Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 32,057
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 777
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #41
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
(07-11-2019 07:21 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  How about addressing the causes of spiraling tuition, instead of enabling them by transferring the revenue source from one middle class pocket to another?

One of the biggest reasons for the massive rise at Rice (and one would therefore presume many others) is that schools are valued base more on how much they give in scholarships vs how much they cost. Rice is viewed better by charging 50k/yr and giving students an average 30k scholarship (I'm making up numbers but I'm not ridiculous) than charging 20k. This of course similarly transfers wealth in need based aid as those who can afford 50k, pay 50k... but it must be considered when talking about costs.

This was a conscious decision by the university a number of years ago... like the 1990's or so for USNWR and other rankings
07-11-2019 04:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tanqtonic Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,676
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 286
I Root For: rice
Location:
Post: #42
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
(07-11-2019 03:49 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 03:41 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 11:18 AM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(07-10-2019 11:13 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I mean, if we want to control public school tuition costs, cap tuition and raise taxes.

How the heck does raising taxes control costs?

Seems like you just raised the cost to all taxpayers.

The caping tuition at public colleges controls costs...

Your statement clearly says "cap tuition and raise taxes". So you included raise taxes because ….?

UT Austin has only 11% of its revenue derived from state general revenue.

The breakdown is

46% from the research and other grants
22% from tuition and fees
12% from the permanent university endowment fund
11% from state revenue
9% from gifts and endowments

Seems an action from the state to cap tuition or raise taxes seems amazingly heavy handed given then distribution as opposed to '84-ish when the state revenues paid just under half the operating revenue.
07-11-2019 04:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RiceLad15 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,527
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 88
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #43
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
(07-11-2019 04:11 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 03:49 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 03:41 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 11:18 AM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(07-10-2019 11:13 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I mean, if we want to control public school tuition costs, cap tuition and raise taxes.

How the heck does raising taxes control costs?

Seems like you just raised the cost to all taxpayers.

The caping tuition at public colleges controls costs...

Your statement clearly says "cap tuition and raise taxes". So you included raise taxes because ….?

UT Austin has only 11% of its revenue derived from state general revenue.

The breakdown is

46% from the research and other grants
22% from tuition and fees
12% from the permanent university endowment fund
11% from state revenue
9% from gifts and endowments

Seems an action from the state to cap tuition or raise taxes seems amazingly heavy handed given then distribution as opposed to '84-ish when the state revenues paid just under half the operating revenue.

It’s certainly not an elegant solution, but if you want to decrease tuition, you need to make up that lack of funding elsewhere. Increasing state funding is the only revenue source that the state can affect directly. You could cut expenses to make up for the decrease in revenue as well, I just don’t know the intricacies of UT’s expenses, so while not elegant, it’s clear and concise.
07-11-2019 05:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tomball Owl Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,963
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 47
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Comal County
Post: #44
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
(07-11-2019 05:46 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 04:11 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 03:49 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 03:41 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 11:18 AM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  How the heck does raising taxes control costs?

Seems like you just raised the cost to all taxpayers.

The caping tuition at public colleges controls costs...

Your statement clearly says "cap tuition and raise taxes". So you included raise taxes because ….?

UT Austin has only 11% of its revenue derived from state general revenue.

The breakdown is

46% from the research and other grants
22% from tuition and fees
12% from the permanent university endowment fund
11% from state revenue
9% from gifts and endowments

Seems an action from the state to cap tuition or raise taxes seems amazingly heavy handed given then distribution as opposed to '84-ish when the state revenues paid just under half the operating revenue.

It’s certainly not an elegant solution, but if you want to decrease tuition, you need to make up that lack of funding elsewhere. Increasing state funding is the only revenue source that the state can affect directly. You could cut expenses to make up for the decrease in revenue as well, I just don’t know the intricacies of UT’s expenses, so while not elegant, it’s clear and concise.

Still doesn’t cut costs as you originally proposed.

