Politics

[Brent in Az]

Affordable or free college is detrimental, if students are doing nothing but stepping into a liberal indoctrination center.

Future leaders with a liberal hive mind will be the final death blow of what this country was founded on.

Founding father's.....rolling over in the grave.

 

[John Wasmuth]

….

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Having properly educated people are one of the biggest assets a country can have and a great investment for the future.
I don't believe in paying off student loans by the government but somehow we should make college education more affordable or free for the ones who deserve it not only who can afford it.
The system we have is unsustainable and broken.
It would be a great use of our tax dollars and will protect our leadership position in the long run.

The problem with this is defining "who" deserves it.

 

[wesheltonj]

Nonetheless, in this case @Tanks forwarded legal analysis on SEC rules is correct.

I do think Trump could beat an accusation that his statements about his company on his own social media network are insufficient. He shouldn’t have to use FB or X to get the word out since he is competing with those platforms.

But Trump’s “pitchman” rah-rah about the health and fundamentals of his social media company will absolutely cause a class action. He’s unbridled, has no media relations oversight, and he basically invited anyone that bought at X price and loses money in the future to file a claim.

How often does this happen? All the time. At least 3-4 times in the past ten years I’ve received class action offers and settlements because I owned shares in XYZ company and their management made misleading statements that injured me upon later sale. I didn’t go looking for a lawsuit, but I did receive class representation with the click of a button because I was eligible. Trump has no business speaking on behalf of any public company, he lacks the composure to follow the necessary rules.

IPO run up happens all the time and then the price alway drops. I’ve lost my ass on Beyond Meat, because my wife was convinced it would go even higher when it was over $260 and now it’s $7.

 

[Red Leg]

Pretty good opinion piece by Liz Peek (very bright woman) about the irrepressible imbecile otherwise known as Marjorie Taylor Green. The republican party seems determined to prove that it not only can't govern, but is committed to its own self-destruction.

Marjorie Taylor Greene is an idiot. She is trying to wreck the GOP

Georgia Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene is all about drama queen energy and antics. But here is so much at stake in 2024. Defeating Biden is the real goal, not burning down the House.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Tundra Tiger]

@Red Leg ... he only disagreement I could find was that last set of sentences stated as her message for MTG.

 

[Alistair]

Having properly educated people are one of the biggest assets a country can have and a great investment for the future.
I don't believe in paying off student loans by the government but somehow we should make college education more affordable or free for the ones who deserve it not only who can afford it.
The system we have is unsustainable and broken.
It would be a great use of our tax dollars and will protect our leadership position in the long rurun.

I generally agree with your point, but with a caveat.

Having people properly educated in useful subjects are one of the biggest assets a country can have.

Hard science, engineering, medicine, law, finance, computer science, math. All create enormous value and go a long way to securing the us economy.

They also allow those with those degrees to demonstrate that economic value by going into high paying careers.

This means, of course, thay they are a good investment and allow those who entered the fields to repay their student loans. So the 'college is too expensive' point is moot. It is not too expensive, it delivered good value.

College is only too expensive when it does not deliver any real value. Spending a quarter million to get a degree that leads to a career in corporate law, or in medicine, or in investment banking is a bargain. Spending a quarter million to do a degree thay gets you a minimum wage bar tending job is not.

Those degrees are very clearly not a valuable asset to the countrys economy. If they were, then people would be willing to hire those people at high wages. They are not.

If people make stupid choices and can't see the difference there then that's on them. If they want to pay a lot of money for an objectively low value piece of paper, then thats their call. I have little sympathy.

If I was the government, I wouldn't be assigning loans, or placing price controls. I'd leave it to the private market.

It might mean people continue to be stupid, it might simply mean that private lenders are not willing to lend to people trying to do degrees that probably deliver little value. The second point is maybe more likely, and a net reduction in college grads would ultimately rebalance the scales organically with regards to university pricing and the value of a degree.

 

[cash_tx]

A pretty information-rich commentary from Zeihan today, and certainly confirms what some of our more astute members have said about the utter ineptitude of Jake Sullivan and the Biden admin at-large (along with the appropriate level of impuning the Russian collaborators currently holding a slim majority in the House as well):

 

[rookhawk]

Having properly educated people are one of the biggest assets a country can have and a great investment for the future.
I don't believe in paying off student loans by the government but somehow we should make college education more affordable or free for the ones who deserve it not only who can afford it.
The system we have is unsustainable and broken.
It would be a great use of our tax dollars and will protect our leadership position in the long run.

The problem with the democrat party's line of thinking about "making college affordable" is that it actually made it more expensive.

