Trump's Final 100 days

Remember, like a week ago, when the GOP thought their "memo" was going to take down the deep state and exonerate Donald?

Ah, how time flies...

The thoughtful responses by darkoz and AZ just show the different way people look at the same thing. I see it a little differently than both. Rather than think last year's tax rates are 'correct', and any change is either 'giving' or 'taking' from one specific group, each year I would like a thoughtful analysis on what is needed for the government and the programs/services it funds. Energy costs were low so the government needs less to power the military?.... tax less. New surprise natural disasters....tax more...... Decision to pay down the debt.... tax more. BUT let's all get rid of the idea that the government is giving something to a person/corporation because they are changing the rate at which they are taxed. If you want to say a new tax law is more favorable to the rich than the last tax law was, that would be an accurate portrayal. (Except I pay more as a rich New Yorker!).

Quote: AxelWolf

FYI. Pedophiles are people who go for 13 and under boys or girls. NO ONE halfway legitimate has even accused him of pedophilia. So it seems you are just using words to make things look worst than they actually are.

Sorry, I will stick with "child molester" instead of "pedophile" since he went for a 14 year old and not a 13 year old. Hope that works better for you.

Quote: SOOPOO

The thoughtful responses by darkoz and AZ just show the different way people look at the same thing. I see it a little differently than both. Rather than think last year's tax rates are 'correct', and any change is either 'giving' or 'taking' from one specific group, each year I would like a thoughtful analysis on what is needed for the government and the programs/services it funds. Energy costs were low so the government needs less to power the military?.... tax less. New surprise natural disasters....tax more...... Decision to pay down the debt.... tax more. BUT let's all get rid of the idea that the government is giving something to a person/corporation because they are changing the rate at which they are taxed. If you want to say a new tax law is more favorable to the rich than the last tax law was, that would be an accurate portrayal. (Except I pay more as a rich New Yorker!).

Agreed lets move on

Isnt this thread about trump. Lets get back on track. I wont even respond to AZ last post which sounds like advocating for taxless government (oops i did it again)

Down with Trump!!!

Quote: ams288

Sorry, I will stick with "child molester" instead of "pedophile." Hope that works better for you.

Please statutory rapist!

Thank you

Edit: saying the correct term not calling Ams one :)

Yet these same people who say that the money is theirs to keep has to deal with the reality of how to repay the 15 trillion in public debt (that is money that the government can only raise through taxes and fees). I guess they could declare bankruptcy and watch the dollar and your spending power go down the drain (this is what Trump did with some of his subsidiaries, six times - I wonder if he is planning the same with the US). The same libertarians also have to figure out how to pay trillions of dollars for a bunch of wars and an annual $700 billion defence budget. The interest alone on 15 trillion at 1.8% (current) + the 700 billion adds up to a trillion dollar budget a year or about $3,000/per person.

I guess we could just wrap up government, hold an auction, declare bankruptcy and start over. Bring home the 1.3 million military too and sell off the aircraft carrier groups to North Korea, China, and Russia. Same with the nukes: let them decay in their silos and or sell them to Pakistan.

The ship has sailed on taxes, just like it has on abortion and gay marriage.

The feds cutting taxes is just Uncle Jack saying, "We're completely irresponsible with our money!" (Jack would have been far better off just killing Walter at that point, by the way, and keeping all of the cash. Somehow at some point the feds are going to feel the same way).

Quote: SOOPOO

The thoughtful responses by darkoz and AZ just show the different way people look at the same thing. I see it a little differently than both. Rather than think last year's tax rates are 'correct', and any change is either 'giving' or 'taking' from one specific group, each year I would like a thoughtful analysis on what is needed for the government and the programs/services it funds. Energy costs were low so the government needs less to power the military?.... tax less. New surprise natural disasters....tax more...... Decision to pay down the debt.... tax more. BUT let's all get rid of the idea that the government is giving something to a person/corporation because they are changing the rate at which they are taxed. If you want to say a new tax law is more favorable to the rich than the last tax law was, that would be an accurate portrayal. (Except I pay more as a rich New Yorker!).

Reasonable. Unfortunately the idea of an actual budget has gone over the head of most federal politicians as well as over the heads of tens of million of Americans. On the other hand, cutting a tax rate by 40% kind of IS a "gift".

Quote: boymimbo

Yet these same people who say that the money is theirs to keep has to deal with the reality of how to repay the 15 trillion in public debt (that is money that the government can only raise through taxes and fees). I guess they could declare bankruptcy and watch the dollar and your spending power go down the drain (this is what Trump did with some of his subsidiaries, six times - I wonder if he is planning the same with the US). The same libertarians also have to figure out how to pay trillions of dollars for a bunch of wars and an annual $700 billion defence budget. The interest alone on 15 trillion at 1.8% (current) + the 700 billion adds up to a trillion dollar budget a year or about $3,000/per person.

The debt will never be repaid. Never was planned to since the 1780s. Only time it was repaid (or whittled down to $40,000 depending on who you believe) was from land sales under Jackson. But never repaid from taxes.

What gets me is the people who whine about tax cuts are the same ones who want free college, free health care, free everything. Not free, of course, but thru the government.

