No more obamacare

reefraff

reefraff

Active Member

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3215372
Discounted rate? There's no discounted rate at Texas State Universities. They have a Flat Rate Tuition where the only difference is whether you're a Texas resident or you're not. I found this article from a Dallas ABC affiliate that was written in 2007:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...1968ebbf2.html
Texas deregulated the tuitions in 2003, and they've escalated every year since then. Grants and non-loan student aid only apply to underprivileged and low income families. Trust me, I couldn't apply for any of those types of loans with my income.
Key Point: Since Republicans took over Texas government five years ago, tuition has skyrocketed -- increasing by 68% across the UT system. Bottom line: Republicans are pricing families out of the opportunity of higher education.
When Republicans took control of the Texas Legislature in 2003, they did everything in their power to shrink government in order to ensure that Texas families were left to drown in the bathtub. Take, for example, tuition deregulation.
Prior to 2003, the state invested in higher education tuition and set a hard cap for universities. This created low tuition for Texas colleges and universities, allowing Texas families -- many of whom are middle and working class -- to still have opportunties for higher education.
However, the 78th Legislature chose to implement tuition deregulation, allowing Texas colleges and universities to jack up tuition without any measurable increase in the quality of education. I started school in the fall of 2002, and left UT-Austin in the spring of 2006, and I never once witnessed any measurable increase in the quality of my education. I did, however, notice an increase in tuition -- an increase that is hitting students and families hard.
UT Regents -- appointed by the failed Republican leadership we must desparately replace -- have decided to increase tuition and fees at the UT system schools once again. Here is a look at the increase in tuition in fees, from the fall of 2003 (the last year before tuition deregulation) and what families can expect to pay when they begin their college journey next fall:
Increase in Tuition and Fees in UT System
Fall ‘03 Fall ‘08 Increase
UT-Arlington $ 2,366 $ 4,071 72.06%
UT-Austin $ 2,721 $ 4,266 56.78%
UT-Brownsville $ 1,490 $ 2,736 83.62%
UT-Dallas $ 2,622 $ 4,705 79.44%
UT-El Paso $ 1,837 $ 3,034 65.16%
UT-Pan American $ 1,561 $ 2,612 67.33%
UT-Permian Basin $ 1,749 $ 2,714 55.17%
UT-San Antonio $ 2,222 $ 3,832 72.46%
UT-Tyler $ 1,795 $ 2,994 66.80%
UT SYSTEM AVG $ 2,040 $ 3,440 68.62%

From your link
In the early 1980s, Texas bragged of having the country's lowest tuition, heavily subsidized with state oil and gas revenues. Now the state ranks 19th in cost, higher than any other state in the Southwest or West. (Vermont tops the College Board's list at more than $10,000, while Florida is the cheapest at less than $3,400.)

[hr]
So oil and gas taxes were used to subsidize tuition but guess what happened to domestic production in the 90's when oil was less than 20 a barrel? I guess they should have just increased the taxes to make up for the decreased production.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3215375
So then what does it matter what they pay the coach?
Because the coaches salary comes out of the same general fund that they use to pay the other professors that teach at the school, general improvements, and what should keep tuition rates low. The money gained from BCS Bowls and such goes towards improvements in the Athletic Dept. itself - supporting all the other 'non football' sports, maintaining stadiums and athletic facilities, purchasing athletic equipment and uniforms, etc.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3215372
Discounted rate? There's no discounted rate at Texas State Universities. They have a Flat Rate Tuition where the only difference is whether you're a Texas resident or you're not. I found this article from a Dallas ABC affiliate that was written in 2007:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...1968ebbf2.html
Texas deregulated the tuitions in 2003, and they've escalated every year since then. Grants and non-loan student aid only apply to underprivileged and low income families. Trust me, I couldn't apply for any of those types of loans with my income.
Key Point: Since Republicans took over Texas government five years ago, tuition has skyrocketed -- increasing by 68% across the UT system. Bottom line: Republicans are pricing families out of the opportunity of higher education.
When Republicans took control of the Texas Legislature in 2003, they did everything in their power to shrink government in order to ensure that Texas families were left to drown in the bathtub. Take, for example, tuition deregulation.

