, the more US colleges hike tuitions so that they can attract the richest students - from China and India - not just the US, the less competitive the US gets. So in that respect, nukie is almost right. Investment in education is part of the total investment in economic competitveness and national security.

[AFbombloader]

There's no such thing as a tax that benefits everyone equally. I couldn't join up because I'm 4F, and yet I still get taxed to pay the military's salaries. That's life.


Let me start off by saying I appreciate you paying taxes to cover my salary. I have to do the same thing, does that make me self-employed??:laugh2:

AF :salute:

[typomaniac]

Let me start off by saying I appreciate you paying taxes to cover my salary. I have to do the same thing, does that make me self-employed??

Personally I find that to be one of the stupidest accounting rules the government has come up with. Such is the topic for another thread, though. And it still doesn't change the fact that not everyone benefits equally from how taxes are spent.

[Pale Rider]

There's no such thing as a tax that benefits everyone equally. I couldn't join up because I'm 4F, and yet I still get taxed to pay the military's salaries. That's life.
You can thank the military for everything this country is, and every right you have. I'd say that was worth paying for.


Aside from which, the more US colleges hike tuitions so that they can attract the richest students - from China and India - not just the US, the less competitive the US gets. So in that respect, nukie is almost right. Investment in education is part of the total investment in economic competitveness and national security.
This notion that I, as a single person with no kids, should be REQUIRED to PAY for the families kids down the street to go to college is outrageous. That's communism in it's purest form.

Forcibly requiring one persons efforts to pay for anothers lack of, is communism. Anything else you need to know?

[typomaniac]

You can thank the military for everything this country is, and every right you have. I'd say that was worth paying for.Quite probably, but that wasn't the issue, Pale.

Forcibly taking from the rich and giving to the poor is communism. Anything else you need to know?I guess we must have a communist military, then. :dunno:

More to the point, there has never been (and probably never will be) a nation that doesn't forcibly take from its people and use the spoils to at least appease the working class.

[Pale Rider]

Quite probably, but that wasn't the issue, Pale.
Just responding to you... you brought it up... :dunno:


More to the point, there has never been (and probably never will be) a nation that doesn't forcibly take from its people and use the spoils to at least appease the working class.
Really... can you prove that claim?

[Abbey Marie]

I'll bet that the next socialist policy to come down the pike from the Dems will be open college admissions. That way every slacker who wants to, can go to college on that free nickel, regardless of grades.

Why bother working hard in school? And parents, why bother to save? The government will make sure everyone goes to college anyway. The end result will be the dumbing down of college classes, and ultimately, a useless college diploma.

[typomaniac]

Just responding to you... you brought it up... :dunno:
What I brought up was how much my contribution to the DoD budget benefited me personally (versus, for example, you), not whether it was worth the price. It's a fine point, true, but not the same thing.


Really... can you prove that claim?
Well, no nation ever existed without taxes, to the best of my knowledge. And it didn't take long for people to realize that if you don't throw some kind of bone to the lowest classes, they'll eventually get angry enough to rebel. So, to be precise, no nation that did absolutely nothing for its poor ever lasted for very long.

I don't know of any exceptions to that rule. Do you?

[avatar4321]

more taxes? Do they have any other ideas?

[Abbey Marie]

more taxes? Do they have any other ideas?

Sure do! Gay marriage and birth control for 11 year olds.

[avatar4321]

Sure do! Gay marriage and birth control for 11 year olds.

how about we just give them an island or something to govern their own way.

[typomaniac]

more taxes? Do they have any other ideas?

...and YOU are a pathetic American!


Sure do! Gay marriage and birth control for 11 year olds.

...and YOU are a pathetic American!

(By the way, gay marriages would increase the tax base.)

[Abbey Marie]

Why are we pathetic Americans?

[typomaniac]

Why are we pathetic Americans?

