It's funny to me that Trump went after Hillary's stamina, while he was sniffing and pouting and making weird noises after 45 minutes when he got cranky.And what the hell was up with Trump and that glass of water I have never seen anyone look like, it was like a 3 step process.
I finally watched most of the debate and she took him to school and that's on just presentation alone.It's funny to me that Trump went after Hillary's stamina, while he was sniffing and pouting and making weird noises after 45 minutes when he got cranky.
I like Bernie but I think making the government foot the bill isn't the answer, just like with medicine, the problem is that we're allowing institutions to gouge their customers.Listening to Bernie Sanders sell out with a promise of essentially a giveaway college education to everyone to buy votes for Clinton and it makes me ill. Why should a college degree be paid for from tax money?
1 paid for my own education with a combination of GI Bill and earnings. I paid for my children's education out of what I earned. I just don't understand the mentality that says the tax payer should be required to fund this. Students loans okay. Fair interest rates for student loans hell yes. Student loan debt forgiveness hell no.
Of course it's a problem but the cause is essentially the government getting into the game and creating a money funnel for the schools to create a gougining pricing structure. Believe me if the Dems add fuel to the fire with more funds running rampid the pricing will go helter skelter. The way to lower costs is to create competitive pricing. That's done by controlling the loan practices toward responsible lending. Schools will then have to deal with pricing the way the marketplace dictates.I like Bernie but I think making the government foot the bill isn't the answer, just like with medicine, the problem is that we're allowing institutions to gouge their customers.
Back when the GI bill was footing your college, it was exponentially cheaper than what it's paying for mine right now. That's the big issue, how as an institution that pays its faculty so poorly (nearly 80% of faculty now are adjuncts) while simultaneously asking for higher and higher tuition. That's not acceptable from a non-profit institution.
The point is that it's a problem, and the people who can't afford education are not at fault. The system (including student loans that allowed tuition to become so inflated) are the problem. And while Berniecrats are mislead on the solution, the reason that there's such an uproar is the complete failure so many politicians have had addressing this growing source of economic disparity.
frankly I think that we need to outlaw all federal funding to for profit schools, and have much more stringent price controls on non-profit colleges.Of course it's a problem but the cause is essentially the government getting into the game and creating a money funnel for the schools to create a gougining pricing structure. Believe me if the Dems add fuel to the fire with more funds running rampid the pricing will go helter skelter. The way to lower costs is to create competitive pricing. That's done by controlling the loan practices toward responsible lending. Schools will then have to deal with pricing the way the marketplace dictates.
There is no "better way" to tax and spend money on inequitable programs.Better to spend tax money on free college than flushing it down the shitter for new jets that don't work. And now I read the navy is having the same problems with some of their new ships.
You can get the same effect by drying up the expenditures and the population will decrease to a reasonable level while the universities scramble to encourage attendance. It will also likely have a better enrollment into trade and vocational school enrollment. More students are needed there than the non useful degrees that are being attained. The nation needs more trade people.Just take all the government student loan money of the next 20 years and build college campuses. Watch the price of education plummet.
No more government subsidizing non performing loans, no more debt, and affordable college.
Tighten up the loan program and drop a lot of the senseless grants, etc.What do you mean by "drying up the expenditures"?
I would do that, but a lot of the problem is we have not added new colleges since the 60's, while our population has swelled and the % enrolling has also. That is part of the price rise, which is further fueled by the governments endless loans to institutions.Tighten up the loan program and drop a lot of the senseless grants, etc.
Who is going to foot the bill for these new colleges. What I am advocating is a process that weeds out a lot of the enrollment that is wasted. I don't have the stats but there are thousands of students that get loans but peter out after a couple of years of unsuccessful enrollment then finally drop out. The loans go unpaid. If there were tighter guidelines for the program a lot of the loans would not be made for this type student. Academics and actual need would be the standard barrier for granting loans. This would lower the amounts spent and also lower the population group that creates the waste and over supply that keeps the college's that are fat with enrollment and steep pricing. This is just the tip of the iceberg. This link is a tiny expression of what I am saying.I would do that, but a lot of the problem is we have not added new colleges since the 60's, while our population has swelled and the % enrolling has also. That is part of the price rise, which is further fueled by the governments endless loans to institutions.
Starving the institutions only releases half the problem and does nothing for the poor. Building more and cutting the subsides will do more and hopefully bring them down enough that the poor can afford them or at least private financing would make sense