(04-11-2017 12:15 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I wonder if they could extend this to medical schools and advanced degrees.

I've always had one weakness for a huge federal program, and that's the idea of federal level medical and nursing schools where the tuition is free but you then have to work X years in difficult locations like rural locations and inner cities.

I think there are programs that do that in certain states.

(04-11-2017 12:41 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  Always unintended consequences when you start jacking with the economics of a market and subsidizing.

Is the state setting the state rate for a state school jacking with the economics of the market? Hell federal student loans do more to screw with the market than this ever will.

What this will do is increase the competition for seats at state schools.

I mean if they were talking about setting rates on private schools, or giving money towards private tuition then I would be with you.

Quote:That's fine because I do not have to live in New York. Just make sure that we are not obliged Federally to pay for unintended consequences.

I seriously doubt in any way the debt here would be transferred to the federal government but, and I really hate to go here;

Federal Taxes paid by NY resident : $13,659
- Federal spending per-capita in NY: $9,940

Federal Taxes paid by AR resident : $10,917
- Federal spending per-capita in AR: $9,635

Every NY resident is a +3,500$ a year into the federal coffers, everyone from Arkansas is a +1,300$.

(04-11-2017 02:10 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 12:41 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  Always unintended consequences when you start jacking with the economics of a market and subsidizing.

Is the state setting the state rate for a state school jacking with the economics of the market? Hell federal student loans do more to screw with the market than this ever will.

What this will do is increase the competition for seats at state schools.

I mean if they were talking about setting rates on private schools, or giving money towards private tuition then I would be with you.

Quote:That's fine because I do not have to live in New York. Just make sure that we are not obliged Federally to pay for unintended consequences.

I seriously doubt in any way the debt here would be transferred to the federal government but, and I really hate to go here;

Federal Taxes paid by NY resident : $13,659
- Federal spending per-capita in NY: $9,940

Federal Taxes paid by AR resident : $10,917
- Federal spending per-capita in AR: $9,635

Every NY resident is a +3,500$ a year into the federal coffers, everyone from Arkansas is a +1,300$.

I guess cost of living gets thrown out the window here.

(04-11-2017 02:26 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 02:10 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 12:41 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  Always unintended consequences when you start jacking with the economics of a market and subsidizing.

Is the state setting the state rate for a state school jacking with the economics of the market? Hell federal student loans do more to screw with the market than this ever will.

What this will do is increase the competition for seats at state schools.

I mean if they were talking about setting rates on private schools, or giving money towards private tuition then I would be with you.

Quote:That's fine because I do not have to live in New York. Just make sure that we are not obliged Federally to pay for unintended consequences.

I seriously doubt in any way the debt here would be transferred to the federal government but, and I really hate to go here;

Federal Taxes paid by NY resident : $13,659
- Federal spending per-capita in NY: $9,940

Federal Taxes paid by AR resident : $10,917
- Federal spending per-capita in AR: $9,635

Every NY resident is a +3,500$ a year into the federal coffers, everyone from Arkansas is a +1,300$.

I guess cost of living gets thrown out the window here.

Yes, yes it does...

Because when you say "Don't ask the US government to user our Arkansas Dollars to bail out you New Yorkers" It;s kind of important to point out that "us new yorkers" are sending 3 times the number of dollars to DC as you guys.

In DC, a New York Dollar and an AK dollar has the exact same value. So why in the world would an apartment rent in NYC make a difference?

edit: the point is that NY is one of the biggest contributors to the federal treasury from which every draws cash. Ak does ok, but not as much.

(04-11-2017 02:29 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 02:26 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 02:10 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 12:41 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  Always unintended consequences when you start jacking with the economics of a market and subsidizing.

Is the state setting the state rate for a state school jacking with the economics of the market? Hell federal student loans do more to screw with the market than this ever will.

What this will do is increase the competition for seats at state schools.

I mean if they were talking about setting rates on private schools, or giving money towards private tuition then I would be with you.

Quote:That's fine because I do not have to live in New York. Just make sure that we are not obliged Federally to pay for unintended consequences.

I seriously doubt in any way the debt here would be transferred to the federal government but, and I really hate to go here;

Federal Taxes paid by NY resident : $13,659
- Federal spending per-capita in NY: $9,940

Federal Taxes paid by AR resident : $10,917
- Federal spending per-capita in AR: $9,635

Every NY resident is a +3,500$ a year into the federal coffers, everyone from Arkansas is a +1,300$.

I guess cost of living gets thrown out the window here.

Yes, yes it does...

Because when you say "Don't ask the US government to user our Arkansas Dollars to bail out you New Yorkers" It;s kind of important to point out that "us new yorkers" are sending 3 times the number of dollars to DC as you guys.