When I say discounted I mean AFTER federal grants and such. Which everyone can apply for and usually gets.
With that said I noticed the same article you linked stated community colleges in Texas are one of the cheapest in the nation. Is it not feasable to take all your basic classes for 2 years at a community college and then move to the university anymore? The cost would average back out....
Or wait, here is a novel idea...save themselves the money and go to college in another state off the border. the cost for the drive would be cheaper.Once again the market regulates itself...if it is to expensive in one place you go elsewhere.
 
bang guy

bang guy

Moderator
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3215372
Discounted rate? There's no discounted rate at Texas State Universities.
It costs 17K per year for a full time student and the tuition is around 8K. That sounds like a pretty good discount.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3215556
Because the coaches salary comes out of the same general fund that they use to pay the other professors that teach at the school, general improvements, and what should keep tuition rates low. The money gained from BCS Bowls and such goes towards improvements in the Athletic Dept. itself - supporting all the other 'non football' sports, maintaining stadiums and athletic facilities, purchasing athletic equipment and uniforms, etc.
Wrong
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colle...n-salary_N.htm
"He is paid from athletics department revenue. The department receives no government or institutional support and has transferred more than $6.6 million to the university since the 2005-06 fiscal year. Texas is among 25 of 120 major-college programs that made more on athletics than they spent in 2007-08, the most recent year covered in studies by USA TODAY and the NCAA; it spent $111 million, and had a $9.2 million surplus."
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3215617
Wrong
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colle...n-salary_N.htm
"He is paid from athletics department revenue. The department receives no government or institutional support and has transferred more than $6.6 million to the university since the 2005-06 fiscal year. Texas is among 25 of 120 major-college programs that made more on athletics than they spent in 2007-08, the most recent year covered in studies by USA TODAY and the NCAA; it spent $111 million, and had a $9.2 million surplus."
This is the problem with so many that criticize certain policies and such in politics today. They make an assumption without ever doing the research before hand...or they hear something and just keep repeating it without ever fact checking it.
 
srfisher17

srfisher17

Active Member
Making higher education available to any QUALIFIED kid is an area I'm actually quite liberal. However, taxpayers should not (IMO) be the primary funding source....although they already are in many cases. TN, GA, and maybe other states use $ from lottery profits to fund any student with a 'B" average. This grant, along with low-income Pell Grants can go a long way in many state schools. I have no problem with students taking out easily available student loans or using work-study to fund their education. Where I live, any QUALIFIED student should be able to afford college, maybe not the most expensive state schools, but still a good 2 or 4 yr school. IMO, even if a kid graduates with some serious debt; it is a very wise investment and the debt is chicken feed in the long run.
Also; I think it would be smart and economical for many more kids to do their 1st year or two at a Community College; of course, making sure all credits will transfer.
In addition; the Armed Forces are another excellent alternative for financing college, many kids will do better after spending a few years maturing.
 
