Comments by "Snack Plissken" (@snackplissken8192) on "Why FREE college HURTS the poor - VisualEconomik EN" video.

  1. Such a good topic. The accreditation system is pretty bad in the US. With few exceptions (i.e. STEM, Medical, or Law), you can't really make rational educational decisions based on value. I think the best system would be one in which the schools were judged based on how successful their average graduates were, that students and lenders had a good idea how much various majors were worth in terms of expected income, and where universities could only charge what people could afford. In other words, if you know that your premed is worth a lot of money because most of your graduates get into good med schools and make high incomes, you could afford to charge more for it and would thus put more of those resources into improving your premed program. If your communications department mostly just churned out minimum wage employees, lenders would not lend for it, students would not want it, and you would either have to improve your program or drop it to focus on what your school was good at. This way, low value programs would be picked up by schools whose specialty was low cost education, and high value programs would be kept by the schools that gave students the best financial prospects. This means that worthless programs would largely disappear because they cost borrowers money in the long run, low value programs would become cheaper because no big money will chase them, and high value programs would be more expensive but have the best access to loans which even poor students could pay back when they became rich tax payers.
    1