Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Tuition rates can be fixed with one simple bill.  In ~2003 Republicans passed a bill that was nothing more than a windfall to the financial industry when they made student loans nearly impossible to discharge in bankruptcy.   You can run up massive debt buying cigarettes, cable television, gambilng, and fritos with bean dip and make it all go away if things get bad enough, but get in over your head with student loans and you're fucked forever.   Overnight, student loans became the most valuable product lenders can offer, and this is what caused the insane spikes in tuition.   Money was made freely available to people too young and too ignorant to handle it, all backed by the federal government.  The schools took advantage of the lenders taking advantage of the kids.   If this administration is serious about tuition (it's not), that is the only thing that will fix it. Tighten up the money supply, and the rest will follow.  Those assholes fucked an entire generation with the bankruptcy reform bill.

  • Hook 'Em 8
  • Like 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

Those assholes fucked an entire generation with the bankruptcy reform bill.

QF emphasis.

And if you want to know the biggest thing I criticize Biden about, it's that -- he was a chief architect and proponent of it (Senator from Delaware, bitch-boy for the financial services folks).  The bankruptcy reform bill was and remains utter fuckery.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, bschoolprof said:

The fact this has so many likes tells you all you need to know about team vs principles.  

There were 61 posts in a thread about leaders tying funding to ideological litmus tests before you chose to chime in.  Remarkable which one jumped out at you as worthy of commentary.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

There were 61 posts in a thread about leaders tying funding to ideological litmus tests before you chose to chime in.  Remarkable which one jumped out at you as worthy of commentary.

I thought it was self evident the Trump admin's extortion was a terrible idea.  The hypocrisy was worth pointing out, IMO.  Still is.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

There were 61 posts in a thread about leaders tying funding to ideological litmus tests before you chose to chime in.  Remarkable which one jumped out at you as worthy of commentary.

It also reveals a stunningly incomprehensible set of "principles"

As long as your the first to take an illegal/unethical action, you're fine. Its the tit-for-tat that they are upset with.

To wit: Texas moves forward with Trump's redistricting request to gain five new GOP House seats. A-ok with us!                                                                       California responds with the same to cancel the advantage. Wait a minute! What hypocrites! They said they were mad about the Texas thing!

Trump extorts universities. A-ok with us!   California responds that they will withhold grants to those who capitulate. Wait a minute! That's hypocrisy from the Dems! And that's the real issue here!

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted
22 minutes ago, Chopper said:

By Erwin Chemerinsky

Mr. Chemerinsky is the dean of the law school at the University of California, Berkeley.

Chemerinsky literally wrote the text book for Constitutional Law back when he was a prof at USC.

My former law professor.  Brilliant man who I had the chutzpah to argue with way more than I should have.  He was a bit younger in those days, as was I.  Still get together once every couple of years. I've been arguing with him over a couple of points in his con law text book since he first published it back in the 90s, but despite seven or so revisions to it he has held strong against making any changes based on my arguments.  :)

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, bschoolprof said:

I thought it was self evident the Trump admin's extortion was a terrible idea.  The hypocrisy was worth pointing out, IMO.  Still is.  

Sorry but pointing out hypocrisy over the last decade is pure folly as evidenced by those in charge right now.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
54 minutes ago, Chopper said:

I’ve seen a copy of the compact and note that it would violate the First Amendment in another way: requiring universities to have policies prohibiting “all university employees, in their capacity as university representatives,” to abstain from “actions or speech relating to societal and political events except in cases in which external events have a direct impact upon the university.” It would be hard to come up with a more explicit attempt to restrict freedom of speech.

Holy shit. HOLY SHIT.

  • Haha 2
  • Rage+1 4
Posted
43 minutes ago, bschoolprof said:

I thought it was self evident the Trump admin's extortion was a terrible idea.  The hypocrisy was worth pointing out, IMO.  Still is.  

As pointed out earlier, Newsom's post doesn't require adherence to any particular policies of his or any other administration.

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Posted
It also reveals a stunningly incomprehensible set of "principles"
As long as your the first to take an illegal/unethical action, you're fine. Its the tit-for-tat that they are upset with.
To wit: Texas moves forward with Trump's redistricting request to gain five new GOP House seats. A-ok with us!                                                                       California responds with the same to cancel the advantage. Wait a minute! What hypocrites! They said they were mad about the Texas thing!
Trump extorts universities. A-ok with us!   California responds that they will withhold grants to those who capitulate. Wait a minute! That's hypocrisy from the Dems! And that's the real issue here!

This is the conservative way.
“Sure, maybe what Trump did is bad. But you know what’s WAY worse? Anyone fighting back.”
It’s a time-honored approach to delegitimizing all opposition to the authoritarian. And that’s exactly why it’s being advanced in this thread.
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
On 10/2/2025 at 10:52 AM, TwiceHorn said:

Arizona State is the far less serious of the two schools.

 

On 10/2/2025 at 11:01 AM, royiv said:

ASU’s undergrad programs are a mess, but Crow hasn’t yet managed to fuck up the law school. Of the two law schools in Arizona, ASU’s is held in higher regard.

I know it's deeply unpopular and a bad word these days, but ASU is our premiere climate science, sustainability, ESG-science and accounting type program in the U.S. 

If we ever see a world where a new administration takes over and we care about the planet and the intersectionality of the planet and business, ASU will be the place pumping out those leaders. In fact, saw this from the UN conference last week:

Quote

 

Arizona State University will use a $115 million donation, the largest in the university's history, to launch a new school focused on conservation and training the next generation of leaders to protect biodiversity and promote global sustainability.

The news was announced by ASU President Michael Crow on Sept. 22 at a "Climate Week" event in New York.

The Rob Walton School of Conservation Futures, named after the 80-year-old philanthropist donor and former chairman of Walmart Inc., will be part of ASU's Changing Futures campaign. The university's College of Global Futures, which hosted an opening for its $192 million nature-inspired research facility on University Drive during Earth Week 2022, will be renamed the Rob Walton College of Global Futures in recognition of the sustaining funding.

 

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona-environment/2025/09/22/asu-launches-rob-walton-school-conservation-futures-115m-donation/86087367007/

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
3 hours ago, Samson's Wig said:

 The schools took advantage of the lenders taking advantage of the kids.   If this administration is serious about tuition (it's not), that is the only thing that will fix it. Tighten up the money supply, and the rest will follow.  Those assholes fucked an entire generation with the bankruptcy reform bill.

I'm mostly with you on this, but I don't agree that the cause is so linear. Around the same time, and probably in the decade before, our own state government started to drastically cut funding for our state institutions, which caused them to try and find that money elsewhere (tuition). The state government decided along the way that higher education is no longer worth nearly as much of our state funding, and from there, dominoes started to fall. Everything you described also could be called "privatization". They handed over yet another public service to private control in order to line someone's pockets. Capitalism has been gut-deep in higher ed for a bit longer than 2003. 

I can probably give some leeway to the argument that university budgets have also inflated over the years, especially in construction & building upgrades and staff.... but there's definitely an argument to be had about it. I don't think slashing budgets offsets how fucked the rest of the balance has become. That's one of those things where I think it becomes a recruiting issue. You better keep up with the joneses if you want to continue to be called a "great" school and public ivy or whatever. But...... that was also a few UT presidents ago and before a regime took over. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Drool 1
Posted
40 minutes ago, BurdineBandit said:

I'm mostly with you on this, but I don't agree that the cause is so linear. Around the same time, and probably in the decade before, our own state government started to drastically cut funding for our state institutions, which caused them to try and find that money elsewhere (tuition). The state government decided along the way that higher education is no longer worth nearly as much of our state funding, and from there, dominoes started to fall. Everything you described also could be called "privatization". They handed over yet another public service to private control in order to line someone's pockets. Capitalism has been gut-deep in higher ed for a bit longer than 2003. 

I can probably give some leeway to the argument that university budgets have also inflated over the years, especially in construction & building upgrades and staff.... but there's definitely an argument to be had about it. I don't think slashing budgets offsets how fucked the rest of the balance has become. That's one of those things where I think it becomes a recruiting issue. You better keep up with the joneses if you want to continue to be called a "great" school and public ivy or whatever. But...... that was also a few UT presidents ago and before a regime took over. 

I completely agree, and left out the other prong of state governments taking advantage of the situation by dropping the subsidizing of tuition to almost nothing to avoid bogging down my comment too much.  But you're absolutely correct that this is an essential aspect of what happend.   State governments felt more comfortable dropping funding, because of what happened after the bankruptcy reform act.   They were already reducing prior, but you saw it fall off a cliff after 2003.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
6 hours ago, bschoolprof said:

Nah, you're either for tying grant funding to ideological/political litmus tests or you're not. Surl seems to be fine or outraged by this depending on team and context.  

I think it's terrible policy either way.  

 

No, you're both-siding this bullshit. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
2 hours ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

No, you're both-siding this bullshit. 

 

Yeah, Newsom proposes no litmus test other than not capitulating to Trumpco.

In some really broad sense, don't capitulate is a policy or sort of litmus test of its own, but not really.

Unless you believe the California governor and Newsom in particular has been dictating California university education policy.

 

Posted

Newsom tells universities not to agree to restrict staff first amendment rights or share international student info with the feds and he’s the bad guy now? 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted

My kids' school district is going to be turbo-fucked by the state when they take over school operations, and now this bullshit. My oldest still has 5 years to go, and he loves UT, but I imagine that UT 5 years from now is not where we will want him to go (or where he will want to go).

  • Hook 'Em 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...