As Obama acts more like a dictator every day, he’s looking for new ways to energize potential voters to save his 2012 prospects. His latest trick is a “student stimulus” of sorts.
But Obama is now seeking to use that new power to obtain a taxpayer-financed stimulus that Congress won’t approve. The idea is to cap student loan repayment rates at 10 percent of a debtor’s income that goes above the poverty line, and then limiting the life of a loan to 20 years.
Sounds awfully nice, doesn’t it? I would say awfully stupid. It doesn’t take an economics degree to figure out that this would essentially amount to taxpayer-funded college education. Here’s one example from the story.
If Suzy Creamcheese gets into George Washington University and borrows from the government the requisite $212,000 to obtain an undergraduate degree, her repayment schedule will be based on what she earns. If Suzy opts to heed the president’s call for public service, and takes a job as a city social worker earning $25,000, her payments would be limited to $1,411 a year after the $10,890 of poverty-level income is subtracted from her total exposure.
Twenty years at that rate would have taxpayers recoup only $28,220 of their $212,000 loan to Suzy.
This may well be an extreme example, but it hardly off base when it comes to demonstrating the flaw with this idea. For one thing, the snowball effect would make this worse. If students know that they’ll only end up paying a small portion of their education costs, they’re more likely to choose a school with tuition costs well above their means because they know they won’t have to foot the bill later. This does nothing to address reasons why education costs are so expensive, and will actually make them more expensive, as schools will figure out that free market rules no longer apply to them, they’ll jack up tuition rates even more.
This is a dumb idea by a dumb administration. A sad attempt to energize young voters on his behalf.
Blogs For Victory 
This is all the obAMATEUR has left – class warfare, wealth envy and buying votes.
He certainly can’t run on “4 more years” with such a dismal and failing record. All of his and his party’s fault, their “all of it or nothing approach” to legislation.
Meanwhile, we continue to operate under one continuing resolution after the next since Harry Reid and the Senate squash one Republican budget after the next and the occasional obAMATEUR budget. There is so much economic uncertainty in the business atmosphere.
All thanks to the obAMATEUR….
As barstool pointed out in the previous thread, rising tuition costs are a result of bloated administrations, non educational support functions, and tenured professors who don’t put one foot in the classroom. So in a sense, this is a bail out for “big education” and public unions. No surprise.
Close enough. I agree with Iowahawk. Make the university a co-signer on loans. Problem solved.
I don’t know what public unions Clueless is talking about though. The secretaries at universities make like 20,000 per year plus benefits and there aren’t too many of them. Groundkeepers make less. I assume Clueless just kneejerks the anti-union rhetoric.
I do agree that there shouldn’t be a situation where tenured profs don’t step foot inside the classroom. Of course Clueless knows those people are largely grant funded scientists who ‘BUY’ out there teaching with NSF support. Still, it’s a bad idea to keep the best minds out of the classroom and completely in the lab working on problems for the DOD or big Pharma.
Get rid of the football teams and other athletic nonsense that don’t pay their own weight at most schools. Get rid of the free tutoring labs all over to help the mediocre students who couldn’t be bothered to learn multiplication in grade school.
Give Clueless, Neo, GMB etc $150,000 and make them presidents of almost any university instead of the elite class of prius driving elites we have today.
I don’t know what public unions Clueless is talking about though. The secretaries at universities make like 20,000 per year plus benefits and there aren’t too many of them. Groundkeepers make less.
Of course barstool, I am sure that the well intentioned AAUP has nothing to do with this. It should make perfect financial sense to give a professor tenure after just three years, hire someone else to teach the subject they were hired to teach, all the while, keeping them on the payroll for life, with benefits. And if the university secretaries only make $20K a year, than I think OWS is protesting the wrong institution. Wall Street certainly pays their support staff a lot more.
And I have heard you spout off about the “football” programs before (funny how you never mention women sports which ARE a financial drain), so I did a quick search and found this ESPN analysis:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/otl/news/story?id=4722523
Out of 120 colleges surveyed, here’s the money line: On the flip side, about two dozen college athletic departments take no money from student fees.
