Sanders just submitted college for all bill.

[Unkotare]

It's remarkable that you think "free college" at those state universities is something that should exist. Just another Liberal, who doesn't have the guts to call himself a Democrat, thinking those who didn't produce the kids owe something to them their own sorry parents won't provide.

Why are you opposed to the parents of these kids funding their own kid's college? Why do you think it's the personal responsibility of someone that isn't their parent?

If you are talking about college, why is it the "responsibility" of the individual's parents? You keep making that assumption. We are presumably talking about people who are adults at that point.

Well?

Didn't think you had a valid answer. Seems I was correct.

Why are you avoiding?

I've made it clear where I stand.

Then why are you afraid to answer? Why isn't it the individual responsibility of an adult? You some kind of communist?

 

[OldLady]

The principle is the same....why should you pay for educating someone else's kid?

Not when the purpose of each isn't the same.

I shouldn't pay to educate someone else's kid. I'm not the one that produced someone else's kids. That, alone, means it's not my place to do a damn thing for them. NOTHING.

wow

Tell me why I should be the one to do for a kid what their own damn parents won't do for them. If their own parents won't do it, explain why someone that isn't their parent should be held to a higher standard.

A lot of people share your point of view, but I think it's probably a good thing for society in general that some people have a broader perspective.
John Donne explained it much better than I can:
“No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend's or of thine own were: any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee.”
We're all on this rock together; when we help each other, I think we end up helping ourselves to a better world in the long run.

The problem is only a portion of those on the rock are helping. The rest of them are having the help handed to them for nothing. I don't owe someone else's kid college. That's their parents job. If their parents can't do it, it's not my place to do for them what their own parents won't do.

I understand your position. Mine is, those kids whose parents can't help them get to college will be in a better position to help their kids get to college if they attend. It's a long-run perspective, I know, but study after study has shown that it works. Maybe your kids won't have to help others so much....Anyway, relax. The bill won't make it.

 

[Conservative65]

Not when the purpose of each isn't the same.

I shouldn't pay to educate someone else's kid. I'm not the one that produced someone else's kids. That, alone, means it's not my place to do a damn thing for them. NOTHING.

wow

Tell me why I should be the one to do for a kid what their own damn parents won't do for them. If their own parents won't do it, explain why someone that isn't their parent should be held to a higher standard.

A lot of people share your point of view, but I think it's probably a good thing for society in general that some people have a broader perspective.
John Donne explained it much better than I can:
“No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend's or of thine own were: any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee.”
We're all on this rock together; when we help each other, I think we end up helping ourselves to a better world in the long run.

The problem is only a portion of those on the rock are helping. The rest of them are having the help handed to them for nothing. I don't owe someone else's kid college. That's their parents job. If their parents can't do it, it's not my place to do for them what their own parents won't do.

I understand your position. Mine is, those kids whose parents can't help them get to college will be in a better position to help their kids get to college if they attend. It's a long-run perspective, I know, but study after study has shown that it works. Maybe your kids won't have to help others so much....Anyway, relax. The bill won't make it.

If it has worked so well in the past, why is the same thing still being proposed. If, as you say, it's made things better over the long run, why is there more and more of a demand for such things. Wouldn't it stop sooner or later if the results were what you claimed?

My position is if a parent won't help their own kids they produced, why does it default to those who didn't produce them? You can't provide a valid answer because one doesn't exist. You can claim it MIGHT do this or that. What about those who get help and aren't successful. What happens for those who don't graduate? Do they have to pay back the money?

 

[Unkotare]

wow

Tell me why I should be the one to do for a kid what their own damn parents won't do for them. If their own parents won't do it, explain why someone that isn't their parent should be held to a higher standard.

A lot of people share your point of view, but I think it's probably a good thing for society in general that some people have a broader perspective.
John Donne explained it much better than I can:
“No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend's or of thine own were: any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee.”
We're all on this rock together; when we help each other, I think we end up helping ourselves to a better world in the long run.

The problem is only a portion of those on the rock are helping. The rest of them are having the help handed to them for nothing. I don't owe someone else's kid college. That's their parents job. If their parents can't do it, it's not my place to do for them what their own parents won't do.

I understand your position. Mine is, those kids whose parents can't help them get to college will be in a better position to help their kids get to college if they attend. It's a long-run perspective, I know, but study after study has shown that it works. Maybe your kids won't have to help others so much....Anyway, relax. The bill won't make it.

If it has worked so well in the past, why is the same thing still being proposed. If, as you say, it's made things better over the long run, why is there more and more of a demand for such things. Wouldn't it stop sooner or later if the results were what you claimed? .....

Holy crap, you're stupid.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Because keeping the fire department ready and operating at all times benefits them if it's THEIR house that catches fire instead. Also, the fire in my house quite possibly might spread to theirs.

Now tell me what direct benefit I get from educating someone else's kid.

You really can't work this one out for yourself?

The direct benefit to me of total strangers sitting in "Perspectives in Pop Culture" classes on my dime?

No, I'm really going to need some help here.

You're not only familiar with the current curriculum in every state university in America, but you also know it wouldn't change once tuitions were rolled back to where they were in the 1950s and 1960s? Remarkable.

It's remarkable that you think "free college" at those state universities is something that should exist. Just another Liberal, who doesn't have the guts to call himself a Democrat, thinking those who didn't produce the kids owe something to them their own sorry parents won't provide.

Why are you opposed to the parents of these kids funding their own kid's college? Why do you think it's the personal responsibility of someone that isn't their parent?

If you are talking about college, why is it the "responsibility" of the individual's parents? You keep making that assumption. We are presumably talking about people who are adults at that point.

Because most likely, the "adult" in question is 18 and just graduated high school and has little or no job experience and is still living at home and being otherwise supported by their parents.

But hey, if they're living independently, then the responsibility is theirs. But notice that, either way you figure it, the responsibility is NOT people who don't know the student and have no stake whatsoever in their continued education.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Apparently he thinks the purpose behind learning the second grade is the same as for college. With some of those that get in college now requiring remedial classes, I can see where he would make that mistake.

The principle is the same....why should you pay for educating someone else's kid?

Not when the purpose of each isn't the same.

I shouldn't pay to educate someone else's kid. I'm not the one that produced someone else's kids. That, alone, means it's not my place to do a damn thing for them. NOTHING.

wow

Tell me why I should be the one to do for a kid what their own damn parents won't do for them. If their own parents won't do it, explain why someone that isn't their parent should be held to a higher standard.

A lot of people share your point of view, but I think it's probably a good thing for society in general that some people have a broader perspective.
John Donne explained it much better than I can:
“No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend's or of thine own were: any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee.”
We're all on this rock together; when we help each other, I think we end up helping ourselves to a better world in the long run.

I would rebut by saying that one does not help a person by encouraging dependence and an entitlement mindset. It is of much greater help to someone going into college to make THEM responsible for the costs and thus more conscious of the need to spend the money wisely.

 

[Unkotare]

You really can't work this one out for yourself?

The direct benefit to me of total strangers sitting in "Perspectives in Pop Culture" classes on my dime?

No, I'm really going to need some help here.

You're not only familiar with the current curriculum in every state university in America, but you also know it wouldn't change once tuitions were rolled back to where they were in the 1950s and 1960s? Remarkable.

It's remarkable that you think "free college" at those state universities is something that should exist. Just another Liberal, who doesn't have the guts to call himself a Democrat, thinking those who didn't produce the kids owe something to them their own sorry parents won't provide.

Why are you opposed to the parents of these kids funding their own kid's college? Why do you think it's the personal responsibility of someone that isn't their parent?

If you are talking about college, why is it the "responsibility" of the individual's parents? You keep making that assumption. We are presumably talking about people who are adults at that point.

Because most likely, the "adult" in question is 18 and just graduated high school and has little or no job experience and is still living at home and being otherwise supported by their parents.......

If the adult in question is an adult he should support himself.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Not when the purpose of each isn't the same.

I shouldn't pay to educate someone else's kid. I'm not the one that produced someone else's kids. That, alone, means it's not my place to do a damn thing for them. NOTHING.

You take the point too far. 'Free' college is a very bad idea, but if your house was burning down you'd want the fire department to come. Why should your neighbors pay to save your house?

Because keeping the fire department ready and operating at all times benefits them if it's THEIR house that catches fire instead. Also, the fire in my house quite possibly might spread to theirs.

Now tell me what direct benefit I get from educating someone else's kid.

You really can't work this one out for yourself?

You can't work out something that doesn't exist. If it had a direct benefit, you'd say what it was. Since you don't, seems you haven't worked it out.

Take at least 1/3 of the kids currently in HS and put them on the street tomorrow. Would that result in a cost or a benefit to society, genius?

High school ain't college, Chuckles. Take a look at our college campuses right now and tell me those spoiled little assholes are a benefit to society.

Victims and Microaggressions: Why 2015 Was The Year Students Lost Their Minds

(I don't normally pay attention to the Daily Beast, but in this case, they'll do as a demonstration.)

I guarantee you that the asswipes out there screeching and shouting are NOT the ones paying out of their own pockets, nor are they at all likely to graduate college with a useful degree and obtain gainful employment. They're a lot more likely to spend the rest of their lives screeching and protesting and being a nuisance, either for fun or profit.

The ones who are actually going to benefit society are in their dorm rooms, studying and wishing the protesters would shut the hell up so they can concentrate. They're also taking responsibility for their own educations.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The direct benefit to me of total strangers sitting in "Perspectives in Pop Culture" classes on my dime?

No, I'm really going to need some help here.

You're not only familiar with the current curriculum in every state university in America, but you also know it wouldn't change once tuitions were rolled back to where they were in the 1950s and 1960s? Remarkable.

It's remarkable that you think "free college" at those state universities is something that should exist. Just another Liberal, who doesn't have the guts to call himself a Democrat, thinking those who didn't produce the kids owe something to them their own sorry parents won't provide.

Why are you opposed to the parents of these kids funding their own kid's college? Why do you think it's the personal responsibility of someone that isn't their parent?

If you are talking about college, why is it the "responsibility" of the individual's parents? You keep making that assumption. We are presumably talking about people who are adults at that point.

Because most likely, the "adult" in question is 18 and just graduated high school and has little or no job experience and is still living at home and being otherwise supported by their parents.......

If the adult in question is an adult he should support himself.

Irrelevant and tangential. Support himself or not, that's between him and his family. The operative point is that, either way, I shouldn't be paying to send him to college.

 

[Unkotare]

You're not only familiar with the current curriculum in every state university in America, but you also know it wouldn't change once tuitions were rolled back to where they were in the 1950s and 1960s? Remarkable.

It's remarkable that you think "free college" at those state universities is something that should exist. Just another Liberal, who doesn't have the guts to call himself a Democrat, thinking those who didn't produce the kids owe something to them their own sorry parents won't provide.

Why are you opposed to the parents of these kids funding their own kid's college? Why do you think it's the personal responsibility of someone that isn't their parent?

If you are talking about college, why is it the "responsibility" of the individual's parents? You keep making that assumption. We are presumably talking about people who are adults at that point.

Because most likely, the "adult" in question is 18 and just graduated high school and has little or no job experience and is still living at home and being otherwise supported by their parents.......

If the adult in question is an adult he should support himself.

Irrelevant and tangential. Support himself or not, that's between him and his family. The operative point is that, either way, I shouldn't be paying to send him to college.

Why should anyone be if he is an adult?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Not when the purpose of each isn't the same.

I shouldn't pay to educate someone else's kid. I'm not the one that produced someone else's kids. That, alone, means it's not my place to do a damn thing for them. NOTHING.

You take the point too far. 'Free' college is a very bad idea, but if your house was burning down you'd want the fire department to come. Why should your neighbors pay to save your house?

Because keeping the fire department ready and operating at all times benefits them if it's THEIR house that catches fire instead. Also, the fire in my house quite possibly might spread to theirs.

Now tell me what direct benefit I get from educating someone else's kid.

You really can't work this one out for yourself?

The direct benefit to me of total strangers sitting in "Perspectives in Pop Culture" classes on my dime?

No, I'm really going to need some help here.

You are confusing college and HS. Read my original post.

No, I'm not. YOU are confusing them by bringing high school into a discussion of free college in the first place. I have been steadfastly addressing the question of taxpayers funding people's COLLEGE educations, and will continue to do so. If you want to digress and blur lines by constantly reverting back to high school, that's your problem.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It's remarkable that you think "free college" at those state universities is something that should exist. Just another Liberal, who doesn't have the guts to call himself a Democrat, thinking those who didn't produce the kids owe something to them their own sorry parents won't provide.

Why are you opposed to the parents of these kids funding their own kid's college? Why do you think it's the personal responsibility of someone that isn't their parent?

If you are talking about college, why is it the "responsibility" of the individual's parents? You keep making that assumption. We are presumably talking about people who are adults at that point.

Because most likely, the "adult" in question is 18 and just graduated high school and has little or no job experience and is still living at home and being otherwise supported by their parents.......

If the adult in question is an adult he should support himself.

Irrelevant and tangential. Support himself or not, that's between him and his family. The operative point is that, either way, I shouldn't be paying to send him to college.

Why should anyone be if he is an adult?

Why is it relevant to the topic of taxpayer-funded college?

 

[Unkotare]

You take the point too far. 'Free' college is a very bad idea, but if your house was burning down you'd want the fire department to come. Why should your neighbors pay to save your house?

Because keeping the fire department ready and operating at all times benefits them if it's THEIR house that catches fire instead. Also, the fire in my house quite possibly might spread to theirs.

Now tell me what direct benefit I get from educating someone else's kid.

You really can't work this one out for yourself?

