zlacker

All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

submitted by pessim+(OP) on 2023-07-23 21:24:03 | 737 points 525 comments
[view article] [source] [go to bottom]

NOTE: showing posts with links only show all posts
◧◩
3. tarr11+95[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-23 21:59:25
>>starsi+H
also free lunches in schools

https://www.nycfoodpolicy.org/states-that-have-passed-univer...

◧◩◪
21. JumpCr+38[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-23 22:19:20
>>ecf+n7
> my sister who had a masters and is making $35k as a teacher Tennessee

If it's a public school, those loans should begin falling off after five years and be forgiven after ten [1].

[1] https://www.forbes.com/advisor/student-loans/teacher-student...

◧◩◪
30. bushba+x8[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-23 22:22:02
>>hotpot+48
In California it’s ~85% of high school students graduate on average across all demographics

https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/ad/datasummary.asp

66. armcha+Ia[view] [source] 2023-07-23 22:34:50
>>pessim+(OP)
I thought this was already a thing. It turns out to be partially covered in 35 states:

> As of 2021, there are 35 states that have some type of statewide postsecondary education tuition waiver or scholarship program for students who have been in foster care.

> 24 states have statewide tuition waivers: Alaska[1], Arizona, California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, (Dark blue color on the map)

> 4 states have state funded grant programs for students in foster care are: Ohio, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Virginia. (Light blue color on the map)

> 7 states have state funded scholarship programs for students in foster care are: Alabama, Arkansas, Iowa, Michigan, New York, North Carolina, and Washington. (Purple color on the map)

> 16 states and the District of Columbia have only the Federal Chafee Educational Training Voucher: Colorado, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Vermont, Wisconsin and Wyoming (Yellow color on the map)

https://depts.washington.edu/fostered/tuition-waivers-state (bonus points for software gore right below the title)

What I was thinking of was the Chafee Educational Training Voucher, which gives up to a $5000/year reimbursement:

> Students can get up to $5,000 per academic year based on cost of attendance, available funds, the student’s unmet financial need.

> Note: For the federal fiscal year 2022, the voucher’s maximum annual amount was temporarily increased to $12,000. On Oct. 1, 2022, the maximum award will revert to $5,000 per year.

https://studentaid.gov/sites/default/files/foster-youth-vouc...

◧◩◪◨
69. j45+La[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-23 22:35:17
>>INGSOC+N9
Equality is very different than equity.

https://onlinepublichealth.gwu.edu/resources/equity-vs-equal...

◧◩
104. ekam+yd[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-23 22:55:27
>>Racing+dc
The state only takes care of kids if a court assumes jurisdiction under WIC 300. You can only voluntarily give ups kid within the first few days of birth (this is known as safe surrender https://advokids.org/legal-tools/safe-surrender/) otherwise courts usually assume jurisdiction due to cases of abuse, neglect, abandonment, etc
◧◩◪◨⬒
160. nobody+Lh[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-23 23:26:38
>>ttfkam+Rd
>Somehow European countries pull it off without bankrupting themselves.

While providing universal health care to a similar number of folks and with a smaller aggregate economy.

Those Europeans must be cooking the books, eh? /s

US GDP[0]: $25,462,700 million

Aggregate EU GDP[1]: 15.8 trillion euros

N.B.: USD/Euro Exchange rate (23 July 2023)[2]: 0.89 Euro == 1 US Dollar.

[0[ https://countryeconomy.com/gdp/usa?year=2022

[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/279447/gross-domestic-pr...

[2] https://www.xe.com/currencyconverter/convert/?Amount=1&From=...

◧◩◪◨⬒
174. rayine+Ei[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-23 23:32:27
>>jewayn+kd
I’m convinced this is a structural characteristic of America, resulting from the immigration patterns that built the population.

If you look at polls worldwide, most people wouldn’t leave their home country even if they had the choice to emigrate somewhere else: https://news.gallup.com/poll/468218/nearly-900-million-world.... In South Asia, where I’m from, it’s just 11%. Even in sub-Saharan Africa it’s under 40%. Immigrants are the outliers who are willing to leave everything they know behind.

Of course over time there’s regression to the mean, and new communities form here in the US. But most of the US population traces their ancestry only back to the late 19th century or early 20th century. This constant population turnover means there’s a very limited ability to develop the kind of solidarity required to make sacrifices on behalf of strangers in your community.

◧◩◪◨
195. johnny+kk[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-23 23:44:59
>>ttfkam+qd
No secret that society is a metaphorical group of crabs in a bucket at times:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crab_mentality

219. kepler+Hl[view] [source] 2023-07-23 23:54:41
>>pessim+(OP)
Too bad we'll fail to give those kids a proper math education well before they reach college.

https://calmatters.org/education/2021/11/california-math/

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧
223. buggle+Yl[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-23 23:56:53
>>phpist+Hk
Try reading a newspaper?

https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-pol-ca-gavin-newsom-san-...

