I heard Obama say that he wants to provide free college to every American. I think it's a terrible idea. He would spend gadzillions of our money, and when everyone has a college degree, those grads will be flippin burgers and hanging onto garbage trucks. We will have come full circle and wasted who knows how much money. Socialism doesn't work very well.

I think it's a good idea for those who couldn't afford to go otherwise... education is important and hey if the people actually going to college worked and tried they won't be flippin no burgers!

I agree with terellowens. It would be so awesome to be able to go to any college and not worry about it costing $80,000 per semester!

I hadn't heard about that before. Did he say how he planned on coming up with the money for that?

Can you provide some evidence / link to him saying this please? Otherwise it is very hard to comment on it without knowing the details.

Stanford is doing their part:
Stanford drops tuition for some students (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/20/MNABV5LHM.DTL&tsp=1)

In a radical change to its financial aid program, Stanford University will announce today that it will no longer charge tuition to students whose families earn less than $100,000 a year.
In addition, the university will waive room and board fees for students whose families earn less than $60,000 a year.

Wow, that's cool!

I see no problem with having more work programs, so those that want to go and afford to do so, or haing it tied to military service or other service like peace corp.

Both Democrats have said that in return for about $4000 annual credit for college (Hillary's plan is $3500) there would be a mandatory 2 year service requirement (community ,public ,military ) . Isn't nothing free !

Is that the same plan for those of us who are over 40 and back in college? Obviously we can't go into the military, so that would leave me with community or public service?

Sounds good to me... college costs are killing me slowly.
It'd be nice to not have to work full time to afford school-

As Tom said. Isn't any such thing as a free lunch!

Can you provide some evidence / link to him saying this please? Otherwise it is very hard to comment on it without knowing the details.
I was watching a newscast on TV and heard him say it.

My point is that you can bet that someway, somehow, the taxpayer (you) will pick up the tab, and after everyone has a college degree, there will still be just so many jobs to be had. Therefore, many college grads will have to settle for low paying jobs. We will be back where we started.

You're right. No one but society's elite should be able to attend college.

You're right. No one but society's elite should be able to attend college.
That's not the point, and you should be able to realize that.

It won't happen. The government wants a dumb populace so that they can govern them better. If everyone had a good higher education they may revolt.

Another grand sounding scheme to drum-up minority votes…something the Democrats are well versed in.

I agree that this is a not-so-good idea. I think colleges should be cheaper for those who qualify and can't afford it, but to make it free for everyone...

It is a fantastic idea with some alterations. It should be harder to get in. College/university should be an elitist organisation, but not on background, social class or money as it currently is. It should be elitist for intelligence and hard work.

The whole of society benefits from (good) graduates in useful subjects. They keep the economy strong, provide medical services, justice, leadership etc. Therefore they are an investment into a healthy society, anyone who cannot see that is short-sighted.

My country used to have free education. Although it is still heavily subsidised the universities have turned into businesses chasing students and manipulating pass rates to keep customers. The whole system is also waterlogged with useless degrees.

Make it much harder but make it free.

Remember too, that, at least here in the states, it is the older adult going back to college. The average nurse graduate right now is 43. We were considered non-traditional students until here recently. At my school there are more adults attending college and university than there are teens straight out of high school.

It won't happen. The government wants a dumb populace so that they can govern them better. If everyone had a good higher education they may revolt.
Well, they are not likely to get a well educated populace out of most of the institutions of higher learning as they exist today. My father completed 6th grade, and was better educated than most college grads of today! (He was born in 1898)

Yeah another pandering handout during an election year paid for by US taxpayors.

What's next free hybrids?

If Obama mentioned this, why did he not approach it from a different angle. Limit tuitions... oh that might piss off the teachers unions.

Look at our public education, how many kids get it "free" and don't care for it and end up disrupting the class for those kids that actually want to learn?

If you want to learn and improve your station in life, do it the old fashioned American way, work for it and earn it - I did.

If you don't want to put in the effort, time, sacrifice, why should taxpayors pay for your education?

Hello again, Gal:

Yeah, I agree. Educating our people isn't a good idea. We should keep 'em dumb. We should teach them to "just say no to drugs". We should teach them that God made the earth. We should teach them NOTHING about sex.

THEN they're prepared to flip burgers.

However, THAT certainly wouldn't happen if they were educated?

By the way, are you educated?? Usually the ones who aren't, are the ones suspicious of those who are.

excon

I would LOVE if every child who dreamed of going to college got the chance to go.

How many outstanding doctors, scientist, nurses, etc. are we all missing out on, because that talented person couldn't afford to go to college. Many and way more then we should be.

There is brillance out there that we are just not making the most of. What would it hurt to invest in our children? It cost wamore when we don't.

Then all those educated professionals could " flip the burgers " ? Or is it more jobs Americans won't do !

then all those educated professionals could " flip the burgers " ? or is it more jobs Americans won't do !Hello tom:

You're American. You're educated. You don't flip burgers. Why not? Are you above that? Probably. But, not because you're American. But, because you're educated.

So, you think McDonalds would shut down if everybody got educated?? Of course, if you close the borders, which you white guys would like to do, you're right; there wouldn't be anybody to cook your burgers.

Fortunately, we're a nation of immigrants. It's worked fine for us in the past - even for you. I wouldn't change it. You would. I spose that's why you ask your question. I guess you think we're not going to let anybody in to cook your burgers.

I don't think McDonalds would stand for that. I don't think you would either. What? You don't like your burgers?

excon

I did lots of work to pay for my education Flipping burgers was one of them .

Many a college kids flips burgers. Some graduates are flipping them now. Nothing wrong with flipping burgers.

Not having every child have the opportunity to go to college... in my opinion... most times keeps those that have... keep having... and those that don't have... don't haves.

Not every child would take advantage of the opportunity, just like other opportunities that some have that go unexercised.

I was one of 5 it was a sweat job for high school tuition. If I was offered the opportunity to go to college back then, I would have passed.

Today you have to have a college education, I was just very fortunate.

I think in a way, that flip the burger fear for most, is a cop out. I don't mean that harsh, honest I don't.

I think there may be a fear, that the little people may catch us.

That sounds awful doesn't. But I tell you what, I come across edcuated, not educated and all sorts in between, and there is incredible talent in each group, to have talent go by the wayside, because one does not have the means is so antiquated.

I see no reason why college education should be free which really means someone else pays for it.

I see many a reason. I see it almost every day in the faces of our youth with hearts that are willing but the purses are not.

There is zero reason to keep them down and their talents hidden because they were not born into a family who could afford higher education.

as a previous educator at a university, perhaps its odd I have mixed feelings here?

I absolutely do not think there should be guaranteed college ed funded by the govt. period.

if you want to provide loans and a means by which people who are qualified get financial help, especially when needed, fine. Coming from an lower class home, I was thankful to get all the loans and grants I received.. and I NEVER thought "im so put upon to pay back this money" for my loans... sure, I was glad when they were over, but I made a choice.

free college is an awful idea. Classes are often glutted now with kids who are just at college because their parents are willing to foot the bill. And sure... even if they grad with a degree they don't care about, it gets them a step up on the financial ladder much of the time... but the strain on the education system would be immense... not to mention the devaluation of the degree.

I was the first in my fam to graduate from college. I value the opportunity. I also earned it with grades, determination, and work. Loans and grants did fine by me.

tho' as the country is running now, with the huge financial mess we are in... there's good reason to believe ed funding is just going to get harder and harder to get, let alone free ed.

Hello again, tom:

As we just discovered, Exxon Mobile made about $40 BILLION last year, off you and me and Inthebox and every other American. That's PURE profit AFTER taxes. Please don't try any more of your voodoo right wing spin on it.

If we taxed the oil companies and ONLY the oil companies, just 10% on their obscene profits, we could pay for college for EVERYONE who wants an education.

Or do you think the oil companies are the only ones who should do the squeezing?

excon

There is a difference between helping people gain an education when they want it, and giving it away like candy in a parade.

Again the facts contradict what you say . Exxon paid more taxes than the lower income workers combined . Also Exxon is a publicly traded company and their profits are found in the statements of pension funds and 401Ks

I think kp2171 is correct in that the education is diluted and less valuable the more graduates there are . I know what he is taking about when he says " classes are often glutted now with kids who are just at college because their parents are willing to foot the bill." I knew many students who were biding their time at a 4 year party .

My daughter, coming from an upper middle income fam, will graduate this spring with more college debt than I did, coming from a lower income fam...

Seems fine to me.

again the facts contradict what you say . Exxon payed more taxes than the lower income workers combined . Also Exxon is a publicly traded company and their profits are found in the statements of pension funds and 401Ks

I think kp2171 is correct in that the education is diluted and less valuable the more graduates there are . I know what he is taking about when he says " classes are often glutted now with kids who are just at college because their parents are willing to foot the bill." I knew many students who were biding their time at a 4 year party .

And turning it into a 6 to 8 year party. They enter the workforce with the mindset
Of what can I get out of you, instead of the days, when can I contribute.

Maybe, just maybe, if this somehow could work out, where everyone had an opportunity, maybe those who take it for granted, wouldn't take it for granted any longer.

I'm not saying hand things out like candy, there would have course have to be academic requirements.

I just can't believe that people couldn't support higher education opportunities for everyone.

there is a difference between helping people gain an education when they want it, and giving it away like candy in a parade.Hello again:

I don't know. Back when an associate degree meant something, the Community College system was set up to offer a FREE two year degree. In some places, that's still happening. It worked then, and where it's still happening, it's working now.

I don't see it, at all, like the free candy scenario you describe. Frankly, I think those that show up for the free candy soon find out that it's not free at all. Or they flunk out and cook burgers. You can't force it down people’s necks. But, at least they were exposed to an opportunity. Offering it IS a good thing, and it's proven to work.

excon

Hello again:

I dunno. Back when an associate degree meant something, the Community College system was set up to offer a FREE two year degree. In some places, that's still happening. It worked then, and where it's still happening, it's working now.

I don't see it, at all, like the free candy scenario you describe. Frankly, I think those that show up for the free candy soon find out that it's not free at all. Or they flunk out and cook burgers. You can't force it down people’s necks. But, at least they were exposed to an opportunity. Offering it IS a good thing, and it's proven to work.

excon


YUP - I don't get what the "fear" is. Why the resistance?

I am tired of the gvt. Picking my pockets that's why. Free in this case does not mean free. Gee I got a great idea. I am smart enough and qualified so hear me out. In about a dozen years I could earn my doctorate . Then and only then will I fulfill my potential . So I'll take a decade off from my obligations and you can subsidize my existence... Sounds like a plan to me!

So glutting the education system with kids who might not want to be there is a good thing??

Again... I taught at a univ in classes that had some kids there who were just taking up air. And the ones who were academically weak were just set up to fail... they didn't have the tools to succeed in that environment.

Believe me... I think we have some serious issues with our ed system, and that trickles all along into our economy.

But I don't think a guaranteed ed is the way to go when higher ed institutions are already straining over the cost of increasing tech.

I don't know...

I understand the spirit. I think people who crave and desire a higher education should get it... and have that opportunity today. It might take time. It might take work. What the hell is wrong with that?

I just think one more massive govt funded handout is going to lose so many dollars to waste... and I know that our ed system, as is, simply cannot handle a massive influx of students.

Lets talk about other areas... better technical skill training or entrepreneurial , for ex. But I just think earning a degree and paying back for that ed isn't too much to ask in most cases.

Hello again:

Although this is kind of a round robin discussion we need to make certain distinctions.

I agree, absolutely, that the state of our Universities is dismal. There ARE people floating and looking for a free ride. And they graduate thinking the same.

But that's bad management, pure and simple. It has NOTHING to do with the way the education is paid for. Clearly, there are schools where THAT doesn't happen, and the graduates ARE prepared. In terms of quality, funding doesn't matter.

Of course, you do realize that I'm not talking about the PUBLICLY funded universities. I'm talking about the damn expensive private ones. Seems to me, City College of New York turns out very good people - for free..

excon

see... it think it does tie into money.

when I told my mother I needed an extra year to pick up an extra major, I saw that worried look in her eyes... it meant more loans.

now you might think having a free ed would have enabled me to do with without stress... but the financial burden made me make good, sound choices about my ed. I picked up that "extra" major because I had statistics that showed it would increase my employment opportunities and my earning power right out of the gate.

OK... let me work in your context... you get a free education... are you willing to earn reduced wages for x number of years until the govt is paid back?

ungh.. see... I just can't do it. Its more red tape. More big gov. more dollars passing though more sticky hands.

so... knowing that our current ed system cannot handle a 10% increase in students today (there isn't the housing, nor the lecture rooms available) how do we do this?

not only are you going to pay for the service of education, but you are talking about major infrastructure and tech burdens on universities.

unless we want to go more virtual, online ed... I just see this as a huge expense that goes well beyond the degree. Universities struggle with mortar and bricks, computer labs, resources, bodies to teach... its just not as simple as saying pay for the ed...

And in my area, the hard sciences, we had a new building built that, within three years, was beyond capacity... we had 20-21 students in labs that should have had 16-18 for safety reasons...

We had classrooms being fought over because there wasn't enough space.

Infrastructure and overhead are real issues for universities and colleges, even when demand is high.

And more to add... personally, I quit teaching because there were too many students. The costs were so high that theyd just try to cram more students into less space, meaning more tuition dollars for the univ, but more work for me and more stress in the college at no increase in pay. You CANNOT teach 200 students the same way you teach 40. Period.

Result? A good teacher (I think I'm modest enough) said to hell with it... it wasn't worth the strain nor the financial burden. I worked nights and weekends to try to run the class the best way for students to learn. Result? I had to diminish the quality of education for higher numbers, or I had to take hours and hours away from family life. it sucked rocks. So I quit. Went to industry.

So I'm biased. Ill admit that.

Shoving more students into the system, in my experience, was terrible for "good" teaching... and that was just a modest increase.

If you are willing to pay for kids ed, you'd better find a way to pay for the infrastructure, the tech, and find a way to pay for quality teachers... because industry, which relies on competition, paid so much better than ed.

They should cut down on students. Harder entry requirements, harder/actually have entrance tests , harder courses. There is too much dead wood that showed up because their parents could afford it and it seemed like an easier path than work.

I agree temp.

And if those parents who previously could afford it can no longer.

It's all just absurd.

There is a way that this could be done. As Temp states - Stricter requriements - would be a must.

To keep things the way that is is currently, those who will be unable to go to college
Might as well bag high school. Why bother? ( I don't really mean that) But a HS degree is not worth a thing these days.

I pay approx $4,000.00 annually for school tax. It supposed to be one of the best school systems and the only kiddies I have are 4 foot, and I don't mind paying it one bit, if it will benenfit this generation.

Kids should not have to work many hours while going to college. I had to work during high school and didn't mind it one bit, but of course my studies were effected. I was plum tired.

We need to at least take a look at the current way and consider alternate ways. No one can convince me that kid, with the will, motivation grades, should be denied a higher education.

Trust me, we have so much waste in this country, that money could be found in no time.

Our system works good. If you want a higher education you work hard for it at high school. You gain entry into a course of your selection only if your marks warrant it. If you want to be a doctor and earn big buck when you graduate then you have to earn it through hard work prior to going to uni. If you work hard enough and get in then the government will assist you. They will pay for your degree. But when you graduate and start earning enough money then you pay them back gradually.

They'll even assist you to live while you're a full time student through weekly payments.

If you want to go back and study some more, they won't pay for it. By then its up to you to foot the bill, or get someone else to foot it for you (scholarship, employer etc.)

It seems to work well. The people who want to go to Uni can. No matter what background they come from. And just cause your rich doesn't mean its your right to go to law school. You have to earn it.

Doesn't that make sense? It appears to me that your entry requirements are simply inadeqaute and reward the rich and not the hard workers? Am I wrong?

I heard Obama say that he wants to provide free college to every American. I think it's a terrible idea. He would spend gadzillions of our money, and when everyone has a college degree, those grads will be flippin burgers and hanging onto garbage trucks. We will have come full circle and wasted who knows how much money. Socialism doesn't work very well.
I want to live in a free municipality. I have a right to free natural gas for heating, electricity for heating water and cooking, garbage pick-up for the ecosystem, free fire department because it's not fair to have my house burn down, free education for my kids because it's not fair for them to grow-up prejudiced and vote against Obama or Hillary.

Our system works good. If you want a higher education you work hard for it at high school. You gain entry into a course of your selection only if your marks warrant it. If you want to be a doctor and earn big buck when you graduate then you have to earn it through hard work prior to going to uni. If you work hard enough and get in then the governement will assist you. They will pay for your degree. But when you graduate and start earning enough money then you pay them back gradually.

They'll even assist you to live while your a full time student through weekly payments.

If you want to go back and study some more, they wont pay for it. By then its up to you to foot the bill, or get someone else to foot it for you (scholarship, employer etc.)

It seems to work well. The people who want to go to Uni can. No matter what background they come from. And just cause your rich doesnt mean its your right to go to law school. You have to earn it.

Doesnt that make sense? It appears to me that your entry requirements are simply inadeqaute and reward the rich and not the hard workers? Am i wrong?


Hello Skell :D

I LOVE your system. If we could only tweek ours to be similar to yours.

Mm... Not really reward the rich. There are those yes,. but there are those that work their tail off academically and also to pay for college... It's a mixed bag. But there are still those that just can't afford it and may never get the chance

The cost of college here is repulsive. And now a 4 year degree is becoming so common place that the kids now need to go on and have a masters. But a good bit work while going for their masters.

Some very fortunate kids are professional students. I say good for them, if they are able to do it. I don't have a problem with that at all. I just like as many obstacles removed from preventing anyone from going to college.

"free education will prevent your kids from growing up prejudiced"?. same planet. Different worlds.

"free education will prevent your kids from growing up prejudiced"?... same planet. different worlds.


I would hope. I just want all to have the same oppurtunites. If a child is gifted, how sad it is to have that wasted due to circumstances.

I want to live in a free municipality. I have a right to free natural gas for heating, electricity for heating water and cooking, garbage pick-up for the ecosystem, free fire department because it's not fair to have my house burn down, free education for my kids because it's not fair for them to grow-up prejudiced and vote against Obama or Hillary.

The difference is though that free education can be seen as an investment. Giving you free power and gas isn't.
Although I don't fully agree with 100% free education I think its critical that governments inject as much money as possible into it.

The cost of college ed goes up about twice the rate of inflation... so it's a real long term issue.

But one that's easier to talk about than medicare/medicaid or social security. One in four workers pay for one recipient in ssi today... how's that going to work out in a couple of decades?

Neither party, dems or reps, have the guts to face issues that are real and fiscally important. Most is smoke and mirrors. The gop has lost its soul in reckless spending and the war, and the dems talk a great talk, but promises of everything to all just isn't going to cut it.

Time to suck it up and wade through some tough times, for both sides of the aisle.

free education = no prejudice?

hmmm... guess what? We have "free" ed... its called public HS.

I would hope. I just want all to have the same oppurtunites. If a child is gifted, how sad it is to have that wasted due to circumstances.

Exactly. A gifted poor child should have more chance to shine than a dumb rich kid. Is that not the case at present in the US? From what I read it isn't and that's sad!

Funny about education: what is wrong with education is that it is "free"; the fox is in charge of the henhouse.

Exactly. A gifted poor child should have more chance to shine than a dumb rich kid. Is that not the case at present in the US? From what i read it isnt and thats sad!


Not always Skell,

The rich don't have to struggle as much and they do have to meet the criteria as any student. Those who can not afford it as easily as the rich, take out student loans and work while in school and parents take out loans against their homes.

Then there are those - that simply have no means at all.

I don't see why anyone would have heartburn with giving as much assistance as possible.

I'm all for loans and grants based on real need and honest merit.

