The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

Paid-for college should be available to all high school graduates that require the financial aid

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/15/2015 Category: Education
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 442 times Debate No: 68413
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)




Thank you in advance to whoever accepts this round, the round will go as follows:
Neg Constructive
1st Aff Rebuttal
1st Neg Rebuttal
2nd Aff Rebuttal
2nd Neg Rebuttal
Aff summary
Neg summary
Aff FF
Neg FF


Alright, thanks for starting this debate. You seem to have failed to lay out the base definition, so I will provide them.

College- "a part of an American university that offers courses in a specified subject"

Baseline, college is effective if you take 4 years. This will cost roughly $36,000 per student.

financial aid - "Money to support a person or cause"

This is very flexible, how do we determine who should receive handouts?

I can imagine nearly every student will apply for financial aid, and we can simply not afford to give everyone $36,000.

You also give no requirements, so I must assume there are none. Why should a student who is not qualified be given a handout? Why should a lazy person be handed what ever he needs?

Debate Round No. 1


I'll say that everyone under the poverty line would qualify assuming they got accepted


Education is a privallege, not a right. While i beleive those are disavantaged need help, yourmeans ofdoing so are incorrect. Are you aware that last year alone 45 million Americans, or 14.5% of the population was under the federal poverty line? Your argument is lazy at best.

As for total cost, ill assume that 50% of people under the poverty line would like to take advantage. I feel this is generous because if an entire group of people was offered something free, more like 99% of them will take it. None the less, i feel like 50% proves my argument enough. If 22.5 million people wanted $36,000 dollars in college, the total would cost about $810,000,000,000.

That money has to come from somewhere? Where do you want to make cuts? The military? Medicare and medicaid? The only problem with cutting those things is that people like those programs. So you essentailly would have to defund the entire government to give everyone free college.

Debate Round No. 2


The money would of course find its way back into the government. People who graduate college earn a larger wage. This then results in higher income tax and more money being spent in America. Of course it would cost money, but the money would then go back into our economy and benefit everyone.


How on earth would the money "make its way back to the government"?

You think people who graduate always make more money? Why are people with degrees unemployed while people without them with jobs?

You've failed to actually prove how these things would work, so of course i will argue that they make no sense what so ever.

Debate Round No. 3


In fact, even the most basic degrees boost income by a considerable amount. For the exact numbers, follow the link I provided, but to summarize, even the most modest degree, not even a bachelors degree, has a 4k per year advantage over people who haven't gone to college. The number just increases from there.


I understand that if I have a degree, and I have experience, and if I have all these other things, then I can be successful. Theres so much more to those statistics than just the degree. Also, when that degree becomes free, it become equivalent to not having a degree. Giving 4 whole years to everyone would essentially make it just as beneficial to not go at all.

I have a few voting issues that I would like to bring up.
1. My opponent has failed to several arguments, which must mean he agrees with all of my arguments.
2. He really has not taken a stance. When I said something wouldn't work, he only talked about one thing in his argument. I would quote it, however it happened in every round, so it shouldn't be too difficult to find.
3. He ignored the specific numbers I gave, presumably because he knew there was nothing he could do about them. He merely said he understood it was "expensive", but he failed to explain how all $810 billion would instantly make it's way back to the government.
4. I would also like to point out that his second round was absurd. I had no where to rebut, and clearly he wasn't going anywhere either.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by KonstanBen 2 years ago
Basically if money is the only thing preventing a child from going to college
Posted by ColeTrain 2 years ago
Lol, okay...? I would potentially accept if you explain exactly what you mean now.
Posted by KonstanBen 2 years ago
I'm not sure....i was really tired when I wrote this
Posted by ColeTrain 2 years ago
How would you define an individual as "requiring financial aid?"
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's arguments are fine, but Pro doesn't provide enough substance to affirm the resolution. Whilst: "The money would of course find its way back into the government," seems fine in theory, it needs to be supported with things that show me this, such as statistics and further arguments. To further add to this problem, Con's counter-arguments brought about great question as to where the money would come from (albeit those arguments were unreferenced). Therefore, I have to give arguments to Con.