◧◩◪◨⬒
247. coffee+Un[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-24 00:18:36
>>jewayn+kd
America is the most charitable country in the world[1]. But, as evidenced by the parent's comment, there is no shortage of people willing to spend other people's money, and Americans are justifiably cautious of that.

[1] https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/most-char...

◧◩
250. zzzeek+ao[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-24 00:20:44
>>getmei+F5
Being Black in America is actually a specific situation with structural inequality baked in. It is strictly based on skin color and it is backed up by a significant number of studies, as well as observed by its actual victims [1]

[1] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/11/15/black-ame...

254. xmddmx+Bo[view] [source] 2023-07-24 00:24:06
>>pessim+(OP)
This idea is not really new - the California Master Plan for Education essentially promised a free higher education to everyone in California. In 1960. [1]

As these things go, the plan was eroded over time, with the (in)famous Proposition 13 of 1978 dealing a big blow.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Master_Plan_for_Hig...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
267. JumpCr+ap[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-24 00:29:58
>>j45+Gm
> Would you say Equality and equity are the same?

It depends on with whom I'm speaking. Even the Wikipedia page for the former is a disambiguation [1].

The historical (and international) use of the former is closer to that of egalitarianism [2]. I fail to see what is gained by redefining equality and creating the term equity when equal opportunity vs. equality of outcome has decades of scholarship behind it, to say nothing of being clearer on first glance.

I don't know enough to render judgement. But it smells like the tail-chasing semantics the social sciences love, randomly re-appropriating jargon instead of debating the underlying problem.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egalitarianism

◧◩◪
272. noneth+Fp[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-24 00:34:22
>>veave+vk
Honestly we'd be better off cutting out everything political and err on the side of being over-inclusive with "political." California deserves to be dunked on for a lot of things but should hacker news be the place for that?

I'm sure someone will glibly informs me that "everything is political". So please tell me how "High-Performance server for NATS.io, the cloud and edge native messaging system"[1] is political like this discussion about controversial public policy. Clearly, and thankfully, there is a spectrum.

[1] >>36820544

◧◩◪
307. travis+us[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-24 00:59:30
>>pirate+Xe
We've had the HOPE scholarship[1] for a very long time now too. Funded by the state lottery.

[1] - https://www.tn.gov/collegepays/money-for-college/tn-educatio...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
359. krapp+VD[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-24 02:32:04
>>dopido+OA
>How would be paying people minimum wage to batch cook food from scratch with local produce be more expensive ?

Local produce is more expensive, as is cooking from scratch[0]. Another problem is that won't scale. You can't feed millions of kids twice a day every weekday from the local farmers' market.

[0] https://www.vox.com/videos/2018/3/22/17152460/healthy-eating...

> how would be our Republicans friends do lunch for schools? Every kids bring a box ?

Make them pay for it. If they can't pay, they don't eat.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
364. Rebelg+AE[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-24 02:37:30
>>Rebelg+ba
Adding on to this a bit, if the ruling elite's children did eat the same cafeteria good, I think it would be a net boon for society.

Think of how every family in Finland taking home a newborn baby gets a box of starter supplies. The box doubles as a crib, so most babies, regardless of their parents wealth, spend their first days sleeping in the same cardboard box.

IMO it's cool as shit to start everyone off the same way like that. From what I understand it also helps reduce the sort of stigma that can hurt kids taking advantage of free lunch programs

[1]: https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22751415.amp

◧◩
373. slavbo+2G[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-24 02:53:12
>>xmddmx+Bo
There is this meme that Prop 13 is responsible for everything bad in California because of course we could pay for anything if we had more money. In reality the CA budget has grown faster than inflation for decades. https://www.statista.com/statistics/313176/california-state-...
◧◩◪◨
386. gcanyo+5J[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-24 03:24:55
>>xmddmx+Iq
>50 years ago...50% graduation rate

cite? This seems to be saying the graduation rate was between 80 and 85% back in 1972: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/are-americas-rising-high-...

◧◩◪◨
407. concep+cP[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-24 04:38:13
>>umeshu+KH
I’m gonna say you haven’t looked into how that money can be spent. About half goes into the school and rainy day fund, the stimulus checks were required by law for I think 16? So your question is “what did they do with 34B” which again… pretty easy to figure out. There’s a budget.

Looks like it was about 38b https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/4432

That link also has the allocations for that 38b. You can get 5Gb fiber in my neighborhood now. Some of that is probably due to this budget for instance.

