Utopia Talk / Politics / Why Is This Administration

Hot Rod Member	Sun Sep 05 18:36:35 Why?
Madc0w Member	Sun Sep 05 18:40:13 Oh look, Hot Rod is against lowering federal spending. What a socialist.
Aeros Member	Sun Sep 05 18:41:05 Your question was already answered. Because incorporated Universities tend to be thinly veiled scams out to scalp money from stupid people who don't bother to research and find out they are not accredited and issue worthless credits at ridiculous prices.
Rugian Member	Sun Sep 05 18:41:30 Madc0w Member Sun Sep 05 18:40:13 Oh look, Hot Rod is against lowering federal spending. What a socialist. Thread over. Winner: madc0w.
Aeros Member	Sun Sep 05 18:41:58 So my question to Rod is, why do you want the Federal Government doling money out to universities offering shit degrees?
Rugian Member	Sun Sep 05 18:44:16 Aeros, don't even bring up the part about the shit degrees. You can just tell that if this program didn't previously exist and Obama tried starting it up, Hot Rod would be screaming about the "expansion of socialism." Just stick to that one point; he deserves no more in terms of response.
Hot Rod Member	Sun Sep 05 18:52:01 MadCow - Oh look, Hot Rod is against lowering federal spending. What a socialist. Actually I am against, and always have been, of *ANY* federal funds going to education at any level.
jergul Member	Sun Sep 05 18:56:13 "Bachelor''s and master''s degree programs are less at risk because they tend to lead to better-paying jobs and lower default rates than certificate and trade programs, says Todd Young, a senior equity analyst who covers for-profit colleges including DeVry (DV: 41.30, +1.16, +2.88%) at Morningstar." Your answer to "why" HR.
Madc0w Member	Sun Sep 05 18:57:18 So you should be supporting the administration on this. The for-profit colleges should survive in the free market without any federal funding. If I was a libertarian, I would support Obama on this issue.
Hot Rod Member	Sun Sep 05 19:06:27 MC - So you should be supporting the administration on this. The for-profit colleges should survive in the free market without any federal funding. Right along with State Universities. "The Education Department estimates that about 5% of programs and about 16% of programs in the for-profit sector could be at risk of losing their federal aid eligibility." It doesn't appear to impact ever school of this sort and then only a few of the recruiters. Why not just give stiffer penalties to those recruiters. You could even use the same set of penalties for University Sports recruiters that go over the line.
Madc0w Member	Sun Sep 05 19:07:36 "Right along with State Universities. " So then, why are you criticizing the administration for doing something you support?
ehcks Member	Sun Sep 05 19:08:31 Wait, what? You're against education funding? I shouldn't be surprised, but.. why?
Rugian Member	Sun Sep 05 19:08:40 There are bigger drains on the federal budget than college educations for young people. Like Social Security for people that never had children and consequently are responsible for its impending demise.
Hot Rod Member	Sun Sep 05 19:12:47 MC, do try to pay attention. "The for-profit colleges should survive in the free market without any federal funding. Right along with State Universities."
Rugian Member	Sun Sep 05 19:14:43 That's great. But that's not the question you were posing in the OP. THAT question was "why is trying to kill private universities."
Hot Rod Member	Sun Sep 05 19:16:45 You guys really don't get it do you? This is the same thing as the one payer insurance option he wanted so bad. He wants the government to control education with bureaucrats deciding who goes to college and who doesn't. The Progressives want absolute control over our lives.
Rugian Member	Sun Sep 05 19:19:13 Except this change doesn't apply to private not-for-profit schools. So there goes your point.
Madc0w Member	Sun Sep 05 19:27:31 "The Progressives want absolute control over our lives. " I will point out that this quote comes straight from Glenn Beck.
Hot Rod Member	Sun Sep 05 19:32:20 My point is, *IT SHOULD.* Jesus Christ, pay attention. MC, It has been common knowledge for decades. You are just too stupid to get it.
Madc0w Member	Sun Sep 05 19:33:43 I'm too stupid to understand that Glenn Beck tells you what to think?
ehcks Member	Sun Sep 05 19:35:49 Tell us, Hot Rod, why should only rich people be educated?
Hot Rod Member	Sun Sep 05 19:40:45 No, you are too stupid to understand that Obama is doing everything he can to wreck this country in the name of Social Justice, but is nothing more than a power grab. Taking over the insurance and financial and energy and education industries are not ways to improve America. The government is incapable of running anything, especially an entire economy from top to bottom. That is what you are too stupid to see.
