More student loans for California

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/11/19/californi...ition.protests/

 

What part of bankrupt do they not understand?

More of the gimme generation who feels entitled to all the free hand outs the govt will give.

 

luckily we have the power to just vote more money outta thin air. otherwise it would be a problem. unemployment coming to an end? no problem, obama can just pass laws to keep extending the checks. while we are at it, lets just make unemployment and welfare checks double and throw in some free universal healthcare. lets just vote to to raise taxes so every can have a free tier 1 education, not a big deal. lol.

in a ll seriousness, i hope they raise tuition 60%. less competition for me! i do not support or condone the dilution of my UC degree.

 

I am glad I graduated back in 2003. UC system was very reasonable back then.

 

1/3 increase rate is just ridonculous!!!

 

Hey, college is an investment in yourself. With a degree you will get far more lifetime earnings on average than you would without one. If that is not worth it to someone to take out a loan to brighten their future prosects, ok, put up drywall for a living. Thats the choice.

The flip side is that some total stanger pays to keep some kids tuition down through his taxes, even if he never used the school or will in his lifetime. And knowing what I know about the big research institutions, millions of dollars are spent each year to do research that puffs up the university's image, chase after federal money, and educate the best and brightest from around the globe but not neccessarily people from that state. Does the research lead to new inventions and drugs and all kind of good stuff? Yes, but it does not neccessarily take money from Californians (or any state) and spend it for the educational puposes of the average Californian.

We've spent to sh*tloads on our medical school in the past ten years for research purposes and have made lot of great opportunities for student who by and large are not from our state and the tab is picked up by a bunch of rural farmers and such who want to fund a school that their kids can go to and not one that is just out to say "We are rated number 3 in the world for some kind of research" done mostly by students from India. If my state decided our budget cuts were being targeted at the university, I'd be fine with them shutting down some of the research, but the fact is, they put it on tuition first in hope that most of the voters will bitch to their reps about more funding for the university. Its a boring political game year after year, but voters are too dumb to figure it out.

But the fact is, there are lots of schools out there to choose from in other states, and you are better off with big loans and an education than you are with no debt and no degree.

 

I think this is so fundamentally wrong and foolhardy. The UC system, along with the CSU and community college systems, have long been among or at the top of public universities worldwide, and that is something to be proud of. Since 1984 (coinciding with...oh, yeah, Reagan's presidency and the conservative rebirth) the funding for UC and CSU has dropped dramatically as a percentage of state General Fund appropriations, while funding for criminal justice and incarceration facilities has nearly tripled (mostly to fight the "war on drugs," at the behest of the very powerful Prison Guard lobby).

Now, I think (and maybe I'm alone in this) that it's bad social policy to spend more on incarceration than on education. I am not a member of the "gimme generation." I believe that it is right for me to pay taxes to support the education of future generations of Californians, because I have benefited from state educational subsidies. Rather, the generation of leaders and the polity who make up the electorate who have taken control of state politics are members of the "I care for me and mine, alone" generation, and do not understand or believe in the providence of investing in the intellectual capacity of this state.

Saddling students with tens of thousands of dollars in debt essentially forecloses them from buying homes in the state, leading many to take their high-quality education with them when they leave. It would be next to impossible to take an entry-level job as a teacher in an elementary school or high school straight out of undergrad, when you account for loan payments on a $50,000 balance. Don't we want highly intelligent and well educated people to be teaching in our public schools? So many people I know were driven away from this career path by educational debt alone.

Tuition in state should be low, to lure the best and brightest from other states to come to ours, where their tax payments over the course of a career will far exceed the initial investment that the state made in their education. If we don't educate this generation to succeed in the information economy, we can only expect that the average level of wealth and prosperity will go down relative to the last generation. Gee, thanks, guys.

It's not so much a matter of not having enough money as it is a question of priorities. I, for one, believe that education and youth development programs should be THE #1 priority in the state budget. But what do I know, I'm just here taking handouts.

- Public elementary, Public High '03, UCSD '07, Berkeley '10.

 

Low tuition and luring the best and brightest are not conguent. If that were the case the brightest would be at cheap community colleges and not at Harvard. And people don't neccessarily take a job in that state they left their home to attend college. Keeping your tuition low with tax money, to lure someone from Jersey who then goes home to work buys California exactly nothing. If thats what you want to do, cool. But most states have in state and out of state tuition rates for state funded schools.

My state ofers low tuition to people from foreign countries. I have no problem with foreign students, just don't think it is in the best interest of local tax payers to buy down the cost of tuition to people from somewhere else over their own sons and daughters.

 

That's part of living in a society; you pay for things you may never need or use, because it's part of the social contract. All Californians benefit directly from having students learning things in the UC schools, because those students then populate jobs in the sectors that make California's economy so powerful and cutting-edge. They attract businesses which want smart, qualified professionals. They pay taxes to the state which are higher than they would if they were, as you say, putting up drywall.

There are a many examples of things that total strangers pay for even if they never use the facilities, but that's a part of being a resident of an organized state. I think there is a fundamental selfishness that infects the electorate who says "well, my son/daughter doesn't use the UC system, so why should I have to pay a cent for it?" You don't hear the same person saying "well, my son/daughter isn't incarcerated, so my tax dollars shouldn't be available for prisons." Pacifists can't earmark their federal tax dollars away from spending for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. All the same thing, it's just that education is prioritized below violence and security in the people's hierarchy of needs. I think that's backwards.

Quick2k

 

Ya doesnt make any fukkin sense out here, were most obviosly the most expensive and highest taxed state in the country. Jobs are becomming more scarce and now this, and watch our population continue to climb.

I think I have figured it out, all the broke people are immigrating to CA so we can pay for them. CA taxes the hell outta anyone that makes money and gives freebies to anyone that doesnt pull their own weight.