◧◩◪
424. czDRZ-+hX[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-24 06:09:09
>>petsor+yG
Admissions data at UC Berkeley shows that nonresident students have historically been ~35% of admits, with 2022 at 28%. UCLA historically has had ~40% nonresident admits, with 2022 at 34%[0]. UCLA’s freshman profile shows that GPA and SAT/ACT scores (from when they were still required) are higher for nonresidents as well[1]. It’s reasonable to argue that resident admit percentage should be higher, but the idea that nonresidents are preferred isn’t supposed by admissions data.

As for the nonresident tuition issue, it seems like a matter of having the state make up the difference between resident and nonresident tuition so that the university receives the same fee regardless of residency status.

[0] https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/about-us/information-...

[1] https://admission.ucla.edu/apply/freshman/freshman-profile/2...

◧◩◪◨⬒
434. mvncle+p31[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-24 07:07:25
>>johnny+ft
> CA's population has tripled in 60 years

Somewhat unrelated, but several states have seen unexpected growth since that time period

Kind of hard to believe, but in 1950 Florida and Kentucky had about the same population. Since then Florida has 8x'ed (I think because of modern AC). Other states (especially in the south and southwest) have seen similar levels of growth to CA. I don't see how the problem you mentioned is specific to California

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_United_States_census

https://www.vox.com/2015/6/27/8854037/us-population-history-...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
448. throwa+od1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-24 08:36:32
>>lisper+NU
It's actually that "billionaires" will somehow produce a whole lot more things and pay for it all for everybody else, absolving themselves of any further rational thought or moral responsibility to those with less than themselves.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ee8GedvPmBU

◧◩◪
503. steven+Hp3[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-24 19:29:15
>>nxx788+mF
Nothing is free. It is estimated that state and local governments spend 9 percent of state and local direct general spending on higher education [1]. One could argue that the opportunity cost of higher education to taxpayers is 9% of their work life.

[1] https://www.urban.org/policy-centers/cross-center-initiative...

◧◩◪◨
522. dredmo+l1j[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-28 20:48:27
>>xmddmx+Iq
A 50% graduation rate for US secondary education had been attained by the 1947-48 school year, which is now 75 years ago. By 50 years ago (1972-73), the actual rate was 75%, among 17 year olds. (Note that some normal-schedule students would be graduating at age 18, and other statistics look at graduation or G.E.D. equivalent at later ages, e.g., 19 or 20.)

That said, yes, there was a dramatic increase in attendance and graduation from ~1900, when the graduation rate was about 6%.

US Department of Education, 120 Years of American Education: A Statistical Portrait, p 55, "Table 18 --- High school graduates, by sex and control of institution: 1869--70 to 1991--92"

<https://books.googleusercontent.com/books/content?req=AKW5Qa...> (PDF)

◧◩◪◨
523. ajju+15k[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-29 05:15:46
>>xmddmx+ar
A few loosely coupled thoughts on the subject - mostly to flesh out my own thinking

(tldr - in which I conclude that we agree on the goal but disagree on “which was easy to implement”, after thinking through my own educational / economical history at some length ;))

I benefited from:

* a nearly free and (luckily) high quality school education from kindergarten through 12th grade - most schools were not that great in my time, I lucked out (with parents who strived / persisted until they got me into the right one) * a nearly free but terrible education for my bachelors in engineering in India * a largely discounted and excellent post-graduate education in the US, paid for by my work as a research assistant, which I had to compete for, and that paid the equivalent of $375/month after taxes for working 20 hours a week with a full course load from which I paid my living expenses (in the early oughts - so i was poor :)), but came with a tuition waiver.

Here’s how it has led me to approach this subject:

* I definitely agree that the ideal of nearly free education for everyone that wants it is the right one for a richer society like America to strive for, but subject to some basic rules(eg maintain non-abysmal grades that reflect at least basic effort)

* Free just means someone else is paying for it - and that has its limits. In a free / subsidized college world, major states in India had (have?) so few engineering colleges that if you got less than 99%, you couldn’t study technology - at all! Barring a stroke of luck (family moving to another state where I at least got into a pretty bad engineering college) , I would have had to study economics instead of engineering.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/education/news/delhi-uni...

* Around the time of the article above (maybe a few years before) India started allowing private colleges to charge more. This has made education a lot more expensive in India on average, although I believe a similar number of “free seats” still exist, but the number of “seats” to study popular fields has gone up by on order of magnitude, and that has enabled a LOT more people to study what they want, but incomes have grown a lot too for white collar workers. For many (not all) fields, folks are able to take a loan and pay it back.

* If, for instance, the US government paid for just “degree granting post-secondary institutions” expenses, it would instantly become the #2 budget category just below social security and above health, medicare, “income security” and defense.

* It seems that 65% of US adults over 25 do not have a bachelors degree. It seems likely many of them will not support using their tax dollars to create a new #2 budget liability - despite the “chicken-or-egg” dynamic - that if the education was free, many of them would have a degree, and might support it.

[go to top]