One bad one-liner deserves another, that's all. :coffee:

[Pale Rider]

Well, no nation ever existed without taxes, to the best of my knowledge. And it didn't take long for people to realize that if you don't throw some kind of bone to the lowest classes, they'll eventually get angry enough to rebel. So, to be precise, no nation that did absolutely nothing for its poor ever lasted for very long.

I don't know of any exceptions to that rule. Do you?

Well, without digging deep into finding the facts on that, my point is, America was and still should be a capitalist society, but the liberals be damned until they can turn America into full fledged communism. A little here, a little there, baby steps so as not to attract too much attention or outrage. Take more from the rich and throw the poor another bone. But when you're my age and you can look back at the big picture, of how it used to be compared to now, and what the liberals have planned for the future... hell... it's communism man... pure and simple. From the womb to the tomb. That's a good motto for liberals. They won't be happy until you give them ALL of your money, and they oversee EVERY STEP OF YOUR LIFE, because you're too stupid and incompetent to do anything for yourself... like pay for college.

[actsnoblemartin]

Edwards should give up all his money, if he believes in it so much



Edwards plans big for presidency



Candidate: Sacrifice must be priority, too

By LAUREN R. DORGAN
Monitor staff


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

October 26. 2007 1:25AM



DAN HABIB / Monitor staff
John Edwards

John Edwards says if he's elected president, he'll institute a New Deal-like suite of programs to fight poverty and stem growing wealth disparity. To do it, he said, he'll ask many Americans to make sacrifices, like paying higher taxes.

Edwards, a former Democratic senator from North Carolina, says the federal government should underwrite universal pre-kindergarten, create matching savings accounts for low-income people, mandate a minimum wage of $9.50 and provide a million new Section 8 housing vouchers for the poor. He also pledged to start a government-funded public higher education program called "College for Everyone."

"It is central to what I want to do as president to do something about economic inequality. I do not believe it is okay for the United States of America to have 37 million people living in poverty," he said in a meeting with Monitor reporters and editors this week. "And I think we need, desperately need, a president who will say that to America and call on Americans to show their character."

At every stop, Edwards said, he tells voters he'll ask them to sacrifice. Asked to describe what he means, he described his plan for increases in capital gains taxes, saying taxes on "wealth income" should be in line with those on work income.

"I think if we want to fund the things that I think are important to share in prosperity, then people who have done well in this country, including me, have more of a responsibility to give back," he said. Later, he added: "There are no free meals."

Like other Democrats, Edwards named his top three priorities as ending the war in Iraq, enacting universal health care and overhauling the American energy system. "Those are three things instantly I would do," he said.
Edwards also ripped fellow Democrat Sen. Hillary Clinton, who leads most polls nationally and in New Hampshire by a wide margin, for taking campaign contributions from federal lobbyists and for her recent vote in favor of naming Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist group. Edwards barely mentioned Sen. Barack Obama.

Both Edwards and Clinton have proposed universal health care plans that mandate insurance for everyone, while Obama has proposed a plan that requires coverage only for children. Edwards, who was first to propose a plan, called Clinton's a "carbon copy" of his but said he is better positioned to negotiate because he has the "clean hands of not taking money from lobbyists."

"Senator Clinton has over the years has taken millions of dollars from lobbyists and defends the status quo system," he said. "She just basically says the system works and her argument is, 'I'm experienced, I can operate within the system.' "

Clinton spokeswoman Kathleen Strand questioned the line Edwards has drawn. He takes money from state lobbyists and from a variety of industry groups; according to a Washington Post roundup, he's taken more than $8 million this year from lawyers and law firms, including some that also employ lobbyists.

"It is disappointing that instead of taking the opportunity to lay out his ideas to New Hampshire voters, John Edwards is consistently choosing to engage in misleading, desperate attacks against Senator Clinton," Strand said.

Edwards called the Iran vote made by Clinton and others "a signal" to President Bush about what's permissible.

