Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Wealth Redistribution Under Obama


  • Please log in to reply
124 replies to this topic

#16 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,167 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 23 November 2012 - 09:40 PM

the govt is also good at creating a problem that only they can fix, then they will say come the next election, see, we "fixed" it. lol

but on the huddle, any sliver of criticism towards govt/unions et al=gun loving neocon uber nazi skinhead racist boston celtic loving ty cobb worshipping poster.

im optimistic these guys in dc figure it out. i mean they have so much skin in the game it only makes sense for them to solve the problems right?

#17 Anybodyhome

Anybodyhome

    USN Retired

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,155 posts
  • LocationWherever I May Roam

Posted 24 November 2012 - 07:01 AM

Any of you remember when free tuition was well within reach in California and was set to go nationwide by the late 60's and into the early 70's? The entire University of California system (UCLA, USC, UC Santa Barbara, UC Davis, UC Irvine, just to name a few) was to be free of tuition.

That was, until Ronald Reagan was elected Governor. By 1970 he was installing a $600 per year tuition...

http://lansingonline...bout-higher-ed/

Among other notable acts:
Once elected, Mr. Reagan set the educational tone for his administration by:


a. calling for an end to free tuition for state college and university students,
b. annually demanding 20% across-the-board cuts in higher education funding
c. repeatedly slashing construction funds for state campuses
d. engineering the firing of Clark Kerr, the popular President of the University of California, and
e. declaring that the state "should not subsidize intellectual curiosity

http://www.newfounda...dge/Reagan.html

http://www.nytimes.c...-education.html


Yes, there was a time when education was free....

#18 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,980 posts

Posted 24 November 2012 - 07:53 AM

Seeing as this article was about the government trying to reduce wasteful spending of taxpayer money in regards to student loans, I'm not sure why everyone's immediately snarling and stabbing at the strawman of debt relief.

The banks don't want to comply (the gov is offering to pay the FULL amount of the bond), because they don't want to get out of a system where the taxpayer takes on the risks, but the banks takes the profits.

But let's ignore all that and go after the real problem: young people trying to improve their lives.


lol not a single one of these fuging republicans actually addressed FFELP or sherrod brown's legislation. 16 replies. not one.

#19 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,302 posts

Posted 24 November 2012 - 08:20 AM

Any of you remember when free tuition was well within reach in California and was set to go nationwide by the late 60's and into the early 70's? The entire University of California system (UCLA, USC, UC Santa Barbara, UC Davis, UC Irvine, just to name a few) was to be free of tuition.

That was, until Ronald Reagan was elected Governor. By 1970 he was installing a $600 per year tuition...

http://lansingonline...bout-higher-ed/

Among other notable acts:
Once elected, Mr. Reagan set the educational tone for his administration by:




a. calling for an end to free tuition for state college and university students,
b. annually demanding 20% across-the-board cuts in higher education funding
c. repeatedly slashing construction funds for state campuses
d. engineering the firing of Clark Kerr, the popular President of the University of California, and
e. declaring that the state "should not subsidize intellectual curiosity


http://www.newfounda...dge/Reagan.html

http://www.nytimes.c...-education.html


Yes, there was a time when education was free....


So University staff were were willing to work for free? And the folks that make the books and equipment were willing to provide it for free? And the utility companies were willing to provide services to the school for free? And construction companies were willing to do work on the campuses for free? Wow, that would have been very nice of all of them.

Of course, if you were talking about the government/taxpayers paying for everything, then that wouldn't be free. If it is taxpayer funded, then thank god Reagan put a stop to it. The cost to the taxpayer would have been astronomical and the benefit of having a college education would have been significantly degraded. Even socialist leaning Europe hasn't been stupid enough to to do that.

#20 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 12,393 posts

Posted 24 November 2012 - 08:47 AM

lol not a single one of these fuging republicans actually addressed FFELP or sherrod brown's legislation. 16 replies. not one.


And I even (rightly) placed blame on the Obama administration.

Why do you think I rarely put any factual information on here? You have to appeal to their emotional side.

#21 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,302 posts

Posted 24 November 2012 - 09:07 AM

Its an opinion piece that paints the problems with increasing student debt as the fault of poor government policy, inaction by congress and investor greed. IMO, that is a heavily flawed analysis that completely ignores personal responsibility. While I agree that government policy is partially to blame, imo the heart of the problem lies with those assuming the debt in the first place. We as a nation need to understand that debt can be a good thing if used wisely, but if not used wisely, can go horribly wrong. That is true whether its over using the credit card, getting loans for a degree in french literature or borrowing from China to finance a war. It was true of the housing bubble, and its true with student loans.

#22 Anybodyhome

Anybodyhome

    USN Retired

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,155 posts
  • LocationWherever I May Roam

Posted 24 November 2012 - 09:34 AM

So University staff were were willing to work for free? And the folks that make the books and equipment were willing to provide it for free? And the utility companies were willing to provide services to the school for free? And construction companies were willing to do work on the campuses for free? Wow, that would have been very nice of all of them.

Of course, if you were talking about the government/taxpayers paying for everything, then that wouldn't be free. If it is taxpIayer funded, then thank god Reagan put a stop to it. The cost to the taxpayer would have been astronomical and the benefit of having a college education would have been significantly degraded. Even socialist leaning Europe hasn't been stupid enough to to do that.



Gee, it had been working in the UC system for over 100 years until Reagan got his hands on it. See, here's where reading some history may have actually benefited you in forming your opinion, but why let facts get in the way.

I was born and raised in Southern California and lived there until 1992. As my brothers and sister and I can attest, we're all very familiar with the UC system.

The Sixties were also a time when the top corporate tax rate was 52% instead of today’s 35%, and the top individual marginal income tax rate was 70%, though that was still a bargain compared to the 94% charged on incomes above $200,000 during WWII.

http://lansingonlinenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/CORPORATE-TAX-RATES.pdf

#23 FurdTurgason

FurdTurgason

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 954 posts

Posted 24 November 2012 - 10:53 AM

Everything should be free. Imagine no possessions.

#24 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 12,393 posts

Posted 24 November 2012 - 12:19 PM

Its an opinion piece that paints the problems with increasing student debt as the fault of poor government policy, inaction by congress and investor greed. IMO, that is a heavily flawed analysis that completely ignores personal responsibility. While I agree that government policy is partially to blame, imo the heart of the problem lies with those assuming the debt in the first place. We as a nation need to understand that debt can be a good thing if used wisely, but if not used wisely, can go horribly wrong. That is true whether its over using the credit card, getting loans for a degree in french literature or borrowing from China to finance a war. It was true of the housing bubble, and its true with student loans.


So how did you manage the $42k + a year that it takes to attend Wake Forest? Perhaps you can show the youth of today the debt free way.


#25 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,302 posts

Posted 24 November 2012 - 12:22 PM

[/font]

Gee, it had been working in the UC system for over 100 years until Reagan got his hands on it. See, here's where reading some history may have actually benefited you in forming your opinion, but why let facts get in the way.

I was born and raised in Southern California and lived there until 1992. As my brothers and sister and I can attest, we're all very familiar with the UC system.

The Sixties were also a time when the top corporate tax rate was 52% instead of today’s 35%, and the top individual marginal income tax rate was 70%, though that was still a bargain compared to the 94% charged on incomes above $200,000 during WWII.

http://lansingonlinenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/CORPORATE-TAX-RATES.pdf


You do understand the basic premise that tax payer funded education is not actually free don't you?

I imagine the situation with the college system in California is far more complex than you seem to think it is, but I did look up some information on it. Reagan didn't implement tuition for students in the california college system. He tried, but was defeated. He did implement some fees, which were relatively small. They did increase as time went along, but that was much later. And no governor since, republican or democrat has made any serious effort to eliminate them. California is a very blue state, yet the citizens of the state aren't willing to pay the taxes necessary to fund a no fee/no tuition system of higher education. If you want to blame someone for that, then you should blame the california voters, because its something they don't want. And Reagan did what the voters wanted him to do. Democracy sucks doesn't it.

#26 FurdTurgason

FurdTurgason

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 954 posts

Posted 24 November 2012 - 12:23 PM

Everyone deserves everything. If my parents can afford to send me to Princeton, then by God all students should be allowed to go to Princeton. It's only fair.

#27 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,302 posts

Posted 24 November 2012 - 12:26 PM

So how did you manage the $42k + a year that it takes to attend Wake Forest? Perhaps you can show the youth of today the debt free way.


Didn't go to Wake Forest, just grew up a few miles from the campus and was a lifelong fan.

I went to college by spending my first two years in community college and then I transferred to a four year university. Also got some credit for military schools attended, plus some University of Maryland courses. Employer benefits paid the majority of my college fees. Worked days and went to school at night. Had to sacrifice quite a bit of family time since I was married, but ended with a degree and no college related debt.

Its not a path I would recommend, but it worked out for me. By not recommend, I mean its best done when young, trying to do it while married with children is not easy.

#28 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 12,393 posts

Posted 24 November 2012 - 12:35 PM

Again no one will address the fact that this is about a reduction to the burden to the taxpayer being blocked in favor of bondholder profiteering.

Taxpayer wealth (largely middle-class) is being redistributed to bondholders (usually upper class) through the government and no one raises an eyebrow.

Yeah. Conservatives are alllllll about reducing spending and taxes and helping the middle class.



#29 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 12,393 posts

Posted 24 November 2012 - 12:44 PM

Didn't go to Wake Forest, just grew up a few miles from the campus and was a lifelong fan.

I went to college by spending my first two years in community college and then I transferred to a four year university. Used employer benefits to attend college while I worked. Worked days and went to school at night. Had to sacrifice quite a bit of family time since I was married, but ended with a degree and no college related debt.

Its not a path I would recommend, but it worked.


Good way to go. I got a scholarship and worked summers and nights.

That was back when college was at least affordable though. College of Charleston in state now cost more than did to go to Harvard back just 10-15 years ago, and wages sure as hell haven't kept up.

$80,000-$100,000 for a state school? I think it's pretty naive to say my generation would have handled that any better than the current one.



#30 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,302 posts

Posted 24 November 2012 - 01:05 PM

Good way to go. I got a scholarship and worked summers and nights.

That was back when college was at least affordable though. College of Charleston in state now cost more than did to go to Harvard back just 10-15 years ago, and wages sure as hell haven't kept up.

$80,000-$100,000 for a state school? I think it's pretty naive to say my generation would have handled that any better than the current one.


Cost in North Carolina hasn't risen as much I think. Its about 60 grand more or less to attend one of the State schools. I have been looking into it for my son who will be going in three years.

I do agree with the article that the feds have mismanaged college loans to a great extent, and banks have taken advantage of that. With interest rates so low, I am not sure while federally backed college loans are at 6-8% interest. My car loan rates are cheaper than that, and they are less secure.

But I am not convinced that Senator Brown's bill would fix the problem though. As this article points out, some of the CBO's budget projections could be problematic.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.