Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Arizona: College is only for the rich and athletes

1568101115

Posts

  • UnknownSaintUnknownSaint Registered User
    So have they clarified "Athletics" yet? I'm just curious if the Arizona bowling team is going to suddenly be packed.

    Frisbee golf club attendance up 1000%

  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    This is an unfortunate, but not unexpected event for that state. This is just a continuation of the (please excuse the foul language) "Fuck you. I got mine." attitude that is prevalent in the densely populated Phoenix-Metro area; due to the retirement communities and entrenched-corrupted interests, and all the propaganda/voting-patterns that fall out from that.

    For an example of the "Fuck you. I got mine." attitude,
    [Rep. Michelle] Ugenti [R-Scottsdale] said she paid for her own apartment, her car and her food, worked full time "and still having enough time in all of that, and with all of that responsibility, to play rugby for ASU.''

    What she didn't say:
    • When she went to ASU (2000-2004):
      • In-State Tuition was all of $2,400 annually
      • Parking decals were ~$50-$100 (annually) for lot 59
      • Rent for a near campus apartment or house was all of $400-500 for a two bedroom that you could split the rent 4 ways. *cough*okitwasmorelike6or7butdon'ttellthelandlord*cough*
      • Food prices were cheaper
      • Gasoline Prices were cheaper
    • The "ASU Rugby Team" is a sports club with no tryouts. You just have to show up to practice; if you're good enough, you play in the matches. Point being, she could have played, but the commitment wasn't as big of a thing as she's making it out to be in her retort.

    What I get from this is a list of excuses. So are you going to blame those that say the same thing when they went to school in the 70's-80's? The fact is students have to work hard. There is no point in funding them if all they are going to do is just get passing grades (3.0 and lower GPA) and come out with debt working in a McDonalds because they are so poorly educated due to them not having either the skills needed or enough training.

    I don't follow your line of thought in the least.

    Course work is primarily where students gain the skills for gainful employment in their chosen fields.

    Or does your 40 part time work week prepare you to translate ancient Mongolian texts?

    Course work is fine, but I'm not talking about course work am I? I'm talking about the students who do not understand and just wing it through university and end up graduating from debt with a less than stellar GPA and no idea of how to get a job. I'm not talking about rick lazy kids which are in a class of their own but those who are going to university but aren't going to graduate with good grades and with the right skills.

    I don't work. I have enough fund to pay for my education, international fees no less, without taking debt which is what university should be about. Not everyone should go. Only those with the monetary funds to do so as well as those who are smart enough to find a career in academia.

    The number of students who "wing it" and graduate anyway is probably so low as to be a non-issue. And if it isn't that's a bigger problem than just "lazy poor kids".

    But there really is very little point debating with you on this, because your beloved serfdom universe isn't something I'm too willing to give much thought to.

  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    So have they clarified "Athletics" yet? I'm just curious if the Arizona bowling team is going to suddenly be packed.

    I haven't seen anything where it's narrowed. The bill text that was linked earlier in the thread just said "athletic scholarships" and the like. So if the Arizona Bowling Team has full ride scholarships, I wasted my undergrad years.

  • MentalExerciseMentalExercise Indefenestrable Registered User regular
    I would say that the problem with this idea is that for a task as complicated as college I suspect only a small minority of people would be more motivated by having skin in the game, and for everyone worrying about money is actually a distraction.

    If you want college students to take their educations more seriously you'll have to do it culturally somehow, not through simply adding to the pricetag.

  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic I've Done Worse Registered User regular
    So have they clarified "Athletics" yet? I'm just curious if the Arizona bowling team is going to suddenly be packed.

    I haven't seen anything where it's narrowed. The bill text that was linked earlier in the thread just said "athletic scholarships" and the like. So if the Arizona Bowling Team has full ride scholarships, I wasted my undergrad years.

    Ah, so they don't mean Scholar-Athletes, they mean "Athletes that are required to maintain a 2.0 so they can play"-minor leaguers Scholars.

    That is just a blatant pandering it's annoying.

  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    I would say that the problem with this idea is that for a task as complicated as college I suspect only a small minority of people would be more motivated by having skin in the game, and for everyone worrying about money is actually a distraction.

    If you want college students to take their educations more seriously you'll have to do it culturally somehow, not through simply adding to the pricetag.