Back in the good old days, if you were a kid with good credit you'd build a business plan, walk into your bank, and ask for a student loan. They would expect you to explain what the degree will cost, the data that shows how quickly you'll find a job, and what the prevailing wage is for the occupation. Accountants, lawyers, doctors, chemists, engineers...they all got their loans.

Because YOU actually had to go get the loan, you understood the severity of the situation and the effort involved in obtaining and repaying that loan. It created disinterest in college for many wise people, so universities had to contain their costs so their tuition was reasonable enough to get customers.

Perfect example: A relative of mine enrolled for his MBA at Wharton in 1965 for less than $6000. That would be CPI adjusted to $60,000 in today's dollars. But due to easy money, bad credit, no credit, today a Wharton MBA is over $250,000!

How did this outrageous inflation of college happen? By making college affordable (trademark: DNC lingo). The Stafford Loan came about and we nationalized student loan debt. $22,500 per year regardless of the shitty school, the terrible major, your awful credit, and your terrible high school grades. Overnight, every for-profit infomercial university raised their tuition to (drumroll)....$22,500 or higher.

What ended up happening is people that had no business going to college went to cut-rate colleges. They lived a lavish lifestyle off their loans. They never graduated. They attended such bad schools for nursing and other practicum required degrees that the shady schools couldn't get them access to hospitals to do their required rotations. Net result, a worthless degree, no license as an RN or LPN, $90,000 in debt plus interest.

This "making college affordable" nonsense and the government programs have only created a slave class and misery. It's spiked the costs of university degrees astronomically. If you haven't shopped around, you don't realize how bad its become. My nationally recognized MBA cost me $78,500 in 2005, that same program is now $180,000! Think about that for a minute. At the time of enrollment, the 65 students in the executive MBA's average age was 30, their average salary was about $130,000. Thus, their MBA was a bit over HALF A YEAR'S salary! Today, the average salaries are the same, but the program is 170% of a YEAR's salary!

This was all because citizens suck at math and we made college access possible for everyone.

We don't need more college graduates. We don't need more humanities degrees. We don't need more psychologists. Yet the US taxpayer is underwriting the cost of these degrees we do not need that creates in roads to a profession that can never repay them.

What we did and do need are more minority skilled laborers with good training making six figures. With 2-years of paid training, anyone without a drug problem, illegitimate kids, or a criminal record can be upper middle class in the same amount of time it takes to graduate from university.

 

[flatwater bill]

Harvard University offers over 600 free college classes online. In total, the top 9 universities offer thousands of courses, and nation wide, there are over 10,000 free courses. I suspect most young people complaining about the cost of education have taken........none of them. .why should they. YOU will pay their living costs and tuition....FWB

 

[Louis Toadvine]

In terms of placement and outcome, there's a distinction between studying what many here would consider a bullsh*t non-STEM major (English, History, Political Science, Sociology, etc.) at a no-name private college or typical state university and a top-tier/recognized liberal arts college or university. I have heaps of classmates from my liberal arts undergrad college who studied one of the above and have done quite well across the spectrum: law, medicine, business, banking, etc. In fact, it's the norm, not the exception.

It's not that the English and History departments at Williams College or the University of Virginia provide more tangible skill sets, it's that the students studying at these schools are generally more motivated, networked/connected, and possess a greater degree of intellectual horsepower. Getting accepted to and graduating from one of these schools signals something to professional degree programs and employers: this person has what it takes. These students will do well no matter what they study.

In short: Yes, paying full ticket price to study Sociology or English at 99% of schools is a losing proposition, and most students studying these kinds of subjects might benefit from either a) studying something more tangible/applied; or b) not attending college. But there's a distinction to be made. Not all English and PoliSci degrees can be measured with the same yardstick.

 

[Louis Toadvine]

Harvard University offers over 600 free college classes online. In total, the top 9 universities offer thousands of courses, and nation wide, there are over 10,000 free courses. I suspect most young people complaining about the cost of education have taken........none of them. .why should they. YOU will pay their living costs and tuition....FWB

This is true, but I can promise you that McKinsey & Company, Goldman Sachs, Apple, Oracle, Yale Law School, Stanford Graduate School of Business, and thousands of other employers and graduate schools do not care how many free online college classes you've taken from Harvard. That won't get you a job or accepted.

Completing a free online college class from Harvard might get you a handshake and a pat on the back... from your parents.

 

[wesheltonj]

An easy major and getting a high GPA plays well for graduate/professional school.

One of my law school professors said that business degrees should not be offered at universities (I have two) because they are easy and you don’t “learn anything.” I tend to agree. (Flame away).

 

[rookhawk]

In terms of placement and outcome, there's a distinction between studying what many here would consider a bullsh*t non-STEM major (English, History, Political Science, Sociology, etc.) at a no-name private college or typical state university and a top-tier/recognized liberal arts college or university. I have heaps of classmates from my liberal arts undergrad college who studied one of the above and have done quite well across the spectrum: law, medicine, business, banking, etc. In fact, it's the norm, not the exception.

