State University should provide no cost education for qualifying students?
Debate Rounds (3)
http://quickfacts.census.gov... the Median household Income in America from 2008 to 2012 is $53,046. http://www.collegedata.com... states that, "in the most recent survey of college pricing, the College Board reports that a "moderate" college budget for an in-state public college for the 2013"2014 academic year averaged $22,826". If the average family survives on $53,046 than it would be hard for them to raise that $22,826 and support their family at the same time.
http://sites.psu.edu... states that if there was a no cost college, in order to make private schools more appealing, they would be forced to lower their tuition. The cost of private schools can be twice the cost of Public Universities, so if people are going to go to a more expensive college in the first place, then they will not change their opinion just because a public college is offering no cost education. They are going to choose a more prestigious school for the name. Also to address the scholarships, according to debt.org, about 60% of the nations full time students graduate with student loans, which means over half of college students needed to borrow money to pay for college and that they are still paying for college after they graduate. No cost education would fix that problem. The same source states that over the past 2 decades, costs of college and universities has increased at more than twice the rate of inflation. Between 2008-2010 the average tuition at a four year public university rose by 15%. From 2011 to 2012 alone, prices rose 4.8%. Also income has declined every year between 2007-2011 for 80% of US families, which could make it harder for some families to help their children pay for their college education.
http://osfa.uga.edu..., books alone can cost anywhere from $800 to thousands of dollars. Without students to pay for the cost of these books, the school would go into debt trying to afford books for the students. The quality of education wouldn't be as great as it could be if education were free. http://goo.gl... NYTimes states that students who are in debt, are more likely to choose a higher paying job than those that don"t have any debt at all.
kortni forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||4||0|
Reasons for voting decision: The forfeit definitely doesn't help, which is the reason for the conduct. As far arguments, much of Con's best comes up in R2. I buy that there's an effect on school funding, that it's an opportunity for students to build a credit score, and that quality may decrease. The remainder of the points are either responded to pretty well, or aren't that well-articulated. The reason why Pro's still winning is because his major impacts - access and less debt - are better articulated and weighed within the debate. Con's points might have been stronger if they'd received any comparable weight, but lacking that, they're just assertions of harm without any impact factor worth mentioning.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.