I always value spirited debate so no worries from me.
Yes, debate is how we all learn and grow.
One point of clarification though, i didn't say tuition should match future income. I said student loan rates should. Connecting future job prospects on the ability to repay seems a very easy to understand system that would create a more efficient work force.
Fair enough, and I agree. Here's an idea - prohibit interest on student loans. Force lenders to accept return in the form of a percentage of future income. Allow then to consider the student's major, GPA, and progress in making lending decisions. Consideration of the quality of the security offered is a factor in all other kinds of lending, why not with student loans? Why shouldn't the engineering major with a 3.8 GPA completing 18 units a semester get a better rate that the philosophy major with a 2.0 who can only get through 9-12 units a semester?
No having said that... I disagree whole heartedly with tax payer dollars funding it...
I think this is a narrow view, though I respect it. The idea behind tax payer subsidies for higher education is that an educated workforce benefits the entire "community" whether that is the city, state, or the entire country. You will find few large businesses, though usually having a conservative political view on other topics, that take your position on this one. They need educated workers to make money.
In my days as an executive I went to several "pow wows" with senior government officials in a particular state (not my own) that was trying to attract high tech business. Their schools were horrible though from elementary right through college. There were several multibillion dollar firms considering opening new operations in this state. The message to the state officials was clear - we're not spending $5 billion to build a plant until we can be assured of an adequate supply of competent local employees. And if your elementary schools don't improve, we won't be able to transfer people there - they'll quit instead.
Now, almost 10 years later, none of the proposed operations in that state have moved forward, one large existing plant has closed, and one of the large companies has completely pulled out of the state. The schools there are still abyssmal. I don't know for certain if the education situation was the cause but I know for a fact that it mattered to these companies and they most definitely expected substantial state support.
You can also find strong relationships worldwide among education spending and economic prosperity.
I'm not saying we should through tax dollars at schools. In Arizona the schools are terrible and I think they already get too much money that they waste. But I think some level of taxpayer subsidy from kindergarten through graduate school is imperative and benefits all of us, as long as it is accompanied by competent administration and management.