Do your kids qualify for needs-based financial aid for college?

[ENT Doc]

So just to make sure I'm clear, you're saying this discrimination is bad, but they should absolutely be allowed to do it.

Well, I'll give you your freedom-lover title back. But I don't know how outraged you can be if they're doing something that you fully believe they ought to be able to do.

Again, see my previous example. One can be quite enraged about things the first amendment provides for yet still want the first amendment. And yes I’m outraged by the fact that these colleges (and mainly our government) set up a second tier system of taxation. I think double taxation ticks a lot of people off.

[AR]

Again, see my previous example. One can be quite enraged about things the first amendment provides for yet still want the first amendment. And yes I’m outraged by the fact that these colleges (and mainly our government) set up a second tier system of taxation. I think double taxation ticks a lot of people off.

But just to be clear, as outraged as you are, you think they absolutely ought to be allowed to do it.

[ENT Doc]

But just to be clear, as outraged as you are, you think they absolutely ought to be allowed to do it.

Based on current law I do. Would I be opposed to a law preventing discrimination based on ability to pay? Not sure. That’s a very slippery slope and typically the more the government interferes with the market the more it screws it up. Case in point: topic of this thread.

[Tim]

afan
"I live in the US and I want the economy to be as productive as possible. I want society to progress as rapidly as possible. For those things to happen, we need the most, best, smart, well educated people trying to accomplish those goals. If the entry is limited to those whose parents can afford the bill, then we are all worse off. Viewed purely from my narrow self interest, the system would be better if it provides even more help than it does to kids of lesser means."

This is called a sense of civic duty and charity. The problem is the government or university funding for reasons that are not simply need and merit based. Then passing the bill to those that may have actually been better qualified leaving them with a bill. There is a breakeven point, what would have been affordable is now not. Opportunity removed or made more expensive. The goal of the "best, smart, well educated people" is not achieved. Not due to your charity, but due to the system.

[AR]

Based on current law I do. Would I be opposed to a law preventing discrimination based on ability to pay? Not sure. That’s a very slippery slope and typically the more the government interferes with the market the more it screws it up. Case in point: topic of this thread.

That's fine. It's just that when most people say that a certain type of discrimination is terrible, they would be in favor of the government ending it. And if you don't think they should, it's hard to believe that you think it is as truly terrible as you claim it is.

"Man, this discrimination is awful, but I don't think the government should do anything about it" is just not a position that most people have for obvious reasons. Even though it makes perfect sense if you substitute kneeling during the anthem.