View Full Version : Students Refuse to Sign Pledge to Pay Individual Share of the National Debt
red states rule
04-29-2011, 04:24 PM
This is classic! Yes, these college kids do not want to cut spending but they do NOT want to pay their share of the national debt either
Let someone else pick up the tab. Raise taxes on the "wealthy" but do NOT cut the government spending
These are are future leaders. YIKES!!!
<iframe width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4rDahs4cmuc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
fj1200
04-29-2011, 06:28 PM
At Cal? Surprised?
red states rule
04-30-2011, 03:42 AM
At Cal? Surprised?
I wonder if Gabby would have signed the pledge? Or would she went into a 30 minute rant on how only Republicans should sign the pledge since all of the debt is their fault?
What sort of an idiot would you have to be to sign a pledge in the knowledge that it involves you giving consent to be charged $47K because some random guy you just met sticks a pen and paper in your hand?
red states rule
04-30-2011, 01:36 PM
What sort of an idiot would you have to be to sign a pledge in the knowledge that it involves you giving consent to be charged $47K because some random guy you just met sticks a pen and paper in your hand?
That is not the point of the video
The freeloader kids want someone ELSE to pay for the debt - not them. But at the same time they do not want government to cut spending
They might not be able to get their handout
Same mentality shown by school kids in your country when they took to the street to protest they might have to pay for part of their education
That is not the point of the video
The freeloader kids want someone ELSE to pay for the debt - not them. But at the same time they do not want government to cut spending
They might not be able to get their handout
Same mentality shown by school kids in your country when they took to the street to protest they might have to pay for part of their education
No, exactly the point of the video.
I'm all in favour of eliminating deficits, tacking the national debt and having a stable and mintainable economy based on real growth not predicted growth (though that will never happen)
However, some bloke walks up to me and says 'sign this document to pay your share of the national debt' and he'd be told were to go.
As for the school kids in our country there where allot of politics involved in that, for example the liberal democrats where elected on the promise that not only would students not pay more than £3225 per year for tuition fees, not only that they said they would reduce it to £0 per year and pay for it with a national tax on graduates after they graduated and got a job. What did they do? They got into office, tripled the tution Cap to over £9000 per year and brought in a graduate tax too. The protests were because the Dems were idiotic enough to turn their back on a young engaged electorate who voted for them because they cared about that issue and felt betrayed at how the party they voted for (many with their first ever votes) had tarnished their promise to them.
logroller
04-30-2011, 03:15 PM
No, exactly the point of the video.
I'm all in favour of eliminating deficits, tacking the national debt and having a stable and mintainable economy based on real growth not predicted growth (though that will never happen)
However, some bloke walks up to me and says 'sign this document to pay your share of the national debt' and he'd be told were to go.
As for the school kids in our country there where allot of politics involved in that, for example the liberal democrats where elected on the promise that not only would students not pay more than £3225 per year for tuition fees, not only that they said they would reduce it to £0 per year and pay for it with a national tax on graduates after they graduated and got a job. What did they do? They got into office, tripled the tution Cap to over £9000 per year and brought in a graduate tax too. The protests were because the Dems were idiotic enough to turn their back on a young engaged electorate who voted for them because they cared about that issue and felt betrayed at how the party they voted for (many with their first ever votes) had tarnished their promise to them.
Government officials fail to fulfill campaign promises...say it ain't so! Maybe the next election promises will be fulfilled, or maybe the people need to make the changes. Given the history of poor performance by govt and an increasingly partisan public, odds for either are pretty low, so I suppose it'd be best to fold; but with the table stakes as high as they are, we gotta go all in. We, the people, gotta parlay our efforts. And maybe we'll lose, but the blind bets on govt are breaking us anyways, I'll take my chances with the people, atleast there's a possibility of winning.
Government officials fail to fulfill campaign promises...say it ain't so! Maybe the next election promises will be fulfilled, or maybe the people need to make the changes. Given the history of poor performance by govt and an increasingly partisan public, odds for either are pretty low, so I suppose it'd be best to fold; but with the table stakes as high as they are, we gotta go all in. We, the people, gotta parlay our efforts. And maybe we'll lose, but the blind bets on govt are breaking us anyways, I'll take my chances with the people, atleast there's a possibility of winning.
I dont think you understand the magnitude of the lib dems turning their backs on the students. If there is one policy that even people who knew little about politics new about the lib dems, they were the student party.
Idk what i fould say by way of a comparison, but something like imagine the Green Party getting into power and then commissioning two dozen new coal power plants be built asap.
This was the first chance the lib deems have had in government here in 80 odd years, and they took their flagship policy and binned it right infront of their voters faces.
Sorry of this is derailing.
logroller
04-30-2011, 06:29 PM
I dont think you understand the magnitude of the lib dems turning their backs on the students. If there is one policy that even people who knew little about politics new about the lib dems, they were the student party.
Idk what i fould say by way of a comparison, but something like imagine the Green Party getting into power and then commissioning two dozen new coal power plants be built asap.
This was the first chance the lib deems have had in government here in 80 odd years, and they took their flagship policy and binned it right infront of their voters faces.
Sorry of this is derailing.
I think you place too much faith in your elected officials. Their prerogitive to pander to the public is their prerogitive. Abhorrent to your moral standards perhaps, so vote 'em out. If indeed this student party represents the majority interest, officials shall benefit by implementing party demands; if not, lip-service is a likely consolation. I would suggest the likelihood such fees be offset by private donors, alumnus, industry and such. Find me a majority of persons willing to commit personally, and you shall not need your officials to offer the doleing of public funds. Alas, I suspect such sponsorship is insufficient, as is the legislative support for those lib dems when they attempt to fulfill the promises you had accepted. That's frustrating I understand, but I'd blame the people, not govt.
Kathianne
04-30-2011, 06:44 PM
Noir, while UK numbers look decent compared to US, I think they allow internet voting, no? Still have a problem with youth vote:
http://i56.tinypic.com/dzb4v7.png
Noir, while UK numbers look decent compared to US, I think they allow internet voting, no? Still have a problem with youth vote:
http://i56.tinypic.com/dzb4v7.png
No Internet voting,
Also, data from the last election, 2010 - http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemId=2613&view=wide
Turnout Rose in the 18-24 bracket to 44% with the subcategory of male 18-24 getting 50%
still not good enough but it's getting better (:
And the fact that the lib dems have done this will prob assure that many of those voters voting for the first time will be voting next time time against them as a protest.
Kathianne
04-30-2011, 07:05 PM
No Internet voting,
Also, data from the last election, 2010 - http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemId=2613&view=wide
Turnout Rose in the 18-24 bracket to 44% with the subcategory of male 18-24 getting 50%
still not good enough but it's getting better (:
And the fact that the lib dems have done this will prob assure that many of those voters voting for the first time will be voting next time time against them as a protest.
With the numbers comes the influence, that's bottom line.
red states rule
05-02-2011, 03:51 AM
No, exactly the point of the video.
I'm all in favour of eliminating deficits, tacking the national debt and having a stable and mintainable economy based on real growth not predicted growth (though that will never happen)
However, some bloke walks up to me and says 'sign this document to pay your share of the national debt' and he'd be told were to go.
As for the school kids in our country there where allot of politics involved in that, for example the liberal democrats where elected on the promise that not only would students not pay more than £3225 per year for tuition fees, not only that they said they would reduce it to £0 per year and pay for it with a national tax on graduates after they graduated and got a job. What did they do? They got into office, tripled the tution Cap to over £9000 per year and brought in a graduate tax too. The protests were because the Dems were idiotic enough to turn their back on a young engaged electorate who voted for them because they cared about that issue and felt betrayed at how the party they voted for (many with their first ever votes) had tarnished their promise to them.
