Try the political quiz
@B8LVK6N Agreements7mos ago

Higher education should be achievable by people of all backgrounds

Student loans can be live ruining for people who are lower or middle class which discourages more than half of the population to get a degree or certification that allows for them to work in crucial roles. We ask "where are all the doctors? nurses?" while making it financially impossible for 50%+ of the population to work as one.

+
Expand

Knowledge quiz

How much do you know about Education?

See if you know more than the average American.

Test your knowledge!

14 Replies

 @B8MKZFW from Pennsylvania  disagreed…7mos7MO

It is a persons’ choice to attend college and they can work for scholarships to make it more affordable.

 @B8MHQ7R from Texas  disagreed…7mos7MO

Individual's should not have to fun other people's children's college degrees. All the money would just come from tax payer dollars, and the quality of education would go down due to less funding.

 @B8NCCVY from Wisconsin  commented…7mos7MO

Fix your spelling and how would funding go down? The quality would tank because of lack of innovative incentives like a limited budget to work with

 @B8MDFWB from Florida  disagreed…7mos7MO

student debt has become so enormous, that it would require overwhelming funds from government that they cannot afford to provide. they should help alleviate the issue with policies that can help reduce student debt, not solve it all with their own money

 @B8N2FST from Illinois  disagreed…7mos7MO

College is NOT required. College should provide only targeted training for a given field. Remove excess requirements, remove degree programs that do not contribute, remove federal backing of most college loans.

 @B8NZBQNNo Labels from Utah  agreed…7mos7MO

If we take away all funding and aid to Israel then we can fix our government and other parts of our societal and educational system instead of funding proxy wars and genocide.

 @B8NVW9VDemocrat from Illinois  agreed…7mos7MO

I agree. Those who want to work hard for a degree should be able to without the implications of having to pay for it.

 @B8NGX6W from Pennsylvania  agreed…7mos7MO

Free College for All will really help education grow, and it will help people who want to go to college, but are low income and don't have the money.

 @B8MJVR8  from Michigan  agreed…7mos7MO

Yes, I really agree with this statement because it is a true thing that is happening in the world today, wherein many people cannot afford the education they would want to acquire, such as their dream jobs like doctors, nurses, lawyers, etc, because of the tuition that is placed upon these roles.

 @B8MHMX9  from North Carolina  agreed…7mos7MO

Yes I agree. College should be free. Most people when thinking of what to do when graduating high school is either trade school or college. The underlying problem with college is money.

 @B8MFR23Women’s Equality from Illinois  agreed…7mos7MO

Free college for all could give others more confidence to speak up. Letting the author speak will not let it go through.

 @B8MDHH9Women’s Equality from Florida  agreed…7mos7MO

I think it should be free because college, if high school can be free to get education so can college, because college is only school for adults.

 @B8MM43M from North Carolina  disagreed…7mos7MO

The tax payers would not benefit from this at all colleges would also not be able to have the resources they do now

 @B8MJPMR from Tennessee  disagreed…7mos7MO

Yes, students loans hurt people for long periods of time. But if the student get a job on campus then they should pay their loans by taking money out of their pay check.

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...

About this author

Learn more about the author that submitted this agreement.

@B8LVK6N

Last activeActivity3 discussionsInfluence1 engagementsEngagement bias100%Audience bias100%Active in
Answers  1 Feedback  1 Agreements  1 App improvements  1
PartyUndeclaredLocationUnknown

More conversations

Join in on more popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2yrs2Y

Israeli Bombings Kill 2,300 In Lebanon in 3 weeks

Lebanese authorities say Israeli bombing has killed more than 2,300 people and injured almost 11,000, mostly in the past three weeks, with Israeli attacks reaching areas far beyond Hizbollah’s traditional bastions of support in the south.The Israeli military has ordered people living in more than a quarter of Lebanon to flee, according to a UN calculation, as its fight with the Iran-backed Shia militant group Hizbollah threatens to engulf the Mediterranean country.Lebanese authorities say Israeli bombing has killed more than 2,300 people and injured almost 11,000, mostly in the past three weeks, with Israeli attacks reaching areas far beyond Hizbollah’s traditional bastions of support in the south.More than 1mn people have fled their homes in Lebanon in under a month, according to its government, a dramatic forced movement of the population in a country of only about 5mn inhabitants with a land mass smaller than the US state of Connecticut. Israeli forces began a ground offensive in south Lebanon two weeks ago, in their fourth invasion of the country in under five decades. They had already destroyed large parts of the densely populated southern Beirut suburb where Hizbollah had its headquarters, and killed many top militant commanders in air strikes, including former leader Hassan Nasrallah.Rema Jamous Imseis, Middle East director of UNHCR, told journalists in Geneva that “over 25 per cent of [Lebanon is] under a direct Israeli military evacuation order”. “People are heeding these calls to evacuate and they’re fleeing with almost nothing,” she added, saying that 80 per cent of the shelters opened by the Lebanese government — mostly in schools — were now full.

▲  1012 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2yrs2Y

A Moment of Darkness': Washington Post's No-Endorsement Decision Ignites Media Firestorm

Even though the presidential race between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris is neck and neck, The Washington Post has decided not to make a presidential endorsement for the first time in 36 years, the publisher and CEO announced Friday."We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates," Will Lewis wrote in an opinion piece published on the paper's website. He referenced the paper's policy in the decades prior to 1976, when, following the Watergate scandal that the Post broke, it endorsed Democratic nominee Jimmy Carter. The last time the Post did not endorse a presidential candidate in the general election was 1988, according to a search of its archives.Colleagues learned the news from the editorial page editor, David Shipley, at a tense meeting shortly before Lewis' announcement. The meeting was characterized by someone with direct knowledge of discussions on condition of anonymity to speak about internal matters.Shipley said that he told other editorial board leaders Thursday by management that there would be no endorsement, though he has known for weeks. He added that he "owns" this decision. The reason he cited was to create "independent space" where the newspaper does not tell people for whom to vote.Colleagues were said to be "shocked" and uniformly negative. Post corporate spokespeople have not responded to multiple messages left by NPR on the subject.Former Washington Post Executive Editor Martin Baron, who led the newsroom to acclaim during Trump's presidency, denounced the decision starkly."This is cowardice, a moment of darkness that will leave democracy as a casualty," Baron said in a statement to NPR. "Donald Trump will celebrate this as an invitation to further intimidate The Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos (and other media owners). History will mark a disturbing chapter of spinelessness at an institution famed for courage."A similar decision by Los Angeles Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong led this week to the resignations of the paper's editorials editor and two editorial board members. Soon-Shiong said that he had asked the editorial board to draft a "factual analysis" of Trump and Harris' policies and plans. In her resignation letter, editorials editor Mariel Garza said the decision made the paper look “craven and hypocritical,” given its past reporting and editorials on Trump.

▲  1013 replies