By Andrew Boyd

To start where Charles Dervarics‘ column concludes, I‘d submit that free is never free, with the possible exceptions of hope, love, compassion and sorrow. So, let’s dispense with the notion of “free college.”  

In the realm of public goods and investments, we don’t say free military might, free infrastructure, or free police protection; but it certainly makes sense to think about education as a public good, although, unlike an interstate highway, most if not all the value of a higher education accrues to the individual in such a way for which free-market mechanisms can account. 

In terms of the mechanism, I’d be more inclined to support tax credits and/or subsidies for higher education with associated economic means testing and requirements for some base levels of effort and achievement on the part of the student, not unlike the kinds of constraints we place upon things like welfare and unemployment, although the erosion now on those constraints, I’d propose, has serious and even dire implications for our social and economic well-being. 

Statistically, Americans with a college degree on average earn twice that of those with a high-school diploma. This, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics for CY2019. Of course, if you increase the supply of something (those with college degrees), the price (wage) is likely to fall, so there is the notion of diminishing returns. Also, there’s strong evidence that many people might derive greater benefit from a vocational degree. It took me 10 phone calls this week to find an electrician who would even respond to my work request, and I’ve yet to even get him to show up. You can’t outsource that value to Indonesia or Lethoso, after all.

Ideologically, if we’re prepared to swallow the moral hazard of yet another social welfare program, a.k.a compelled spending (at the threat of harm, which only the government can do) and all the attendant inefficiencies and market distortions, I think it should at least be accompanied by some strategy that ties back to our national economic wellbeing – a degree in underwater basket weaving not being the same, in this context, as one in STEM (science, technology, engineering and math). 

Finally, let’s not set aside the growing menace of our national spending problem and the increasingly unbearable financial burdens we’re placing upon future generations, which at something like $90,000 of public debt per American, might be thought of as a pretty significant offset to the economic benefits of more education.  At what point, I wonder, do we have “the talk” about how much of America's productivity should rightly be consumed by compelled spending, propped up by a fiat currency and the utter foolishness of modern monetary theory? A column for another day perhaps.

_____
Email comments to editors@thehustings.news