    I don't want to be classist, but I don't think that there are many poor students who commit to college in the first place and then just drop out and be bitches because to get in, they would've had to pound the books in high school.

  • MentalExerciseMentalExercise Indefenestrable Registered User regular
    I would say that the problem with this idea is that for a task as complicated as college I suspect only a small minority of people would be more motivated by having skin in the game, and for everyone worrying about money is actually a distraction.

    If you want college students to take their educations more seriously you'll have to do it culturally somehow, not through simply adding to the pricetag.

    I don't want to be classist, but I don't think that there are many poor students who commit to college in the first place and then just drop out and be bitches because to get in, they would've had to pound the books in high school.

    I did, more or less.

  • spacekungfumanspacekungfuman Poor and minority-filled Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    This is an unfortunate, but not unexpected event for that state. This is just a continuation of the (please excuse the foul language) "Fuck you. I got mine." attitude that is prevalent in the densely populated Phoenix-Metro area; due to the retirement communities and entrenched-corrupted interests, and all the propaganda/voting-patterns that fall out from that.

    For an example of the "Fuck you. I got mine." attitude,
    [Rep. Michelle] Ugenti [R-Scottsdale] said she paid for her own apartment, her car and her food, worked full time "and still having enough time in all of that, and with all of that responsibility, to play rugby for ASU.''

    What she didn't say:
    • When she went to ASU (2000-2004):
      • In-State Tuition was all of $2,400 annually
      • Parking decals were ~$50-$100 (annually) for lot 59
      • Rent for a near campus apartment or house was all of $400-500 for a two bedroom that you could split the rent 4 ways. *cough*okitwasmorelike6or7butdon'ttellthelandlord*cough*
      • Food prices were cheaper
      • Gasoline Prices were cheaper
    • The "ASU Rugby Team" is a sports club with no tryouts. You just have to show up to practice; if you're good enough, you play in the matches. Point being, she could have played, but the commitment wasn't as big of a thing as she's making it out to be in her retort.

    What I get from this is a list of excuses. So are you going to blame those that say the same thing when they went to school in the 70's-80's? The fact is students have to work hard. There is no point in funding them if all they are going to do is just get passing grades (3.0 and lower GPA) and come out with debt working in a McDonalds because they are so poorly educated due to them not having either the skills needed or enough training.

    I don't follow your line of thought in the least.

    Course work is primarily where students gain the skills for gainful employment in their chosen fields.

    Or does your 40 part time work week prepare you to translate ancient Mongolian texts?

    Course work is fine, but I'm not talking about course work am I? I'm talking about the students who do not understand and just wing it through university and end up graduating from debt with a less than stellar GPA and no idea of how to get a job. I'm not talking about rick lazy kids which are in a class of their own but those who are going to university but aren't going to graduate with good grades and with the right skills.

    I don't work. I have enough fund to pay for my education, international fees no less, without taking debt which is what university should be about. Not everyone should go. Only those with the monetary funds to do so as well as those who are smart enough to find a career in academia.

    The number of students who "wing it" and graduate anyway is probably so low as to be a non-issue. And if it isn't that's a bigger problem than just "lazy poor kids".

    But there really is very little point debating with you on this, because your beloved serfdom universe isn't something I'm too willing to give much thought to.

    Its not about who wing it or not, its about students graduating without extreme debt with little to poor workplace opportunities.

    The idea TNC is advocating is really no different than the idea of allowing the smartest people into college with full rides and paying for it by admitting other people who are willing to pay full price that I proposed (and people seemed comfortable with) earlier in the thread.

  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    Why exactly should lazy rich people be going to college but not the mythical lazy poor person who would have had to put serious effort into actually getting there?

  • EgoEgo Registered User regular
    This is an unfortunate, but not unexpected event for that state. This is just a continuation of the (please excuse the foul language) "Fuck you. I got mine." attitude that is prevalent in the densely populated Phoenix-Metro area; due to the retirement communities and entrenched-corrupted interests, and all the propaganda/voting-patterns that fall out from that.

    For an example of the "Fuck you. I got mine." attitude,
    [Rep. Michelle] Ugenti [R-Scottsdale] said she paid for her own apartment, her car and her food, worked full time "and still having enough time in all of that, and with all of that responsibility, to play rugby for ASU.''

