More People Should be Helped by the Government into College

"You say that the government would be bankrupted because of this. But, if people were to make more money they would be paying a larger income tax and spending more money, thus improving the economy." My opponent reiterates his point that larger incomes would lead to larger income taxes. I must repeat my point that incomes will not increase. Companies do not pay more for someone just because of a degree, they pay according to how much money they make and how much money they can afford to pay someone. Someone with a college education can beat out those with poorer levels of education for jobs. But when everyone has an equal shot at the same level of education, competition ceases to exist and the money difference is minimal. Hence, the cost to the middle class in terms of tax for this proposal is enormous compared to the nearly non-existent increase in pay. "Though I admit that there is an unemployment rate, this would not necessarily raise it. It would merely mean an increase of jobs that aren't common in America, such as physicists, chemists, engineers, etc. Thus leading us to greater technological advancement." I hate to say this, but my opponent is incorrect in saying that those jobs are not common in the United States. Plenty of physicists, chemists, and engineers have trouble finding jobs. And I use those terms loosely. Many people who major in chemistry, physics, or engineering have trouble finding employment. Further saturating those fields would only lead to more hardship. Besides, larger quantity does not necessarily mean better quality. More on that later. "Then there are the kids who can't afford to go to college, who have the intellect, but not the dough." I say, "tough luck". The only beneficiaries of this would be the kids in extraordinarily poor neighborhoods. I don't mean to sound politically incorrect, but to pour money into that would be a gigantic waste. Professionals for the most part, arise from the middle class. The intellect required to be a professional comes from living in better environments and having a good childhood. Pouring billions of dollars into poor neighborhoods in the hopes that the one possible doctor or one possible lawyer will arise is just absurd because then you would cripple the middle class into forcing their kids into worse schools since their money has to go to paying poor kids to waste their time in some community college for a degree in underwater basket weaving instead of putting their own kid through medical school. "People would still have to meet the high standards of colleges to get accepted." That's ridiculous. As there are very demanding colleges, there are also colleges where the only prerequisite for admission is being able to breathe. There are plenty of colleges where students just show up to lecture and take tests as a formality, learning absolutely nothing and coming out with a garbage degree. "Seeing how America is spending $1,000 dollars a second in Iraq it would stand to reason that we can send Americans to a better future in medicine or engineering or finances, instead of to their deaths!" I agree. This is why I am in support of granting free acceptance to state colleges for all college age men and women enrolled in the military. However, your reasoning is that by throwing money at poor people, we can turn them all into doctors and lawyers. *********************************************************************** I think this debate has gotten quite confusing because of all the different issues. Let me simplify them: 1. My opponent's plan would take middle class kids out of college and put poor kids into college. There are more productive middle class people than there are potentially productive poor people. Overall, we LOWER the amount of skill in the work force. 2. My opponent's plan would increase unemployment because it would skyrocket the number of people majoring in things they expect to pay off while the number of jobs available remain the same. 3. My opponent's plan would raise taxes massively and it wouldn't be fair. How would people who don't want to go to college benefit from this? How would older individuals who have already graduated benefit from this? What about people who don't want to have children? There is absolutely no foreseeable, positive outcome from my opponent's proposal. All of it is guesswork based on shallow reasoning and naivetï¿½.