Hello Everybody,

"Free college for everyone is a bad idea. But it is not
exactly the type of thing that would make him similar to
Stalin and Castro."
- Earl Croasmun to Tim Richardson, ALL-POLITICS, 2/12/2016

Louisiana has had a free college tuition program for all,
known as TOPS, for decades. It was an idea brought forth
by oil tycoon Patrick Taylor, for whom the scholarship is
named. The way it works is every high school graduate who
has earned at least a 2.5 average gets free four years of
college, courtesy of Louisiana taxpayers. This can be
trade school, if the kid chooses to go that route instead.

The cost of tuition is repaid many times over when the
person joins the workforce. Imagine the taxes paid over
the course of a lifetime compared to the infintesimally
small cost of the state paying for tuition. The state
comes out way ahead in that deal.

Yesterday, the state of Louisiana suspended payments for
the TOPS program. That means students will have to pay
their own way to go to college. Or obtain student loans,
which must be repaid later, with interest. Many students
do not have the money to go to college, nor will they be
able to repay a student loan if forced to go that route.
What that means is a less educated and less qualified
workforce. Low pay, not even enough to make ends meet.
Not much tax being paid to the state, thus lower revenue
for the state.

What brought this about was low oil prices. At less than
$40 a barrel, the state of Louisiana cannot survive as it
bases its budget on the price of oil. State politicians
are not willing to raise taxes, or to rescind tax cuts for
the wealthy. So they choose to cut the budget. And the
only areas where the budget can be cut is education and
health care.

The state budget deficit is expected to double next year.
And that is taking into consideration the suspension of
TOPS payments.

Nationally, the US is entering a recession. It will in
most likelihood be a very deep recession, if not an actual
depression. Well, all recessions are depressions. Just
a matter of degree.

This is the age of austerity.

The only way out of this mess is to spend our way out.
FDR showed us the way, back in 1933. The first thing he
did when he took office was declare a bank holiday. It
was really a ten-day period of time that he used to close
all the banks. One-third of those banks never re-opened.

Once FDR got our banking institutions in order, he put
this country back to work. And on the road to prosperity.

We need another FDR.

A New Deal for a New Century.

Free College Tuition for All

Free Health Care for All

Free Everything for All

--Lee

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Hello Everybody,

"Free college for everyone is a bad idea. But it is not
exactly the type of thing that would make him similar to
Stalin and Castro."
- Earl Croasmun to Tim Richardson, ALL-POLITICS, 2/12/2016

Louisiana has had a free college tuition program for all,

There is (or `was') a (more or less) `free' college education for all;
It was called `Community' college.

For a couple of hundred dollars per year and your text books and materials,
a person could go to `Community' colleges and the degrees from one were
just as acceptable as one from a big college.

Once FDR got our banking institutions in order, he put
this country back to work. And on the road to prosperity.

The Second World War is what put this country `back to work', NOT `FDR'.

We need another FDR.

Like a hole in the head!

A New Deal for a New Century.

Free College Tuition for All

Free Health Care for All

Free Everything for All

Yeah...and the money to pay for all that will just float down to us from Heaven...sorta like `Mannah'!
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
* Origin: Telnet://valhalla.synchro.net - Richmond, Virginia (1:275/93)

Hello Tim,

"Free college for everyone is a bad idea. But it is not
exactly the type of thing that would make him similar to
Stalin and Castro."
- Earl Croasmun to Tim Richardson, ALL-POLITICS, 2/12/2016

Louisiana has had a free college tuition program for all,

There is (or `was') a (more or less) `free' college education for all;
It was called `Community' college.

TOPS can be used for attending `Community' college (junior college
or 2-year college). Most credits earned at those colleges can be
transferred to 4-year institutions, if further studies are pursued.

Not sure how long the TOPS program payments will remain suspended.
Students are really getting nervous, those who cannot afford any
other way. I expect many of them now will choose to vote for Bernie
Sanders. Especially those whose parents are not paying the tuition.

For a couple of hundred dollars per year and your text books and

materials,

a person could go to `Community' colleges and the degrees from one were just as acceptable as one from a big college.

Why should students (or their parents) be forced to pay what the
state (through taxpayer dollars) can easily provide? People pay
enough taxes as it is. Investing in our young people by helping
them get the education they need to compete in today's modern
world strengthens the economy for us all, thus making life easier
for everyone.

Once FDR got our banking institutions in order, he put
this country back to work. And on the road to prosperity.

The Second World War is what put this country `back to work', NOT `FDR'.

The depression was largely over, with people working in every sector,
before hostilities broke out in WWII. Had FDR not tried to pack the
US Supreme Court, the economy would have rebounded even sooner.

We need another FDR.

Like a hole in the head!

We may have him in Bernie Sanders. During last night's debate
between Sanders and Clinton, Sanders said that FDR is his hero.
Hillary Clinton agreed pertaining to her own view, but I think
she was trying to play nice (her real hero is Bill Clinton).

FDR put people back to work with various government projects,
mostly created by executive order. Bernie Sanders (or Hillary
Clinton) should be honest with the American people by telling
them that is how they will also put people back to work.

