We’ve covered the Pittsburgh mayor’s plan to place a 1% tax on tuition in Pittsburgh in the past and now it looks like we’ll be covering the topic quite a bit in the future. The NY Times’s Ian Urbina writes in from home of the Steelers with news that the mayor is serious about it and — get this- other mayors of college-bound cities are watching, hoping and praying.
As before, I can’t decide who bothers me more: the cities piling on the back of the students or the colleges with their righteous claim to all of the freedom of private business (unfettered tuition increases!!) and all of the benefits of a charity (no taxes!!!).
I think that Mr. Urbina did a pretty good job of drilling down to the core dispute: Pittsburgh wants to fund the fancy retirement pensions on the backs of the next generation. The demographics of the United States make it clear that there’s going to be a massive battle between the baby boomers who expect a well-padded retirement and the next generation who don’t have any money. The city probably figures that they can get the next generation to put another 1% on the old student loans to pay for more unlimited retiree health care. After all they’re “good debt”.
This is going to be a brutal battle that won’t end soon. It’s much deeper than whether the schools should put in a new climbing wall or another latte bar. The size of the cash piles at stake are massive and it will be a massive cross-generational battle with questions like, “Do we give retired cops medical insurance or do we make it possible for another 10% of the population to go to college?”
Related posts:
- Pittsburgh to tax student tuition?
- Retirement, Health Care and College Loans?
- Smart young man misses the obvious
- Poor Marjorie Dillon
- Slump hits the well-educated too?!
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds
BlogoSquare