Equity Implications of State Tuition Policy and Student Loans

Hartman, Robert W.

doi:10.1086/259992

Cited by 41 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Longitudinal data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY) used here 1 Some of the important contributions at the time were Hansen andWeisbrod (1969, 1971) , Hansen (1970), Hartman(1972), and Pechman(1970Pechman( , 1972. 2 An example is Moore(1978).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Public Subsidies to Higher Education Regressive?

Johnson

2006

Education Finance and Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper estimates the dollar amount of public higher education subsidies received by U.S. youth and examines the distribution of subsidies and the taxes which finance them across parental and student income levels. Although youths from highincome families obtain more benefit from higher education subsidies, high-income households pay sufficiently more in taxes that the net effect of the spending and associated taxation is distributionally neutral or mildly progressive. These results are robust to alternative assumptions and are consistent with Hansen and Weisbrod's earlier celebrated findings for California, although not with the conclusions often drawn from those findings. *I appreciate helpful comments by

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Public Subsidies to Higher Education Regressive?

Johnson

2006

Education Finance and Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Hansen & Weisbrod, 1969a, p. 78) The authors' conclusions were quite controversial, and were debated in academic and policy settings for almost a decade (Carnegie Commission, 1973;Cohn et al, 1970;Hansen & Weisbrod, 1969aHartman, 1970Hartman, , 1976McGuire, 1976;Pechman, 1970;Windham, 1976;Zwerling, 1973). If it was true that the extensive and complex program of higher education subsidies in the country did more to benefit high income than low income students, there was no argument to be made for the support of higher education subsidies as a progressive redistribution program.…”

Section: Redistribution Through Higher Education Subsidies: the Histomentioning

confidence: 99%

Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research

Smart¹

2007

Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research

853

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

All Rights Reserved © 2007 SpringerNo part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the exception of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work.

show abstract

“…This is because the opt-out condition that repayments must equal 150 percent of the loan plus a break-even finance charge is too much of a deterrent to the very rich class. This has prompted the view that "the unfortunate thing about Yale's program is that Yale is not the government and cannot compel participation" (Hartman, 1972). Obviously if Yale could compel participation, those members of the student class who eventually earn the lowest incomes would be better off because their repayment rates could be reduced.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%