In DC, a New York Dollar and an AK dollar has the exact same value. So why in the world would an apartment rent in NYC make a difference?

edit: the point is that NY is one of the biggest contributors to the federal treasury from which every draws cash. Ak does ok, but not as much.

It matters because of your salaries are higher to adjust for COL therefore the gov't is taking more absolute dollars out of your paycheck. They don't care what your salary is or how much you pay for all the other crap. They take a cut of your paycheck by a %. This **** ain't rocket science.

Yes. Offering a 100% subsidy on education cost IS interfering with the market for education. The demand for zero cost education is greater than the demand for high cost education.

On the other point. Even if Arkansas only invests $1 to New York's $1000 I still don't want Arkansas' dollar to be spent on bailing out New York's unintended consequence that Arkansas had no say in.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

(04-11-2017 02:34 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  It matters because of your salaries are higher to adjust for COL therefore the gov't is taking more absolute dollars out of your paycheck. They don't care what your salary is or how much you pay for all the other crap. They take a cut of your paycheck by a %. This **** ain't rocket science.

Is a dollar from Arkansas worth less than a dollar from NY when the govt is spending it?

And if COL is so damn important, why does Arksnsas need as much *back* from the federal government as NY?

If it's COL driven then the money from AK should be lower *AND* the money to AK should be lower.... This **** ain't rocket science.

(04-11-2017 02:34 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  Yes. Offering a 100% subsidy on education cost IS interfering with the market for education.

So should all states stop subsidizing any of their in state tuition to state schools..

If not, where would you draw the line.

(04-11-2017 10:10 AM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 02:04 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  



Pretty much sums up my feelings on this.

I think there is a lot of knee jerk reactions going on from conservative, libertarians, and liberals on this.

Conservative complain about the tax mone
Libertarians complain about the market and the effect on value
Liberals complaining about the requirement to stay in the state afterwards

At the end of the day this is the *STATE* doing something for *STATE SCHOOLS*. The State is already subsidizing the tuition of these school they are just going to grow that.

In addition to that fact this does not cover room, board, books, or fees... This is not "free college". This is a tuition free experience for qualified kids already living in the state, whos parents are likely paying state taxes, and who will have to work in the state for four years afterwards (paying taxes) ir they will have to pay the loan back.

I fail to see how a *STATE* setting tuition for *STATE* residence at a *STATE* school to 0 is a gross slap in the face to anyone.

some of us figured that one out right out of the gate....

I never look at party lines when it comes to pragmatic solutions....

hell, I'll even take it a step further.....I think it scares smaller states to a level of losing occupants if this works....

ah-ha.....

(04-11-2017 05:16 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 02:34 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  Yes. Offering a 100% subsidy on education cost IS interfering with the market for education.

So should all states stop subsidizing any of their in state tuition to state schools..

If not, where would you draw the line.

What they should do is...before subsidizing anything...try to figure out just what the hell their market interference will actually do. Because what they actually do, pretty much, is just use it to bribe voters for votes because it sounds good.

Will colleges just raise tuition to try to milk the system? Will you subsidize private schools as well and if you don't what effect will it have on them? If you do agree to subsidize the privates do you encourage fly-by-night for profits? Does this subsidy apply to absolutely fricking useless degrees that nobody has job openings for? Will you be encouraging colleges to recruit as many warm bodies as possible each semester regardless of their likelihood of graduating? What happens to the labor market for say...physical therapists...when you are graduating way too many physical therapists, more than the job market can absorb?

When you subsidize dairies you can just give away free blocks of cheese or dump truckloads of milk out onto the ground. But when you get a surplus of subsidized college graduates you can't exactly feed 'em to the hogs.

(04-11-2017 07:08 AM)bullet Wrote:  30% of the population ends up with a college degree. Do we want to subsidize the top 30-40% (excluding those whose parents make over 125k)? We already do to some extent, but do we want to make it tuition free?

the beauty of this is how it is implemented based on restrictions....

I think most are in agreement since NY is uber libtard, they'll screw it up....

but as a first pass, others will take the 'wait and watch' approach and refine....

IMO, this one is a big deal within the 'ones that can but cannot' , but should be holding hands with the 'ones that can'....

this could be a game changer for a handful.....I would grade that as "acceptable" in posit

(04-11-2017 12:15 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I wonder if they could extend this to medical schools and advanced degrees.

I've always had one weakness for a huge federal program, and that's the idea of federal level medical and nursing schools where the tuition is free but you then have to work X years in difficult locations like rural locations and inner cities.

I made that point many posts ago...."4+ year degrees..."

that would be what I like to deem as, "the bonus boner"

(04-11-2017 08:30 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 06:51 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 02:04 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  



Pretty much sums up my feelings on this.

Good video. It's unfortunate that the Libertarians sound the most sane when they have no chance to be in control. But they become crazy as they get closer to having a breakthru - Gary Johnson...

Yes, odd isn't it how they seem crazier in the media portrayal when they have some success. So odd.

C'mon. Did you see Gary Johnson on those shows and/or in debates? The media didn't torpedo Gary. Hell, they tried to PUSH Gary because the thought was he'd split the GOP vote ala Perot and Bush in 1992. Unfortunately Gary squandered a golden opportunity to give the LP relevance when he came off as an uninformed buffoon. You cannot spin that any other way. He was bad, and that set the LP back at least 10 years.

(04-11-2017 06:16 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 05:16 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  So should all states stop subsidizing any of their in state tuition to state schools..

If not, where would you draw the line.

What they should do is...before subsidizing anything...try to figure out just what the hell their market interference will actually do. Because what they actually do, pretty much, is just use it to bribe voters for votes because it sounds good.

State colleges serve no purpose people, let's ban them!

Quote:Will colleges just raise tuition to try to milk the system?

In NY tuition are set by SUNY, not the schools. And SUNY's proposed raises ahve to be approved by the legislature. UB does not set their tuition.

Quote:Will you subsidize private schools as well and if you don't what effect will it have on them?

Having city buses does not obligate you to subsidize taxi and uber drivers.

Quote:If you do agree to subsidize the privates do you encourage fly-by-night for profits?

You dont, period.

Quote:Does this subsidy apply to absolutely fricking useless degrees that nobody has job openings for?

I'd rather it did not but to get something like this done you have to compromise.

Quote:Will you be encouraging colleges to recruit as many warm bodies as possible each semester

"A decade ago just 35 percent of students at the State University of New York at Buffalo graduated within four years. That number climbed to 55 percent last year, and the gain was accompanied by a rare narrowing of graduation-rate gaps for minority and low-income student populations."
I'm pretty sure the carrying capacity of a university is limited by facilities. If that was the goal of a state U they would accept 100% of the students.

Quote:regardless of their likelihood of graduating?

UB has made it their mission to get kids done in four years, and have won honors because of it. SUNY has decided to roll UB's initiative out to all Universities.

Quote:What happens to the labor market for say...physical therapists...when you are graduating way too many physical therapists, more than the job market can absorb?

Please tell me how htis is any different from federal student loans? please?

Quote:When you subsidize dairies you can just give away free blocks of cheese or dump truckloads of milk out onto the ground.

Lets subsidize apples and oranges... We need a lot of them since you're so keen on comparing the two.

Quote:But when you get a surplus of subsidized college graduates you can't exactly feed 'em to the hogs.

So no state colleges then... Gotcha...

The people of NY need to what what they think is best for their state. Free tuition to state schools for in-state students is not unheard of. Did not California do this in the past? Why yes, the did do that. http://www.nytimes.com/1982/12/28/scienc...ation.html

Quote:LOS ANGELES, Dec. 27— California's public system of higher education, long the envy of many other states, is edging toward acceptance of something even Ronald Reagan, as Governor, could not force upon it: tuition.

The California Postsecondary Education Commission recommended earlier this month that the state abandon one of the cornerstones of its college and university system, a pledge that the state will pay instructional expenses for all residents.

The recommendation was the latest evidence of deep stresses bedeviling the long-admired California system of higher education. In hindsight, many educators say, the system was allowed to grow too large in the 1960's and is now having difficulty adapting to the falling birth rate, a state fiscal crisis and changing demands from students.

The no-tuition concept was embodied in the state's 1960 Master Plan for Higher Education, which established a three-tier system of free public higher education and led to vast expansion.

The system grew to include nine campuses of the University of California, which accepts the highest achievers among high school graduates; 19 campuses of the California State University system, whose admission standards are less restrictive, and 106 two-year community colleges.

(04-11-2017 06:28 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 06:16 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 05:16 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  So should all states stop subsidizing any of their in state tuition to state schools..

If not, where would you draw the line.

What they should do is...before subsidizing anything...try to figure out just what the hell their market interference will actually do. Because what they actually do, pretty much, is just use it to bribe voters for votes because it sounds good.

State colleges serve no purpose people, let's ban them!

Quote:Will colleges just raise tuition to try to milk the system?

In NY tuition are set by SUNY, not the schools. And SUNY's proposed raises ahve to be approved by the legislature. UB does not set their tuition.

Quote:Will you subsidize private schools as well and if you don't what effect will it have on them?

Having city buses does not obligate you to subsidize taxi and uber drivers.

Quote:If you do agree to subsidize the privates do you encourage fly-by-night for profits?

You dont, period.

Quote:Does this subsidy apply to absolutely fricking useless degrees that nobody has job openings for?

I'd rather it did not but to get something like this done you have to compromise.