Good luck selling that proposal. I’m sure the Aggies, Cougars, Red Raiders, Horned Frogs, Bears, Owls (except for you), etc., would love to have their taxes increased to subsidize “free”, as characterized by the Comical, tuition for the Longhorns. Maybe we should pay for their tickets at NRG as well?
07-11-2019 08:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cannibal Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 242
Joined: Apr 2011
Reputation: 1
I Root For: me
Location:
Post: #45
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
For tu to say they offer free college which it's getting from PUF to the masses is just absurd, they steal it and then say your welcome!
07-12-2019 08:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frizzy Owl Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,973
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 44
I Root For: Rice
Location:
Post: #46
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
(07-11-2019 05:46 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 04:11 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 03:49 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 03:41 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 11:18 AM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  How the heck does raising taxes control costs?

Seems like you just raised the cost to all taxpayers.

The caping tuition at public colleges controls costs...

Your statement clearly says "cap tuition and raise taxes". So you included raise taxes because ….?

UT Austin has only 11% of its revenue derived from state general revenue.

The breakdown is

46% from the research and other grants
22% from tuition and fees
12% from the permanent university endowment fund
11% from state revenue
9% from gifts and endowments

Seems an action from the state to cap tuition or raise taxes seems amazingly heavy handed given then distribution as opposed to '84-ish when the state revenues paid just under half the operating revenue.

It’s certainly not an elegant solution, but if you want to decrease tuition, you need to make up that lack of funding elsewhere. Increasing state funding is the only revenue source that the state can affect directly. You could cut expenses to make up for the decrease in revenue as well, I just don’t know the intricacies of UT’s expenses, so while not elegant, it’s clear and concise.

Woosh!

Once again: the free flow of tuition money drives the cost increases. Compensating with tax revenue doesn't avert a funding crisis, it keeps the gravy train rolling.
07-12-2019 08:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frizzy Owl Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,973
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 44
I Root For: Rice
Location:
Post: #47
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
If a student goes $50,000 in debt to get a degree in gender studies or applied basket weaving, just who exactly is the winner?

Another consequence of the tuition revenue gravy train is that, for a significant portion of the student body, public universities are diploma mills.
07-12-2019 08:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RiceLad15 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,527
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 88
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #48
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
(07-11-2019 08:20 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 05:46 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 04:11 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 03:49 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 03:41 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  The caping tuition at public colleges controls costs...

Your statement clearly says "cap tuition and raise taxes". So you included raise taxes because ….?

UT Austin has only 11% of its revenue derived from state general revenue.

The breakdown is

46% from the research and other grants
22% from tuition and fees
12% from the permanent university endowment fund
11% from state revenue
9% from gifts and endowments

Seems an action from the state to cap tuition or raise taxes seems amazingly heavy handed given then distribution as opposed to '84-ish when the state revenues paid just under half the operating revenue.

It’s certainly not an elegant solution, but if you want to decrease tuition, you need to make up that lack of funding elsewhere. Increasing state funding is the only revenue source that the state can affect directly. You could cut expenses to make up for the decrease in revenue as well, I just don’t know the intricacies of UT’s expenses, so while not elegant, it’s clear and concise.

Still doesn’t cut costs as you originally proposed.

Good luck selling that proposal. I’m sure the Aggies, Cougars, Red Raiders, Horned Frogs, Bears, Owls (except for you), etc., would love to have their taxes increased to subsidize “free”, as characterized by the Comical, tuition for the Longhorns. Maybe we should pay for their tickets at NRG as well?

Huh, TIL that A&M and Tech are private universities that don't receive state funding...

But two things. 1) the original comment thread was about the cost of attendance (tuition), not the amount of money that universities are spending, in general.

2) Capping tuition would inherently affect the total amount of money universities spend. Tuition is the only lever that universities can immediately pull in order to generate revenue and cover increases in costs, right? So if you eliminate that lever, the only way to increase operating costs are to pull in more donations (not guaranteed), pull in more research dollars (not guaranteed), or lobby at the state level (not guaranteed), because you aren't going to dig into the endowment.

I kind of viewed this inelegant proposal as increasing state funding to allow universities to keep their current budgets. Then, if universities can make a compelling case to increase state funding, since their tuition revenue is fixed, they would have to convince the state to open its purse.

At least, that's how I would see capping tuition making school's more affordable for all students across the income spectrum.
07-12-2019 10:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RiceLad15 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,527
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 88
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #49
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
(07-12-2019 08:42 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 05:46 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 04:11 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 03:49 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 03:41 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  The caping tuition at public colleges controls costs...

Your statement clearly says "cap tuition and raise taxes". So you included raise taxes because ….?

UT Austin has only 11% of its revenue derived from state general revenue.

The breakdown is

46% from the research and other grants
22% from tuition and fees
12% from the permanent university endowment fund
11% from state revenue
9% from gifts and endowments

Seems an action from the state to cap tuition or raise taxes seems amazingly heavy handed given then distribution as opposed to '84-ish when the state revenues paid just under half the operating revenue.

It’s certainly not an elegant solution, but if you want to decrease tuition, you need to make up that lack of funding elsewhere. Increasing state funding is the only revenue source that the state can affect directly. You could cut expenses to make up for the decrease in revenue as well, I just don’t know the intricacies of UT’s expenses, so while not elegant, it’s clear and concise.

Woosh!

Once again: the free flow of tuition money drives the cost increases. Compensating with tax revenue doesn't avert a funding crisis, it keeps the gravy train rolling.

Wasn't the conversation about how to control costs of attendance?
07-12-2019 10:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tanqtonic Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,676
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 286
I Root For: rice
Location:
Post: #50
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
(07-12-2019 08:20 AM)cannibal Wrote:  For tu to say they offer free college which it's getting from PUF to the masses is just absurd, they steal it and then say your welcome!

The Permanent Fund really isnt 'stealing' anything.

It is an asset deeded to the Universities, as entities, by the state, another entity.

Its no more stealing than calling a 1 million dollar endowment from a private individual 'stealing'.

Now, if they did it with general state funds transferred to them from tax revenues, I would agree with you to the extent of the transfer. That is, I agree with you for about 11%.
07-12-2019 10:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tanqtonic Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,676
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 286
I Root For: rice
Location:
Post: #51
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
(07-12-2019 10:13 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 08:20 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 05:46 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 04:11 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 03:49 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  Your statement clearly says "cap tuition and raise taxes". So you included raise taxes because ….?

UT Austin has only 11% of its revenue derived from state general revenue.

The breakdown is

46% from the research and other grants
22% from tuition and fees
12% from the permanent university endowment fund
11% from state revenue
9% from gifts and endowments

Seems an action from the state to cap tuition or raise taxes seems amazingly heavy handed given then distribution as opposed to '84-ish when the state revenues paid just under half the operating revenue.

It’s certainly not an elegant solution, but if you want to decrease tuition, you need to make up that lack of funding elsewhere. Increasing state funding is the only revenue source that the state can affect directly. You could cut expenses to make up for the decrease in revenue as well, I just don’t know the intricacies of UT’s expenses, so while not elegant, it’s clear and concise.

Still doesn’t cut costs as you originally proposed.

Good luck selling that proposal. I’m sure the Aggies, Cougars, Red Raiders, Horned Frogs, Bears, Owls (except for you), etc., would love to have their taxes increased to subsidize “free”, as characterized by the Comical, tuition for the Longhorns. Maybe we should pay for their tickets at NRG as well?

Huh, TIL that A&M and Tech are private universities that don't receive state funding...

But two things. 1) the original comment thread was about the cost of attendance (tuition), not the amount of money that universities are spending, in general.

2) Capping tuition would inherently affect the total amount of money universities spend. Tuition is the only lever that universities can immediately pull in order to generate revenue and cover increases in costs, right? So if you eliminate that lever, the only way to increase operating costs are to pull in more donations (not guaranteed), pull in more research dollars (not guaranteed), or lobby at the state level (not guaranteed), because you aren't going to dig into the endowment.

I kind of viewed this inelegant proposal as increasing state funding to allow universities to keep their current budgets. Then, if universities can make a compelling case to increase state funding, since their tuition revenue is fixed, they would have to convince the state to open its purse.

At least, that's how I would see capping tuition making school's more affordable for all students across the income spectrum.

