Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #318523 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-02 03:00 +0200 |
| Last post | 2015-09-01 18:46 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 116 — 16 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
Better breakdown of OS/browser share Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-02 03:00 +0200
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-02 01:35 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-02 09:11 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-02 14:52 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-02 16:53 +0200
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-02 11:43 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-02 17:53 +0200
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-02 15:59 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-02 18:07 +0200
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-02 13:10 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-02 17:16 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-02 13:20 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-02 17:24 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-02 19:17 +0200
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-02 11:21 -0500
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share ronb <ronbNOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 16:36 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-02 15:56 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-02 18:05 +0200
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-09-02 20:46 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-03 09:08 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-03 15:53 +0200
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-03 09:08 -0500
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-09-03 10:24 -0400
DumFSck's idiocy chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-03 09:40 -0500
Re: DumFSck's idiocy Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 15:02 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-09-03 12:28 -0600
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-04 00:24 +0200
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-02 13:09 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-02 17:22 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-02 17:45 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-03 10:03 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-03 09:17 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-03 13:35 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-03 10:42 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-03 15:25 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-03 12:55 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-03 09:31 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 16:42 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-09-03 09:26 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-03 10:39 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 15:04 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-03 12:52 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 17:02 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-03 17:00 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-03 20:56 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-09-04 08:53 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-04 10:20 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-04 07:39 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-04 10:49 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-04 08:55 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-04 09:19 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-04 12:58 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-04 10:11 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-04 12:57 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-04 10:03 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-04 15:44 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 19:50 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-04 12:58 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 20:11 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-04 13:17 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 20:27 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Hoppy Hopkins <hopster86u4me@surferb.net> - 2015-09-04 18:28 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 13:21 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 20:33 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 13:46 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 14:49 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 16:34 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 16:37 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-09-04 20:18 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 17:40 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-04 21:18 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-05 09:53 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-05 11:11 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-09-05 10:21 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 08:09 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-09-05 11:42 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 08:46 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-09-05 11:54 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-05 16:05 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share hifye <hifye@humanoid.net> - 2015-09-05 11:58 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-05 11:10 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-05 16:02 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 14:20 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-05 16:00 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-09-05 13:51 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 14:12 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 13:11 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 20:20 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-04 13:24 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 20:30 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 13:36 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 13:28 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 20:38 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 13:49 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-04 14:00 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-04 12:56 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-04 16:29 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 20:35 +0000
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-04 18:24 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-04 18:42 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-04 18:43 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-04 21:17 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-04 21:50 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-05 09:51 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-05 10:12 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 11:24 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-05 16:09 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-04 21:57 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 14:28 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-10 05:16 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-10 10:26 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-09-10 11:38 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-10 12:02 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-10 09:16 -0700
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-10 14:53 -0400
Re: Better breakdown of OS/browser share Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 18:46 -0700
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-05 11:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D2107E3E.5A04B%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #319100 |
On 9/5/15, 8:42 AM, in article msf2dg$g3c$1@dont-email.me, "DFS" <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: > On 9/5/2015 11:09 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >> On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 8:21:19 AM UTC-6, DFS wrote: >>> On 9/4/2015 9:18 PM, A.M wrote: >>>> On 2015-09-04 8:18 PM, DFS wrote: >>>>> On 9/4/2015 7:37 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> One of the great mysteries of life: >>>>>> >>>>>> How does one go about getting a Masters degree when he can >>>>>> comprehend what he's read? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Without much trouble. >>>>> >>>>> It's getting a Master's when you /can't/ comprehend what you've >>>>> read that's a problem... >>>> >>>> Is he saying that I misread something? >>> >>> >>> No. >>> >>> Carroll was indulging in his sickening obsession. >> >> LOL! I know how you and Snit like a good recap... >> >> Snit, seemingly unable to comprehend what he read of what Lloyd >> wrote, pounded in the first tent stake for his new circus: >> >> "Seems like you do not see the value in an education." >> >> Lloyd: "Some more of your bullshit." >> >> Snit, now just flat out lying, pounded the next stake in place: >> "Nope. I am noting you are speaking of education as something that >> does not matter." >> >> Lloyd's point: "A job that does not really need more education >> shouldn't have a requirement to have it just to fill out a checkmark >> on some HR's form." >> >> Regarding that point, Lloyd asked: "I very well see the value of an >> education, but I don't agree with over education. Note the >> difference?" >> >> Snit, intent on pounding in his next tent stake: "Yes: word play to >> put down the value of an education." >> >> IOW, as he so often does, Snit was trying to dishonestly stuff words >> into someone's mouth, which is "wrong". Snit has repeatedly asked for >> his "wrongs" to be pointed out. I'm pointing them out.Snit is >> whining, which is what he does... and you're doing whatever it is >> that you do, which looks a lot like whining ;) > > > Don't take it so hard. I just told Slimer the truth: > > "Carroll was indulging in his sickening obsession." > > You know it and I know it and everyone who reads cola knows it: a Steve > Carroll post will be a disturbing one-way tirade against his obsession. > For years on end. > Yup... and the above is a great example of how it works: he pulls quotes out of context. None of what I posted does he show what I am even responding to, then he notes what Lloyd said that was off topic. Whatever. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-05 16:02 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <msfhkk$cud$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #319100 |
On 2015-09-05 11:42 AM, DFS wrote: > On 9/5/2015 11:09 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >> On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 8:21:19 AM UTC-6, DFS wrote: >>> On 9/4/2015 9:18 PM, A.M wrote: >>>> On 2015-09-04 8:18 PM, DFS wrote: >>>>> On 9/4/2015 7:37 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> One of the great mysteries of life: >>>>>> >>>>>> How does one go about getting a Masters degree when he can >>>>>> comprehend what he's read? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Without much trouble. >>>>> >>>>> It's getting a Master's when you /can't/ comprehend what you've >>>>> read that's a problem... >>>> >>>> Is he saying that I misread something? >>> >>> >>> No. >>> >>> Carroll was indulging in his sickening obsession. >> >> LOL! I know how you and Snit like a good recap... >> >> Snit, seemingly unable to comprehend what he read of what Lloyd >> wrote, pounded in the first tent stake for his new circus: >> >> "Seems like you do not see the value in an education." >> >> Lloyd: "Some more of your bullshit." >> >> Snit, now just flat out lying, pounded the next stake in place: >> "Nope. I am noting you are speaking of education as something that >> does not matter." >> >> Lloyd's point: "A job that does not really need more education >> shouldn't have a requirement to have it just to fill out a checkmark >> on some HR's form." >> >> Regarding that point, Lloyd asked: "I very well see the value of an >> education, but I don't agree with over education. Note the >> difference?" >> >> Snit, intent on pounding in his next tent stake: "Yes: word play to >> put down the value of an education." >> >> IOW, as he so often does, Snit was trying to dishonestly stuff words >> into someone's mouth, which is "wrong". Snit has repeatedly asked for >> his "wrongs" to be pointed out. I'm pointing them out.Snit is >> whining, which is what he does... and you're doing whatever it is >> that you do, which looks a lot like whining ;) > > > Don't take it so hard. I just told Slimer the truth: > > "Carroll was indulging in his sickening obsession." > > You know it and I know it and everyone who reads cola knows it: a Steve > Carroll post will be a disturbing one-way tirade against his obsession. > For years on end. I still think that if Snit has sex with Steve Carroll, he might finally get over him. -- A.M
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-05 14:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <77ea4003-9eaa-4c97-a20d-83faf4e2ce51@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #319174 |
On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 2:55:58 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 9/5/15, 1:02 PM, in article msfhkk$cud$3@dont-email.me, "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> > wrote: > > >>> Snit, intent on pounding in his next tent stake: "Yes: word play to > >>> put down the value of an education." > >>> > >>> IOW, as he so often does, Snit was trying to dishonestly stuff words > >>> into someone's mouth, which is "wrong". Snit has repeatedly asked for > >>> his "wrongs" to be pointed out. I'm pointing them out.Snit is > >>> whining, which is what he does... and you're doing whatever it is > >>> that you do, which looks a lot like whining ;) > >> > >> > >> Don't take it so hard. I just told Slimer the truth: > >> > >> "Carroll was indulging in his sickening obsession." > >> > >> You know it and I know it and everyone who reads cola knows it: a Steve > >> Carroll post will be a disturbing one-way tirade against his obsession. > >> For years on end. > > > > I still think that if Snit has sex with Steve Carroll, he might finally > > get over him. > > Snit's ex was saying the same thing in 2004. At least you stopped referring to her as my ex., I guess that's a step in the right direction. Ever since you two let your relationship escalate to the point where the police got involved you've tried to drag me into it... as a red herring or something. C'mon, what really happened between you two? Your wife found out you were actually carrying the torch for her and called the cops? > Really... her "defense" at > being so obsessed with me was Carroll was more. HER theory was he was > attracted to me and jealous of me. LOL! You actually believe this stuff, don't you? You chased her around like a puppy ;)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-05 16:00 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <msfhgq$cud$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #319076 |
On 2015-09-05 10:21 AM, DFS wrote: > On 9/4/2015 9:18 PM, A.M wrote: >> On 2015-09-04 8:18 PM, DFS wrote: >>> On 9/4/2015 7:37 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> >>>> One of the great mysteries of life: >>>> >>>> How does one go about getting a Masters degree when he can comprehend >>>> what he's read? >>> >>> >>> Without much trouble. >>> >>> It's getting a Master's when you /can't/ comprehend what you've read >>> that's a problem... >> >> Is he saying that I misread something? > > > No. > > Carroll was indulging in his sickening obsession. Ah, alright. -- A.M
