The Tea Party

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
So for those who want our universities to be a giant deregulated free-market free for all, maybe it would be wise to consider how much that will affect the path of the nation's best and brightest.

Is it possible there would be a market for a decent to high quality school at lower prices?

How do you plan on enforcing the best and the brightest to do "social justice" work?

I do agree we need to have more "productive" minds out there in the marketplace - as it turns out it takes some bright minds to navigate the regulatory land mines and that pays well.
 
I don't understand why state colleges' and universities' tuition is not tied to the inflation rate. Any increase above the inflation rate makes tuition exclusionary. The mission of state schools is to allow access to higher education to all those who want it. It's one of the promises that states have made to their populations.

No question states are in the financial hole, but well-educated citizens is only going to help fix that.
My university's annual operating budget is $3.7 billion. I know that we're going to have to pay for a lot of that in tuition, realistically. But the state currently contributes not even 25% of that number. I think our appropriations are $350 million. Tuition's going up by 7% next year.
 
Will you read the whole thing? Or dismiss it out of hand?

Ephphatha Poetry: "Imagine if the Tea Party Was Black" - Tim Wise

Ephphatha Poetry: "Imagine if the Tea Party Was Black" - Tim Wise

An interesting essay. I anticipate that the comments here will echo the variety of comments on that blog, or those I'm already seeing on Facebook.

We know where the lines are, and who's going to comment on which side of those lines, but I thought it was good food for thought.

Cori, we're not "interesting." :sad:

Although I think we're too accurate for some.
 
Eh, I can live with it not turning into another predictable internet slap fight with the same five players.

I thought it was interesting, and that's all that mattered to me.

I didn't repost it on my Facebook because I didn't want to end up seriously considering "defriending" my mom again over it, when she posted her expected response. :wink:
 
Is it possible there would be a market for a decent to high quality school at lower prices?

How do you plan on enforcing the best and the brightest to do "social justice" work?

Who said anything about enforcing? I am saying give people some incentive to do such work. Loan forgiveness (to some degree) would be one way. Schools like Yale already do that, and forgive a certain level of debt for the time that you spend doing social justice work afterwards. But most schools don't have an endowment of the sort that the Ivys have and are not necessarily in the position to provide this. The government most certainly could do so with its loans, but we all know how much you hate socialism.

And of course there is a market for lower priced schools. What kind of a question is this? Somebody going to Harvard Law and somebody going in-state to one of California's state universities WON'T be paying the same amount of money. Obviously. The point is that you might be talking about a $25K vs. $40K differential. Which is significant, but let's not pretend that $25K is in any way affordable or, frankly reasonable.

Most kids graduating from college have significant debt. Those who elect to go on to further schooling may have enormous levels of debt. I am not sitting here and complaining - I went into a profession where there is a payoff. But at the same time, I can tell you of example after example of excellent students who wanted to do social justice type of work and COULD NOT afford it when they had a loan of $118K or $95K or $140K leaving school. It just is not feasible for an individual who may have monthly payments of $1400 for their student loan, nevermind rent and living expenses. So we are pushing a certain number of our most capable young people into lucrative, corporate work, which they would NOT have chosen if they were in a different financial position. To you, this may be all nice and dandy; to me, it's a shame and a by-product of the idea that everything in our society should be run on a capitalist, profit-based system and that the free market is our modern Jesus that cures everything and is the solution for everything.
 
And of course there is a market for lower priced schools. What kind of a question is this? Somebody going to Harvard Law and somebody going in-state to one of California's state universities WON'T be paying the same amount of money. Obviously. The point is that you might be talking about a $25K vs. $40K differential. Which is significant, but let's not pretend that $25K is in any way affordable or, frankly reasonable.

Cal State Fullerton is tuition free for in-states residents with a $1500 per semester fee (with books and such comes to about $2000 a semester for undergrads). This is a quality school at a great price. In theory, one could do 2 years of junior college and then transfer here for the last two years. A decent four year degree for under 20k.
 
Except now, CSUF isn't taking transfers from JCs due to budget cuts.

Limiting transfers, yes. And that is sad. If state colleges can offer a quality education at this price, I consider it a great use of tax dollars and investment in our future. There are hundreds of places I would cut before cutting the state university and college system.
 
My in-state tuition fee for one year at my public, state university is about $13,000. Add room and board and you're looking at $25,000. For one year. Oh, and tuition is going up by about 7% every year.
 
Cal State Fullerton is tuition free for in-states residents with a $1500 per semester fee (with books and such comes to about $2000 a semester for undergrads). This is a quality school at a great price. In theory, one could do 2 years of junior college and then transfer here for the last two years. A decent four year degree for under 20k.

is that right?

