Nanker Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 Wtf is free college? It's all those colleges and universities who have professors, administrators, staff, groundskeepers, cafeteria help that completely volunteer their services. And let's not forget the construction companies and workers who build the campi, and the utility companies that furnish the gas, water, electricity, telecommunications, etc. That's all freely given gratis, no string attached. All this so the little darlings can get a real education that will get them nowhere in life but hey, at least it'll be for free. Once they figure out how to get all those folks to donate their time and money and work.
Dorkington Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 If Sanders were elected , what could he get thru a Republican Congress ? Big money like Citizens Untied , lobbyists control politicians . This is why I'm not too upset about him 'losing'. My original expectation was that he was running for the Presidency simply to push the conversation on the left, and he did just that. More than ever, 'Democrats', support a lot of progressive policies. Not sure if they'll happen, because as you said, big money controls our government (yes, both sides), but at least there's public momentum for certain things. Wtf is free college? Tax-funded, just like other tax-funded initiatives, services, etc. People just use the word 'free', because they aren't directly paying for it. But you knew that.
FireChan Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 Gee, it was only a few days ago we were told what a great principled man Bernie Sanders is. Silver lining, this could be the first dose of reality for all those safe space college kids. This is why I'm not too upset about him 'losing'. My original expectation was that he was running for the Presidency simply to push the conversation on the left, and he did just that. More than ever, 'Democrats', support a lot of progressive policies. Not sure if they'll happen, because as you said, big money controls our government (yes, both sides), but at least there's public momentum for certain things. Tax-funded, just like other tax-funded initiatives, services, etc. People just use the word 'free', because they aren't directly paying for it. But you knew that. Why not? The US Gov is swimming in dough. They can pay for everything.
Chef Jim Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 This is why I'm not too upset about him 'losing'. My original expectation was that he was running for the Presidency simply to push the conversation on the left, and he did just that. More than ever, 'Democrats', support a lot of progressive policies. Not sure if they'll happen, because as you said, big money controls our government (yes, both sides), but at least there's public momentum for certain things. Tax-funded, just like other tax-funded initiatives, services, etc. People just use the word 'free', because they aren't directly paying for it. But you knew that. Then the word free is a lie. I read an opinion piece in the WSJ saying that the word free should not exist. I'll try to find it and link it. There is no such thing. It's a marketing ploy and people are fools for falling for it. Question for you. Why should I, who chose not to have children mainly for financial reasons, be required to pay for your children's education?
Dorkington Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 I'm fine with either term being used. I'm not sure how many people see 'free education' and don't understand that its paid for by taxes. As far as why your taxes shouldn't go towards children being educated, because you don't plan to have children. That heads down a slippery slope. My own personal opinion is that I believe in tax funded services that better the whole of society, even if I don't plan to use them. I believe a certain level of education benefits the whole of society.
keepthefaith Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 It's all those colleges and universities who have professors, administrators, staff, groundskeepers, cafeteria help that completely volunteer their services. And let's not forget the construction companies and workers who build the campi, and the utility companies that furnish the gas, water, electricity, telecommunications, etc. That's all freely given gratis, no string attached. All this so the little darlings can get a real education that will get them nowhere in life but hey, at least it'll be for free. Once they figure out how to get all those folks to donate their time and money and work. Would the government attempt to negotiate a price with the colleges and might the colleges choose to not accept any or only a few of the "free" students due to the low re-imbursements and could that lead to higher college costs for those students that pay their own way? I'm fine with either term being used. I'm not sure how many people see 'free education' and don't understand that its paid for by taxes. As far as why your taxes shouldn't go towards children being educated, because you don't plan to have children. That heads down a slippery slope. My own personal opinion is that I believe in tax funded services that better the whole of society, even if I don't plan to use them. I believe a certain level of education benefits the whole of society. Would we allow people who get taxpayer paid college education to quit after 2-3 years if they don't like it or don't want to do the work required to graduate?
Very wide right Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 Belief in God doesn't make you schizophrenic. Belief that God is talking to you does. This from a man who saw them purposely blow up the pentagon on 911
IDBillzFan Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 I'm fine with either term being used. I'm not sure how many people see 'free education' and don't understand that its paid for by taxes. Then why are they calling it 'free' if everyone knows it's not free? What reasoning is there for that?
Azalin Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 This from a man who saw them purposely blow up the pentagon on 911 If you're going to troll here, at least try to raise your game a bit, will you?
