To: JohnM who wrote (242276 ) 1/16/2014 12:25:14 AM From: Bread Upon The Water Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 541685 That's some high class disassembling alight. You may be right about the reasons for rising and falling tuition, but the point brought out in the article was that in this/these particular instance(s) noted the tuition was specifically raised on one economic group in order to subsidize another. It had nothing to do with all those other differences you note. Sure the universities subsidize "talent" of one sort or another, but they don't make blanket tuition differences just based on economic class (before now). And I have, for one, have never heard of such an approach until now. It's class warfare on the middle class is what it is. And again, I don't have a problem with this as long as it gets done after open debate about it at the University policy level. It may be for the good of society we decide that is the direction we want to take in education and if so fine. Just don't hide the policy in among the the university administrators. (And to further muddy the waters this tuition policy, and the hiding of it, is akin to the deceptive camouflage put up by the President when the AFCA was passed. There was never open debate the young subsidizing the old back then because of statements like "if you like your insurance policy you can keep it.") The tuition alternative is for the lesser economic class to incur more debt. It's their situation and they have the means to solve it if they wish. Additionally, any kid can with a high school degree and normal physicality can join the Navy or the Air Force, thus minimizing his/her exposure to combat, and come out in 4 years with a pretty much free ride thru college guaranteed via the GI Bill. So it's not as if we are closing off opportunities for the economically disadvantaged to receive a higher education.