It's not that the English and History departments at Williams College or the University of Virginia provide more tangible skill sets, it's that the students studying at these schools are generally more motivated, networked/connected, and possess a greater degree of intellectual horsepower. Getting accepted to and graduating from one of these schools signals something to professional degree programs and employers: this person has what it takes. These students will do well no matter what they study.

In short: Yes, paying full ticket price to study Sociology or English at 99% of schools is a losing proposition, and most students studying these kinds of subjects might benefit from either a) studying something more tangible/applied; or b) not attending college. But there's a distinction to be made. Not all English and PoliSci degrees can be measured with the same yardstick.

In upper crust WASP east coast culture, its completely acceptable to go get a "worthless" undergraduate degree. The upper-upper class has always had the financial means to allow the leisure of "finishing school" to become a renaissance man of the liberal arts.

Those going to Vasser, Bryn Mawr, William & Mary, Bowdoin, Oberlin, Brown, or any of the other 7-sisters...it's all fine to have a worthless undergrad degree because that was never the final destination. Those folks were intending and did go to a top-20 post-graduate school for a degree in law, medicine, hard science, or other occupation thereafter.

Are the undergrad degrees mentioned above "worthless"? Probably. Was it rewarding to the individual? Probably. Could you have gone to a top-tier State school for Undergrad like UVA, Cornell (yes, its State and Ivy), Michigan, or Berkley for undergrad and landed into the same prestigious post-graduate field of study at the same schools? Yes, definitely. Would you have had more valuable, marketable skills by getting a non-liberal arts undergrad degree as well? Most definitely.

But most people aren't going to tier-1 obscure liberal arts schools with any sense of agency that they will necessarily need a masters in a valuable subject thereafter. Most liberal arts students are rudderless and middle class going through the motions to get a communications, english, history, other humanities degree with no real destination. <-That's who we're being asked to forgive their debts.


Just a point of order: there is only one Ivy that statistically has a positive ROI across all fields at full tuition costs, Harvard. Not Princeton, Yale, Penn, or Dartmouth (more impressive to me). What that means is people are buying into prestige but the rack-rates do not generate the extra income required to overcome the cost of attendance.

 

[ActionBob]

When are we going to get that our economy is global?

Exactly!

Stopping exports to China would severely impact US Farmers. And if you think that is not a problem for the whole economy you need to look at that again and think it through. There are two things that everything relies on. Including human life as we know it on planet Earth. Agriculture and mining, and I include the petroleum industry in mining.

So short term food prices "may" come down. Although the majority of the price you pay at the supermarket is NOT the cost of the commodities produced on farms. It is transportation, refining and processing, packaging, distribution, and markup at all levels.

However American farmers do one thing as well as they do producing, and that is spending money, or reinvestment. It and mining (especially energy) are the basic drivers of the economy.

Agriculture has been doing really well overall the past several years, until this year.. We don't get credit for it, but I contend that the dramatic rise in the stock market would not have happened without a strong Agriculture sector.

We don't have the direct vote because we are down to less than 1.5% of the population feeding the rest of you.... and not only feeding, but where do think those cigars and bottles of bourbon come from? And cotton, ethanol, bio diesel, pet food. Food, fuel, fiber, alcohol and pet food are the 5 basics produced by American Agriculture and imported by China..... losing the Chinese market woukd not hurt as bad as losing Mexico. But it would hurt severely.

And further to the point of a World economy. The invasion of Ukraine drove up grain and fertilizer prices. It tripled the cost of fertilizer because of the interruption of two major producers of fertilizer. Ukraine and Russia. That is still impacting every American, and I suspect most people around the World, every day!

 

[mdwest]

An easy major and getting a high GPA plays well for graduate/professional school.

One of my law school professors said that business degrees should not be offered at universities (I have two) because they are easy and you don’t “learn anything.” I tend to agree. (Flame away).

I have an MBA as well as an MS in Strategic Management... I freely admit I learned very little.. and neither were all that hard to achieve from a learning perspective..

Both took a considerable amount of time and effort... the MS in particular had some very lengthy writing/research assignments..

But frankly, given enough time and money to train him, any monkey could achieve either degree..

Im about 1/2 through a DBA at this point (taking a very long, slow road to completion).. Ive learned quite a bit in the doctoral program.. but almost nothing learned has been about business.. its all been about conducting research at the doctoral level, writing at the doctoral level (you wouldnt know that Ive learned anything about writing from the way I post lol...), and how to analyze huge amounts of data properly (while removing as much bias as possible along the way)..

but learn anything new about "business"? not so much...

 

[ActionBob]

@Corey0372 i don’t think banning imports from China would be realistic. It would also hurt our economy greatly. And I am not talking about just iPhones and Dell computers. We import a ton of everyday stuff from China that are not made elsewhere.

Agreed, sort of. You are also making a great point to 1. Bring manufacturing of vital things back to the US. 2. Accessing products from other, friendly and aligned countries.

You know. Like Trump was trying to do

Of course that takes a long while....

The even bigger issue is our exports. Although that is why Russia and especially Brazil are in that alliance..... Agriculture resources that China needs. And Russian oil.

 

[WAB]

thats the problem in a nutshell..

of course they have low paying, entry level jobs.. they are recent grads (you would hope)...

the difference is... when I was in my young 20s and had a couple of student loans to pay off.. I did 2 things...

I worked multiple jobs.. I easily did 55-65 hours a week, every week, for the first few years I was out of school.. I had my "real" job.. plus I worked a night a week, and most saturdays at a bar earning extra cash... plus I picked up occasional shifts at a camera shop down the road.. and I was serving in the national guard.. thats simply what it took to pay my bills... I wanted to be a big boy, live on my own, and have a life.. I had no desire to live at home with mom, or have a half dozen roommates.. so I freaking worked my butt off to earn enough to make things work...

and....

I was very careful about spending... I drove a beater truck.. I never went out to eat unless I was taking someone on a date.. I didnt buy expensive electronics ($1K phones didnt exist back then, but there were plenty of other stupid things I could have foolishly spent money on.. I just didnt).. I didnt hang out in coffee shops paying $6 for a non fat latte.. etc..etc..

It took a few years.. but I paid my dues.. and by my late 20's I wasnt worried so much about finances.. I carried very little debt.. I had worked my way into a couple of promotions and was significantly better compensated, etc..etc..

Most (although certainly not all) young people these days arent interested in particularly hard work, and certainly arent interested in large volumes of work.. and they definitely think they are owed high wages despite that..

I literally had a mid 20's male (who has a fairly good amount of student loan debt) tell me just 3 or 4 weeks ago that his goal in life was to marry well and be a house husband.. he didnt want to work at all..

I asked him if he didnt realize that a housewife is one of the hardest working people I know.. you dont sit at home on your ass... if youre not going to work, youre going to be expected to do the lions share of the cleaning, cooking, caring for the kids, running family errands like getting cars serviced, doing grocery runs, etc..

he no shit thought thats what the maid was for..

when asked "how are you going to afford a maid? you dont work? and shouldnt the maid be given the same opportunity to sit on their ass all day and do nothing just like you? why should they toil for low wages? you clearly dont want to..

he just got frustrated and refused to continue the discussion..

I managed to come out of school without debt. However that involved working many jobs, some technical, some menial, and taking on lab instruction during semester. I once had to turn down an NRC job for a summer and work as a janitor because it paid better. My impression, which could be wrong, is that many young people today are unwilling to make the sacrifices and put in the hard work necessary. They look at us, and instead of being motivated to achieve the same, are resentful of what we have.

I am very proud to say that my son does not fit that mold. He is brilliant, has multiple advanced degrees, and works his ass off to support his family.

 

[Alistair]

I have an MBA as well as an MS in Strategic Management... I freely admit I learned very little.. and neither were all that hard to achieve from a learning perspective..

Both took a considerable amount of time and effort... the MS in particular had some very lengthy writing/research assignments..

But frankly, given enough time and money to train him, any monkey could achieve either degree..

Im about 1/2 through a DBA at this point (taking a very long, slow road to completion).. Ive learned quite a bit in the doctoral program.. but almost nothing learned has been about business.. its all been about conducting research at the doctoral level, writing at the doctoral level (you wouldnt know that Ive learned anything about writing from the way I post lol...), and how to analyze huge amounts of data properly (while removing as much bias as possible along the way)..

but learn anything new about "business"? not so much...

I think it depends on the level you are at in your career when you start.

I did my MBA when I was lower middle management. I knew a lot about supply chain and product development, but not a whole lot on anything else.

The modules on those topics were tick box exercises, but I got quite a lot out of my marketing, accounting, legal, procurement, and strategic and people management modules.

Having been promoted a couple times during and after my mba, I suspect that I'd have picked up a lot of those skills working a higher level day job, but at the time it gave me a lot of useful skills and I think helped me transition into higher roles more effectively.

Which was, after all, the point of doing it.

 

[DillonG]

That was kind of awesome. Wall Street over extending itself to short a stock into oblivion. They got greedy and overextended, the fact people saw it and took advantage of it is pretty awesome.

So why do you think all of the major brokerage firms (Schwab, TD, Morgan Stanley, etc.) shut down trading on those stocks?