In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
On March 07 2016 15:26 Slaughter wrote: People in the US talk such a big game when it comes to being friendly and open and the bastion of freedom of opportunity but really its just a country full of selfish people. Me me me, I must win and if someone else is winning then its my loss so no I don't want to pay for things that benefit other people because fuck them they all must be moochers who want everything given to them.
*meanwhile in Europe* Isn't it great that we have enriched our nation by investing in ourselves as a whole instead of being divided and letting some invisible hand work its magic?
Like there is 0 sense of community and unity in this country. Everyone is too individualistic and what groups do form are numerous with narrow goals and they all distrust each other (and also cut across cultural/racial/economic/religious lines).
We carved ourselves up into niches and everyone only wants their niche to win and thinks that they are 100% self reliant and every other group is just looking for hand outs on their dime.
No one actually wants to make America "great" again, they want to make whatever niche they are apart of to get theirs and who cares about the rest.
Fuck You. Got Mine is the motto of this country.
Okay. We're going to making housing free for everybody. A domicile is more important than ever in this day and age. Especially with ballooning housing costs. Nobody will notice you without a place to live. And people who have housing pay taxes (homeless people pay less taxes) - so it all works out. If you're at all skeptical about the viability of the specifics of footing the bill for my rent, it means you hate helping people, are greedy, and just want to insult people by calling them moochers. What do you think?
Didn't some place give all the homeless a place to stay recently to great effect? They figured out it actually costs way less money to give them a roof over their heads than to have them sleep on the street. So if its purely a fiscal issue you save money.
On March 07 2016 15:26 Slaughter wrote: People in the US talk such a big game when it comes to being friendly and open and the bastion of freedom of opportunity but really its just a country full of selfish people. Me me me, I must win and if someone else is winning then its my loss so no I don't want to pay for things that benefit other people because fuck them they all must be moochers who want everything given to them.
*meanwhile in Europe* Isn't it great that we have enriched our nation by investing in ourselves as a whole instead of being divided and letting some invisible hand work its magic?
Like there is 0 sense of community and unity in this country. Everyone is too individualistic and what groups do form are numerous with narrow goals and they all distrust each other (and also cut across cultural/racial/economic/religious lines).
We carved ourselves up into niches and everyone only wants their niche to win and thinks that they are 100% self reliant and every other group is just looking for hand outs on their dime.
No one actually wants to make America "great" again, they want to make whatever niche they are apart of to get theirs and who cares about the rest.
Fuck You. Got Mine is the motto of this country.
Okay. We're going to making housing free for everybody. A domicile is more important than ever in this day and age. Especially with ballooning housing costs. Nobody will notice you without a place to live. And people who have housing pay taxes (homeless people pay less taxes) - so it all works out. If you're at all skeptical about the viability of the specifics of footing the bill for my rent, it means you hate helping people, are greedy, and just want to insult people by calling them moochers. What do you think?
On March 07 2016 15:26 Slaughter wrote: People in the US talk such a big game when it comes to being friendly and open and the bastion of freedom of opportunity but really its just a country full of selfish people. Me me me, I must win and if someone else is winning then its my loss so no I don't want to pay for things that benefit other people because fuck them they all must be moochers who want everything given to them.
*meanwhile in Europe* Isn't it great that we have enriched our nation by investing in ourselves as a whole instead of being divided and letting some invisible hand work its magic?
Like there is 0 sense of community and unity in this country. Everyone is too individualistic and what groups do form are numerous with narrow goals and they all distrust each other (and also cut across cultural/racial/economic/religious lines).
We carved ourselves up into niches and everyone only wants their niche to win and thinks that they are 100% self reliant and every other group is just looking for hand outs on their dime.
No one actually wants to make America "great" again, they want to make whatever niche they are apart of to get theirs and who cares about the rest.
Fuck You. Got Mine is the motto of this country.