Hot Rod Member	Sun Sep 05 19:41:25 ehcks, go soak your head.
ehcks Member	Sun Sep 05 19:43:16 Other than size and broadness of responsibilities, what's the difference between a governmental bureaucracy and a corporate managerial system?
miltonfriedman Member	Sun Sep 05 19:43:47 **I am not really interested to carry on a conversation with a troll and liar like molester Rod. However, as someone who is teaching at a traditional university and is appalled by the practices going on at for-profit colleges, I will post a reply in an attempt to inform the board members. Frankly, this is one of the regulations supported by Obama that should be respected by everyone without a political axe to grind. Therefore, HR will probably keep on trolling but the rest should take this issue seriously. =================== "Why?" 1. Investigations done by DoE a month ago shows that they lured new students with false advertisements including false promises of federal funding (illegal) and false promise of jobs. 2. DoE has also found that many for-profit colleges are recruiting students purely for the financial aid. 3. DoE has further found that graduates of for-profit universities carried higher debts than those from traditional colleges and universities. http://www...n6838102.shtml?tag=mncol;lst;2
ehcks Member	Sun Sep 05 19:43:50 But no, let's go back to the previous question. Why are you against education?
miltonfriedman Member	Sun Sep 05 19:46:27 "Why not just give stiffer penalties to those recruiters. You could even use the same set of penalties for University Sports recruiters that go over the line." Typical trolling, of course. As we know, athletic recruiters who go over the line are punished severely by the NCAA. If DeVry and Univ of Phoenix are governed by a self-governing body like NCAA, than I'd agree that DoE does not need to play a role. But since they aren't, then it's time for DoE and Obama to step in.
Hot Rod Member	Sun Sep 05 20:12:17 ehcks - Other than size and broadness of responsibilities, what's the difference between a governmental bureaucracy and a corporate managerial system? One is effective, the other isn't.
Hot Rod Member	Sun Sep 05 20:18:08 I'm not against education. The purpose of this attack is to start driving for-profit colleges out of business so the only option is public education. They won't rest until they are all gone. The Progressives want cradle to grave control over our lives.
Aeros Member	Sun Sep 05 20:24:19 No its not. Quit whining.
miltonfriedman Member	Sun Sep 05 21:45:12 "The purpose of this attack is to start driving for-profit colleges out of business so the only option is public education. They won't rest until they are all gone." Of course this is false since Obama is one of the proudest supporters for community colleges, which are also for-profit. In fact, community colleges offer better retention rate and smaller debt burden to students. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124753606193236373.html HR, are you done making false claims? Or is this another hackery masquerading itself as concerns over educational funding? If this is just another hackery, then I would appreciated if you leave education out of it as it is too important to be used for such disgusting motive.
Hot Rod Member	Sun Sep 05 23:14:37 mf - Of course this is false since Obama is one of the proudest supporters for community colleges... Community Colleges are government owned and ran. The subject is about privately owned or publicly traded colleges and trade schools such as DeVry. There is no way that these private schools can survive without students who qualify for student loans. Take away the student loans and you bankrupt these schools. I asked my doctor a few weeks ago what would happen to him if The Health Care program is not stopped. He said it would bankrupt him. Now they are trying to deprive these schools of customers whose only way of attending is through student loans.
miltonfriedman Member	Sun Sep 05 23:26:45 "Community Colleges are government owned and ran." Absolutely false. Most community colleges are dependent of property taxes and tuition. They are not "government owned." "There is no way that these private schools can survive without students who qualify for student loans. Take away the student loans and you bankrupt these schools." Correct. And they have been doing it illegally. "I asked my doctor a few weeks ago what would happen to him if The Health Care program is not stopped. He said it would bankrupt him." Unsubstantiated personal experience. Irrelevant. "Now they are trying to deprive these schools of customers whose only way of attending is through student loans." Correct. Businesses that use illegal means to attain profits will be punished. I am glad that Obama has taken a step to punish illegal activities.
miltonfriedman Member	Sun Sep 05 23:31:25 Are you done with lies now, HR? Can you leave education alone for your partisan hackery? Or are you such a disgusting human being that every facets of social institutions from education to lil' Davey are subjected to your mistreatment?
