• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Factory orders fall for third straight month

ocean515 said:
Actually, public universities should emphasize the areas of knowledge in greatest need. Grants, scholarships, and low interest loans should be made available only to those areas of need. Science, technology, etc.. No student loans for the vast majority of liberal arts majors. If students want to pursue those majors, let them pay for their education on their own.

Without going into great detail, public universities need to eliminate any funding for classes that are a waste of taxpayer funds. An advisory board should be formed of business and technology leaders who can identify these areas of need. "Teachers/Professors" who want to teach the worthless degrees can find jobs at private universities or go get a different job. Scamming students and putting them into debt for decades should be considered a crime of opportunity, and treated as such.
Click to expand...
What you're describing is not particularly "free market" in its approach to government dictating the direction of the economy.
 
Unrepresented said:
I'd rather the costs of higher education be shifted from students. If employers want to require an educated staff, let them help shoulder the burden.

I'm playing volleyball on the beach tomorrow morning, a week into December. California certainly has its upsides.
Click to expand...

What's your monthly property tax bill? :roll:

There's more to life than good weather. :wink:
 
countryboy said:
What's your monthly property tax bill? :roll:

There's more to life than good weather. :wink:
Click to expand...
I didn't intend to suggest that good weather was a summary of the benefits of California living, or that we don't have challenges, such as the unrealistic housing markets in the major metropolitan areas.

But it was sunny and 70's on the beach this morning.:mrgreen:
 
Unrepresented said:
What you're describing is not particularly "free market" in its approach to government dictating the direction of the economy.
Click to expand...

The government wouldn't be dictating anything. Again, without going into the finer details, financial assistance would be directed to areas of need. For example, there is a shortage of engineers in multiple areas. Loans, etc., would be made available to those students who want to pursue those majors. Why disperse limited resources in area of higher education that have little to no value to the public?

All one has to do is review available majors from public universities to recognize there are areas of study that meet this "little/no value" standard. They should be offered, of course, but students pursuing those degrees should pay for them themselves.
 
ocean515 said:
The government wouldn't be dictating anything. Again, without going into the finer details, financial assistance would be directed to areas of need. For example, there is a shortage of engineers in multiple areas. Loans, etc., would be made available to those students who want to pursue those majors. Why disperse limited resources in area of higher education that have little to no value to the public?

All one has to do is review available majors from public universities to recognize there are areas of study that meet this "little/no value" standard. They should be offered, of course, but students pursuing those degrees should pay for them themselves.
Click to expand...
I'm fairly certain that universities wouldn't offer majors that they didn't perceive as having value and that the students wouldn't study them without perceiving value.

There are already market motivations that contribute towards certain fields of study. I'd prefer we decrease barriers to education in general, rather than construct more by favoring only select fields.
 
Unrepresented said:
Just pointing out that you're badmouthing the value of higher education while displaying lacking in some of the finer points of grammar.

Also:

Allot
al·lot
əˈlät/
verb
verb: allot; 3rd person present: allots; past tense: allotted; past participle: allotted; gerund or present participle: allotting

give or apportion (something) to someone as a share or task.
"equal time was allotted to each"


A lot
Adv. 1. a lot - to a very great degree or extent; "I feel a lot better"; "we enjoyed ourselves very much"; "she was very much interested"; "this would help a great deal"
a good deal, a great deal, lots, very much, much
Click to expand...
No one succeeded because of proper grammar. But many have succeeded on hard work and the fruits of their labor and ideas. People that succeed in this way, don't give a **** about your grammar abilities, unless it's critical for their jobs(like translation software businesses)
 
DarkWizard12 said:
No one succeeded because of proper grammar. But many have succeeded on hard work and the fruits of their labor and ideas. People that succeed in this way, don't give a **** about your grammar abilities, unless it's critical for their jobs(like translation software businesses)
Click to expand...
I'm not really a grammar nazi, and I have many, many typos, errors, and misused words here and anywhere else I've ever written anything. As I stated earlier, I posted the corrections because of my interpretation of the poster's devaluing of education while simultaneously showing a lack of concern about what appeared to be a lack of education on proper use of plurals and apostrophes.
 
Unrepresented said:
I'm fairly certain that universities wouldn't offer majors that they didn't perceive as having value and that the students wouldn't study them without perceiving value.

There are already market motivations that contribute towards certain fields of study. I'd prefer we decrease barriers to education in general, rather than construct more by favoring only select fields.
Click to expand...

I'm fairly certain a majority of students are generally clueless when it comes to a major, and they finally pick one that sounds cool, or doesn't require as much effort to complete. As I wrote, a review of degrees offered at most public universities will provide ample evidence of the large number of these degrees.

I don't suggest these pointless degrees be eliminated, I just don't think they should be funded with the precious dollars that are available. If a student wants to borrow money from a lender, or from parents, or can save or work for the cost, all the power to them.

The scam that higher education has become is one of the greater crimes committed on young people, and those behind the scam should be shamed out of the education field altogether.
 
Unrepresented said:
Private universities may do as they wish, of course, but public universities have to observe whatever mandates are demanded of them, and chances are, private universities will wish to stay competitive with public universities.
Click to expand...

States have a bigger mandate: balance their budgets. And as their finances have come under pressure they've placed more of the burden on students because they know the students can finance the cost with subsidized loans or get Mommy and Daddy to pay the freight, either with cash of PLUS loans. I mean, even in the progressive People's Democratic Republic of California students who want to attend a school in the UC system get hosed to the tune of $30K-plus a year, so what chance do students anywhere else have? As far as private colleges wanting to compete with public schools, the top-tier schools compete more on academic reputation than price. Students seem willing to fork over the dough for the MITs, Berkeleys, Harvards, Stanfords, and Princetons regardless of cost. It's the lower tier private schools that compete more on price, and even then there's a two-tier pricing system, kind of like the MSRP quoted for a new car and what one is actually pays. These schools are just trying to make themselves look exclusive by listing a high price for tuition while offering considerable subsidies just to get bodies in the door.
 
ocean515 said:
I'm fairly certain a majority of students are generally clueless when it comes to a major, and they finally pick one that sounds cool, or doesn't require as much effort to complete. As I wrote, a review of degrees offered at most public universities will provide ample evidence of the large number of these degrees.

I don't suggest these pointless degrees be eliminated, I just don't think they should be funded with the precious dollars that are available. If a student wants to borrow money from a lender, or from parents, or can save or work for the cost, all the power to them.

The scam that higher education has become is one of the greater crimes committed on young people, and those behind the scam should be shamed out of the education field altogether.
Click to expand...
I agree with you that there are educational institutions that are cheating students. In general, I view the threat as being from the "for profit" education system where graduation rates and job placement are relatively low. Those are the targets I'd address first if you're looking for significant reform and strong results.
Ahlevah said:
States have a bigger mandate: balance their budgets. And as their finances have come under pressure they've placed more of the burden on students because they know the students can finance the cost with subsidized loans or get Mommy and Daddy to pay the freight, either with cash of PLUS loans. I mean, even in the progressive People's Democratic Republic of California students who want to attend a school in the UC system get hosed to the tune of $30K-plus a year, so what chance do students anywhere else have? As far as private colleges wanting to compete with public schools, the top-tier schools compete more on academic reputation than price. Students seem willing to fork over the dough for the MITs, Berkeleys, Harvards, Stanfords, and Princetons regardless of cost. It's the lower tier private schools that compete more on price, and even then there's a two-tier pricing system, kind of like the MSRP quoted for a new car and what one is actually pays. These schools are just trying to make themselves look exclusive by listing a high price for tuition while offering considerable subsidies just to get bodies in the door.
Click to expand...