These kids are enjoying their free ride and do not want to have to pay for it. Like in your country Noir, some here in the US understand we are broke and serious cuts have to take place
We do not have a revenue problem - we have a serious spending problem. Given the fact that most professors are liberal I am not surprised most of the kids want those who are currently paying the huge majority of taxes in this country to pay more
logroller
05-03-2011, 02:27 AM
Don't get me started. There's all this drama on the campus I attend. Interviews with the University President talking about how legislators are cutting funding to 1998 levels, only now the school has more students then they did then. Let me tell you, most of the students in college have no idea what added value is. They just think a college degree is a passport to higher wages; then they get pissed when they have to pay for that higher earning potential.:lame2:
Its about time college started teaching lessons that do apply once students are in the real world. Lesson #1-- no free rides in life, you get out what you put in.:lol:
red states rule
05-03-2011, 03:35 AM
Don't get me started. There's all this drama on the campus I attend. Interviews with the University President talking about how legislators are cutting funding to 1998 levels, only now the school has more students then they did then. Let me tell you, most of the students in college have no idea what added value is. They just think a college degree is a passport to higher wages; then they get pissed when they have to pay for that higher earning potential.:lame2:
Its about time college started teaching lessons that do apply once students are in the real world. Lesson #1-- no free rides in life, you get out what you put in.:lol:
Since most of the Professors are liberals and who believe in redistributing other peoples wealth - why are you surprised?
During the 2008 election this clip summed up for me the mindset of most Obama supporters
<iframe width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/P36x8rTb3jI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
logroller
05-03-2011, 03:51 AM
Won't have to pay for gas or mortgage huh? She never had to, if she's able to walk and doesn't mind being homeless:laugh::laugh::laugh:
Well, they're not all liberal. I'm lucky because there is a business development center built and heavily funded by local business. And the professors they've brought in have real world experience and bring those concepts to the table. But that's just the College of Business and Public Policy-- the rest of the school(including admin) uber lib.
red states rule
05-03-2011, 03:55 AM
Won't have to pay for gas or mortgage huh? She never had to, if she's able to walk and doesn't mind being homeless:laugh::laugh::laugh:
Well, they're not all liberal. I'm lucky because there is a business development center built and heavily funded by local business. And the professors they've brought in have real world experience and bring those concepts to the table. But that's just the College of Business and Public Policy-- the rest of the school(including admin) uber lib.
If she was waitng for that check for the WH I am sure her car was long ago repo'd and her house went to f/c sale
But it is the mindset of most libs LR that some people are "entitled" to other peoples money
logroller
05-03-2011, 04:00 AM
If she was waitng for that check for the WH I am sure her car was long ago repo'd and her house went to f/c sale
But it is the mindset of most libs LR that some people are "entitled" to other peoples money
To focus on the principles: its opportunity, everybody is entitled to the opportunity to earn their own money. Anything less is abhorrent to American principles.
red states rule
05-03-2011, 04:04 AM
To focus on the principles: its opportunity, everybody is entitled to the opportunity to earn their own money. Anything less is abhorrent to American principles.
We agree on that LR
But FDR was the Godfather of liberalism and he planted the seed that has grown into the dense forest we have now. Government is the enity that decides who get what from whom.
The tax code has become the instrument where the left redistributes the wealth and it adds to the poverty. When you pay people NOT to do something, like work, they will comply
I work in the written correspondence department at work and I actually received a letter form a customer that demanded to know why we put his home into f/c.
He did not understand why
He admitted he was FIVE months behind on his payments, BUT he sent his last demand notice to the White House for payment
Enough said
logroller
05-03-2011, 04:29 AM
We agree on that LR
But FDR was the Godfather of liberalism and he planted the seed that has grown into the dense forest we have now. Government is the enity that decides who get what from whom.
The tax code has become the instrument where the left redistributes the wealth and it adds to the poverty. When you pay people NOT to do something, like work, they will comply
I work in the written correspondence department at work and I actually received a letter form a customer that demanded to know why we put his home into f/c.
He did not understand why
He admitted he was FIVE months behind on his payments, BUT he sent his last demand notice to the White House for payment
Enough said
Well its pretty hard to follow "enough said", but I would like to add drug laws to the list of gov't overstepping its power to the tune of billions of taxpayer dollars. The welfare state and police state are birds of a feather IMO.
red states rule
05-03-2011, 04:31 AM
Well its pretty hard to follow "enough said", but I would like to add drug laws to the list of gov't overstepping its power to the tune of billions of taxpayer dollars. The welfare state and police state are birds of a feather IMO.
My girlfrind and I had a disagreement over that as well. The topic was taxpayer money being used to give drug users "clean needles"
Why should I pay for someone th break the law?
She said it was for their "health"
Go figure
logroller
05-03-2011, 04:39 AM
My girlfrind and I had a disagreement over that as well. The topic was taxpayer money being used to give drug users "clean needles"
Why should I pay for someone th break the law?
She said it was for their "health"
Go figure
How about sell them drugs in clean needles cheaper than they could buy whatever black death they get from some scumbag who'll end up costing taxpayers thousands in legal fees and incarceration? Just saying, we're gonna pay for it anyways, rather through medicrap when (not if) they get HepC, HIV or prison, why not cut costs?
red states rule
05-03-2011, 04:40 AM
How about sell them drugs in clean needles cheaper than they could buy whatever black death they get from some scumbag who'll end up costing taxpayers thousands in legal fees and incarceration? Just saying, we're gonna pay for it anyways, rather through medicrap when (not if) they get HepC, HIV or prison, why not cut costs?
Why help people break the law? The last thing I want is another dope head high on drugs out on the street LR
logroller
05-03-2011, 04:46 AM
Why help people break the law? The last thing I want is another dope head high on drugs out on the street LR
They're breaking the law anyways. Really i think we should decriminalize, for the same reasons-- the war on drugs should be fought in the home. Once its on the street its a losing battle-- and taxpayers are the biggest losers, not the dopers.
Kathianne
05-03-2011, 08:29 AM
How about sell them drugs in clean needles cheaper than they could buy whatever black death they get from some scumbag who'll end up costing taxpayers thousands in legal fees and incarceration? Just saying, we're gonna pay for it anyways, rather through medicrap when (not if) they get HepC, HIV or prison, why not cut costs?
Yep, sell and tax.
These kids are enjoying their free ride and do not want to have to pay for it. Like in your country Noir, some here in the US understand we are broke and serious cuts have to take place
We do not have a revenue problem - we have a serious spending problem. Given the fact that most professors are liberal I am not surprised most of the kids want those who are currently paying the huge majority of taxes in this country to pay more
Yeahhh, the students (like me) who voted for education free at the point of delivery to be paid for with a graduate tax paid only by University graduates when the were in work were really all looking for a "free ride"
logroller
05-03-2011, 11:00 AM
Yeahhh, the students (like me) who voted for education free at the point of delivery to be paid for with a graduate tax paid only by University graduates when the were in work were really all looking for a "free ride"
That sums it up nicely!:thumb:
Kathianne
05-03-2011, 11:04 AM
Yeahhh, the students (like me) who voted for education free at the point of delivery to be paid for with a graduate tax paid only by University graduates when the were in work were really all looking for a "free ride"What about those that didn't graduate? What if they didn't get a job? What then?
fj1200
05-03-2011, 11:33 AM
Yeahhh, the students (like me) who voted for education free at the point of delivery to be paid for with a graduate tax paid only by University graduates when the were in work were really all looking for a "free ride"
Kind of sounds like a loan. What's wrong with a loan? Haven't Euros heard of loans before? Why the government program when private options don't require big gov?
gabosaurus
05-03-2011, 12:04 PM
First of all, I hope RSR realizes that the video is a staged set-up. Sort of like when the "Iraqi citizens" ran in and toppled the statue of Saddam.
Second, I did attend college looking for a free ride. And I was really proud to get one. So were my parents, who didn't have to pay close to $200,000 for my degree. I recommend free rides for everybody who can get one. The free rides are otherwise known as "scholarships."
Last, I often wonder why conservatives never worried about the rising national debt while the Bushies were in office. Dubya referred to the debt as "the cost of protecting freedom."
I suppose things are different when libs are in power.
logroller
05-03-2011, 01:17 PM
Kind of sounds like a loan. What's wrong with a loan? Haven't Euros heard of loans before? Why the government program when private options don't require big gov?
Hey I don't have a problem with loans per se, but subsidization of anything leads to increased costs down the road. An opportunity to attend college is a good thing, but far too many who attend college seek not to add value, just dollars. In the long-run throwing money at everyone not only inflates the price, but brings down the quality of university education-- undermining the entire principle of education.
Kathianne
05-03-2011, 02:08 PM
Hey I don't have a problem with loans per se, but subsidization of anything leads to increased costs down the road. An opportunity to attend college is a good thing, but far too many who attend college seek not to add value, just dollars. In the long-run throwing money at everyone not only inflates the price, but brings down the quality of university education-- undermining the entire principle of education.
It's a matter of time before the higher education bubble bursts:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/16/education/16loan.html
March 15, 2011
Loan Study on Students Goes Beyond Default Rates
By TAMAR LEWIN
For each student who defaults on a loan, at least two more fall behind in payments on their student debt, a new study has found.
The Institute for Higher Education Policy, a nonprofit organization, said in a report that two out of five student loan borrowers were delinquent at some point in the first five years after they started repaying their loans.
Almost a quarter of the borrowers used an option to postpone payments to avoid delinquency.
The institute said the goal of its study was to develop a fuller picture of the debt burden that students face by compiling data on students who have trouble repaying their loans, but do not default.
“We want to get beyond the dichotomy of people who default on their loans and everyone else,” Alisa Cunningham, the institute’s vice president for research and programs, said on Tuesday.
The study, based on data from five of the nation’s largest student-loan agencies, found that only 37 percent of student borrowers who started repaying their loans in 2005 were able to fully pay them back on time.
And that percentage is probably decreasing, given the high unemployment rate of recent years, Ms. Cunningham said.
With tuition rising more rapidly than inflation or family incomes, student borrowing has been growing. College seniors who graduated in 2009 had an average of $24,000 in student loan debt, up 6 percent from 2008, according to an annual report from the Project on Student Debt. ...
red states rule
05-03-2011, 03:54 PM
Yeahhh, the students (like me) who voted for education free at the point of delivery to be paid for with a graduate tax paid only by University graduates when the were in work were really all looking for a "free ride"
Noir, as I pointeds out to you before NOTHING IS FREE
Someone paid for your educaton at the time you were attending classes
red states rule
05-03-2011, 03:59 PM
First of all, I hope RSR realizes that the video is a staged set-up. Sort of like when the "Iraqi citizens" ran in and toppled the statue of Saddam.
Second, I did attend college looking for a free ride. And I was really proud to get one. So were my parents, who didn't have to pay close to $200,000 for my degree. I recommend free rides for everybody who can get one. The free rides are otherwise known as "scholarships."
Last, I often wonder why conservatives never worried about the rising national debt while the Bushies were in office. Dubya referred to the debt as "the cost of protecting freedom."
I suppose things are different when libs are in power.
Everything that goes agianst your views Gabby is dismissed as staged. Soon I expect you to say the same about election results as more and more voters dismiss liberalism
As I pointed out to Noir, someone was paying the bill while you were attending classes
I guess you did not take Economics 101 or you slept thru the class
I am not surprised a self professed liberal admits to looking for a free ride. However,the least you could for the small minority paying the huge majority of the taxes is give them a thank you. Instead you smear them and demand they pay more in taxes to finance more expensive handouts
Many on the right (and I beleive you as well) were bitching about the spending under Bush. It would be nice if Obama could cut his $1.6 trillion dollar deficit down to Bush's worst deficit of $500 billion
That sums it up nicely!:thumb:
You do understand the concept of something being free at the point of delivery and being paid for later, yes?
What about those that didn't graduate? What if they didn't get a job? What then?
I'm not sure about those who don't graduate, as for those who do and don't get a job, the student is responsible for the debt for 25 years, after that it is wiped. Paid for by other taxes, really as an insurance policy to the university. However if an average graduate gets their robes aged 21/22, and they hadnt earned enough in the following 25 years to pay off a £10,000 sum then they could never of paid it if it was a private company either. And I think we'd all admit the number of people who could graduate and then fail to hold any sort of job even at minimum wage would be negligible until they were nearing there 50's
Kind of sounds like a loan. What's wrong with a loan? Haven't Euros heard of loans before? Why the government program when private options don't require big gov?
Yeah it basically is a loan. If someone wants they could chose to loan the money from a bank instead. But they can change interest rates or demand paypents at will. The Govemrennt scheme is a contact that will not change and protects the student from a volatile Market.
Noir, as I pointeds out to you before NOTHING IS FREE
Someone paid for your educaton at the time you were attending classes
I know nothing is free, but you can have a system where things are free at the point of delivery and then paid for (by the very people who benifited) at a later date.
red states rule
05-03-2011, 07:34 PM
You do understand the concept of something being free at the point of delivery and being paid for later, yes?
I'm not sure about those who don't graduate, as for those who do and don't get a job, the student is responsible for the debt for 25 years, after that it is wiped. Paid for by other taxes, really as an insurance policy to the university. However if an average graduate gets their robes aged 21/22, and they hadnt earned enough in the following 25 years to pay off a £10,000 sum then they could never of paid it if it was a private company either. And I think we'd all admit the number of people who could graduate and then fail to hold any sort of job even at minimum wage would be negligible.
Yeah it basically is a loan. If someone wants they could chose to loan the money from a bank instead. But they can change interest rates or demand paypents at will. The Govemrennt scheme is a contact that will not change and protects the student from a volatile Market.
I know nothing is free, but you can have a system where things are free at the point of delivery and then paid for (by the very people who benifited) at a later date.
Noir, nothing is "free" at the point of delivery. Someone is paying for the service at the time the service is provided
I am surprised you do not get it. You are smarter then this
Noir, nothing is "free" at the point of delivery. Someone is paying for the service at the time the service is provided
I am surprised you do not get it. You are smarter then this
Well obviously...that's how national economies have worked for centuries.
red states rule
05-03-2011, 07:49 PM
Well obviously...that's how national economies have worked for centuries.
That is not what you posted Noir
"I know nothing is free, but you can have a system where things are free at the point of delivery and then paid for (by the very people who benifited) at a later date."
But the problem is thanks to liberal tax and spend policies - we have fewer and fewer people paying the bill at the time the services are delivered
That is not what you posted Noir
"I know nothing is free, but you can have a system where things are free at the point of delivery and then paid for (by the very people who benifited) at a later date."
But the problem is thanks to liberal tax and spend policies - we have fewer and fewer people paying the bill at the time the services are delivered
I think you are deliberately arguing the pedantic semantics rather than the overall point. I'm not going to waste my time with such nonsense. I know what I mean and I'm sure you do too, if so stop messing about. If not then just have a nice day.
red states rule
05-03-2011, 08:02 PM
I think you are deliberately arguing the pedantic semantics rather than the overall point. I'm not going to waste my time with such nonsense. I know what I mean and I'm sure you do too, if so stop messing about. If not then just have a nice day.
Sorry if your own post gets in the way of the debate Noir :laugh2:
You seem to be content miking the cash cow until its dry.
BTW, it was dry along time ago
gabosaurus
05-04-2011, 12:37 AM
As I pointed out to Noir, someone was paying the bill while you were attending classes
I guess you did not take Economics 101 or you slept thru the class
I am not surprised a self professed liberal admits to looking for a free ride. However,the least you could for the small minority paying the huge majority of the taxes is give them a thank you. Instead you smear them and demand they pay more in taxes to finance more expensive handouts
RSR, I am sorry that you weren't smart enough to get into college.
But yes, someone was paying the bill while I was in class. It was the University of California. They give academic scholarships to deserving students.