Okay. We're going to making housing free for everybody. A domicile is more important than ever in this day and age. Especially with ballooning housing costs. Nobody will notice you without a place to live. And people who have housing pay taxes (homeless people pay less taxes) - so it all works out. If you're at all skeptical about the viability of the specifics of footing the bill for my rent, it means you hate helping people, are greedy, and just want to insult people by calling them moochers. What do you think?
Is low-income housing not even a thing in the US?
We're not talking about low-income housing or shelters. We're talking about free housing for everybody.
What Bernie's pushing is not "adding to the myriad need-based scholarships and loan programs," it's "free college for everybody." Or have I missed something?
On March 07 2016 15:26 Slaughter wrote: People in the US talk such a big game when it comes to being friendly and open and the bastion of freedom of opportunity but really its just a country full of selfish people. Me me me, I must win and if someone else is winning then its my loss so no I don't want to pay for things that benefit other people because fuck them they all must be moochers who want everything given to them.
*meanwhile in Europe* Isn't it great that we have enriched our nation by investing in ourselves as a whole instead of being divided and letting some invisible hand work its magic?
Like there is 0 sense of community and unity in this country. Everyone is too individualistic and what groups do form are numerous with narrow goals and they all distrust each other (and also cut across cultural/racial/economic/religious lines).
We carved ourselves up into niches and everyone only wants their niche to win and thinks that they are 100% self reliant and every other group is just looking for hand outs on their dime.
No one actually wants to make America "great" again, they want to make whatever niche they are apart of to get theirs and who cares about the rest.
Fuck You. Got Mine is the motto of this country.
Okay. We're going to making housing free for everybody. A domicile is more important than ever in this day and age. Especially with ballooning housing costs. Nobody will notice you without a place to live. And people who have housing pay taxes (homeless people pay less taxes) - so it all works out. If you're at all skeptical about the viability of the specifics of footing the bill for my rent, it means you hate helping people, are greedy, and just want to insult people by calling them moochers. What do you think?
Is low-income housing not even a thing in the US?
We're not talking about low-income housing or shelters. We're talking about free housing for everybody.
What Bernie's pushing is not "adding to the myriad need-based scholarships and loan programs," it's "free college for everybody." Or have I missed something?
Well private college wouldn't be free for one, so Hillary's retort about paying for Trumps kids is pretty much bunk.
On March 07 2016 15:26 Slaughter wrote: People in the US talk such a big game when it comes to being friendly and open and the bastion of freedom of opportunity but really its just a country full of selfish people. Me me me, I must win and if someone else is winning then its my loss so no I don't want to pay for things that benefit other people because fuck them they all must be moochers who want everything given to them.
*meanwhile in Europe* Isn't it great that we have enriched our nation by investing in ourselves as a whole instead of being divided and letting some invisible hand work its magic?
Like there is 0 sense of community and unity in this country. Everyone is too individualistic and what groups do form are numerous with narrow goals and they all distrust each other (and also cut across cultural/racial/economic/religious lines).
We carved ourselves up into niches and everyone only wants their niche to win and thinks that they are 100% self reliant and every other group is just looking for hand outs on their dime.
No one actually wants to make America "great" again, they want to make whatever niche they are apart of to get theirs and who cares about the rest.
Fuck You. Got Mine is the motto of this country.
Okay. We're going to making housing free for everybody. A domicile is more important than ever in this day and age. Especially with ballooning housing costs. Nobody will notice you without a place to live. And people who have housing pay taxes (homeless people pay less taxes) - so it all works out. If you're at all skeptical about the viability of the specifics of footing the bill for my rent, it means you hate helping people, are greedy, and just want to insult people by calling them moochers. What do you think?
Is low-income housing not even a thing in the US?
We're not talking about low-income housing or shelters. We're talking about free housing for everybody.
What Bernie's pushing is not "adding to the myriad need-based scholarships and loan programs," it's "free college for everybody." Or have I missed something?
Depends. I haven't actually read his plan (if that's even laid out yet), but free post-secondary education (or heavily subsidized education) usually leads to stricter qualifications for students and for the schools. So college may be free, but everyone still won't be going to college (whether its desire or aptitude).
The biggest difference would be that the bottom colleges will actually have to start caring about academic output...which is why in most other countries going to a Community College doesn't really have a stigma to it, but it does probably mean you're receiving an education in a trade or applied skills for specific fields.
On March 07 2016 15:26 Slaughter wrote: People in the US talk such a big game when it comes to being friendly and open and the bastion of freedom of opportunity but really its just a country full of selfish people. Me me me, I must win and if someone else is winning then its my loss so no I don't want to pay for things that benefit other people because fuck them they all must be moochers who want everything given to them.
*meanwhile in Europe* Isn't it great that we have enriched our nation by investing in ourselves as a whole instead of being divided and letting some invisible hand work its magic?
Like there is 0 sense of community and unity in this country. Everyone is too individualistic and what groups do form are numerous with narrow goals and they all distrust each other (and also cut across cultural/racial/economic/religious lines).
We carved ourselves up into niches and everyone only wants their niche to win and thinks that they are 100% self reliant and every other group is just looking for hand outs on their dime.
No one actually wants to make America "great" again, they want to make whatever niche they are apart of to get theirs and who cares about the rest.
Fuck You. Got Mine is the motto of this country.
Okay. We're going to making housing free for everybody. A domicile is more important than ever in this day and age. Especially with ballooning housing costs. Nobody will notice you without a place to live. And people who have housing pay taxes (homeless people pay less taxes) - so it all works out. If you're at all skeptical about the viability of the specifics of footing the bill for my rent, it means you hate helping people, are greedy, and just want to insult people by calling them moochers. What do you think?
Is low-income housing not even a thing in the US?
We're not talking about low-income housing or shelters. We're talking about free housing for everybody.
What Bernie's pushing is not "adding to the myriad need-based scholarships and loan programs," it's "free college for everybody." Or have I missed something?
Well private college wouldn't be free for one, so Hillary's retort about paying for Trumps kids is pretty much bunk.
I must say I find this opposition to my free housing plan highly unfounded. I'm not talking about putting people in the Hamptons on the government's dime. I'm simply saying we should use public money to cover at least the down payment (tuition) on homes, leaving mortgage payments (room, board, etc.) in the hands of the newly created taxpayer.
On March 07 2016 15:26 Slaughter wrote: People in the US talk such a big game when it comes to being friendly and open and the bastion of freedom of opportunity but really its just a country full of selfish people. Me me me, I must win and if someone else is winning then its my loss so no I don't want to pay for things that benefit other people because fuck them they all must be moochers who want everything given to them.
*meanwhile in Europe* Isn't it great that we have enriched our nation by investing in ourselves as a whole instead of being divided and letting some invisible hand work its magic?
Like there is 0 sense of community and unity in this country. Everyone is too individualistic and what groups do form are numerous with narrow goals and they all distrust each other (and also cut across cultural/racial/economic/religious lines).
We carved ourselves up into niches and everyone only wants their niche to win and thinks that they are 100% self reliant and every other group is just looking for hand outs on their dime.
No one actually wants to make America "great" again, they want to make whatever niche they are apart of to get theirs and who cares about the rest.
Fuck You. Got Mine is the motto of this country.
Okay. We're going to making housing free for everybody. A domicile is more important than ever in this day and age. Especially with ballooning housing costs. Nobody will notice you without a place to live. And people who have housing pay taxes (homeless people pay less taxes) - so it all works out. If you're at all skeptical about the viability of the specifics of footing the bill for my rent, it means you hate helping people, are greedy, and just want to insult people by calling them moochers. What do you think?
Is low-income housing not even a thing in the US?
We're not talking about low-income housing or shelters. We're talking about free housing for everybody.