Many young people (age 18 to 35) are unemployed or underemployed.
Far too many. The cost of living remains high, quality jobs are
scarce, and pay is meager. Expecting young people to take out
student loans without having the ability to repay those loans
in a timely manner is depriving future generations the posterity
they deserve.

The middle class bailed out Wall Street just a few short years
ago. Had that not been done, our economy would have collapsed
into chaos, a chaos worse than during the Great Depression.

It is time for Wall Street to bail out the middle class.

How can that be done? By taxing the investors. Tax them both
ways. Buying and selling. Rather than buying stock at 3% and
selling at 3%, make it buying at 6% and selling at 6%. That
would be for starters. This action alone would easily pay the
cost of college tuition for every person who wants to further
their education.

A New Deal for a New Century.

Free College Tuition for All

Free Health Care for All

Free Everything for All

Yeah...and the money to pay for all that will just float down to us from Heaven...sorta like `Mannah'!

That is exactly what Al Sharpton and Bernie Sanders were
discussing just the other day when they met in a restaurant
having breakfast. Or was it a free lunch? (Sharpton also
met separately with Hillary Clinton later in the day)

--Lee

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

"Free college for everyone is a bad idea. But it is not
exactly the type of thing that would make him similar to
Stalin and Castro."

Yes Free College is a bad idea. Who get's employer preference? Free college students or paid? We need to lower student debt not give out more handouts. Let's just let the students stay home and just send them the degree they
want. I have a hard time understanding what motivates young people these
days. I never got a damn thing when I was young. I had to earn everything! That's my 2 cents anyway. ;-)

HusTler

[B HusTler

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A2 (Windows)
* Origin: FlupH * darktech.org (1:275/91)

Steve Wolf wrote to Lee Lofaso <=-

"Free college for everyone is a bad idea. But it is not
exactly the type of thing that would make him similar to
Stalin and Castro."

Yes Free College is a bad idea. Who get's employer preference? Free college students or paid? We need to lower student debt not give out
more handouts. Let's just let the students stay home and just send them the degree they want. I have a hard time understanding what motivates young people these days. I never got a damn thing when I was young. I
had to earn everything! That's my 2 cents anyway. ;-)

Free tuition is not a new thing. From 1971 to 1974 I recieved free tuition from CCNY and it certainly wasn't a community college. Regarding your employer prefernce, why not let merit determine that factor. Whether free or paid, the level of education is still required to attend and succeed. So, to me at least, if a student receives free education and graduates with a 4.0 where a student who pays, taking the same courses, gets a 2.4, which one would you choose?

I understand the motivation issue as well. Success is not guaranteed and that should be stressed, but the path to success should be and let the student prove him/herself.


--

Bill

Telnet: tequilamockingbirdonline.net
Web: bbs.tequilamockingbirdonline.net
FTP: ftp.tequilamockingbirdonline.net:2121
IRC: irc.tequilamockingbirdonline.net Ports: 6661-6670 SSL: +6697
Radio: radio.tequilamockingbirdonline.net:8010/live


... Look Twice... Save a Life!!! Motorcycles are Everywhere!!!
=== MultiMail/Win32 v0.50
--- SBBSecho 2.33-Win32
* Origin: TequilaMockingbird Online - Toms River, NJ (1:266/404)

Hello Bill,

"Free college for everyone is a bad idea. But it is not
exactly the type of thing that would make him similar to
Stalin and Castro."

Yes Free College is a bad idea. Who get's employer preference? Free
college students or paid? We need to lower student debt not give out
more handouts. Let's just let the students stay home and just send them
the degree they want. I have a hard time understanding what motivates
young people these days. I never got a damn thing when I was young. I
had to earn everything! That's my 2 cents anyway. ;-)

Free tuition is not a new thing. From 1971 to 1974 I recieved free

tuition

from CCNY and it certainly wasn't a community college. Regarding your employer prefernce, why not let merit determine that factor. Whether free or paid, the level of education is still required to attend and succeed. So, to me at least, if a student receives free education and graduates

with

a 4.0 where a student who pays, taking the same courses, gets a 2.4, which one would you
choose?

An employer would choose to hire an employee who graduated from an
accredited school rather than from a school that was not accredited.

The issue is not really whether the student had paid for his/her
tuition or somebody else (taxpayers) had paid for his/her tuition.
The issue for the employer is whether the potential employee is
qualified or not qualified to do the job.

I understand the motivation issue as well. Success is not guaranteed and that should be stressed, but the path to success should be and let
the student prove him/herself.

A graduate of an accredited institution of higher learning has
already proven himself/herself, regardless of who had paid the
cost of his/her tuition. As such, the matter of who paid the
tuition should not be a factor, or an issue of concern, of the
employer.

All employees have to constantly prove themselves to their
employers, throughout their careers, regardless of their education.
That much should be obvious.

--Lee

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Hello Steve,

"Free college for everyone is a bad idea. But it is not
exactly the type of thing that would make him similar to
Stalin and Castro."

Yes Free College is a bad idea. Who get's employer preference? Free

college

students or paid?

Bobby Jindal had a scholarship to attend Brown University.
Barack Obama had a scholarship to attend Harvard University.
I had a scholarship to attend Harvard on the Bayou.
Guess which college graduates got elected to public office?

We need to lower student debt not give out more handouts.

The economy is for the person, not the other way around.
Employers do not care who pays for the tuition a college
kid goes to. What employers want is qualified employees.
People who can do the job(s) they are hired to do.

Let's just let the students stay home and just send them the degree they want.

Nothing wrong with that. Today, many colleges and universities
offer online courses, some with full degree programs. Of course,
somebody has to pay for those courses. Students would love their
parents (or somebody else) to pay for those courses, and parents
would love not to have to foot the bill themselves.

I have a hard time understanding what motivates young people these
days.

Money. And girls. Mostly girls. For girls it is guys. Mostly
guys. Not so much money, as the guys get the money. And with the
money well you know how that goes ...

I never got a damn thing when I was young.

Oh, come now. I'm sure you did. Dogs chase cats. Boys chase girls.
That is the way of the world. Or how it used to be, anyway.

I had to earn everything!

Not me. I had the girls come to me. Made life much easier.
Until the school principal decided to make boys play on one playground
and girls on another. Guess who got the blame?

That's my 2 cents anyway. ;-)

Can't even buy a piece of bubble gum with that.
Best to do away with pennies entirely.
Round up to a nickel.
Or maybe a dime.
Just think of the savings we would have.
All those wasted pennies.
We can just nickel and dime everybody to death.
Use quarters for the slots.
Eliminate paper currency.
It's just fiat money, anyway.
Not really worth the paper it is printed on.
Which is not really paper at all ...

--Lee

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Lee Lofaso wrote to Bill McGarrity <=-

HIya Lee...

"Free college for everyone is a bad idea. But it is not
exactly the type of thing that would make him similar to
Stalin and Castro."

Yes Free College is a bad idea. Who get's employer preference? Free
college students or paid? We need to lower student debt not give out
more handouts. Let's just let the students stay home and just send them
the degree they want. I have a hard time understanding what motivates
young people these days. I never got a damn thing when I was young. I
had to earn everything! That's my 2 cents anyway. ;-)

Free tuition is not a new thing. From 1971 to 1974 I recieved free

tuition

from CCNY and it certainly wasn't a community college. Regarding your employer prefernce, why not let merit determine that factor. Whether free or paid, the level of education is still required to attend and succeed. So, to me at least, if a student receives free education and graduates

with

a 4.0 where a student who pays, taking the same courses, gets a 2.4, which one would you
choose?

An employer would choose to hire an employee who graduated from an accredited school rather than from a school that was not accredited.

Are you saying CCNY is not an accredited school? I think you better do some research on that. The way I was reading things from the start it was a given we were talking about accredited schools so your point is basically moot.

The issue is not really whether the student had paid for his/her
tuition or somebody else (taxpayers) had paid for his/her tuition.
The issue for the employer is whether the potential employee is
qualified or not qualified to do the job.

I understand the motivation issue as well. Success is not guaranteed and that should be stressed, but the path to success should be and let
the student prove him/herself.

A graduate of an accredited institution of higher learning has
already proven himself/herself, regardless of who had paid the
cost of his/her tuition. As such, the matter of who paid the
tuition should not be a factor, or an issue of concern, of the
employer.

Agreed...

All employees have to constantly prove themselves to their
employers, throughout their careers, regardless of their education.
That much should be obvious.

Agreed again, but that wasn't the original stipulation of this thread.

Everyone seems to be getting all worked up over this free tuition. The proposal by Sanders is PUBLIC institutions wuold be free. In dealing with private institutions, they have to pay for their sports scholarships somehow, so the non-jocks will still owe $200K when their done.


--

Bill

Telnet: tequilamockingbirdonline.net
Web: bbs.tequilamockingbirdonline.net
FTP: ftp.tequilamockingbirdonline.net:2121
IRC: irc.tequilamockingbirdonline.net Ports: 6661-6670 SSL: +6697
Radio: radio.tequilamockingbirdonline.net:8010/live


... Go Giants!!
=== MultiMail/Win32 v0.50
--- SBBSecho 2.33-Win32
* Origin: TequilaMockingbird Online - Toms River, NJ (1:266/404)

Hello Bill,

[..]

Free tuition is not a new thing. From 1971 to 1974 I recieved BM>free

tuition from CCNY and it certainly wasn't a community college.

Regarding your employer prefernce, why not let merit determine BM>that

factor. Whether free or paid, the level of education is BM>still required to attend and succeed. So, to me at least, if a BM>student receives free education and graduates with a 4.0 where BM>a student who pays, taking the same courses, gets a 2.4, which

one would you choose?

An employer would choose to hire an employee who graduated from an
accredited school rather than from a school that was not accredited.

Are you saying CCNY is not an accredited school?

An employer hiring students who graduate from non-accredited
institutions would be taking much more of a chance than hiring
students who graduate from accredited institutions.

I think you better do some research on that. The way I was reading things from the start it was a given we were talking about accredited schools so your point is basically moot.

Not all programs are accredited at institutions that are
accredited. I have a cousin who graduated in engineering.
The school he graduated from was accredited, but the school
of engineering was not. So he wound up having to retake
all his engineering classes at another institution.

The issue is not really whether the student had paid for his/her
tuition or somebody else (taxpayers) had paid for his/her tuition.
The issue for the employer is whether the potential employee is
qualified or not qualified to do the job.