Hot Rod Member	Mon Sep 06 05:15:17 Fuck yuou, I try to talk to you like an adult and all you can come up with nine year old insults. And you blame me. HA!
miltonfriedman Member	Mon Sep 06 10:54:57 An adult conversation would be devoid of retarded hyperbole such as: "He wants the government to control education with bureaucrats deciding who goes to college and who doesn't. The Progressives want absolute control over our lives. " When you begin to talk like an adult, I'll treat you as one.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Sep 06 11:44:44 Your idea of conversation is either agreeing with you or suffering filty insults. Not everyone think like you do. Thank God. "No, you are too stupid to understand that Obama is doing everything he can to wreck this country in the name of Social Justice, but is nothing more than a power grab. Taking over the insurance and financial and energy and education industries are not ways to improve America. The government is incapable of running anything, especially an entire economy from top to bottom. That is what you are too stupid to see."
CrownRoyal Member	Mon Sep 06 12:50:19 "Taking over the insurance and financial " This administration took over financial industry?
CrownRoyal Member	Mon Sep 06 12:58:55 Or insurance for that matter?
Hot Rod Member	Mon Sep 06 13:39:12 CR - This administration took over financial industry? The next thing to it. They piled on so many regulations, including bheing aqble to fire whom the please and replace them with whom they wish. Did you know that it is no longer permitted to file a Freedom of Information claim against the SEC? CR - Or insurance for that matter? The plan is, one step at a time I believe. Did you know the *ONLY DEMOCRATS* using the health plan in the reelection campaigns are those who voted *against* it? Wasn't it supposed to be the crowning jewel in this administrations goals. It certainly has been a democratic goal for decades.
CrownRoyal Member	Mon Sep 06 13:40:56 "The next thing to it." So they did not? Then why lie? Just say, "The next thing to it." "The plan is, one step at a time I believe. " So they DID NOT take over either? Then why lie?
Hot Rod Member	Mon Sep 06 13:56:41 I use hyperbole, get over it. They have, in essence, taken over the financial industry through a myriad of regulations. No they don't own it, but they now control it.
Byron Member	Mon Sep 06 13:58:22 Basically these new rules are no different than Bush's "No Child Left Behind" notions.
Adolf Hitler Member	Mon Sep 06 14:02:48 " Then why lie? " Come on, thats like asking a fish why it swims. Theres a reason dead rod has a reputation as the biggest liar to ever post at UP.
Ninja Member	Mon Sep 06 14:06:47 "On Wednesday, the General Accountability Office testified to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor & Pensions that it sent officers into the for-profit field acting as prospective students to examine recruiting tactics. Undercover tests at 15 for-profit colleges found that all made deceptive or questionable statements to applicants, including suggestions to falsify financial aid forms and exaggerating potential salaries after graduation. " I don't get how you can support these corporations receiving federal support. If they are really worth whatever tuition they wish to charge, nothing stops the free market from loaning people money and people choosing to these "schools".
CrownRoyal Member	Mon Sep 06 14:16:29 Hot Rod Member Mon Sep 06 13:56:41 I use hyperbole, get over it. They have, in essence, taken over the financial industry through a myriad of regulations. No they don't own it, but they now control it. -------- Allright, you lied again, all is forgiven. Again. Now, explain how "they" control it.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Sep 06 14:21:48 First of all I *DO NOT* support federal funding for *ANY* school. But if Colleges, Universities and Community Colleges are going to resort to underhanded recruiting techniques, as I suspect they are, I see no reason to take away student loans just for students attending for-profit colleges and trade schools without punishing the others. The only reason for doing that that I can think of is to destroy the industry. If illegal recruiting techniques are really a serious problem then increase the penalty to the recruiters. If a recruiter knows he is going to do a hard ten for a first offense I doubt he will take the chance. Don't you?
Ninja Member	Mon Sep 06 14:50:48 "But if Colleges, Universities and Community Colleges are going to resort to underhanded recruiting techniques, as I suspect they are, I see no reason to take away student loans just for students attending for-profit colleges and trade schools without punishing the others. " Wow, total speculation as your basis? That's absurd. Why would colleges need to lie about that stuff? Anyways, your claims that Obama is trying to shut down for-profit colleges is absurd. "The Education Department estimates that about 5% of programs and about 16% of programs in the for-profit sector could be at risk of losing their federal aid eligibility. A department spokeswoman says the programs that might lose eligibility are unknown. "
Hot Rod Member	Mon Sep 06 15:20:41 Ethical debates surround U.S. colleges' use of international recruiters Posted 6/1/2010 3:26 PM By Elizabeth Redden, Inside Higher Ed Two years ago, hiring overseas agencies â?? paid by the college in the form of per-student commissions â?? to recruit international students was taboo. Few colleges would publicly admit to the practice, which is illegal under U.S. law when it comes to recruiting American students. Today, while ethical qualms persist, and the debate over the payment of per-student commissions still simmers, more colleges have embraced the recruitment strategy â?? and more still are willing to consider it. MORE: http://www...e-international-students_N.htm
Ninja Member	Mon Sep 06 15:27:41 They're debating the ethics of people being paid to recruit international students. You have not quoted anything about the recruiters doing anything to mislead recruits.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Sep 06 15:42:34 Please? Are you saying breaking the law has nothing to do with recruiting ethics?
Ninja Member	Mon Sep 06 15:44:27 " Are you saying breaking the law has nothing to do with recruiting ethics?" "which is illegal under U.S. law when it comes to recruiting American students." They weren't breaking the law. It is against the law to pay for American recruits, not international ones.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Sep 06 15:59:15 My error, here. Try this one. Miami Recruiting Violations? NCAA Investigating University 08/ 6/10 06:32 PM | AP CORAL GABLES, Fla. â?? The University of Miami is being investigated for possible NCAA violations. Miami issued a statement Friday, saying the investigation surrounds "impermissible text messages and telephone calls to prospective student-athletes." The university conducted an audit and reported its findings to the NCAA. A joint investigation has been launched. The university says it will take the appropriate steps to ensure full compliance with NCAA rules and regulations. The statement doesn't list which sports were involved or how many text-related violations were discovered. The school declined further comment. The NCAA website says "schools cannot text prospective student-athletes at any time." Texting was eliminated because of the potential cost to prospective student-athletes, the site said. Past NCAA cases involving text messaging have typically led to schools either being placed on probation or imposing that penalty on themselves. http://www...ruiting-violatio_n_674074.html
Ninja Member	Mon Sep 06 16:09:19 That has to do with sports and a national athletic association that has it's own rules. You have not alleged any misleading recruiting tactics, only violations of self imposed rules associated with athletics.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Sep 06 18:50:08 It is the same thing only different. With one you are misleading in order to garner the school a few thousands in tuition from student loans. Which costs the government a drop in the bucket. The other you are misleading to get a star athlete that may bring millions to the university. Which is just plain unethical. Both use underhanded recruiting techniques. That is the point. My point is they do not have to destroy the school over this. All they have to do is increase the penalty for recruiting violations. The government does everything upside down and backwards. The health plan is supposed to fix the fraud associated with Medicare. Do you know how they "fixed" the fraud. They cut Medicare benefits by $500 Billion over the next ten years. I ask you, how does that address the fraud?
Ninja Member	Mon Sep 06 19:07:28 "With one you are misleading in order to garner the school a few thousands in tuition from student loans. Which costs the government a drop in the bucket. " The changes aren't just about the government loans going to these schools because of disreputable recruiting tactics, they're also defrauding the students and leaving them with tons of loans and (assuming they get a job) salaries that don't reflect what the schools suggested. "The other you are misleading to get a star athlete that may bring millions to the university. " In what way are the student-athletes being mislead? All your article says is that some schools were texting kids which isn't allowed under any circumstances. You have provided no evidence of the students were being mislead in any way. Hell, you have provided no information about the contents of the messages. "My point is they do not have to destroy the school over this." They're not. First off, only 16% of for-profit schools are expected to be affected and they have every chance to comply with the rules to qualify for federal student loans. 16% is hardly destroying all for-profit colleges.
Ninja Member	Mon Sep 06 19:19:13 p.s., the NCAA has some of the most absurd and random rules. For example: http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/4945435/ Fans of N.C. State, Duke and Carolina have set up pages on the social networking site asking John Wall, a Raleigh high school basketball star, to play for their schools. ... Under NCAA rules, fans are not allowed to recruit players. The NCAA says such sites are a high-tech way to try to influence the college choice of a recruit.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Sep 06 19:31:37 I concede. You win this one, but I fall back with my earlier statement intact. "First of all I *DO NOT* support federal funding for *ANY* school."
Ninja Member	Mon Sep 06 20:20:00 "First of all I *DO NOT* support federal funding for *ANY* school." Of course not, why would it be in our national interest to have an educated populace that is able to compete for jobs with other countries?
miltonfriedman Member	Mon Sep 06 22:22:57 "Your idea of conversation is either agreeing with you or suffering filty insults. Not everyone think like you do. Thank God." Incorrect. I dislike false claims. For example: "Taking over the insurance and financial and energy and education industries" "I use hyperbole"
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: