A political antidote

From the very first blog, we have discussed the main causes of skyrocketing tuition, some plausible solutions to it, and actual implementations of those solutions in numerous countries across the globe.

For today's blog, I want to take a look some presidential candidates who have already mentioned their "political" solutions to this noteworthy socioeconomic phenomenon.

Before we divide into the world of politics, it might be beneficial to succinctly examine how different the American education policy is from that of European nations.

If one were to look at the education system in Europe, as one can observe, most of European countries offer post-secondary education as either free or significantly less than that of America.


(Let's go study in Europe)  Click this to see all the list of European nations and their educational policies towards citizens. For instance, in Norway, there are no tuition fees at public universities and colleges. Even in Spain, students are only paying 12.50 EUR per credit, $14 USD per credit. I would simply quell my appetite  for a couple of large pizzas from Canyon for once and add another 3 credit-course on my schedule.

The reason is that most of European countries have different political structure than that of America.
They have socialist economy while the United States have

Most of these countries offer students to attend colleges tantamount to a day worth of college in the United States, if you excuse my exaggeration.. it is needed. Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and Finland are the countries that are firmly based on Socialism, where everyone gets an equal share and ranked as one of the happiest countries. However, most importantly, one mustn't be beguiled by the benefits of Scandinavian countries offer. All of those were possible because they are A) homogenous B) People are paying 40% 60% of their pay.


There are two circumstances that America don't hold: it is absolutely diverse and massive country and has much lower income tax rates.

So, even if we want "tuition colleges", it will never ever happen.


Luckily, the federal reserve finds a correlation between federal aid and high tuition fees.


Since there is no way that America will instantly put "free-education policy" in practice, one is highly encouraged to scrutinize the issue of high tuition fees in respect to binary perspectives, democrats and republicans.

As the presidential election of 2016 is flowing successfully, one could see that the Democratic presidential candidates often, and clearly mention the high cost of a college education as part of the debate along the 2016 election.

To begin with, Hillary Clinton recently announced her proposal that guarantees $350 government expenditure over a decade in order to subside states which would agreed to increase their college spending. By doing so, her proposal can prevent countless college students from taking loans to cover their tuition.

Along with Clinton's government spending to levitate burden on students' shoulders, her "New College Compact (Hillaryclinton.com)

* These are two main reforms that she is proposing: Student should never have to borrow to pay for tuition, book, and fees to attend a 4-year public college in their state under the New College Compact. The additional support they receive will reduce all costs, including living expenses, by thousands of dollars. Student at community college will receive free tuition. Students will have to do their party by contributing their earnings from working 10 hours a week.

* If you have student debt, you will be able to refinance your loans at current rates, with an estimated 25 million borrowers receiving debt relief. Typical borrowers could save $2,000 over the life of their loans.

Here, one can hope that with some buttress of a particular political regime, skyrocketing tuition seems resolvable.

Another contender, Bernie Sanders who values the wealth of today as 100 and that of tomorrow as 0
proposed his act called, "College for All Act". This will eliminate tuition at all four-year public colleges and universities. And the federal government would pay "two-thirds" of the tuition costs.
Therefore, states would be responsible for 1/3.

Significance of his bill is that 1) it would forbid the use of money to pay administrator salaries, merit-based financial aid , and the construction of luxuries, non-academic buildings.
2) It would lower student loan rates and allow borrowers to refinance. (Sanders Act).


Two political reformation would be much practical and affective and trying to change a good chunk of the current education system, such as eradicating certain unpopular departments and replacing them into online courses or getting rid of disdainful notion/norm towards technical/vocational schools.


However, the rising problem would be taxation. It is the problem in both Clinton's act and that of Sanders.

They are both focusing on the use of "government spending", when the amount of debt of this nation possesses is absurd.

Who is responsible and willing to pay more tax when it is painful enough?

As the debt of America has surpasses 18 trillion a good month ago, it would certainly jeopardize our nation's economy, even aggregate it.

For Republican candidates, their primary focuses are foreign policy, abortion and anti-terrorism rather than spending time proposing "Education Act". But they clearly hold identical views that both Clinton and Sanders' proposals will result an economical catastrophe.

Sen. Marco Rubio's approach to this topic was to help working-class people in order to create alternatives to traditional four-year college programs with flexibility (NYT).

Bush once quoted that it is needed to change the incentives for colleges with fresh policies that would yield in more individualization, improved value of a college degree, driving down overall costs.