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-05 13:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1d40f570-b2b0-484b-b2cd-78eaca7e1b5f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #318986 |
Lloyd writes: > I used the Vietnam era GI Bill. Times have changed a lot since then. > But today isn't insane, it just requires more work to obtain the funds. Ummm...not quite. The "full MSRP" price of higher Ed has skyrocketed, and there have been various Government-based initiatives which have increased a family's ability to pay said prices, which means that "demand" has been functionally inflated such that "supply" hasn't had to adjust their prices downwards. > I have yet to see anyone that wanted to go to college not get there > because of money. Usually the ones that don't, don't have enough fire in > their belly. True, there is the student's level of initiative as an issue, but I have seen the financial aspect rear its ugly head - - and ironically, it does so in families whose parents are successful college graduates: what happens is that they earn too much income to have their kids get a good break on tuition and as such, it places a huge burden on the family to contemplate a re-mortgage of the house to try to pay for it. FWIW, if it already isn't happening, I expect that the longer term trend will be families which will generationally alternate between having the degree and not ... IE, college educated parents w/good jobs whose kids can't qualify for discounted rates so they don't go ... but their kids (grandchildren of the college-educated) will be able to go because their parents, being less educated, will have lower income jobs which will let their kids have a chance at tuition assistance (and the grandparents may help, although under-the-table, so as to not jeopardize the assistance). Yes, this is insane, but it is how the current system is configured. -hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-05 14:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f4e8a652-d4b4-4b7c-89a3-1791711013bb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #319189 |
On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 2:51:46 PM UTC-6, -hh wrote: > Lloyd writes: > > I used the Vietnam era GI Bill. > > Times have changed a lot since then. > > > But today isn't insane, it just requires more work to obtain the funds. > > Ummm...not quite. The "full MSRP" price of higher Ed has skyrocketed, > and there have been various Government-based initiatives which have > increased a family's ability to pay said prices, which means that "demand" > has been functionally inflated such that "supply" hasn't had to adjust their > prices downwards. > > > I have yet to see anyone that wanted to go to college not get there > > because of money. Usually the ones that don't, don't have enough fire in > > their belly. > > True, there is the student's level of initiative as an issue, but I have seen the > financial aspect rear its ugly head - - and ironically, it does so in families whose > parents are successful college graduates: what happens is that they earn too > much income to have their kids get a good break on tuition and as such, it > places a huge burden on the family to contemplate a re-mortgage of the house > to try to pay for it. FWIW, if it already isn't happening It's happening. > , I expect that the longer > term trend will be families which will generationally alternate between having > the degree and not ... IE, college educated parents w/good jobs whose kids can't > qualify for discounted rates so they don't go ... but their kids (grandchildren of the > college-educated) will be able to go because their parents, being less educated, > will have lower income jobs which will let their kids have a chance at tuition assistance > (and the grandparents may help, although under-the-table, so as to not jeopardize > the assistance). Yes, this is insane, but it is how the current system is configured. It is insane; unfortunately, your suggestion isn't so far out of whack.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 13:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ac8194d0-e8ed-4838-a2ad-00fbd23ddb8a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #318982 |
On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 1:50:27 PM UTC-6, Lloyd Parsons wrote: > On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 15:44:36 -0400, A.M wrote: > > > On 2015-09-04 1:03 PM, Snit wrote: > >> On 9/4/15, 9:57 AM, in article mscief$3q2$1@dont-email.me, "A.M" > >> <.m@nsn.s> wrote: > >> > >>> On 2015-09-04 11:55 AM, cc wrote: > >>>> On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 10:49:23 AM UTC-4, A.M wrote: > >>>>> On 2015-09-04 10:39 AM, cc wrote: > >>>>>> On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 10:20:09 AM UTC-4, A.M wrote: > >>>>>>> On 2015-09-04 8:53 AM, DFS wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Also, US is #1 in higher education > >>>>>>>> http://www.universitas21.com/article/projects/details/152/u21- > ranking-of- > >>>>>>>> national-higher-education-systems > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> It's the envy of the world. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Well, higher education is not a fair representation for me since > >>>>>>> higher education in the United States involves places like Harvard > >>>>>>> and Yale which are very exclusive to the best of the best from > >>>>>>> every country. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> And also involves places like Kaplan University and everything in > >>>>>> between. Even the not so best of the best can attend. In the US > >>>>>> roughly 70% of people at least enroll in a college after high > >>>>>> school currently. > >>>>>> Not all are able to finish of course, but the opportunity is there. > >>>>>> That's hardly exclusive. > >>>>> > >>>>> Not everyone can afford the tuition that Harvard and Yale demand so > >>>>> yeah, it's pretty exclusive. > >>>> > >>>> Harvard and Yale are, yes. But higher education itself, is not. > >>> > >>> I'm curious then. Here in Quebec at least, tuition to our university > >>> is about $2,000 (including books) per semester. Its affordability > >>> (even the internationally-reknowned schools like McGill University) > >>> means that a lot of people apply and that the best are chosen but that > >>> a lot of lesser students get schooling as well. As far as I know, the > >>> highest tuition you will pay here in Canada in general is about $8,000 > >>> per semester. Does ANY university in the University cost $8,000 or > >>> less? > >> > >> <http://www.mybudget360.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/tuition-housing- > cpi1. > >> jpg> OR <http://goo.gl/SlnFhr> > >> ... > > > > If you exclude those who can't afford it from getting a higher education > > then you're essentially saying that only those from fairly wealthy > > families where the parents are well-educated can get into University. > > Genetically and socially, they are already a lot more intelligent than > > the absolute _everyone_ who can study here. > > > > We're a lot more fair, you're a lot more exclusive whether anyone likes > > it or not. In the end, our general population is more educated as a > > result of how accessible it still is. > > While being a bit better off financially makes it easier to afford higher > education here, it is not all that difficult for those of lesser means. > Loans and grants are all over the place to help, and there are many that > also work their way through college. It isn't a lack of money that keeps > some from doing it, it is more a lack of fortitude and willingness to > explore all the options. I agree.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 20:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <d4ucorF1834U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #318987 |
