# Why is a federal dept. of education needed? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 10, 2012, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-a-federal-dept-of-education-needed/612376 "2012-02-10T04:11:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2012, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-a-federal-dept-of-education-needed/612376/121 "2012-02-16T02:33:56Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Lol, you are assuming that people didn’t go to college only because they were unable to go. > > I find this amusing because you are probably so steeped in the “everyone should go to college” mentality that it did not even occur to you that in 1950, there were plenty of perfectly respectable middle class people who graduated high school and went straight to work, marriage, the military, trade school, etc. by their own choice. Because the difference in lifetime income was very large back then as it is now. I’m all for reducing the cost of higher education and perhaps colleges offer more unnecessary frills than they need to but you are proposing that we cut off funding. This means less access for poor students. Who knows if tuition will one day drop to the point where you can work your way through Northwestern while eating at the soup kitchen and sleeping on you friends couch but until that day comes, you will be restricting access. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2012, 9:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-a-federal-dept-of-education-needed/612376/122 "2012-02-16T09:26:24Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Um… ok. I await _your_ apology. Stating that it’s possible to save a lot of money by doing such things such as eating at the local shelter is NOT the same thing as stating that college students should be hanging out at homeless shelters. If you don’t understand the difference, that’s unfortunate but it any event I am not interested in a discussion with someone who exaggerates and twists my position, i.e. someone who strawmans me. This discussion is concluded. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2012, 9:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-a-federal-dept-of-education-needed/612376/123 "2012-02-16T09:43:40Z")
> [@kunilou](#): > > There have been a number of factors mentioned in this thread. > Changes in funding sources, including the reduction of state support > Changes in mission > Costs of an information technology infrastructure > Increased costs for buildings and maintenance, including improvements in amenities (like air conditioning, as well as the higher energy costs associated with it) > Increased levels of staffing > Higher salary levels And most of these claims have not stood up to scrutiny. For example, I went and got the budget figures for the state of North Carolina and it does not appear that the massive increases of tuition at NCSU are the result of reduction in state support. With respect to the other factors mentioned, such as increased staffing, higher salary levels, and change in mission – those are not inconsistent with my position. Generally speaking colleges have had a lot more money to play around with and it’s unsurprising that they would hire more people, increase salaries, and expand their mission in order to justify themselves. In short, your rebuttal is largely hand-waving. > [@](#): > > I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make. It’s very simple: Your position is that the only evidence and argument supporting the claim that increased tuition is a result of increased student loans and grants is that the two things have increased over time. My position is that the support for my position is more solid because an inference of such a relationship is supported by common sense and basic economics. Not to mention that the other explanations put forward have not stood up to scrutiny. > [@](#): > > As I said, it means that even in the 1950s, the cost of a college education was already being affected by the availability of funds beyond what an individual could get on his own, so it doesn’t work to use that decade as a benchmark for affordability. That’s not an answer to my question, which was simple and reasonable and aimed to figure out what exactly you were disputing. I’m not going to waste my time if you insist on playing hide the ball with your position. This discussion is concluded. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2012, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-a-federal-dept-of-education-needed/612376/124 "2012-02-16T14:34:01Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > This discussion is concluded. It’s probably for the best, considering how thoroughly wrong your position has been shown to be. I admire your chutzpah with this, though: > [@](#): > > Stating that it’s possible to save a lot of money by doing such things such as eating at the local shelter is NOT the same thing as stating that college students should be hanging out at homeless shelters. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2012, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-a-federal-dept-of-education-needed/612376/125 "2012-02-16T16:09:43Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > This discussion is concluded. I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make here, but the most logical conclusion is that you’ve finally realized that you’ve been wrong all along and have decided to cut your losses. I agree with **RNATB** that it’s prolly for the best. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2012, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-a-federal-dept-of-education-needed/612376/126 "2012-02-16T16:56:15Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make here, It’s pretty simple: I prefer not to continue a discussion with someone who insists on misstating my position. It’s really not so hard to understand. > [@](#): > > but the most logical conclusion is that you’ve finally realized that you’ve been wrong all along and have decided to cut your losses. Lol no, but if it makes you feel better to think that, feel free. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2012, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-a-federal-dept-of-education-needed/612376/127 "2012-02-16T17:08:04Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > It’s pretty simple: I prefer not to continue a discussion with someone who insists on misstating my position. It’s really not so hard to understand. Can you quote anyone saying that? If not I think you should apologize to people for misstating their position. I don’t remember anyone in the thread insisting on that. > [@brazil84](#): > > Lol no, but if it makes you feel better to think that, feel free. I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make here. I don’t recall saying that I felt unwell or poorly in any way, so I’m not sure why you would think something would make me feel better. Can you quote me saying that? I do feel free, tho, because I’m an American. And I agree with many of the points made by other posters that show conclusively that there is a need for the DOE. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2012, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-a-federal-dept-of-education-needed/612376/128 "2012-02-16T17:14:25Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Can you quote anyone saying that? Saying exactly what? > [@](#): > > I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make here. I don’t recall saying that I felt unwell or poorly in any way, so I’m not sure why you would think something would make me feel better. Can you quote me saying that? First you must quote me where I stated or implied that you felt unwell or poorly. 🙂 Also, please explain your motivation to move the discussion up a level. ---
**Author:** ![Yllaria](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yllaria/32/3452_2.png) [@Yllaria](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yllaria)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2012, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-a-federal-dept-of-education-needed/612376/129 "2012-02-16T17:22:12Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Well I think that there is confusion about the value of a degree or diploma. Is the value primarily because of what you learned in studying? Or is it primarily a signal to distinguish you from others? > > If it’s the former, then it makes sense to push for “everyone to go to college.” If it’s the latter, then there’s no point because it will just result in degree inflation. Does it really matter? Your thesis is that the availability of student loans is driving up the cost of college and that removing student loans would cause a return to the prices of the good old days. It doesn’t matter why so many more degrees are needed. As long as they’re needed, your thesis does not hold. You can argue that there ought to be plenty of jobs available to an intellegent, hard working person with an 8th grade education, but that’s a different topic. > [@brazil84](#): > > As I noted earlier in the thread, one can see that elite colleges like Harvard generally do not check ID’s at the entrance to lecture halls. To me, this is strong evidence that the value of a Harvard degree is in the signal and not in the actual studying and education. And yet if you’re caught having someone else take your tests, you’re expelled. So maybe not. And it’s still off topic. Whatever the value is, dropping student loans won’t reduce the cost of admission. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2012, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-a-federal-dept-of-education-needed/612376/130 "2012-02-16T17:37:41Z")
> [@Yllaria](#): > > Does it really matter? Not to my original descriptive point, no. However, there is also a normative argument in play: There has been a suggestion that the availability of student loans is a big positive in that it has resulted in a big increase in the number of college graduates. I dispute that there is a lot of value in this change. > [@](#): > > You can argue that there ought to be plenty of jobs available to an intellegent, hard working person with an 8th grade education, but that’s a different topic. It’s a topic which has been implicitly raised in this thread. > [@](#): > > Whatever the value is, dropping student loans won’t reduce the cost of admission. If by “cost” you mean “price,” then I would disagree with you. If by “cost,” you mean the amount of money that a college spends per student, I would still disagree with you. ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2012, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-a-federal-dept-of-education-needed/612376/131 "2012-02-16T21:59:07Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > This discussion is concluded. That’s okay, it was becoming tiresome for me, as well > [@brazil84](#): > > If by “cost” you mean “price,” then I would disagree with you. If by “cost,” you mean the amount of money that a college spends per student, I would still disagree with you. Okay, I call for a cite now. Show me an example of a post-secondary school in the U.S. (it doesn’t even have to be a four-year accredited college, I’ll settle for an accredited vocational school) that doesn’t participate in the Federal Student Loan program, which is not otherwise subsidized by taxpayers, a religious body or a foundation and which provides a comparable training program at a substantially lower tuition and per student cost than schools in the FSL program. ---
