Try the political quiz
@BC7VQP8Socialist Agreements3mos ago

It provides a more merit based approach to the collage system and allows for more higher level educated people

+
Expand

Knowledge quiz

How much do you know about Education?

See if you know more than the average American.

Test your knowledge!

12 Replies

 @BC89647 from South Carolina  disagreed…3mos3MO

College does not fully yield the benefits it offers for everyone. It is made by the experience of who attends. But this is a monetary issue, college tuition is absurdly high and the government paying for it may be detrimental to the deficit. Additionally, many people in college don't even get anything out of it or go a completely different direction.

 @BC88RDYRepublican from South Dakota  disagreed…3mos3MO

People would do it just to go sit on their couch and collect unemployment or benefits becuase they are lazy and they would go to collage and get it paid for so they dont have to live a working life.

 @BC9QQ9H  from MP  disagreed…3mos3MO

It would completely disappoint the hardworkers of society that gained their money through merit from organizations. Suddenly Handing out free college would shift a student's effort to continue their civil service.

 @BC9T2WP from Ohio  agreed…3mos3MO

College isn't necessary but should be accesible to all, giving everyone an equal opportunity to do more and be well educated, the only issue would be job opportunities would be harder to guarantee, but this could be avoided if these students end up making their own businesses in the process.

 @BC9HCDJ from Oklahoma  agreed…3mos3MO

I do agree. We should be striving for a well-educated and well-fed society. Anything contrary to this is just feudalism masquerading as “fair economics”

 @BC9F3X6 from Texas  agreed…3mos3MO

It allows people elligible not face any economic hardships and attend college with their intelligence.

 @BC92JV2 from South Carolina  agreed…3mos3MO

I feel like college should be free because people already made sacrifices to even get through highschool so the least they can do is pay for people to get in college.

 @BC8WC9P from New York  agreed…3mos3MO

I think college being free would mess up the economy and not provide other jobs such as the military with enough people.

 @BC88BY2 from Arizona  agreed…3mos3MO

ngl i dont agree with that i think its cool the way it is but i think colleges tuitions should be a lot cheaper just not free cus if its free everything would basically be a community college and theyd let anybody in

 @BC88CPL from California  agreed…3mos3MO

Everyone has the right to an education. Making it cost thousands of dollars prevents many from attending.

 @BC886YPPeace and Freedom from Arizona  agreed…3mos3MO

I think the idea of free college for all is really appealing because education shouldn’t be limited by someone’s financial situation. It could create more equal opportunities and help people pursue careers they’re passionate about without being held back by debt. However, I also think there needs to be a clear plan for how it would be funded, because taxpayers would ultimately carry that cost. Maybe a balanced approach

 @BC85HK5 from Missouri  agreed…3mos3MO

The college system shouldn´t just be for a more higher level educated people becauase it should be for everyone regardless.

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.

@BC7VQP8

Last activeActivity2 discussionsInfluence1 engagementsEngagement bias100%Audience bias100%Active in
Counter Arguments  1 Disagreements  1 Agreements  1
PartySocialistLocationUnknown

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