More than happy to have kids who are academically fit have the means to go on to college.

But a blanket "free ride" is an election year move. I expect more from mr obama than promises that are fiscally dumb and, honestly, very difficult to implement at the college level.

Trust me... I loved teaching. Was good at it. But throwing tons of new bodies into the mix is not the way to get better, high quality ed.

Not always Skell,

The rich don't have to struggle as much and they do have to meet the criteria as any student. Those who can not afford it as easily as the rich, take out student loans and work while in school and parents take out loans agains their homes.

Then there are those - that simply have no means at all.

I don't see why anyone would have heartburn with giving as much assistance as possible.

Ok thanks for clearing that up Allheart. :D

And I agree. As much assistance as possible should be given to those wanting to better themselves and the country. I don't see how anyone could disagree with that either.

im all for loans and grants based on real need and honest merit.

more than happy to have kids who are academically fit have the means to go on to college.

but a blanket "free ride" is an election year move. i expect more from mr obama than promises that are fiscally dumb and, honestly, very difficult to implement at the college level.

trust me... i loved teaching. was good at it. but throwing tons of new bodies into the mix is not the way to get better, high quality ed.


I do trust you. It can be worked out. Those "new" bodies shouldn't just become non important.

If a team was put together to brainstorm on this and cared enough to come up with a workable solution, it could be done. It's not that difficult.

Extend high school for two years... call it Advanced Education. Do it in terms. We mangage to school them from age 6 to 17/18 - We can't handle a couple more years?

Our kids are too valuable and deserve to have the oppurtunity... not hand out.. opportunity.

im all for loans and grants based on real need and honest merit.

more than happy to have kids who are academically fit have the means to go on to college.

but a blanket "free ride" is an election year move. i expect more from mr obama than promises that are fiscally dumb and, honestly, very difficult to implement at the college level.

trust me... i loved teaching. was good at it. but throwing tons of new bodies into the mix is not the way to get better, high quality ed.

Agree. To me, and if that's what is actually been promised, a blanket free ride appears nothing more than a political stunt and I don't see any benefit.

Ok thanks for clearing that up Allheart. :D

And i agree. As much assistance as possible should be given to those wanting to better themselves and the country. I dont see how anyone could disagree with that either.

Thank you. Once again... I'm just not getting it.

How about if you don't earn your entry to university through high school and can give reason why not other than just not having good crack at it, then you get a second chance to gain entry. Do a bridging course. Do your final year at high school again. Prove that you deserve entry, prove that you deserve assistance. If you still can't then its off to flipping burgers.

University to me is an earned priveledge. Earned through hard work. Not a paid priveledge.

I Think It Is A Great Idea I Am 22 Years Old And To Get Free Pelgrants They Won't Give Me Enough To Even Pay My Way. They Want to Go By My Parents Income And My Stepdad. I Called Fasfa They Said It Was Because Parents Are Supposed To Pay For The Kids College For Six Years. Unless I Get Knocked Up Or Married. Sorry I Don't Think I Should Have To Pop Out A Baby Or Get Married To Some Jerk To Go To College... that Is So Wrong So I Got One More Year And I Am 24 And I Can Just Claim Myself And Get Money For My College. Yes I Think It Is A Great Idea To Give People Who Can't Afford It Free College. And Those Who Have Tons Of Money Should Pay!

I Think It Is A Great Idea I Am 22 Years Old And To Get Free Pelgrants They Wont Give Me Enough To Even Pay My Way. They Wanna Go By My Parents Income And My Stepdad. I Called Fasfa They Said It Was Because Parents Are Suposed To Pay For The Kids College For Six Years. Unless I Get Knocked Up Or Married. Sorry I Don't Think I Should Have To Pop Out A Baby Or Get Married To Some Jerk To Go To College......that Is So Wrong So I Got One More Year And I Am 24 And I Can Just Claim Myself And Get Money For My College. Yes I Think It Is A Great Idea To Give People Who Can't Afford It Free College. And Those Who Have Tons Of Money Should Pay!

Can you feel this young ladies desire to go to college. Can you hear the frustration.
This should not be.

I'm with Skell - Work hard... earn it. Nothing handed to anyone. On sheer merit.
Toplady - Don't you give up. See if you can get a job that will at least pay partial, some may pay all.

But chin up girl... the best things achieved are those that we struggled for but successfully
Did :)

Robert Heinlien used to say in his novels that democracies failed when the masses realized they could vote themselves largesse .lets make food free too while we are at it.

Robert Heinlien used to say in his novels that democracies failed when the masses realized they could vote themselves largesse .lets make food free too while we are at it.


Tom my friend... food ultimately turns into... waste.

Educating a child to his or her highest potential will result in a higher investment with far greater returns.

This is not just a feel good cause. I think it is the right of the child, who puts forth the effort, to be able to obtain a higher education.

If it is worth it to them then they should gladly take on the debt .

Education is NOT a right . The right to a "free education" is the same as the right to take from someone's wallet or purse what is not yours. If it is a right then lets make it compulsory like we do for K-12 . Everyone has to delay their adulthood for 4 more years and be warehoused by the government in state sponsored institutes of higher learning . And let's mandate what they learn while we are at it. Why not ? We are paying for it.

if it is worth it to them then they should gladly take on the debt .

Education is NOT a right . The right to a "free education" is the same as the right to take from someones wallet or purse what is not yours. If it is a right then lets make it compulsory like we do for K-12 . Everyone has to delay their adulthood for 4 more years and be warehoused by the government in state sponsored institutes of higher learning . And let's mandate what they learn while we are at it. Why not ? We are paying for it.


Then why not make parents pay from K - 12. Heck I don't have children. Why should I pay taxes to support their education then. (mind you, I am glad that a portion of my taxes go for something beneficial )

Boy Tom, when you have a view you stick to your guns there... even when I'm right :p

I would be PROUD of us if we invested in our children that way. Tom, you, yourself are a brilliant man. If someone offered you a challenge, to come up with a plan that all children who meet the quals... are able to go to college... without prejudice to the ability to pay... I bet you could come up with one. And one that would work.

I think before we talk about free money for college we need to address where we are today. Our country is borrowing money hand over fist from foreign nations.

Wait a year or two and see how the credit crunch is going to restrict loans for college. The problem is, nobody wants to pay the toll. Why in the world are we staving off a recession? Its called a correction. Its needed, necessary, and most certainly NOT solved by borrowing foreign cash.

I'm not a bleeding heart, and I'm not stone hearted. I think there are social services that are worth tapping into my check, and I think there are some things that are just another product of the nanny state.

Most presidents get a couple of big items at most to tackle in one term... and whomever is elected, if they have any concern for the future, needs to deal with some of the issues I talked about... esp health care costs in the next few decades and basic fiscal responsibility.

But promising 2K to every child born, or free ed for all... its just social pandering.

I heard Obama say that he wants to provide free college to every American. I think it's a terrible idea. He would spend gadzillions of our money, and when everyone has a college degree, those grads will be flippin burgers and hanging onto garbage trucks. We will have come full circle and wasted who knows how much money. Socialism doesn't work very well.

I know it's easier to hang onto the old stale politics as usual. You heard only in-part; they would have to give some civil community service time in return. But to answer your question, with a question, Social U.S. or Social Iraq? I'd certainly rather use money toward the educational purposes of our children's future, than the $9,000,000,000 a month in Iraq.

It's impossible. It's just all campaign hogwash. They are all full of sh1t. Do you actually believe any of them? Do you think maybe the private bankers that collect our federal income tax will start kicking down for education? Excuse me, I need to lay down on the floor. I'm getting cramps from laughing so hard.

I agree FREE college for everyone might not be the greatest idea for our society. But just to play the devil's advocate, college isn't for everyone. I know plenty of people who could go to college. But they've made the chocie not to. Some of them have found other jobs and are happy enough they don't feel the need to earn a degree for something different. Others hated high school and say there's no way they'll ever step foot in another classroom. And think about out of all of the people who did go to college, they would have so many more opportunities. If you were given a great education and worked for years for your masters in chemistry or art history or whatever you can think of, would you really just be like "k, i worked my butt off all that time. i'm gonna go flip some burgers now."? I don't think so.

to come up with a plan that all children who meet the quals....are able to go to college ...without prejudice to the ability to pay...I bet you could come up with one. And one that would work.

I like the idea of, say, two years of national service in an organized effort to accomplish some purpose for the betterment of this country. I don't believe every student in high school is headed for college. For those who do not go, there should be other plans in place for them, such as job shadowing, vocational training, paid and unpaid internships, and the military--all of which would give students career opportunities and the chance to earn a living wage. There would even be a plan for those who aren't interested in partaking of any of the above and who would rather choose a "easy" life of crime.

I like the idea of, say, two years of national service in an organized effort to accomplish some purpose for the betterment of this country. I don't believe every student in high school is headed for college. For those who do not go, there should be other plans in place for them, such as job shadowing, vocational training, paid and unpaid internships, and the military--all of which would give students career opportunities and the chance to earn a living wage. There would even be a plan for those who aren't interested in partaking of any of the above and who would rather choose a "easy" life of crime.


Beautiful ideas Wondergirl.

With the amount of money spent by the Gov't in the months of June through Sept (end of FY). That has to be spent otherwise agencies loose the money for that FY and receive that much less the following FY - is enough to fund college for everyone two times over.

I was one of those that received my High School degree and said thank you very much, and may I never see another classroom again. We do exsist.

I am addressing the issue and not the canadate proposing it. I have always felt every child should have the opportunity to attend college.

I do not have children and never will, so this doesn't even effect me directly, but it still is something I feel very strong in.

It is not the fault of a child born into a home where funding is limited just as it is not the fault of the child born into a wealthy home. God bless them and I am thrilled for them that they have opportunities such as they do. I sincerely mean that. It kills me when someone snubs their nose at someone because "they were born with a silver spoon in their mouth". God bless them and that's one less child we need to worry about.

This is not about rich vs poor. It's about our children having equal opportunity.

Here in the U.K. children leave school at 16 and can then go on to college and that is free for every school leaver.
The government now want to make children stay on at school till 18 which in my opinion is a good idea.
College should be free for evryone

Here in the U.K. children leave school at 16 and can then go on to college and that is free for every school leaver.
The goverment now want to make children stay on at school till 18 which in my opinion is a good idea.
College should be free for evryone


Nicki that is wondeful!!

It can be done! :)

Before we spend more of our money to give "free "education to college students I would prefer that our "free" education system would actually graduate literate students. All our tax money thrown at that problem has not generated satisfactory results. Throughout this country public school systems complain about underfunding (they are wrong.. but that is a different debate ) ,but here we have these panderers telling the gullible how they are going to give them other freebees. Free college... free health care... bread and circus .

Hi Tom,

It's the issue I support - not focusing on the canadate. I say we reroute some of that wasteful spending focus it on our education system, let's fix it and consider options in ensuring all those who wish to attend higher eductation have the ability to.

Let's give it a try. Put a pilot Program in place. I think it's worth it. And it be a darn good thing for us to do.

But I think you and I will never meet on this :(, but I still respect you immensley.

Yup we are polar opposites on this issue . Me ;I would abolish the Dept. of Education... maybe there is where we could find the money. Education until recently(1979) ,as a matter of federalism ,was a State and local issue and not the perusal of the national government..

But since you are concerned about the gifted students who can't afford it here is a little known secret. Brown ,Stanford, Harvard, Yale and Dartmouth ;all top of the line universities ;offer free tuition to students who have the academic credentials whose parents incomes are less than $100,000. Many states already offer college education in their State run colleges for those who qualify. There are scholarships and grants galore. What we are really talking about here is the ability of the marginal student to get a free education. The smart ones are already getting taken care of .

Perhaps areas where are views are different but still an enjoyable and healthy discussion.:)

Yes, I am aware of those schoarships available for outstanding scholars. I wouldn't necessary call the remainder of the students marginal, perhaps, average and/or above average.

The "smart" ones... ugh. I think sometimes intellegence can be overated. If anything, it's a gift and one that should be used and shared, but not to boast. Just a general statement on my thoughts of smart versus not.

I am with you as far as the Educational system. It is horrid in some areas, outstanding in others, and getting by in the remainder.

Hit the delete button on the whole thing, revamp it. Make it outstanding in all areas and maybe it would produce more "smart" students.

Obama trying to provide a college education for our youth is money better spent, but some of the reasoning here misunderstands as if it would be mandated. That's not what Obama was suggesting, nor the case. The other part of the equation, that seems to be missed, is that not everyone is college material. Some youth simply learn skills better fit for trade industry: mechanic, welder, carpenter, plumber, ac/heat, etc...

Obama trying to provide College education for our youth is money better spent, but some of the reasoning here misunderstands as if it would be mandated. That's not what Obama was suggesting, nor the case. The other part of the equation, that seems to be missed, is that not everyone is College material. Some youth simply have skills better fit for trade industry, mechanic, welder, carpenter, plumber, ac/heat, etc...


Exactly! And those children should also be able to pursue their skilled area.
My comments are not refective as to what Barack is proposing. I am just sharing my thoughts on the topic.


I would like to see signicant help to all children for a higher education as well as a better education system across the board.

Our military taken care of, while in service and post service. (shouldn't be too much to ask)

And not to have our elderly pick which med they can afford that month. (this area is a disgrace on our part)

Don't think I'm asking too much. (The higher education would be the last of the 3 - but still is on my list)

What percentage of your income are you willing to give in taxes for your wish list ? When Social Security was conceived there were 8 workers supportind a retiree. Now I think the ration is getting close to 2 workers per one retiree. That system alone is going to implode shortly . Medicare has not even been considered ,but again ;given the demographics the system will soon topple . We just added a Federal entitlement for senior's drugs without any consideration as to how it will be paid for . No Child Left Behind is a massive new national government outlay that every critic says is underfunded.
Now Hillary and Obama are acting like the Joker in the Batman movie throwing money out the car yelling "who do you trust? " . Free College,free health care .etc. Don't tell me the rich will pay for it. There aren't enough rich people to fund the candy store they are setting up.

I'm not a group hug person, but this has been a nice thread that's stayed on track and not gotten bogged down with noise or dumb reddies. How it should be here.

all for targeting kids who are in need positions... and that's not always easy to do, such as the case of the student whose parents make too much money but are unwilling to take on debt themselves. My financial burden will be 2x that what my daughter will have coming out of college. Shell pay back loans at about $120/mo at first, and her debt will last about 10 years. I'm OK with that. We had the means (mostly the financial planning) to do it, went without some things, and made it work.

I want the best students to get opportunity first. We are lagging as a nation versus the world in many areas... and it isn't that our univ system is bad. Many foreign students come to the US for training in the hard sciences, for ex, as the education is good. So... my first goal is to make sure good students get earned opportunity.

I also value what a college ed can mean for students who are not as strong, but willing to work, and clearly in need financially... not getting the scholarships or other funding for academics. One of my "fav" students was a young man, a minority who was the first in his fam to college, lower class, struggled to get through some tought classes, and got the degree with mediocre grades. He didn't go on to do awesome research. He took a sales job for a chemical supplier. Last time I saw him, he was a happy, successful, grateful man.

so I'm not just about top kids get free rides... and I'm not about just letting those who want an ed to have one for free. That will get abused and place all the financial burdens on colleges that I've already mentioned.

my only concern with some merit system is its more red tape and opportunity for sticky hands... but some med schools, for ex, give "free tuition" for students that give a year for a year in rural communities or other regions of dire need... I don't know how that is run... I think the regions sponsor it... well... those who remember "northern exposure"... that's the idea.

Right now I pay $4,000.00 just for school tax.

I think what we contribute currently, if used appropraiately should cover my wish list.

I am willing to pay more taxes for my wish list ESPECIALLY for our elderly. Even with the waste that goes on currently. However, there needs to be some serious movement into looking into the waste.

Tom, I'm telling you, if we got a bin and put all the funding in it that was wasted, it would cover at least 2 of my 3 wishes.

Obama trying to provide a college education for our youth is money better spent, but some of the reasoning here misunderstands as if it would be mandated. That's not what Obama was suggesting, nor the case....
Are you suggesting that Obama is running for president by making suggestions?

[QUOTE=kp2171]
one of my "fav" students was a young man, a minority who was the first in his fam to college, lower class, struggled to get through some tought classes, and got the degree with mediocre grades. he didnt go on to do awesome research. he took a sales job for a chemical supplier. last time i saw him, he was a happy, successful, grateful man.

QUOTE]

I agree KP it is a nice thread. This is how knowledge is acquired and shared and I am grateful for it.

The young man above is one of the ones I would like to reach (The one that KP share with us. There is this waitress, where hubby and I dine, who is brilliant. I am trying to get her placed in a company, but of course, they look at her resume, and first they go to the education part, which she is weak on by today standards, but I tell you what, she is a perfect fit for this company and would make the company shine, as well as herself.

Hello again:

Me and my distinctions... The first is the idea; should we educate our children. The second is the process.

I don't disagree with any of you in terms of the process. It's broken - has been for a long time. We're spending more and getting dumber.

This thread, however, has primarily been about the process - how to pay for it, the schools suck, the kids are there for a free ride, they're too damn liberal... I don't know. Complaints abound.

But, because the process is broken doesn't mean it has to stay that way. It doesn't mean that it can't be fixed. It doesn't mean that we should give up. You guys sound like a bunch of naysayers... You guys are stuck talking about the process.

Educating our children is smart. It's something we SHOULD do. It's a GOOD thing. Tom is the only one who pointed out a reason why it might not be good. There'll be nobody around to cook his burgers.

All Obama is doing is talking about the possibilities. We like hearing about what we CAN do, rather than what we can't.

excon

I'm a process person.

If a company makes wishful decisions without the financial backing and proper infrastructure/systems, it is toast.

But, because the process is broken doesn't mean it has to stay that way. It doesn't mean that it can't be fixed. It doesn't mean that we should give up. .
Educating our children is smart. It's something we SHOULD do. It's a GOOD thing.
excon


And there it is... If it's broke, we can't turn our back nor should we.

It's like when someone says, "But we've always done it that way"... Well this way isn't working and to slam the door is just wrong.

There are soooooooooooooooo many areas that could use a little slenderizing and that funding could go right to educating our children. How could that possibly be a bad thing.

Got news for those against it, if all children are not giving the most opportunities to succeed, to obtain health insurance, to make do for themselves, guess what, we all will end up paying anyway.

Let's fund it upfront for a positive result instead of paying for the negative ramifications later.

Plus... it just isn't right not to make sure each child gets to meet his or her potential. What we have to make sure some stay down, so the "menial" jobs are filled.

I got news for all of you, at this stage, I welcome scrubbing floors. The office environment, after so many years, can get to you.

Give me the scrub brush and bucket - and give all children an opportunity to higher education.

Hello again:

Frankly, I don't think we need to spend a nickel more. We're spending plenty. We just need to get more bang for our buck.

I'm not going to start pointing fingers. We've been doing that for 40 years. There's enough blame across the political spectrum to go around. I don't know how to fix it. I just know that it CAN be fixed.

Ok, I do know how to fix it. For starters, let's in one fell swoop, eliminate the Education Department and the NEA.

excon

Hello again:

Frankly, I don't think we need to spend a nickel more. We're spending plenty. We just need to get more bang for our buck.

I'm not going to start pointing fingers. We've been doing that for 40 years. There's enough blame across the political spectrum to go around. I dunno how to fix it. I just know that it CAN be fixed.

Ok, I do know how to fix it. For starters, let's in one fell swoop, eliminate the Education Department and the NEA.

excon

Exactly.

We spend tons in areas already that is wasted. We need to reroute funds and allocate for issues such as this.

One way would be to penalize agencies who "dump" money at the end of the FY just so not to loose it and receive less.