Don't worry, when the USD collapses, and it will, the fun will begin. Propping it up now is just because no other nation wants to take the trade deficits you must take to become a reserve currency.

Quote: boymimbo

I guess they could declare bankruptcy and watch the dollar and your spending power go down the drain (this is what Trump did with some of his subsidiaries, six times - I wonder if he is planning the same with the US).

Let me tell you how completely and utterly unsurprised I would be if Trump actually tried to declare bankruptcy for the United States.

Through Twitter.

And then two hours later a White House press release would say, "Err, uhh, what he MEANT was...."

501 pages and all we've proved is which group has more free time during normal business hours.

Quote: RogerKint

501 pages and all we've proved is which group has more free time during normal business hours.

Well i definitely have more free time during business hours. Otherwise whats the point of being an AP

To constantly brag about it online, duh.

For Steverinos and for finding common ground, cheers!

Quote: RogerKint

501 pages and all we've proved is which group has more free time during normal business hours.

Now that is clever!

TRUMP 2020!

I do like Rand Paul. However, he did just vote for the tax cuts that add 1.5 trillion to the deficit. But anytime a politician calls notice to their blatant hypocrisy, even when it's his own, it's refreshing.

But what is also refreshing is that this deal was a compromise in an era where there has been none. Each side got some of what it wanted but not all of what they wanted. That's how it's supposed to work.

Quote: Steverinos

I do like Rand Paul. However, he did just vote for the tax cuts that add 1.5 trillion to the deficit. But anytime a politician calls notice to their blatant hypocrisy, even when it's his own, it's refreshing.

But what is also refreshing is that this deal was a compromise in an era where there has been none. Each side got some of what it wanted but not all of what they wanted. That's how it's supposed to work.

Kind of, sort of.
A compromise generally consists of give and take. In this case, each side simply gave away what wasn't theirs.

Quote: billryan

Kind of, sort of.
A compromise generally consists of give and take. In this case, each side simply gave away what wasn't theirs.

True. It'd be nice if we talked about revenue every once in a while. But the only way that's happening is if Americans elect democrats.

Quote: billryan

Kind of, sort of.
A compromise generally consists of give and take. In this case, each side simply gave away what wasn't theirs.

More Republican double speak

George Orwell must be turning in his grave!

For those literal minded people on here thats a figure of speech

Quote: darkoz

More Republican double speak

George Orwell must be turning in his grave!

For those literal minded people on here thats a figure of speech

You think I'm a Republican. Max thinks I'm a shade left of Che'.
Guess I'm doing something right.

Quote: RogerKint

To constantly brag about it online, duh.

For Steverinos and for finding common ground, cheers!

That was a fine speech by Rand and should be required watching on all the media outlets. He is sounding alot like his daddy lately.

The last few times I voted for POTUS I wrote in RP. If he would have been elected, the country would be in much much better shape, and most of our foreign conflicts would have been eliminated.

Quote: petroglyph

Quote: RogerKint

To constantly brag about it online, duh.

For Steverinos and for finding common ground, cheers!

That was a fine speech by Rand and should be required watching on all the media outlets. He is sounding alot like his daddy lately.

The last few times I voted for POTUS I wrote in RP. If he would have been elected, the country would be in much much better shape, and most of our foreign conflicts would have been eliminated.

I think a government's goal in good times (like now) is to reign in the deficits. Increasing defense spending (which includes homeland security) by 20% (to almost a trillion) makes absolutely no sense, and raising spending on Non-governmental programs also is nonsensical. Giving a 1.6 trillion tax cut when the economy is already maxed out is just bad timing. It would have had a much bigger impact when a recession is nigh.

Now with a heated economy the government will have to raise interest rates, which will increase the cost of borrowing and raise inflation.

All this would require hard choices, and with the GOP facing a challenging midterm thank to its CiC they had to raise spending to have a chance.

Quote: AxelWolf

You have a problem with a 3rd person (1000000th in this cae) of someone making claims of guilt, and yet there is no proof? If a legitimate person who claims to have been a victim claims someone is guilty, that's fine, but not someone who has nothing to do with it.

If he wanted to Add IMO that would be fine. He wants us to believe it's all facts.

I'm all for INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY! I would rather see all guilty men go free than one innocent person get convicted. I feel the same way about people just being accused of something and losing everything based on just accusations.

Someone can lose everything, including their life, based on a lie perpetuated by someone else.

I'm with you on all of that, especially if you would be fine if all he added is, "IMO," that's more than fair.

BoyMimbo,

It's cool. God, Spaghetti-Monster, Initial Boundary Conditions of a Deterministic Universe...have to thank someone, or something.

Quote: AZDuffman

Republicans do want to see them get out of poverty, why do you think otherwise? But the way out is responsible behavior. The rest will take care of itself.

Yeah, that's always worked for everyone. I seem to remember something about, "Hoovervilles," back when a more significant percentage of the country was devoutly Religious. Slavery, too, before that still. Before this country even existed, way over in Europe...something about an Inquisition.

The fact is that the Christian and traditional Abrahamic ideals are now outdated, they sucked even before ever being outdated and a not-insignificant percentage of those who claim to subscribe to same are sanctimonious hypocrites.

