By your response, it's apparent you really are clueless and have no idea what lockout/tag out is about. Since you seem incapable of learning new concepts... it's pointless to continue with you on this issue. .
Ron Paul works towards the elimination of the inefficient Department of Education, leaving education decisions to be made at the state, local or personal level. Parents should have the right to spend their money on the school or method of schooling they deem appropriate for their children.
On November 14, 2008 Ron Paul said in a New York Times interview:
“First, the Constitution does not authorize the Department of Education, and the founders never envisioned the federal government dictating those education policies.
Second, it is a huge bureaucracy that squanders our money. We send billions of dollars to Washington and get back less than we sent. The money would be much better off left in states and local communities rather than being squandered in Washington.
Finally, I think that the smallest level of government possible best performs education. Teachers, parents, and local community leaders should be making decisions about exactly how our children should be taught, not Washington bureaucrats.
The Department of Education has given us No Child Left Behind, massive unfunded mandates, indoctrination, and in some cases, forced medication of our children with psychotropic drugs. We should get rid of all of that and get those choices back in the hands of the people.”
The Department of Education has given us No Child Left Behind, massive unfunded mandates, indoctrination, and in some cases, forced medication of our children with psychotropic drugs. We should get rid of all of that and get those choices back in the hands of the people.”
No Child Left Behind originated in the administration of George Worst Bush, not The Dept of Education. The Dept of Education was stuck implementing Bush's plan.
The first immediate result of eliminating the Dept of Education??? Middle Class and Poor kids who would have gone to college, now won't. Way to go Ron! The Rich however will go to the newly uncrowded colleges.
I keep hearing that the RON PAUL dollars that used to be spent in Washington will now be spent by the states... If Ron Paul won the election and in January Paul takes over and eliminates the Dept of Ed... do you seriously think that New Yorkers would support a huge STATE TAX INCREASE to fund higher education??? Not Likely. I am quite sure that most of this board would oppose the state tax for education. Ron Paul would save the tax payers dollars, and American kids would fall farther behind the rest of the world in higher education... (all except for the RICH of course... Since colleges would be almost empty, an average Rich kid would finish first in his class.)
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
~ "DELIVERS A TRUE BALANCED BUDGET IN YEAR THREE OF DR. PAUL’S PRESIDENCY: Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who doesn’t just talk about balancing the budget, but who has a full plan to get it done. " ~
The last Republican who promised to give us a Balanced Budget in 3 years was Ronald Reagan, and we all know how that turned out.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
If Ron Paul won the election and in January Paul takes over and eliminates the Dept of Ed... do you seriously think that New Yorkers would support a huge STATE TAX INCREASE to fund higher education??? Not Likely.
Do you understand economics? Without federal money, the cost of education would DECREASE, since the colleges would have to readjust their cost to reflect a real market economy. Colleges set tuition based on the prospect of receiving federal money. They know the federal guidelines and who qualifies and how to price their tuition to make sure that they attract as many people eligable to receive federal assistance and loans.
How does college tuition go up 71% when median income declined 4.9%? Where is the money for tuition coming from if the median income is declining - loans - grants?
Quoted Text
From 1999 to 2009, tuition at public two-year colleges increased 71 percent, while the median family income declined 4.9 percent, adjusted for inflation, according to a study by the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/30/education/30collegeweb.html
Box The cost of going to college will go down and as for higher taxes NO because the money would stay in our state not go to the federal level. My brother and daughter both worked and paid for their own college education. Parent's can also start college savings plans. Look at all the kids graduating from colleges now who CANNOT find a job and have HUGE loans to pay off. College is not for everyone, some make it seem like you cannot make a living without it. What about vocational schools and learning a trade. We will always need carpenters, welders, painters, mechanics etc. Ron Paul gave an example recently of a college where the students work part time there to pay for tuition during the semesters and on summer break work full time to pay for there room and board. When they graduate most owe NOTHING.
And then there are scholarships which are paid for by the private sector. Why should taxpayers have to pay for anyones college education except for their own and their childrens anyways.???
I use my daughter as an example. My family allthough my hubby worked full time and I worked part time are in the poverty range. We could not save up for college for my daughter. Because she wanted to go to college she started working at age 16 and after graduating from HS went to SCC. During the summer she worked full time and then went to St. Rose and then on to SUNY. She did this all on her own and I am very proud of her. She recently paid off her college loan.
My two sons did not go to college. They are both in a trade and work everyday and I am just of proud of them. Because all three of them know the value of hard work.
Do you understand economics? Without federal money, the cost of education would DECREASE, since the colleges would have to readjust their cost to reflect a real market economy. Colleges set tuition based on the prospect of receiving federal money. They know the federal guidelines and who qualifies and how to price their tuition to make sure that they attract as many people eligable to receive federal assistance and loans.
Your assumption... "Without federal money, the cost of education would DECREASE, since the colleges would have to readjust their cost to reflect a real market economy." "READJUST THEIR COST? The physical cost of running the school... utilities, maintenance, supplies won't change. "READJUST THEIR COST? The reality... ~ Teachers and professors out of work as many colleges close due to lack of enrollment. ~ With no Federal funding, kids who's income was borderline, will now not go to college. ~The remaining colleges will fight to recruit a very small group of students. The Rich Kids.
Who loses? Poor and lower middle class kids Who gains? Rich Kids... THE PLAN IS A SUCCESS!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
While critics charge that gradually cutting back on federal financial aid is "heartless," doing so would actually be one of the most compassionate things we can do in the long run for middle-class families. Going to college is a big part of the American Dream for many young people, but well-meaning "help" from the federal government is driving up costs, creating massive debt, and, in some cases, ruining lives.
The reality... ~ Teachers and professors out of work as many colleges close due to lack of enrollment. ~ With no Federal funding, kids who's income was borderline, will now not go to college. ~The remaining colleges will fight to recruit a very small group of students. The Rich Kids.
This is quite illogical and the furthest thing from the truth and economic law. You still haven't explained how tuition rates went up 71% over 10 years while median income went down 4.9% over the same 10 years. Is the 71%(double the average rate of inflation) increase because of the increase of fixed costs of utilities and maintenance? Talk to the students carrying around $1 trillion in student loan debt. Ask them how affordable college is and if they believe it was worth it.
Box loves social engineering...The world is too unjust for Box and loves the constant threat of the state to deliver the social justice as he deems just. He believes in the federal government holding you down with their jackboot on your throat, ripping money out of your pockets and giving it to who he believes deserves it.
Our public schools and higher education has actually fallen behind other countries in the developed world despite the 40 years of federal central planning and trillions of dollars. But more spending and more planning is what box believes in necessary. Box is one of those people that believe good intentions outweigh actual results.
Box loves social engineering...The world is too unjust for Box and loves the constant threat of the state to deliver the social justice as he deems just. He believes in the federal government holding you down with their jackboot on your throat, ripping money out of your pockets and giving it to who he believes deserves it.
Our public schools and higher education has actually fallen behind other countries in the developed world despite the 40 years of federal central planning and trillions of dollars. But more spending and more planning is what box believes in necessary. Box is one of those people that believe good intentions outweigh actual results.
Cicero seems to be lost again. Most of his post is propaganda... He's posting what I think... as if Cic had any idea of what I think. Cic sounds threatened again... His language is reminiscent of Nazi Germany:
~ social engineering, ~ the world is too unjust, ~ the constant threat of the state, ~ the federal government holding you down, ~ their jackboot on your throat, ~ ripping money out of your pockets. Pretty dramatic, but Cic is full of 'drama'!
Instead of posting HIS views, or HIS opinions, Cicero spends his days posting MY VIEWS and MY OPINIONS From this post: ~ Box loves... ~ The world is too unjust for Box... ~ He believes... again ~ he believes... ~ what box believes in... ~ Box is...
OK, My turn: Cicero loves... opera. The world is too... silly... for Cic. Cicero believes... in the tooth fairy. again Cicero believes... the world is flat. What Cicero believes in... is flatulence and finally, Cicero is... LMAO pretty lame!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Cic sounds threatened again... His language is reminiscent of Nazi Germany:
You would know...Nazi = National SOCIALIST
Box's hatred toward the "rich" in America and love for the state is eerily similar to the Nazi rhetoric blaming the "rich" Jewish business owner in Germany. You always have to have a common enemy and scapegoat as a reason for your problems. Hitler and Box seem to blame and demonize the same people for the nations problems - rich businesses. SCARY!!
Box's hatred toward the "rich" in America and love for the state is eerily similar to the Nazi rhetoric blaming the "rich" Jewish business owner in Germany. You always have to have a common enemy and scapegoat as a reason for your problems. Hitler and Box seem to blame and demonize the same people for the nations problems - rich businesses. SCARY!!
Cicero Drama (continued) Again, with little to post, Cic again posts his view of what I THINK. (Strange ) ~ Box's hatred... ~ Love of the state... ~ Hitler and Box (Hitler & Box? )
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Box, you still haven't answered. Why is tuition cost up 71% in 10 years? God forbid gas went up 71% in 10 year, box and the left would be SCREAMING about the greedy 'big oil'. But colleges can screw their customers and raise their tuition putting people further in debt.
So go ahead an answer in your own words why college costs are increasing twice the rate of inflation. Is that social justice? Is that proof of DOE success?
Box, you still haven't answered. Why is tuition cost up 71% in 10 years? God forbid gas went up 71% in 10 year, box and the left would be SCREAMING about the greedy 'big oil'. But colleges can screw their customers and raise their tuition putting people further in debt.
So go ahead an answer in your own words why college costs are increasing twice the rate of inflation. Is that social justice? Is that proof of DOE success?
Talk about a straw man!
You post a quote (true or not I don't know) then DEMAND that I respond to your quote: ~ "Why is tuition cost up 71% in 10 years? " ~ Of course the real answer (the one that Cicero doesn't want you to know) is... THEY HAVEN'T! Yea it's just more of Cicero's propaganda and BS.
On Cicero's post #1040 he posts: ~How does college tuition go up 71% when median income declined 4.9%?
Then again Cicero DEMANDS that I answer his data on post #1044: ~You still haven't explained how tuition rates went up 71% over 10 years while median income went down 4.9% over the same 10 years. Is the 71%(double the average rate of inflation)
Then once again on post # 1048 Cicero positively DEMANDS a response to his data with: ~Box, you still haven't answered. Why is tuition cost up 71% in 10 years? God forbid gas went up 71% in 10 year,
So to keep Cicero from having a stroke, and possibly to calm his nerves, I'll answer his question. I went to his link (NY Times) and read the article... WHICH STATES: ~ " From 1999 to 2009, tuition at public two-year colleges increased 71%" ~
So to finally answer Cicero's frantic question... ~ "Why is tuition cost up 71% in 10 years? " ~ My answer is, of course, they haven't. (How many of you fell for Cicero's little scam?)
My guess to why 2 YEAR COMMUNITY COLLEGES have increased in tuition is that they always were IMO under priced. Our local 2 year schools had tuition in the hundreds, not thousands. Possibly Federal and State grants, scholarships and donations have decreased. I don't know the reason, and my guess is neither does Cic. I did learn that: The average tuition at public four-year colleges was $10,747... and At public two-year colleges, the average tuition was $2,527.
Total tuition for a student who attends a 2 year school then finishes in a 4 year school is around $26,500. For most middle class working families, that is the price of a new car.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Logged
)
)