What Bernie's pushing is not "adding to the myriad need-based scholarships and loan programs," it's "free college for everybody." Or have I missed something?
Well private college wouldn't be free for one, so Hillary's retort about paying for Trumps kids is pretty much bunk.
I must say I find this opposition to my free housing plan highly unfounded. I'm not talking about putting people in the Hamptons on the government's dime. I'm simply saying we should use public money to cover at least the down payment (tuition) on homes, leaving mortgage payments (room, board, etc.) in the hands of the newly created taxpayer.
Do you have a STEM degree? Because your logic needs some work. If you want to make a parodic analogy to housing you should at least make the analogy work. Public schooling = public housing. Private schooling = private housing. You know. Basic stuff. It's a shame that analogies aren't on the SAT anymore.
On March 07 2016 15:26 Slaughter wrote: People in the US talk such a big game when it comes to being friendly and open and the bastion of freedom of opportunity but really its just a country full of selfish people. Me me me, I must win and if someone else is winning then its my loss so no I don't want to pay for things that benefit other people because fuck them they all must be moochers who want everything given to them.
*meanwhile in Europe* Isn't it great that we have enriched our nation by investing in ourselves as a whole instead of being divided and letting some invisible hand work its magic?
Like there is 0 sense of community and unity in this country. Everyone is too individualistic and what groups do form are numerous with narrow goals and they all distrust each other (and also cut across cultural/racial/economic/religious lines).
We carved ourselves up into niches and everyone only wants their niche to win and thinks that they are 100% self reliant and every other group is just looking for hand outs on their dime.
No one actually wants to make America "great" again, they want to make whatever niche they are apart of to get theirs and who cares about the rest.
Fuck You. Got Mine is the motto of this country.
Okay. We're going to making housing free for everybody. A domicile is more important than ever in this day and age. Especially with ballooning housing costs. Nobody will notice you without a place to live. And people who have housing pay taxes (homeless people pay less taxes) - so it all works out. If you're at all skeptical about the viability of the specifics of footing the bill for my rent, it means you hate helping people, are greedy, and just want to insult people by calling them moochers. What do you think?
Is low-income housing not even a thing in the US?
We're not talking about low-income housing or shelters. We're talking about free housing for everybody.
What Bernie's pushing is not "adding to the myriad need-based scholarships and loan programs," it's "free college for everybody." Or have I missed something?
Well private college wouldn't be free for one, so Hillary's retort about paying for Trumps kids is pretty much bunk.
I must say I find this opposition to my free housing plan highly unfounded. I'm not talking about putting people in the Hamptons on the government's dime. I'm simply saying we should use public money to cover at least the down payment (tuition) on homes, leaving mortgage payments (room, board, etc.) in the hands of the newly created taxpayer.
Just saying that there's a lot of people who wouldn't use it, even if it was free.
On March 07 2016 15:26 Slaughter wrote: People in the US talk such a big game when it comes to being friendly and open and the bastion of freedom of opportunity but really its just a country full of selfish people. Me me me, I must win and if someone else is winning then its my loss so no I don't want to pay for things that benefit other people because fuck them they all must be moochers who want everything given to them.
*meanwhile in Europe* Isn't it great that we have enriched our nation by investing in ourselves as a whole instead of being divided and letting some invisible hand work its magic?
Like there is 0 sense of community and unity in this country. Everyone is too individualistic and what groups do form are numerous with narrow goals and they all distrust each other (and also cut across cultural/racial/economic/religious lines).
We carved ourselves up into niches and everyone only wants their niche to win and thinks that they are 100% self reliant and every other group is just looking for hand outs on their dime.
No one actually wants to make America "great" again, they want to make whatever niche they are apart of to get theirs and who cares about the rest.
Fuck You. Got Mine is the motto of this country.