We should reward agencies for coming under budget for that FY. This way the funding that is traditionally dumped, could fund this type of a Program as well as others.

It can be done - just like making sure our elderly have the meds they need... Sorry, that can be done as well.

Since when are we so incompetent that we can't fix problems. That's basically what we are saying.

For starters, let's in one fell swoop, eliminate the Education Department and the NEA.


That would be a great 1st start. But you know the union will not go quitely .

That would be a great 1st start. But you know the union will not go quitely .Hello again, tom:

Therein, lies the bigger problem - hence the round robin nature of the post.

Tom is correctamundo about the bureaucracy and the union. I'm speaking about THE bureaucracy and THE union - the whole kit and caboodle... Come to think about it, bureaucrats ARE in a UNION.

Because of the UNION, bureaucrats can't be fired. That includes the State Department, the CIA, the Education Department. NO president can make a dent unless we do something about entrenched bureaucrats and their union.

You better slow me down or my Ron Paul is coming out.

excon

I think the current state of the Education Department is not the place to start. Start at the beginning. Government agencies today are suffering due to insufficient funding allocations. To look and try to fix the problem in the middle, when fix it entirely.

Start with, where is the funding coming from, where is it spent, why is it spent that way and appropriate accordinlgy to need and have accountability.

Having adequate funding allocations is an important factor in having an Agency perform it's mission successfully.

Hello again, All:

We educated our children better BEFORE there WAS a Department of Education. I'm really not sure what they do, but I'm really sure we could do without 'em. Frankly, I think they're the problem, not the solution.

excon

Hello again, All:

We educated our children better BEFORE there WAS a Department of Education. I'm really not sure what they do, but I'm really sure we could do without 'em. Frankly, I think they're the problem, not the solution.

excon


Def. contribute to the problem. Hugely.

Allheart it certainly is easy to say that things are undefunded but that is not the reality . There is plenty of money already being spent .Our kids should be Einsteins if that was the answer. Government is not the solution . I like when companies like Microsoft sponsor projects in a school like getting them computers in the rooms in return for naming the school Bill Gates elementary school . That is where we should focus our efforts ;convincing the private sector to sponsor scholarships and educational upgrades. The government could play a role in that but they are really a poor choice when it comes to managing almost anything.

Obama trying to provide a college education for our youth is money better spent, but some of the reasoning here misunderstands as if it would be mandated. That's not what Obama was suggesting, nor the case. The other part of the equation, that seems to be missed, is that not everyone is college material. Some youth simply learn skills better fit for trade industry: mechanic, welder, carpenter, plumber, ac/heat, etc...

Exactly, that is the first issue. Not everyone is college material. Just another 2 years to screw off. Trade schools serve some folks much better.

Allheart it certainly is easy to say that things are undefunded but that is not the reality . There is plenty of money already being spent .Our kids should be Einsteins if that was the answer. Government is not the solution . I like when companies like Microsoft sponsor projects in a school like getting them computers in the rooms in return for naming the school Bill Gates elementary school . That is where we should focus our efforts ;convincing the private sector to sponsor scholarships and educational upgrades. The government could play a role in that but they are really a poor choice when it comes to managing almost anything.


That is very true Tom. I know certain agencies when funded, the total looks large, but then there are restrictions on where within that agency funding can be spent. So, one area within the agency say... labor... is underfunded but supplies, is grossly over funded and you can not swap out. Not sure if that is how it works at DOE.

LOVE your plan though with the Private Sector. LOVE IT!! So, why can't we do that?

Hello again, All:

My Ron Paul side says that you're giving too much faith to the bureaucrats. I suppose it's equally true that my cynicism is unfounded too... But, nahhhh.

Due to your big heart, you think that the people working at the Department of Education are working for the betterment of the schools.

I'm sure that when bright young people are hired, that's what they think too. But, after a while they find that bureaucrats aren't really in it for the betterment of the schools, they're in it for the betterment of themselves, to expand their power, and increase their budget.

They should actually find a real job. I hear McDonalds is hiring.

excon

Hello again, All:

My Ron Paul side says that you're giving too much faith to the bureaucrats. I suppose it's equally true that my cynicism is unfounded too..... But, nahhhh.

Due to your big heart, you think that the people working at the Department of Education are working for the betterment of the schools.

I'm sure that when bright young people are hired, that's what they think too. But, after a while they find that bureaucrats aren't really in it for the betterment of the schools, they're in it for the betterment of themselves, to expand their power, and increase their budget.

They should actually find a real job. I hear McDonalds is hiring.

excon


Great just what we need more burger flippers :D

I was a burger flipper and a taco fryer... and even a french fryer... and all at the same time. Multi-talented I think they call it :)

I believe the Department of Education calls that multitasking.

I'm getting hungry

Tom you say free education free health service like it is a bad thing here in the uk we have both you say it like it's a bad thing it works pretty well over here.
Yeah our government has its problems like yours but we have it and it works fine.

We have a legislation called every child matters and the main points are below without free nhs and schooling these may not be achieved.

* Be healthy
* Stay safe
* Enjoy and achieve through learning
* Make a positive contribution to society
* Achieve economic well-being

Nicki-

Higher education such as university (the equivalent of college in America) is not free in the UK*. I have a huge debt to prove this. Yes it is much more heavily subsidised than in America and for that I a truly grateful but free it is not.

*with the exception of Scotland which has a different system

Sorry did not realise they were different thought college was college

I work with a lot of americans. Sometimes it's like we speak different languages. It's so funny I'll say something then I just get a blank stare. Or we'll spend half a conversation talking about two completely separate things. :D

Are you suggesting that Obama is running for president by making suggestions?


Would that be in contrast to Dubya that suggested under his guided economics that we would be country of people known as the "haves and have mores." Maybe GW's inference implied "recession." :)

Would that be in contrast to Dubya that suggested under his guided economics that we would be country of people known as the "haves and have mores." Maybe he was just suggesting that would be more "recession." :)
It would be in contrast to W who said he would cut taxes fairly for everyone, and he did. Promise made, promise delivered, in contrast to Dems who are too willing to lie and conceal their economics, other than to mask their program in class warfare.

It would be in contrast to W who said he would cut taxes fairly for everyone, and he did.

But oh what else he did -- created an unnecessary debt that may take generations to pay off.

But oh what else he did -- created an unnecessary debt that may take generations to pay off.

He helped rack up a 9,000,000,000 monthly spenditure in Iraq.

Hello again:

Frankly, I don't think we need to spend a nickel more. We're spending plenty. We just need to get more bang for our buck.

I'm not going to start pointing fingers. We've been doing that for 40 years. There's enough blame across the political spectrum to go around. I dunno how to fix it. I just know that it CAN be fixed.

Ok, I do know how to fix it. For starters, let's in one fell swoop, eliminate the Education Department and the NEA.

excon
Wonders never cease! For the second time, I agree with you!

It would be in contrast to W who said he would cut taxes fairly for everyone, and he did. Promise made, promise delivered, in contrast to Dems who are too willing to lie and conceal their economics, other than to mask their program in class warfare.

So the Democrats speaking of spenditures on our children, our future generations, concerning education, is somehow less important than Dubya's failed economics, that by the way he delivered on. Recession, record foreclosures and bankruptcies, and gas prices escalating (although we found out this week he was unaware of gas possibly hitting $4 a gallon).

Shabbos starts soon. I enjoyed the topic and reading the various views. Everyone have a great evening, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents.

But oh what else he did -- created an unnecessary debt that may take generations to pay off.
You should be fair with responsibility for the budget deficits; the president neither taxes nor appropriates. If you wish to argue that W should have been tougher on Congress, you have a lot of company. He also promised to bring a new tone to the nation's capitol and he tried; I believe that is why he didn't get into rancorous arguments over the budget (you know: bickering?? ), which everyone, according to the liberal media, detests. He did his part and gets no thanks for it. There are lots and lots of critics; I call them, people riding in the wagon; but not many who want to get out and pull the wagon. W will be judged more responsibly and favorably in future years; he has been a worker, not a loafer or philanderer.

I agree. Bad idea indeed.

You should be fair with responsibility for the budget deficits

I was referring to the exorbitant costs due to an unnecessary war in another part of the world.

England just had its first run on a bank. Norther Rock. America is right behind you. We will have a few runs on the banks here soon I'm betting. After the government bails their Wall Street sweet hearts out, we won't be able to afford free anything. It's all campaign caca.

Hello again:

Me and my distinctions......... The first is the idea; should we educate our children. The second is the process.

I don’t disagree with any of you in terms of the process. It's broken - has been for a long time. We're spending more and getting dumber.

This thread, however, has primarily been about the process - how to pay for it, the schools suck, the kids are there for a free ride, they're too damn liberal.... I dunno. Complaints abound.

But, because the process is broken doesn't mean it has to stay that way. It doesn't mean that it can't be fixed. It doesn't mean that we should give up. You guys sound like a bunch of naysayers...... You guys are stuck talking about the process.

Educating our children is smart. It's something we SHOULD do. It's a GOOD thing. Tom is the only one who pointed out a reason why it might not be good. There'll be nobody around to cook his burgers.

All Obama is doing is talking about the possibilities. We like hearing about what we CAN do, rather than what we can’t.

excon

Like you say education is a good thing, and the question really is who should pay for it at the post high school level.

The taxpayor or the student, most of whom are over the age of 18 and, therefore, can take on choice and responsibility instead of expecting to be spoon fed and waited on all their life at the taxpayors expense.

I thought you were a libertarian?

If you go to any major research university, in the hard sciences, you will find an over representation of Asians and Indians. Most of whom are foreign and are busting their butts to get an education, not expecting it free. What is wrong with American raised students that they are not willing to sacrifice and work hard for their futures? Why is Obama appealing to this?

I got my bachelors at 20, got my post grad degree before 25, went on to underpaid professional training, and was not in "the real world" till close to 30. All the while accumulating debt from school loans. My generation and the generation before me, in my field went through this.

