Senator Sanders bring many strong arguments today into the spectrum of the political discussion. One these topic is on “Free college education,” which many of his young supporters’ love; I wonder why… In reality these young supporters would never see free college education placed into effect by the time they get done with college… But let’s continue the reality of a free college education, what does it mean, and who benefits from it?
According to Senator Sanders the majority of European nations have a free higher education system at a cheaper price, but the United States does not and that is wrong. While I agree with Senator Sanders on the moral side of that statement, the reality side of the argument is unspoken here. According to Mr. Chingos from the Brookings Institute, free college will only benefit the rich still, and the bell curve will skew to the socioeconomic wealth class benefiting the most . His argument is based upon external factors around the college education system that will not change. Simply the student still needs to eat, have functioning housing (with internet, air conditioning, electricity, etc…), a cell phone, professional development, and time to complete their studies… Mr. Chingos concludes that the wealthiest Americans will benefit from Senators Sanders idea the most, being that they will not have to worry about the external factors of a college education, being that their financial cost will already be covered. The extensive statistical analysis supporting Mr. Chingos argument about this position that free tuition will only support the richest in the United States. I challenge my fellow college peers to disprove this man logic, because frankly I do not see flaws in his statement; the system will always benefit the rich in the United States.
Mr. Davidson from the New York Times sure agrees with the majority of the populist that the cost of higher education is inflated when tuition cost has doubled in twenty years. Mr. Davidson does not side with Senator Sanders point of view that four-year education system should be free for all, but agree with President Obama that the community college system should be free for all. The author side that graduation rate among community college student is best, and would have the greatest return on investment for the states. Stating that statistical analysis predicts that the states would save $40,000 per person with an associates degree. Reasoning each individual that has associates degree is greater than 50% chance to not be jailed. His reasoning behind not the valuing the four-year degree, is the same as Mr. Chingos; external cost are higher, and investment risk does not benefit the state. As matter of fact Mr. Davidson is rather pissed with the government state and federal, stating “In other words, our system gives three times as much aid to the least needy as it gives to the most.” His research shows that the wealthiest student will receive an offer of $25K per academic year, and the poorest student will receive an offer $13.5K. 
I would say the system is rigid either way… But I challenge my peers to prove these authors wrong. THE ISSUE IS NOT COST OF HIGHER EDUCATION!! IT IS K-12, AND POOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT!! I challenge my peer to prove me wrong!
- Matthew M. Chingos , April 21, 2016, “Who would benefit most from free college?”, http://www.brookings.edu/research/reports/2016/04/21-who-would-benefit-most-from-free-college-chingos
- Adam Davidson, Sept. 8th, 2015, “Is college Tuition Really Too High?”, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/13/magazine/is-college-tuition-too-high.html?_r=0