MistakenGenius wrote:guano wrote:cinephile wrote:matthewsean85 wrote:
Is this based on some psychological response? You might not be wrong, but I don't see irrational people (namely people who are willing to pay sticker at already astronomical prices) seeing much difference between 95k/year and 100k/year. Also consider that most people don't look at COA, they look at tuition only. So while tuition could potentially stall at 99k/year, that would probably equate to 120k/year, give or take a few thousand.
Exactly what I meant, the psychological reaction to a 100k sticker price. And of course the COA would be higher but people never consider that. Still, I think a school would have a hard time increasing tuition itself to 100k or more.
Our whole system is ridiculous. I think we should shut down 99% of all institutions of higher education and just have the few remaining become subsidized completely by the government. And I think we should probably cut chemistry and other ridiculous subjects out of our high school curricula and start teaching kids real skills from age 14. I mean, not just plumbers and electricians, but teach kids to become artisan bakers and raise the minimum wage to a living wage. And those are all my feelings at the moment, but this'll never happen.
A) people probably said the same thing about tuition breaking $10,000
B) chemistry is more important than history
C ) freedom of choice
I will agree with A). I have no doubt that people thought $10,000 was never going to happen. Personally, I don't see a peak, there won't be a peak until the government withdraws it's ridiculous funds or collapses. That said, B is the most asinine thing I've ever read. Chemistry has practical use to something like .01% of the population. Hell, my best friend is a chemical engineer and he even says the chemistry he uses is completely unrelated to high school chemistry. It's a completely worthless subject. History meanwhile needs to be learned and understood by everyone. I'll just assume you're a fool.
There are more jobs in chemistry than history. If 0.1% of people use it, that's still 300,000 people - significantly more than all history teachers, museum curators and college professors combined.
I'm not saying history is useless, but hard sciences are more important, because jobs