No thanks. The Church had its chance and failed. Several times. Government's turn. We just need to work on getting the Church completely out of the Government.

Quote:

Then take a student loan and go to a tech school. Call the trade union and see when the apprenticeship test is being given.

Why should they need to go into debt?

Quote:

And it is a very logical assumption. Look at how many kids enter but never complete college. Look at how many need remedial classes when they get there. Look at how many cannot find work with the useless major they chose. Look at how few jobs really require a college degree to do. Warehousing kids in college will not solve anything, though it makes many things worse.

Remedial classes? I think you're completely ignoring the suggestion that I made, several times, about minimum GPA requirements to get to continue for free. If you don't qualify academically, then you either pay or don't go. Effectively, you're really just expanding the scholarship programs at state institutions and funding them with Federal and State dollars, that's really all you're doing.

Many people have difficulty finding work regardless of the chosen major. It all really depends on labor force supply and demand at a given time. Although, it does occur to me that we import a bunch of doctors and programmers from other countries, or alternatively, they come to school here to begin with. What's that Republican battle cry? "They're taking our jobs." Well, they are. The high-paying ones. Why don't we make it easier for people born in this country to obtain the necessary education to get those jobs?

How does a degree make things worse? Are you suggesting that riding a lift and placing items upon a pallet is more difficult if you're college educated?

Finally, if they don't complete college successfully, then they are indebted and must pay as if it were a student loan. Completion would be a requirement for each degree that an individual embarks on.

Quote:

Liberals call any spending an "investment." It will not save money no matter how much we pretend it would.

Umm...no. I don't think, "The wall," is an investment. It is spending, though.

Quote:

What income do they lose? The income they would have made by working full time and probably at something better paying. Assume they work 20 hours per week instead of a traditional 40. Assume they make about $9 per hour (a normal starting wage) vs even $12 per hour they could easily find for full time work.

Better paying where? Working full-time where? I truly have no idea where your notion of all of these high-paying full-time jobs with benefits sitting around waiting to be taken might be. Didn't you say something about crashing at your Mom's for a bit when you were down? Where was the, "Income you would have made by working full time and probably at something better paying," then?

Quote:

2000 x 12 = $24,000 x 4 = $96,000 an entry level person will make. And that is at a very low wage,
1000 x 12 = $12,000 x 4 = $48,000 a college student will bring in part time work.

Look at literally any lifetime earnings chart reflecting people with various college degrees as opposed to people without. It's so obvious that I'm not even going to bother to find one. Besides that, we could fill our highest paying positions with more Americans. Republicans should like that.

Quote:

Yes, they could work more in summer yadda yadda yadda. They also will likely work less than 20 hours per week and not work at all over breaks, so call it even. $48K is a decent years pay at the bottom level, maybe closer to a year and a half. Up in smoke. How does that help them escape poverty?

I'm looking at lifetime earnings and comparing those to Government benefit costs. Long-term. That's what an investment is. An investment doesn't just look at the next four years.

Quote: ams288

Sorry, I will stick with "child molester" instead of "pedophile" since he went for a 14 year old and not a 13 year old. Hope that works better for you.

The age also does not specifically matter. It's really about puberty-state, which can vary in age from person to person. I'm actually with Axel on this only because, "Pedophile," is probably literally the worst thing you could ever call someone. So, you want to:

A. Make sure you're using it correctly.

AND

B. Make sure that they definitely are one of those.

Quote: RogerKint

501 pages and all we've proved is which group has more free time during normal business hours.

Sleeping, posting, writing.

#NormalBusinessHours

Quote: boymimbo

Increasing defense spending (which includes homeland security) by 20% (to almost a trillion) makes absolutely no sense, and raising spending on Non-governmental programs also is nonsensical.

It makes a lot of sense when you look at how much of that money is going to lobbies, donors, cronies, or other self serving interests of the so called conservative politicians making these decisions.

Quote: petroglyph

That was a fine speech by Rand and should be required watching on all the media outlets. He is sounding alot like his daddy lately.

The last few times I voted for POTUS I wrote in RP. If he would have been elected, the country would be in much much better shape, and most of our foreign conflicts would have been eliminated.

If nothing else, he's at least very consistent.

I don't know. Crying about deficits when you just voted for a bill that increases it by 1.5 trillion?

Quote: gamerfreak

It makes a lot of sense when you look at how much of that money is going to lobbies, donors, cronies, or other self serving interests of the so called conservative politicians making these decisions.

If protecting the petrodollar was easy, every country would have one ;)

Boymimbo thinks bankruptcy would kill the USD. It was killed in 1913, it's just on life support now.

Quote: Steverinos

I don't know. Crying about deficits when you just voted for a bill that increases it by 1.5 trillion?

According to this:

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/s31

Paul voted against the bill.

I'm referring to the tax cuts.

Quote: Steverinos

I'm referring to the tax cuts.

Ok i added a thankyou to the first post then removed it based on missions point now just added it back

All in the space of 2 minutes

Quote: billryan

Kind of, sort of.
A compromise generally consists of give and take. In this case, each side simply gave away what wasn't theirs.

Reminds me of a couple I knew whose marriage was in trouble mostly because they were struggling financially. He'd spend a lot on hunting gear and trips and just to show him, she'd spend even more designer clothes.

Quote: RogerKint

501 pages and all we've proved is which group has more free time during normal business hours.

Work smarter, not harder.

(I believe the majority of the forum members lean to the left, anyway, so it is completely unsurprising that there are far more anti-Trump posts, regardless of anybody's working hours.)

Quote: Mission146

Yeah, that's always worked for everyone. I seem to remember something about, "Hoovervilles," back when a more significant percentage of the country was devoutly Religious. Slavery, too, before that still. Before this country even existed, way over in Europe...something about an Inquisition.

You have lost me here. Not sure why you think you need to be religious to behave responsibly.

Quote:

Why should they need to go into debt?

The do not need to, they can save and pay as they go as much as possible.

Quote:

Remedial classes? I think you're completely ignoring the suggestion that I made, several times, about minimum GPA requirements to get to continue for free. If you don't qualify academically, then you either pay or don't go. Effectively, you're really just expanding the scholarship programs at state institutions and funding them with Federal and State dollars, that's really all you're doing.

This would be nice if we could enforce it. But soon as you set a standard, magically watch most of the high school kids hitting it. Same with once they are in college. Everyone will be getting a 3.0! The direct and indirect pressures will make it happen. Too much money to lose if you give them "C."

Quote:

Many people have difficulty finding work regardless of the chosen major. It all really depends on labor force supply and demand at a given time. Although, it does occur to me that we import a bunch of doctors and programmers from other countries, or alternatively, they come to school here to begin with. What's that Republican battle cry? "They're taking our jobs." Well, they are. The high-paying ones. Why don't we make it easier for people born in this country to obtain the necessary education to get those jobs?

Pell Grants. Student Loans. Other grants. We make it very possible to get educated. We just do not hand it on a silver platter. The first 12 years we do, after that one must start to go out and make it happen as the adult they are.

Quote:

How does a degree make things worse? Are you suggesting that riding a lift and placing items upon a pallet is more difficult if you're college educated?

Finally, if they don't complete college successfully, then they are indebted and must pay as if it were a student loan. Completion would be a requirement for each degree that an individual embarks on.

Who is saying a degree "makes things worse?" The degree is just a piece of paper. Now, see, the debt is the motivator to complete things. Also a motivation not to take a stupid major, though we still have far too much of that.

Quote:

Umm...no. I don't think, "The wall," is an investment. It is spending, though.

Same as if you get an alarm on your house. But we need a wall to protect the border. Ask someone with a ranch near or on the border how bad things are getting. The proof that it is a good idea is how loudly Mexico is complaining about it.

Quote:

Better paying where? Working full-time where? I truly have no idea where your notion of all of these high-paying full-time jobs with benefits sitting around waiting to be taken might be. Didn't you say something about crashing at your Mom's for a bit when you were down? Where was the, "Income you would have made by working full time and probably at something better paying," then?

Last thing first. "Staying at my mom's" did not mean I was not working. I worked like crazy. The longest I was out of work when I lived there was six weeks, and that was because the new job started in six weeks. Several times I was laid off and had a new job by the end of the week. Now, a college student is different. Classes eat 20 hours a week, minimum. Study ideally another 10-20. So they cannot really work full time. Thus they lose income.

Where are the full time jobs with benefits? All around, when you look. Shortages exist in trucking, welding, and various factories. I keep seeing modern auto suppliers say they cannot get enough people with the basic math and interest to get staffed. No college needed--they train!

Quote:

Look at literally any lifetime earnings chart reflecting people with various college degrees as opposed to people without. It's so obvious that I'm not even going to bother to find one.

Look deeper. The college chart is skewed upwards by the higher earning top. The without is skewed down by HS dropout lumps who cannot get a decent job. However, a good tradesman will do just fine. OTOH, go to Barnes & Noble and see how many folks with degrees are working there.

12 years free is enough. After that you need to get out of the cart and start pulling it.

Quote: TigerWu

Work smarter, not harder.

(I believe the majority of the forum members lean to the left, anyway, so it is completely unsurprising that there are far more anti-Trump posts, regardless of anybody's working hours.)

Wasn't the poll for trump pretty lopsided on these forums? Maybe that was "who do you think will win?" rather than "who do you want to win?" Either way, you obviously care a lot. That's awesome 👏

Quote: RogerKint

Wasn't the poll for trump pretty lopsided on these forums? Maybe that was "who do you think will win?" rather than "who do you want to win?"

I don't remember... was it?

Quote:

Either way, you obviously care a lot. That's awesome 👏

I wouldn't say I care "a lot." Maybe a little.

Quote: TigerWu

I don't remember... was it?



I wouldn't say I care "a lot." Maybe a little.

I'll just leave this here

Don't worry, I'm still super stoked on you. Don't be mad.

Quote: Mission146

The age also does not specifically matter. It's really about puberty-state, which can vary in age from person to person. I'm actually with Axel on this only because, "Pedophile," is probably literally the worst thing you could ever call someone. So, you want to:

A. Make sure you're using it correctly.

AND

B. Make sure that they definitely are one of those.

I would a call him a former 30 year old guy trying to have sex with underage teenage girls. A guy who became a judge with all kinds of strict judgment of other people's moral failings.

I suppose that could make him sound better than a pedophile.

Quote: AZDuffman

You have lost me here. Not sure why you think you need to be religious to behave responsibly.

You're talking about, "Making heroes out of single mothers," so insinuating that all mothers should be married in order to have children. I'm just saying that many of the traditional Republican definitions of, "Responsibility," are handed down almost directly from Abrahamic Religious convictions, whether they know it or not.

Abortion, stuff like that.

That's why I keep coming back to, "Pick one." Many people like to advocate for their notions of personal responsibility as though that is something that everyone is just going to suddenly do. In many cases, they are not, and nor do they share the same ideas as to the specific entailments of what responsibility is comprised of.

Ultimately, you have to ask the question: Do you want to do what is best Macro-Economically, or enforce what you think is best and most moral on an individual level? The point that I'm making is that there are many cases where both of those things cannot happen at the same time.

Quote:

The do not need to, they can save and pay as they go as much as possible.

Save with what?

Quote:

This would be nice if we could enforce it. But soon as you set a standard, magically watch most of the high school kids hitting it. Same with once they are in college. Everyone will be getting a 3.0! The direct and indirect pressures will make it happen. Too much money to lose if you give them "C."

There's not any money to lose. The idea is that a college would typically be at or near maximum enrollment capacity just based on those who would qualify under those parameters. There would also have to be some structure in place in terms of both standardization and auditing so that the system could not be gamed easily.

Also, I'm talking GPA. A C here and there would be acceptable, in terms of overall GPA.

Quote:

Pell Grants. Student Loans. Other grants. We make it very possible to get educated. We just do not hand it on a silver platter. The first 12 years we do, after that one must start to go out and make it happen as the adult they are.

Right, but why not expand it? Why not reduce it? Why pick some arbitrary number of years and decide, "That's good enough for a free education."

The other major difference is that public schools from K-12 have to take anyone, and would continue to have to do so, this would come with requirements. The first requirement is hitting a high school cumulative GPA, which will automatically disqualify many of them, and then they could pursue those other options if they wanted to. After a certain point, if they hit a certain GPA in college, then they might qualify for free tuitions. Maybe, maybe not.

Either way, it's not like it is going to be, "You graduated high school, so here you go, free college." Like I said, just think of it as a Government-sponsored scholarship program, because that's basically what I'm suggesting.

Quote:

Who is saying a degree "makes things worse?" The degree is just a piece of paper. Now, see, the debt is the motivator to complete things. Also a motivation not to take a stupid major, though we still have far too much of that.

I don't know why some majors could qualify for the free tuitions while others would not qualify. I don't know that every major needs to qualify. A student would certainly have to maintain a minimum courseload throughout.

Quote:

Same as if you get an alarm on your house. But we need a wall to protect the border. Ask someone with a ranch near or on the border how bad things are getting. The proof that it is a good idea is how loudly Mexico is complaining about it.

Protect it from what, exactly?

Quote:

Last thing first. "Staying at my mom's" did not mean I was not working. I worked like crazy. The longest I was out of work when I lived there was six weeks, and that was because the new job started in six weeks. Several times I was laid off and had a new job by the end of the week. Now, a college student is different. Classes eat 20 hours a week, minimum. Study ideally another 10-20. So they cannot really work full time. Thus they lose income.

Assuming they would be fully employed during that time, I am willing to stipulate they lose income throughout those four years. I maintain (and literally every single study on the matter bears it out) that they gain income over the course of a lifetime. As a result, you have more taxes going into the system and less benefits coming out of the system, because they make more money.

Quote:

Where are the full time jobs with benefits? All around, when you look. Shortages exist in trucking, welding, and various factories. I keep seeing modern auto suppliers say they cannot get enough people with the basic math and interest to get staffed. No college needed--they train!

Would you be in favor of state-supported work-placement programs at colleges? A student could have the option of training for a specific line of work right there.

I think one of the difficulties with trucking is that trucking schools can often be difficult to get loans for, in general. Also, I'm not sure whether or not scholarships exist to become a trucker, but I doubt it. Maybe we should have that.

Quote:

Look deeper. The college chart is skewed upwards by the higher earning top. The without is skewed down by HS dropout lumps who cannot get a decent job. However, a good tradesman will do just fine. OTOH, go to Barnes & Noble and see how many folks with degrees are working there.

Working at Barnes & Noble in a highly tertiary economy? Surely you jest! People move up into management and sometimes higher management in tertiary job types, education is often a factor as to whether or not people get those opportunities.

It's not just huge earners. Look at the difference between some college and/or Associate's Degree in 2014 as opposed to high school only:

https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2015/median-weekly-earnings-by-education-gender-race-and-ethnicity-in-2014.htm

Education is an investment. For individuals, for the Government, for the good of the country. It's really pretty clear.

Quote:

12 years free is enough. After that you need to get out of the cart and start pulling it.

Why not six years, or thirty or seventy-two? Do we just assume that we are doing something absolutely right with out only evidence being that is the way we are doing it now?

Quote: rxwine

I would a call him a former 30 year old guy trying to have sex with underage teenage girls. A guy who became a judge with all kinds of strict judgment of other people's moral failings.

I suppose that could make him sound better than a pedophile.

I'm just saying that words either have meanings, or words do not have meanings. I am in the, "Words have meanings," camp.

Maybe Trump will give this guy a pardon, too.

Quote: Mission146

That's why I keep coming back to, "Pick one." Many people like to advocate for their notions of personal responsibility as though that is something that everyone is just going to suddenly do. In many cases, they are not, and nor do they share the same ideas as to the specific entailments of what responsibility is comprised of.

I said what I pick. Teach the best way to stay out of poverty.

1. Finish High School
2. No kids before marriage
3. No marriage before age 25

Quote:

Save with what?

From work. Summer jobs and after school jobs as a start.

Quote:

There's not any money to lose. The idea is that a college would typically be at or near maximum enrollment capacity just based on those who would qualify under those parameters. There would also have to be some structure in place in terms of both standardization and auditing so that the system could not be gamed easily.

Also, I'm talking GPA. A C here and there would be acceptable, in terms of overall GPA.

There is plenty to lose when every student is probably worth $20K per year. Adds up fast. Colleges will pack em in and give everyone a B or better. Then they get a piece of paper with no value because too many people have one. We just end up with more and more diploma mills.

Quote:

Right, but why not expand it? Why not reduce it? Why pick some arbitrary number of years and decide, "That's good enough for a free education."

Because this is the real world.

Quote:

The other major difference is that public schools from K-12 have to take anyone, and would continue to have to do so, this would come with requirements. The first requirement is hitting a high school cumulative GPA, which will automatically disqualify many of them, and then they could pursue those other options if they wanted to. After a certain point, if they hit a certain GPA in college, then they might qualify for free tuitions. Maybe, maybe not.

You keep missing the point here. You are assuming static behavior. Behavior is dynamic. As soon as students need a 3.0 to get free college, EVERYONE will get a 3.0 as pressure mounts on teachers to give said grades. Don't believe me? Why do over 90% of Harvard students get "As?" Because to get less would make them and the school look bad. So the grades get inflated. Only 8-10% of any class should get an "A" in a course or test. If more do, the test or class is too easy and grades mean little to nothing.

Quote:

I don't know why some majors could qualify for the free tuitions while others would not qualify. I don't know that every major needs to qualify.

Nice thought. It would last about 20 minutes.

Quote:

Assuming they would be fully employed during that time, I am willing to stipulate they lose income throughout those four years. I maintain (and literally every single study on the matter bears it out) that they gain income over the course of a lifetime. As a result, you have more taxes going into the system and less benefits coming out of the system, because they make more money.

Simple calculations show they must make around $175,000 more over a lifetime to pay back enough in taxes assuming around $60K in tuition. I have seen the studies, and again, there are many flaws.

Quote:

Would you be in favor of state-supported work-placement programs at colleges? A student could have the option of training for a specific line of work right there.

We have much of this. I looked into going for my CCNA this time last year. Could have gotten some subsidy of some sort they said. If you are wanting this route, no need for a college education. In fact, better for a short term thing, get them to work within a year at the very most.

Quote:

I think one of the difficulties with trucking is that trucking schools can often be difficult to get loans for, in general. Also, I'm not sure whether or not scholarships exist to become a trucker, but I doubt it. Maybe we should have that.

Trucking companies offer payback and most schools have some kind of loan. Essentially you get it paid back to you over 2 years work or so. Trucking is one of the fastest trainings to decent earnings. It has hard parts. The first few years are real ball breakers. Wives whine about their man being on the road overnight. This makes some guys quit, then they go back to a lower paying local job. It is about more than education, it is about drive.

Quote: AZDuffman

I said what I pick. Teach the best way to stay out of poverty.

1. Finish High School
2. No kids before marriage
3. No marriage before age 25

Is an 18 year old an adult, or not? Pick one.

How can someone who shouldn't (in your view) have agency to enter into a wedding contract have agency to enter into a loan contract?

Quote:

From work. Summer jobs and after school jobs as a start.

That's fine, like I said, PT employment (preferably through the school itself) could be a condition. Obviously, the school wouldn't have jobs for everyone. An active attempt to gain PT employment, though.

Quote:

There is plenty to lose when every student is probably worth $20K per year. Adds up fast. Colleges will pack em in and give everyone a B or better. Then they get a piece of paper with no value because too many people have one. We just end up with more and more diploma mills.

Why don't all High Schools just give everyone straight A's, then the colleges wouldn't know who to give scholarships to, if what you're saying is true. Don't you think it's going to look a bit obvious when your graduation rates with a degree go from 70% (or whatever they are) to 90% with the entire difference coming from a 100% graduation rate of people there on free tuition?

Quote:

Because this is the real world.

Yeah, and in the real world, we sometimes decide that just because we are already doing things a certain way does not automatically make it the best way.

Quote:

You keep missing the point here. You are assuming static behavior. Behavior is dynamic. As soon as students need a 3.0 to get free college, EVERYONE will get a 3.0 as pressure mounts on teachers to give said grades. Don't believe me? Why do over 90% of Harvard students get "As?" Because to get less would make them and the school look bad. So the grades get inflated. Only 8-10% of any class should get an "A" in a course or test. If more do, the test or class is too easy and grades mean little to nothing.

Why would the school look bad? Harvard would look bad if it didn't look like anyone could do it? I thought it was supposed to be hard to get into Harvard because Harvard is a hard school?

What percentage do you think should pass (C or better) a course or test?

Quote:

Nice thought. It would last about 20 minutes.

Why? Using it for high areas of likely future employment makes total sense.

Quote:

Simple calculations show they must make around $175,000 more over a lifetime to pay back enough in taxes assuming around $60K in tuition. I have seen the studies, and again, there are many flaws.

Okay, if the difference between an Associate's and a H.S. Diploma is $100/week, roughly, then forty years at FT work:

100 * 40 * 52 = $208,000.

That's just the difference between H.S. and an Associate's.

Game, Set, Match.

Quote:

We have much of this. I looked into going for my CCNA this time last year. Could have gotten some subsidy of some sort they said. If you are wanting this route, no need for a college education. In fact, better for a short term thing, get them to work within a year at the very most.

It must have changed since I was eighteen. I couldn't get in without paying cash and they told me to go to a bank for a loan. A Average cumulative H.S. GPA. At least that's good.

Quote:

Trucking companies offer payback and most schools have some kind of loan. Essentially you get it paid back to you over 2 years work or so. Trucking is one of the fastest trainings to decent earnings. It has hard parts. The first few years are real ball breakers. Wives whine about their man being on the road overnight. This makes some guys quit, then they go back to a lower paying local job. It is about more than education, it is about drive.

Maybe, like I said, I'm going off of old information, anyway.

Quote: Mission146

I'm just saying that words either have meanings, or words do not have meanings. I am in the, "Words have meanings," camp.

Tertiary: ter·ti·ar·y
ˈtərSHēˌerē,ˈtərSHərē/Submit
adjective
1.
third in order or level.
"most of the enterprises were of tertiary importance"
2.
GEOLOGY
relating to or denoting the first period of the Cenozoic era, between the Cretaceous and Quaternary periods, and comprising the Paleogene and Neogene subperiods.
noun
1.
GEOLOGY
the Tertiary period or the system of rocks deposited during it.
2.
a lay associate of certain Christian monastic organizations.
"a Franciscan tertiary"

Tertiary | Define Tertiary at Dictionary.com
www.dictionary.com/browse/tertiary
Adjective. Relating to or having a carbon atom that is attached to three other carbon atoms in a molecule. Relating to an organic molecule, such as an alcohol, in which the functional group is attached to a tertiary carbon.

Tertiary | Definition of Tertiary by Merriam-Webster
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tertiary
c : of, relating to, or being the normal folded structure of the coiled chain of a protein or of a DNA or RNA — compare primary 4, secondary 3. 3 : occurring in or being a third stage. tertiary lesions of syphilis.

tertiary Definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/tertiary
tertiary definition, meaning, what is tertiary: relating to a third level or stage. Learn more.

, "Working at Barnes & Noble in a highly tertiary economy?" You don't see tertiary used in sentences very often. I am familiar with tertiary windings, [https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/role-tertiary-winding-power-transformer-akhtar-pe-msc-eng-bsc-eng] but I'd never seen the word used in association with employment? Nigh. Double plus good for using it in a sentence.

Quote: Mission146

I'm just saying that words either have meanings, or words do not have meanings. I am in the, "Words have meanings," camp.

In this case, I'm in the "hoping this character hears himself referred to as a pedophile for the rest of his life".

Though generally I would agree with you.

“Unless it’s changed overnight, the motto of the Olympics, since 1894, has been ‘Faster, Higher, Stronger.’ It appears the U.S. Olympic Committee would like to change that to ‘Darker, Gayer, Different.'”
Fox News Editorial that ran for hours before someone yanked it down.

Quote: Mission146

Is an 18 year old an adult, or not? Pick one.

How can someone who shouldn't (in your view) have agency to enter into a wedding contract have agency to enter into a loan contract?

What does being an adult have to do with it? Ever hear the saying, "Just because you can does not mean you should?" You want to marry and pop out kids at 18, prepare to live broke for life.

Quote:

Why don't all High Schools just give everyone straight A's, then the colleges wouldn't know who to give scholarships to, if what you're saying is true. Don't you think it's going to look a bit obvious when your graduation rates with a degree go from 70% (or whatever they are) to 90% with the entire difference coming from a 100% graduation rate of people there on free tuition?

I see human nature for what it is. If "free college" is available for any student with a "B" average, the pressure on teachers to give at least a "B" will be enormous. Instead of having to deal with parents who think their average child deserves a "B," the teachers will just give it. Parents already lobby for higher grades. And I don't blame the teachers for not caring and just caving for the better grade. Next year it will not matter for the teacher.

Quote:

Why would the school look bad? Harvard would look bad if it didn't look like anyone could do it? I thought it was supposed to be hard to get into Harvard because Harvard is a hard school?

Harvard is a hard school, about the most selective in the nation. But their grading system is an open joke.

Quote:

What percentage do you think should pass (C or better) a course or test?

A "D" would be passing. You can do a lot of work with standard deviations, but I would say no more than 8-10% of the class should get an "A." Otherwise "A" is meaningless. The middle 50% should get a "C." If most of the class is getting >90% on a test then the test is too easy.

Quote:

Okay, if the difference between an Associate's and a H.S. Diploma is $100/week, roughly, then forty years at FT work:

100 * 40 * 52 = $208,000.

That's just the difference between H.S. and an Associate's.

Game, Set, Match.

Hardly GSM. You need to take the time value of money into account for starters. Then you have to take into account that the more people with degrees, the less the premium they will receive. "Free" college will drop that $100 to $50 in no time.

Quote:

It must have changed since I was eighteen. I couldn't get in without paying cash and they told me to go to a bank for a loan. A Average cumulative H.S. GPA. At least that's good.

It was not "free college" but a free training course for the unemployed. Month and a half or something. Very directed. If you are on unemployment they are out there.

Quote: petroglyph

Tertiary: ter·ti·ar·y
ˈtərSHēˌerē,ˈtərSHərē/Submit
adjective
1.
third in order or level.
"most of the enterprises were of tertiary importance"

Nice try.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/tertiaryindustry.asp

First sentence:

Quote:

The tertiary industry is the segment of the economy that provides services to its consumers; this includes a wide range of businesses such as financial institutions, schools and restaurants.

Or, this:

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/tertiary-sector

Or, this:

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Glossary:Tertiary_sector

This:

https://bizfluent.com/info-8564100-primary-secondary-tertiary-sectors.html

It's a very commonly used term in Economic study.

Actually, "Third in order or level," fits. The Primary Economy (base goods) would be considered the first level, the Secondary Economy is manufacturing, so tertiary would be the third order, in that instance.

Some subscribe to five levels, but the last two just break off from Tertiary and would fall under that purview anyway.

Quote: AZDuffman

What does being an adult have to do with it? Ever hear the saying, "Just because you can does not mean you should?" You want to marry and pop out kids at 18, prepare to live broke for life.

Yeah, but you say, "Teach it," as if teaching it and actually effectuating it are the same things. They tried to teach it with Abstinence-Only education. They failed. They tried to eliminate pre-marital sex, instead, people often got pregnant and would just marry someone that they would otherwise not have wanted to marry as a cover lest be shunned by the church or other social outlets.

Quote:

I see human nature for what it is. If "free college" is available for any student with a "B" average, the pressure on teachers to give at least a "B" will be enormous. Instead of having to deal with parents who think their average child deserves a "B," the teachers will just give it. Parents already lobby for higher grades. And I don't blame the teachers for not caring and just caving for the better grade. Next year it will not matter for the teacher.

What are you talking about? Why doesn't everyone get straight-A's now, then? I was proud of my son yesterday, went to an awards assembly. He was the only kid out of 23 in his class to get a 4.0 and make the Principal's List. A handful of others made the honor roll.

Still, if only 1:23 is getting Straight-A's in fourth grade, it makes me think there isn't much pressure to inflate the grades.

Quote:

Harvard is a hard school, about the most selective in the nation. But their grading system is an open joke.

Is it? Yet, it's one of the most powerful degrees someone could get. Who goes to Harvard? Rich people and whoever else Harvard chooses in its infinite wisdom. That reeks to me of manufactured self-replication of the current state of affairs. It also sounds like people getting handed a degree of the highest order, if what you're saying is true, not at all based on personal merit.

You really do a great job of proving my points for me, sometimes.

Quote:

A "D" would be passing. You can do a lot of work with standard deviations, but I would say no more than 8-10% of the class should get an "A." Otherwise "A" is meaningless. The middle 50% should get a "C." If most of the class is getting >90% on a test then the test is too easy.

I don't really have a problem with any of that. I'm not sure how many should get a D or fail in your scenario, but in general terms, I'm not extremely opposed to your suggestion. Maybe 40% to get a C. Is C supposed to be the Mean Average, Median Average or the Mode? In my view, as long as the mean average is in the C range, then it makes sense enough to me. I don't know that I would worry about what percentage are specifically getting a C.

Quote:

Hardly GSM. You need to take the time value of money into account for starters. Then you have to take into account that the more people with degrees, the less the premium they will receive. "Free" college will drop that $100 to $50 in no time.

I can't emphasize this enough: That was the difference between an Associate's Degree and/or Some College and a High School Diploma. Bachelor's vs. High School, and now you're at $400+ per week extra, on average. I'm sorry, but you have no argument here. None. Zero. It's unassailable. Why do you think I'm so big on this issue?

Quote:

It was not "free college" but a free training course for the unemployed. Month and a half or something. Very directed. If you are on unemployment they are out there.

I'm not and nor was I when I looked into that. Maybe I should've quit my job! lol

This just showed up on my recommended list on YouTube. Pretty damn funny. For whatever reason, if somehow people are wondering why Trump was elected and Clinton wasn't, this is why.

NSFW (may contain swear words)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoIVUTx0N5c

Jeez, people out there are insane. Fortunately, they provide humor, sorta like cats.



Anyway, it seems like SJWs have calmed down recently, or else I just haven't been seeing the news lately. But I think this kinda nonsense is a small indicator on future elections. People don't want to put up with that s***. Or maybe the SJWs will start up again in a year or so, when the campaign for presidency season starts up.