Dorkington Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 Would the government attempt to negotiate a price with the colleges and might the colleges choose to not accept any or only a few of the "free" students due to the low re-imbursements and could that lead to higher college costs for those students that pay their own way? Would we allow people who get taxpayer paid college education to quit after 2-3 years if they don't like it or don't want to do the work required to graduate? Are you suggesting that college should be mandatory? Hm, interesting, didn't really think about that option. My opinions on tax funded 'college' are a bit mixed. I'd like to see community college and trade schools be fully tax funded as a first step, and then university if the results prove favorable. Separately, at the high school level, I think there needs to be some changes need to be made to better prepare children for the real world. All I know is, we throw a lot of kids into loads of debt because we (as a society) tell them they *have* to do it. Also, I'm not sure if a BA in underwater basket weaving is something that should be tax funded, compared to a BS in engineering. Can we pick and choose which degrees are tax funded? And if we do, does that create social problems as a result? Not every science or art is entirely useful in the real world.
GG Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 This from a man who saw them purposely blow up the pentagon on 911 Who's them? And how did they blow up the Pentagon?
Deranged Rhino Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 If you're going to troll here, at least try to raise your game a bit, will you? Seconded.
sodbuster Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 A college education is an investment, yes? So if we make college free, why not get rid of capital gains taxes and make all investments free?
reddogblitz Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 Was he the the one being played, or were you and your fellow Sandernistas the ones who got berned? Both.
Nanker Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 If you're going to troll here, at least try to raise your game a bit, will you? I believe this stems from a root misunderstanding between Tom and the Giants troll. Tom stated many times that he was the plane crash into the Pentagon on 911. Somehow it got twisted in their back and forth and the Giant troll believed that Tom said he saw rockets fired into it. ****, for all I know Tom might have said something like that in a frustrated sarcastic response to him. Anyway, the Giant Troll has oft repeated that ridiculous assertion.
Azalin Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 Seconded. Why is it that trolls seem to universally be some of the most unimaginative people online nowadays? Where are the Hogboys of today? Say what you will about him, but Hogboy practically wrote the book on internet trolling. His Combo alter-ego had everyone, myself included, completely wound up. Kids today. They just don't get it. I believe this stems from a root misunderstanding between Tom and the Giants troll. Tom stated many times that he was the plane crash into the Pentagon on 911. Somehow it got twisted in their back and forth and the Giant troll believed that Tom said he saw rockets fired into it. ****, for all I know Tom might have said something like that in a frustrated sarcastic response to him. Anyway, the Giant Troll has oft repeated that ridiculous assertion. I wasn't around to experience the one you refer to as "the Giants troll". I quit posting here for a decade or so, only stopping by to lurk every couple of years or so, so I missed that one.
IDBillzFan Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 Kids today. They just don't get it. Circle gets the square.
FireChan Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 Why is it that trolls seem to universally be some of the most unimaginative people online nowadays? Where are the Hogboys of today? Say what you will about him, but Hogboy practically wrote the book on internet trolling. His Combo alter-ego had everyone, myself included, completely wound up. Kids today. They just don't get it. I wasn't around to experience the one you refer to as "the Giants troll". I quit posting here for a decade or so, only stopping by to lurk every couple of years or so, so I missed that one. I believe it was only a few months ago.
....lybob Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 I believe this stems from a root misunderstanding between Tom and the Giants troll. Tom stated many times that he was the plane crash into the Pentagon on 911. Somehow it got twisted in their back and forth and the Giant troll believed that Tom said he saw rockets fired into it. ****, for all I know Tom might have said something like that in a frustrated sarcastic response to him. Anyway, the Giant Troll has oft repeated that ridiculous assertion. While Tom definitely has the mass to cause the damage can he really generate the velocity needed given that his ankles are made out of chalk .
Nanker Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 Why is it that trolls seem to universally be some of the most unimaginative people online nowadays? Where are the Hogboys of today? Say what you will about him, but Hogboy practically wrote the book on internet trolling. His Combo alter-ego had everyone, myself included, completely wound up. Kids today. They just don't get it. I wasn't around to experience the one you refer to as "the Giants troll". I quit posting here for a decade or so, only stopping by to lurk every couple of years or so, so I missed that one. The "Giants troll" is in reference to "Very Wide Right" as a screen name for a "Bills" fan. He tolls on the main board too. Somehow he and Tom got into it about 911 and the Pentagon. I skipped over a lot of that inanity like I do so many of the verbal fights between two or three posters. While Tom definitely has the mass to cause the damage can he really generate the velocity needed given that his ankles are made out of chalk . Now that's uncalled for.
Recommended Posts