You can't work out something that doesn't exist. If it had a direct benefit, you'd say what it was. Since you don't, seems you haven't worked it out.

Take at least 1/3 of the kids currently in HS and put them on the street tomorrow. Would that result in a cost or a benefit to society, genius?

High school ain't college......

Yeah, that's a distinction I have made several times now. Congratulations of being a better reader than whatshisass.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Now think about that for a second.


....

Apparently he thinks the purpose behind learning the second grade is the same as for college. With some of those that get in college now requiring remedial classes, I can see where he would make that mistake.

The principle is the same....why should you pay for educating someone else's kid?

Not when the purpose of each isn't the same.

I shouldn't pay to educate someone else's kid. I'm not the one that produced someone else's kids. That, alone, means it's not my place to do a damn thing for them. NOTHING.

You take the point too far. 'Free' college is a very bad idea, but if your house was burning down you'd want the fire department to come. Why should your neighbors pay to save your house?

For the reading impaired, note where I am referring to K-12 vs college.

For the reading-impaired, note where the thread isn't about K-12.

 

[Samson]

It's remarkable that you think "free college" at those state universities is something that should exist. Just another Liberal, who doesn't have the guts to call himself a Democrat, thinking those who didn't produce the kids owe something to them their own sorry parents won't provide.

Why are you opposed to the parents of these kids funding their own kid's college? Why do you think it's the personal responsibility of someone that isn't their parent?

If you are talking about college, why is it the "responsibility" of the individual's parents? You keep making that assumption. We are presumably talking about people who are adults at that point.

Because most likely, the "adult" in question is 18 and just graduated high school and has little or no job experience and is still living at home and being otherwise supported by their parents.......

If the adult in question is an adult he should support himself.

Irrelevant and tangential. Support himself or not, that's between him and his family. The operative point is that, either way, I shouldn't be paying to send him to college.

Why should anyone be if he is an adult?

......

Dense.

 

[Unkotare]

...... Take a look at our college campuses right now and tell me those spoiled little assholes are a benefit to society.........

I have, and a great many certainly are. However, don't make the same mistake as whatshisass and conflate two different things.

 

[Unkotare]

Apparently he thinks the purpose behind learning the second grade is the same as for college. With some of those that get in college now requiring remedial classes, I can see where he would make that mistake.

The principle is the same....why should you pay for educating someone else's kid?

Not when the purpose of each isn't the same.

I shouldn't pay to educate someone else's kid. I'm not the one that produced someone else's kids. That, alone, means it's not my place to do a damn thing for them. NOTHING.

You take the point too far. 'Free' college is a very bad idea, but if your house was burning down you'd want the fire department to come. Why should your neighbors pay to save your house?

For the reading impaired, note where I am referring to K-12 vs college.

For the reading-impaired, note where the thread isn't about K-12.

Note the original post that confused whatshisass so much.

 

[Unkotare]

......

I guarantee you that the asswipes out there screeching and shouting are NOT the ones paying out of their own pockets, nor are they at all likely to graduate college with a useful degree and obtain gainful employment. They're a lot more likely to spend the rest of their lives screeching and protesting and being a nuisance, either for fun or profit.

The ones who are actually going to benefit society are in their dorm rooms, studying and wishing the protesters would shut the hell up so they can concentrate. They're also taking responsibility for their own educations.

I believe you. Now show the proof (since you gave a guarantee and all).

 

[Unkotare]

You take the point too far. 'Free' college is a very bad idea, but if your house was burning down you'd want the fire department to come. Why should your neighbors pay to save your house?

Because keeping the fire department ready and operating at all times benefits them if it's THEIR house that catches fire instead. Also, the fire in my house quite possibly might spread to theirs.

Now tell me what direct benefit I get from educating someone else's kid.

You really can't work this one out for yourself?

The direct benefit to me of total strangers sitting in "Perspectives in Pop Culture" classes on my dime?

No, I'm really going to need some help here.

You are confusing college and HS. Read my original post.

No, I'm not. YOU are confusing them by bringing high school into a discussion of free college in the first place. ......

You have to try a little harder to follow along with the discussion.

 

[Unkotare]

If you are talking about college, why is it the "responsibility" of the individual's parents? You keep making that assumption. We are presumably talking about people who are adults at that point.

Because most likely, the "adult" in question is 18 and just graduated high school and has little or no job experience and is still living at home and being otherwise supported by their parents.......

If the adult in question is an adult he should support himself.

Irrelevant and tangential. Support himself or not, that's between him and his family. The operative point is that, either way, I shouldn't be paying to send him to college.

Why should anyone be if he is an adult?

Why is it relevant to the topic of taxpayer-funded college?

It's the exact principle that whatshisass keeps referring to.