With the current state of the economy - ? Recession, sinking dollar, the war in Iraq, the subprime mortgage mess, rising gasoline and food prices... baby boomers reaching 65 now and the expected increase in entitlement spending, let alone the solvency of the Soc Sec system in question,

Medicare Spending to Surge - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB120399640594392887.html)


How realistic and responsible is it for Obama to put out the idea of"free" college?
How is it going to get paid for ?


And this is before we even get onto Obama's tax stance.

Tax Delusions (http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9224)


"In short, Obama is a "tax-and-spend" liberal, while Hillary is a "spend-and-tax" liberal. If either actually launched their gargantuan spending plans on the basis of imaginary revenues expected from taxing the rich, he or she would quickly end up having to tax the stuffing out of the middle class."

an over representation of Asians and Indians. Most of whom are foreign and are busting their butts to get an education, not expecting it free.

On weekends at Chicagoland libraries, there is an over-representation of Asians (Indians are Asians). Where are the white kids? Hmmm, they are at the fast-food places flipping burgers (for Tom probably) and working as cashiers at stores in the malls. Why are they working instead of studying at the library? They are earning money to pay for their snazzy cars and the gasoline guzzled and the insurance required--the snazzy cars that they need to get to work.

Now, ask around to find out how the Asian students get to school and the library and then home again

Yes wondergirl you do have to question the priorities of some of the "white kids" . (this is actually getting a little too sterotypical for my liking) . I was flipping burgers and doing anything else I could from the age of 12 to earn money ;not to buy fancy cars ,but to pay for my college education . Maybe I should feel wronged because I wasn't entitled to a "free education" . Had my parents been poorer I could've probably at least gotten a guaranteed low cost loan .They couldn't pay for my schooling because of many factors including high medical expenses for my sister (kidney failure). But somehow I do not think I was entitled to it. My folks were responsible for me until I was 18 and I did not expect them to be responsible beyond that . Anything they did past 18 like letting me live in their house was a bonus that I am forever grateful for . When I went to school I continued to "flip burgers"(worked in the college cafeteria) and in the summers took any job that would pay $$ . One summer I did camp counselor in the day and ripped tickets at the theater by night. Other jobs included maintenance at Grumman Aerospace,road construction ,and I worked at an injection molding plant making water coolers(that job really sucked.) .The couple of years my family lived in Iran I travelled to visit them .Even there I tried to find work (the Peace Corp turned me down ) . Perhaps if I got my education for "free" which again means that I pick someone else's pocket on my behalf,then I would not have as well rounded experiences.So I in no way feel slighted because my education was not "free" .

I was referring to the exorbitant costs due to an unnecessary war in another part of the world.
"Land of the free and home of the victims
by Ernest Istook
February 29, 2008 |

I wish I were a victim. Then people would give me things, and government would take care of me.

That's a dominant message on the presidential campaign trail, where some candidates preach that we have become a nation of victims, and that government is the only shining knight who can ride to our rescue.

Sadly, we've fallen to the point where this argument often works.

Using the politics of fear rather than hope, these candidates want to expand a failed war: the "War on Poverty," which has cost America trillions but produced no victory. They now are calling for a permanent surge of programs to cover the middle class - an expansion of the same failed strategy that has given us a permanent underclass that depends on government.

They hope to lure more Americans into this quagmire by convincing them that we are victims.

According to Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, America is a place where the middle class is repressed.

Here's the heart of the Clinton argument, in her website's words:

Hillary has a plan to restore America's middle class. After six and a half years of Bush administration policies, the middle class is struggling to succeed in an economy that is leaving more and more Americans behind.

Income inequality has risen to the highest levels since 1929, and wages have stagnated. In the meantime, health care premiums and college tuition have skyrocketed, squeezing middle-class families who have largely relied on their home equity to make ends meet. The burgeoning problems in the housing market further threaten many middle-class families.

Obama describes it this way on his website:

While wages remain flat, the costs of basic necessities are increasing. The cost of in-state college tuition has grown 35 percent over the past five years. Health care costs have risen four times faster than wages over the past six years. And the personal savings rate is now the lowest it's been since the Great Depression.

For both candidates, the answer to all these problems is a rush of new government programs that makes Lyndon B. Johnson look like Ronald Reagan:"
Enjoy: Land of the free and home of the victims (http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed022908b.cfm)

yes wondergirl you do have to question the priorities of some of the "white kids" . (this is actually getting a little too sterotypical for my liking) . I was flipping burgers and doing anything else I could from the age of 12 to earn money ;not to buy fancy cars ,but to pay for my college education . Maybe I should feel wronged because I wasn't entitled to a "free education" . Had my parents been poorer I could've probably at least gotten a guaranteed low cost loan .They couldn't pay for my schooling because of many factors including high medical expenses for my sister (kidney failure). But somehow I do not think I was entitled to it. My folks were responsible for me until I was 18 and I did not expect them to be responsible beyond that . Anything they did past 18 like letting me live in their house was a bonus that I am forever grateful for . When I went to school I continued to "flip burgers"(worked in the college cafeteria) and in the summers took any job that would pay $$ . One summer I did camp counselor in the day and ripped tickets at the theater by night. Other jobs included maintainance at Grumman Aerospace,road construction ,and I worked at an injection molding plant making water coolers(that job really sucked.) .The couple of years my family lived in Iran I travelled to visit them .Even there I tried to find work (the Peace Corp turned me down ) . Perhaps if I got my education for "free" which again means that I pick someone elses pocket on my behalf,then I would not have as well rounded experiences.So I in no way feel slighted because my education was not "free" .

I too worked my tail off from age 12 (raking leaves and such till I could get working papers at age 16) but that was for my gradeschool and high school tution. I worked during the week and all weekends. And proud as heck for it. And feel better for it. That's why when it came for college, I was just too darn tired. Literally.

I just want all of our children to have as much opportunities as possible. I agree, no handouts, but let's come up with some sort of plan where those that are willing, rich or not rich, obtain higher education, but yes, must pay back in some sort of way.

Those parents who wish there child to go to the more "elite" colleges will then need to pay for it themselves.

Just like grades K through 12, you can opt to attend for free or if you wish other, you have to pay.

Let's try something. Give it an attempt to work before coming up with every reason not to.

Let's meet in the middle.

I worked from 12 on up through college... but I think there should be a balance of responsibility...

My daughters had to work for play money, but school has been her primary job, and helping her be able to focus on this first, and then play money second (including cell phone bill, gas, etc) was a good in between.

Shell pay for school after she grads, and we've assumed a financial obligation as well. In the end.

i worked from 12 on up through college... but i think there should be a balance of responsibility...

my daughters had to work for play money, but school has been her primary job, and helping her be able to focus on this first, and then play money second (including cell phone bill, gas, etc) was a good in between.

shell pay for school after she grads, and weve assumed a financial obligation as well. in the end.
This is how it should be, a family looking after family. This business about the government paying for education is a Faustian bargain, and really is immoral, stealing from Peter to pay Pam.

My parents were divorced and Mom had 5 girls... poor Dad.

But I feel so guilty for saying I paid for HS tuition when Mom fed and clothed me an all.

When I worked 1/3 of my pay went to Mom... 1/3 in the bank (that's what covered the HS tuition) and 1/3 she let me keep :).

I did however get a reduction in my tuition because of my circumstanses and the grade school picked up the difference (that didn't make me feel real good, but I am very grateful)

Three of the girls went to live with Dad and the two of us where with Mom (Dad was much less strict :). So that's why I had to pitch in as well.

I wouldn't trade it for anything. Because every little thing I am grateful for because I know how hard it is to come by.

Even back then if college was an option - as I said, I would have passed. It was for many reasons, but my mind just seemed to reject Acadmeics from entering. LOL I am not putting myself down. Religion and English classes I loved... the rest... major brain block.

Love is priceless. When I watch Hillary or Obama or W advocating for more government in education, health care, farming, take your pick, it is not about love. It's about stealing, legal theft. You can wrap and market these programs however you wish, but in the final analysis it's all about April 15: pay or go to jail.

This is how it should be, a family looking after family. This business about the government paying for education is a Faustian bargain, and really is immoral, stealing from Peter to pay Pam.

Now govt did help us...

Loans through the dept of ed for four years. Sure they get some interest, but by the time you wade through the layers, you know they aren't making money... its still taxpayer sponsored in the end. But.. a program that certainly helped reasonably when I needed it.

We didn't get a free ride... we didn't get hammered financially, tho' part of that was reasonable planning on our part.

But we'll just have to see what happens in the next two years when the ripples of the credit crunch keep spreading... isn't over yet... just beginning

I don't think it's a bad idea. In fact, it's a brilliant idea, only thing I would change is "...every..." part because I think only the poor and middle class shouldn't have to pay. Let the Rich put out some cash!! It should be put in effect immediately, because Im going to college this fall :)

I think that it is a good idea, as long as there is an agreement that one has to get certain grades in order to receive the financial aid. Obviously no one deserves to have their college paid for if they're failing classes and just there for the "party experience." I'm a college student right now, I get mostly As and a few Bs, and I receive little financial help at all even though my parents are unable to help me pay for college. When I graduate, just with my undergrad degree, I'll be over $40,000 in debt, all to be educated in something that will ultimately give back to society - it's as if one is paying their future employer. Even if university costs were scaled back quite a bit, to a reasonable amount, would be extremely heplful. It's sad that education is a business now.

No such thing as a "free education " someone is paying for it.

Socialism doesn't work very well.

And yet, that's exactly where the "enlightened" want to take us. I've often wondered if they're so enlightened why can't they see the evidence of Socialism's failures that's right in front of their faces? Or is it that they know it and just don't care because it's all about consolidating power? I say it's the latter...

I've often wondered if they're so enlightened why can't they see the evidence of Socialism's failures that's right in front of their faces? Hello speech:

I don't know... We're on the precipice of possibly the WORST DEPRESSION ever experienced by modern man - which was, by the way, caused by the EXCESSES of unfettered capitalism.

That's right in front of your face, and you don't see it.

excon

... the EXCESSES of unfettered capitalism.