"Are we going to hear six months from now, Bush invades Iran, 'If only I had known then what I know now?' " Edwards said. "How long does it take to learn this lesson? There's a very hard lesson that I've had to learn from Iraq."

As a senator, Edwards voted to authorize the war in Iraq, as did Clinton. Since then, Edwards has apologized and called the vote a mistake, while Clinton has not, saying that she "takes responsibility" for her vote and she would end the war. Edwards has often criticized Clinton for stopping short of an apology.

Edwards said he would pull combat troops out of Iraq within 10 months, while leaving behind a strike force in the region and limited troops in Iraq with missions like protecting the American embassy. He said it's impossible to predict the future of the country.

"No one knows what's going to happen in Iraq. We're in a bad place, the choices are ugly," he said. And we have to make the best choices under the circumstances to maximize the chances for success, but there are enormous risks in Iraq. And a lot of it is out of our hands."

Edwards billed himself as a "rare combination": The most progressive of the major candidates as well as "the most electable." He pointed to the fact that he was elected to the Senate from a "red state" and that he comes from a rural area, two factors that he said prove his electability.

Edwards said the time has passed for "poll-driven, careful, cautious ideas."

"I think you have to say, 'There's something rotten in Denmark,' " he said. "The system needs to be fixed."

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071026/FRONTPAGE/710260384

[typomaniac]

Well, without digging deep into finding the facts on that, my point is, America was and still should be a capitalist society...America is and always has been a country of state-regulated capitalism. (Some would call it socialism!) A pure capitalist society never has existed and never can exist: it would quickly implode into anarchy.
...but the liberals be damned until they can turn America into full fledged communism.I don't know who you've been talking to in Reno, but I can't think of any liberals in the SF area who want that. Even they recognize that communism doesn't work.
But when you're my age and you can look back at the big picture, of how it used to be compared to now, and what the liberals have planned for the future... hell... it's communism man... pure and simple. From the womb to the tomb.Hell, that's only 12 years. Nobody gets anything done in 12 years. :D

That's a good motto for liberals. They won't be happy until you give them ALL of your money, and they oversee EVERY STEP OF YOUR LIFE, because you're too stupid and incompetent to do anything for yourself... like pay for college.How long is a smart 18-year-old with no degree going to have to work to earn enough for 4 years of college? Come on.

[Kathianne]

If paying higher taxes means not having to save for college tuition, most families wouldn't see that as a problem, would they?

Do you believe all should attend college? Well I guess we are getting there, attending I mean, not graduating. You would have us pay for that?

[typomaniac]

Do you believe all should attend college? Well I guess we are getting there, attending I mean, not graduating. You would have us pay for that?

Anyone who's smart enough and academically inclined should attend college, yes. And yes, that's something I would have you all pay for if I were US Dictator.

No sense wasting money on those who are below average intelligence, or who are truly happy doing motorcycle repair (or whatever).

[Pale Rider]

America is and always has been a country of state-regulated capitalism. (Some would call it socialism!) A pure capitalist society never has existed and never can exist: it would quickly implode into anarchy.
Debatable, but for another time and thread.


I don't know who you've been talking to in Reno, but I can't think of any liberals in the SF area who want that. Even they recognize that communism doesn't work.
But yet they continue to vote for the candidate with the most communistic ideas and plans.


Hell, that's only 12 years. Nobody gets anything done in 12 years. :D
OK... was that where I was supposed to laugh? You'll have to excuse me...


How long is a smart 18-year-old with no degree going to have to work to earn enough for 4 years of college? Come on.
I did it, and if I can, anybody can.

[Kathianne]

Anyone who's smart enough and academically inclined should attend college, yes. And yes, that's something I would have you all pay for if I were US Dictator.

No sense wasting money on those who are below average intelligence, or who are truly happy doing motorcycle repair (or whatever).

Problem is, too many are 'attending' meaning accepted, but not graduating. Bingo, bottom line, they are not qualified in ability or prior knowledge.