On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 13:11:47 -0700, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 1:50:27 PM UTC-6, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >> On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 15:44:36 -0400, A.M wrote: >> >> > On 2015-09-04 1:03 PM, Snit wrote: >> >> On 9/4/15, 9:57 AM, in article mscief$3q2$1@dont-email.me, "A.M" >> >> <.m@nsn.s> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 2015-09-04 11:55 AM, cc wrote: >> >>>> On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 10:49:23 AM UTC-4, A.M wrote: >> >>>>> On 2015-09-04 10:39 AM, cc wrote: >> >>>>>> On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 10:20:09 AM UTC-4, A.M wrote: >> >>>>>>> On 2015-09-04 8:53 AM, DFS wrote: >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> Also, US is #1 in higher education >> >>>>>>>> http://www.universitas21.com/article/projects/details/152/u21- >> ranking-of- >> >>>>>>>> national-higher-education-systems >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> It's the envy of the world. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Well, higher education is not a fair representation for me >> >>>>>>> since higher education in the United States involves places >> >>>>>>> like Harvard and Yale which are very exclusive to the best of >> >>>>>>> the best from every country. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> And also involves places like Kaplan University and everything >> >>>>>> in between. Even the not so best of the best can attend. In the >> >>>>>> US roughly 70% of people at least enroll in a college after high >> >>>>>> school currently. >> >>>>>> Not all are able to finish of course, but the opportunity is >> >>>>>> there. >> >>>>>> That's hardly exclusive. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Not everyone can afford the tuition that Harvard and Yale demand >> >>>>> so yeah, it's pretty exclusive. >> >>>> >> >>>> Harvard and Yale are, yes. But higher education itself, is not. >> >>> >> >>> I'm curious then. Here in Quebec at least, tuition to our >> >>> university is about $2,000 (including books) per semester. Its >> >>> affordability (even the internationally-reknowned schools like >> >>> McGill University) means that a lot of people apply and that the >> >>> best are chosen but that a lot of lesser students get schooling as >> >>> well. As far as I know, the highest tuition you will pay here in >> >>> Canada in general is about $8,000 per semester. Does ANY university >> >>> in the University cost $8,000 or less? >> >> >> >> <http://www.mybudget360.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/tuition- housing- >> cpi1. >> >> jpg> OR <http://goo.gl/SlnFhr> >> >> ... >> > >> > If you exclude those who can't afford it from getting a higher >> > education then you're essentially saying that only those from fairly >> > wealthy families where the parents are well-educated can get into >> > University. Genetically and socially, they are already a lot more >> > intelligent than the absolute _everyone_ who can study here. >> > >> > We're a lot more fair, you're a lot more exclusive whether anyone >> > likes it or not. In the end, our general population is more educated >> > as a result of how accessible it still is. >> >> While being a bit better off financially makes it easier to afford >> higher education here, it is not all that difficult for those of lesser >> means. Loans and grants are all over the place to help, and there are >> many that also work their way through college. It isn't a lack of >> money that keeps some from doing it, it is more a lack of fortitude and >> willingness to explore all the options. > > > I agree. The big problem with the loans is twofold. 1. Why are big loans available for degrees in fields that just don't pay enough to make paying them back viable? That really needs to be looked at. 2. When some loans become just not payable then there should be some way to get them forgiven or some modifications. In the past there were some teaching jobs, Peace Corps and other service that could forgive at least portions of those loans. But it really all comes back to #1. Getting a fat loan for a degree in underwater basketweaving is just pure idiocy! Well, make that 3-fold! :) Tighten up the amount of the loans by quite a bit. These schools have no incentive to tighten their belts as long as fat loans to students will cover the costs. IOW, the cost at all too many schools is just pure fantasy not seen anywhere else but on a hospital bills fictions. -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 13:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D20F4C07.59F2C%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #318989 |
On 9/4/15, 1:20 PM, in article d4ucorF1834U2@mid.individual.net, "Lloyd Parsons" <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: >>> While being a bit better off financially makes it easier to afford >>> higher education here, it is not all that difficult for those of lesser >>> means. Loans and grants are all over the place to help, and there are >>> many that also work their way through college. It isn't a lack of >>> money that keeps some from doing it, it is more a lack of fortitude and >>> willingness to explore all the options. >> >> >> I agree. > > The big problem with the loans is twofold. > 1. Why are big loans available for degrees in fields that just don't pay > enough to make paying them back viable? That really needs to be looked > at. > 2. When some loans become just not payable then there should be some way > to get them forgiven or some modifications. In the past there were some > teaching jobs, Peace Corps and other service that could forgive at least > portions of those loans. I can accept those. > But it really all comes back to #1. Getting a fat loan for a degree in > underwater basketweaving is just pure idiocy! > > Well, make that 3-fold! :) > Tighten up the amount of the loans by quite a bit. These schools have no > incentive to tighten their belts as long as fat loans to students will > cover the costs. IOW, the cost at all too many schools is just pure > fantasy not seen anywhere else but on a hospital bills fictions. We need to treat education as an investment in the future, not a profit center for the government. We do that with K-12... and now a four year degree is just as important as that was when we started that. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 20:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <d4udahF1834U4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #318991 |
On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 13:24:23 -0700, Snit wrote: > On 9/4/15, 1:20 PM, in article d4ucorF1834U2@mid.individual.net, "Lloyd > Parsons" <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> While being a bit better off financially makes it easier to afford >>>> higher education here, it is not all that difficult for those of >>>> lesser means. Loans and grants are all over the place to help, and >>>> there are many that also work their way through college. It isn't a >>>> lack of money that keeps some from doing it, it is more a lack of >>>> fortitude and willingness to explore all the options. >>> >>> >>> I agree. >> >> The big problem with the loans is twofold. >> 1. Why are big loans available for degrees in fields that just don't >> pay enough to make paying them back viable? That really needs to be >> looked at. >> 2. When some loans become just not payable then there should be some >> way to get them forgiven or some modifications. In the past there were >> some teaching jobs, Peace Corps and other service that could forgive at >> least portions of those loans. > > I can accept those. > >> But it really all comes back to #1. Getting a fat loan for a degree in >> underwater basketweaving is just pure idiocy! >> >> Well, make that 3-fold! :) >> Tighten up the amount of the loans by quite a bit. These schools have >> no incentive to tighten their belts as long as fat loans to students >> will cover the costs. IOW, the cost at all too many schools is just >> pure fantasy not seen anywhere else but on a hospital bills fictions. > > We need to treat education as an investment in the future, not a profit > center for the government. We do that with K-12... and now a four year > degree is just as important as that was when we started that. Don't get me started on degree creep! All too many jobs that claim a degree is really needed to do the job are just spewing pure, unadulterated bullshit! It does not take a degree in building maintenance to be a janitor! -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 13:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f27fc785-5391-4cfd-b333-7d8e75442c8c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #318996 |
On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 2:30:12 PM UTC-6, Lloyd Parsons wrote: > On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 13:24:23 -0700, Snit wrote: > > > On 9/4/15, 1:20 PM, in article d4ucorF1834U2@mid.individual.net, "Lloyd > > Parsons" <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>>> While being a bit better off financially makes it easier to afford > >>>> higher education here, it is not all that difficult for those of > >>>> lesser means. Loans and grants are all over the place to help, and > >>>> there are many that also work their way through college. It isn't a > >>>> lack of money that keeps some from doing it, it is more a lack of > >>>> fortitude and willingness to explore all the options. > >>> > >>> > >>> I agree. > >> > >> The big problem with the loans is twofold. > >> 1. Why are big loans available for degrees in fields that just don't > >> pay enough to make paying them back viable? That really needs to be > >> looked at. > >> 2. When some loans become just not payable then there should be some > >> way to get them forgiven or some modifications. In the past there were > >> some teaching jobs, Peace Corps and other service that could forgive at > >> least portions of those loans. > > > > I can accept those. > > > >> But it really all comes back to #1. Getting a fat loan for a degree in > >> underwater basketweaving is just pure idiocy! > >> > >> Well, make that 3-fold! :) > >> Tighten up the amount of the loans by quite a bit. These schools have > >> no incentive to tighten their belts as long as fat loans to students > >> will cover the costs. IOW, the cost at all too many schools is just > >> pure fantasy not seen anywhere else but on a hospital bills fictions. > > > > We need to treat education as an investment in the future, not a profit > > center for the government. We do that with K-12... and now a four year > > degree is just as important as that was when we started that. > > Don't get me started on degree creep! All too many jobs that claim a > degree is really needed to do the job are just spewing pure, > unadulterated bullshit! It does not take a degree in building > maintenance to be a janitor! LOL! You're wasting your breath with him on this topic, he's *so* far to the left that he doesn't realize how far he is. That's fine... it's his prerogative... just don't hand me the bill for his delusion.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 13:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <09ffb21d-0b99-479d-9f9a-1c0d5bb8d4f8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #318989 |
On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 2:20:47 PM UTC-6, Lloyd Parsons wrote: > On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 13:11:47 -0700, Steve Carroll wrote: > > > On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 1:50:27 PM UTC-6, Lloyd Parsons wrote: > >> On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 15:44:36 -0400, A.M wrote: > >> > >> > On 2015-09-04 1:03 PM, Snit wrote: > >> >> On 9/4/15, 9:57 AM, in article mscief$3q2$1@dont-email.me, "A.M" > >> >> <.m@nsn.s> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> On 2015-09-04 11:55 AM, cc wrote: > >> >>>> On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 10:49:23 AM UTC-4, A.M wrote: > >> >>>>> On 2015-09-04 10:39 AM, cc wrote: > >> >>>>>> On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 10:20:09 AM UTC-4, A.M wrote: > >> >>>>>>> On 2015-09-04 8:53 AM, DFS wrote: > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> Also, US is #1 in higher education > >> >>>>>>>> http://www.universitas21.com/article/projects/details/152/u21- > >> ranking-of- > >> >>>>>>>> national-higher-education-systems > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> It's the envy of the world. > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> Well, higher education is not a fair representation for me > >> >>>>>>> since higher education in the United States involves places > >> >>>>>>> like Harvard and Yale which are very exclusive to the best of > >> >>>>>>> the best from every country. > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> And also involves places like Kaplan University and everything > >> >>>>>> in between. Even the not so best of the best can attend. In the > >> >>>>>> US roughly 70% of people at least enroll in a college after high > >> >>>>>> school currently. > >> >>>>>> Not all are able to finish of course, but the opportunity is > >> >>>>>> there. > >> >>>>>> That's hardly exclusive. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Not everyone can afford the tuition that Harvard and Yale demand > >> >>>>> so yeah, it's pretty exclusive. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Harvard and Yale are, yes. But higher education itself, is not. > >> >>> > >> >>> I'm curious then. Here in Quebec at least, tuition to our > >> >>> university is about $2,000 (including books) per semester. Its > >> >>> affordability (even the internationally-reknowned schools like > >> >>> McGill University) means that a lot of people apply and that the > >> >>> best are chosen but that a lot of lesser students get schooling as > >> >>> well. As far as I know, the highest tuition you will pay here in > >> >>> Canada in general is about $8,000 per semester. Does ANY university > >> >>> in the University cost $8,000 or less? > >> >> > >> >> <http://www.mybudget360.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/tuition- > housing- > >> cpi1. > >> >> jpg> OR <http://goo.gl/SlnFhr> > >> >> ... > >> > > >> > If you exclude those who can't afford it from getting a higher > >> > education then you're essentially saying that only those from fairly > >> > wealthy families where the parents are well-educated can get into > >> > University. Genetically and socially, they are already a lot more > >> > intelligent than the absolute _everyone_ who can study here. > >> > > >> > We're a lot more fair, you're a lot more exclusive whether anyone > >> > likes it or not. In the end, our general population is more educated > >> > as a result of how accessible it still is. > >> > >> While being a bit better off financially makes it easier to afford > >> higher education here, it is not all that difficult for those of lesser > >> means. Loans and grants are all over the place to help, and there are > >> many that also work their way through college. It isn't a lack of > >> money that keeps some from doing it, it is more a lack of fortitude and > >> willingness to explore all the options. > > > > > > I agree. > > The big problem with the loans is twofold. > 1. Why are big loans available for degrees in fields that just don't pay > enough to make paying them back viable? That really needs to be looked > at. At the end of the day it's the responsibility of the consumer, some of them have no clue about how things are in the real world when they going for that history degree. Then you tell, well, maybe you can veer towards the law, water/lands rights, etc. and they cringe. WTF do they think they were buying? > 2. When some loans become just not payable then there should be some way > to get them forgiven or some modifications. In the past there were some > teaching jobs, Peace Corps and other service that could forgive at least > portions of those loans. > > But it really all comes back to #1. Getting a fat loan for a degree in > underwater basketweaving is just pure idiocy! Exactly. > > Well, make that 3-fold! :) > Tighten up the amount of the loans by quite a bit. These schools have no > incentive to tighten their belts as long as fat loans to students will > cover the costs. IOW, the cost at all too many schools is just pure > fantasy not seen anywhere else but on a hospital bills fictions. That's a scary analogy... but the 'no incentive' point makes sense.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 20:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <d4udpiF1834U7@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #318994 |
On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 13:28:36 -0700, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 2:20:47 PM UTC-6, Lloyd Parsons wrote: >> On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 13:11:47 -0700, Steve Carroll wrote: >> >> > On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 1:50:27 PM UTC-6, Lloyd Parsons >> > wrote: >> >> On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 15:44:36 -0400, A.M wrote: >> >> >> >> > On 2015-09-04 1:03 PM, Snit wrote: >> >> >> On 9/4/15, 9:57 AM, in article mscief$3q2$1@dont-email.me, "A.M" >> >> >> <.m@nsn.s> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> On 2015-09-04 11:55 AM, cc wrote: >> >> >>>> On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 10:49:23 AM UTC-4, A.M wrote: >> >> >>>>> On 2015-09-04 10:39 AM, cc wrote: >> >> >>>>>> On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 10:20:09 AM UTC-4, A.M wrote: >> >> >>>>>>> On 2015-09-04 8:53 AM, DFS wrote: >> >> >>>>>>>> >> >> >>>>>>>> Also, US is #1 in higher education >> >> >>>>>>>> http://www.universitas21.com/article/projects/details/152/ u21- >> >> ranking-of- >> >> >>>>>>>> national-higher-education-systems >> >> >>>>>>>> >> >> >>>>>>>> It's the envy of the world. >> >> >>>>>>> >> >> >>>>>>> Well, higher education is not a fair representation for me >> >> >>>>>>> since higher education in the United States involves places >> >> >>>>>>> like Harvard and Yale which are very exclusive to the best >> >> >>>>>>> of the best from every country. >> >> >>>>>> >> >> >>>>>> And also involves places like Kaplan University and >> >> >>>>>> everything in between. Even the not so best of the best can >> >> >>>>>> attend. In the US roughly 70% of people at least enroll in a >> >> >>>>>> college after high school currently. >> >> >>>>>> Not all are able to finish of course, but the opportunity is >> >> >>>>>> there. >> >> >>>>>> That's hardly exclusive. >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> Not everyone can afford the tuition that Harvard and Yale >> >> >>>>> demand so yeah, it's pretty exclusive. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Harvard and Yale are, yes. But higher education itself, is not. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> I'm curious then. Here in Quebec at least, tuition to our >> >> >>> university is about $2,000 (including books) per semester. Its >> >> >>> affordability (even the internationally-reknowned schools like >> >> >>> McGill University) means that a lot of people apply and that the >> >> >>> best are chosen but that a lot of lesser students get schooling >> >> >>> as well. As far as I know, the highest tuition you will pay here >> >> >>> in Canada in general is about $8,000 per semester. Does ANY >> >> >>> university in the University cost $8,000 or less? >> >> >> >> >> >> <http://www.mybudget360.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/tuition- >> housing- >> >> cpi1. >> >> >> jpg> OR <http://goo.gl/SlnFhr> >> >> >> ... >> >> > >> >> > If you exclude those who can't afford it from getting a higher >> >> > education then you're essentially saying that only those from >> >> > fairly wealthy families where the parents are well-educated can >> >> > get into University. Genetically and socially, they are already a >> >> > lot more intelligent than the absolute _everyone_ who can study >> >> > here. >> >> > >> >> > We're a lot more fair, you're a lot more exclusive whether anyone >> >> > likes it or not. In the end, our general population is more >> >> > educated as a result of how accessible it still is. >> >> >> >> While being a bit better off financially makes it easier to afford >> >> higher education here, it is not all that difficult for those of >> >> lesser means. Loans and grants are all over the place to help, and >> >> there are many that also work their way through college. It isn't a >> >> lack of money that keeps some from doing it, it is more a lack of >> >> fortitude and willingness to explore all the options. >> > >> > >> > I agree. >> >> The big problem with the loans is twofold. >> 1. Why are big loans available for degrees in fields that just don't >> pay enough to make paying them back viable? That really needs to be >> looked at. > > At the end of the day it's the responsibility of the consumer, some of > them have no clue about how things are in the real world when they going > for that history degree. Then you tell, well, maybe you can veer towards > the law, water/lands rights, etc. and they cringe. WTF do they think > they were buying? > > >> 2. When some loans become just not payable then there should be some >> way to get them forgiven or some modifications. In the past there were >> some teaching jobs, Peace Corps and other service that could forgive at >> least portions of those loans. >> >> But it really all comes back to #1. Getting a fat loan for a degree in >> underwater basketweaving is just pure idiocy! > > Exactly. > > >> Well, make that 3-fold! :) >> Tighten up the amount of the loans by quite a bit. These schools have >> no incentive to tighten their belts as long as fat loans to students >> will cover the costs. IOW, the cost at all too many schools is just >> pure fantasy not seen anywhere else but on a hospital bills fictions. > > That's a scary analogy... but the 'no incentive' point makes sense. Think about this. The rapid increase in medical costs didn't really start until all the health insurance started showing up. And that is for a simple reason. If the cost had risen as fast as it has without the insurance companies, it would have rapidly dropped and then risen much more slowly if you and I had to pay that bill out of our pockets. Little incentive these days to hold the hospitals medical staff more financially responsible by examining every fictional bill they send you. -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 13:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c133edfd-6a56-47f4-b824-dd6e572d9d97@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #319000 |
On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 2:38:15 PM UTC-6, Lloyd Parsons wrote: (snip) > >> Well, make that 3-fold! :) > >> Tighten up the amount of the loans by quite a bit. These schools have > >> no incentive to tighten their belts as long as fat loans to students > >> will cover the costs. IOW, the cost at all too many schools is just > >> pure fantasy not seen anywhere else but on a hospital bills fictions. > > > > That's a scary analogy... but the 'no incentive' point makes sense. > > Think about this. The rapid increase in medical costs didn't really > start until all the health insurance started showing up. And that is for > a simple reason. If the cost had risen as fast as it has without the > insurance companies, it would have rapidly dropped and then risen much > more slowly if you and I had to pay that bill out of our pockets. > > Little incentive these days to hold the hospitals medical staff more > financially responsible by examining every fictional bill they send you. Sorta makes sense, then, that the insurance companies would have a policy of 'auto-denying' claims like they have.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 14:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D20F5471.59F3B%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #319000 |
On 9/4/15, 1:38 PM, in article d4udpiF1834U7@mid.individual.net, "Lloyd Parsons" <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Well, make that 3-fold! :) >>> Tighten up the amount of the loans by quite a bit. These schools have >>> no incentive to tighten their belts as long as fat loans to students >>> will cover the costs. IOW, the cost at all too many schools is just >>> pure fantasy not seen anywhere else but on a hospital bills fictions. >> >> That's a scary analogy... but the 'no incentive' point makes sense. > > Think about this. The rapid increase in medical costs didn't really > start until all the health insurance started showing up. In the US. Not true in other nations where there is a even a single payer. > And that is for > a simple reason. If the cost had risen as fast as it has without the > insurance companies, it would have rapidly dropped and then risen much > more slowly if you and I had to pay that bill out of our pockets. And the alternative? The rich get health care and let the rest die? > Little incentive these days to hold the hospitals medical staff more > financially responsible by examining every fictional bill they send you. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 12:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D20F4573.59F1F%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #318979 |
On 9/4/15, 12:44 PM, in article mscs7k$9l7$1@dont-email.me, "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> wrote: >>> I'm curious then. Here in Quebec at least, tuition to our university is >>> about $2,000 (including books) per semester. Its affordability (even the >>> internationally-reknowned schools like McGill University) means that a >>> lot of people apply and that the best are chosen but that a lot of >>> lesser students get schooling as well. As far as I know, the highest >>> tuition you will pay here in Canada in general is about $8,000 per >>> semester. Does ANY university in the University cost $8,000 or less? >> >> <http://www.mybudget360.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/tuition-housing-cpi1. >> jpg> OR <http://goo.gl/SlnFhr> >> ... > > If you exclude those who can't afford it from getting a higher education > then you're essentially saying that only those from fairly wealthy > families where the parents are well-educated can get into University. Right... with the exception of some very gifted poorer people who manage to get scholarships. Others can do it, too, but they get stuck with loans that are almost impossible to pay off... and harder to get out from under than a billionaire getting out of what he owes by creating a corporation and letting it go bankrupt. > Genetically and socially, they are already a lot more intelligent than > the absolute _everyone_ who can study here. I would not agree to this. I do not think the wealthy are genetically more intelligent. > We're a lot more fair, you're a lot more exclusive whether anyone likes > it or not. In the end, our general population is more educated as a > result of how accessible it still is. Education is a part of infrastructure. If you have a well educated population you have better "resources" for businesses. Your views, though, are surprisingly liberal on this. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 16:29 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mscus9$k4j$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #318984 |
On 2015-09-04 3:56 PM, Snit wrote: > On 9/4/15, 12:44 PM, in article mscs7k$9l7$1@dont-email.me, "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> > wrote: > >>>> I'm curious then. Here in Quebec at least, tuition to our university is >>>> about $2,000 (including books) per semester. Its affordability (even the >>>> internationally-reknowned schools like McGill University) means that a >>>> lot of people apply and that the best are chosen but that a lot of >>>> lesser students get schooling as well. As far as I know, the highest >>>> tuition you will pay here in Canada in general is about $8,000 per >>>> semester. Does ANY university in the University cost $8,000 or less? >>> >>> <http://www.mybudget360.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/tuition-housing-cpi1. >>> jpg> OR <http://goo.gl/SlnFhr> >>> ... >> >> If you exclude those who can't afford it from getting a higher education >> then you're essentially saying that only those from fairly wealthy >> families where the parents are well-educated can get into University. > > Right... with the exception of some very gifted poorer people who manage to > get scholarships. Others can do it, too, but they get stuck with loans that > are almost impossible to pay off... and harder to get out from under than a > billionaire getting out of what he owes by creating a corporation and > letting it go bankrupt. Which is why a lot of people don't bother to pursue their education. Even though our education system is a lot less expensive than yours is, even the students here have some trouble paying off their debts after they graduate. At most, it's about $10,000 a year (if they don't live with their parents) so I can't imagine having to pay off about five times that. >> Genetically and socially, they are already a lot more intelligent than >> the absolute _everyone_ who can study here. > > I would not agree to this. I do not think the wealthy are genetically more > intelligent. I'm not saying that wealth makes them smart, I'm saying that their wealth is often the result of parents being smart. If it is, the kids tend to have prioritized education a lot more than kids from poorer families. >> We're a lot more fair, you're a lot more exclusive whether anyone likes >> it or not. In the end, our general population is more educated as a >> result of how accessible it still is. > > Education is a part of infrastructure. If you have a well educated > population you have better "resources" for businesses. > > Your views, though, are surprisingly liberal on this. Oh, I believe that education should be paid for, not free. After all, the very idea of paying for it prevents those without dedication from being enrolled. However, I am strongly against the price being unaffordable for members of the middle class. A free ride isn't a good idea but neither is one which only kids whose parents are doctors can. -- A.M
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 20:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <d4udjmF1834U6@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #318995 |
On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 16:29:44 -0400, A.M wrote: > On 2015-09-04 3:56 PM, Snit wrote: >> On 9/4/15, 12:44 PM, in article mscs7k$9l7$1@dont-email.me, "A.M" >> <.m@nsn.s> >> wrote: >> >>>>> I'm curious then. Here in Quebec at least, tuition to our university >>>>> is about $2,000 (including books) per semester. Its affordability >>>>> (even the internationally-reknowned schools like McGill University) >>>>> means that a lot of people apply and that the best are chosen but >>>>> that a lot of lesser students get schooling as well. As far as I >>>>> know, the highest tuition you will pay here in Canada in general is >>>>> about $8,000 per semester. Does ANY university in the University >>>>> cost $8,000 or less? >>>> >>>> <http://www.mybudget360.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/tuition- housing-cpi1. >>>> jpg> OR <http://goo.gl/SlnFhr> >>>> ... >>> >>> If you exclude those who can't afford it from getting a higher >>> education then you're essentially saying that only those from fairly >>> wealthy families where the parents are well-educated can get into >>> University. >> >> Right... with the exception of some very gifted poorer people who >> manage to get scholarships. Others can do it, too, but they get stuck >> with loans that are almost impossible to pay off... and harder to get >> out from under than a billionaire getting out of what he owes by >> creating a corporation and letting it go bankrupt. > > Which is why a lot of people don't bother to pursue their education. > Even though our education system is a lot less expensive than yours is, > even the students here have some trouble paying off their debts after > they graduate. At most, it's about $10,000 a year (if they don't live > with their parents) so I can't imagine having to pay off about five > times that. > >>> Genetically and socially, they are already a lot more intelligent than >>> the absolute _everyone_ who can study here. >> >> I would not agree to this. I do not think the wealthy are genetically >> more intelligent. > > I'm not saying that wealth makes them smart, I'm saying that their > wealth is often the result of parents being smart. If it is, the kids > tend to have prioritized education a lot more than kids from poorer > families. > >>> We're a lot more fair, you're a lot more exclusive whether anyone >>> likes it or not. In the end, our general population is more educated >>> as a result of how accessible it still is. >> >> Education is a part of infrastructure. If you have a well educated >> population you have better "resources" for businesses. >> >> Your views, though, are surprisingly liberal on this. > > Oh, I believe that education should be paid for, not free. After all, > the very idea of paying for it prevents those without dedication from > being enrolled. However, I am strongly against the price being > unaffordable for members of the middle class. A free ride isn't a good > idea but neither is one which only kids whose parents are doctors can. Well the current economy in the US is based on making fat cats fatter and killing off the middle class. They've been doing it for years. -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 18:24 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <msd5jf$fok$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #318998 |
On 2015-09-04 4:35 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: > On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 16:29:44 -0400, A.M wrote: > >> On 2015-09-04 3:56 PM, Snit wrote: >>> On 9/4/15, 12:44 PM, in article mscs7k$9l7$1@dont-email.me, "A.M" >>> <.m@nsn.s> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>>> I'm curious then. Here in Quebec at least, tuition to our university >>>>>> is about $2,000 (including books) per semester. Its affordability >>>>>> (even the internationally-reknowned schools like McGill University) >>>>>> means that a lot of people apply and that the best are chosen but >>>>>> that a lot of lesser students get schooling as well. As far as I >>>>>> know, the highest tuition you will pay here in Canada in general is >>>>>> about $8,000 per semester. Does ANY university in the University >>>>>> cost $8,000 or less? >>>>> >>>>> <http://www.mybudget360.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/tuition- > housing-cpi1. >>>>> jpg> OR <http://goo.gl/SlnFhr> >>>>> ... >>>> >>>> If you exclude those who can't afford it from getting a higher >>>> education then you're essentially saying that only those from fairly >>>> wealthy families where the parents are well-educated can get into >>>> University. >>> >>> Right... with the exception of some very gifted poorer people who >>> manage to get scholarships. Others can do it, too, but they get stuck >>> with loans that are almost impossible to pay off... and harder to get >>> out from under than a billionaire getting out of what he owes by >>> creating a corporation and letting it go bankrupt. >> >> Which is why a lot of people don't bother to pursue their education. >> Even though our education system is a lot less expensive than yours is, >> even the students here have some trouble paying off their debts after >> they graduate. At most, it's about $10,000 a year (if they don't live >> with their parents) so I can't imagine having to pay off about five >> times that. >> >>>> Genetically and socially, they are already a lot more intelligent than >>>> the absolute _everyone_ who can study here. >>> >>> I would not agree to this. I do not think the wealthy are genetically >>> more intelligent. >> >> I'm not saying that wealth makes them smart, I'm saying that their >> wealth is often the result of parents being smart. If it is, the kids >> tend to have prioritized education a lot more than kids from poorer >> families. >> >>>> We're a lot more fair, you're a lot more exclusive whether anyone >>>> likes it or not. In the end, our general population is more educated >>>> as a result of how accessible it still is. >>> >>> Education is a part of infrastructure. If you have a well educated >>> population you have better "resources" for businesses. >>> >>> Your views, though, are surprisingly liberal on this. >> >> Oh, I believe that education should be paid for, not free. After all, >> the very idea of paying for it prevents those without dedication from >> being enrolled. However, I am strongly against the price being >> unaffordable for members of the middle class. A free ride isn't a good >> idea but neither is one which only kids whose parents are doctors can. > > Well the current economy in the US is based on making fat cats fatter and > killing off the middle class. They've been doing it for years. The middle class is inconvenient to them. -- A.M
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 18:42 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <msd6l8$j6v$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #318998 |
On 2015-09-04 5:05 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote: > On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 14:01:12 -0700, Snit wrote: > >> On 9/4/15, 1:35 PM, in article d4udjmF1834U6@mid.individual.net, "Lloyd >> Parsons" <lloydp211@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>> Education is a part of infrastructure. If you have a well educated >>>>> population you have better "resources" for businesses. >>>>> >>>>> Your views, though, are surprisingly liberal on this. >>>> >>>> Oh, I believe that education should be paid for, not free. After all, >>>> the very idea of paying for it prevents those without dedication from >>>> being enrolled. However, I am strongly against the price being >>>> unaffordable for members of the middle class. A free ride isn't a good >>>> idea but neither is one which only kids whose parents are doctors can. >>> >>> Well the current economy in the US is based on making fat cats fatter >>> and killing off the middle class. They've been doing it for years. >> >> This I agree with. Go Sanders! :) > > Sanders is a sideshow, no chance at all. Communists just don't get any respect in the United States, no respect at all. -- A.M
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web