Actually AM should be even more pissed: in that case the PUF which is a base source to both (and only) the UT and AM systems is being utilized, plus all the taxpayers 'giving' to the effort via the state tax coffers. On second thought, change that to AM *and* all the other schools in the UT system....

And to the extent that UT Austin receives direct tax funding, a tax increase to increase only their largesse I think would be kind of sick.
07-12-2019 10:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frizzy Owl Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,973
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 44
I Root For: Rice
Location:
Post: #52
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
(07-12-2019 10:14 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-12-2019 08:42 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 05:46 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 04:11 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 03:49 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  Your statement clearly says "cap tuition and raise taxes". So you included raise taxes because ….?

UT Austin has only 11% of its revenue derived from state general revenue.

The breakdown is

46% from the research and other grants
22% from tuition and fees
12% from the permanent university endowment fund
11% from state revenue
9% from gifts and endowments

Seems an action from the state to cap tuition or raise taxes seems amazingly heavy handed given then distribution as opposed to '84-ish when the state revenues paid just under half the operating revenue.

It’s certainly not an elegant solution, but if you want to decrease tuition, you need to make up that lack of funding elsewhere. Increasing state funding is the only revenue source that the state can affect directly. You could cut expenses to make up for the decrease in revenue as well, I just don’t know the intricacies of UT’s expenses, so while not elegant, it’s clear and concise.

Woosh!

Once again: the free flow of tuition money drives the cost increases. Compensating with tax revenue doesn't avert a funding crisis, it keeps the gravy train rolling.

Wasn't the conversation about how to control costs of attendance?

Yes, and it still is. As you know full well, the conversation went to underlying causes of cost increases. Increasing university revenue with taxes doesn't address those causes.

Your solution to every problem is throwing more tax revenue at it. I'd like to see a more intelligent approach that actually addresses underlying issues.
07-12-2019 11:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RiceLad15 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,527
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 88
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #53
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
(07-12-2019 10:34 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(07-12-2019 10:13 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 08:20 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 05:46 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 04:11 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  UT Austin has only 11% of its revenue derived from state general revenue.

The breakdown is

46% from the research and other grants
22% from tuition and fees
12% from the permanent university endowment fund
11% from state revenue
9% from gifts and endowments

Seems an action from the state to cap tuition or raise taxes seems amazingly heavy handed given then distribution as opposed to '84-ish when the state revenues paid just under half the operating revenue.

It’s certainly not an elegant solution, but if you want to decrease tuition, you need to make up that lack of funding elsewhere. Increasing state funding is the only revenue source that the state can affect directly. You could cut expenses to make up for the decrease in revenue as well, I just don’t know the intricacies of UT’s expenses, so while not elegant, it’s clear and concise.

Still doesn’t cut costs as you originally proposed.

Good luck selling that proposal. I’m sure the Aggies, Cougars, Red Raiders, Horned Frogs, Bears, Owls (except for you), etc., would love to have their taxes increased to subsidize “free”, as characterized by the Comical, tuition for the Longhorns. Maybe we should pay for their tickets at NRG as well?

Huh, TIL that A&M and Tech are private universities that don't receive state funding...

But two things. 1) the original comment thread was about the cost of attendance (tuition), not the amount of money that universities are spending, in general.

2) Capping tuition would inherently affect the total amount of money universities spend. Tuition is the only lever that universities can immediately pull in order to generate revenue and cover increases in costs, right? So if you eliminate that lever, the only way to increase operating costs are to pull in more donations (not guaranteed), pull in more research dollars (not guaranteed), or lobby at the state level (not guaranteed), because you aren't going to dig into the endowment.

I kind of viewed this inelegant proposal as increasing state funding to allow universities to keep their current budgets. Then, if universities can make a compelling case to increase state funding, since their tuition revenue is fixed, they would have to convince the state to open its purse.

At least, that's how I would see capping tuition making school's more affordable for all students across the income spectrum.

Actually AM should be even more pissed: in that case the PUF which is a base source to both (and only) the UT and AM systems is being utilized, plus all the taxpayers 'giving' to the effort via the state tax coffers. On second thought, change that to AM *and* all the other schools in the UT system....

And to the extent that UT Austin receives direct tax funding, a tax increase to increase only their largesse I think would be kind of sick.

I had thought the PUF was on top of state funding for these two universities, and there was a base level of state funding doled out for all public universities in the state. Am I misunderstanding the system?
07-12-2019 02:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RiceLad15 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,527
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 88
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #54
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
(07-12-2019 11:04 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  
(07-12-2019 10:14 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-12-2019 08:42 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 05:46 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 04:11 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  UT Austin has only 11% of its revenue derived from state general revenue.

The breakdown is

46% from the research and other grants
22% from tuition and fees
12% from the permanent university endowment fund
11% from state revenue
9% from gifts and endowments

Seems an action from the state to cap tuition or raise taxes seems amazingly heavy handed given then distribution as opposed to '84-ish when the state revenues paid just under half the operating revenue.

It’s certainly not an elegant solution, but if you want to decrease tuition, you need to make up that lack of funding elsewhere. Increasing state funding is the only revenue source that the state can affect directly. You could cut expenses to make up for the decrease in revenue as well, I just don’t know the intricacies of UT’s expenses, so while not elegant, it’s clear and concise.

Woosh!

Once again: the free flow of tuition money drives the cost increases. Compensating with tax revenue doesn't avert a funding crisis, it keeps the gravy train rolling.

Wasn't the conversation about how to control costs of attendance?

Yes, and it still is. As you know full well, the conversation went to underlying causes of cost increases. Increasing university revenue with taxes doesn't address those causes.

Your solution to every problem is throwing more tax revenue at it. I'd like to see a more intelligent approach that actually addresses underlying issues.

It didn’t really move topics, or at least my response was never meant to try and move topics. When I was talking about costs originally, I was talking about the cost of attendance (which you did say we were talking about), since we had been discussing the difficulty of middle class households paying for college. A very viable way to control the cost of attendance at a public school is to use a big ol’ stick and mandate a set cost for attendance, and make sure the university still has the funds to operate.

You may not like that approach, but it would make sure that public universities remain affordable to all in-state residents.

Or do you disagree that capping tuition and fees, at say, $5,000 per year, would result in an affordable option for middle class households?

I said this wasn’t elegant, but I don’t see how it isn’t an option. You may dislike it, and that’s ok.
07-12-2019 02:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tomball Owl Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,963
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 47
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Comal County
Post: #55
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
(07-12-2019 02:28 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-12-2019 11:04 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  
(07-12-2019 10:14 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-12-2019 08:42 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  
(07-11-2019 05:46 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  It’s certainly not an elegant solution, but if you want to decrease tuition, you need to make up that lack of funding elsewhere. Increasing state funding is the only revenue source that the state can affect directly. You could cut expenses to make up for the decrease in revenue as well, I just don’t know the intricacies of UT’s expenses, so while not elegant, it’s clear and concise.

Woosh!

Once again: the free flow of tuition money drives the cost increases. Compensating with tax revenue doesn't avert a funding crisis, it keeps the gravy train rolling.

Wasn't the conversation about how to control costs of attendance?

Yes, and it still is. As you know full well, the conversation went to underlying causes of cost increases. Increasing university revenue with taxes doesn't address those causes.

Your solution to every problem is throwing more tax revenue at it. I'd like to see a more intelligent approach that actually addresses underlying issues.

It didn’t really move topics, or at least my response was never meant to try and move topics. When I was talking about costs originally, I was talking about the cost of attendance (which you did say we were talking about), since we had been discussing the difficulty of middle class households paying for college. A very viable way to control the cost of attendance at a public school is to use a big ol’ stick and mandate a set cost for attendance, and make sure the university still has the funds to operate.

You may not like that approach, but it would make sure that public universities remain affordable to all in-state residents.

Or do you disagree that capping tuition and fees, at say, $5,000 per year, would result in an affordable option for middle class households?

I said this wasn’t elegant, but I don’t see how it isn’t an option. You may dislike it, and that’s ok.