I worked pretty hard when I was in high school. No partying, no messing around, lots of studying and preparation. Athletes get college scholarships for their skills. So do smart people. It's part of the college system.
I understand that a sizable portion of DP is unable to grasp the concept of being intelligent. But it sort of works like this: Universities pay money for smart kids to attend their schools. The kids then graduate, get good jobs, make big bucks and then give back to their schools. Then we go on to ruling the world.
That is the division of power here. Some of us rule the world. The rest us you either work for us or go out to protect our world. We appreciate all of your support. :)
red states rule
05-04-2011, 03:45 AM
RSR, I am sorry that you weren't smart enough to get into college.
But yes, someone was paying the bill while I was in class. It was the University of California. They give academic scholarships to deserving students.
I worked pretty hard when I was in high school. No partying, no messing around, lots of studying and preparation. Athletes get college scholarships for their skills. So do smart people. It's part of the college system.
I understand that a sizable portion of DP is unable to grasp the concept of being intelligent. But it sort of works like this: Universities pay money for smart kids to attend their schools. The kids then graduate, get good jobs, make big bucks and then give back to their schools. Then we go on to ruling the world.
That is the division of power here. Some of us rule the world. The rest us you either work for us or go out to protect our world. We appreciate all of your support. :)
Aside from the personal insults Gabby, what you are missing is that there is a decreasing number of people paying the bill while the kids are attending classes
Thanks to Obamanomics, liberal tax and spend polices - the economy is sinking further south
Instead of growing private sector jobs, your side wants to try and make welfare and other forms of government assistance a career opprotunity. Currently we have nearly half the people paying ZERO federal income taxes while the top 50% of earners pay 97% of the federal income taxes collected
Even you can see this can't continue, but your liberal beliefs and sheer arrogance prevents you from publicly admitting it
http://images5.cpcache.com/product/364084955v19_480x480_Front.jpg
fj1200
05-04-2011, 06:57 AM
Yeah it basically is a loan. If someone wants they could chose to loan the money from a bank instead. But they can change interest rates or demand paypents at will. The Govemrennt scheme is a contact that will not change and protects the student from a volatile Market.
You apparently are not aware of how loans work at least here in the US. They are contracts which spell out the terms of the loan, nobody changing interest rates, unless floating rates of course and then according to terms, and nobody demanding payments at will.
You apparently are not aware of how loans work at least here in the US. They are contracts which spell out the terms of the loan, nobody changing interest rates, unless floating rates of course and then according to terms, and nobody demanding payments at will.
Nobody demands payments? So a bank is happy to yet someone sit for years and not pay any of the loan off and not hold it against their credit record etc?
fj1200
05-04-2011, 07:21 AM
Nobody demands payments? So a bank is happy to yet someone sit for years and not pay any of the loan off and not hold it against their credit record etc?
Your words were "demand payment AT WILL" which is completely different than payments according to contract. If you do not meet the terms of the contract then it may harm your credit score. Don't change the terms of your argument midstream please.
Your words were "demand payment AT WILL" which is completely different than payments according to contract. If you do not meet the terms of the contract then it may harm your credit score. Don't change the terms of your argument midstream please.
I guarntee you all loans will come with small print saying that with due notice the terms can be changed.
fj1200
05-04-2011, 09:15 AM
I guarntee you all loans will come with small print saying that with due notice the terms can be changed.
I guess you'll be showing me that fine print then.
I guess you'll be showing me that fine print then.
Well I'm not going to take out such a lone so I can't.
fj1200
05-04-2011, 11:06 AM
Well I'm not going to take out such a lone so I can't.
That's a high-quality guarantee you've got there then. :420:
logroller
05-04-2011, 03:04 PM
Due notice from govt??? Don't hold your breath on that one. If Free markets go 100mph, govt transactions go like 5. I can only speak to US govt student loans, but they don't change their policies much at all. The biggest change I've seen in 10yrs is they'll stop dispensing funds if you're busted for drugs, other than that its pretty much a long-term fixed, prime rate personal loan with no penalties, only accrual interest beginning 6months after graduation or withdrawal from a qualified institution. Bout as close to free money as you can get without printing it yourself...but then again, that's what the "lender" does.
logroller
05-04-2011, 03:19 PM
RSR, I am sorry that you weren't smart enough to get into college.
But yes, someone was paying the bill while I was in class. It was the University of California. They give academic scholarships to deserving students.
I worked pretty hard when I was in high school. No partying, no messing around, lots of studying and preparation. Athletes get college scholarships for their skills. So do smart people. It's part of the college system.
I understand that a sizable portion of DP is unable to grasp the concept of being intelligent. But it sort of works like this: Universities pay money for smart kids to attend their schools. The kids then graduate, get good jobs, make big bucks and then give back to their schools. Then we go on to ruling the world.
That is the division of power here. Some of us rule the world. The rest us you either work for us or go out to protect our world. We appreciate all of your support. :)
Congrats on your scholarship, I'm happy the opportunity was available to you. What concerns me is the dependance upon federal funding which is tied to enrollment alone(ie not scholarly performace). It behooves institutions to maintain high retention numbers to preserve funding, as opposed to producing high income graduates to kick back through donations for scholarships(which I assume is where your schloarship came from). Say maintaining a 2.0 GPA may seem adequate to some, but schools may lower the standards to this end-- this is of concern to me and many others. Perhaps Cal doesn't need to do so, but not all universities have the depth of potential enrollees that the flagship of the California University system does.
red states rule
05-04-2011, 03:58 PM
I guarntee you all loans will come with small print saying that with due notice the terms can be changed.
The only time the terms of a loan can be changed is when the borrower defaults
Kathianne
05-04-2011, 04:21 PM
I guarntee you all loans will come with small print saying that with due notice the terms can be changed.
No, they don't. Wherever did you get that idea?
red states rule
05-04-2011, 04:31 PM
No, they don't. Wherever did you get that idea?
The same place he got this:
"I know nothing is free, but you can have a system where things are free at the point of delivery and then paid for (by the very people who benifited) at a later date."
No, they don't. Wherever did you get that idea?
Because ever contract I've ever signed has had those clauses. I made a point of bringing them up in everything I have to sign for.
Kathianne
05-04-2011, 06:11 PM
Because ever contract I've ever signed has had those clauses. I made a point of bringing them up in everything I have to sign for.
I'll have to guess you are looking at the default clause, that RSR pointed out. If you are late or months in arrears, the penalties or possible penalties are included in the contract.
Kathianne
05-04-2011, 06:13 PM
The same place he got this:
"I know nothing is free, but you can have a system where things are free at the point of delivery and then paid for (by the very people who benifited) at a later date."
And what came to my mind, why I asked about those that didn't graduate or didn't find employment after graduation was because of Noir. My remembrance was he was a year or more into university, then wondered at the significance of it and such. Thought another road might be better and wanted to drop out, for awhile at least. Worried what the folks would say, ''but he was paying for it." Not exactly, only if he graduated?
And what came to my mind, why I asked about those that didn't graduate or didn't find employment after graduation was because of Noir. My remembrance was he was a year or more into university, then wondered at the significance of it and such. Thought another road might be better and wanted to drop out, for awhile at least. Worried what the folks would say, ''but he was paying for it." Not exactly, only if he graduated?
Indeed,
Though what I am doing now is paying for my University as a go, I've already paid for my fees until September '11, and by then I should have enough saved to pay my next years fees there and then. A much better system I think, but I can understand why it's not for everyone as holding down a full time job and being in full time education doesn't leave much time for anything else.
I'll have to guess you are looking at the default clause, that RSR pointed out. If you are late or months in arrears, the penalties or possible penalties are included in the contract.
But the point of the Gov plan is that whenever you are working for are forced to pay it. And whenever you are not working you won't have private companies putting you in debt and arrears.
fj1200
05-04-2011, 06:33 PM
Because ever contract I've ever signed has had those clauses. I made a point of bringing them up in everything I have to sign for.
Have those contracts been for fixed terms and conditions? This isn't a credit card were talking about here.
Kathianne
05-04-2011, 06:40 PM
Indeed,
Though what I am doing now is paying for my University as a go, I've already paid for my fees until September '11, and by then I should have enough saved to pay my next years fees there and then. A much better system I think, but I can understand why it's not for everyone as holding down a full time job and being in full time education doesn't leave much time for anything else.
So now you are paying for it, not putting it off on government plan of 'down the line?"
If that's the case, why would you think that's not a better way or our system of loans isn't, compared to what was proposed before the bubble popped?
Of my 3 kids, one was able to pay for college on his own, with a bunch of scholarships, being a resident assistant, and working part time. He chose in last year to take out small loan to get an apartment and not have to deal with being an RA. He's already paid back most of it, little over a year.
The other two did need loans on top of scholarship and working. Both of them are ahead of schedule at paying them back, as that's the road to better credit and no fear of government coming to get them. Indeed, because of their FAFSA, if they keep going where they are, no interest loan. There are some good things about having a poor parent.
Why should those that drop out not have to pay back? That's implied by what you wrote.
Have those contracts been for fixed terms and conditions? This isn't a credit card were talking about here.
Well yes the terms are fixed but the condictions are changeable if the company what's to change them.
The only loan I have ever taken out was to pay for my iMac, and it sates in the small print that all debts are "payable on demand" I had allllllot of discussions about that with the people in the apple shop and have since become aware of the fact that it is a commonplace clause in loans.
So now you are paying for it, not putting it off on government plan of 'down the line?"
If that's the case, why would you think that's not a better way or our system of loans isn't, compared to what was proposed before the bubble popped?
Of my 3 kids, one was able to pay for college on his own, with a bunch of scholarships, being a resident assistant, and working part time. He chose in last year to take out small loan to get an apartment and not have to deal with being an RA. He's already paid back most of it, little over a year.
The other two did need loans on top of scholarship and working. Both of them are ahead of schedule at paying them back, as that's the road to better credit and no fear of government coming to get them. Indeed, because of their FAFSA, if they keep going where they are, no interest loan. There are some good things about having a poor parent.
Why should those that drop out not have to pay back? That's implied by what you wrote.
Just because something is better for me doesn't mean it's better for everyone, and tbh I think (not trying to seem arrogant or anything cus I'm not) but allot of people would struggle to do 50 hour weeks at work and deal with the Uni workload
Over here there are basicly no such things as scholarships, which is probably a real failing in our system.
And like I said I don't know what happens to those who dont make it, maybe they do have to pay it off, maybe they dont I don't know.
fj1200
05-04-2011, 06:50 PM
Well yes the terms are fixed but the condictions are changeable if the company what's to change them.
Not when the terms don't allow it.
The only loan I have ever taken out was to pay for my iMac, and it sates in the small print that all debts are "payable on demand" I had allllllot of discussions about that with the people in the apple shop and have since become aware of the fact that it is a commonplace clause in loans.
It's kind of pointless to "demand" repayment from a student who just graduated eh?
Not when the terms don't allow it.
It's kind of pointless to "demand" repayment from a student who just graduated eh?
The small print will always allow it. That's the point.
Kathianne
05-04-2011, 07:37 PM
The small print will always allow it. That's the point.
But the 'small print' that you claim is there, isn't.
Kathianne
05-04-2011, 07:38 PM
Just because something is better for me doesn't mean it's better for everyone, and tbh I think (not trying to seem arrogant or anything cus I'm not) but allot of people would struggle to do 50 hour weeks at work and deal with the Uni workload
Over here there are basicly no such things as scholarships, which is probably a real failing in our system.
And like I said I don't know what happens to those who dont make it, maybe they do have to pay it off, maybe they dont I don't know.
But that would be a big thing to the taxpayers, no? Just like the time you completed, but have separated from, no?
gabosaurus
05-04-2011, 09:00 PM
Aside from the personal insults Gabby, what you are missing is that there is a decreasing number of people paying the bill while the kids are attending classes
Thanks to Obamanomics, liberal tax and spend polices - the economy is sinking further south
Instead of growing private sector jobs, your side wants to try and make welfare and other forms of government assistance a career opprotunity. Currently we have nearly half the people paying ZERO federal income taxes while the top 50% of earners pay 97% of the federal income taxes collected
What does any of this have to do with students getting scholarships to attend college?
red states rule
05-05-2011, 02:57 AM
What does any of this have to do with students getting scholarships to attend college?
You did sleep thru Economics 101 Gabby
Someone has to be paying for the scholarships and the full cost of the kids education with the kid is attending classes
Thanks to Obama and the Dems, fewer people are working and paying taxes. In fact we have a record number of people getting some form of government assistance
So we have a shrinking number of people paying taxes thus paying the bills.
This is common sense Gabby - however you are stuck on common nonsense
red states rule
05-05-2011, 03:15 AM
Well yes the terms are fixed but the condictions are changeable if the company what's to change them.
The only loan I have ever taken out was to pay for my iMac, and it sates in the small print that all debts are "payable on demand" I had allllllot of discussions about that with the people in the apple shop and have since become aware of the fact that it is a commonplace clause in loans.
I would say it is payable on demand IF youn default
That is standard in all loan agreements
I would say it is payable on demand IF youn default
That is standard in all loan agreements
In any end, if the student tuition loan to a bank said that when you can instantly see why it's undesirable. I mean a student now could easily walk out of Uni here having loans in excess of £30,000 (about $50,000) but you can not default on the gov option. If you work you pay, no choice. If you don't work it's frozen until you start again. Simple.
red states rule
05-05-2011, 03:31 AM
In any end, if the student tuition loan to a bank said that when you can instantly see why it's undesirable. I mean a student now could easily walk out of Uni here having loans in excess of £30,000 (about $50,000) but you can not default on the gov option. If you work you pay, no choice. If you don't work it's frozen until you start again. Simple.
Can't default on a government option?
Have you ever heard of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac?
What id the kids leaves your country? Works under the table?
There are many ways the taxpayer can be left holding bag for the unpaid bill. That is one reason why your government made the cuts since they are going broke like we are Noir
fj1200
05-05-2011, 06:57 AM
The small print will always allow it. That's the point.
:rolleyes:
red states rule
05-05-2011, 03:59 PM
I guess Noir defaulted on this thread
I guess Noir defaulted on this thread
Clearly, I mean, it's been over 12 hours since I last posted in it, sorry if my reply times aren't fast enough for you rsr
logroller
05-05-2011, 07:57 PM
And like I said I don't know what happens to those who dont make it, maybe they do have to pay it off, maybe they dont I don't know.
I'll bet that's in the fine print.;)
Well yes the terms are fixed but the condictions are changeable if the company what's to change them.
The only loan I have ever taken out was to pay for my iMac, and it sates in the small print that all debts are "payable on demand" I had allllllot of discussions about that with the people in the apple shop and have since become aware of the fact that it is a commonplace clause in loans.
FJ's right--That is pretty standard for loans. If you're making payments with interest, they'd rather you keep you paying that interest rather than a lump sum payoff; so you needn't worry about that clause unless you default. They just have to say that or they'd have to sue you because you could claim you weren't aware of what would happen if you didn't pay them.
gabosaurus
05-05-2011, 11:38 PM
RSR, are you against incentive bonuses for business executives? I believe you have defended that in the past.
Academic scholarships are incentive payments for excellent performance in high school.
I think you are bitter about scholarships and universities in general because you never made it past high school. Instead, you bitch and moan about how smart people are ruining the world.
But whatever. I am very proud that my parents never had to worry about paying for college. As a result, I owe nothing, and neither does my husband. You can't blame any of the rising debt on me. Not to mention the fact that I am pretty certain that we pay more taxes than you do.
