US Politics Mega-thread - Page 68
Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On April 04 2018 01:29 Plansix wrote: Source My grandfather talked about living off of very little while attending Brown. But that was in the 1950s when the cost of attending was peanuts compared to now. This guy was paying 53K a year to attend school and wasn't being provide with three meals a day. And the main reason this is happening appears to be because colleges administrators refuse to admit there is a problem. They will let people saddle themselves with 200K in debt that can't be discharged, but then be bothered to care if those students can't feed themselves. And none of this will be addressed by our current administration, who is more focused on making sure banks can collect on the student loans than they are at protecting debtors. The 53k or whatever would typically cover a meal plan; tuition tends to be in the 40k range with additional cost for room & board, books, etc. I know I'm nitpicking. What's crazy to juxtapose is the incredible amount of food waste that also happens at colleges. It's part of why they contract with Sodexo/ Aramark for their lowest tiers of service - because an insane amount of it ends up uneaten or in the garbage. | ||
Gorsameth
Netherlands21345 Posts
On April 04 2018 01:29 Plansix wrote: For comparison I checked my old college for the price. 7.7k a year is their highest tuition cost.Source My grandfather talked about living off of very little while attending Brown. But that was in the 1950s when the cost of attending was peanuts compared to now. This guy was paying 53K a year to attend school and wasn't being provide with three meals a day. And the main reason this is happening appears to be because colleges administrators refuse to admit there is a problem. They will let people saddle themselves with 200K in debt that can't be discharged, but then be bothered to care if those students can't feed themselves. And none of this will be addressed by our current administration, who is more focused on making sure banks can collect on the student loans than they are at protecting debtors. Now that ofcourse doesn't include a dorm room or anything but you can do a lot with an extra 45.3k a year. | ||
Slaughter
United States20254 Posts
| ||
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
Mohdoo
United States15394 Posts
On April 04 2018 01:55 Slaughter wrote: If you are living on campus with a meal plan your use of money shouldn't be an issue since the meal plan you paid for should never have you go hungry. True. At my university, the meal plan was insanely expensive, though. It ended up being like $6-7/meal. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 04 2018 01:52 Gorsameth wrote: For comparison I checked my old college for the price. 7.7k a year is their highest tuition cost. Now that ofcourse doesn't include a dorm room or anything but you can do a lot with an extra 45.3k a year. It costs a full year's salary for a middle class person to attend that college. And that is to obtain a degree and likely enough skills to enter one profession. And there are countless people who will argue that it is a good investment and the costs are justified. They will break out a 30 year plan showing the potential earnings of the student and how the loan pays for itself so quickly. Of course all of this assumes 30 years of solid, uninterpreted work without a single crisis for that student. It is an argument that is so out of touch with reality it sounds like something the tech industry would think up. On April 04 2018 01:55 Slaughter wrote: If you are living on campus with a meal plan your use of money shouldn't be an issue since the meal plan you paid for should never have you go hungry. And yet 36% of students don't eat enough, so there is clearly a problem. My bet is that the students don't take the a full meal plan because its costs a lot and isn't very good. And since these folks are 18-22 and are spending a truck load of money on these schools, maybe more responsible administrators dive in and fix the problem. | ||
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
| ||
Ciaus_Dronu
South Africa1848 Posts
On April 04 2018 01:56 Dangermousecatdog wrote: I don't get it. How can you afford higher education if you can't afford to feed yourself? I really don't understand. Honestly speaking, you shouldn't be paying for higher education if you can't feed yourself. Nobody is forced to pay for higher education. I really don't have much sympathy for those who choose a lifestyle without monetary allowance. There are a lot of sources of funding that will cover some / all tuition. I live in a country with a terrible exchange rate to basically everywhere, but I could still likely manage to get my tuition covered to a plethora of universities around the world. For some, not many, but certainly some, I could probably get some form of rent or residence covered too. And then I'd still be SoL cus SA Rands aren't covering jack-all in terms of living expenses in some developed nation. And I'ma have to jump on your head here a bit, so sorry for this, but to dismiss higher education as just a lifestyle is... kinda shit. It's a serious opportunity for upward mobility, especially for bright students who can manage to get some funding. And for many such people, working a trade or office job when you are fully capable of doing something you'll find much more engaging, that would be a better use of your particular ability, could be a literally life-destroying decision. No, it's not for everyone, yes, it is over-encouraged, but that doesn't mean that there aren't many people for whom it is the best shot at a decent life. And in the current financial reality, saving up to study is not something those people may be able to realistically do any time in the foreseeable future. Taking a chance at a good scholarship is the best chance many people might have to not live a life where every day after 30 the bridge looks better and better. Especially since you are not getting one of those if you take time off to work first (not in most cases anyway). | ||
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
edit: this might not apply to community colleges, where the situation is very different from the resort-park experience of a GWU. i dont really know what the experience of most community college students is like | ||
GreenHorizons
United States22679 Posts
Oklahoma teachers filled the state Capitol on Tuesday, resulting in a shutdown of all entrances as law enforcement said the 101-year-old building was at capacity. As lawmakers gathered inside the House chamber, teachers took a seat on the marble floor outside the doors, chanting "We're not leaving." For the second day, hundreds of schools across Oklahoma remained closed as thousands of teachers gathered at the state Capitol to demand more state funding. "I'm here for as long as it takes, I'm here for the students," said Patrika Renschen, a seventh-grade math teacher from Deer Creek. "I'm holding out hope." During a morning session of the House, Democrats attempted to bring a repeal of the capital gains tax deduction up for a vote. But Republicans voted against the move. newsok.com | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 04 2018 02:25 IgnE wrote: students make bad/weird decisions. i attribute most of the problem to a horrible university culture that treats students like children at a resort-park in all the wrong ways (curriculum, "safety," responsibility, grading) but takes advantage of them in all the ways that make the university money and justifies it by saying "but they're all adults here." edit: this might not apply to community colleges, where the situation is very different from the resort-park experience of a GWU. i dont really know what the experience of most community college students is like My experience is 20 year old, but it was all about providing career direction and getting core classes done at low costs. The age mix is wider too. A lot of 30 and 40 year old students getting a degree or further job training. | ||
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
| ||
Gorsameth
Netherlands21345 Posts
On April 04 2018 02:59 On_Slaught wrote: I think I trust the military more to not randomly shoot people then the police. So might be an improvement ^^Link to what I referenced earlier. Creating a very dangerous situation if he goes through with this. https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/981221207289757696 | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
Excludos
Norway7943 Posts
On April 04 2018 03:06 Plansix wrote: I am not 100% sure the military is allowed to patrol the boarders. The national guard of a specific state could, but only if ordered by the governor. I don’t think the President has ability to deploy troops to a specific state or part of the US on a whim. Really? That sounds a bit weird. If you're in conflict or potential conflict with one of your neighbors, would the government still not be allowed to station troops there? Border patrol is the exact job most of the world's active military have at the moment. That said, this just sounds like a completely pointless idea. What exactly are they going to do? Catch and deport them harder? | ||
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
Imagine the shitshow if some soldier shoots a family crossing the border. | ||
IyMoon
United States1249 Posts
On April 04 2018 03:13 Excludos wrote: Really? That sounds a bit weird. If you're in conflict or potential conflict with one of your neighbors, would the government still not be allowed to station troops there? Border patrol is the exact job most of the world's active military have at the moment. That said, this just sounds like a completely pointless idea. What exactly are they going to do? Catch and deport them harder? I think in war time the president cant put troops anywhere in the mainland, the difference being we are not at war | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 04 2018 03:13 Excludos wrote: Really? That sounds a bit weird. If you're in conflict or potential conflict with one of your neighbors, would the government still not be allowed to station troops there? Border patrol is the exact job most of the world's active military have at the moment. That said, this just sounds like a completely pointless idea. What exactly are they going to do? Catch and deport them harder? There are like a million exceptions, but in general the president, and by extension the federal government, is not allow to deploy troops the US army on US soil. We have a border patrol who handles that job. If they need help, the states will ask for it themselves. The president doesn’t do it for no reason. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act Unlike EU countries, we are a nation of state and each state has its own smaller part of the US military, called the National Guard. They are functionally identical to the US Army. Receive all the same training and operate within the same command structure. But they are under the command of the local governor when it comes to domestic events. Again, there are endless exceptions. But the president cannot order the army to go occupy a US city without overwhelming cause to do so. | ||
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
![]() | ||
| ||