Just normal American Utopia...

[Archy1221]

His case got so much discussion in the sports world when the horrible lady falsely accused Trevor of sexual misconduct.   Now it seems the only place you can find content is social media or the occasional “update” article with a quick passing of 1/4 of updated facts.   For instance, Ken Rosenthal, wrote Bauer should be out of MLB two years ago and hasn’t really said anything now to retract his incorrect , idiotic and damaging statement.  
 

These rush to judgment stories happen far too often in the public sphere and on college campuses that you would think society would have learned by now.   We need to get away from the “believe all women/men” and instead go with “support all women/men to come forward but look into the facts before we punish the accused”  just because they come forward doesn’t mean the allegation is true.   
 

Trevor lost 2 years of an MLB career and the punter from the Giants lost his entire career before it got started both based on false accusations of them.  

 

 

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

[Lorewarn]

36 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

 

 

 

Found Matt Gaetz' dad.

[ZRod]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

 

Why can't Biden let the will of the free market work? End these senseless regulations!

[Archy1221]

Dang it Bill…I hate to keep agreeing with you.

 

 

[BigRedBuster]

On 10/12/2023 at 2:13 PM, Archy1221 said:

Dang it Bill…I hate to keep agreeing with you.

 

 

Kind of like political parties.

[teachercd]

On 10/5/2023 at 1:15 PM, BigRedBuster said:

 

 

Feds always have a hardon for these types of things.

[DevoHusker]

I was amazed to see this

 

 

I did not know what constitutes top 10%. According to several sources, it is just under $200k.  My wife and I combined make about half that...

https://www.fool.com/the-ascent/personal-finance/articles/whats-the-income-of-the-top-10-5-and-1/

 

[BigRedBuster]

I think that if I'm Gucci, I am investing in very small cracking devices that I can hide in the liners of the bags.  Stuff like that is relatively inexpensive from what it used to be.

 

 

 

 

[Archy1221]

 

[BigRedBuster]

11 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

 

Wrong

 

Cost of college has skyrocketed since I was at UNL.  If you look at what percentage the government (state) is funding then compared to now, it's not even close.  The state used to fund the University system WAY more.

[Archy1221]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

Wrong

 

Cost of college has skyrocketed since I was at UNL.  If you look at what percentage the government (state) is funding then compared to now, it's not even close.  The state used to fund the University system WAY more.

He is not wrong.  What you say is also a component, but Peter is absolutely correct.  

[Archy1221]

Choose wisely!   Schools should be required to have counseling session with any student that is paying for education with student loan funds to talk about the amount of loans being requested, the future cost of those loans, what the average expected income from the major being chosen is going to be and how much the debt repayments are going to be as a percentage of average income after graduation.   
 

You can soon make $40,000 a year working fast food in CA working 40 hrs a week with 2 weeks vacation at the new $20/hr minimum without going into $100,000 debt.  
 

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

15 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

He is not wrong.  What you say is also a component, but Peter is absolutely correct.  

 

Well the government-blaming component -- the knee-jerk conservative headline here -- isn't the real story, either.

 

He claims "the minute the government guaranteed loans" the cost of college skyrocketed. In fact the government started offering student loans in 1958 and the era of student loans covers all the years we consider reasonably priced college education and manageable post-college loan repayment.

 

So the skyrocketing cost of college in recent years must be a confluence of other things, including misguided greed. Peter also calls student loans the promise of "something for nothing" when they are in fact loans that must be paid back with interest. So he's really just an a$$h@!e about the whole thing, assuming the only reason college students are libs is their fealty to a federal government that has pursued a reasonable practice across administrations of all political persuasions. 

 

Come to think of it, there's not a single assertion Peter is absolutely correct about.

 

Whereas we could all gather around the fire and discuss the cost of education, crippling student loans, the installation of loan limits, and the real world value of high end universities, community colleges, and trade schools. 

[Archy1221]

46 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

Come to think of it, there's not a single assertion Peter is absolutely correct about.

does Peter embellish in his statements?  Sure, kinda like most people trying to make a point.  Look at your post as an example. 
 

 

The research and CBO disagree with you.  
 

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/56754

 

Until recently, the existing empirical evidence did not clearly show that increased borrowing through federal student loans contributed to the tuition increases. However, new research indicates that it played a role in increasing tuition for undergraduate programs.3Economists have estimated the extent to which expanding student loan availability contributed to colleges’ and universities’ ability to charge higher prices for the same services. To do that, economists studied periods in which students’ or parents’ ability to borrow for school changed sharply.

For example, David Lucca and coauthors studied the effects of increases in loan limits for subsidized and unsubsidized Stafford loans in academic years 2008 and 2009 on tuition for undergraduate programs. They estimated that schools accepting students with those types of loans increased their sticker price tuition between 20 cents and 60 cents for each dollar the loan limits increased and that the net price students paid after accounting for discounts also increased.4

Mahyar Kargar and William Mann studied the tightening, in 2011, of eligibility criteria for PLUS loans available to parents of undergraduate students. Many parents who had been eligible before the change were no longer eligible. The economists looked at the schools’ response to that reduction in available credit and found that schools that were more affected by the change raised their tuition less than other schools and received less revenue per student than other schools. Those findings indicate that the increased availability of financial aid led, at least in part, to tuition increases.5