**Author:** ![robinson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/848f3c/32.png) [@robinson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robinson)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2012, 7:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-a-federal-dept-of-education-needed/612376/132 "2012-02-17T07:17:07Z")
Its needed as a whipping boy for creationists. ---
**Author:** ![Yllaria](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yllaria/32/3452_2.png) [@Yllaria](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yllaria)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2012, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-a-federal-dept-of-education-needed/612376/133 "2012-02-17T23:36:33Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Not to my original descriptive point, no. However, there is also a normative argument in play: There has been a suggestion that the availability of student loans is a big positive in that it has resulted in a big increase in the number of college graduates. I dispute that there is a lot of value in this change. . . You do not dispute, you dismiss. Not the same thing. If you were disputing, the sentence would go on to say " because . . . . " QUOTE=brazil84;14780946]It’s a topic which has been implicitly raised in this thread. . . [/QUOTE] Not really. It may have been something you were thinking about. It may have been one of your motives. But that’s something that’s inside your head, not something implicit in what you’ve said. QUOTE=brazil84;14780946]If by “cost” you mean “price,” then I would disagree with you. If by “cost,” you mean the amount of money that a college spends per student, I would still disagree with you. [/QUOTE] Disagree. Dismiss. Whatever. This thread has been one long whine of “That’s not important - I don’t know why anyone would think THAT was important.” And then changing what’s being whined about. No plan to put something better in its place, just an identification of something Not Believed In and the claim that if it went away things would magically be better. I don’t like that omelette. If we disbanded the omelette, we’d have the eggs back in their shell again. And what’s being dismissed keeps changing. First it’s the Department of Education. No purpose. What? Not no purpose - studnet loans? Well, student loans, no purpose. Drive up cost. No student loans, no need for DOE. What? Not drive up cost - demand drive up cost? Well, should be no demand. I don’t see demand. Dismiss demand. No demand, no high cost (not proven, but asserted and partially plausible). No high cost, no student loans. No student loans, no DOE. What, evidence of demand? Dismiss demand. No need for college. College stinks. Only think you need college. If no need for college, then no demand. No demand, no high cost (np). No high cost, no student loans. No student loans, no DOE. What? Need college for jobs? Well, shouldn’t need college for jobs. Dismiss need. Quit going to college, job requirements will change (no, you didn’t say that, but I’m not sure how else you would get to enough well paying jobs that don’t require college. And on, and on. Perhaps next we don’t really need jobs that pay all that much. We only think we do. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 9:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-a-federal-dept-of-education-needed/612376/134 "2012-02-18T09:55:32Z")
> [@Yllaria](#): > > You do not dispute, you dismiss. Not the same thing. What exactly is the difference? > [@](#): > > Not really. Yes, really. For example, the following are quotes from other posters in this thread: > [@](#): > > I don’t think ANYONE disagrees with the statement that student loans have resulted in increased tuition. A lot of us don’t think that cutting off access is the answer. > [@](#): > > And yet you seem to be advocating a system that would favor the top 10-15% of the population in wealth. > [@](#): > > You don’t see the benefit of levelling the playing field? > [@](#): > > In other words, if we do what you suggest and eliminate the federal aid program- and thus, supposedly, reduce the cost of college to 1950s levels, adjusted for inflation- we’ll end up with a 5% college educated workforce. > > Is that what you want? > [@](#): > > We’ve had threads on the first issue and frankly we simply can’t compete in 2010 with a 1950 work force. There are about a hundred Chinese business leaders in DC this week for a meeting with the US chamber of commerce. All the jobs that don’t require a college degree and can be exported to China will be exported to China. Clearly these are normative statements, i.e. the poster is asserting or implying that there is substantial value in increasing college attendance. Do you agree that the persons who posted these statements are going beyond the issue of the connection between student loans and tuition? > [@](#): > > Disagree. Dismiss. Whatever. Again, what exactly is the difference? > [@](#): > > This thread has been one long whine of “That’s not important - I don’t know why anyone would think THAT was important.” And then changing what’s being whined about. I’m not sure what you mean by “whine,” but it was other posters who brought up the normative argument about access. So if you have a problem with that, you should take it up with them. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-a-federal-dept-of-education-needed/612376.md?page=6)