Why College Tuition Cannot Be Free

College tuition cannot be completely free. Free education is a wonderful idea for a perfect world. Unfortunately, this world, the United States, is not perfect because its economy is a free market and there is no room in state budgets. Despite promises by politicians, it is impossible to make tuition free for all colleges and universities.

During his 2016 presidential campaign, Senator Bernie Sanders vowed to make the cost of attending undergraduate college free. Similarly, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton vowed to make the cost of attending community college free. Both planned to use taxpayer money to subsidize the colleges.

How can a free market economy allow government intervention for colleges, but not other industries and institutions? If Sanders and/or Clinton made college free to anyone to attend then why can't we have a free house, too? Like the cost of college tuition, the cost of having a mortgage is too high, so the government must step in and pay for it? Oh, that's right, the role of government in the US is to stay out of private business because they can't afford to buy everyone a home and everything else already promised.

Private business and government don't mix in the US, for the most part, because the government is not in the business of being the economy. According to Merriam-Webster, the free market economy is an economic market or system in which prices are based on competition among private businesses and not controlled by a government. The government is designed to enforce the social contract and preserve society, not run the economy.  Colleges set their own prices based on the supply colleges and universities and demand of receiving a college education.

Admittedly, not all colleges are private. There are public college systems, for sure, like the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education, which is chartered by the state, has a board which the governor appoints, and uses taxpayer money. Moreover, some private universities, like Temple University, receive taxpayer money by the state and, in return, the University discounts tuition. Therefore, governments can influence tuition cost, but not control it. Sounds wonderful!

Since Sanders and Clinton want to make college free and some colleges are chartered by state governments and other receive state funds to decrease tuition cost for students then I don't see why the federal government couldn't step in further-- they already have! I'm sure state legislators will welcome a blank check from the federal government. Seems logical that college could be free if  they're chartered by the state or receive taxpayer money to make tuition more affordable, problem solved. In a perfect world, this is a great idea and one that should have happened years ago. Trouble is state governments, let alone the federal government, as they are nowadays, are incapable of passing a balanced budget. State legislators cannot afford to appropriate taxpayer money to colleges and universities inorder to make college tuition free.

Making college education free sounds intelligible, but, unfortunately, college tuition cannot be free because legislators cannot agree oh how to raise enough money. State and federal legislators have a lot of programs to fund in this great country already: entitlement plans, departments, endowments, military, and pensions, to name a few. Unless new taxes are levied and other programs are cut or funding is cut, the likelihood of tuition being free, which is estimated at $62.6 billion dollars annually, is slim to none.

Free college tuition sounds great, but there is no budget for an expensive endeavor and the government cannot set tuition costs.

Thank you not thanks

Thanking someone is the simplest and easiest way of expressing gratitude. One of the basic human emotions, gratitude is something all humans feel. Whether one asks for a favor or one is signaling the conclusion to an interaction, thanking is an expression so common it is almost subconscious.  

As someone who works in sales, I have encountered plenty of people express their gratitude insincerely. Just because someone expresses gratitude doesn't mean their gratitude is positively received. Choosing the word or phrase to express or attempt to express gratitude means the difference between being grateful, insincere, or blatantly rude. 

I'm talking about thanks, not thank you-- big difference between the two. 

One day I received an email from a customer who was upset about an inconsistent data formatting.  When read fast the email sounded like a simple question, but when reading slowly it sounded like a command. I thought nothing of the email until I saw the sign-off, thanks. Leaning in my chair I reflected. This person was not asking me to help her with something difficult-- this person was commanding me to help even after the sale was made. (To be clear each customer signs a contract stating that the data sold as-is) At first, I would have gladly helped her, but her "thanks" sign off made me rethink this person's email.

Six letters don't seem like a big deal. How I analyzed this person's use of thanks could be totally wrong because I did not confront her about it. Nevertheless, I am sure that this person used thanks in a commanding way. If she used thank you then, maybe, I would not have reacted in a way that motivated me to write this blog post.