bang guy

bang guy

Moderator
I have no problem, as a taxpayer, paying college tuition for good students. I personally am rather progressive on this. Well, more progressive than my other conservative stances. I really think that poor 'A' students should receive 100% taxpayer funded education. I don't think it would increase costs if we simply stopped all subsidies for 'C' students and below to pay for the poor 'A' students.
Let the welfare parents know that their child is guaranteed a free education if they study hard.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by Bang Guy
http:///forum/post/3215609
It costs 17K per year for a full time student and the tuition is around 8K. That sounds like a pretty good discount.
I'm not talking about housing, books, etc. Everyone is missing the point. Tuition at Texas State Schools was somewhat reasonable before the State Legislature deregulated the tuition in 2003. It now is wide open for the universities to charge whatever they like. This was just an example to show how state regulation and politics is no better than what you keep whining abput at the federal level. You keep harping you want to keep 'government out of your business', but you have no problem if the state government does the same things the federal government does.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3215620
This is the problem with so many that criticize certain policies and such in politics today. They make an assumption without ever doing the research before hand...or they hear something and just keep repeating it without ever fact checking it.
Riiight. And athletics is the only thing that matters when it comes to running a big university. Gotta have that big football program. Screw the educational value of going to college. Let the other professors take a pay cut, as long as the football program makes a BCS Bowl. This pretty sums up my argument:
Last February, high-ranking UT system officials and the 15 campus presidents agreed to a pay freeze for 2009-10. In June, the Austin campus froze salaries of most non-faculty personnel. And last week, an Austin campus committee recommended a tuition increase of 3.95% for both the 2010-11 and 2011-12 school years.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3215706
=
Last February, high-ranking UT system officials and the 15 campus presidents agreed to a pay freeze for 2009-10. In June, the Austin campus froze salaries of most non-faculty personnel. And last week, an Austin campus committee recommended a tuition increase of 3.95% for both the 2010-11 and 2011-12 school years.
And this is because they spend so much on football and sports?
 
bang guy

bang guy

Moderator
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3215704
I'm not talking about housing, books, etc. Everyone is missing the point. Tuition at Texas State Schools was somewhat reasonable before the State Legislature deregulated the tuition in 2003. It now is wide open for the universities to charge whatever they like. This was just an example to show how state regulation and politics is no better than what you keep whining abput at the federal level. You keep harping you want to keep 'government out of your business', but you have no problem if the state government does the same things the federal government does.
How is reducing regulation adding more government? Personally, I think it's stupid and short sighted to raise tuition beyond affordability but I don't see how it meddles in my affairs.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by Bang Guy
http:///forum/post/3215695
I have no problem, as a taxpayer, paying college tuition for good students. I personally am rather progressive on this. Well, more progressive than my other conservative stances. I really think that poor 'A' students should receive 100% taxpayer funded education. I don't think it would increase costs if we simply stopped all subsidies for 'C' students and below to pay for the poor 'A' students.
Let the welfare parents know that their child is guaranteed a free education if they study hard.
I am down with the taxpayer funding for needy A students BUT for certain course studies. I don't want to be paying for some kid to go screw around and party for 4 years. Make sure they are holding up their end of the deal by making passing grades in a major that holds some promise of future employment. The government already kinda does this with reimbursements if you agree to work for them for X years after graduating.
 
uneverno

uneverno

Active Member
The point is not a majority. It's not "Whose cuisine reigns supreme."
We're not a Democracy - we're a Republic. Majority is not a material issue. Personhood is. Civil rights are. The Constitution is.
What has been twisted into an issue of import to the R's and the D's is whose side you're on. That's only because the Republic has sanctioned a two party system. It's not a two party system though. They're both on the side of the Corporation. It's a game of Monopoly. The point of the two party system, as it stands, is to divide and conquer. If one "side" wins, they both do because, in fact, there is no difference between them.
I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and to bid defiance to the laws of our country.
Thomas Jefferson, letter to George Logan. November 12, 1816.
I would contend that Jefferson was correct: Our system has evolved to preserve the "aristocracy" at the expense of its supporters (i.e. We the Taxpayers.)
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3217290
Here's another prime example of how States rights are just as bad, if not worse, than Federal legislation:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35076853...lth-pregnancy/
She was choosing to have the baby. yet she still smoked for 6 months....Child abuse comes to mind.
Also, this is a city case...since it was handled by the district attorney...it has nothing to do with the state and their legislation. Courts are separate from the state legislation....or did you not know that.
 
bang guy

bang guy

Moderator
Well, the State legislation makes the laws that the courts interpret and enforce. I wouldn't say they are unrelated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top