The bigger university teams, and certainly the ones that win, actually make money for the school, promote the name and increase attendance and moral. Just a little fact of life.
Yesterday barstool you replied:
How do you get an endless amount of tenured professors out of my statements?
And can only respond back by asking, what do you think “lifetime tenure” with little, to zero accountability encourages? Christie is leading the charge:
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/04/christie_pushes_tenure_reform.html
Clueless
Few professors are members of the AAUP. There is no collective bargaining for salaries of the professoriate as there is a large disparity between what an engineering prof vs. an art history prof make in salary.
Tenure comes after 7 years. Again the people not in the class are designing the latest drug for old people or weapon for the DOD. Keep thinking that after 3 years the Art History prof sits in her office all day contemplating Picasso.
ESPN Entertainment and SPORTS Programming Network is going to be straightforward about the drain of money given to college sports? Are you retarded? First they only surveyed 120 schools because they knew the rest were losing money. Then of the 120 only 12 could even give the appearance of breaking even. But if student Moral is the purpose of wasting $$ you have made an argument FOR the Obama plan. What raises Moral better than getting an education you don’t pay for so you can go on a better Spring Break?
The fact is people like Clueless don’t care about the academics at State U, they want to see their school play on TV.
Of course you are WRONG even about Christie. No surprise. He is leading the charge against tenure for TEACHERS in public schools.
Here’s another financial analysis of Big 12 football
http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/26843/take-a-look-inside-the-big-12s-finances
And more:
The incentives for American professors are the same at every institution. Promotion and tenure decisions are made based on a record of publication, not teaching. A 2005 article by James Fairweather in the Journal of Higher Education collected the data: College professors actually get paid less the more time they spend in a classroom. This is true not only at large research universities but also at teaching universities, and even at small liberal arts colleges.
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/15/opinion/la-oe-riley-teaching-20110615
Clueless is in rare form this morning. Stuck on stupid.
1. The link you provided talks about college football in the Big12. As you might not know, there is a thing called Title IX which says that for every male football player there has to be a female athlete. Nobody shows up to women’s tennis e.g. and so it is a sunk cost. Again only 12 of 120 colleges surveyed out of thousands could justify their athletic programs overall. By your standard we can say that universities are FINE if e.g. their math departments are money makers overall.
2. The OP-ED piece in the LA paper is not even at the level of crap journalism of the LA times. . It is from a woman who is hawking a book. Naomi Schaefer Riley is the author of “The Faculty Lounges: And Other Reasons Why You Won’t Get the College Education You Paid For.”
Attacking the source is so trite. Tell me barstool, which source would meet your approval?
Here’s more. And as you can see by the timeline in the upper right, salary increases have been generous:
http://chronicle.com/stats/aaup/index.php?action=result&year=2011&state=Arizona&offset=0&withRanks=1&sort=institution&limit=25
Hey barstool and bodie,
Here’s another word game your representatives are engaged in, in an attempt to distract and deflect from their failures, and lead the idiots of your base into voting for them again. Sad thing is, most liberals will buy into this hook, line and sinker. Liberals are just too stupid to get out of their own way
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/190107-dems-increasingly-call-it-a-republican-congress
And bodie and barstool,
You never did tell us how you feel about the blatant anti semitism at play at OWS. Any thoughts?
Clueless
You do know that Arizona University employees were furloughed right?
As for attacking the source being trite. I think the following hits the mark pretty well with Wall Street, the OP-ED piece, and Clueless suck-ups.
“It’s hard to make a man understand something if his livelihood depends on him not understanding it.” ~ Upton Sinclair
OK, here’s another state – what’s your excuse this time? This is a fun game:
http://chronicle.com/stats/aaup/index.php?action=result&year=2011&state=Connecticut&offset=0&withRanks=1&sort=institution&limit=25
Whom should we trust to determine whether Occupy Wall Street is an anti-Semitic movement: Anti-Defamation League (ADL) national director Abraham Foxman or birther, conspiracy theorist, and race-baiter Eric Bolling?
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201110270001?frontpage
What does Clueless think about that argument?
Cluster,
I’m thoroughly enjoying this; ‘dolph has no facts, and no case yet he continues to flail. The so-called “op ed” piece regarding time spend away from the classroom is correct and demonstrable; we prepare the differential for the Chancellor every year and would realize a 15% savings (on average) if the professors would just teach the classes they were contracted to teach.
Btw, “Secretaries” at every California state run college and university make between $46,000 and $86,000 on average (1.0 FTE). Entry level groundskeepers make between $29,000 and $41,000 with senior groundskeepers making $33,000 to $68,000 and leads or supervisors making between $56,000 and $108,000.
And ‘dolph’s answer to your facts? Change the subject. Priceless!
Cluster and Count are the Scarlet Knights of B4V posters. 0-10 and thinking they are on a win streak.
It’s not a so-called op-ed piece. It IS an op-ed piece. The woman has a book to hawk just like the Count has to keep the wages low to justify his masters’ salaries. Again you can’t blame the Count. His livelihood depends on these deceits. “It’s hard to make a man understand something if his livelihood depends on him not understanding it.” ~ Upton Sinclair
To close out the season on the losers and make it 0-11. I went to Connecticut and took the first University-Albertus Magnus. Full Professor in 2011 average salary $74,100. Sounds like a lot for someone with 15+ post bachelor’s degree experience. Let’s see what they were making in 2005. Oh it’s $75,000.
So using Clueless’ data. We see that in 6 years the professors at Albertus Magnus in Connecticut who were not paid well in 2005 considering the qualifications are paid even less today.
That should not be a surprise. The Count has a fancy car because the $ which should be spent on better qualified faculty is moved toward partially to adjunct faculty and the left over savings to bloated administrations.
Wow, that strawman ‘dolph built is really on a losing streak isn’t he?
I audit; I don’t decide to whom or for what remuneration is paid.
And I see you’re still jealous of my Benz, how sad is that?
I’d steer clear of that Albertus Magnus if I were you, since it’s the only one on the entire page that lowered Professor’s pay in the current year.
Statistically, college professors’ pay and compensation has outpaced society and the average hours spent teaching has dropped precipitously during the same period. Before complaining about coaches’ salaries, perhaps you and your teaching fellows might consider doing what you were hired to do.
I agree Count, I am enjoying this too. I was humored by barstools link to media matters, as barstool is often quick to attack any publication that he disagrees with as a “rag”, and yet while we all can demonstrably prove media matters as a joke, he hangs his hat on them – comical.
I also enjoyed, in his link, how Foxman acknowledges the anti semitism, but yet discounts it as not relevant. So it is there, but not really. Pay no attention people – nothing to see here. Hilarious.
And barstool, thanks for finding the one obscure college that fits your narrative. Does anybody actually go to that school? How about if you research an actual university?
“we all can demonstrably prove media matters as a joke”
But newsbusters and worldnetdaily are very, very serious, right Cluster?
Riiiiiiiiiiiiight. Keep tying yourself in knots.
@Count and Clueless
I picked the first on the list. You boobs are 0-12 since the obvious fact that Clueless is picking the list itself means he scoured through cases to try and find the one supporting his narrative. Connecticut with YALE who would have guessed that state values education?
The beauty of the situation is if I’m wrong then being ‘paranoid’ that GOPPERS like you are destroying education changes nothing. Like GMB with his garden, I can advise people I know how to avoid wasting $$ getting a phony astrology degree. Where if you’re lucky afterwards, you end up working 50 weeks per year, 60 hours a week so that you can brag about a car or a house or a Carnival cruise or the expensive bottle of scotch in the bar.
Again with the class envy; tsk tsk.
If you’re so unhappy with your life maybe you should go back to school and learn a trade so you can carve out something better for yourself.
Have you thought about a career in cosmetology? I understand Estheticians make good money; better than an arithmetic teacher at a city college in Podunk Arizona I’m guessing.
And they feel good about themselves, think about it, mmm-k?
count
more like a hair dresser in loose loafers.
@Count
You’re happy with your job, I’m happy with mine. I don’t envy a car, you don’t envy 3 months vacation. I don’t envy a bottle of scotch, you don’t envy a flexible schedule. I don’t envy being sneaky and serving a class destroying the education system of the US, you don’t envy someone with tangible skills.