Once again, free college and high tuition fees are never-ending socioeconomic phenomenon that we have to carry on and hopefully minimize their toxicity by the time when our kids become college students.


Your thoughtful opinions and feedback are much appreciated!

Nuisance, Nuisance, everywhere around the globe

For the past two posts, we have scrutinized the main causes of skyrocketing tuition along with some possible solutions/ policies. It is true that people in 21st society are tend to be judged by their materialistic values, such as occupation, wealth, education and even appearance.

As accentuated numerous times, it is apparent that our society has become competitive than it has even been before. And with the experiences of living in three different countries so far, I've been comparing how each country deals with tuition problem  and its saturated market (competitive society),  The more you see dark sides around the world, the more you will appreciate your life.

Also, I have found a very interesting correlation between skyrocketing tuition and aging population.

What? an aging population and rising tuition?

Yeah! This is why countries in East Asia are facing right now that forces them to raise up their college tuition!!!

To begin with, there is a  common socioeconomic pattern that all east Asian countries possess, South Korea, Japan and China.  It is an "Aging population". An aging population is a looming economic and social burden, particularly, in Northeast Asia.

A brief explanation the correlation between these two:

As you can see from this graph, when the aged population reached 8% of total population, there is an enormous decrease in GDP/capita.


For instance, as of as of 2013, Japan's GDP/capita was $38,600 USD. However, when aging population reaches 8% of 127.3 million ( approx. 1 million), the GDP/capita will not only drop below $ , but also create astronomical amount of national debts, analogous to the United States.


Are you still wondering a correlation between them? Don't worry, it took me a while too.


So, the meaning of an aging population/society can be translated economically as "no more increase in GDP, a stagnant economy".


Why? Because, as you can see from the population pyramid of Japan, when old people retire by the age of 65, they tend to hold their wealth rather than accelerating he economy.

Therefore, fewer economic activities within a nation means increase in national debt, ultimately meaning no more investments from the government.


This is the general tendency of the States. Ever since it's debt surpasses 18 trillion USD, there has been a noticeable decrease in government funding.


For instance, due to the impact of budget cuts in California, UC colleges are accepting more international and out-of-state students in order to elude financial instability. Finally, we've come down to a conclusion that budget cuts in college education inevitably force college to raise their tuition.


Without further due, let's get right into policies and possible solutions that some countries have come up with.

In Canada, it came up with "Co-operative education programs" as a means to solve skyrocketing tuition problem. So, Co-op programs are implemented in majority of universities in Canada, such as U of Waterloo, U of Ottawa, U of Toronto, and allows students to apply concepts learned in class during paid-work terms. Basically, after four years of study, students will have not only a diploma that indicates participation in a CO-OP programs, but also 16 months of experience in their fields of study along with a network of valuable contacts. Ultimately, these factors will play significant roles when finding a job after their graduation (CO-OP benefits).


While I spent my 4 years of high school in Canada, every single kid around me was so preoccupied for finding a CO-OP program in order to make their parents feel less burdensome.

5 benefits of CO-OP programs:

Gain valuable paid work experience in your field of study

Develop professional skills and gain a better understanding of the workplace

Discover what career fits you through different job opportunities

Meet key people in the job market who will facilitate your placement after graduation

Travel and meet interesting people


Like this Canada has already cultivated a new trend on their own in order to maintain the interest among students to apply for colleges. Experiences in one's desired field can sure attract students since we all look forward to get a job related to our fields of study.


Furthermore, in South Korea, college tuition has risen astronomically since early 2000s.
When there's a $0.50 increase in inflation, there's a $50 increase in college tuition. As of moment, the annual cost of attending public colleges in Korea is second-highest in the World, led by the United States.

With the acknowledgment of that the total population of Korea is 1/6th that of the States, and its size is tantamount to that of Pennsylvania.

(4500,000 KRW = $4500 USD)




 why the tuition is so high in such a small country?

Because the Korean government covers all expenses for pre-school to high school, which means if you go stick with public schools, everything is free including lunch, and textbooks.
This education policy ultimately came back at it. Numerous college students committed suicides due to high college tuition.

In order to react to it, its government decreased interest rates on college loans. However due to high dependence on college as a means to success, colleges in Korea are reluctant to lower their tuition.

Fortunately but could be unfortunate enough, all men between 18-35 are subjected to mandatory military service. So, college students tend to take a two-year gap after their freshman year to serve in military. During this period, they can save money for upcoming tuition, and luckily, legislative branch is reviewing a  bill that guarantees extra credits for all men who have served their militant duties.