I'm just trying, along with several others, to get you to realize/admit raising taxes doesn't control costs. Should be a simple concept.
(This post was last modified: 07-12-2019 03:06 PM by Tomball Owl.)
07-12-2019 03:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RiceLad15 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,527
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 88
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #56
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
(07-12-2019 03:06 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(07-12-2019 02:28 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-12-2019 11:04 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  
(07-12-2019 10:14 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(07-12-2019 08:42 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  Woosh!

Once again: the free flow of tuition money drives the cost increases. Compensating with tax revenue doesn't avert a funding crisis, it keeps the gravy train rolling.

Wasn't the conversation about how to control costs of attendance?

Yes, and it still is. As you know full well, the conversation went to underlying causes of cost increases. Increasing university revenue with taxes doesn't address those causes.

Your solution to every problem is throwing more tax revenue at it. I'd like to see a more intelligent approach that actually addresses underlying issues.

It didn’t really move topics, or at least my response was never meant to try and move topics. When I was talking about costs originally, I was talking about the cost of attendance (which you did say we were talking about), since we had been discussing the difficulty of middle class households paying for college. A very viable way to control the cost of attendance at a public school is to use a big ol’ stick and mandate a set cost for attendance, and make sure the university still has the funds to operate.

You may not like that approach, but it would make sure that public universities remain affordable to all in-state residents.

Or do you disagree that capping tuition and fees, at say, $5,000 per year, would result in an affordable option for middle class households?

I said this wasn’t elegant, but I don’t see how it isn’t an option. You may dislike it, and that’s ok.

I'm just trying, along with several others, to get you to realize/admit raising taxes doesn't control costs. Should be a simple concept.

I’m not saying that raising taxes would control costs...

I’m saying capping tuition would control the cost of attendance. And that you offset the drop in funding with an increase in state funding.
07-12-2019 03:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tomball Owl Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,963
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 47
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Comal County
Post: #57
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
(07-12-2019 03:38 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I’m not saying that raising taxes would control costs...

May not be what you meant, but that’s exactly what you said.

“I mean, if we want to control public school tuition costs, cap tuition and raise taxes.”
07-12-2019 08:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 61,590
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1380
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #58
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
(07-12-2019 03:38 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I’m not saying that raising taxes would control costs...
I’m saying capping tuition would control the cost of attendance. And that you offset the drop in funding with an increase in state funding.

It's always easy to spend somebody else's money. Until it isn't.
07-12-2019 08:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RiceLad15 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,527
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 88
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #59
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
(07-12-2019 08:27 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(07-12-2019 03:38 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I’m not saying that raising taxes would control costs...

May not be what you meant, but that’s exactly what you said.

“I mean, if we want to control public school tuition costs, cap tuition and raise taxes.”

Am I the only one that sees that “cap tuition” precedes “raise taxes?”

I would get your point if I had just written “if we want to control public school tuition costs, then raise taxes.”
07-12-2019 08:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RiceLad15 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,527
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 88
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #60
RE: OT: UT offers free tuition < $65k
(07-12-2019 08:45 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(07-12-2019 03:38 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I’m not saying that raising taxes would control costs...
I’m saying capping tuition would control the cost of attendance. And that you offset the drop in funding with an increase in state funding.

It's always easy to spend somebody else's money. Until it isn't.

No doubt - it’s also easy to suggest universities cut programs or departments that people don’t interact with or understand very well. It’s always easy to tell someone else to cut their budget. Until it isn’t.

I think we should look at a per pupil funding and see how it compares to historical averages, benchmarked against inflation. Then look at administration expenses in the same way. Try and figure out what’s causing whatever trends we identify to be occurring (there is almost certainly some administrative bloat), and then address root causes.

I would advocate strongly against cutting any academic/research funding, as there many departments already struggle to fund full-time professors, post-docs, grad students, and student researchers because federal funding is less generous these days. And I would also argue for capping the rate of increase of tuition at all public universities. It seems like we care about people being able to afford college if it is the right path for them, be they from the lower income, middle income, or upper income bracket. And I do feel strongly that it is important to investing in and support an effective and rigorous public university system that allows for those who want to take that path can take that path.
07-12-2019 09:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2019 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.