[Pale Rider]

No sense wasting money on those who are below average intelligence, or who are truly happy doing motorcycle repair (or whatever).

OK... a jab at me... no problem... I have a degree in Electrical Engineering. You know how much money I made with that degree? The most was $13 an hour. (There are many other schools between that and this, including the Air Force.) I went to school for Harley Davidson Techincian, five days a week, six hours a day, for fifteen months straight with no break. As a Master Harley Davidson Technician, you know how much I was making when I retired from that? Right at almost $35 an hour. Now I own my own my own business, and it's performing skills I learned OTHER THAN in college. Know how much I make at that. Try between $75 and $100 an hour. Now what? Are you going to tell me the ONLY WAY to make good money is to go to college?

C'mon man... :slap:

[typomaniac]

OK... a jab at me... no problem... I have a degree in Electrical Engineering. You know how much money I made with that degree? The most was $13 an hour. (There are many other schools between that and this, including the Air Force.) I went to school for Harley Davidson Techincian, five days a week, six hours a day, for fifteen months straight with no break. As a Master Harley Davidson Technician, you know how much I was making when I retired from that? Right at almost $35 an hour.Okay, I can see how you might have seen it as a jab. You'll just have to take my word for it that I really didn't know you made money from repairing Harleys. (I figured you were just an enthusiast.)

At any rate, I don't consider it a "jab" to say that someone is happier working with their hands than buried in reading material. I know full well that skilled laborers are by no means stupid.


Now I own my own my own business, and it's performing skills I learned OTHER THAN in college. Know how much I make at that. Try between $75 and $100 an hour. Now what? Are you going to tell me the ONLY WAY to make good money is to go to college?

C'mon man... :slap:Never said that. Sure, there are people without degrees who are lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time. Most of them never get that chance. (Not to mention that college was a lot cheaper in your day, even inflation-adjusted.)

[Pale Rider]

Okay, I can see how you might have seen it as a jab. You'll just have to take my word for it that I really didn't know you made money from repairing Harleys. (I figured you were just an enthusiast.)

At any rate, I don't consider it a "jab" to say that someone is happier working with their hands than buried in reading material. I know full well that skilled laborers are by no means stupid.

Never said that. Sure, there are people without degrees who are lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time. Most of them never get that chance. (Not to mention that college was a lot cheaper in your day, even inflation-adjusted.)

The most I ever borrowed in student loans was $1,192.00. That's total, for college, three different technical schools, and several college extension courses and summer trainings. The rest came out of my own pocket. I worked and paid my way. That's why I see it as such a travesty to force me to pay for someone else to go to college, even those who think it's just a great time to party and flunk out, or just aren't smart enough to be there in the first place, as you've talked with Kathy about.

[Kathianne]

The most I ever borrowed in student loans was $1,192.00. That's total, for college, three different technical schools, and several college extension courses and summer trainings. The rest came out of my own pocket. I worked and paid my way. That's why I see it as such a travesty to force me to pay for someone else to go to college, even those who think it's just a great time to party and flunk out, or just aren't smart enough to be there in the first place, as you've talked with Kathy about.

Yup, my youngest is now in his senior year. He has had scholarship for academics and some for need. He worked as an RA for 3 years. He also did a Disney Internship, mind you, he's graduating 1 semester beyond 4 years. His total 'debt', $less than 2 k.

[Abbey Marie]

One bad one-liner deserves another, that's all. :coffee:

Aww. I didn't think it was all that bad! :coffee:

[Yurt]

If paying higher taxes means not having to save for college tuition, most families wouldn't see that as a problem, would they?

You do realize how stupid your comment is.

If the feds force us to "save" by paying more "taxes" so that our child can go to school, yeeeeah, wooopi.


:poke:

[AFbombloader]

I guess we must have a communist military, then.

Funny thing, I read an article a few years ago that stated the US Military was the only working communist society. I guess if you look at it, it was right. It works in this instance, but I do not want to have the whole country operating in that form of goverment. In the military you need to have the one person in charge and everyone following without question.