I am out of the loop

I went to college in the 70s

this shows



Cal State Fullerton at $4700 a year
UCLA at $9200
USC at $40,000


College Search - compare colleges and universities side-by-side

people should choose a school that fits best within their means
 
people should choose a school that fits best within their means

Please keep in mind that choosing an undergraduate university may limit your possibilities when it comes to a graduate or professional program afterwards. What I mean is that if you have your sights on a top school for a post-graduate degree, you almost need to come out of certain feeder schools. Most people seem to have no concept of how important this can be.
 
Please keep in mind that choosing an undergraduate university may limit your possibilities when it comes to a graduate or professional program afterwards. What I mean is that if you have your sights on a top school for a post-graduate degree, you almost need to come out of certain feeder schools. Most people seem to have no concept of how important this can be.

of course I understand that

people that are born into higher income families, have more advantages


the $50000 a year school should produce a degree with more value, than the $5000 a year school

a $100,000 car should be a better car than a $10,000 car.

some are able to pay cash for that $100,000 car. Should those that can afford a $10,000 car be given a $100,000 car.

or have their $100,000 car loan waived?
 
Please keep in mind that choosing an undergraduate university may limit your possibilities when it comes to a graduate or professional program afterwards. What I mean is that if you have your sights on a top school for a post-graduate degree, you almost need to come out of certain feeder schools. Most people seem to have no concept of how important this can be.

That's fine, who should pay for the expensive USC degree?
 
That's fine, who should pay for the expensive USC degree?

I think that people have to make the decision themselves as to what they think the relative value of a degree is.

Is any BA worth $50K/year? I absolutely think that it is not and that there is little reason to charge that much. If schools that charge that much receive public funding, the government should regulate tuition to the extent that they are able to. If it is a completely private institution that doesn't benefit at all from taxpayer dollars, they can do as they wish, I suppose. Even in that event, the government has the ability to curtail loan payments.

I am not even talking about undergraduate degrees so much as professional degrees - things like medicine, law, teaching, dentistry. There is great social value that people with these degrees can provide. The government has a role in providing incentives to these students.

I don't expect you to agree with or understand any such socialist thinking. Clearly there is a segment of Americans that operates completely outside of the sphere of the rest of the Western democratic world in this respect.
 
Cori, we're not "interesting." :sad:

Although I think we're too accurate for some.

Eh, I can live with it not turning into another predictable internet slap fight with the same five players.

I thought it was interesting, and that's all that mattered to me.

I didn't repost it on my Facebook because I didn't want to end up seriously considering "defriending" my mom again over it, when she posted her expected response. :wink:


ask a question

get an answer

excitable times, like these days

2-28-6920cr2.jpg





black%20panthers_1969.jpg





Black-Panthers-outside-Alameda-County-Courthouse-1969-by-Roz-Payne.jpg
 
I don't expect you to agree with or understand any such socialist thinking. Clearly there is a segment of Americans that operates completely outside of the sphere of the rest of the Western democratic world in this respect.

I support state-subsidized college education, so your generalizations can be taken elsewhere :happydance:
 
A few things I've seen in this discussion:

We need to fund state schools better, this will reduce tuition: Agree 100%. One of the best "bangs for your buck." I think state schools can make up for some of the gap between them and the elite schools in perceived level of quality, value, etc, by forming strategic partnerships with private employers. This is relatively easy when you have the backing of the state government, which employers want to keep happy.

Demand is up, so tuition is way up: Very true. I think, obviously, government policies that facilitate the borrowing of money for college have a role in increasing the demand for it. However, these are not new, they have been in place for quite some time. In fact, the money was a lot "easier" even 10 years ago before direct government and government subsidized(sallie mae,etc) loans were allowed to be given out at 8, 10, 12% interest rates(when market rates were at record lows, but I will get mad if I go further :)). This was the time period I was in school, unfortunately, and the rates were WAY, WAY out of line with historical averages during this time. I was in school from 2005-09, most loans running 7-12%, whereas my mother's God daughter went to school from 1997-2001 and paid a maximum of 4% on any government related loan.

Not to mention, even since the credit crisis hit in 2007 with the resulting tightening in the private sector, tuition has not let up one little bit, it in fact has still increased by double digit percentages!

So what is it? Why, in the last 10 yrs do we all of a sudden see 30, 35, 40, $45,000 tuition bills? I think the answer is a lot more simple than most let on here. Colleges are of course businesses subject to the same economic pressures as the rest of the economy. So lets look at:

Stock market: Has not been great or even consistently decent since 2000. We all know what its been like since 2007! Obviously, colleges and universities have endowments that they have invested in stocks, bonds, etc. If the endowment is strong, they are less dependent on tuition.

Health Care and Energy Costs: Colleges pay these like everyone else, probably more so because they are generally very generous with benefits and they have many buildings used as residences, so there is a lot of energy consumption. Health care rising fast, energy rising fast, they pay, they pass the cost on.

Changing nature of the economy in general: 30 years ago, it was much easier to have a job and a middle class lifestyle without a college degree. As we all know, those days are history. So out of necessity, more people are seeking college educations. This could be more of a factor than the "easy money" argument, as college loans have thus far avoided the "hand them out of a cracker jack box" no documentation, interest only, "we don't care if you pay them back cause we're selling them to Wall Street" mentality that plagued the mortgage industry.

I don't know the answer. I think the student loan reforms this year were a step in the right direction, if we are taking the plunge as taxpayers, we may as well be doing it in house in a way that incentivizes keeping the deficit down as opposed to making a few private corporations with lobbyists whole on any losses(socialism much??!!!!!).

I think the most simple, most obvious answer is the best one: College is expensive, so people need good incomes to pay for it. So lets get to work creating the good, high paying jobs of the 21st century so that we can afford to send our kids to college! That is a starting point that we can all agree on, though we will of course differ on how to get there!
 
Cal State Fullerton at $4700 a year

I estimated $4000 after the fees listed on their website- books, labs, and parking probably make it closer to $4700 as you've posted here. That's still an awesome deal and someone could certainly start a great career with B.A. or B.S. from this school. Also, should they excel - they would also become eligible for grants and scholarships.

I'm not saying it would be easy for someone to wait tables and pay for school on their own, but it's certainly possible. I waited tables and took advantage of the GI Bill. Someone may take another path (I had a friend that sold cars and waited tables to pay for tuition). If you want a degree from a decent school without debt, it's possible. As with most things in life, it will take hard work, times of frustration, and creativity. Do I wish my parents could have afforded to send me to USC and pay for room and board so I could have really had the full college experience? Maybe. But I somehow managed to graduate from a decent school and start a career.

Also, many medium to large sized companies will pay for a good portion of grad school.
 
A few things I've seen in this discussion:

We need to fund state schools better, this will reduce tuition: Agree 100%. One of the best "bangs for your buck." I think state schools can make up for some of the gap between them and the elite schools in perceived level of quality, value, etc, by forming strategic partnerships with private employers. This is relatively easy when you have the backing of the state government, which employers want to keep happy.

Demand is up, so tuition is way up: Very true. I think, obviously, government policies that facilitate the borrowing of money for college have a role in increasing the demand for it. However, these are not new, they have been in place for quite some time. In fact, the money was a lot "easier" even 10 years ago before direct government and government subsidized(sallie mae,etc) loans were allowed to be given out at 8, 10, 12% interest rates(when market rates were at record lows, but I will get mad if I go further :)). This was the time period I was in school, unfortunately, and the rates were WAY, WAY out of line with historical averages during this time. I was in school from 2005-09, most loans running 7-12%, whereas my mother's God daughter went to school from 1997-2001 and paid a maximum of 4% on any government related loan.

Not to mention, even since the credit crisis hit in 2007 with the resulting tightening in the private sector, tuition has not let up one little bit, it in fact has still increased by double digit percentages!

So what is it? Why, in the last 10 yrs do we all of a sudden see 30, 35, 40, $45,000 tuition bills? I think the answer is a lot more simple than most let on here. Colleges are of course businesses subject to the same economic pressures as the rest of the economy. So lets look at:

Stock market: Has not been great or even consistently decent since 2000. We all know what its been like since 2007! Obviously, colleges and universities have endowments that they have invested in stocks, bonds, etc. If the endowment is strong, they are less dependent on tuition.

Health Care and Energy Costs: Colleges pay these like everyone else, probably more so because they are generally very generous with benefits and they have many buildings used as residences, so there is a lot of energy consumption. Health care rising fast, energy rising fast, they pay, they pass the cost on.

Changing nature of the economy in general: 30 years ago, it was much easier to have a job and a middle class lifestyle without a college degree. As we all know, those days are history. So out of necessity, more people are seeking college educations. This could be more of a factor than the "easy money" argument, as college loans have thus far avoided the "hand them out of a cracker jack box" no documentation, interest only, "we don't care if you pay them back cause we're selling them to Wall Street" mentality that plagued the mortgage industry.

I don't know the answer. I think the student loan reforms this year were a step in the right direction, if we are taking the plunge as taxpayers, we may as well be doing it in house in a way that incentivizes keeping the deficit down as opposed to making a few private corporations with lobbyists whole on any losses(socialism much??!!!!!).

I think the most simple, most obvious answer is the best one: College is expensive, so people need good incomes to pay for it. So lets get to work creating the good, high paying jobs of the 21st century so that we can afford to send our kids to college! That is a starting point that we can all agree on, though we will of course differ on how to get there!

