Although I am not a proponent of a totally free educational system, I do believe there is some middle ground between a $30,000 state education and “free.” I’m not sure why people always choose to take these extreme sides in arguments, whether it’s abortion, gun control, health care or education, but that’s currently the climate we live in.

David Harsanyi’s Sunday column (Page 9A) made several not-well-thought-out points, the biggest being when he said, “Once colleges know that prospective students can get any loan for any major they desire, incurring no risk whatsoever, what motivation do these institutions have to offer a degree of value?” It’s almost as if he does not understand our college education system at all and how people are accepted into these universities and certain majors.

Does he not understand the competitive nature of these colleges? Whether it’s UW-Milwaukee, UW-Madison, Marquette University or Harvard, these colleges all have standards and reputations.

It would be completely irrelevant who is paying them for it. Not just anybody can get in, and just because you can afford MIT, UCLA or UW-Madison does not mean you can get in. It certainly doesn’t mean you get into the college of engineering or get a PhD in computer science just because you can now afford it and want it.

He either really does not understand how this works, or he is being purposefully misleading. I’m guessing the former.

TOM WAGNER

Frisco, Texas

Formerly of Janesville

3
1
0
0
3