AF:salute:

[avatar4321]

Anyone who's smart enough and academically inclined should attend college, yes. And yes, that's something I would have you all pay for if I were US Dictator.

No sense wasting money on those who are below average intelligence, or who are truly happy doing motorcycle repair (or whatever).

what makes you think people who like motorcycle repair are below average intelligence? how arrogant.

[typomaniac]

what makes you think people who like motorcycle repair are below average intelligence? how arrogant.

Read post #30, kid. :slap:

[avatar4321]

Read post #30, kid. :slap:

nothing in post 30 negates what I just said.

[theHawk]

Funny thing, I read an article a few years ago that stated the US Military was the only working communist society. I guess if you look at it, it was right. It works in this instance, but I do not want to have the whole country operating in that form of goverment. In the military you need to have the one person in charge and everyone following without question.

AF:salute:

Its like Gene Hackman said,"We're here to preserve democracy, not practice it." :laugh2:

[typomaniac]

nothing in post 30 negates what I just said.

Clearly someone has to spoon-feed you:


...I don't consider it a "jab" to say that someone is happier working with their hands than buried in reading material. I know full well that skilled laborers are by no means stupid.

[Guernicaa]

Theres a reason that I'm against this, and its probably the wrong reason to be against it:
There are a lot of undiscovered smart poor kids who never go to private colleges because it costs too much. Smart enough to get some scholarships, but not enough for private tuition. Thus, it reduces the competition for schools. If everyone was given money for college, the competition would be overwhelming. Everyone can go to college, but not everyone does, and thats the way it should stay.

[Nukeman]

Theres a reason that I'm against this, and its probably the wrong reason to be against it:
There are a lot of undiscovered smart poor kids who never go to private colleges because it costs too much. Smart enough to get some scholarships, but not enough for private tuition. Thus, it reduces the competition for schools. If everyone was given money for college, the competition would be overwhelming. Everyone can go to college, but not everyone does, and thats the way it should stay.Actually its the "smart" middle class that gets screwed here. There are a number of programs for the poor but nothing for the middle class. If your poor you have a much easier time of obtaining grants and hardship scholarships those dont exist for the middle class.

Ultimately the middle class gets stuck with high taxes to support these types of programs with no way to utilize them. With the higher taxes comes less money to send their own children to college

Do you really believe a "private college" provideds a superior education over a "public college"? What I have learned through the years is that it is what you put into it that counts I dont care if you go to Harvard or Ohio State its what YOU put into it not what the schools name is..

[typomaniac]

Actually its the "smart" middle class that gets screwed here. There are a number of programs for the poor but nothing for the middle class. If your poor you have a much easier time of obtaining grants and hardship scholarships those dont exist for the middle class.

Ultimately the middle class gets stuck with high taxes to support these types of programs with no way to utilize them. With the higher taxes comes less money to send their own children to college.

That's how the status quo works, absolutely. So doesn't it stand to reason that getting rid of government grants for the poor only and replacing them with tuition for anyone smart enough to attend is the better alternative?

[Kathianne]

Theres a reason that I'm against this, and its probably the wrong reason to be against it:
There are a lot of undiscovered smart poor kids who never go to private colleges because it costs too much. Smart enough to get some scholarships, but not enough for private tuition. Thus, it reduces the competition for schools. If everyone was given money for college, the competition would be overwhelming. Everyone can go to college, but not everyone does, and thats the way it should stay.

Actually the private schools have way more money for underpriviledge but smart kids. It's way easier to get a free ride at Harvard, Northwestern, even a small private university than a U of I or U of M.

[Guernicaa]

Yeah I need to re-phrase what I was trying to say.
I think I said it wrong.

If everyone is given free money to go to college, regardless of where it is, college competition will go up because so many more people are going to go.

Also, I think paying those bills yourself, or at least some of it, makes you appreciate your college education more.