    What she didn't say:
    • When she went to ASU (2000-2004):
      • In-State Tuition was all of $2,400 annually
      • Parking decals were ~$50-$100 (annually) for lot 59
      • Rent for a near campus apartment or house was all of $400-500 for a two bedroom that you could split the rent 4 ways. *cough*okitwasmorelike6or7butdon'ttellthelandlord*cough*
      • Food prices were cheaper
      • Gasoline Prices were cheaper
    • The "ASU Rugby Team" is a sports club with no tryouts. You just have to show up to practice; if you're good enough, you play in the matches. Point being, she could have played, but the commitment wasn't as big of a thing as she's making it out to be in her retort.

    What I get from this is a list of excuses. So are you going to blame those that say the same thing when they went to school in the 70's-80's? The fact is students have to work hard. There is no point in funding them if all they are going to do is just get passing grades (3.0 and lower GPA) and come out with debt working in a McDonalds because they are so poorly educated due to them not having either the skills needed or enough training.

    I don't follow your line of thought in the least.

    Course work is primarily where students gain the skills for gainful employment in their chosen fields.

    Or does your 40 part time work week prepare you to translate ancient Mongolian texts?

    Course work is fine, but I'm not talking about course work am I? I'm talking about the students who do not understand and just wing it through university and end up graduating from debt with a less than stellar GPA and no idea of how to get a job. I'm not talking about rick lazy kids which are in a class of their own but those who are going to university but aren't going to graduate with good grades and with the right skills.

    I don't work. I have enough fund to pay for my education, international fees no less, without taking debt which is what university should be about. Not everyone should go. Only those with the monetary funds to do so as well as those who are smart enough to find a career in academia.

    The number of students who "wing it" and graduate anyway is probably so low as to be a non-issue. And if it isn't that's a bigger problem than just "lazy poor kids".

    But there really is very little point debating with you on this, because your beloved serfdom universe isn't something I'm too willing to give much thought to.

    Its not about who wing it or not, its about students graduating without extreme debt with little to poor workplace opportunities.

    ...which is a good reason to make university cheaper, not more expensive.

    Countries with free post-secondary education tend to do pretty well. It's not like there's a glut of factory worker jobs needing to be filled in the US right now.

  • Pi-r8Pi-r8 Registered User regular
    This is an unfortunate, but not unexpected event for that state. This is just a continuation of the (please excuse the foul language) "Fuck you. I got mine." attitude that is prevalent in the densely populated Phoenix-Metro area; due to the retirement communities and entrenched-corrupted interests, and all the propaganda/voting-patterns that fall out from that.

    For an example of the "Fuck you. I got mine." attitude,
    [Rep. Michelle] Ugenti [R-Scottsdale] said she paid for her own apartment, her car and her food, worked full time "and still having enough time in all of that, and with all of that responsibility, to play rugby for ASU.''

    What she didn't say:
    • When she went to ASU (2000-2004):
      • In-State Tuition was all of $2,400 annually
      • Parking decals were ~$50-$100 (annually) for lot 59
      • Rent for a near campus apartment or house was all of $400-500 for a two bedroom that you could split the rent 4 ways. *cough*okitwasmorelike6or7butdon'ttellthelandlord*cough*
      • Food prices were cheaper
      • Gasoline Prices were cheaper
    • The "ASU Rugby Team" is a sports club with no tryouts. You just have to show up to practice; if you're good enough, you play in the matches. Point being, she could have played, but the commitment wasn't as big of a thing as she's making it out to be in her retort.

    What I get from this is a list of excuses. So are you going to blame those that say the same thing when they went to school in the 70's-80's? The fact is students have to work hard. There is no point in funding them if all they are going to do is just get passing grades (3.0 and lower GPA) and come out with debt working in a McDonalds because they are so poorly educated due to them not having either the skills needed or enough training.

    I don't follow your line of thought in the least.

    Course work is primarily where students gain the skills for gainful employment in their chosen fields.

    Or does your 40 part time work week prepare you to translate ancient Mongolian texts?

    Course work is fine, but I'm not talking about course work am I? I'm talking about the students who do not understand and just wing it through university and end up graduating from debt with a less than stellar GPA and no idea of how to get a job. I'm not talking about rick lazy kids which are in a class of their own but those who are going to university but aren't going to graduate with good grades and with the right skills.

    I don't work. I have enough fund to pay for my education, international fees no less, without taking debt which is what university should be about. Not everyone should go. Only those with the monetary funds to do so as well as those who are smart enough to find a career in academia.

    The number of students who "wing it" and graduate anyway is probably so low as to be a non-issue. And if it isn't that's a bigger problem than just "lazy poor kids".

    But there really is very little point debating with you on this, because your beloved serfdom universe isn't something I'm too willing to give much thought to.

    Its not about who wing it or not, its about students graduating without extreme debt with little to poor workplace opportunities.

    The idea TNC is advocating is really no different than the idea of allowing the smartest people into college with full rides and paying for it by admitting other people who are willing to pay full price that I proposed (and people seemed comfortable with) earlier in the thread.

    How about we just tax the rich people and use that to let everyone go to college instead?

  • ronyaronya Arrrrrrf. the ivory tower's basementRegistered User regular
    This is an unfortunate, but not unexpected event for that state. This is just a continuation of the (please excuse the foul language) "Fuck you. I got mine." attitude that is prevalent in the densely populated Phoenix-Metro area; due to the retirement communities and entrenched-corrupted interests, and all the propaganda/voting-patterns that fall out from that.

    For an example of the "Fuck you. I got mine." attitude,
    [Rep. Michelle] Ugenti [R-Scottsdale] said she paid for her own apartment, her car and her food, worked full time "and still having enough time in all of that, and with all of that responsibility, to play rugby for ASU.''

    What she didn't say:
    • When she went to ASU (2000-2004):
      • In-State Tuition was all of $2,400 annually
      • Parking decals were ~$50-$100 (annually) for lot 59
      • Rent for a near campus apartment or house was all of $400-500 for a two bedroom that you could split the rent 4 ways. *cough*okitwasmorelike6or7butdon'ttellthelandlord*cough*
      • Food prices were cheaper
      • Gasoline Prices were cheaper
    • The "ASU Rugby Team" is a sports club with no tryouts. You just have to show up to practice; if you're good enough, you play in the matches. Point being, she could have played, but the commitment wasn't as big of a thing as she's making it out to be in her retort.

    What I get from this is a list of excuses. So are you going to blame those that say the same thing when they went to school in the 70's-80's? The fact is students have to work hard. There is no point in funding them if all they are going to do is just get passing grades (3.0 and lower GPA) and come out with debt working in a McDonalds because they are so poorly educated due to them not having either the skills needed or enough training.

    I don't follow your line of thought in the least.

    Course work is primarily where students gain the skills for gainful employment in their chosen fields.

    Or does your 40 part time work week prepare you to translate ancient Mongolian texts?

    Course work is fine, but I'm not talking about course work am I? I'm talking about the students who do not understand and just wing it through university and end up graduating from debt with a less than stellar GPA and no idea of how to get a job. I'm not talking about rick lazy kids which are in a class of their own but those who are going to university but aren't going to graduate with good grades and with the right skills.

    I don't work. I have enough fund to pay for my education, international fees no less, without taking debt which is what university should be about. Not everyone should go. Only those with the monetary funds to do so as well as those who are smart enough to find a career in academia.

    The number of students who "wing it" and graduate anyway is probably so low as to be a non-issue. And if it isn't that's a bigger problem than just "lazy poor kids".

    But there really is very little point debating with you on this, because your beloved serfdom universe isn't something I'm too willing to give much thought to.

    Its not about who wing it or not, its about students graduating without extreme debt with little to poor workplace opportunities.

    The idea TNC is advocating is really no different than the idea of allowing the smartest people into college with full rides and paying for it by admitting other people who are willing to pay full price that I proposed (and people seemed comfortable with) earlier in the thread.

    You may have missed the frankly disturbing section where he extols a system of educational patronage where poor smart kids bargain to be adopted in order to gain funding

  • EgoEgo Registered User regular
    I think my favourite idea so far in this thread is Paladin's progressive tuition cost.

    So everyone pays tuition. Based on their income.

    Something tells me rich folks would be all for subsidized education in an instant.

  • ronyaronya Arrrrrrf. the ivory tower's basementRegistered User regular
    Seriously, skfm, TNC is pushing a notion substantially further to the right than I think you would be prepared to endorse. He doesn't object if poor children subordinate themselves to rich people to acquire higher education through cultural institutions like adoption or patronage; he objects if they do so via the market system, aka, by borrowing money and going into debt:
    Certainly I'm not for banning education to those who can't afford it. Previous times showed that if a student had the potential but not the means they would be adopted and educated. What my argument is that there should be a strict limit on who gets in and who doesn't based on both merit and other factors. Those just arguing that I'm for only the rich are incorrect. Those with the mental and monetary funds without taking debt should be allowed to go in. Those without monetary funds should either be told to enter competitions to see only the brightest gets in or try to get noticed by those who could send that person to university. This free for all system does not work.

    We're talking 18th century attitudes here.

    As I pointed out earlier, he won't back any form of universal 'brightest' competitions because he wants those who are rich but not bright to nonetheless get a free pass. This is outright classism of a form we usually do not see in the modern West, to say the least.

  • naengwennaengwen Registered User regular
    Pi-r8 wrote: »
    This is an unfortunate, but not unexpected event for that state. This is just a continuation of the (please excuse the foul language) "Fuck you. I got mine." attitude that is prevalent in the densely populated Phoenix-Metro area; due to the retirement communities and entrenched-corrupted interests, and all the propaganda/voting-patterns that fall out from that.

    For an example of the "Fuck you. I got mine." attitude,
    [Rep. Michelle] Ugenti [R-Scottsdale] said she paid for her own apartment, her car and her food, worked full time "and still having enough time in all of that, and with all of that responsibility, to play rugby for ASU.''

    What she didn't say:
    • When she went to ASU (2000-2004):
      • In-State Tuition was all of $2,400 annually
      • Parking decals were ~$50-$100 (annually) for lot 59
      • Rent for a near campus apartment or house was all of $400-500 for a two bedroom that you could split the rent 4 ways. *cough*okitwasmorelike6or7butdon'ttellthelandlord*cough*
      • Food prices were cheaper
      • Gasoline Prices were cheaper
    • The "ASU Rugby Team" is a sports club with no tryouts. You just have to show up to practice; if you're good enough, you play in the matches. Point being, she could have played, but the commitment wasn't as big of a thing as she's making it out to be in her retort.

    What I get from this is a list of excuses. So are you going to blame those that say the same thing when they went to school in the 70's-80's? The fact is students have to work hard. There is no point in funding them if all they are going to do is just get passing grades (3.0 and lower GPA) and come out with debt working in a McDonalds because they are so poorly educated due to them not having either the skills needed or enough training.

    I don't follow your line of thought in the least.

    Course work is primarily where students gain the skills for gainful employment in their chosen fields.

    Or does your 40 part time work week prepare you to translate ancient Mongolian texts?

    Course work is fine, but I'm not talking about course work am I? I'm talking about the students who do not understand and just wing it through university and end up graduating from debt with a less than stellar GPA and no idea of how to get a job. I'm not talking about rick lazy kids which are in a class of their own but those who are going to university but aren't going to graduate with good grades and with the right skills.

    I don't work. I have enough fund to pay for my education, international fees no less, without taking debt which is what university should be about. Not everyone should go. Only those with the monetary funds to do so as well as those who are smart enough to find a career in academia.

    The number of students who "wing it" and graduate anyway is probably so low as to be a non-issue. And if it isn't that's a bigger problem than just "lazy poor kids".

    But there really is very little point debating with you on this, because your beloved serfdom universe isn't something I'm too willing to give much thought to.

    Its not about who wing it or not, its about students graduating without extreme debt with little to poor workplace opportunities.

    The idea TNC is advocating is really no different than the idea of allowing the smartest people into college with full rides and paying for it by admitting other people who are willing to pay full price that I proposed (and people seemed comfortable with) earlier in the thread.

    How about we just tax the rich people and use that to let everyone go to college instead?

    What are you, a communist? Taxing job creators will only make them move to Turbakistan and fund weapons of mass destruction and flatten the American dream! DO YOU HATE LIBERTY!?

    Am I doin it rite

  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    edited February 2012
    ronya wrote: »
    This is an unfortunate, but not unexpected event for that state. This is just a continuation of the (please excuse the foul language) "Fuck you. I got mine." attitude that is prevalent in the densely populated Phoenix-Metro area; due to the retirement communities and entrenched-corrupted interests, and all the propaganda/voting-patterns that fall out from that.

    For an example of the "Fuck you. I got mine." attitude,
    [Rep. Michelle] Ugenti [R-Scottsdale] said she paid for her own apartment, her car and her food, worked full time "and still having enough time in all of that, and with all of that responsibility, to play rugby for ASU.''

    What she didn't say:
    • When she went to ASU (2000-2004):
      • In-State Tuition was all of $2,400 annually
      • Parking decals were ~$50-$100 (annually) for lot 59
      • Rent for a near campus apartment or house was all of $400-500 for a two bedroom that you could split the rent 4 ways. *cough*okitwasmorelike6or7butdon'ttellthelandlord*cough*
      • Food prices were cheaper
      • Gasoline Prices were cheaper
    • The "ASU Rugby Team" is a sports club with no tryouts. You just have to show up to practice; if you're good enough, you play in the matches. Point being, she could have played, but the commitment wasn't as big of a thing as she's making it out to be in her retort.

    What I get from this is a list of excuses. So are you going to blame those that say the same thing when they went to school in the 70's-80's? The fact is students have to work hard. There is no point in funding them if all they are going to do is just get passing grades (3.0 and lower GPA) and come out with debt working in a McDonalds because they are so poorly educated due to them not having either the skills needed or enough training.

    I don't follow your line of thought in the least.

    Course work is primarily where students gain the skills for gainful employment in their chosen fields.

    Or does your 40 part time work week prepare you to translate ancient Mongolian texts?

    Course work is fine, but I'm not talking about course work am I? I'm talking about the students who do not understand and just wing it through university and end up graduating from debt with a less than stellar GPA and no idea of how to get a job. I'm not talking about rick lazy kids which are in a class of their own but those who are going to university but aren't going to graduate with good grades and with the right skills.

    I don't work. I have enough fund to pay for my education, international fees no less, without taking debt which is what university should be about. Not everyone should go. Only those with the monetary funds to do so as well as those who are smart enough to find a career in academia.

    The number of students who "wing it" and graduate anyway is probably so low as to be a non-issue. And if it isn't that's a bigger problem than just "lazy poor kids".

    But there really is very little point debating with you on this, because your beloved serfdom universe isn't something I'm too willing to give much thought to.

    Its not about who wing it or not, its about students graduating without extreme debt with little to poor workplace opportunities.

    The idea TNC is advocating is really no different than the idea of allowing the smartest people into college with full rides and paying for it by admitting other people who are willing to pay full price that I proposed (and people seemed comfortable with) earlier in the thread.

    You may have missed the frankly disturbing section where he extols a system of educational patronage where poor smart kids bargain to be adopted in order to gain funding

    I find no problem with this system. If your smart and know that you are, then its normal for you to find out the best for yourself and do whatever it takes to get in.
    Why exactly should lazy rich people be going to college but not the mythical lazy poor person who would have had to put serious effort into actually getting there?

    Because "lazy rich people" can pay without debt while the "mythical lazy poor person" graduates with poor to none workplacements and a below than average GPA,

    Education is one of the ways to actually break out of the cycle of poverty that traps kids into being poor. What you're saying is "Born poor? Fuck off" and if that's what you actually believe then I think we're done here.

    Seinfeld3.gif

    AManFromEarth on
  • MechMantisMechMantis Registered User regular
    You may have missed the frankly disturbing section where he extols a system of educational patronage where poor smart kids bargain to be adopted in order to gain funding

    I find no problem with this system. If your smart and know that you are, then its normal for you to find out the best for yourself and do whatever it takes to get in.
    Why exactly should lazy rich people be going to college but not the mythical lazy poor person who would have had to put serious effort into actually getting there?

    Because "lazy rich people" can pay without debt while the "mythical lazy poor person" graduates with poor to none workplacements and a below than average GPA,

    So college should only be for those who pay completely up front, or those who're willing to debase themselves enough so they can pay completely up front?

    I just want to be clear because that sounds, at face value, absolutely terrible. I can't be reading that right.

  • EupfhoriaEupfhoria Registered User regular
    ...university should be about... Only those with the monetary funds to do so as well as those who are smart enough to find a career in academia.

    and there's no one who goes to college to prepare for a career in jobs that aren't 'academia'? right...

    and to echo some of the sentiments in the 'civility in discourse thread', these ideas you are espousing deserve no respect. They are fucking stupid. Really, only rich people or those who are ignorant of what these ideas would actually entail would ever agree with you.

  • spacekungfumanspacekungfuman Poor and minority-filled Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Here is an idea that provides real "skin in the game." Why not require anyone who accepts state aid to provide some sort of civil service for a couple of years after graduation. Then the state could see a direct return on its investment by guaranteeing that it will have educated people available for beaurocratic positions. You could even pay less than you would pay to "real" government workers to reflect the money the government already laid out towards school. Best of all, when they entered the private jobs market, they would have their degree plus two years of experience on their resume.

  • Pi-r8Pi-r8 Registered User regular
    Education is one of the only actual ways out of the cycle of poverty that traps kids into being poor. What you're saying is "Born poor? Fuck off" and if that's what you actually believe then I think we're done here.

    No what I said and advocate if your smart there will be methods to get into University. Others will just have to work within their means but still get an education. Become janitors, carpenters and other professions that might be lacking.

    none of those professions is lacking right now.
    It's not like we have some critical shortage of janitors.

  • spacekungfumanspacekungfuman Poor and minority-filled Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Eupfhoria wrote: »
    ...university should be about... Only those with the monetary funds to do so as well as those who are smart enough to find a career in academia.

    and there's no one who goes to college to prepare for a career in jobs that aren't 'academia'? right...

    and to echo some of the sentiments in the 'civility in discourse thread', these ideas you are espousing deserve no respect. They are fucking stupid. Really, only rich people or those who are ignorant of what these ideas would actually entail would ever agree with you.

    To further echo some sentiments from the civility thread, you have just succeeded in making yourself look like the unreasonable, closed minded person in this discussion.

  • ronyaronya Arrrrrrf. the ivory tower's basementRegistered User regular
    edited February 2012
    Scholarships in return for a government bonds already exist. But say you want it to be sufficiently common so that you can fund tens of thousands of students every year, instead of the handful already aiming for a civil service career track anyway. Then you have to answer this question:

    What penalty do you imagine you could impose for non-performance of said civil service bond that you can't impose for a student loan debt to the state already?

    ronya on
  • ronyaronya Arrrrrrf. the ivory tower's basementRegistered User regular
    and there's no one who goes to college to prepare for a career in jobs that aren't 'academia'? right...

    No, read the "as well as those". Not everyone goes into academia, they go for business degrees with the right connections to carry out their own family business or become the CEO because they have the connections.

    Why is everything 'connections' with you? Why do you object to equality of opportunity?

  • SammyFSammyF Registered User regular
    edited February 2012
    Here is an idea that provides real "skin in the game." Why not require anyone who accepts state aid to provide some sort of civil service for a couple of years after graduation. Then the state could see a direct return on its investment by guaranteeing that it will have educated people available for beaurocratic positions. You could even pay less than you would pay to "real" government workers to reflect the money the government already laid out towards school. Best of all, when they entered the private jobs market, they would have their degree plus two years of experience on their resume.

    That idea is so much more progressive than your earlier position that I'm pretty sure I saw it proposed on an episode of West Wing. I don't mean that to sound critical; I'm just trying to acknowledge that you're obviously trying to approach this with an open mind.

    I would generally be down with that on a philosophical level. I think there would probably be some implementation hurdles which may or may not be surmountable; I don't know if we have enough civil service jobs to go around for everyone who accepts financial aid. I don't know what impact that would have on people who wanted to try and get a civil service job who were ineligible for financial aid initially. The biggest hurdle I see, though, is that states can barely afford to offer the financial aid in the first place; I'm not sure where they'll find the money to pay all of those graduates even the most basic cost-of-living wage while they're putting in their service.

    SammyF on
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Eupfhoria wrote: »
    ...university should be about... Only those with the monetary funds to do so as well as those who are smart enough to find a career in academia.

    and there's no one who goes to college to prepare for a career in jobs that aren't 'academia'? right...

    and to echo some of the sentiments in the 'civility in discourse thread', these ideas you are espousing deserve no respect. They are fucking stupid. Really, only rich people or those who are ignorant of what these ideas would actually entail would ever agree with you.

    To further echo some sentiments from the civility thread, you have just succeeded in making yourself look like the unreasonable, closed minded person in this discussion.

    SKFM, I consider myself a fairly civil sort of fellow, but are you honestly trying to defend the bullshit, paternalistic, dark age serfdom society that The Nomadic Circle is peddling?

    Really?

  • Pi-r8Pi-r8 Registered User regular
    Pi-r8 wrote: »
    Education is one of the only actual ways out of the cycle of poverty that traps kids into being poor. What you're saying is "Born poor? Fuck off" and if that's what you actually believe then I think we're done here.

    No what I said and advocate if your smart there will be methods to get into University. Others will just have to work within their means but still get an education. Become janitors, carpenters and other professions that might be lacking.

    none of those professions is lacking right now.
    It's not like we have some critical shortage of janitors.

    I gave those as an example.

    It's not just janitors. Any kind of job that doesn't require higher education will have a ton of applicants right now (at least in the US). We have far more people with less-than-a-college-education than we can employ. The only jobs that still have a shortage of workers are in specific niche technical fields and nursing. Not to mention, there's plenty of college grads who would be quite happy to get a blue-collar job these days.

    Your idea that we'll somehow have a shortage of labor if we send too many people to college is just totally wrong.

  • ronyaronya Arrrrrrf. the ivory tower's basementRegistered User regular
    ronya wrote: »
    What penalty do you imagine you could impose for non-performance of said civil service bond that you can't impose for a student loan debt to the state already?

    No education ever. Simple as that. Of course, that would be my reasoning if I supported his ideas.

    Most governments have no use for an untrained high school graduate; they would want them to be educated first prior to serving their bond.

  • MentalExerciseMentalExercise Indefenestrable Registered User regular
    Here is an idea that provides real "skin in the game." Why not require anyone who accepts state aid to provide some sort of civil service for a couple of years after graduation. Then the state could see a direct return on its investment by guaranteeing that it will have educated people available for beaurocratic positions. You could even pay less than you would pay to "real" government workers to reflect the money the government already laid out towards school. Best of all, when they entered the private jobs market, they would have their degree plus two years of experience on their resume.

    ...This doesn't seem like a bad idea exactly. Kind of the G.I. bill, but in reverse order?
    Education is one of the only actual ways out of the cycle of poverty that traps kids into being poor. What you're saying is "Born poor? Fuck off" and if that's what you actually believe then I think we're done here.

    No what I said and advocate if your smart there will be methods to get into University. Others will just have to work within their means but still get an education. Become janitors, carpenters and other professions that might be lacking.

    Except that system disproportionately rewards people with hustle and people skills. Which is fine, except I don't give a shit if the guy that engineered my car's engine has people skills. I just want the guy who's best at math and science. The idea with school should be to encourage and reward most the people with the skills they'll actually need in their career when they get out.

  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Pi-r8 wrote: »
    Education is one of the only actual ways out of the cycle of poverty that traps kids into being poor. What you're saying is "Born poor? Fuck off" and if that's what you actually believe then I think we're done here.

    No what I said and advocate if your smart there will be methods to get into University. Others will just have to work within their means but still get an education. Become janitors, carpenters and other professions that might be lacking.

    none of those professions is lacking right now.
    It's not like we have some critical shortage of janitors.

    I gave those as an example.

    I believe you mean you gave those as examples.

    But then you're able to pay for yourself to go to college, so surely you know better than me. I am a lowly poor after all.

    And being a ESOL student shouldn't matter, not based on your prescription.

  • spacekungfumanspacekungfuman Poor and minority-filled Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    ronya wrote: »
    Scholarships in return for a government bonds already exist. But say you want it to be sufficiently common so that you can fund tens of thousands of students every year, instead of the handful already aiming for a civil service career track anyway. Then you have to answer this question:

    What penalty do you imagine you could impose for non-performance of said civil service bond that you can't impose for a student loan debt to the state already?

    You would have the equivalent of the "dishonorable discharge" which can make someone effectively unemployable.

  • ronyaronya Arrrrrrf. the ivory tower's basementRegistered User regular
    edited February 2012
    ronya wrote: »
    Scholarships in return for a government bonds already exist. But say you want it to be sufficiently common so that you can fund tens of thousands of students every year, instead of the handful already aiming for a civil service career track anyway. Then you have to answer this question:

    What penalty do you imagine you could impose for non-performance of said civil service bond that you can't impose for a student loan debt to the state already?

    You would have the equivalent of the "dishonorable discharge" which can make someone effectively unemployable.

    Being dishonorably discharged makes someone effectively unemployable because it isn't just assigned willy-nilly for things unrelated to your work performance, like defaulting on your student loans/bonds. You may observe that having a horrible credit rating today doesn't impinge on your career, at least directly. So why would private-sector employers take this into account? Are you proposing to penalize employers if they dare to employ someone who failed to serve their bond?

    ronya on
1568101115
Sign In or Register to comment.