Obama and his student loan claims

[Luddly Neddite]

Regardless, student loans are a major burden on college graduates today. starting out life with meager employment prospects and a major debt to pay is rough. And yes, both he President and his wife had to pay off significant debt. Law degrees do not come cheaply

No one is forced to attend Harvard. There are cheaper routes to education that are affordable to almost anyone.

Yeah, and the last thing we need is those damn elitists who aim to get the best education they can and then have the gall to work hard to pay off their loans.

He should have known his place and kept to it. After all, the guv of AZ dropped out of trade school and that don't bother them racist repubs, not even a bit. Never you mind that she can't speak an entire sentence without screwing it up. Same with that purty little $arah chic that we all have the hots for, right boys? $he didn't get no education and look how far she got. Fat bank account, courtesy of Good Ole Boys who can't think no bettern she kin. 'sides, we kin always hire foreign talent like our Mittens wants.

Your boy had his education paid for. The president did not. Instead, he worked for it.

Fucking deal with it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

To review: Pure ignorant Pubcrappe...."Claims"? You feggin brainwashd (racist?) AZZHOLE! Pub dupes LOL!

Btw- Public college (AND health) costs doubled under BOOOSH, AND he put banks in as the greedy scumbag middle men on loans...just a coincidence I suppose...

So nice of you to come on in and participate....

....normally, one has to amble down to a homeless shelter to find a person of your caliber.

 

[Rozman]

Does anyone else find his attempt to link with the 'common man' a bit off??

Basically, I guess he is trying to say he is the same as others and 'struggled' with things such as student loans

Obama: I only paid off my student loans eight years ago | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

But this seems a bit weird... supposedly he paid them all back just 8 years ago.. and struggled to do so... yet his salary history shows that even as far back as 2000, he was pulling in more than 240K per year... is he seriously trying to compare to a teacher making 40K trying to pay back 40K in student loans?? And if he was indeed struggling at 200+K a year, and admits it, why the fuck is he trying to increase burden on ones in the same boat my wanting to raise taxes on that very same group??

More hackery and pandering, if you ask me... and it has no basis in reality

He is shameless...
But then again his followers lap up everything that comes out of his mouth.
This is a very wealthy man and he has been for quite some time.
This is Axelrod his campaign guy trying to make Obama look like a regular guy
and thereby making Romney look like the evil rich bastard.

We get it Romney has money.... Duh!

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Another assertion without any evidence: "Yup. The free market works in education as well as it does anywhere else. If the federal government pulled all its support for education and forced colleges and universities to depend on student enrollment and philanthropy in order to survive, the costs come down in short order."

First of all, nobody said that, but you already know that. Second, the premise is correct. It's basic Econ 101 which you would understand if you had an education yourself. You subsidize something, you're going to get more of it, so as long as the government continues to provide students with more money to borrow the universities will continue to raise their tuition because they know the students can just borrow the money to keep paying it. It's actually quite an elementary concept that shouldn't need explained to someone who alleges to be as intellectual as you pretend.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I will vote for Romney and certainly don't begrudge his money.

And I have a hard time thinking of a biracial son of a single mother on food stamps as an elitist.

Romney can win this election if his supporters don't get stupid.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Does anyone else find his attempt to link with the 'common man' a bit off??

Basically, I guess he is trying to say he is the same as others and 'struggled' with things such as student loans

Obama: I only paid off my student loans eight years ago | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

But this seems a bit weird... supposedly he paid them all back just 8 years ago.. and struggled to do so... yet his salary history shows that even as far back as 2000, he was pulling in more than 240K per year... is he seriously trying to compare to a teacher making 40K trying to pay back 40K in student loans?? And if he was indeed struggling at 200+K a year, and admits it, why the fuck is he trying to increase burden on ones in the same boat my wanting to raise taxes on that very same group??

More hackery and pandering, if you ask me... and it has no basis in reality

If he is going to talk about his loans, he should support the claims. How about some transparency Barry?

But, you're okay with Mittens hiding his tax returns.

Yep. That's the right wingers for you.

Mittens want to double the interest on student loans. If you have kids (and this is a RHETORICAL question), will they be able to afford any college at all?

If the op had a brain and could actually use it, he would know that if one considers the age and incredible accomplishments of the President and First Lady, its very probable that they would not have been able to pay off their enormous student loans any more quickly. But, what the hell, why not make some more lies about them. Its the only thing the rw's have.

But yeah, we need to stop aiming so high in this country. Most other countries have already passed us by in every way that counts - including education. We need to just lay down and shut up cuz that's what Mittens wants.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Another assertion without any evidence: "Yup. The free market works in education as well as it does anywhere else. If the federal government pulled all its support for education and forced colleges and universities to depend on student enrollment and philanthropy in order to survive, the costs come down in short order."

First of all, nobody said that, but you already know that. Second, the premise is correct. It's basic Econ 101 which you would understand if you had an education yourself. You subsidize something, you're going to get more of it, so as long as the government continues to provide students with more money to borrow the universities will continue to raise their tuition because they know the students can just borrow the money to keep paying it. It's actually quite an elementary concept that shouldn't need explained to someone who alleges to be as intellectual as you pretend.

You obviously did not take finance or political philosophy, or you failed if you did.

Somebody, please give us some data to support the connection that the far right weirdos here are trying to make.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Romney can win this election if his supporters don't get stupid.

Too late.

That's a given.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Another assertion without any evidence: "Yup. The free market works in education as well as it does anywhere else. If the federal government pulled all its support for education and forced colleges and universities to depend on student enrollment and philanthropy in order to survive, the costs come down in short order."

First of all, nobody said that, but you already know that. Second, the premise is correct. It's basic Econ 101 which you would understand if you had an education yourself. You subsidize something, you're going to get more of it, so as long as the government continues to provide students with more money to borrow the universities will continue to raise their tuition because they know the students can just borrow the money to keep paying it. It's actually quite an elementary concept that shouldn't need explained to someone who alleges to be as intellectual as you pretend.

You obviously did not take finance or political philosophy, or you failed if you did.

Last I checked I was the one with the graduate degree, but thanks for playing anyway.

 

[JakeStarkey]

So what, Taz? Answer the second part that you left out. "You obviously did not take finance or political philosophy, or you failed if you did. // Somebody, please give us some data to support the connection that the far right weirdos here are trying to make."

 

[PoliticalChic]

Another assertion without any evidence: "Yup. The free market works in education as well as it does anywhere else. If the federal government pulled all its support for education and forced colleges and universities to depend on student enrollment and philanthropy in order to survive, the costs come down in short order."

"Now that people are examining the relative costs and benefits of college education more closely than ever, the argument that schools are charging substantially more than undergraduate education really needs to cost is gaining traction. According to a paper by Professor Vance Fried of Oklahoma State University, many colleges and universities are charging their undergraduates much more than their education costs, says the Pope Center for Higher Education.

In his book "Better/Cheaper College," Fried carefully calculated that a quality liberal arts education at a residential college only needs to cost around $8,000 per year.
The revenues that most schools receive, however, are considerably in excess of that amount.
Based on tuition revenues alone, the average private undergraduate school makes about $5,500 per student.
When donations and endowment income are added, profits jump to $12,800 per student.
That is twice the profit margin earned by for-profit University of Phoenix, he states.

In their book "Higher Education?" Andrew Hacker and Claudia Dreifus identify a number of schools, such as Western Oregon University, where "there are no star professors, not much research, and the administration is bare bones. All these limits inadvertently make Western Oregon a delightful place." So there are colleges that don't rake in "profits" but just give their students a good, affordable education. Why aren't there more of them?

Fried's answer is that the copious amount of government money that flows into most colleges and universities makes it irresistibly tempting for them to spend the profits on frills.
He advocates shutting off the flow: "Less federal money would force higher college productivity and, of course, lower government spending."
Source: George Leef, "Non-Profit Colleges Can Be Very Profitable," Pope Center for Higher Education, August 17, 2011.
For text:
Non-profit Colleges Can Be Very Profitable | The John William Pope Center for Higher Education Policy
For study:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/PA678.pdf

 

[Rozman]

Why is it the so called rich are being asked to "sacrifice" and pay their "fair share" in taxes for the good of the country....

Why can't the President and all his liberal media followers ask Colleges and Universities and the faculty
to cut their salaries and operating costs to "chip in" for the good of the country.

Let them do their "fair share"....

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Even our boneheaded Vice-President understands the concept

Biden Admits Government Subsidies Have Increased College Tuition | RealClearPolitics

 

[JakeStarkey]

Another assertion without any evidence: "Yup. The free market works in education as well as it does anywhere else. If the federal government pulled all its support for education and forced colleges and universities to depend on student enrollment and philanthropy in order to survive, the costs come down in short order."

"Now that people are examining the relative costs and benefits of college education more closely than ever, the argument that schools are charging substantially more than undergraduate education really needs to cost is gaining traction. According to a paper by Professor Vance Fried of Oklahoma State University, many colleges and universities are charging their undergraduates much more than their education costs, says the Pope Center for Higher Education.

In his book "Better/Cheaper College," Fried carefully calculated that a quality liberal arts education at a residential college only needs to cost around $8,000 per year.
The revenues that most schools receive, however, are considerably in excess of that amount.
Based on tuition revenues alone, the average private undergraduate school makes about $5,500 per student.
When donations and endowment income are added, profits jump to $12,800 per student.
That is twice the profit margin earned by for-profit University of Phoenix, he states.

In their book "Higher Education?" Andrew Hacker and Claudia Dreifus identify a number of schools, such as Western Oregon University, where "there are no star professors, not much research, and the administration is bare bones. All these limits inadvertently make Western Oregon a delightful place." So there are colleges that don't rake in "profits" but just give their students a good, affordable education. Why aren't there more of them?

Fried's answer is that the copious amount of government money that flows into most colleges and universities makes it irresistibly tempting for them to spend the profits on frills.
He advocates shutting off the flow: "Less federal money would force higher college productivity and, of course, lower government spending."
Source: George Leef, "Non-Profit Colleges Can Be Very Profitable," Pope Center for Higher Education, August 17, 2011.
For text:
Non-profit Colleges Can Be Very Profitable | The John William Pope Center for Higher Education Policy
For study:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/PA678.pdf

Thank you, PC. Let me do some reading and checking the writers credentials. But I suspect Fried can't empirically verify his conclusion. The fact that education costs more may because far more people go to college today than prior to 1960. So we have classic supply and demand. I imagine that government funding also plays into the demand. I am some reading to do.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Why is it the so called rich are being asked to "sacrifice" and pay their "fair share" in taxes for the good of the country....

Why can't the President and all his liberal media followers ask Colleges and Universities and the faculty
to cut their salaries and operating costs to "chip in" for the good of the country.

Let them do their "fair share"....

Cut their salaries?

How the heck can one put food on the table on 500k?

1. Salaries of college presidents on the rise
The Associated Press
College presidents are getting healthy raises, and a dozen at private universities earn $1 million or more including benefits, according to a new survey published Monday.
Salaries at public universities remain a tier lower but also are on the rise, with eight presidents earning $700,000 or more last year, six more than the year before, according to the annual survey by the Chronicle of Higher Education.
THE CHRONICLE'S SURVEY: More on what college leaders make
Presidential salaries are facing closer scrutiny at a time when college prices continue to rise well above the rate of inflation.
Salaries of college presidents on the rise - USATODAY.com


2. College presidents' salaries increase: One-third earn over $500K
At least one person on campus has done OK as the economy has declined: public university presidents' salaries climbed 7.6% last year.
Fifteen presidents of public research universities took home at least $700,000 in 2007-2008, up from eight in last year's survey, and nearly one-third now earn over $500,000, according to the annual Chronicle of Higher Education survey out Monday.
College presidents' salaries increase: One-third earn over $500K - USATODAY.com



3. University President Salaries Soar Into the Millions
By Michael Janofsky
THE NEW YORK TIMES
Donald E. Ross turned Lynn University, once a nearly bankrupt two-year Catholic school for women in Boca Raton, Fla., into a thriving four-year liberal arts college. Now, as Mr. Ross nears retirement after 34 years as president, it is apparent how much the board of trustees appreciates his work.
Mr. Ross ranked first in total compensation among the nation’s private university presidents for the 2003-4 academic year with a package worth $5,042,315, according to the latest annual survey of executive compensation by The Chronicle of Higher Education. Data from 2003-4 is the most recent available for private institutions. The results were released publicly last Monday.
For the first time, the survey reported leaders of private universities earning $1 million in a single year. The four others identified were Audrey K. Doberstein, formerly of Wilmington College in Delaware ($1,370,973); E. Gordon Gee of Vanderbilt University ($1,326,786); John R. Silber of Boston University ($1,253,352); and John N. McCardell Jr., formerly of Middlebury College in Vermont ($1,213,141).
University President Salaries Soar Into the Millions - The Tech



4. The price of a college education rose substantially last year, despite a 2.1 percent decline in the Consumer Price Index from July 2008 to July 2009.

High Tuition
Hit hard by state budget cuts, four-year public colleges raised tuition and fees by an average of 6.5 percent last year. Prices at private colleges rose 4.4 percent, according to a report issued Tuesday by the College Board.
Patrick Callan, president of the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, called the increases “hugely disappointing.”
Nonetheless, Ms. Baum acknowledged that over time, the costs trends at four-year public universities have been troubling.
“From 1979 to 1989, the annual rate adjusted for inflation was 3 percent,” she said, “the next decade was 4 percent, and the most recent decade 5 percent. So the trend was exacerbated in recent years.”
College Costs Keep Rising, Report Says - NYTimes.com

 

[JakeStarkey]

No link between college expenses, salaries, and government funding. In fact, even when government cuts funding, expenses go up significantly. Why is that?

 

[driveby]

Wow, what ever happened to "ask not what your country can do for you"? Seems it's been changed to "I am liberal, hear my whine"......

 

[The T]

Wow, what ever happened to "ask not what your country can do for you"? Seems it's been changed to "I am liberal, hear my whine"......

....let ME see what I can give you next on the backs of others for your vote...so I can take MORE liberty from you in the process...

 

[The T]

Does anyone else find his attempt to link with the 'common man' a bit off??

Basically, I guess he is trying to say he is the same as others and 'struggled' with things such as student loans

Obama: I only paid off my student loans eight years ago | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

But this seems a bit weird... supposedly he paid them all back just 8 years ago.. and struggled to do so... yet his salary history shows that even as far back as 2000, he was pulling in more than 240K per year... is he seriously trying to compare to a teacher making 40K trying to pay back 40K in student loans?? And if he was indeed struggling at 200+K a year, and admits it, why the fuck is he trying to increase burden on ones in the same boat my wanting to raise taxes on that very same group??

More hackery and pandering, if you ask me... and it has no basis in reality

It's just another false weapon in his campaign of Class Warfare/Class Envy.

It's ALL he has. His record otherwise?

*Sucks*

 

[The T]

No link between college expenses, salaries, and government funding. In fact, even when government cuts funding, expenses go up significantly. Why is that?

Rantings of an IDIOT^^