Yes. I'm very much aware that here in California we've seen all levels of higher education increase significantly in cost over the last few years. Attacking one of the fundamental means of economic mobility is immoral. I'm openly advocating it be reversed.
 
Industrial numbers are soft in China, too.



The idea that you can decrease the cost of higher education by increasing federal subsidies of it is.... :) Well, entertaining.
 
Unrepresented said:
I agree with you that there are educational institutions that are cheating students. In general, I view the threat as being from the "for profit" education system where graduation rates and job placement are relatively low. Those are the targets I'd address first if you're looking for significant reform and strong results.


Yes. I'm very much aware that here in California we've seen all levels of higher education increase significantly in cost over the last few years. Attacking one of the fundamental means of economic mobility is immoral. I'm openly advocating it be reversed.
Click to expand...

It's not just "for profits". The current graduation rate in the California State University System is abysmal. In fact, it's so bad, the data is really difficult to find. The most recent studies that can be found related to retention rates date back to 2005. This means kids are checking into college, taking out loans to pay for them and very quickly dropping out, because they either couldn't handle to curriculum, or they just couldn't hack the effort.

It's a crime what has been done to the minds of young people today. College isn't for everyone. It shouldn't be. Community Colleges can provide skills training the is completely sufficient for someone to go out and live a successful, productive and lucrative life. Instead, the message is, get a college degree, or suffer. BS.

And one more rant. Why does it take 5-6 years now to complete a degree? Because it's been designed to rip off the students, and feather the beds of tenured professors, and greedy administrators.
 
ocean515 said:
It's not just "for profits". The current graduation rate in the California State University System is abysmal. In fact, it's so bad, the data is really difficult to find. The most recent studies that can be found related to retention rates date back to 2005. This means kids are checking into college, taking out loans to pay for them and very quickly dropping out, because they either couldn't handle to curriculum, or they just couldn't hack the effort.

It's a crime what has been done to the minds of young people today. College isn't for everyone. It shouldn't be. Community Colleges can provide skills training the is completely sufficient for someone to go out and live a successful, productive and lucrative life. Instead, the message is, get a college degree, or suffer. BS.

And one more rant. Why does it take 5-6 years now to complete a degree? Because it's been designed to rip off the students, and feather the beds of tenured professors, and greedy administrators.
Click to expand...
I'm happy to reform higher education, but the for profit stuff is much lower hanging fruit. It's an easy win:

tumblr_msm70366sK1s217p8o1_500.jpg
 
Unrepresented said:
I'm happy to reform higher education, but the for profit stuff is much lower hanging fruit. It's an easy win:

tumblr_msm70366sK1s217p8o1_500.jpg
Click to expand...

God forbid DeVry or University of Phoenix be allowed to make a profit. They are chicken feed and amount to a blip on the radar. Why start there?

The 800 pound Gorilla is the Public Universities subsidized by taxpayers, and screwing the students and the public at the same time.
 
ocean515 said:
God forbid DeVry or University of Phoenix be allowed to make a profit. They are chicken feed and amount to a blip on the radar. Why start there?

The 800 pound Gorilla is the Public Universities subsidized by taxpayers, and screwing the students and the public at the same time.
Click to expand...

It's a much larger problem than you're acknowledging.

20130906_062118_ssjm0908college90_300.jpg
 
Unrepresented said:
Yes. I'm very much aware that here in California we've seen all levels of higher education increase significantly in cost over the last few years. Attacking one of the fundamental means of economic mobility is immoral. I'm openly advocating it be reversed.
Click to expand...