That's right in front of your face, and you don't see it.

excon
You have to be drinking or smoking or injecting... ; 'unfettered capitalism'? Show it to me.

Hello speech:

I dunno.... We're on the precipice of possibly the WORST DEPRESSION ever experienced by modern man - which was, by the way, caused by the EXCESSES of unfettered capitalism.

That's right in front of your face, and you don't see it.

excon

And Socialism is the answer? I have yet to see any "unfettered capitalism" in my lifetime, businesses are regulated out the wazoo. Besides the usual regulatory agencies involved, my place of business has to comply with OSHA, NFPA, MSHA, ANSI, NIOSH, USCG, DOE, State and local fire marshals and perhaps the mother of all governmental agencies aside from the IRS - DOT. You should see what we have to go through to work at the local nuke plant. What "unfettered capitalism" are you referring to, and besides the regulatory failures I acknowledge, perhaps loaning thousands and thousands of dollars to people who can't pay it back would be a good practice to end?

Perhaps if there was some unfettered capitalism then the housing bubble would not have happened. The demand side of the market was created by Congress and the Presidents of the last 2 decades who, with good intentions, tried to make home owners of people who could not afford it.

Really off topic here, but when was anything that the government handed out FREE?
If a person really wants an education it can be done. My oldest daughter went to school full time while holding down a part time job to pay for the school. Was it an ivy league college? Nope. Two years at Community college, followed by her bachelors from another school and now at 38 with two kids she is enrolled in a masters program from a well respected university. Not one cent from mom and dad. Does she have to work hard? You bet, but she has done it all on her own. NO HANDOUTS FROM MR OBAMA EITHER!

NO HANDOUTS
The handouts would have been from Bush and his predecessors, not Obama.

My younger son went to college out of high school, used his savings and also took out four govt loans which he is now paying back thanks to the job his college degree got for him.

Really off topic here, but when was anything that the government handed out FREE?
If a person really wants an education it can be done. My oldest daughter went to school full time while holding down a part time job to pay for the school. Was it an ivy league college? Nope. Two years at Community college, followed by her bachelors from another school and now at 38 with two kids she is enrolled in a masters program from a well respected university. Not one cent from mom and dad. Does she have to work hard? You bet, but she has done it all on her own. NO HANDOUTS FROM MR OBAMA EITHER!
Apparently, it won't be a handout. From Obama's web site --

"Make college affordable to all Americans:

Obama and Biden will create a new American Opportunity Tax Credit worth $4,000 in exchange for community service. It will cover two-thirds the cost of tuition at the average public college or university and make community college tuition completely free for most students."

Two years at Community college.... NO HANDOUTS FROM MR OBAMA EITHER!Hello again, 450,

Then who DID your daughter get her handout from? Your state government? Your city? Do you NOT understand what a "community college" is? I suppose you don't.

You probably think your toothpaste is safe because it was made by a good old American company. But, you'd be wrong about that too. It's safe because some stinkin liberal passed a law to GUARANTEE that it's safe!

But, I digress.

excon

You probably think your toothpaste is safe because it was made by a good old American company. But, you'd be wrong about that too. It's safe because some stinkin liberal passed a law to GUARANTEE that it's safe!! ....

excon

Ah, yes, liberals: and what law would that be? What department of your sacred regulators looks after toothpaste? They are much more interested in what we think, by the way.

What department of your sacred regulators looks after toothpaste? Hello again, George:

They're from a little known bureaucracy called the Food and Drug Administration. You probably never heard of 'em.

Damn Democrats!

excon

Koolaid be dammed excon you really are funny. She paid for every credit hour she earned out of her own pocket.
Some people might call them junior colleges because they do not offer a four year degree. But they also do not offer courses in binge drinking, rape, or any other nonsense that has nothing to do with an education and everything to do with keeping tenured professors who do little more than teach one class a semester and drag down hugh sums of money employed.
Why is it you find it hard to fathom that some people have common sense and do not want government in their pockets stealing the money they earn?

Hello again, 450:

Please try to stay focused... I wasn't talking about their CURRICULUM and neither were you. Curriculum is NOT the subject of this thread. This thread is about government subsided education. Toward that end, I was addressing my remarks about how community colleges are FUNDED.

They're HANDED money BY the government to subsidize education... You seem to really HATE that Obama wants to give away your tax money to subsidize education, but your daughter TAKES tax money to subsidize HER education. Yet, you somehow seem to think it's different. You even BOAST that she doesn't take government money.

Well, it's NOT different - not even close.

I ask you again, do you understand community colleges? I don't think you do.

excon

Hello again, George:

They're from a little known bureaucracy called the Food and Drug Administration. You probably never heard of 'em.

Damn Democrats!

excon

Sounds like a damn Democrat: toothpaste is a food and/or drug.

Deleted

You know excon, if you would quit dipping into that koolaid that you so proudly claim to have not drank, you would understand my point.
Of course I know that colleges are partially supported by my tax dollars. Even though you may think so I am not an idiot. What Mr savior to all is wanting is so far beyond that it is not even funny. His proposals like all others put forth by the socialist left is to take away all incentive to work and instead turn us into a bunch of mind numbed robots AKA communist Russia. Is that what you want for our country? A country founded on the principal "if you work hard, you can rise above your current social and economic status and become anything you set your mind to".

What Mr savior to all is wanting is so far beyond that it is not even funny. His proposals like all others put forth by the socialist left is to take away all incentive to work and instead turn us into a bunch of mind numbed robots AKA communist Russia.
Ummmm, please read up on that a little more. Work and repayment are part of his plan.

WG, isn't that what is already available in the form of student loans? Many of which are never paid back by people making large incomes but simply do not or quit paying the loans and the government, our same government who now wants trillions of dollars never goes after?

WG, isn't that what is already available in the form of student loans? Many of which are never paid back by people making large incomes but simply do not or quit paying the loans and the government, our same government who now wants trillions of dollars never goes after?
Do you have stats on how many student loans are defaulted on and how many are paid?

I don't understand your point in the "our same government" part of the sentence.

In a press release, Secretary Spellings announced that the FY 2006 national cohort default rate is 5.2 percent. The Department also released a summary of the FY 2006 official cohort default rates by state, by institution type, and a graph showing the trend in national default rates. A briefing on the national default rates was provided with the announcement of the FY 2006 rates.

Give a "free" education to the masses and I would be willing to bet the rate would be closer to 30%
If people who cannot afford to buy a house today were given an education what makes you think they could or would repay student loans? Or more aptly, what sorts of jobs would all these "liberal arts" graduates get? Flipping burgers at micky dees for 8.50 an hour.

In a press release, Secretary Spellings announced that the FY 2006 national cohort default rate is 5.2 percent. The Department also released a summary of the FY 2006 official cohort default rates by state, by institution type, and a graph showing the trend in national default rates. A briefing on the national default rates was provided with the announcement of the FY 2006 rates.

Give a "free" education to the masses and I would be willing to bet the rate would be closer to 30%
If people who cannot afford to buy a house today were given an education what makes you think they could or would repay student loans? Or more aptly, what sorts of jobs would all these "liberal arts" graduates get? Flipping burgers at micky dees for 8.50 an hour.
Wow! McDonald's pays over $8 an hour?? I should quit my low-paying tax-supported public library job that I've had for 24 years and get onto McD's management team.

But Obama has not promised anything free to anyone.

But Obama has not promised anything free to anyone.

Really! So what do you call this? "The House of Representatives approved an $819 billion economic stimulus package Wednesday, dealing the new Obama administration a legislative victory...." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/28/house-vote-obamas-economic-stimulus-plan/
And this: Wed. Feb. 13, 2008
WASHINGTON - President Bush on Wednesday signed a multibillion-dollar economic rescue package on Wednesday that means $300 to $1,200 rebates for many American households. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23143814/

Really! So what do you call this? "The House of Representatives approved an $819 billion economic stimulus package Wednesday, dealing the new Obama administration a legislative victory...." House Passes $819B Stimulus Package - Presidential Politics | Political News - FOXNews.com (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/28/house-vote-obamas-economic-stimulus-plan/)
and this: Wed., Feb. 13, 2008
WASHINGTON - President Bush on Wednesday signed a multibillion-dollar economic rescue package on Wednesday that means $300 to $1,200 rebates for many American households. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23143814/
Like the article says (as per Obama), it's an investment that will produce returns, and is not a gift. Plus there will be checks and balances this time, not like the handout Bush gave, the handout the banks have stuffed into their vaults, the handout no one is benefitting from.

Create the American Opportunity Tax Credit: Obama and Biden will make college affordable for all Americans by creating a new American Opportunity Tax Credit. This universal and fully refundable credit will ensure that the first $4,000 of a college education is completely free for most Americans, and will cover two-thirds the cost of tuition at the average public college or university and make community college tuition completely free for most students. Recipients of the credit will be required to conduct 100 hours of community service




My only question is what exactly 100 hours of "community service?"


Is it in ACORN?

Is it faith based?


------------------------

There is already a needs based program via the late senator Pell.

Also there is the "hope" credit.

There is also military service - don't forget that one.


---------------------------------------------


List of colleges and universities in the United States by endowment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._colleges_and_universities_by_endowmen t)



Why don't they suggest that the colleges set aside a certain percentage of their endowment toward reducing tuition? Why should the taxpayor [ that pays for everything the politicians promise ] pay for everything?

Harvard charges about 31 k per year yet they have a 34 billion dollar endowment.

How are the academic big wigs any different than the wallstreet tycoons or auto execs?



G&P

My only question is what exactly 100 hours of "community service?"
Probably similar to what I supervise -- unpaid volunteer work. I also supervise unpaid work by court-ordered offenders (30-275 hrs.). They wash adult and children's library shelves (i.e. wash each shelf after moving the books onto a cart, dry the shelf, return the books to the shelf in the correct order), damp-wipe rotating paperback racks, damp-wipe the magazine shelves, clean interior glass, clean gunk and adhesives off children's dept. windows and glass walls, wash bathroom walls and stalls walls and doors, pick up trash and dumped cigarette butts off the library parking lot and property, keep the outdoor drains free of debris, shovel snow, keep the walkways and handicapped parking spaces free of snow and ice, separate and dump paper recyclables from trash, process books and other library materials, polish the bronze plaques throughout the library, clean each leaf on all our silk and live plants (they get very dusty from all the patron comings and goings), check the inventory list for each book in the library, clean all the toys in the children's dept. clean the thousands of DVDs and music CDs and audio (book) CDs, cut down cardboard boxes for recycling, clean all public-use and staff computer screens and mice and desktops and furniture, clean with Murphy's soap all library furniture wood (oak), clean all interior stairwells both public and "hidden" (used during tornado warnings, etc.), tie up the oldest magazines that have been withdrawn, haul withdrawn because outdated or unread-for-five-years books to the Dumpster... I'm sure there's more...

I have a five-page checklist of work that must be done daily, weekly, monthly, and occasionally.

WG,
Maybe if you got out of your library and your cushy government job you would see the USA in a whole different light. People in private sector do not have the privilege of retiring after 20 or 25 years with full medical paid for life and a nice fat retirement check paid for by the tax payers. We actually have to work until we are 66 or 70 depending on age and hopefully we have scrimped and saved enough money to allow us to retire. Then we have to go out and spend hundreds of dollars a month for a supplemental health care package that hopefully we might never need in our old age. That is if an insurance company will actually sell us a policy with out restrictions on preexisting conditions. If Mr Obama and the DNC really really wanted to stimulate the economy instead of pay backs and pork they would actually sit down and write a package that that makes sense. Cut federal spending, cut payroll taxes, then watch how the extra money in your and my pockets every month is used.
There is nothing for free in this world. Someone has to pay.
Heck the bottom line is that if and that is a big IF the teachers unions actually made their teachers teach in grade school and high school college would not be as necessary. As it stands now, a person has to have a college education because they never got one in public high schools before that.

That is if an insurance company will actually sell us a policy with out restrictions on preexisting conditions.
Hello again, 450:

I wholeheartedly agree. I don't know why your doctors decisions have to be run by the insurance company first... That's SCREWED up.

We need to get the insurance company OUT of the examination room, and have the government cover us ALL, irrespective of your preexisting conditions. That'd be GOOD for you. No?

excon

Oh PLEEZE not that again. Lets seen now, according to the Hillary health care plan as proposed ? Back in 1993 was it, that would have happened. Now, feel free to go back and check my figures, but as I remember it her hinesses plan would have cost the American taxpayers something like 35% of the GDP!
So no that is not a viable option in anybodies book.
Please stop drinking that koolaid would you!

... Then we have to go out and spend hundreds of dollars a month for a supplemental health care package that hopefully we might never need in our old age. That is if an insurance company will actually sell us a policy with out restrictions on preexisting conditions....

Please note that medicare supplement policies and medicare advantage policies are available to retirees without underwriting during the 'open enrollment' period. If a retiree makes his election at the right time, 'pre-existing conditions' are not operative. When to Enroll in Medicare: Review Important Dates for Each Medicare Enrollment Period (http://www.humana-medicare.com/humana-medicare-drug-plan/medicare-prescription-drugs-enrollment.asp#SUPP)
I am not endorsing Humana, but this ad appeared quickly in my search, and the information looks correct.

George, We are just now going through this with my mother in law. If she had the medicare part A her last hospital stay would have cost her out of pocket $1068.00.
So how many citizens on a fixed income with no supplemental policies can afford that in one month? Having a supplemental policy is crucial to seniors. But the Government is not the answer. When has the Government ever been able to do anything less costly than the private sector does it?

So how many citizens on a fixed income with no supplemental policies can afford that in one month? Hello again, 450:

Slow down. You're making my head spin...

On the one hand you recognize that someone in your family can't afford their health coverage...

But, on the other hand, you don't think the government should step in to help. Dude! Does your mother in law know you're willing to throw her under the bus?

excon

...We are just now going through this with my mother in law. If she had the medicare part A her last hospital stay would have cost her out of pocket $1068.00.
Evidently, your mother-in-law is not 65. As I understand it, Part A (Hospitalization) is 'free'. Part B has a monthly premium of $96.40 during 2009. It has been a couple years since I looked into this, but some insurance companies were reimbursing the Part B premium in their Medicare Advantage plans, which liberals/Democrats find despicable, by the way. Enhanced benefits under Medicare Advantage plans is something George Bush got right, and Obamacrats will try to gut.

You are both wrong, She is 92. Attached is a summary of the copayments required under part A medicare
2008 MEDICARE DEDUCTIBLE, CO-INSURANCE & PREMIUM AMOUNTS

Cost-Sharing for Part A and Part B
Note: On September 19, 2008 the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced Part A and Part B premiums and deductibles for 2009 (see below).
Hospital Deductible: $1,024 / benefit period
Hospital Coinsurance:
Days 0-60: $0
Days 61-90: $256 / day
Days 91-150: $512 / day

Unless you qualify with more than 60 quarters worked you pay a premium for this coverage.

It's not a matter of being wrong; rather, what are the facts. There are many seniors, 92 years of age and older, with Part A. Just curious: what is your ma-in-law's reason for not having it? She is evidently not eligible for Medicaid, but there again I am making assumptions.

That is correct you are making an assumption. But, in her situation having not worked long enough to qualify for the Free premiums, and for the last hospital stay of 5 days her out of pocket cost under Medicare would have been $1068 dollars. Under the private replacement plan she has her out of pocket was $800. Dollars. This plan cost her $96 dollars a month and does have limits. With her other medical problems over the past year she is bumping up against those limits. So we will have to see what happens in the next few months.

WG,
Maybe if you got out of your library and your cushy government job you would see the USA in a whole different light. People in private sector do not have the privilege of retiring after 20 or 25 years with full medical paid for life and a nice fat retirement check paid for by the tax payers. We actually have to work until we are 66 or 70 depending on age and hopefully we have scrimped and saved enough money to allow us to retire. Then we have to go out and spend hundreds of dollars a month for a supplemental health care package that hopefully we might never need in our old age. That is if an insurance company will actually sell us a policy with out restrictions on preexisting conditions. If Mr Obama and the DNC really really wanted to stimulate the economy instead of pay backs and pork they would actually sit down and write a package that that makes sense. Cut federal spending, cut payroll taxes, then watch how the extra money in your and my pockets every month is used.
There is nothing for free in this world. Someone has to pay.
Heck the bottom line is that if and that is a big IF the teachers unions actually made their teachers teach in grade school and high school college would not be as necessary. As it stands now, a person has to have a college education because they never got one in public high schools before that.
My job is not at all cushy. The community is mainly blue collar. We have no library union. Starting pay is around $10 an hour. We hire mostly part-timers (no pension). In the corporate world, I would get a nice pension after making (with my education and with my job responsibilities) a salary of six figures. After almost 30 years in public libraries, I make less than $35,000 a year. (As a Lutheran teacher, my pay was even lower.) I have been at my pay ceiling for years -- I'm told the library can't afford to pay me more. The property taxes that support public libraries are spent on books and other library materials and for building maintenance, not for staff salaries. (My library needs a new roof, and the director is in the process of getting a mortgage to pay for it.) That's why we have so many volunteers and community service workers, to get the work done that we can't afford to hire people for. The saying is, "If you want to get rich, don't work at a public library."

...in her situation having not worked long enough to qualify for the Free premiums...

She didn't qualify under her own earnings or her husband's earnings for Medicare? Does she qualify for Medicaid?

She didn't qualify under her own earnings or her husband's earnings for Medicare? Does she qualify for Medicaid?
Under her qualifications her medicare payment would be $248 or 264 dollars a month. Her EX husband owned his own business for many years and did not pay SSI.
Regardless, under the 2009 rules for part A the copayment for hospital stay of up to 60 days is $1024. I personally don't know a lot of retirees with that sort of cash just laying around. But, the alternative is so far worse is it not?

Socialism doesn't work very well.Hello again:

Does anyone other than me, find the irony in this discussion??

excon

Hello again:

Does anyone other than me, find irony in this discussion???

excon
I do. Wondergirl wonders if they do.

I'm told the library can't afford to pay me more.

There is active discussions in my area about consolidating lirary services and shutting some down.
My daughter works in the local one while going to college. She may choose library science as a career

I went into a library in our area and saw a bar code self checkout table and I told her that she may want to reconsider unless she goes into research .

I'm told the library can't afford to pay me more.

There is active discussions in my area about consolidating lirary services and shutting some down.
My daughter works in the local one while going to college. She may choose library science as a career

I went into a library in our area and saw a bar code self checkout table and I told her that she may want to reconsider unless she goes into research .

WG:

I would want to see that it writing:

What exactly qualifies as community service?

As we all know Obama was a "community organizer" with ACORN.

Does a political group like ACORN need to be supported by the taxpayors?

----------------------------------------

I like your sig: however, I need the money, I've been hurt, and I would not want even want to see myself dancing;)






G&P

There is active discussions in my area about consolidating lirary services and shutting some down.
My daughter works in the local one while going to college. She may choose library science as a career

I went into a library in our area and saw a bar code self checkout table and I told her that she may want to reconsider unless she goes into research .
Similar discussions are underway in my area. We also just set up a self-checkout station. I receive the monthly magazine from ALA. The times, they are a-changin' in Libraryland.

What exactly qualifies as community service?
Community service is unpaid work done to benefit the community, usually done at a non-profit institution that serves the public and is funded by their tax dollars or donations. Our cat shelter qualifies, as does the animal (dog and cat) shelter, food pantries, the park district, and public schools. I've already listed some of the unpaid work volunteers and community service workers do at our library. Choosing and delivery/pickup of library books/materials to our community's homebound is a library volunteer service I didn't mention.

I'm hoping once spring comes someone will organize volunteers or community service workers to pick up all the trash that's currently lying under the snow and ice.