Michael O'Hare is anxious to prove that he can play with the big kids - that would be the free market conservatives. Specifically he wants to end government support for higher education:

The economics of the issue are pretty cut-and-dried if we think higher education is only about job skills for alumni. In that model, it’s an investment, the alums make money from it (better jobs and higher pay), and so students should pay full tuition and if they don’t have it up front, take loans.  The “problem”, if there is one, is just a capital market failure.  If schools want to compete for better students with scholarships and such, or if California wants to bribe stars to come here for college because they tend to stay here afterwards, they are free to do so, and how nice for the A students; otherwise full tuition is the rule and college accessibility is a matter for banks.

On this theory, a state giving students from poor families a free or cheap ride, however you set it up,  is a well-meaning but ill-targeted idea, because most won’t be poor when they graduate, because some will leave the state after graduation, and because in-kind subsidies are generally bad practice. If you want to help the poor, give money to the poor (including poor college graduates teaching in bad K-12 schools or lawyering in the public defenders’ office), and lend it to the about-to-be-not-poor.

Which creates a serious issue for people who care about income distribution - and Wonks Anonymous guesses the Mr. O'Hare counts himself in their number.

If we give poor people money because they are poor then we are accused of taking income from the righteous Chosen of God and giving it to the shiftless and morally deficient.

On the other hand, if we offer them an opportunity to invest in themselves and improve their earning power then they become future rich people, undeserving of our help. We need to make sure that these future plutocrats pay their way which is best accomplished by charging the full cost of their education and leaving them over their heads in debt upon graduation.

At this point, if they decide to enter a public service job, they might just be poor enough to qualify for welfare and the righteous scorn of the Chosen of God.

Such a land of opportunity. If you work hard and study then you can spend the rest of your life living just a little better than you would if you didn't work hard while you pay most of your additional earnings over to the banks.

Mr. O'Hare mentions that he attended Harvard. Wonks Anonymous presumes that he did so at the expense of his parents. Wonks Anonymous presumes that they decided to give Mr. O'Hare this in-kind subsidy because they judged this to be the best way to assure his full and equal participation in our complex modern society.

Mr. O'Hare's parents were right and, if Mr. O'Hare believes that it is good to help the poor, then Wonks Anonymous can only wonder: If massive educational subsidies from parents are good for rich kids why aren't massive educational subsidies from the government good for the poor.