Okay. We're going to making housing free for everybody. A domicile is more important than ever in this day and age. Especially with ballooning housing costs. Nobody will notice you without a place to live. And people who have housing pay taxes (homeless people pay less taxes) - so it all works out. If you're at all skeptical about the viability of the specifics of footing the bill for my rent, it means you hate helping people, are greedy, and just want to insult people by calling them moochers. What do you think?
Is low-income housing not even a thing in the US?
We're not talking about low-income housing or shelters. We're talking about free housing for everybody.
What Bernie's pushing is not "adding to the myriad need-based scholarships and loan programs," it's "free college for everybody." Or have I missed something?
Well private college wouldn't be free for one, so Hillary's retort about paying for Trumps kids is pretty much bunk.
I must say I find this opposition to my free housing plan highly unfounded. I'm not talking about putting people in the Hamptons on the government's dime. I'm simply saying we should use public money to cover at least the down payment (tuition) on homes, leaving mortgage payments (room, board, etc.) in the hands of the newly created taxpayer.
Do you have a STEM degree? Because your logic needs some work. If you want to make a parodic analogy to housing you should at least make the analogy work. Public schooling = public housing. Private schooling = private housing. You know. Basic stuff. It's a shame that analogies aren't on the SAT anymore.
One of the first things they taught us at analogy school was that, by virtue of being an analogy, it will inevitably be an imperfect comparison.
And I'm not parodying anything. I'm saying that with the rising average annual public tuition in the US being $9,139, education is not the only sector in which the government should take up more responsibility. We should also be willing to spend $36,000 to benefit people when they're putting a down payment on a home. If you instead want to spend the whole sum of the $200,000 median home price to make my housing program more "public" I'd have to consider that further.
On March 07 2016 12:57 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: So does Sanders free college policy apply to every course? What about liberal arts courses like Gender studies, art history & philosophy.Courses with no jobs at the end of them, courses that already have far too many students enrolled on a supply/demand (for work) basis.
Sanders fans, please explain to me the benefit to society and the taxpayer of putting more students through gender studies or art history at the publics expense.What is in it for the taxpayer.
history & philosophy students have quite solid job prospects, apart from that isn't offering people as much self-realization as possible kind of the point of society? If someone wants to study history because he is a great history enthusiast isn't that good?
Why does the government need to finance that in the here and now?
The government doesn't fund things, taxpayers do. College grads pay more taxes. It works out.
SOME college grads pay more taxes. Millions dont.
That's why there is a debt bubble in the first place. Kids by the millions majored in Gender studies and History and then wondered why they cant land a six figure job.
There is also a debt bubble because college tuition has increased insane amounts over the years that make it impossible to self fund unless your very rich or get some kind of scholarship ride.
Im not going to deny the huge tuition some of the high end college cost.
However, these are adults we're talking about here, they should've known what they're getting into.
Colleges are businesses and no one force you to attend one.
I just expect people to have enough common sense to not spend 100k on a gender study degree.
Im astounded people still say this in 2016...a time where you require a degree to be a manager at a stupid Abercrombie and Fitch store.
I mean you kinda have to go unless you either go military or luck in to a job. People being forced to spend so much money to go to school is as much a problem as everyone over valuing degrees in the first place.
Also let's be real here. You may be an adult at 18 but youre still very much a child in most circumstances. Your life experiences are pretty much zero at this point and to think that this sort of loan will fuck you long in to the future is weighed against the need for a degree in the first place. It doesn't not help that there is a community college stigma in this country either.
The debt bubble is going to explode one day. It's going to be bad when it does.
On March 07 2016 15:26 Slaughter wrote: People in the US talk such a big game when it comes to being friendly and open and the bastion of freedom of opportunity but really its just a country full of selfish people. Me me me, I must win and if someone else is winning then its my loss so no I don't want to pay for things that benefit other people because fuck them they all must be moochers who want everything given to them.
*meanwhile in Europe* Isn't it great that we have enriched our nation by investing in ourselves as a whole instead of being divided and letting some invisible hand work its magic?
Like there is 0 sense of community and unity in this country. Everyone is too individualistic and what groups do form are numerous with narrow goals and they all distrust each other (and also cut across cultural/racial/economic/religious lines).
We carved ourselves up into niches and everyone only wants their niche to win and thinks that they are 100% self reliant and every other group is just looking for hand outs on their dime.
No one actually wants to make America "great" again, they want to make whatever niche they are apart of to get theirs and who cares about the rest.
Fuck You. Got Mine is the motto of this country.
Okay. We're going to making housing free for everybody. A domicile is more important than ever in this day and age. Especially with ballooning housing costs. Nobody will notice you without a place to live. And people who have housing pay taxes (homeless people pay less taxes) - so it all works out. If you're at all skeptical about the viability of the specifics of footing the bill for my rent, it means you hate helping people, are greedy, and just want to insult people by calling them moochers. What do you think?
Is low-income housing not even a thing in the US?
We're not talking about low-income housing or shelters. We're talking about free housing for everybody.
What Bernie's pushing is not "adding to the myriad need-based scholarships and loan programs," it's "free college for everybody." Or have I missed something?
Well private college wouldn't be free for one, so Hillary's retort about paying for Trumps kids is pretty much bunk.
I must say I find this opposition to my free housing plan highly unfounded. I'm not talking about putting people in the Hamptons on the government's dime. I'm simply saying we should use public money to cover at least the down payment (tuition) on homes, leaving mortgage payments (room, board, etc.) in the hands of the newly created taxpayer.
Do you have a STEM degree? Because your logic needs some work. If you want to make a parodic analogy to housing you should at least make the analogy work. Public schooling = public housing. Private schooling = private housing. You know. Basic stuff. It's a shame that analogies aren't on the SAT anymore.
One of the first things they taught us at analogy school was that, by virtue of being an analogy, it will inevitably be an imperfect comparison.
And I'm not parodying anything. I'm saying that with the rising average annual public tuition in the US being $9,139, education is not the only sector in which the government should take up more responsibility. We should also be willing to spend $36,000 to benefit people when they're putting a down payment on a home. If you instead want to spend the whole sum of the $200,000 median home price to make my housing program more "public" I'd have to consider that further.
Or we could work out alternative housing arrangements and shift away from an economic system built on turning the citizenry into debt-financed mortgage capitalists. But yes, let's make sure everyone has housing. I'm on board with you and your below-median analogizing.
On March 07 2016 12:57 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: So does Sanders free college policy apply to every course? What about liberal arts courses like Gender studies, art history & philosophy.Courses with no jobs at the end of them, courses that already have far too many students enrolled on a supply/demand (for work) basis.
Sanders fans, please explain to me the benefit to society and the taxpayer of putting more students through gender studies or art history at the publics expense.What is in it for the taxpayer.
history & philosophy students have quite solid job prospects, apart from that isn't offering people as much self-realization as possible kind of the point of society? If someone wants to study history because he is a great history enthusiast isn't that good?
Why does the government need to finance that in the here and now?
The government doesn't fund things, taxpayers do. College grads pay more taxes. It works out.
SOME college grads pay more taxes. Millions dont.
That's why there is a debt bubble in the first place. Kids by the millions majored in Gender studies and History and then wondered why they cant land a six figure job.
There is also a debt bubble because college tuition has increased insane amounts over the years that make it impossible to self fund unless your very rich or get some kind of scholarship ride.
Im not going to deny the huge tuition some of the high end college cost.
However, these are adults we're talking about here, they should've known what they're getting into.
Colleges are businesses and no one force you to attend one.
I just expect people to have enough common sense to not spend 100k on a gender study degree.
Im astounded people still say this in 2016...a time where you require a degree to be a manager at a stupid Abercrombie and Fitch store.
I mean you kinda have to go unless you either go military or luck in to a job. People being forced to spend so much money to go to school is as much a problem as everyone over valuing degrees in the first place.
Also let's be real here. You may be an adult at 18 but youre still very much a child in most circumstances. Your life experiences are pretty much zero at this point and to think that this sort of loan will fuck you long in to the future is weighed against the need for a degree in the first place. It doesn't not help that there is a community college stigma in this country either.
The debt bubble is going to explode one day. It's going to be bad when it does.
There are plenty of blue collar jobs that dont require a college degree. As long as shits continue to break down, there will be blue collar jobs.
But of course, an average 18 years old isnt gonna want to fix cars or power lines for a living, that is beneath him.
Instead of learning a useful Trade, he must pursue a career in Medieval English Literature instead! And taxes from blue collar workers will pay for it!
On March 07 2016 12:57 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: So does Sanders free college policy apply to every course? What about liberal arts courses like Gender studies, art history & philosophy.Courses with no jobs at the end of them, courses that already have far too many students enrolled on a supply/demand (for work) basis.
Sanders fans, please explain to me the benefit to society and the taxpayer of putting more students through gender studies or art history at the publics expense.What is in it for the taxpayer.
history & philosophy students have quite solid job prospects, apart from that isn't offering people as much self-realization as possible kind of the point of society? If someone wants to study history because he is a great history enthusiast isn't that good?
Why does the government need to finance that in the here and now?
The government doesn't fund things, taxpayers do. College grads pay more taxes. It works out.
SOME college grads pay more taxes. Millions dont.
That's why there is a debt bubble in the first place. Kids by the millions majored in Gender studies and History and then wondered why they cant land a six figure job.
There is also a debt bubble because college tuition has increased insane amounts over the years that make it impossible to self fund unless your very rich or get some kind of scholarship ride.
Im not going to deny the huge tuition some of the high end college cost.
However, these are adults we're talking about here, they should've known what they're getting into.
Colleges are businesses and no one force you to attend one.
I just expect people to have enough common sense to not spend 100k on a gender study degree.
Im astounded people still say this in 2016...a time where you require a degree to be a manager at a stupid Abercrombie and Fitch store.
I mean you kinda have to go unless you either go military or luck in to a job. People being forced to spend so much money to go to school is as much a problem as everyone over valuing degrees in the first place.
Also let's be real here. You may be an adult at 18 but youre still very much a child in most circumstances. Your life experiences are pretty much zero at this point and to think that this sort of loan will fuck you long in to the future is weighed against the need for a degree in the first place. It doesn't not help that there is a community college stigma in this country either.
The debt bubble is going to explode one day. It's going to be bad when it does.
There are plenty of blue collar jobs that dont require a college degree. As long as shits continue to break down, there will be blue collar jobs.
But of course, an average 18 years old isnt gonna want to fix cars or power lines for a living, that is beneath him.
Instead of learning a useful Trade, he must pursue a career in Medieval English Literature instead! And taxes from blue collar workers will pay for it!
nope, those are scarce resources and since the demand+consumption is flexible, a pricing mechanism is still a good way to limit and distribute on the other hand, a basic minimum should be provided for everyone... my favourite mechanism would be public utilities that provide basic service for a non profit cost + regulated competitors in a market that can supplement (for instance different power mixes by buying production certificates in other countries (as most water power that is sold in germany for instance comes in the form of norwegian production certificates)) combined with a basic income guarantee for everyone constructed as a negative income tax
On March 07 2016 12:57 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: So does Sanders free college policy apply to every course? What about liberal arts courses like Gender studies, art history & philosophy.Courses with no jobs at the end of them, courses that already have far too many students enrolled on a supply/demand (for work) basis.
Sanders fans, please explain to me the benefit to society and the taxpayer of putting more students through gender studies or art history at the publics expense.What is in it for the taxpayer.
history & philosophy students have quite solid job prospects, apart from that isn't offering people as much self-realization as possible kind of the point of society? If someone wants to study history because he is a great history enthusiast isn't that good?
