Don't international students subsidize domestic students because they pay much higher tuition? I'm not sure how reducing their numbers would be a good thing, at least for domestic students.
>tax college endowments
Endowments come from donations, not tuition, and if anything they subsidize the tuition. At best taxing them would be breaking the piggy bank for a one time cash infusion.
>remove higher education non profit status
Eliminating non-profit status won't matter when the institutions are blowing all that revenue on bloated staff.
>and let the higher education industrial complex collapse in on itself.
Based on this and your other suggestions, it seems like you're more interested in smashing the "higher education industrial complex" rather than fixing it.
Colleges prefer international students because they pay full tuition without any aid whatsoever. Eliminating student loans would then encourage colleges to seek students abroad and lobby for their entry into the country. See Canada.
Endowments are almost entirely used for dubious things like sports and football programs which have a nebulous educational value at best and a negative impact at worst. If you were aware of the industry (which you're not down d00ter) you'd know that there are efforts by the government to already start taxing sports and football programs in particular because of how much money these programs bring in.
Eliminating the non profit status allows business taxes to be collected from bloated college programs, sports, and more.
The goal is to return higher education to its pre 1960s status of being affordable from basic income and not a 4 year long resort with learning sprinkled on top.
>Colleges prefer international students because they pay full tuition without any aid whatsoever. Eliminating student loans would then encourage colleges to seek students abroad and lobby for their entry into the country. See Canada.
How is that bad? Should we ban work visas as well because they encourage companies to lobby for workers to immigrate to the US? Maybe we should ban state sponsorship for education as well, because that would encourage students and parents to lobby for tuition subsidies.
>Endowments are almost entirely used for dubious things like sports and football programs which have a nebulous educational value at best and a negative impact at worst. If you were aware of the industry (which you're not down d00ter) you'd know that there are efforts by the government to already start taxing sports and football programs in particular because of how much money these programs bring in.
The logical conclusion for that would be "ban/tax sports programs", not "tax endowments".
>Eliminating the non profit status allows business taxes to be collected from bloated college programs, sports, and more.
This doesn't address my previous comment. Taxes are collected on profit. If they're indeed "bloated", then there wouldn't be much profit to collect from in the first place, because all the money is being spent on bloat.
It's "bad" because the venn diagram of the people who scoff at higher education AND think immigration into our country is a fundamentally bad thing is almost a perfect circle.
???
Don't international students subsidize domestic students because they pay much higher tuition? I'm not sure how reducing their numbers would be a good thing, at least for domestic students.
>tax college endowments
Endowments come from donations, not tuition, and if anything they subsidize the tuition. At best taxing them would be breaking the piggy bank for a one time cash infusion.
>remove higher education non profit status
Eliminating non-profit status won't matter when the institutions are blowing all that revenue on bloated staff.
>and let the higher education industrial complex collapse in on itself.
Based on this and your other suggestions, it seems like you're more interested in smashing the "higher education industrial complex" rather than fixing it.