“I don’t envy being sneaky and serving a class destroying the education system of the US,”
Uh, what was that middle part again?
… and can I assume that you believe communication skills are tangible?
Small talk with women at an Estée Lauder counter is less challenging, you should really think about it.
“I don’t envy a car, you don’t envy 3 months vacation. I don’t envy a bottle of scotch, you don’t envy a flexible schedule. ”
Count has invested an awful lot of time and energy on the notion that if he gets what he considers the trappings of sophistication, that will make him sophisticated. He’s kind of trapped by that now–always a poseur stuck aping those he aspires to be but cannot be.
why does the government need to “loan” money to students to start with…it indicates that institution of higher learning are far more costly than they should be…it would be far better to establish a pay cap of 38k per year(or some basic pay for public service) on administrators and teachers in schools that accept federal contributions…then cut tuitions and flood these schools with americans that dont have jobs….there can be no doubt that most of these institutions can cut useless programs and provide a far better education to students if only they had a motivation that went beyond liberal socialist agenda’s…
its no wonder that high tech industry has to pay foreign people to fill high tech jobs…education has become a racket in america and has failed to fulfill its mission…
Yeah, the sure path to competitiveness in this country is to make sure we get our educators at bargain basement rates. That way, we know all the people who are worth a damn won’t go to the private sector!
corky
dumbed down AA innercity looters dont cost us anything for basket weaving” degrees” do they?
js03
of course you are wrong about the high tech industry, the industry brings in foreign people to undercut the wages of US workers period. Increasing the labor supply while keeping demand constant has the effect of lowering the price of labor.
also it makes no sense to say the federal government can control the pay of state/private employees as most college faculty happen to be. First it violates state rights. Second, do you seriously think someone who spends e.g. 10 years getting a BS, MS and Ph.D in electrical engineering should have there pay capped at wages below postal employees and junior high school teachers?
If college football coaches at LSU, Texas etc. would be willing to cap their pay at 38K you might have an argument about the people who actually teach at the institutions of learning.
obama using taxpayer dollars to save his sorry ass. Who is actually going to vote for this incompetent.
The 46% that are addicted to OPM thats who.
What needs to be said is:
“All we are saying is
Do the right thing”
Our Corporations
Our Capitalistic Investment Banks
Our Government
The people
Scream it loud and often.
dh
The people
is 46% paying NO fed taxes
and
53% paying LESS than 3% of all taxes the “right thing”?
I agree, we should shout it loud
ALL PAY, ALL pay SAME percentage.
CANDY MAN: STIMULUS FOR STUDENTS
Money for Freeeeeeeeeeeeeeee, vote for Meeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
never mind the $ 34 TRILLION $$$$$ gorrilla in the room
Getting closer. At least you said federal this time, but you still left out that the statistic is referencing specifically income taxes. Come on, I know you can do it!
cory,
Since Social Security and Medicare are “off-budget” that is, revenue collected for both are not part of the Federal Budget, can you explain what other Federal Bills are paid by the 47% and how this money is collected?
And remember that excise taxes account for less than 3% of federal revenue, while income taxes account for more than 90% of the budget line revenue.
You seem intent that the 47% that pay no federal income taxes are somehow paying for the Federal Government in some other fashion. It sounds like a distinction without a difference to me but please elaborate.
Yeah, I was just thinking that money not in the federal budget somehow shouldn’t count as really being paid by anybody, because clearly how the government does their accounting matters to people having money withheld from their paychecks (especially when we’ve been pillaging the funds they are paying into for decades, so calling it completely off-budget is a pretty large fib).
Then let’s go on to point out that the remaining regressive taxes, amazingly, don’t actually generate a lot of income because poor people are well, poor. The fact that we tax them and we hardly get anything out of it is just another indication that they are a bunch of worthless, lazy bums and we should totally be okay with the rich getting richer every day!
“Scream it loud and often”
Yes, because malcontents screaming in the streets has always been so effective. The productive are at work, and the losers and slackers are screaming in the streets.
So what’s new……………..
Just curious……what is your alternative to those evil capitalist investment banks? For that matter, how do you define “capitalist investment bank”? Or are you too busy screaming in the streets to bother with definitions and ideas?
this is a better idea!!
That link is hilarious.
“LLF’s lawsuit simply points out that the Supreme Court has defined “natural-born citizen” as a person born to two parents who were both U.S. citizens at the time of the natural-born citizen’s birth.”
No it hasn’t. Ever. You don’t win lawsuits by making up case law.
Cory,
Do you understand what “Supreme Court has defined” means?
Supreme Court Decision;
U.S. v. WONG KIM ARK, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
169 U.S. 649
Fortunately for our democracy, Supreme Court justices read more than two sentences before reaching a verdict.
Here’s a more reasonable selection:
That neither Mr. Justice Miller nor any of the justices who took part in the decision of The Slaughterhouse Cases understood the court to be committed to the view that all children born in the United States of citizens or subjects of foreign States were excluded from the operation of the first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment is manifest from a unanimous judgment of the Court, delivered but two years later, while all those judges but Chief Justice Chase were still on the bench, in which Chief Justice Waite said: “Allegiance and protection are, in this connection” (that is, in relation to citizenship),
“reciprocal obligations. The one is a compensation for the other: allegiance for protection, and protection for allegiance
…At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further, and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction, without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class, there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.”
In other words, 1) the court that said the line you bolded wasn’t aware of the 14th amendment, and 2) they specifically say they aren’t ruling on exactly the issue you think they’re ruling on. Excellent sleuthing, Count. Excellent.
A very elaborate straw man but a straw man nonetheless.
The issue raised by my post on Wong Kim Ark was not to claim an all-inclusive definition of “natural born citizen” as the per curium made clear was never their intent. The point of the citation was that the lawsuit referenced the fact that the SC did define “natural born citizen” res ipsa loquitur, in Wong Kim Ark.
As to the weight with which the Court must give this definition; in the absence of controlling legal authority the Court will use citations that express the Framers’ Intent and if that is difficult to determine based on a lack of writings, the Court uses English Common Law and the understanding the Framers’ had of Common Law. The part in bold clearly states the Framers’ understanding and intent.
Cory stated that no such citation existed and I clarified that it did.
As to your “conclusion” the Court that stated the part I bolded did indeed know of the 14th Amendment, as it was cited frequently in the decision. And the part in bold is not the “ruling” nor did I ever imply that it was.
“Cory stated that no such citation existed and I clarified that it did.”
You’re a funny guy.
“The part in bold clearly states the Framers’ understanding and intent.”
No, actually, it states a limit of what is largely accepted as the Framers’ intent. The natural born citizen group is no smaller than those born in the US to two citizen parents. It says nothing about how large the group is.
No, moron, you cited a case where the opinion, like 2 sentences after your specific quotation, said “For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts.” They specifically avoided creating the case law you are trying to cite. I’d recommend you get at least to third grade reading level before you try to read Supreme Court decisions.
Also, as a side note, using Latin like “res ipsa loquitur” only makes you look smart if use it correctly, which you have not in this case.
I wonder why rodeo clown and MSNBC commentator Ed Schultz hasn’t had this on his program:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/10/27/california-gov-brown-to-seek-sweeping-pension-cuts/
bodie and barstool – any thoughts? Certainly the two geniuses of liberal philosophy could provide some answers, right?
“If Suzy opts to heed the president’s call for public service, and takes a job as a city social worker earning $25,000, her payments would be limited to $1,411 a year after the $10,890 of poverty-level income is subtracted from her total exposure.
Twenty years at that rate would have taxpayers recoup only $28,220 of their $212,000 loan to Suzy.”
Actually Suzy would do even better than this. There is a separate program that eliminates the debt after 10 years if you take a position like social worker.
But at least under the current program that the President is talking about, I believe that there is an income limit of around $38,000.00 to participate. Most productive college graduates earn more than this and would not qualify. Only the least productive can take advantage of this program.
This looks like another Obamma illusion for most college students. He gets the votes now. They discover later that any normal income for a college graduate disqualifies them.
One of the major reasons for rapidly escalating tuition costs is the 511% increase in student loans since 1999.
My understanding is that the Dodd-Frank bill is killing consumer and small business loans, yet the government has no problem ramping up student loans, supporting “big education”, while at the same time now giving many of those students a back door to default, and hang the tax payer with the bill.
This Hope and Change thing is working out really well.
You have cause and effect reversed. Prices aren’t going up more because people are borrowing more, borrowing is going up because people have to borrow more to afford school. Also, grant programs are getting reduced funding on top of tuition going up, so people end up paying for school with more loans and fewer grants and scholarships.
You have cause and effect reversed. Prices aren’t going up more because people are borrowing more, borrowing is going up because people have to borrow more to afford school.
Cory, can you make the case that, since 1999, post secondary education costs plus increasing enrollment minus cuts in grants accounts for a 511% increase in student loans. If so, then you may be correct. It didn’t work that way in the housing bubble. Cheap money over a prolonged period, much of it loaned to people who were never going to pay it back, drove up the prices of homes, not the other way around. I see much the same dynamic playing out in the student loan arena.
Saying that “wow, is this a dumb idea” would only come from and be endorsed by those who never bothered to go to college or earn a higher degree from a university or college. Only those who follow the GOP (conservative) mantra – that only the wealthy are entitled to a college education. How dare the government provide assistance to the youth of this country in achieving a higher education – like, say, China, India, the middle east countries, Japan, and just about every other country that wants to surpass the US in an intelligent populace. Lets just continue to dumb down our children and tell them college is no longer an important goal to set for themselves and let the rest of the world pass up in every way.
It doesn’t matter that our government has paid out over $2Billion a week in Iraq and Afghanistan for 10 plus years. That apparently was and is money well spent. But to help students get an education – how dare the government invest in the future of this country. We built schools in other countries – all good – because it contributed to the continued gain of wealth by those private companies involved in these projects, but, please, no money for education in this country.
What a bunch of dumb-asses that post on this blog. My grandchildren will go to college if I have to dig ditches to pay for their education. I do not want them ending up ignorant fools like js, cluster and neocon (God forbid) the biggest fool on this blog.
A strawman for every season. If you read contracts the way you’ve read this blog you should be digging ditches to pay for someone else’s college education because it obviously was wasted on you.
The “government” already provides the bulk of the cost of higher education, you ignorant cow. The issue is the economic sense of changing the loan program to a give-away program.
The post-secondary education system in theis country is far superior to those in say China, India, the middle east countries, Japan, and just about every other country that wants to surpass the US in an intelligent populace which is why the lucky few from those places wind up here!
count
The “government” already provides the bulk of the cost of higher education, you ignorant cow.
poor scummy, so many OWS’ers so few brains.
AFL-CIO Chief Trumka Calls Mass-Arrests at Occupy Wall Street: ‘Tremendous Dishonor to America’
He urged elected leaders to enable “peaceful” protesters to continue exercising their “most American of rights.”
No FAT BOY, it is you commie leftist GOONS RIOTING who are tremendous disgrace to our country.
Try the workers paradise of N.Korea, right up your alley except they might eat a fat PIG like you for dinner.
Who do you think you are calling people names you impotent pig? You are as much a stawman as there is. The program has not been changed as a give away program but to help students deal with their huge student loans. And regardless of your prattle, you continue to be one of the dumb asses on this blog. If our country is going to give away money – better it be for those getting an education than sending it to another foreign country contributing to destruction and death and wealth of war mongers. Two billion a week could really help college students pay their student loans. Money well spent in my opinion. Better here in the US than in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Velma,
Well, you’re right about one thing ignoramus, you’re much better at name calling than I am.
Helpingf students deal with loans they took out by writing them off is a giveaway, I’m so sorry that you are such an ignorant pile of pig $hit you can’t understand that, but I only assume someone else paid for your education because you exhibit all the mental acumen of a parasitic fairyfly.
And, as an added bonus for reading your inane blather, I’ve discovered that you fully don’t comprehend the “spending in Iraq and Afghanistan” was spent on American companies doing business in those countries or did you forget your illogical rants against Halliburton and Blackwater dip-$hit?
scummy
you impotent pig?
so you screw pigs then “squeal” on them? (for being impotent)
“but I only assume someone else paid for your education”
Out of curiosity, does it count as someone else paying for your education if it is your parents? If not, why not?
cory,
Don’t worry your pretty little head over that.
But, you copuld answer my question regarding the 47% and Federal Taxes.
There’s a good lad.
Lol, my post got deleted I guess. Whatevs, I’ll just strike this up as another instance of people pretending that rich people have what they have because they deserve it, even in instances where that is nearly impossible, like an 18-year-old paying for college tuition.
scummy
I went to college, and trade school, served a five year apprenticeship and have 20 +++ years of courses, training and continuing ed.
I have a degree in business, a journeyman steamfitters license, a state Mechanical contractors license, a Fire alarm systems license, a burglar alarm systems license, I am a certified home inspector.
I am certified in DDC, and DVM, have a solid state electronics certification and one in computers.
I also am a certified project manager which i do quite often today.
I will compare brains and earnings with you any day of the week you twit.
scummy
out over $2Billion a week in Iraq and Afghanistan for 10 plus years.
much of that on Ochimpys watch and a THIRD WAR costing BILLIONS yet that seems to elude you.
why is that?
PS
a student * “LOAN” * is just that.
Cant afford it? DONT BORROW it.
I went nights, weekends, for extra years and get this I PAID MY OWN WAY as I went, as well as paid for a young family.
lazy, looter, taker, non tax paying OPM mentality by dumbed down useful idiots.
PS
I paid for my 3 sons education also scummybagger.
Is the POTUS Stirring Up a Revolution?
Mercer Tyson
Obama was hailed as a healing president, promising peace and harmony.
What we have seen, however, is a president distinctively divisive on racial issues, and instigating class warfare.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/10/is_the_potus_stirring_up_a_revolution.html
neo,
Likewise, we paid for my years in college from a bank account and credit cards; I received grants and scholarships that helped. We paid for my daughter’s BA with cash and she also earned scholarships. We took out loans which we’re still paying, applied for scholarships and borrowed from my father when the cost of my college and my wife’s JD became a choice between dropping out and eating.
We paid dad back straight away and have been paying on the student loan ever since, which is doubly difficult when 44.3% of our income goes to income taxes.
“44.3% of our income goes to income taxes.”
You must be a lousy accountant, then.
A lot of very very stupid people are also very nice people. This Sunny creature is very very stupid but also one of the meanest, nastiest, most vile people I have ever seen. She should be ashamed of herself but I doubt her mind expands to include anything but hatred and viciousness.
I am not poor. I am by no means rich. I am lucky enough not to have any bills excpt for electricity and internet. I pay federal income taxes every year.
The question on the table is, Haven’t you lefties taken enough of my money. Isn’t there some point where you have taken enough and taxed enough. Is there anything you don’t think you desrve to have the tax payers provide for you?
Ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ohhhhhh the IRONY….= PRICELESS !!!!!!!!
Occupy Wall Street kitchen staff protesting fixing food for freeloaders
The Occupy Wall Street volunteer kitchen staff launched a “counter” revolution yesterday — because they’re angry about working 18-hour days to provide food for “professional homeless” people and ex-cons masquerading as protesters.
For three days beginning tomorrow, the cooks will serve only brown rice and other spartan grub instead of the usual menu of organic chicken and vegetables, spaghetti bolognese, and roasted beet and sheep’s-milk-cheese salad.
They will also provide directions to local soup kitchens for the vagrants, criminals and other freeloaders who have been descending on Zuccotti Park in increasing numbers every day.
Pot meet Kettle ROTFLMAO…….LOL LOL LOL
GMB
This guy does not want a soup kitchen, he is one of the 99% ers and wants to fu
Oh Neo, where do you find this stuff? LOL
Might be a difference in what each person feels they are “entitled” to in play. I have student loans (as a part of my 3rd degree) but I took them out knowing I was responsible for paying them off in full. Same for the house I bought here in NC — high water, under water, whatever–no one forced me to sign the contract and I owe the full amount. I have no other bills except for the regular monthlies (water, sewer, electricity, etc.) and would get rid of them as well if I was allowed to. Yes, I am hampered by regulations in this county not allowing me to fall off the grid onto my own.
Nevertheless, it appears I do not support enough slackers every year because they keep coming back for more money every year even though the only thing that has changed is more folks are joining Obama’s OPM money brigade.
db,
I like the Heitage response; “Taxpayers who have worked hard to pay off their own student loan debt – and who are still making payments – should not be penalized by having to pay-off the student loan debt of those who irresponsibly took out more of a loan burden than they can handle, to earn a degree of questionable value. Raising taxes to pay down the principal on loans that students took out on their own volition penalizes Americans who paid their way through college by working during school, or who now live a modest lifestyle in order to responsibly make their loan payments. And it also penalizes the three quarters of American workers who chose not to attend college at all. Why should the three quarters of workers who did not to go to college – waitresses, construction workers, mechanics and other average Americans – have to finance the college student who took out $100,000 in student loans to finance a degree in, say, women’s studies?”
count
say, women’s studies?”
Hmmmmm that could be interesting.
the larry flynt college of womens studies…..Honey im going “back to school”
and that vacation? forgetaboutit.
Neo,
I posted earlier, but it disappeared, that the University of California was in deficit $1.6 Million in 2008 in sports programs. During that year, the cost of African Studies, Chicano Studies and Woman’s Studies surpassed that by ten-fold! And, all that money was State Funds, with ZERO return.
I wonder if ‘dolph can advise us how much the University received in Woman’s Studies scholarships compared to what we received in Sports scholarships? I mean, since he hates the idea that sports programs cost money I’m sure he can demonstrate how Music Therapy is a better investment.
count
During that year, the cost of African Studies, Chicano Studies and Woman’s
right there with basket weaving 101, pole sitting, community organizing, and ebonics.
useless, worthless, BS. for numbed down useful idiots whose wan a coleg dogreee.
then wonder why they are unemployable even at micky D’s.
@Count
1. I don’t hate college sport, I said at universities where they are a big sink of money they are a poor priority.
2. I already agreed with the conservative opinion that Universities should be cosigners.
3. I already posted and Clueless quoted, I am against the exclusive-to-a-niche-group programs (like wymmens studies) etc. which don’t help women and just hire freaks to investigate things like dildo parties.
4. Of course these are a sliver compared to the HUGE expansion in curriculum and instruction programs in the colleges of education which should more aptly be called curriculum destruction. Charging big $$ and giving away free EDD, Masters and BA on how to make the world more politically correct.
Diversity!!!!!!! Yay we spend all this money on diversity and let our cancer researchers go. At least all thes people have thier priority straight, LOL
“The University of California at San Diego, for example, is creating a new full-time “vice chancellor for equity, diversity, and inclusion.” This position would augment UC San Diego’s already massive diversity apparatus, which includes the Chancellor’s Diversity Office, the associate vice chancellor for faculty equity, the assistant vice chancellor for diversity, the faculty equity advisors, the graduate diversity coordinators, the staff diversity liaison, the undergraduate student diversity liaison, the graduate student diversity liaison, the chief diversity officer, the director of development for diversity initiatives, the Office of Academic Diversity and Equal Opportunity, the Committee on Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation Issues, the Committee on the Status of Women, the Campus Council on Climate, Culture and Inclusion, the Diversity Council, and the directors of the Cross-Cultural Center, the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Resource Center, and the Women’s Center.”
GMB,
That is all true, but here’s the finer point.
The Chancellor’s office currently has a staff of two dedicated to diversity; the Associate Vice Chancellor and her assistant.
All of the other titles you listed are definitions of the same two people and student representatives and ad hoc committees.
Get rid of the title 9 bs and a large number of college sports departments would suddenly be moneymakers, as they would no longer have to subsidize female sports teams that can’t remotely support themselves.
“A sad attempt to energize young voters on his behalf.”
How about “A blatant attempt to buy young voter support with our money”
OPM
the best kind for commies and donks.