Why does the government need to finance that in the here and now?
The government doesn't fund things, taxpayers do. College grads pay more taxes. It works out.
SOME college grads pay more taxes. Millions dont.
That's why there is a debt bubble in the first place. Kids by the millions majored in Gender studies and History and then wondered why they cant land a six figure job.
There is also a debt bubble because college tuition has increased insane amounts over the years that make it impossible to self fund unless your very rich or get some kind of scholarship ride.
Im not going to deny the huge tuition some of the high end college cost.
However, these are adults we're talking about here, they should've known what they're getting into.
Colleges are businesses and no one force you to attend one.
I just expect people to have enough common sense to not spend 100k on a gender study degree.
Im astounded people still say this in 2016...a time where you require a degree to be a manager at a stupid Abercrombie and Fitch store.
I mean you kinda have to go unless you either go military or luck in to a job. People being forced to spend so much money to go to school is as much a problem as everyone over valuing degrees in the first place.
Also let's be real here. You may be an adult at 18 but youre still very much a child in most circumstances. Your life experiences are pretty much zero at this point and to think that this sort of loan will fuck you long in to the future is weighed against the need for a degree in the first place. It doesn't not help that there is a community college stigma in this country either.
The debt bubble is going to explode one day. It's going to be bad when it does.
There are plenty of blue collar jobs that dont require a college degree. As long as shits continue to break down, there will be blue collar jobs.
But of course, an average 18 years old isnt gonna want to fix cars or power lines for a living, that is beneath him.
Instead of learning a useful Trade, he must pursue a career in Medieval English Literature instead! And taxes from blue collar workers will pay for it!
Out of curiosity what's your job?
None at the moment. Im a student. Comp Sci major, and i intent to pay back every cent of my debt.
On March 07 2016 17:12 Ravianna26 wrote: So a question creeped into my head: should the government pay people's power and water bills?
Where do you think this money is coming from? The federal government is never truly paying for anything. It's tax payers money that is paying for everyone else's free power, water, houses, etc. The federal government is just collecting and redistributing it to everyone else. They'd also be in charge of building your free homes. Remember how horribly they mismanaged building the health care website? Now think of the quality of home they'd be building. A similar policy was passed for free homes in the Czech Republic, and the homes were a disaster.
Now here's my opinion so you don't think I'm heartless. Under the constitution the federal government has these powers: Print money (bills and coins) Declare war Establish an army and navy Enter into treaties with foreign governments Regulate commerce between states and international trade Establish post offices and issue postage Make laws necessary to enforce the Constitution
Nothing in that tells me the federal government should take my money to make things free for other people. I am however okay if at the state or city level, the people vote in policies that use my tax money for low income house or education or utilities. Why? Because it's the people at a local level who understand the needs of their area. If my city has most citizens housed, why continue to pay on a national level to fix the whole countries housing problem? Instead the city handles the free housing budget, then if they citizens of that city feel the program is no longer needed they can vote to stop paying into it and then pay into other programs that help the less fortunate. That way government policy truly meets the need of the people. If programs that offer free are to succeed, they need to be manage by state and city government.
The difference between housing and education/healthcare? Housing under relatively uncentralized conditions (beyond zoning, inspection etc) seems to lead to a pretty good and solid result in terms of creating housing for people under reasonable prices. Education with free market, and healthcare with free market, crash and burn horribly in that regard.
On March 07 2016 14:49 Plansix wrote: My favorite part about that image is that it so clearly part of a larger quote with more context. But this is the part salt white people want to be mad at, so only those lines matter.
You mean like the internet does all the time to republican candidates?
Here is the context
BLM is actually terrible it's more of a hate-group than anything.
It's just racebaiting and reverse-racism that he's pandering to and he sounds like he quoted it straight from tumblr 'white-guilt' rants
EPT