So tell me RSR, don't you receive a fair amount of government assistance due to your medical situation? Doesn't this mean you are living off the taxpayer's dime? For shame!! :p
red states rule
05-06-2011, 03:06 AM
Clearly, I mean, it's been over 12 hours since I last posted in it, sorry if my reply times aren't fast enough for you rsr
Now it is coser to 24 hours and you still have not responded to this post. If you need more time Noir I can wait
Can't default on a government option?
Have you ever heard of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac?
What id the kids leaves your country? Works under the table?
There are many ways the taxpayer can be left holding bag for the unpaid bill. That is one reason why your government made the cuts since they are going broke like we are Noir
red states rule
05-06-2011, 03:14 AM
RSR, are you against incentive bonuses for business executives? I believe you have defended that in the past.
Academic scholarships are incentive payments for excellent performance in high school.
I think you are bitter about scholarships and universities in general because you never made it past high school. Instead, you bitch and moan about how smart people are ruining the world.
But whatever. I am very proud that my parents never had to worry about paying for college. As a result, I owe nothing, and neither does my husband. You can't blame any of the rising debt on me. Not to mention the fact that I am pretty certain that we pay more taxes than you do.
So tell me RSR, don't you receive a fair amount of government assistance due to your medical situation? Doesn't this mean you are living off the taxpayer's dime? For shame!! :p
Incentive bonuses are paid from corporate profits. The scholarships are paid from taxpayer money
Scholarships are not incentive payments Gabby. The default rates are rising and some need not to paid back
Someone paid for your college Gabby. Probably one the "rich" people you continue smear. As I said before, instead of thanking them you demand they pay more in taxes to support the Dems growing wish list for more entitlements
I have tried to be nice to you yet you continue with the cheap shots and insults. I did not take a cent from the government while I was being treated for cancer Gabby - you know that from past posts
I know when you can't defend your position you always fall back on the personal attacks - even towards people who try to maintain a level of civility towards you
Has you seen the latest results from the policies of the "smart peple" Gabby? Jobless claims are now at a 8 month high, and gas/food prices continue to go up, Spending and debt have hit new records with the "smart" people in charge
Tell me Gabby, is all that part of that hope and change we were promised?
Now it is coser to 24 hours and you still have not responded to this post. If you need more time Noir I can wait
Can't default on a government option?
Have you ever heard of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac?
What id the kids leaves your country? Works under the table?
There are many ways the taxpayer can be left holding bag for the unpaid bill. That is one reason why your government made the cuts since they are going broke like we are Noir
I was working yesterday from 10am until 2am. Any and all posts I made in the past 24hours where from work, and as we were busy that means not many. I've just woken and should be free for a few hours later, ill reply some time around then (:
Edit- sorru I forgot I made a post about waterboarding at like 4:30am.
red states rule
05-06-2011, 04:13 AM
I was working yesterday from 10am until 2am. Any and all posts I made in the past 24hours where from work, and as we were busy that means not many. I've just woken and should be free for a few hours later, ill reply some time around then (:
Just pulling your chain a little Noir. Unlike Gabby we have had a civil back and forth. Get some rest and we will talk later
Have a great day!!
gabosaurus
05-07-2011, 12:49 AM
RSR, Obviously you know zero how college scholarships work. I tried to explain it to you, but you refused to read it. I earned everything I got in college. You have earned nothing.
Kathianne
05-07-2011, 03:28 AM
Incentive bonuses are paid from corporate profits. The scholarships are paid from taxpayer money
Scholarships are not incentive payments Gabby. The default rates are rising and some need not to paid back
Someone paid for your college Gabby. Probably one the "rich" people you continue smear. As I said before, instead of thanking them you demand they pay more in taxes to support the Dems growing wish list for more entitlements
I have tried to be nice to you yet you continue with the cheap shots and insults. I did not take a cent from the government while I was being treated for cancer Gabby - you know that from past posts
I know when you can't defend your position you always fall back on the personal attacks - even towards people who try to maintain a level of civility towards you
Has you seen the latest results from the policies of the "smart peple" Gabby? Jobless claims are now at a 8 month high, and gas/food prices continue to go up, Spending and debt have hit new records with the "smart" people in charge
Tell me Gabby, is all that part of that hope and change we were promised?
Scholarships for universities and colleges in the US are exclusively to my knowledge privately funded. While many are academically or sports related, there are many in the arts also. There are also many for financial, ethnicity, personal or personality reasons, and for a slew of very strange reasons, based upon the criteria set up by those funding the scholarships.
Grants are available from both private and public sources, they do not have to be repaid. Pell Grant is the best known of the public sector and are based on financial means only. Today they aren't significant towards the total costs per year, but receiving them is one of the criteria to gain loans that allow one not to pay interest during schooling. Both the Pell and loans require a FAFSA by student and parents yearly to demonstrate ability to contribute to costs. Obviously the loans do need to be repaid, the difference between whether or not there will be payments while in school is only financial means based upon the FAFSA.
Grants may also be given by universities or private sources for students that have demonstrated both the desire and means to study a particular area that meets the criteria set up by a grant. I received significant grants for studying nursing homes, locations, care, and income back in the 70's. I also received grants and stipends for Constitutional studies in the 2000's. Grants do not require repayment and some like the one cited above also may pay the person for studying and provide books, housing, and meals.
Where significant funding by the government to post-secondary schools goes is directly to the universities themselves through grants for research and for meeting certain criteria related to areas of study, composition of the student enrollment numbers and such. The most expensive contributions to the costs of universities and most likely the cause of the education bubble would be the federal guarantee of the funding for student loans, many made to those incapable of completing their course of studies.
People wonder if the students that are given these loans are defaulting? Oh many try not to pay them back, certainly was true in the 70's; but the government no longer allows that to happen, without grave costs. They will garnish nearly all your wages if you are working. You cannot include student loans in bankruptcy cases. You will not get any loans if in default on student loans.
However, those billions of borrowed dollars are already in and still pouring into the university coffers. In the past 25 years they've been used to build near luxury type of dormitory suites, elaborate buildings, and fitness centers on university campuses. Grants to universities have also funded 'green transit systems' on university campuses and through certain areas of the towns they are located in.
red states rule
05-07-2011, 04:24 AM
Good post Kat - thanks
However........
Dropping out of college after a year can mean lost time, burdensome debt and an uncertain future for students.
Now there's an estimate of what it costs taxpayers. And it runs in the billions.
States appropriated almost $6.2 billion for four-year colleges and universities between 2003 and 2008 to help pay for the education of students who did not return for year two, a report released Monday says.
In addition, the federal government spent $1.5 billion and states spent $1.4 billion on grants for students who didn't start their sophomore years, according to "Finishing the First Lap: The Cost of First-Year Student Attrition in America's Four-Year Colleges and Universities."
The dollar figures, based on government data and gathered by the nonprofit American Institutes for Research, are meant to put an economic exclamation point on the argument that college completion rates need improvement.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/10/11/study-cost-college-dropouts-taxpayers-runs-billions/
and of course we now have many saying illegals should go to college - at US taxpayer expense
All I am saying is, the taxpayers are broke and if someone wants to attend college they should find a way to pay for it
Kathianne
05-07-2011, 04:42 AM
Good post Kat - thanks
However........
and of course we now have many saying illegals should go to college - at US taxpayer expense
All I am saying is, the taxpayers are broke and if someone wants to attend college they should find a way to pay for it
As I stated before, the money pouring into the universities through grants and money from loans and grants to students have created an unsustainable cost to benefit bubble that is beginning to burst even this minute.
Costs need to be brought under control and there must be better criteria for admitting students beyond parents ability to pay or students poor enough to qualify for unlimited borrowing-with no real evaluation of ability to get through.
I would make a guess that in another 15 years, the % of people holding BA/BS will be down once again to 22% or so. Maybe even lower.
red states rule
05-07-2011, 04:53 AM
As I stated before, the money pouring into the universities through grants and money from loans and grants to students have created an unsustainable cost to benefit bubble that is beginning to burst even this minute.
Costs need to be brought under control and there must be better criteria for admitting students beyond parents ability to pay or students poor enough to qualify for unlimited borrowing-with no real evaluation of ability to get through.
I would make a guess that in another 15 years, the % of people holding BA/BS will be down once again to 22% or so. Maybe even lower.
I find it interesting that most of people running the universities are liberals and yet the cost to attend those universities continues to soar
Your point about the large sums of money pouring in strikes me, since most universities plead poverty and demand more funding
LuvRPgrl
05-07-2011, 02:41 PM
The small print will always allow it. That's the point.
In the US, what conditions can be included in a loan are limited by law. For example, the loaner of the funds cant just arbitrarily put in a line that states" these terms can be changed by us at anytime for any reason", that would be declared an illegal contract.
Terms in a loan have to be very specific, and if changes are allowed, the conditions, types and amounts of changes allowed have to be specified in the loan.
LuvRPgrl
05-07-2011, 02:44 PM
I would say it is payable on demand IF youn default
That is standard in all loan agreements
Sounds right to me.
For the loaner to be able to willy nilly demand payment in full at anytime for any reason doesn't sound right.
It may even be illegal.
But bottom line is, even if it were legal, and included, how stupid is that,,,,I mean, how many people could pay it back anyways? I mean, the loan was taken in the first place BECAUSE THE BORROWER DIDNT HAVE THE MONEY, so, if they dont have the money to pay it back, how can the loaner "DEMAND" payment in full? I remember something about a turnip and blood.
SpidermanTUba
05-08-2011, 11:57 AM
This is classic! Yes, these college kids do not want to cut spending but they do NOT want to pay their share of the national debt either
Let someone else pick up the tab. Raise taxes on the "wealthy" but do NOT cut the government spending
These are are future leaders. YIKES!!!
<iframe width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4rDahs4cmuc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
So the fuck what. Most of these kids probably will have college loans that exceed their share anyway
LuvRPgrl
05-08-2011, 12:37 PM
So the fuck what. Most of these kids probably will have college loans that exceed their share anyway
stupid is as stupid does.
to explain the utter stupidity of your statement is not worth the time
red states rule
05-09-2011, 04:18 AM
So the fuck what. Most of these kids probably will have college loans that exceed their share anyway
So their total share of debt is around $!00,000 and they STILL oppose cutting Federal spending AND want higher taxes on those paying a huge majority of the taxes paid
logroller
05-09-2011, 11:07 AM
So their total share of debt is around $!00,000 and they STILL oppose cutting Federal spending AND want higher taxes on those paying a huge majority of the taxes paid
of course, hard to argue with selfishness. I go to college and get grants, but I get more from scholarships because of my grades(3.79cum). Actually the govt pell grants are getting more strict, I had to verify all my tax returns twice , through FAFSA.gov and through the university. Its just more hoops, hoping to cut down on the lazy yahoos who just go to college so they don't have to work. Hopefully it works.
gabosaurus
05-09-2011, 05:53 PM
I find it interesting that most of people running the universities are liberals and yet the cost to attend those universities continues to soar
Your point about the large sums of money pouring in strikes me, since most universities plead poverty and demand more funding
Silly boy! What makes you think universities are run by "liberals"? Since most universities are run by the intellectual elite, does that make most smart people in this country liberals"
By opposite logic, does that make car racing and wrestling run by conservatives? How about garbage collection and landfills? Obviously conservatives.
red states rule
05-10-2011, 03:15 AM
of course, hard to argue with selfishness. I go to college and get grants, but I get more from scholarships because of my grades(3.79cum). Actually the govt pell grants are getting more strict, I had to verify all my tax returns twice , through FAFSA.gov and through the university. Its just more hoops, hoping to cut down on the lazy yahoos who just go to college so they don't have to work. Hopefully it works.
So now it is shflishness for someone to keep the moeny they earn? Typical from those who seem to feel some are entitled to other peoples money
red states rule
05-10-2011, 03:17 AM
Silly boy! What makes you think universities are run by "liberals"? Since most universities are run by the intellectual elite, does that make most smart people in this country liberals"
By opposite logic, does that make car racing and wrestling run by conservatives? How about garbage collection and landfills? Obviously conservatives.
As far as the "smart" people running things Gabby:
Has you seen the latest results from the policies of the "smart peple" Gabby? Jobless claims are now at a 8 month high, and gas/food prices continue to go up, Spending and debt have hit new records with the "smart" people in charge. Record number of people of some government assistance. Record forclosuers
Tell me Gabby, is all that part of that hope and change we were promised?
logroller
05-11-2011, 03:33 PM
So now it is shflishness for someone to keep the moeny they earn? Typical from those who seem to feel some are entitled to other peoples money
Yea it is, but that's not what I was referring to. I have no problem with selfishness though. I was referring to the selfish act of taking money from somebody else. I don't feel I'm entitled to an education, I'm entitled to get out of life what I work for; be it education for a more promising career or more money from my labors, but don't think for a minute I believe I don't owe something to society for opportunity. I may not pay as much in taxes as you do, but I offer something in return for your tax dollars: understanding. Is this something of value to you?
logroller
05-11-2011, 04:18 PM
The avg college graduate earns over $30k per year more than a high school grad, and based on an average 28% tax rate-- equates to over $8000 more tax paid than a high school graduate.
Expanded over a 30 yr career, that's $340,000 on an investment of $200k, assuming a government funded public university costs around $40k per student per year over 5 yrs-- a net profit for govt of $140,000.
The issue is rather the costs, if put to a different use, would be more beneficial. Of course govt spending through borrowing vs revenues collected is an ever-present concern, but the logic of subsidized education appears sound. Any thoughts?
red states rule
05-11-2011, 04:29 PM
Yea it is, but that's not what I was referring to. I have no problem with selfishness though. I was referring to the selfish act of taking money from somebody else. I don't feel I'm entitled to an education, I'm entitled to get out of life what I work for; be it education for a more promising career or more money from my labors, but don't think for a minute I believe I don't owe something to society for opportunity. I may not pay as much in taxes as you do, but I offer something in return for your tax dollars: understanding. Is this something of value to you?
LR I asked this of another poster who did not respond. Fine - that is their choice
If I am walking down the street on a cold snowy day and I see a homeless person sitting on the curb shivering and rather thin - I can take $100 and get that person a warm coat, get him some food, and some shelter for a the night
That is my choice
Now, if I use a gun and rob you of the $100 and use the money to get that person a warm coat, get him some food, and some shelter for a the night - I would be charged with robbery (as well as othe crimes)
That is what the government does everyday with the tax code
They decide who is entitled to other peoples money regardless of how hard the person worked to earn it - they take as much as they damn well please from the producers
Same with education. If I want to fiannce someones education I can do so in a number of ways. It is my choice
Government seems very happy to take the choice out of the picture. Now they even see fit to grant illegal in state tuition. Guess who will pay that bill?
fj1200
05-11-2011, 04:48 PM
... but the logic of subsidized education appears sound. Any thoughts?
Subsidies increase cost and government shouldn't be in the business of "investing." There's also the market distortions that subsidies encourage; some people just shouldn't go to college.
red states rule
05-11-2011, 04:49 PM
Subsidies increase cost and government shouldn't be in the business of "investing." There's also the market distortions that subsidies encourage; some people just shouldn't go to college.
"investing" is the new code word for spending.
logroller
05-12-2011, 02:50 PM
LR I asked this of another poster who did not respond. Fine - that is their choice
If I am walking down the street on a cold snowy day and I see a homeless person sitting on the curb shivering and rather thin - I can take $100 and get that person a warm coat, get him some food, and some shelter for a the night
That is my choice
Now, if I use a gun and rob you of the $100 and use the money to get that person a warm coat, get him some food, and some shelter for a the night - I would be charged with robbery (as well as othe crimes)
http://loyalkng.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/robin-hood-2010.jpg
RSR_H =Red State Robin Hood
That is what the government does everyday with the tax code
They decide who is entitled to other peoples money regardless of how hard the person worked to earn it - they take as much as they damn well please from the producers
Same with education. If I want to fiannce someones education I can do so in a number of ways. It is my choice
Government seems very happy to take the choice out of the picture. Now they even see fit to grant illegal in state tuition. Guess who will pay that bill?
I understand your dilemma, I think we all do. But isn't that a critique of the social contract. Aliens enjoying the same benefits under the contract is really a side issue, not the issue itself. What you have to ask is rather A)education is good for society B) education is under-supplied or mis-allocated by private means C) government is able to provide the service and D) can supply the service in such a way that benefits outweigh costs of alternatives.
You said you could contribute to education privately, do you?
Subsidies increase cost and government shouldn't be in the business of "investing." There's also the market distortions that subsidies encourage; some people just shouldn't go to college.
This is true. But what is the determining factor for "some people", socioeconomic class, race, creed color etc; I agree that the system has become troubled, perhaps irreconcilable, but education has had its hand in furthering inequalities in the past and we needn't cast aside the current system to premise a return of the past. What concerns me is the push for privatization, which on the surface I can agree with, but seems to me to have a strong undercurrent for the profit model which I don't think is best for the process of education. I can't exactly put my finger on it, and maybe its merely a fear of change, but there's something peculiar with education, at its core the expansion of knowledge, that doesn't perfectly translate into dollars and cents. Sometimes markets do fail to reward intellectual contributions; a number of inventors have died penniless despite contributing an invaluable service to mankind(Tesla's AC current/induction motor for example). These maybe exceptions and I certainly understand the role profits have in growing the pie, while subsidies shrink it, but I don't see education as a purely private good. I see it as a means of compelling oneself to be better able to contribute to society and where society benefits I understand why society would promote it, even subsidize it.
fj1200
05-12-2011, 09:28 PM
RSR_H =Red State Robin Hood
:laugh: That's gold. Sorry Red.
This is true. But what is the determining factor for "some people", socioeconomic class, race, creed color etc; I agree that the system has become troubled, perhaps irreconcilable, but education has had its hand in furthering inequalities in the past and we needn't cast aside the current system to premise a return of the past. What concerns me is the push for privatization, which on the surface I can agree with, but seems to me to have a strong undercurrent for the profit model which I don't think is best for the process of education. I can't exactly put my finger on it, and maybe its merely a fear of change, but there's something peculiar with education, at its core the expansion of knowledge, that doesn't perfectly translate into dollars and cents. Sometimes markets do fail to reward intellectual contributions; a number of inventors have died penniless despite contributing an invaluable service to mankind(Tesla's AC current/induction motor for example). These maybe exceptions and I certainly understand the role profits have in growing the pie, while subsidies shrink it, but I don't see education as a purely private good. I see it as a means of compelling oneself to be better able to contribute to society and where society benefits I understand why society would promote it, even subsidize it.
Primary or secondary education. If we're discussing University, like they say across the pond pip pip, then students have ample opportunity to display their talents and be able to either qualify for a loan or qualify for scholarship (I have no problem with schools offering scholarships, non-profit you know). Ever increasing subsidization leads to costs increasing at greater than the rate of inflation which ultimately boils into higher loan payments; the vicious circle continues. The problem becomes finding the right mix of subsidy. Clearly we don't have it.
Primary eduction? We have universal public education provided by public monopolies... see where that's gotten us.
logroller
05-13-2011, 01:23 AM
Primary or secondary education. If we're discussing University, like they say across the pond pip pip, then students have ample opportunity to display their talents and be able to either qualify for a loan or qualify for scholarship (I have no problem with schools offering scholarships, non-profit you know). Ever increasing subsidization leads to costs increasing at greater than the rate of inflation which ultimately boils into higher loan payments; the vicious circle continues. The problem becomes finding the right mix of subsidy. Clearly we don't have it.
Primary eduction? We have universal public education provided by public monopolies... see where that's gotten us.
Two separate sets of concerns between primary and upper education.
I grew up in a home with two educators for parents, both with masters degrees. There is something which has been lost in public education. My parents both shared the "best and the brightest" outlook for educators, from Pres Kennedy I believe, but that seems long since forgotten. Now my wife is teacher, and a good one, she's not the brightest but she puts the welfare of the students first, which unfortunately is not par for the course. I'd tend towards blaming unions, but that may be a scape goat; for what has caused society to forget education is an opportunity to better one's life or the life of their child, and not a babysitting service or a way to delay entry to the workforce, cannot be explained by union entitlements alone and more likely is another vicious cycle where the entitlement mentality has infected the educator who now promotes it. Maybe its the red tape of govt stagnating the educational process; but what's the answer: privatization, charter schools, vouchers... I just don't know how well such ideas translate to practice on a large scale. There's only one thing I'm sure of, the cream rises to the top, and those at the top will find a way to succeed. Now the bottom half, that's where we should focus our efforts for change.
Now upper education, I don't really have much to say, other than a simple observation. I'm at University, er I mean state college and I've been thus far unimpressed with fellow classmates talents, say 1 out of 10. Admittedly I get pell grants and scholarships for my grades, so I may be shy to look the gift horse in the mouth and maybe I'm at Podunk U, and I shouldn't expect much, but here's my observational critique.
In light of state budget cuts there have been regular rallies to oppose education cuts on campus, then the next week a rally against deficits. This happens at least once a quarter and if I weren't attending this college it'd be downright hilarious.
fj1200
05-13-2011, 07:12 AM
Maybe its the red tape of govt stagnating the educational process; but what's the answer: privatization, charter schools, vouchers... I just don't know how well such ideas translate to practice on a large scale.
That's exactly the answer. What's needed is a large scale experiment, I nominate my county in GA. It downright sucks.
... but here's my observational critique.
In light of state budget cuts there have been regular rallies to oppose education cuts on campus, then the next week a rally against deficits. This happens at least once a quarter and if I weren't attending this college it'd be downright hilarious.
You've perfectly identified the problem; A complete inability to critically think about their own actions.
logroller
05-13-2011, 03:53 PM
That's exactly the answer. What's needed is a large scale experiment, I nominate my county in GA. It downright sucks.
I can't think of which founding father said this (Jefferson maybe), but I know a dissenting opinion in a recent SCOTUS case used similar language on a medical marijuana case from norCal. Really what this boils down to is state rights being eclipsed by federal funding.
Kathianne
05-13-2011, 06:09 PM
The avg college graduate earns over $30k per year more than a high school grad, and based on an average 28% tax rate-- equates to over $8000 more tax paid than a high school graduate.
Expanded over a 30 yr career, that's $340,000 on an investment of $200k, assuming a government funded public university costs around $40k per student per year over 5 yrs-- a net profit for govt of $140,000.
The issue is rather the costs, if put to a different use, would be more beneficial. Of course govt spending through borrowing vs revenues collected is an ever-present concern, but the logic of subsidized education appears sound. Any thoughts?
Those stats may be out of date as we speak. Furthermore, they never addressed the hundreds of millions of dollars 'invested' in those enrolled in college that never graduate. More on the issue would be the hundreds of millions/billions poured into universities to address those enrolled in college, many of whom will never graduate. Truth is, at the height of college grads, it was at 28% of population and that was with grade inflation. The times are a changing.
I am a believer in higher education, but always understood that it was not the route for most. I'd like to see less spending on post-secondary and more 'investment' in secondary. Make prep/AP/honors classes more rigorous and plentiful. Create the practical skills beyond child care and automotive classes to prepare the 80% that won't be successful in university studies.
Encourage scholarships that require 'means testing' from private sources. ACT/SAT/AP are not good indicators for those from impoverished backgrounds, but class rank/extracurricular/work history/volunteer backgrounds are. Sell those to private donors.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.