I understand the motivation issue as well. Success is not BM>guaranteed

and that should be stressed, but the path to success BM>should be and let the student prove him/herself.

A graduate of an accredited institution of higher learning has
already proven himself/herself, regardless of who had paid the
cost of his/her tuition. As such, the matter of who paid the
tuition should not be a factor, or an issue of concern, of the
employer.

Agreed...

All employees have to constantly prove themselves to their
employers, throughout their careers, regardless of their education.
That much should be obvious.

Agreed again, but that wasn't the original stipulation of this thread.

Somebody has to foot the bill for the cost of education.
The cost of education has risen dramatically over the past
thirty years. An increase of 1,120 percent, according to
the Wall Street Journal. That is obscene.

Everyone seems to be getting all worked up over this free tuition.

Over just the past ten years, the cost of college tuition has
increased three times as fast as the consumer-price index. And
you do not expect people to get worked up? The cost of college
tuition has gone up twice as fast as medical care over that
same period of time. And you do not expect people to get worked
up? Money does not exactly grow on trees, my friend. Not for
most folks, anyway.

The proposal by Sanders is PUBLIC institutions wuold be free.

Private institutions are free to charge whatever they wish,
if they wish to charge anything at all. That will remain the
case, even if Sanders somehow manages to win the presidential
election.

However, the cost of public institutions is never free. Somebody
has to foot the bill. The only question is who. And how much.

In dealing with private institutions, they have to pay for their sports scholarships somehow, so the non-jocks will still owe $200K when their done.

Louisiana State University is a public institution. The LSU Alumni
Association foots the bill for the cost of renovating Tiger Stadium.
This football stadium seats over 100,000 people. The money that is
made during football season more than pays for all the athletic
scholarships in every sport for the entire year, plus all the salaries
of every coach in every sport. In other words, LSU is a public
institution, but much that goes on is privately funded.

The cost of paying for college tuition is peanuts. Consider how
much more in taxes the college graduate returns to the state over
the course of his/her working life.

There is only one problem with this. And I am surprised that you
(and others) have not seen it.

Bernie Sanders wants to do on a national level what Louisiana has
been doing as a state. Georgia also has a similar program, but not
quite as sweet.

You do see the problem now, don't you?

The state of Louisiana pays for the student's college education.
The college graduate then takes his/her services to another state,
and earns significantly more than he/she could ever have hoped to
have made in Louisiana.

We now live in a global economy. People no longer are forced
to work in the USA. Many young people choose to work overseas,
in places such as China, Vietnam, Thailand, etc., at wages that
pay much more than they could possibly hope for at home.

It is not just teaching English. It is also real jobs, such
as auto manufacturing. In a few months, the USA will be importing
cars made in China. And these cars will be better built, and last
a whole lot longer, than the Yugo that came here from Europe years
ago.

With President Sanders, we will pay for our young people's education.
Then we will send them all to China, where they will make plenty money.
And when they return, our young people will own us - lock, stock, and
barrel.

--Lee

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Everyone seems to be getting all worked up over this free tuition.

Except it's not *free*!

The > proposal by Sanders is PUBLIC institutions wuold be free.

PUBLIC institutions are not *free*.

When people apply the term PUBLIC to anything they are talking about *the taxpayers*.

In a PUBLIC institution there is still maintainence, upkeep, utilities, water, employees, instructors, materials, etc etc.

None of that is *free*. Professors don't work for *free*. Administrators don't work for *free*. Desks chairs, black boards, and all the infrastructure that goes with a `college' are not *free*.

Somebody PAYS!

In dealing with
private institutions, they have to pay for their sports scholarships somehow, so the non-jocks will still owe $200K when their done.

And when we run out of the money of that *somebody* who's footing the bills
for all this...it fails.

Community college has been around for a long time. I had friends who went to
a community college in my home town who got excellent jobs later on in life.

People who can't afford Harvard or Yale do very well in community colleges. But..we are already paying for healthcare for people who aren't even citizens, educating children of people who don't even belong in the country, paying
food stamps...welfare....yadida yadida....

What we DON'T need is more financial burden added to the vast burden of debt THIS president has saddled us with.
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
* Origin: Telnet://valhalla.synchro.net - Richmond, Virginia (1:275/93)

Re: Re: Free College Tuition
By: Tim Richardson to Bill McGarrity on Tue Feb 16 2016 14:15:30

Everyone seems to be getting all worked up over this free tuition.

Except it's not *free*!

When people apply the term PUBLIC to anything they are talking about *the taxpayers*.
In a PUBLIC institution there is still maintainence, upkeep, utilities, water, employees, instructors, materials, etc etc.

colleges. But..we are already paying for healthcare for people who aren't even citizens, educating children of people who don't even belong in the country, paying food stamps...welfare....yadida yadida....

I'm not trying to change the direction of the thread but I just had to post this link I found on a Fox News site. It states that US marshals are arresting people for not paying their student loans!


http://fox59.com/2016/02/17/u-s-marshals-arrest-man-for-student-loan-left-unpai d-for-29-years/

-Steve
--- SBBSecho 2.32-Win32
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digdist.synchro.net (1:340/7)

Re: Re: Free College Tuition
By: Tim Richardson to Bill McGarrity on Tue Feb 16 2016 14:15:30

Everyone seems to be getting all worked up over this free tuition.

Except it's not *free*!

When people apply the term PUBLIC to anything they are talking about *the taxpayers*.
In a PUBLIC institution there is still maintainence, upkeep, utilities, water, employees, instructors, materials, etc etc.

colleges. But..we are already paying for healthcare for people who aren't even citizens, educating children of people who don't even belong in the country, paying food stamps...welfare....yadida yadida....

I'm not trying to change the direction of the thread but I just had to post this link I found on a Fox News site. It states that US marshals are arresting people for not paying their student loans!


http://fox59.com/2016/02/17/u-s-marshals-arrest-man-for-student-loan-left-un pai d-for-29-years/

I saw that on the Drudge page yesterday or the day before. And it's about time.

See...some clown goes to college on `government' (taxpayers) money, gets a
job an makes a decent salary, and thinks `...oh well! the democrats will
pass `student loan forgiveness' before long anyway, so why pay anything? It'll all be free!'

It's time some of them were held accountable.
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
* Origin: Telnet://valhalla.synchro.net - Richmond, Virginia (1:275/93)

Re: Re: Free College Tuition
By: Tim Richardson to Steve Wolf on Wed Feb 17 2016 02:32 pm

colleges. But..we are already paying for healthcare for people who
aren't even citizens, educating children of people who don't even
belong in the country, paying food stamps...welfare....yadida
yadida....

are arresting people for not paying their student loans!

http://fox59.com/2016/02/17/u-s-marshals-arrest-man-for-student-loan-l
eft-un pai d-for-29-years/

I saw that on the Drudge page yesterday or the day before. And it's about time.

See...some clown goes to college on `government' (taxpayers) money, gets a job an makes a decent salary, and thinks `...oh well! the democrats will pass `student loan forgiveness' before long anyway, so why pay anything? It'll all be free!'

It's time some of them were held accountable.
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32

So what happens when and if "free college" comes about? Who will be required to pay back student loans and who gets the free ride? I'm so confused! ;-)

=Steve=
--- SBBSecho 2.33-Linux
* Origin: Electronic Warfare BBS | telnet:\\bbs.ewbbs.net (1:227/201)

Hello Tim,

Everyone seems to be getting all worked up over this free tuition.

Except it's not *free*!

Nothing is life is free. Cheap, yes. Especially whiskey
and whores. But free? Somebody has paid the bartender for
that drink. And somebody has paid that whore.

The > proposal by Sanders is PUBLIC institutions wuold be free.

PUBLIC institutions are not *free*.

Somebody has to pay the piper.
Somebody paid for the brick and mortar.
Somebody paid for the maintenance.
Somebody paid for the administrators.
Somebody paid for the professors.
But nobody pays the students.
Not at the undergraduate level, anyway.

When people apply the term PUBLIC to anything they are talking about *the taxpayers*.

Not just the taxpayers. But taxpayers do fund a good portion.

In a PUBLIC institution there is still maintainence, upkeep, utilities, water, employees, instructors, materials, etc etc.

For sure. But not everything is funded by the taxpayers.
For example, renovations to Tiger Stadium at LSU is funded
by the LSU Alumni Association. Not a dime is spent by the
taxpayers.

None of that is *free*. Professors don't work for *free*. Administrators don't work for *free*. Desks chairs, black boards, and all the infrastructure that goes with a `college' are not *free*.

They are free to those who use them.

Somebody PAYS!

Everybody pays, in a manner of speaking. But not everybody
benefits. We all pay for the Louisiana Superdome. But how many
people in Shreveport actually use the Louisiana Superdome? Does
that mean we should have torn the Louisiana Superdome down after
Hurricane Katrina basically destroyed it? Some say refugees
destroyed the inside of it, while the storm did the damage to
the outside. The federal government has since named the Superdome
to the National Register of Historic Places (thank you, Obama) ...

In dealing with
private institutions, they have to pay for their sports scholarships
somehow, so the non-jocks will still owe $200K when their done.

And when we run out of the money of that *somebody* who's footing the

bills

for all this...it fails.

It's all fiat money. Play money. Just like that monopoloy game
kids like to play. When you run out of dough, the bank just prints
some more. As much as needed. For as long as the game lasts.

Community college has been around for a long time. I had friends who went

to

a community college in my home town who got excellent jobs later on in life.

Graduates of 4-year institutions have returned to school, attending
community colleges in order to learn a new skill or trade. Sometimes
without having the need to take out a student loan. That's right.
Somebody has to pay the bill for going to community college ...

People who can't afford Harvard or Yale do very well in community

colleges.

Many people cannot afford to attend community college. Should we
condemn those people to a lifetime of misery, forcing them to work
at substandard wages, making it impossible for them to pursue, much
less live, the American Dream?

But..we are already paying for healthcare for people who aren't even citizens, educating children of people who don't even belong in the country, paying food stamps...welfare....yadida yadida....

It is the least we can do for our brothers (and sisters) in need ...

What we DON'T need is more financial burden added to the vast burden of

debt

THIS president has saddled us with.

He ain't heavy, he's my brother. We owe it to ourselves to help
others in need. Most especially those less fortunate than ourselves.
Even if it means sacrificing a small part of ourselves to do it.

--Lee

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Hello Tim,

See...some clown goes to college on `government' (taxpayers) money, gets a job an makes a decent salary, and thinks `...oh well! the democrats will pass `student loan forgiveness' before long anyway, so why pay anything? It'll all be free!'

It's time some of them were held accountable.

Over the last thirty years, college tuition has increased
by over 1,120 percent. That is according to the Wall Street
Journal. I'll take those numbers as being credible.

The cost of college tuition has increased three times
faster than the consumer-price index. And twice as fast
as medical care. That is in the last ten years.

Young people can no longer afford to pay their own way
through college. Their parents can no longer afford to
send them to college. They cannot get jobs that pay
enough, even if they work full time, in order to go to
college.

Student loans do not pay the entire cost of going to college.
Only about 80 percent of the cost of tuition. The cost of books
is almost as high as the cost of tuition. And that is not to
mention the cost of room and board, for those living on campus.

Basically, $9,000 to $30,000 per year for the cost of tuition
alone. Undergraduate studies. Not graduate school, law school,
medical school, or professional.

Once upon a time, only the rich could afford to go to college.
It seems we are returning to the days of old. Where the only ones
who can succeed in America are those who have been born with a
silver spoon in their mouth.

What a sick and disgusting people we have become.

--Lee

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Hello Tim,

The > proposal by Sanders is PUBLIC institutions wuold be free.

PUBLIC institutions are not *free*.

When people apply the term PUBLIC to anything they are talking about *the taxpayers*.

Not just the taxpayers. But taxpayers do fund a good portion.

Unless you think all taxpayers carry a mouse around in their pocket...it is taxpayer money that pays for federal `student loans'. It is taxpayer money
that provide the vast majority of the *funding* for various higher institu institutions in *grants* for say...`global warming' studies...and an endless list of other sorts of *grants*.

In the end when the book work is all done, the government (taxpayers) is
paying the majority of the bills.


And typically, it's to fund `leftist' causes like bilking the taxpayers out of BILLIONS of dollars in idiot schemes like the `global warming' scam.
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
* Origin: Telnet://valhalla.synchro.net - Richmond, Virginia (1:275/93)

Hello Tim,

See...some clown goes to college on `government' (taxpayers) money, gets a job an makes a decent salary, and thinks `...oh well! the democrats will pass `student loan forgiveness' before long anyway, so why pay anything? It'll all be free!'

It's time some of them were held accountable.

Over the last thirty years, college tuition has increased
by over 1,120 percent. That is according to the Wall Street
Journal. I'll take those numbers as being credible.

The cost of college tuition has increased three times
faster than the consumer-price index. And twice as fast
as medical care. That is in the last ten years.

That's because the government is footing the bill for a large number of those `going' on student loans.

Any time you get the government (make that read `taxpayers') paying out money to fund something...outfits are gonna milk it for everything they can get.

My anger gets raised whenever I see some high-falutin professor or in industrialist get in front of microphone and start off by saying how honest and upright their `opponent' or competitor `ought' to be...and then without batting an eye start talking about how `costs' are going up so their prices or tuition is going up as well!

A good example of that was the `$600 ash trays they were installing in jet aircraft built for the military. That would have made me, as a congressman
on a military purchasing committee, demand a close scrutiny of any and all government contracts set up for the military. They probably never did. Or if the did it was quickly glossed over because the `taxpayer' is the biggest
cash cow in the nation!
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
* Origin: Telnet://valhalla.synchro.net - Richmond, Virginia (1:275/93)

Re: Re: Free College Tuition
By: Tim Richardson to Steve Wolf on Wed Feb 17 2016 02:32 pm

colleges. But..we are already paying for healthcare for people who TR>> aren't even citizens, educating children of people who don't even TR>> belong in the country, paying food stamps...welfare....yadida
yadida....

are arresting people for not paying their student loans!

http://fox59.com/2016/02/17/u-s-marshals-arrest-man-for-student-loan-l
eft-un pai d-for-29-years/

I saw that on the Drudge page yesterday or the day before. And it's about time.

See...some clown goes to college on `government' (taxpayers) money, gets a job an makes a decent salary, and thinks `...oh well! the democrats will pass `student loan forgiveness' before long anyway, so why pay anything? It'll all be free!'

It's time some of them were held accountable.
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32

So what happens when and if "free college" comes about? Who will be required to pay back student loans and who gets the free ride? I'm so confused! ;-)

The answer to that is `nobody'!

See...foreigners are coming here taking jobs away from Americans. Its gotten
so companies are even forcing American employees to train their foreign replacement or lose whatever benefits and unemployment support they've accrued.

And a lot of these jobs are high-tech, even in Silicon Valley.

You got people out here who spend 4 or 5 years going to college on a student loan (paid for by taxpayers) and they're majoring in `Black Studies'...or `Women's Studies'...or `Community Relations'!

They get a degree in that crap, and wonder why there's no job market in their `field'.

True story:

After I got home from Vietnam I was going to go to college on the GI bill.

I even went so far as to check out a pretty well respected college here in
this area. It would have been free...all I had to pay was parking, textbooks and support myself with some sort of job.

The quickest and easiest degree was a BA in Sociology.

