[renewiltord]

I'm with you. I believe that we need the following reform:

* Information Reform: Schools should be required to report median income of graduating class by major by year (with number of declined-to-disclose). Students should know what they're going to get out of this program.

* Incentive Alignment: School programs above a certain cost should only be payable either up-front or via income share agreement. Schools should only be paid if their education yielded economic gain for students but students should be permitted escape valves if possible.

* Bankruptcy Reform: Student loans should be discharged in bankruptcy, ISAs should not.

[vineyardmike]

> education yielded economic gain for student

What a sad narrow view of education.

I recognize that for many education is a vocational experience meant to provide accesss to better jobs, but really education can be so much more broad and valuable.

[renewiltord]

I think it is very rude of you to have removed the other part of that sentence that addressed that. To then insult me based on this misreading is really boorish. If you are interested in conversing with me, please do not do that.

Now, for anyone else reading for whom it wasn't clear: I want schools to primarily receive economic benefit by providing economic benefit but (quoting from above) I believe students should have an escape valve to pay for education that does not have direct economic benefit. I believe that paying upfront is sufficient as an escape valve.

[vineyardmike]

It was not meant to be an insult, i simply think framing higher education against economic gain at all misses a lot of the value people derive from attending.

> Schools should only be paid if their education yielded economic gain for students but students should be permitted escape valves if possible.

This sentence reads (to me) as if "schools should only get paid if it leads to students making money" and the "escape valve" part seems like "students have an escape from paying when its not profitable" not "they can pay when its not profitable".

Under your new wording, I think that i still disagree. I think schools should charge however they want and instead of regulating how private institutions receive income, we should ensure that there are affordable options focused on vocational outcomes (state-run schools) that are so affordable that they are always economically gainful.

Some taxes are already based on income, so maybe in a profit-sharing model, attending state school is free but you share X% of income in taxes per credit-hour or per-semester until a certain cost is repaid to the state. (eg. a 100 credit hour degree costs 10% income at 0.1% per credit hour until $50k is repaid while a drop-out who attended for a single 15 credit hour semester pays 1.5%, while Harvard can charge 50k per semester up front to any one willing, regardless of outcome)