Quote:Will you be encouraging colleges to recruit as many warm bodies as possible each semester

I'm pretty sure the carrying capacity of a university is limited by facilities. If that was the goal of a state U they would accept 100% of the students.

Quote:regardless of their likelihood of graduating?

UB has made it their mission to get kids done in four years, and have won honors because of it. SUNY has decided to roll UB's initiative out to all Universities.

Quote:What happens to the labor market for say...physical therapists...when you are graduating way too many physical therapists, more than the job market can absorb?

Please tell me how htis is any different from federal student loans? please?

Quote:When you subsidize dairies you can just give away free blocks of cheese or dump truckloads of milk out onto the ground.

Lets subsidize apples and oranges... We need a lot of them since you're so keen on comparing the two.

Quote:But when you get a surplus of subsidized college graduates you can't exactly feed 'em to the hogs.

So no state colleges then... Gotcha...

Yeah, gotcha. You can take everything I say and make it whatever retarded thing you would prefer it say (like ban state colleges!!) in your imaginary world where setting the price manually doesn't effect supply and demand.

Your "It ain't worse than the federal student loan program!!" is the biggest absurdity though. It ain't a kick in the groin! isn't a great selling point.

(04-11-2017 06:27 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 08:30 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 06:51 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 02:04 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  



Pretty much sums up my feelings on this.

Good video. It's unfortunate that the Libertarians sound the most sane when they have no chance to be in control. But they become crazy as they get closer to having a breakthru - Gary Johnson...

Yes, odd isn't it how they seem crazier in the media portrayal when they have some success. So odd.

C'mon. Did you see Gary Johnson on those shows and/or in debates? The media didn't torpedo Gary. Hell, they tried to PUSH Gary because the thought was he'd split the GOP vote ala Perot and Bush in 1992. Unfortunately Gary squandered a golden opportunity to give the LP relevance when he came off as an uninformed buffoon. You cannot spin that any other way. He was bad, and that set the LP back at least 10 years.

gary johnson = #aloof

all libertards +/= #aloof

voters hate #aloof

as a centrist (which is basically libertardian), you have to realize where the fight exists....'they' continually whiff it....

This will be an interesting exercise in Federalism. If NY pulls it off to great effect then other states will copy the success and the incubators of innovation in effective governance will continue. If NY falls flat on its face, then the plan gets scrapped. I'm kinda surprised at the significant number of people appearing to be a supporter of something like this. On the surface it sounds great. However, the devil is in the details. I remain on the fence. Of course, I have no skin in the game. But the bottom line is that there are a number of factors that will need to be factored into this to make it viable:

• With federal student loan money available, how does any state control costs so as to not blow a hole in their own budget?
• Many states today have huge difficulties with subsidizing the public universities as it is today. If they can't subsidize the publics 100%, where does the extra money come from?
• What criteria will be in place when the kids make the decisions to attend university? Will entrance requirements become significantly higher to only allow serious students?
• Will NY put some controls in place to ensure that labor market distortions don't take place thru 100% tuition subsidization? Too many elementary ed teachers would be a problem.
  

Plenty of other questions to ask, these were just off the top of my head.

(04-11-2017 06:42 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 06:27 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 08:30 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 06:51 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 02:04 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  



Pretty much sums up my feelings on this.

Good video. It's unfortunate that the Libertarians sound the most sane when they have no chance to be in control. But they become crazy as they get closer to having a breakthru - Gary Johnson...

Yes, odd isn't it how they seem crazier in the media portrayal when they have some success. So odd.

C'mon. Did you see Gary Johnson on those shows and/or in debates? The media didn't torpedo Gary. Hell, they tried to PUSH Gary because the thought was he'd split the GOP vote ala Perot and Bush in 1992. Unfortunately Gary squandered a golden opportunity to give the LP relevance when he came off as an uninformed buffoon. You cannot spin that any other way. He was bad, and that set the LP back at least 10 years.

gary johnson = #aloof

all libertards +/= #aloof

voters hate #aloof

as a centrist (which is basically libertardian), you have to realize where the fight exists....'they' continually whiff it....

IDK about that. I don't think Gary was misunderstood at all. He was incompetent. LP's are naturally weak at foreign policy issues - I get that. However, he had to be prepared to discuss foreign policy if he wanted to be Pres. It comes with the territory. If you don't have serious plans for foreign policy ready to showcase - and you don't know current events going on in the world - then you are ill prepared. That's a Gary problem that turned into an LP perception problem.

(04-11-2017 06:38 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  Yeah, gotcha. You can take everything I say and make it whatever retarded thing you would prefer it say (like ban state colleges!!) in your imaginary world where setting the price manually doesn't effect supply and demand.

I asked you a simple question... Is subsidized in state tuition, at state universities, screwing with the market?

You went on a ramble, I returned the favor.