Sociology!? I was working in a major ship yard by then and went in to the office one afternoon after shift and asked the girl who'd hired me what sort
of position I could expect to get into with a BA in `Sociology' if I went
to Grossmont and graduated?

She asked me what I was doing aboard the ships on the ways right then. I told her I was a burner and a fitter.

She said `after you get your degree you can look forward to being a burner and a fitter! We don't have much use for `Sociologists' in a ship yard'!

Those who are bitching and complaining about there's `no jobs for them' and they spent a taxpayer-funded student loan doing four years getting a degree
in `Black Studies' or `Women's Studies' or `Community Relations' wasted a
good opportunity and taxpayer's money.

Notice the `black lives matter' movement?

Where do they get all this time and money to go from city to city, protest
to protest? Who pays for all that?

*I* can't even afford to go to SeaWorld once a year....and they can spend all this time and money for travel from place to place protesting!
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
* Origin: Telnet://valhalla.synchro.net - Richmond, Virginia (1:275/93)

Hello Tim,

The > proposal by Sanders is PUBLIC institutions wuold be free.

PUBLIC institutions are not *free*.

When people apply the term PUBLIC to anything they are talking about
*the taxpayers*.

Not just the taxpayers. But taxpayers do fund a good portion.

Unless you think all taxpayers carry a mouse around in their pocket...it

is

taxpayer money that pays for federal `student loans'. It is taxpayer money that provide the vast majority of the *funding* for various higher institutions in *grants* for say...`global warming' studies...and an endless list of other sorts of *grants*.

Loans are paid back, with interest, over time.
Grants are gifts, never having to be paid back, by anybody.

In my view, all (public) schools of higher learning should be free.
Nobody should have to take out loans in order to better themselves.
By pursuing a quality education, students are helping both themselves
and society. We wind up hurting ourselves by forcing them into
what amounts to bankruptcy, before they even get started in their
chosen profession/career.

In the end when the book work is all done, the government (taxpayers) is paying the majority of the bills.

That should be society's gift. A gift of gratitude. Not a stone to
hang around a student's neck for twenty or thirty years.

And typically, it's to fund `leftist' causes like bilking the taxpayers

out

of BILLIONS of dollars in idiot schemes like the `global warming' scam.

You know what the problem with Obama's stimulus package was?
The stimulus was not large enough. Obama should have doubled
it. Or tripled it. By keeping it so small, he really limited
what this country could do. But at least he did something.
Which is far more than what the other side would have done.

I seriously doubt there is much any government can do about
climate change (global warming). It is happening, and happening
so fast, that it is too late to be stopped. Have we reached the
tipping point? If not, we are mighty close to it. How fast will
this climate change be? You ain't seen nothin' yet. Trust me
when I tell you. You ain't seen nothin' yet.

Abrupt climate change is what real scientists are starting to
call it. How abrupt? The change scientists are suggesting will
happen (not if) can be experienced within ten years of having
reached the tipping point.

Once we have crossed that tipping point, it cannot be reversed.
That is the theory.

For more on this topic, ask Al Gore. He has all the inconvenient
truth ...

--Lee

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Hello Tim,

why pay anything? It'll all be free!'

It's time some of them were held accountable.

Over the last thirty years, college tuition has increased
by over 1,120 percent. That is according to the Wall Street
Journal. I'll take those numbers as being credible.

The cost of college tuition has increased three times
faster than the consumer-price index. And twice as fast
as medical care. That is in the last ten years.

That's because the government is footing the bill for a large number of those `going' on student loans.

Loans are paid back, with interest, over time. Students gain
by getting an education, thus better jobs. Taxpayers gain, as
the cost is repaid, with interest, plus future taxes (revenue)
are increased as a result of students graduating (better job
offers equating better pay meaning higher taxes).

Any time you get the government (make that read `taxpayers') paying out money to fund something...outfits are gonna milk it for everything they

can

get.

Oh, come now. You have to spend money to make money. The best
way to do that is by spending other people's money, rather than
your own. Now doesn't that make sense? I mean, that is the
purpose of government, is it not? Government is supposed to work
for us, given the fact that government is us.

Getting government to fund something that benefits me is a good
thing. If you could get government to fund something that benefitted
you, you would undoubtedly think it would be a good thing as well.

Making college free would benefit everyone, not just you and me.
Why? Because those graduates would then be earning higher incomes,
meaning they would be paying higher taxes, thus enabling government
to increase the number of government programs. See how that works?

My anger gets raised whenever I see some high-falutin professor or in industrialist get in front of microphone and start off by saying how honest and upright their `opponent' or competitor `ought' to be...and then without batting an eye start talking about how `costs' are going up so their prices or tuition is going up as well!

It's all relative. So what if the cost of gas is $100 a gallon?
If you have the dough to buy the gas, everything is fine. But if
the cost of gas is 25 cents a gallon and you do not have the dough,
then what does it matter what the cost is? Right now, the cost
of oil is $29 a barrel. There are 42 gallons of oil in 1 barrel.
Do the math. What is the cost of gas today? Talk about do a 69.

A good example of that was the `$600 ash trays they were installing in jet aircraft built for the military.

That was either an accounting error (most probable), or a glitch.
Hard to imagine being an intentional act, as that would be considered
being a form of embezzlement (very illegal).

That would have made me, as a congressman on a military purchasing committee, demand a close scrutiny of any and all government contracts set up for the military.

There are bound to be some (accounting) errors, especially in areas
of defense, given the massive costs necessary to spend in order to
keep this nation safe.

They probably never did.

Look at the OMB. It is massive. Spending on defense is just part
of that budget. There will be some errors, not just in the area
of defense. That does not mean $600 per ashtray or hammer or other
trinket is actually spent.

Or if the did it was quickly glossed over because the `taxpayer' is the biggest cash cow in the nation!

Computer dollars and real dollars are often two very different things.
The so-called $$$ that politicians often cite as having been cut from
the budget are fictional $$$. Those $$$ never existed in the first
place. Cutting nonexistent funds and then claiming to have cut the
budget is a form of gloating that many politicians have mastered.

An example is food stamps. Everybody who needs food stamps is
able to get them. The (annual) total amount of food stamps equates
to the cost of 5 fighter aircraft. Only about 30 percent of the
total amount of food stamps are actually "spent" (administered by
states to those who need them). Politicians then "cut" the food
stamp budget, so as to do away with government waste. But no
actually funds are actually cut. It is just computer dollars.
The same number of people continue to get the same number of
food stamps. But on paper, the federal budget was "cut" by
a certain percentage.

Meanwhile, inflation continues to rise. Taxes on the middle
class continues to rise. Underemployment continues to rise.

Salaries for working people have remained stagnant. The costs
of health care continues to rise. The costs for those on fixed
incomes continues to rise. No COLA in three of the past seven
years for those on social security ...

Republicans want to nominate a billionaire for president.
Democrats are flirting with the idea of nominating a socialist.

What is this world coming to?

Scary thought, isn't it?

--Lee

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Re: Free College Tuition
By: Lee Lofaso to Tim Richardson on Sun Feb 21 2016 05:06 am

budget is a form of gloating that many politicians have mastered.

An example is food stamps. Everybody who needs food stamps is
able to get them. The (annual) total amount of food stamps equates
to the cost of 5 fighter aircraft. Only about 30 percent of the
total amount of food stamps are actually "spent" (administered by
states to those who need them). Politicians then "cut" the food
stamp budget, so as to do away with government waste. But no
actually funds are actually cut. It is just computer dollars.

Republicans want to nominate a billionaire for president.
Democrats are flirting with the idea of nominating a socialist.

What is this world coming to?

At least the "billionaire" doesn't need or depend on all the political money you're talking about to run for office. No need for him to "suck up" to anyone in the political arena. Including the media which decides what we know about in Washington.

--Steve--
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Linux
* Origin: Decker's Heaven -//- bbs.deckersheaven.com (1:135/371)

Hello Tim,

Unless you think all taxpayers carry a mouse around in their pocket...it

is

taxpayer money that pays for federal `student loans'. It is taxpayer money that provide the vast majority of the *funding* for various higher institutions in *grants* for say...`global warming' studies...and an endless list of other sorts of *grants*.

Loans are paid back, with interest, over time.

If they're "...paid back over time..." why is it the democrats are wanting
to *forgive* so many of them? They came out of the taxpayers pocket. But
what the hell! Taxpayers can afford to pat it, right?

Grants are gifts, never having to be paid back, by anybody.

*Grants* are politicians picking the taxpayer's pocket (again!) for such idiot stuff as `global warming'!

With this piece of shit in the White House a lot of taxpayer money went out
the window when pretty well all the so-called `green energy' outfits,
starting with Solyndra, went down the tubes...although not without the top people in the outfit bailing out with gold mine-type separation packages in
the millions!

In my view, all (public) schools of higher learning should be free.

From K thru 12 should be free, and without the ideology indoctrination the liberal left imprints on it.

Nobody should have to take out loans in order to better themselves.

You're right! They either `work' their way through college (as was done in
my parents day), or they don't go!
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
* Origin: Telnet://valhalla.synchro.net - Richmond, Virginia (1:275/93)

Republicans want to nominate a billionaire for president.
Democrats are flirting with the idea of nominating a socialist.

What is this world coming to?

At least the "billionaire" doesn't need or depend on all the political money you're talking about to run for office. No need for him to "suck up" to anyone in the political arena. Including the media which decides what we know about in Washington.

For many years the democrats and their cohorts in the media were picking
the republican candidates.

Like `feeding a card' to the sucker. They almost always chose a candidate
they knew even a democrat could beat.

In 2000 they didn't figure on the Supreme Court getting tired of recount after recount after recount....and at each `recount' there was always something
new; `hanging chad'! Tiny `indentations' on the *democrat* chad (which was taken as what the voter really..really..REALLY intended to vote for...
Sudden discoveries of *uncounted* votes in a car trunk... or a closet!
And each `recount' brought the win closer and closer to Gore's side. It was obvious the `recount' would go on and on till Gore won one, even if by only
ONE vote! THEN the democrats would have demanded the `recounts' stop and Gore be declared the winner.

They fucked up bad that time. They didn't get enough `graveyard' votes out of Chicago to do it the first time.
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
* Origin: Telnet://valhalla.synchro.net - Richmond, Virginia (1:275/93)