Stanford tuition-free if family earns < $125,000

Wrong model, the only reason our government is the way it is is because it's meant to protect big business. Run government under a Co-Op model and the entire dynamic changes. It's simple to self fund and I can prove it, I just need the funding to run a proof of concept project. I already have the perfect property lined up. The only problem is it makes everybody money instead of one.

How is this different from communism? As long as there are greedy people (and there always will be some, either for money or power), any government, and by extension, anything run by the government, will become corrupted. Those that want more will cause the laws of such a society to be changed so the operate within the law; they will find loopholes in the existing law to exploit, and they will block closing those loopholes.

My opinion is that pretty much any government and economic system can work, dictatorship, king, democracy, if the people are altruistic, respectful, and educated.
 
I live in a county dominated by tea party boomers and they just, last April, successfully defunded our county library. "We don't need no education."
....

small sample size used to brush everyone in the tea party.

flawed reasoning.
 
How is this different from communism? As long as there are greedy people (and there always will be some, either for money or power), any government, and by extension, anything run by the government, will become corrupted. Those that want more will cause the laws of such a society to be changed so the operate within the law; they will find loopholes in the existing law to exploit, and they will block closing those loopholes.

My opinion is that pretty much any government and economic system can work, dictatorship, king, democracy, if the people are altruistic, respectful, and educated.

Because it does not affect all industry. The problem with the system we have is that the altruistic are eliminated from service.
 
Because it does not affect all industry. The problem with the system we have is that the altruistic are eliminated from service.
Suggest you read your Ghandi quote again in your signature line. No matter which system is chosen, the altruistic will eventually be eliminated from service.
 
small sample size used to brush everyone in the tea party.

flawed reasoning.

Oh, I could give hundreds more nationwide...didn't figure you had time though...and it wouldn't change your mind anyway.
 
Suggest you read your Ghandi quote again in your signature line. No matter which system is chosen, the altruistic will eventually be eliminated from service.

Not when we don't choose to let them. The problem is that greed provides lesser rewards with less effort. We have been defending this method with wars and threat of God for so long now, thousands of years, we don't believe anything else is possible.
 
Not when we don't choose to let them. The problem is that greed provides lesser rewards with less effort. We have been defending this method with wars and threat of God for so long now, thousands of years, we don't believe anything else is possible.

Meh. Speak for yourself when you say you don't beleive anything else is possible.
 
I am from the same era. I don't remember the total bill, but it was comparable to that. I do remember the tuition was $4/hr and that rate was set by the legislature and was the same across the state. Somewhere I have notes where I calculated that my 4 yr aerospace engineering degree cost me (the USAF actually) around $7k, not including room and board. (Or misc items like like boxes of punch cards). HOWEVER, the state budget greatly subsidized the public universities here, so the true cost was masked.

Over the years the level of state support has gone down, and at the same time they deregulated tuition rates and let the different universities set their own tuition rates.

When I went to school I stayed in an unair conditioned dorm room on campus and ate in a cafeteria with one main course selection per meal. One kid on the floor had a 12" black and white TV that got the 4 channels in town. We spent sat and sun nights in the basement vying for washers and dryers. Now the norm seems to be apartments where kids have cable, kitchens to cook, and their own w/d. If they do have meal plan, the cafeteria looks like the food court at the mall.

So don't blame it on the schools being greedy. There are a lot of factors. The schools compete against each other, and and have no real incentive to lower costs if it seems to devalue their diplomas. Like any good business they will allso try to charge what they think the market will bear. The explosion of grants and loans over the years served to put much more money in the market.

The problem with the state funding cutbacks argument is that the increases are fairly consistent among both public and private schools. Tuition for each has roughly doubled in inflation-adjusted dollars since 1982:

https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=76

I wouldn't mind so much if colleges were graduating students who were twice as smart, but I've come across no evidence of that being the case.

Rich
 
You actually have to have the grades and strength of application to actually get accepted to Stanford, so it's not like it's an unearned freebie.

I was thinking that. Stanford is a little more prestigious than our local tech school. It's not like getting a govt check for making babies.
 
No, not more power to them...less power to them. I agree they are free as a free association to charge how much and how they want...but as purveyors of stars on bellies they should have less power and called out not for their generosity but instead called to for their desire for power over people's life that they desire to invade privacy for an opportunity to get a star on your belly. They deserve opprobrium and shame not kudos, they encourage deceit in how much people have in income or assets; should a "family" get a paper divorce to meet the qualifications...would they be prosecuted for fraud, how will they choose who they prosecute?

No I say no! Less power to them, less kudos. Call them out for the carnival barkers they are (with due respect for carnival barkers for they are at least open in their profession with what they are trying to do).
Calm down, Sally. :rolleyes2:
 
Got to chat with our waiter at applebees yesterday. He has 1 semester to graduate with a degree in business and marketing without any loans. Wasn't smart enough to have either rich or poor parents, had to hold a fulltime job throughout.
 
I live in a county dominated by tea party boomers and they just, last April, successfully defunded our county library. "We don't need no education."

And the leader of the movement is a big rice farmer who gets tens...if not hundreds...of thousands of dollars every year in gov't subsidies.

But give back? :no:

That same scenario is being repeated all across the nation both on the local and national levels by today's generation in charge. Short sighted, selfish people.

All you are is just...

another brick in the wall.
Nice try, using the word defund to make people believe that all funding was cut when it was a cut in funding due to the requirement to have a balanced budget. Oh and the amount in question was 5 percent of the library budget.
 
Nice try, using the word defund to make people believe that all funding was cut when it was a cut in funding due to the requirement to have a balanced budget. Oh and the amount in question was 5 percent of the library budget.

I don't know where you got your info from but it's nowhere close to accurate...likely you read the local tea party propaganda. They weren't accurate with any of their statements during the process, i.e. They lied their asses off including stating that the library director made over $75k/yr when she made a little over half that.

But there's no requirement in Missouri that one tell the truth during political campaigns. And that's sad.

EDIT: BTW.... Now that I reread your post, I have no idea WTF you're talking about. You describe a government imposed cuts to balance the budget. What happened in my county was a citizen driven initiative petition to defund the library.
 
Last edited:
I don't know where you got your info from but it's nowhere close to accurate...likely you read the local tea party propaganda. They weren't accurate with any of their statements during the process, i.e. They lied their asses off including stating that the library director made over $75k/yr when she made a little over half that.

But there's no requirement in Missouri that one tell the truth during political campaigns. And that's sad.

EDIT: BTW.... Now that I reread your post, I have no idea WTF you're talking about. You describe a government induced budget cut to balance the budget. What happened in my county was a citizen driven initiative petition to defund the library.

Your right, I only googled library cuts in Mo and got the information. Since you don't say where you are in MO I had to run a larger search. However it's well documented at the state level
 
Love it...:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::yesnod:.


For people saying Stanford is private and gets NO guvmint funding.. You are slightly incorrect..... They get hundreds of millions each year from the guv in the form of Grants for research and other BS.. Like studying the mating habits of Caterpillers, or methods for basket weaving for tree hugging native Americans....:mad2::mad2::mad2:

Then again, that is the reason why the US has the best universities in the world.
US has crap lower schools, but it has the best universities in the world. That is because of those hundreds of millions of grants.

You want to be nr.1 in at least something, right? Having nr.1 universities costs money.
Without places like Stanford etc, there would be no Silicon Valley. Silicon Valley has provided more wealth to the economy than all the university grants combined.
Investing in education, when done correctly and not the usual way, is a great investment.
 
yep - sometimes (usually?) there are unintended consequences.

otoh - kudos to Stanford for providing assistence.



This is the part that the boomer tea party members don't want to admit to. They don't want to pay taxes for anything even though they benefited greatly when they were young from the generation before them doing so...and doing so without screaming and bitching and moaning and whining like boomers do.


I'm also throwing the BS flag. Their parents paid taxes on stuff that was reasonable and generally not driving budget losses and loans that couldn't be paid back by ten generations. Unless of course you count World War. They could even get in on that one and buy War Bonds.

(GI Bill and War Bonds were way better than having thousands march on DC with IOUs in hand asking for their pay as soldiers and having to turn the Army loose to burn them out like after WWI.)

When my "conservative" county "leadership" thinks they got a great deal on paving four miles of country dirt road that no one needed or wanted paved, at a cost of $2.3M (the project started last October and still isn't completed), and their "not so conservative" competition is bitching they don't spend enough, something's totally FUBAR as the generation before the Boomers would have said...

Yes, it's a truism that government always grows. The problem is, government hasn't grown even less than the inflation rate in my lifetime. Instead we've decided that the correct course of action is to behave like Greece.

As far as the Stanford thing goes, no one has pointed out the obvious. They give away low income tuition to keep the politicians who want to do away with private schools and private profits, at bay. It's just political business insurance/pay off money. Open a limited number of spots ("you gotta qualify to gain admission to our lovely school that will teach you what any other school will"...) and toss out some scholarships so the Statists who want full control of all education money so they can make campaign promises to garner votes, won't shut them down. That's all it is.

Business as usual in the private college business in the Land of the Free. Make sure to give your lying politicians an "out" they can use in public or the mob will go after them with pitchforks for letting anyone profit on education. See also: School vouchers.
 
Whatever...

Taxes are as low as they've been in four decades but they're still way too high for the tea...oops ME...party.

The top bracket during WWII was prox 90%...but we run our latest wars on our kids' credit cards and handed out tax cuts because Homey don't wanna pay that game.

Our generation is a freakin' disgrace.
 
The lack of critical thinking is not a good sign for the future of this country.

People can't understand tax rates, taxes, and taxable (as opposed to non-taxable)

People can't understand tax revenues vs spending

Do people not understand the tax freedom day is getting later and later each year?
 
Do people not understand the tax freedom day is getting later and later each year?

Tax Freedom Day last year was April 21.

Tax Freedom Day in 1980 was April 21.

Tax Freedom Day in 1990 was April 21.
 
I have the utmost respect for Stanford. They rejected me not once, not twice but three times.

And it's not my tax rate that I hate so much as it is how my tax dollars are ****ed away. Bernie Madoff stole $65 billion, including fabricated gains, much of which has been recovered. The fraud resulted in a national outcry including financial reform 150+ year prison terms, suicides etc. The F-35 (badass as it is) is at least $135 billion over budget. How come no one went to jail?
 
The F-35 (badass as it is) is at least $135 billion over budget. How come no one went to jail?

Because the military industrial complex owns our nation and runs it.

Oh...

They own our politicians too.
 
Last edited:
The lack of critical thinking is not a good sign for the future of this country.
People can't understand tax rates, taxes, and taxable (as opposed to non-taxable)
People can't understand tax revenues vs spending
Do people not understand the tax freedom day is getting later and later each year?

The single most effective way to change people's thinking is to do away with withholding, and make people pay their taxes quarterly or annually.
 
Get tired of hearing about the 90% tax bracket that some minute number of folks were in and got to deduct about a zillion things along the way. It does sound good though.
 
Tax Freedom Day last year was April 21.

Tax Freedom Day in 1980 was April 21.

Tax Freedom Day in 1990 was April 21.


Look, I'm no fan of the tea party, but no fan of any liberal organizations either. They are just like this forum and every other forum, slanted with no hope of change.

But, I call BS on the above.

You cherry picked dates to make your point.

Recently, the date HAS gotten later, it goes backwards and forwards depending on who is in office. Right now, the guy there does want to advance that date, some would say as far as he can.

2011 - April 12
2012 - April 13
2013 - April 18
2014 - April 21
2015 - April 24.

Seem later and later every year to me... Over time? Yes it pretty much stays the same. When the Dems are in office, it typically gets later, when the Repubs it gets earlier.

That's a really big shock, huh?

This is why these threads get closed. Things can't stay in context.
 
Whatever...



Taxes are as low as they've been in four decades but they're still way too high for the tea...oops ME...party.



The top bracket during WWII was prox 90%...but we run our latest wars on our kids' credit cards and handed out tax cuts because Homey don't wanna pay that game.



Our generation is a freakin' disgrace.


Taxes are low but the debt is rising way faster than taxation can fix. You could tax at 100% and still need a very long time to pay off the debts being incurred. It's unsustainable.

It would appear that you're confusing the two different sides of the balance sheet. I doubt you'd get any serious argument from a Tea Party or even just a boring old fiscal conservative, if you said tax rates had to be frozen exactly where they are and government had to immediately, not over years, right now, balance their budget. Income equals spending.

Arguing for higher tax rates while not paying attention to spending is beyond ridiculous.

I don't see it as a disgrace that your generation is trying to reign in the idiots that they elected and gave a blank check to, and allowed them to buy votes with those low value dollars.


My Boomer parents followed a pretty typical trajectory in life. Started as slackers who spent all their time doing dope and not working as flower children well into their 20s, one figured out after the divorce that they needed a real job and worked their butt off at a private firm that was eventually bought by one of the largest firms on the planet and was there over 25 years, promotion from secretarial job all the way to managing a national division. The other half heartedly went to college and realized they'd be drafted soon so signed up to do a specific job and applied themselves after military service to that field and also ended up a national level Sales Director for a private firm that sells 80% of a particular type of electronic component that every electronic device on the planet uses.

If anything, both paid too little attention to what their peers who had less skill and more natural sociopathic behaviors were doing who went into politics and didn't stop them.

The single most effective way to change people's thinking is to do away with withholding, and make people pay their taxes quarterly or annually.


Won't work. Every dollar is taxed multiple times from earning to spending. Your sales tax is printed on every receipt you get. Very few people even notice it, let alone move to somewhere it's lower or gone, or demand it be different. They might try to buy "big ticket" items from a county with a lower sales tax rate if they pay any attention at all. And none say a word about ever increasing "fees" as hidden taxes on various things or worse, think their original old style taxes can't pay for the things the new fees claim to. (The total amount went up, the services actually went down. Nobody notices. Where did the money go?)

There's a road sign on our $2.3M dollar freshly paved dirt road. It says, "Paid for by your county sales and use taxes." It's a flat out lie. Half of the road was paid for by a State grant. Which the county folks think is "free money" and don't like being reminded that we all pay increasing taxes and fees to the State every year, too.

As long as they can think they got a "deal" on the road they can't be bothered with the bigger picture that $2.3M for four miles of pavement that no one needed or wanted, is a frivolous waste of everyone's money.

The lack of hard spending controls on these idiots is the real problem. I have been asking around and I can't find a single person in the only rural neighborhood served by this four miles of road (and two ranch houses) who asked nor wanted the road paved. The closest thing I've come to a "reason to do it" was the volunteer fire department says it'll be a little easier maybe to get north of the station in winter and even then, they admit they've never missed a call that direction or had a truck get stuck on that road, in their entire existence.

$2.3M dollars for essentially nothing. And this is at a local level where there are hard money limits on spending. The waste and large numbers grow many more decimal points at each consecutive layer above the local level. And we have no control over it nor interest in controlling it.

We all know what needs to be done. We do it every day in our own homes. A balanced budget that can't be busted, a simplified tracking system of collecting the dollars doe needs vs wants and maintenance vs building, and slash every bit of overhead and costs that don't make sense once the input number is known. Nobody is going to do it that needs to pander to some contrived made up grouping of people in a popularity contest (voting).

Tim wants higher taxes but can't articulate why he can't demand the wasteful spending on things can't be used to pay for whatever his pet projects are instead. Why? Because he knows he can't control his politicians' spending any more than I can.

The whole thing is an amazing farce. The joke is on those who believe taxes are paying for things. We're lucky we make the interest payments. We aren't paying down the principal.
 
Tax Freedom Day last year was April 21.

Tax Freedom Day in 1980 was April 21.

Tax Freedom Day in 1990 was April 21.

another problem: confusing cherry picking a few data points with actual analysis
 
Taxes are low but the debt is rising way faster than taxation can fix. You could tax at 100% and still need a very long time to pay off the debts being incurred. It's unsustainable.

The problem isn't the tax rates.

The problem is spending (and not growing the economy).

Way too few people grasp how total revenues can increase if tax rates (as high as they are) can be kept at the same level.
 
This is the part that the boomer tea party members don't want to admit to. They don't want to pay taxes for anything even though they benefited greatly when they were young from the generation before them doing so...and doing so without screaming and bitching and moaning and whining like boomers do.
Your arguments would be stronger if you told the truth.
TEA = Taxed Enough Already.
That doesn't and never has meant NO Taxes. It means taxes should be collected to cover necessary governmental expenses. But the government just has way too many expenses that aren't necessary.
 
We were warned, we decided that was what we wanted.


http://youtu.be/CWiIYW_fBfY


Ever read the history of that speech and what was cut from it?

Eisenhower wanted to open with the military-industrial complex bit and move on to his bigger concern, the power of the media-government complex.

He was told to remove it or the broadcast would simply be removed by the networks and a baseball game would take his place.

He settled for the military-industrial complex part getting said via broadcast than let them feign technical difficulties and dump his entire speech.
 
Ever read the history of that speech and what was cut from it?

Eisenhower wanted to open with the military-industrial complex bit and move on to his bigger concern, the power of the media-government complex.

He was told to remove it or the broadcast would simply be removed by the networks and a baseball game would take his place.

He settled for the military-industrial complex part getting said via broadcast than let them feign technical difficulties and dump his entire speech.
I don't remember hearing that before. Do you have a source that I can see? It doesn't show up on a quick Google search. The only source I see is Wikipedia saying that the speech underwent at least 21 revisions before it was given. Seems to me that the speech was given live. If he wanted to say something, he could have just said it and let the TV executives fume.

That being said, his comments about the military-industrial complex should not be dismissed because of anything else that he did not say.
 
Ever read the history of that speech and what was cut from it?

Eisenhower wanted to open with the military-industrial complex bit and move on to his bigger concern, the power of the media-government complex.

He was told to remove it or the broadcast would simply be removed by the networks and a baseball game would take his place.

He settled for the military-industrial complex part getting said via broadcast than let them feign technical difficulties and dump his entire speech.

That is an interesting twist!! Any idea how to follow up on the story?

I don't remember hearing that before.

Me either! Could be pretty interesting.

Gary
 
They're a private university, so as long as there's no increased cost to taxpayers, more power to them. It doesn't change the fact that undergraduate higher education in the United States is a scam and a racket just begging for a RICO indictment, but at least they're making the scam more affordable.

Rich

Private universities receive public funds.
 
Whatever...

Taxes are as low as they've been in four decades but they're still way too high for the tea...oops ME...party.

The top bracket during WWII was prox 90%...but we run our latest wars on our kids' credit cards and handed out tax cuts because Homey don't wanna pay that game.

Our generation is a freakin' disgrace.

Who has been in power for the last 6 1/2 years genious? Top brackets don't meen squat if you don't take deductions into account. Did you ever take an econ, or finance course?

TEA Party = lower taxes, not no taxes, and less government, not no goverment J.O.
 
Back
Top