College Tuition Inflation.

Sounds more like the set up in a major corporation. Given the choice of seeing such things, I would rather see it provided to universities as they actually produce a highly valued and worthwhile product.

I went right to the top the heap.
http://vpf-web.harvard.edu/annualfinancial/
If I didn't believe the faculty and administration of universities should be highly compensated for the job they do, I might question a portion of this, but as I believe they should, I don't.

I would not be in support of a bare bones policy in regard to the university experience. That would be the community college experience.

If there is waste, I am sure it's being addressed. It's a business, and like most other business, rooting out inefficiency is a top priority.
For the record, I don't consider top salaries for faculty and administration to be a waste.

Can you cite your reference regarding "Fancy homes for Presidents and top administrators"?
It may be that the university provides very nice digs off campus for their tenure, but I would imagine the residences are owned by the universities themselves.

I'd be curious to know, either way.

 

Perhaps it is best for you to look at data and then come to your own conclusion - I understand that what is clear to me is not clear to you and some others. Here is a good place to start:

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/

 

Ace, it is clear that tuition has risen signficantly over the years.

What is not clarified by the above is your statement that "for every dollar in aid given by the government we see a corresponding increase in tuition...."

As I pointed out, government (state) aid to higher ed has been on the decline for most of the last decade:

According to research conducted by the State Higher Education Executive Officers (SHEEO), educational appropriations per full-time student reached a high of $7,961 in FY 2001, followed by four years of decline from FY 2002 to FY 2005 (after the 2001 recession). Per student funding then increased in fiscal years 2006, 2007 and 2008, recovering to $7,220. In FY 2009, appropriations per student fell by 4 percent due to the onset of the latest recession and declined to $6,928 per student as states struggled with massive revenue shortfalls. Appropriations per student remained lower in FY 2009 (in constant dollars) than in most years since FY 1980.1​

http://www.ncsl.org/documents/fiscal/HigherEdFundingFINAL.pdf​

So on the surface, it would seem the reverse is closer to the truth - for every dollar decline in government aid to higher ed, we see a corresponding increase in tuition.​

I assume that you are talking about govt aid to students (tuition assistance) and I am talking about govt (state) aid to the institutions (state systems of higher ed).​

IMO, the fact that state aid to higher ed is at the lowest level (per student) in 30 years adversely impacts the overall operating costs of the system and ultimately how those costs are covered (or passed on).​

 

In the report I cited, table 28 shows that the expenditures on higher education as a percentage of GDP was 3.3% in 2009. It was 2.5% in 1999. The trend has been increasing. Looking at table 32 you will see that the per capita expenditures on higher education is $734 - this chart does not show trends (feel free to dig into the prior years for comparisons) but I doubt anyone assumes the number is smaller now than in the past.

http://www.ncsl.org/documents/fiscal/HigherEdFundingFINAL.pdf​

I would love to see someone actually take the time to reconcile the conflicting data, I do not plan to. I use the source below for comparison because it links to other sources and it puts the point in narrative form:​

http://www.custudentloans.org/2010/...2010-2011-says-new-report-from-college-board/

I am not trying to prove anything in particular on this subject, I am just going where the data takes me. Whatever the reason cost are increasing at what I consider an unacceptable rate and accountability is lacking because I think the "game" is rigged.​