Good summary and post!
 
I worked two jobs while I was going to a state college, too.


also, in the Southern CA mix is Cal State Long Beach, similar costs as Fullerton. and U C Irvine similar costs to UCLA.
There are options, it is more of a choice.

A person needs to evaluate ,if it is worth going into (more) debt for the more expensive schools.
 
A few things I've seen in this discussion:

We need to fund state schools better, this will reduce tuition: Agree 100%. One of the best "bangs for your buck." I think state schools can make up for some of the gap between them and the elite schools in perceived level of quality, value, etc, by forming strategic partnerships with private employers. This is relatively easy when you have the backing of the state government, which employers want to keep happy.

Demand is up, so tuition is way up: Very true. I think, obviously, government policies that facilitate the borrowing of money for college have a role in increasing the demand for it. However, these are not new, they have been in place for quite some time. In fact, the money was a lot "easier" even 10 years ago before direct government and government subsidized(sallie mae,etc) loans were allowed to be given out at 8, 10, 12% interest rates(when market rates were at record lows, but I will get mad if I go further :)). This was the time period I was in school, unfortunately, and the rates were WAY, WAY out of line with historical averages during this time. I was in school from 2005-09, most loans running 7-12%, whereas my mother's God daughter went to school from 1997-2001 and paid a maximum of 4% on any government related loan.

Not to mention, even since the credit crisis hit in 2007 with the resulting tightening in the private sector, tuition has not let up one little bit, it in fact has still increased by double digit percentages!

So what is it? Why, in the last 10 yrs do we all of a sudden see 30, 35, 40, $45,000 tuition bills? I think the answer is a lot more simple than most let on here. Colleges are of course businesses subject to the same economic pressures as the rest of the economy. So lets look at:

Stock market: Has not been great or even consistently decent since 2000. We all know what its been like since 2007! Obviously, colleges and universities have endowments that they have invested in stocks, bonds, etc. If the endowment is strong, they are less dependent on tuition.

Health Care and Energy Costs: Colleges pay these like everyone else, probably more so because they are generally very generous with benefits and they have many buildings used as residences, so there is a lot of energy consumption. Health care rising fast, energy rising fast, they pay, they pass the cost on.

Changing nature of the economy in general: 30 years ago, it was much easier to have a job and a middle class lifestyle without a college degree. As we all know, those days are history. So out of necessity, more people are seeking college educations. This could be more of a factor than the "easy money" argument, as college loans have thus far avoided the "hand them out of a cracker jack box" no documentation, interest only, "we don't care if you pay them back cause we're selling them to Wall Street" mentality that plagued the mortgage industry.

I don't know the answer. I think the student loan reforms this year were a step in the right direction, if we are taking the plunge as taxpayers, we may as well be doing it in house in a way that incentivizes keeping the deficit down as opposed to making a few private corporations with lobbyists whole on any losses(socialism much??!!!!!).

I think the most simple, most obvious answer is the best one: College is expensive, so people need good incomes to pay for it. So lets get to work creating the good, high paying jobs of the 21st century so that we can afford to send our kids to college! That is a starting point that we can all agree on, though we will of course differ on how to get there!

Good post :up:
 
I saw a post on another forum from an American who said he was $140k in debt from student loans. My mortgage is only around 20k more than that. :crack:
 
would you agree that, on the whole, the president's policies have been successful?

As I said before, the jury is still out:

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The recovery is picking up steam as employers boost payrolls, but economists think the government's stimulus package and jobs bill had little to do with the rebound, according to a survey released Monday.

In latest quarterly survey by the National Association for Business Economics, the index that measures employment showed job growth for the first time in two years -- but a majority of respondents felt the fiscal stimulus had no impact.

NABE conducted the study by polling 68 of its members who work in economic roles at private-sector firms. About 73% of those surveyed said employment at their company is neither higher nor lower as a result of the $787 billion Recovery Act, which the White House's Council of Economic Advisers says is on track to create or save 3.5 million jobs by the end of the year.

That sentiment is shared for the recently passed $17.7 billion jobs bill that calls for tax breaks for businesses that hire and additional infrastructure spending. More than two-thirds of those polled believe the measure won't affect payrolls, while 30% expect it to boost hiring "moderately."

But the economists see conditions improving. More than half of respondents -- 57% -- say industrial demand is rising, while just 6% see it declining. A growing number also said their firms are increasing spending and profit margins are widening.

Nearly a quarter of those surveyed forecast that gross domestic product, the broadest measure of economic activity, will grow more than 3% in 2010, and 70% of NABE's respondents expect it to grow more than 2%.

Still, the survey suggested that tight lending conditions remain a concern. Almost half of those polled said the credit crunch hurts their business
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom