gop willing to cut education to fund tax cuts for the rich

[BluesLegend]

Why is their never any concern for the astronomical increases in tuition and fees? It's just accepted? Why is that?

Because higher education is a campaign contribution cash cow for the Democratic party that's why. Tuition would not be astronomical if not for the government guaranteed loans because lenders wouldn't loan a mush brain college student $150k without those guarantees. Typical of the dumb **** Democrats they have enslaved young college students to student loan debt, there's over $1 trillion of student loan debt on the books now.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Why is their never any concern for the astronomical increases in tuition and fees? It's just accepted? Why is that?

Because higher education is a campaign contribution cash cow for the Democratic party that's why. Tuition would not be astronomical if not for the government guaranteed loans because lenders wouldn't loan a mush brain college student $150k without those guarantees. Typical of the dumb **** Democrats they have enslaved young college students to student loan debt, there's over $1 trillion of student loan debt on the books now.

Yep.

 

[Stephanie]

Why is their never any concern for the astronomical increases in tuition and fees? It's just accepted? Why is that?

Because spending more on education means the quality is better. Right?

Since the govt has now nationalized student loans, the student is indebted to the govt for decades. Nice racket academia world and govt have together.

oh but they don't care about that. government is there to TAKE CARE of us aren't they?

propaganda from the leftwing hate sites and their followers isn't the reality the rest of us live in

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The Republican policy document urges officials to crack down on public institutions for being "zones of intellectual intolerance favoring the Left." "Ideological bias is deeply entrenched with the current university system," it claims, warning that trustees of state institutions have a responsibility to the public to ensure that public dollars not be used for "political indoctrination." Elsewhere, the platform reiterates Republican opposition to the Dream Act, which provides a way for undocumented students brought here as young children to go to college and work toward citizenship.

The Republican platform next turns to what in higher education is uppermost in Americans' minds—college costs and recent graduates' struggles to repay student loans while facing prospects of unemployment or underemployment. One answer from the Republicans: de-emphasize traditional higher education and, for the masses, create programs directly related to job opportunities. "New systems of learning are needed to compete with traditional four-year colleges: expanded community colleges and technical institutions, private training schools, online universities, life-long learning, and work-based learning in the private sector."

- See more at: GOP platform attacks higher education American Federation of Teachers

yes they are willing to make us all like them...uneducated fools......so the rich can get richer....

ROFLMNAO!

Now THAT is adorable!

The proponents of COMMON CORE, come to lament the 'cutting of education'!

 

[Dot Com]

oh but they don't care about that. government is there to TAKE CARE of us aren't they?

propaganda from the leftwing hate sites and their followers isn't the reality the rest of us live in

link?

 

[Dana7360]

Why is their never any concern for the astronomical increases in tuition and fees? It's just accepted? Why is that?

Because spending more on education means the quality is better. Right?

Since the govt has now nationalized student loans, the student is indebted to the govt for decades. Nice racket academia world and govt have together.

What you don't know is that when the student loan program started it was what you call nationalized. However even when it was privatized in the banks, it was still nationalized.

reagan turned it over to banks (privatized) when he was president. The way it was set up was the student borrowed from a private bank and if the student didn't pay the loan back, the government did. Plus the government paid high fees to the banks for processing the loans and maintaining them. It cost us something like 65 billion a year.

I believe it's much better to do it directly through the government so that it costs less. We're no longer paying that 65 billion a year to those banks. The government now gets the benefit of the money generated from those loans. reagan changed it so that it's a win/win for banks and they raked in billions off the government and from students.

Whenever anything is privatized it cost more money because that private institution has to make a profit.

I don't understand why so many people don't realize that privatizing anything makes it much more expensive because there has to be a profit in it for that business. That profit usually is such high levels that the private institution makes a boat load of money. In the cause of student loans, they made that money from us taxpayers and from students who didn't have the money.

 

[Avorysuds]

Sounds like a plan to me! Much better than doing as Obama does, cut taxes for the rich while growing spending.

Our education system has been failling for a very long time, and no amount of money has helped it. In fact more money seems to only get worse results.

 

[Avorysuds]

Why is their never any concern for the astronomical increases in tuition and fees? It's just accepted? Why is that?

Because spending more on education means the quality is better. Right?

Since the govt has now nationalized student loans, the student is indebted to the govt for decades. Nice racket academia world and govt have together.

What you don't know is that when the student loan program started it was what you call nationalized. However even when it was privatized in the banks, it was still nationalized.

reagan turned it over to banks (privatized) when he was president. The way it was set up was the student borrowed from a private bank and if the student didn't pay the loan back, the government did. Plus the government paid high fees to the banks for processing the loans and maintaining them. It cost us something like 65 billion a year.

I believe it's much better to do it directly through the government so that it costs less. We're no longer paying that 65 billion a year to those banks. The government now gets the benefit of the money generated from those loans. reagan changed it so that it's a win/win for banks and they raked in billions off the government and from students.

Whenever anything is privatized it cost more money because that private institution has to make a profit.

I don't understand why so many people don't realize that privatizing anything makes it much more expensive because there has to be a profit in it for that business. That profit usually is such high levels that the private institution makes a boat load of money. In the cause of student loans, they made that money from us taxpayers and from students who didn't have the money.

That was a horribly ignorant post. Shockingly so in fact. I'd say trying to have a conversation with such limited understanding of a subject as you displayed would only produce a negative result.

 

[Stephanie]

Why is their never any concern for the astronomical increases in tuition and fees? It's just accepted? Why is that?

Because spending more on education means the quality is better. Right?

Since the govt has now nationalized student loans, the student is indebted to the govt for decades. Nice racket academia world and govt have together.

What you don't know is that when the student loan program started it was what you call nationalized. However even when it was privatized in the banks, it was still nationalized.

reagan turned it over to banks (privatized) when he was president. The way it was set up was the student borrowed from a private bank and if the student didn't pay the loan back, the government did. Plus the government paid high fees to the banks for processing the loans and maintaining them. It cost us something like 65 billion a year.

I believe it's much better to do it directly through the government so that it costs less. We're no longer paying that 65 billion a year to those banks. The government now gets the benefit of the money generated from those loans. reagan changed it so that it's a win/win for banks and they raked in billions off the government and from students.

Whenever anything is privatized it cost more money because that private institution has to make a profit.

I don't understand why so many people don't realize that privatizing anything makes it much more expensive because there has to be a profit in it for that business. That profit usually is such high levels that the private institution makes a boat load of money. In the cause of student loans, they made that money from us taxpayers and from students who didn't have the money.

That was a horribly ignorant post. Shockingly so in fact. I'd say trying to have a conversation with such limited understanding of a subject as you displayed would only produce a negative result.

Plus you would get bored to death before you finished reading all that nonsense.

 

[The Rabbi]

This is the stupidity of dimocrap scum.

If Education is a KNOWN impetus to higher Earnings......

If we KNOW FOR A FACT that better educated people make more money than lesser educated people.......

And we also know for a fact that the scum of the earth dimocraps pride themselves on being BETTER EDUCATED than Patriotic Conservatives....

Then HOW IN THE **** can we be the Party of The Rich?

How can Patriotic Conservative Americans be UNDER-EDUCATED AND THE PARTY OF THE RICH???????

dimocraps aren't just the scum of the earth..... People, they're just plain, down on the farm, stupid.

The world would truly be a much better place without dimocraps

Democrats are patriots too. But Conservatives (who seem to be wanting one party rule according to your little rant here) accomplices for wage disparity. Dupes. Rubes. Useful Idiots.

You would be appear to be the useful idiot here.
Is the income disparity better or worse since Democrats took control in 2006?
Democrats arent patriots. Democrats are partisan hacks intent on looting government for their own wealth and power.

 

[Avorysuds]

Why is their never any concern for the astronomical increases in tuition and fees? It's just accepted? Why is that?

Because spending more on education means the quality is better. Right?

Since the govt has now nationalized student loans, the student is indebted to the govt for decades. Nice racket academia world and govt have together.

What you don't know is that when the student loan program started it was what you call nationalized. However even when it was privatized in the banks, it was still nationalized.

reagan turned it over to banks (privatized) when he was president. The way it was set up was the student borrowed from a private bank and if the student didn't pay the loan back, the government did. Plus the government paid high fees to the banks for processing the loans and maintaining them. It cost us something like 65 billion a year.

I believe it's much better to do it directly through the government so that it costs less. We're no longer paying that 65 billion a year to those banks. The government now gets the benefit of the money generated from those loans. reagan changed it so that it's a win/win for banks and they raked in billions off the government and from students.

Whenever anything is privatized it cost more money because that private institution has to make a profit.

I don't understand why so many people don't realize that privatizing anything makes it much more expensive because there has to be a profit in it for that business. That profit usually is such high levels that the private institution makes a boat load of money. In the cause of student loans, they made that money from us taxpayers and from students who didn't have the money.

That was a horribly ignorant post. Shockingly so in fact. I'd say trying to have a conversation with such limited understanding of a subject as you displayed would only produce a negative result.

Plus you would get bored to death before you finished reading all that nonsense.

The fact that (s)he leaves out the hundreds of billions if not trillion the Government has done in malinvestment with college education is enough to not want to engage in "debate" with them. But then they don't even recognize that college tuition has blown up do to Government 197% guarantee loan rate for people that fail at life and have no place taking a giant loan out for something they either won't finish or spend amazingly unwisely.

There is more, but whats the the point, they have no interst in bettering themselves, just hating on Republicans, even if they are wrong to do so.

 

[Iceweasel]

What you don't know is that when the student loan program started it was what you call nationalized. However even when it was privatized in the banks, it was still nationalized.

reagan turned it over to banks (privatized) when he was president. The way it was set up was the student borrowed from a private bank and if the student didn't pay the loan back, the government did. Plus the government paid high fees to the banks for processing the loans and maintaining them. It cost us something like 65 billion a year.

I believe it's much better to do it directly through the government so that it costs less. We're no longer paying that 65 billion a year to those banks. The government now gets the benefit of the money generated from those loans. reagan changed it so that it's a win/win for banks and they raked in billions off the government and from students.

Whenever anything is privatized it cost more money because that private institution has to make a profit.

Tuition has skyrocketed with those "inexpensive" student loans. The loan may be cheaper but since it's backed by Uncle Sam they are borrowing a LOT more money! And more than a few default on their loans so I doubt it's cheaper to the tax payer. The primary purpose is to indoctrinate young minds on the goodness of big government and what all it can do for us. If the student actually pays back the loan so much the better.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

The Republican policy document urges officials to crack down on public institutions for being "zones of intellectual intolerance favoring the Left." "Ideological bias is deeply entrenched with the current university system," it claims, warning that trustees of state institutions have a responsibility to the public to ensure that public dollars not be used for "political indoctrination." Elsewhere, the platform reiterates Republican opposition to the Dream Act, which provides a way for undocumented students brought here as young children to go to college and work toward citizenship.

The Republican platform next turns to what in higher education is uppermost in Americans' minds—college costs and recent graduates' struggles to repay student loans while facing prospects of unemployment or underemployment. One answer from the Republicans: de-emphasize traditional higher education and, for the masses, create programs directly related to job opportunities. "New systems of learning are needed to compete with traditional four-year colleges: expanded community colleges and technical institutions, private training schools, online universities, life-long learning, and work-based learning in the private sector."

- See more at: GOP platform attacks higher education American Federation of Teachers

yes they are willing to make us all like them...uneducated fools......so the rich can get richer....

So what do you call bringing in millions of uneducated illegals into the country that will work for peanuts?
Kinda hard to win points when your a partisan hack ain't it?

 

[The Rabbi]

Why is their never any concern for the astronomical increases in tuition and fees? It's just accepted? Why is that?

Because spending more on education means the quality is better. Right?

Since the govt has now nationalized student loans, the student is indebted to the govt for decades. Nice racket academia world and govt have together.

What you don't know is that when the student loan program started it was what you call nationalized. However even when it was privatized in the banks, it was still nationalized.

reagan turned it over to banks (privatized) when he was president. The way it was set up was the student borrowed from a private bank and if the student didn't pay the loan back, the government did. Plus the government paid high fees to the banks for processing the loans and maintaining them. It cost us something like 65 billion a year.

I believe it's much better to do it directly through the government so that it costs less. We're no longer paying that 65 billion a year to those banks. The government now gets the benefit of the money generated from those loans. reagan changed it so that it's a win/win for banks and they raked in billions off the government and from students.

Whenever anything is privatized it cost more money because that private institution has to make a profit.

I don't understand why so many people don't realize that privatizing anything makes it much more expensive because there has to be a profit in it for that business. That profit usually is such high levels that the private institution makes a boat load of money. In the cause of student loans, they made that money from us taxpayers and from students who didn't have the money.

See, here is your mistake. Your first mistake is posting here. Your second mistake is posting as a liberal. Your third mistake is not knowing the facts. Your fourth mistake is thinking you do.
In fact for-profit anything does better than non profit. This is because for profit companies have incentives to reduce costs and run efficiently. Iowa had a not for profit insurance company for health insurance. It failed. And its rates werent lower than the for profit competitors.
Government is grossly inefficient at anything it does. That more than eats up the 2-3% actual profit companies earn.
The student loan program is costing the federal government (i.e. us taxpayers) billions. How is that a bargain?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/11/u...s-of-easing-the-student-debt-burden.html?_r=0

 

[Avorysuds]

Hey guys, I have the AMAZING idea! Can't believe I'm the first to think of it actually... I'm so smart.... Ok ok, so as we all know Government does everything for cheaper, and they never run a deficit or borrow trillions from banks.... So lets make the privet sector and Government 1!!!!! All business will now be Government buiness! They can cut costs like by sooooooo much because they don't need to be profitable!

The Government can even make and or grow business's to astronomical sizes that possibly otherwise wouldn't even exist due to ultra low demand, but now the few that want that "product" get it!!! and for so super cheap!!!!


What should we call this genius system....

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

lets me think here ...the lie....gop is giving tax cuts to the rich while cutting funds for higher education to the bone.....where in lies the lie?

You do realize the reason higher ed is so expensive is because we're loaning endless sums of money to people to spend 10 years studying stupid shit like women's studies, right? I love listening to you educated fools who haven't the sense to get out of the rain.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Why is their never any concern for the astronomical increases in tuition and fees? It's just accepted? Why is that?

Because spending more on education means the quality is better. Right?

Since the govt has now nationalized student loans, the student is indebted to the govt for decades. Nice racket academia world and govt have together.

What you don't know is that when the student loan program started it was what you call nationalized. However even when it was privatized in the banks, it was still nationalized.

reagan turned it over to banks (privatized) when he was president. The way it was set up was the student borrowed from a private bank and if the student didn't pay the loan back, the government did. Plus the government paid high fees to the banks for processing the loans and maintaining them. It cost us something like 65 billion a year.

I believe it's much better to do it directly through the government so that it costs less. We're no longer paying that 65 billion a year to those banks. The government now gets the benefit of the money generated from those loans. reagan changed it so that it's a win/win for banks and they raked in billions off the government and from students.

Whenever anything is privatized it cost more money because that private institution has to make a profit.

I don't understand why so many people don't realize that privatizing anything makes it much more expensive because there has to be a profit in it for that business. That profit usually is such high levels that the private institution makes a boat load of money. In the cause of student loans, they made that money from us taxpayers and from students who didn't have the money.

They're making even more from the students now.

 

[Jarhead]

The gop makes me sick. So you want us to be like mexico with a large lower class and a tiny rich??? You fools are going to lose again.

No. We don't want that. We just want morons like you to stop listening to childish spin and start applying your brains to understanding the true motivations of GOP initiatives.
But, you are either too immature to do so, or you lack the brains to do it.

 

[The Rabbi]

And Trollingbones has left the room.

 

[Dana7360]

Why is their never any concern for the astronomical increases in tuition and fees? It's just accepted? Why is that?

Because spending more on education means the quality is better. Right?

Since the govt has now nationalized student loans, the student is indebted to the govt for decades. Nice racket academia world and govt have together.

What you don't know is that when the student loan program started it was what you call nationalized. However even when it was privatized in the banks, it was still nationalized.

reagan turned it over to banks (privatized) when he was president. The way it was set up was the student borrowed from a private bank and if the student didn't pay the loan back, the government did. Plus the government paid high fees to the banks for processing the loans and maintaining them. It cost us something like 65 billion a year.

I believe it's much better to do it directly through the government so that it costs less. We're no longer paying that 65 billion a year to those banks. The government now gets the benefit of the money generated from those loans. reagan changed it so that it's a win/win for banks and they raked in billions off the government and from students.

Whenever anything is privatized it cost more money because that private institution has to make a profit.

I don't understand why so many people don't realize that privatizing anything makes it much more expensive because there has to be a profit in it for that business. That profit usually is such high levels that the private institution makes a boat load of money. In the cause of student loans, they made that money from us taxpayers and from students who didn't have the money.

They're making even more from the students now.

Actually no they aren't if you're talking about fees and interest and not the actual tuition. Tuition for college has been increasing at an alarming rate since the bush boy.

My husband had student loans. He took them out during the reagan years. At the time the interest was 11%.

Today the interest on a student loan ranges from 4.66% to 7.21%. So no, the government isn't raking in even more money from the students.

Interest Rates and Fees | Federal Student Aid