The thing is California already has high taxes and it can't afford everything it wants to fund. Meanwhile, the state has more than $400 billion in combined debt, unfunded pension liabilities, and infrastructure needs. Something is going to have to give. Expense deferrals, unrealistic assumptions concerning investment rates of return, rosy revenue projections, and other assorted accounting quackery can take you only so far. Ultimately, some difficult choices will have to be made. Now, if you were in the state legislature and you had to choose between an alliance of public employees' unions and an army of pensioners whose benefits would have to be cut but who vote or young, generally apathetic college students who don't vote, which constituency would you choose? The answer is clear:

Between 2007-08 and 2013-14, the state’s budget breakdown changed significantly. During the period, the state’s bond interest payments increased 24% and annual retirement payments increased 25%. Conversely, transportation, social services, the University of California, and the California State University’s portions of the state budget all shrank, illustrating the crowd-out effect on some of the state’s key services.

Wall of Debt - Unsustainable California
Click to expand...
 
new orders for manufactured goods declined 0.7 percent after a revised 0.5 percent drop in September.'
Click to expand...

Oh good, we're sticking it to Chinese goods right where it'll hurt them, now Wall-mart can empty their shelves of foreign junk.
 
Unrepresented said:
It's a much larger problem than you're acknowledging.

20130906_062118_ssjm0908college90_300.jpg
Click to expand...

I'd like to see more specific data related to the matter.

As I see it, there is a combination total between public community colleges and four-year of over $728 million with a combined default rate over 23%. That is considerably higher than the for profit skew I am seeing in the data you've posted. My guess is the information was presented to denigrate for profit schools.
 
ocean515 said:
I'd like to see more specific data related to the matter.

As I see it, there is a combination total between public community colleges and four-year of over $728 million with a combined default rate over 23%. That is considerably higher than the for profit skew I am seeing in the data you've posted. My guess is the information was presented to denigrate for profit schools.
Click to expand...
As I said, there's room for reform across the board, but for profit is IMO really low hanging fruit when you combine debt rates, default rates, and graduation rates.
 
Unrepresented said:
As I said, there's room for reform across the board, but for profit is IMO really low hanging fruit when you combine debt rates, default rates, and graduation rates.
Click to expand...

I guess we have different definitions of low hanging fruit. When one considers that public colleges and universities are also taking in billions in taxpayer subsidies, the financial pillaging is most significant there.
 
ocean515 said:
I guess we have different definitions of low hanging fruit. When one considers that public colleges and universities are also taking in billions in taxpayer subsidies, the financial pillaging is most significant there.
Click to expand...

My definition of "low hanging fruit" in this case is protecting consumers (students) from low quality, incomplete, and debt building investments.
 
Unrepresented said:
My definition of "low hanging fruit" in this case is protecting consumers (students) from low quality, incomplete, and debt building investments.
Click to expand...

I don't think you've considered all the angles.

It would seem your assumption is for profits are low quality, incomplete, and debt building organizations. I have never seen any data that would suggest that.

I do see for profits as being more willing to take on low quality, incomplete, debt building students who couldn't muster the qualifications to even get into a community college. It should be expected that such poor students would generate a higher default rate.

Not sure if an opportunity of last resort for people unqualified for anything else should be singled out as the first line of attack in reform. That seems to be an initiative a public educator would be hoping for.
 
ocean515 said:
I don't think you've considered all the angles.

It would seem your assumption is for profits are low quality, incomplete, and debt building organizations. I have never seen any data that would suggest that.

I do see for profits as being more willing to take on low quality, incomplete, debt building students who couldn't muster the qualifications to even get into a community college. It should be expected that such poor students would generate a higher default rate.

Not sure if an opportunity of last resort for people unqualified for anything else should be singled out as the first line of attack in reform. That seems to be an initiative a public educator would be hoping for.
Click to expand...
When are community colleges turning away students? The qualities you're describing are what community colleges are intended. They're an entrance for students not yet prepared for the higher tiers of the university system.
 
Unrepresented said:
When are community colleges turning away students? The qualities you're describing are what community colleges are intended. They're an entrance for students not yet prepared for the higher tiers of the university system.
Click to expand...

So why do for profit colleges exist? Why would a student go there rather than a taxpayer subsidized community college at a fraction of the cost?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom