BOYCOTT KRMG Their Sponsors and Advertisers!!!!!

[nathanm]

By your own admission the government is trying to give MORE opportunity to poor students. I know this sounds rash and I will be called a corporate stooge and everything, but it is what it is. I for one am not against all these programs. But there again, your argument is false. Government does try to create equal outcomes, they just call it "leveling the playing field" in order to make you think they are making the rules more fair or something.

On the Pell grant note, do state universities give "discounts" to lower income students. Now that would be the way to go in my opinion. An actual reduction in cost instead of a redistribution of the cost.

I though you just said you wanted equal opportunity for all? Part of giving people equal opportunity to succeed is making sure everyone has an equal opportunity to get the education they need to do that. I'm not sure how you can separate giving people equal opportunity and "attempting" to give everyone equal outcomes given your statements.

And how is having schools lean more on the taxpayer to fund the discounts you suggest any different than giving students grants instead? Both are funded by the tax dollar.

[Hoss]

I'm working on it, might take a few more Spatens.

Optimator?

[Hoss]

Personally I could do without Rush and Maher. Neither one of them is funny or thought provoking.

While Maher does perplex me at times, his panels are usually worth watching the show.  He *tries* to get a token conservative on from time to time anyway.  Usually they are more of the party conservative and not the bat-smile crazy ones.

[nathanm]

While Maher does perplex me at times, his panels are usually worth watching the show.  He *tries* to get a token conservative on from time to time anyway.  Usually they are more of the party conservative and not the bat-smile crazy ones.

I think the complete moonbattery of the GOP has driven him over the edge. Back on PI, he used to trash Democrats at least as often as (most) Republicans. He still does have some to say about morons on the left, but it's rarely if ever as loud as his opposition to the Republicans. With Santorum as a plausible candidate, I'm not sure I can really blame him. The amount of anti-intellectual BS that he has spewed forth thus far is astounding. So is his brazen anti-contraception stance. I'll say that again. Anti-contraception. Not anti-abortion. Anti. Contraception.

Somehow, this guy is a serious contender!

[erfalf]

I though you just said you wanted equal opportunity for all? Part of giving people equal opportunity to succeed is making sure everyone has an equal opportunity to get the education they need to do that. I'm not sure how you can separate giving people equal opportunity and "attempting" to give everyone equal outcomes given your statements.

And how is having schools lean more on the taxpayer to fund the discounts you suggest any different than giving students grants instead? Both are funded by the tax dollar.

I guess I should be more clear. Equal opportunity means that no one gets any advantages, regardless of race or creed or whatever. Grants (based on things other than actual qualifications) are a tool to create equal outcomes. I know I'm gonna get this whole only the rich will succeed bit, but I just don't think it is government's responsibility to be addressing this. If it does, where then does it stop: "Well, Jimmy doesn't have an iPhone 4 whatever, lets subsidize that too, everyone needs a phone." Ridiculous I know, but hear this "Well, Jimmy doesn't have a college education, lets subsidize that too, everyone needs a college education." Where does it stop. It goes back to who decides who is stupid.

A college education is not a necessity. I could give example after example of people that have little more than a high school diploma that are doing fantastically well (not millionaires or anything, but well). They didn't come from anything remotely close to wealth. It all has to do with attitude and work ethic.

And I see schools lowering the cost not as leaning on the taxpayer, but forced cutting of a bloated budget. Universities have been proven to be some of the most wasteful spenders out there. And now to top it off, it seems that the product they offer is far from as valuable as it actually costs. If they would step back for a moment and refocus on what their core goals are, I would guess they could cut quit a bit.

Also to be clear, I am only referring to public universities. Private universities for the most part should have the autonomy to do what they want, however if they want to accept federal student loans as payments, the government I guess should have some say so in some things, kind of like medicare I guess, although I don't know much about medicare.

[Conan71]

Erf- I think making post-high school education a priority is one of the best investments government can make.  It beats entitlement programs hands-down.  I don't really see that as what we are told is "social justice" or "leveling the playing field".  You are correct that not everyone is suited for a college education, nor needs one.  I'm personally a proponent of better access to higher ed, whether it's the university level or vo-tech.  Sure beats research grants for the study of Facebook on people's eating habits, the mating habits of amoeba, etc.  Keep in mind not all individual educational grants are based soley on race, gender, ethnicity or even income level- therefore not really trying to level the playing field.

Nathan- We are approaching $4.00 gas in the near future, unemployment is still over 8% and Santorum is winning primaries, with contraception being one of his cornerstone issues.  I mean W T F?  I'm not sure whether to be stunned by his stupidity or those who think that's one of the biggest issues facing America right now.

[Hoss]

Erf- I think making post-high school education a priority is one of the best investments government can make.  It beats entitlement programs hands-down.  I don't really see that as what we are told is "social justice" or "leveling the playing field".  You are correct that not everyone is suited for a college education, nor needs one.  I'm personally a proponent of better access to higher ed, whether it's the university level or vo-tech.  Sure beats research grants for the study of Facebook on people's eating habits, the mating habits of amoeba, etc.  Keep in mind not all individual educational grants are based soley on race, gender, ethnicity or even income level- therefore not really trying to level the playing field.

Nathan- We are approaching $4.00 gas in the near future, unemployment is still over 8% and Santorum is winning primaries, with contraception being one of his cornerstone issues.  I mean W T F?  I'm not sure whether to be stunned by his stupidity or those who think that's one of the biggest issues facing America right now.

It's not just his stupidity though, Conan.  The stupid thing?  That voters are actually buying into it.  Makes me scratch my head.

[Conan71]

It's not just his stupidity though, Conan.  The stupid thing?  That voters are actually buying into it.  Makes me scratch my head.

Exactly the reason I simply don't think I've got much in common with the rank & file GOP anymore.

[nathanm]

I guess I should be more clear. Equal opportunity means that no one gets any advantages, regardless of race or creed or whatever. Grants (based on things other than actual qualifications) are a tool to create equal outcomes.

Ok, so you don't believe in equal opportunity. Glad we cleared that up. That's fine. I disagree, but I'm not going to vilify you for it. We all have our priorities.

A college education is not a necessity. I could give example after example of people that have little more than a high school diploma that are doing fantastically well (not millionaires or anything, but well). They didn't come from anything remotely close to wealth. It all has to do with attitude and work ethic.

Yes, some people manage to do OK despite not having a college degree. Fewer and fewer every year, actually. It's not just about hard work, it's about the existence of the opportunity to succeed. Oftentimes a college degree is a prerequisite. Surely this is clear when you see that unemployment is always significantly higher among those with only a high school diploma than those who have a college degree. Sometimes folks get lucky, but it's not to be expected.

And I see schools lowering the cost not as leaning on the taxpayer, but forced cutting of a bloated budget. Universities have been proven to be some of the most wasteful spenders out there. And now to top it off, it seems that the product they offer is far from as valuable as it actually costs. If they would step back for a moment and refocus on what their core goals are, I would guess they could cut quit a bit.

OK. Just FWIW, the problem with public universities in my view are a) the drastically declining budget appropriations from the states and b) restricted donations that can only be used to build fancy new buildings with the donor's name on them. Few people are willing to donate towards maintenance of said building or general salaries. At best you might get them to endow a department chair. For-profit schools are (generally) even worse, as the costs are much higher and matriculation rates are much lower. Not surprising, since several of the owners specifically set out to game the system. The only advantage is that only the federal government is getting soaked by them. The state isn't paying much if anything.

Conan, I honestly don't know. If the tide was behind Romney, I could understand that. I don't think he's really what we need, but I can see how someone might think that he would bring something valuable to the table. Santorum, on the other hand..

[Conan71]

I think TTC may have summed it up best (I think it was him) that the Dems have managed to sucker the GOP into the old social agenda debate again.  The GOP needs to stay on message about the economy instead of pandering to the furthest right element's moral agenda if they expect to win in November. 

[erfalf]

Erf- I think making post-high school education a priority is one of the best investments government can make.  It beats entitlement programs hands-down.  I don't really see that as what we are told is "social justice" or "leveling the playing field".  You are correct that not everyone is suited for a college education, nor needs one.  I'm personally a proponent of better access to higher ed, whether it's the university level or vo-tech.  Sure beats research grants for the study of Facebook on people's eating habits, the mating habits of amoeba, etc.  Keep in mind not all individual educational grants are based soley on race, gender, ethnicity or even income level- therefore not really trying to level the playing field.

Nathan- We are approaching $4.00 gas in the near future, unemployment is still over 8% and Santorum is winning primaries, with contraception being one of his cornerstone issues.  I mean W T F?  I'm not sure whether to be stunned by his stupidity or those who think that's one of the biggest issues facing America right now.

I agree, education spending is a better investment than virtually everything else. But increasing spending alone does not create better education. I think that has been proven ad nauseum. And yes there are some grants for some crazy stuff. That is what I was leaning toward in another post. Universities need to refocus. If you've been, you know that you rarely see a real professor in your classroom. What exactly am I paying for? It's like going to a Thunder game to watch Durant's backup. Eventually people will stop paying, or at the very least evaluate their spending more thoroughly. I've just been doing some reading about how universities primary focus is not educating us. Why should a state keep funding organizations interest's aren't in line with what we are funding them to do? I'm just posing a question, by no means am I suggesting cutting all funding to our state universities, so let's not conclude that I'm so Ron Paul loon, I am just making a point.

Also, I think in my post I distinguished between academic and income based grants. I'm not opposed to the former.

[nathanm]

I think TTC may have summed it up best (I think it was him) that the Dems have managed to sucker the GOP into the old social agenda debate again.  The GOP needs to stay on message about the economy instead of pandering to the furthest right element's moral agenda if they expect to win in November. 

The problem is that they have no real economic plan. Well, that's an exaggeration..they do have a plan. Their plan is to double down on Bush-era policies. Obviously, that's not a terribly popular message to be pushing. Between that and the vast majority of their support coming from wingers at the moment it's no wonder why they're pushing the wedge issues as hard as they can.

What I find inexplicable is that more than a few people are buying it.

[erfalf]

Ok, so you don't believe in equal opportunity. Glad we cleared that up. That's fine. I disagree, but I'm not going to vilify you for it. We all have our priorities.

I think I was pretty clear that I was for equal opportunity, however I believe it should be based on actual qualifications and not statistics. I don't know if every university shares this policy, but Harvard looks ONLY at academic qualifications for admission. If you have no money, but you qualify, they will find a way. That is equal opportunity.

Yes, some people manage to do OK despite not having a college degree. Fewer and fewer every year, actually. It's not just about hard work, it's about the existence of the opportunity to succeed. Oftentimes a college degree is a prerequisite. Surely this is clear when you see that unemployment is always significantly higher among those with only a high school diploma than those who have a college degree. Sometimes folks get lucky, but it's not to be expected.

Regarding unemployment, those poll results naturally assume that a college education is the sole variable. You even admit that it's not. I wholeheartedly agree. I understand that to be a doctor/lawyer/accountant/teacher that you will never find employment in those fields without a degree. Fortunately, the United States economy is a diverse thing. There are plenty of opportunities available. Some of the most successful people I know without degrees all have their own businesses. In their case, and in most, it has vastly more to do with their work ethic. Are they going to win (that's what they think). Losers lose and winners win, in spite of education. And by no means were these people wholly dependent on luck. That would be an insult.

[Conan71]

I agree, education spending is a better investment than virtually everything else. But increasing spending alone does not create better education. I think that has been proven ad nauseum. And yes there are some grants for some crazy stuff. That is what I was leaning toward in another post. Universities need to refocus. If you've been, you know that you rarely see a real professor in your classroom. What exactly am I paying for? It's like going to a Thunder game to watch Durant's backup. Eventually people will stop paying, or at the very least evaluate their spending more thoroughly. I've just been doing some reading about how universities primary focus is not educating us. Why should a state keep funding organizations interest's aren't in line with what we are funding them to do? I'm just posing a question, by no means am I suggesting cutting all funding to our state universities, so let's not conclude that I'm so Ron Paul loon, I am just making a point.

Also, I think in my post I distinguished between academic and income based grants. I'm not opposed to the former.

I've been to JC and four year and I'm presently paying for two daughter's college educations in Norman.  Fortunately one graduates in a couple of months...whew!  The older one gets some academic scholarship money which has helped keep me out of debt over her four years.  I'm still amazed though at the scholarships thrown the way of some kids who came from much wealthier families.

Don't get me wrong, I do like academic grants because it's as close a correlation you can make to a "qualified" recipient getting the money and who will likely achieve the result intended.  But giving money to those who can already well-afford their degree program necessarily cuts someone else out who may not have the means but may well have the desire, talent, and intellect to complete the same degree program.  I don't have a problem with income-based grants.  Cost can be one of the bigger barriers to getting a meaningful degree for many young adults.

I don't know if you've ever read the posts on here about common education (K-12) but it's no secret that more money is not the solution to the majority of educational problems in the United States.  Other countries achieve better results because there is more emphasis on family and the family is more involved in the education of their children.  That's also why you see typically better results from suburban districts than you do non-magnet or non-special program schools of inner city school systems in the same area.

[nathanm]

I think I was pretty clear that I was for equal opportunity, however I believe it should be based on actual qualifications and not statistics.

It isn't equal opportunity when a C student's parents have the money to send them to college while the B student's parent's don't.

Like it or not, the statistics clearly show that kids from wealthy families make more money over their lifetime (on average) than kids from poor families. That clearly indicates that equal opportunity is not something that is present in our society at the moment. As I said, yes, some people manage to do well for themselves without a college degree. I do OK, but that's because I lucked into a work situation that got me the contacts and experience necessary to do what it is that I do. And it was just that, luck. I could just as easily be working at Geek Squad now. Plenty of my high school friends tried to take the same route but missed out on the opportunity I had and despite working a lot harder than I do haven't had the same success.

The thing is, we can't all be owners. Some of us have to be the cogs in the machine. More and more, being that cog requires a college degree, even when it it isn't strictly necessary.