College is too expensive because way too many kids go that should not. Too many college loans available and the schools are trying to make profit to build more and more stuff. Dorms are turning into luxury apartments now.
UofL helping ACC academic ratings
- Thread starter gobigblue812_rivals29381
- Start date
So you are now trying to use this to attack capitalism? Are you a proponent of socialism but still insist there is nothing political about this?The issue is that NO degree should be "demanding major student loan debt". Other countries do this by having those with the academic chops do the "major degrees" (to borrow our syntax), while the rest would be doing "skills certs"Capitalism, meh.
My sincere apologies. I should have skipped my niece’s wedding to stay online and argue with you.
I told you my thoughts. Full stop on free higher education. Who’s paying the professors? We paying for housing, food and books too? Quality will drop even more. Taxes go up once again. There are already ample opportunities for young people that want to excel and also for those on the downside of advantage. Free higher education for ALL is just stupid.
For those that don’t know or may have forgotten. This nutjob thinks there’s absolutely no difference when it comes to men and women in sports. Just so you know who you’re arguing with.
My sincere apologies. I should have skipped my niece’s wedding to stay online and argue with you.
I told you my thoughts. Full stop on free higher education. Who’s paying the professors? We paying for housing, food and books too? Quality will drop even more. Taxes go up once again. There are already ample opportunities for young people that want to excel and also for those on the downside of advantage. Free higher education for ALL is just stupid.
For those that don’t know or may have forgotten. This nutjob thinks there’s absolutely no difference when it comes to men and women in sports. Just so you know who you’re arguing with.
The amenities race in this country made possible by Title IV is not seen in other countries where kids commute and professors are often paid less. If there was a political desire for free college, what we know as college would have to change dramatically.
What were the courses UK used to keep Sacha Killeya-Jones eligible? He transferred, but none of those classes did, and his resulting GPA prevented him from ever being eligible to play college basketball again.
The level of ignorance and stupidity it takes to equate the two is mind boggling.
You’re just making it K thru 16 instead of K thru 12. There’s nothing substantially different other than that.
Correct. University essentially becomes optional high school, further devaluing it. Right now, we're seeing the devaluing of degrees as-is. Many jobs now want to confirm competency because of the relaxed nature of higher education these days. There are many certificates and online programs for people who want to excel and many of these can lead to jobs that are lucrative. There was a time when the education system taught people to think --- these days, much of our "learning" is regurgitation of canned material, rather than instilling the type of ingenuity and creativeness that perpetuates greatness.
I imagine at some point we move to the free higher education model because it is such a popular idea to some. When it happens, graduate programs become the new university and we essentially just have even less creative thinking in the workforce.
Serve your country and it is free.
Except K-12 now is not what it used to be. I read that 25-40% of college students need remedial help in math or verbal. Make it through 16 and we will be graduating more and more idiots with our tax dollars. Take a look at your public school system and most are failing at least half the students. And I went through the public system years and years ago when more was demanded and my mom was a public school teacher
I am not making it that. Your side are the ones trying to make it that. There is an enormous difference in expense and a great number of other issues as well.
Last edited:
That’s your ridiculous response? Better you just suck up the travesty of UNC’a academic fraud as a wart on your history than cry some dinky foul about a particular player who never amounted to much.
That is what my son did. He got a degree while having to only borrow $5K.
I don’t think it’s a “your side our side” issue as growing student loan debt is an issue that has to eventually affect all sides. It’s a runaway train that has totally gotten out of control. Like mentioned earlier there is now a cap on how much you can get loaned by the government before you have to supplement with a private loan - which can be subject to bankruptcy. I know 200k is still a lot but if that was around when my wife and I graduated that would have been SIGNIFICANTLY less debt than we graduated with. Earlier in this thread it would’ve made it so people couldn’t afford to go to Boston University with a FAFSA, which last year would’ve been no issue. Which was the problem. Someone could’ve taken out a 350k federally backed 7% non bankruptable loan to go to BU for a sociology degree! That’s nuts. I’m very curious to see if here in 3 years all of a sudden 90% of all colleges expensive colleges magically have a top line annual tuition of 50k even if it’s currently higher. I can’t believe we had to get to the point of a tuition cap but the schools abused it to no end.
What's the criteria for this? It doesn't say. I ask because Miami has always been known as a very good school.
Smart kid.
If more students did that, they'd be so much further ahead financially. At the end of the day, your degree will be from the school you graduated from. Some people are either too dumb or ego driven to understand it.
Here is a thought for U. After WW11 American was poor. I don’t know the number exactly but probably about of one third or one fourth of the wealth today in real dollar terms adjusted for an inflated dollar .
BUT OUR FATHERS AND MOTHERS OF THE 1950’s AND 1960’s found the money to establish universities that were basically tuition free . For instance in 1961 my tuition was 74 $ a semester . And included free football and basketball tickets . It s because of that and waiting tables to pay for food , rent etc I was able to attend college . Our mothers and fathers were about as anti communists and socialists as anyone could be . .
HOWEVER THEY REALIZED EVERY CHILD IN AMERICA SHOULD BE ABLE TO FULFILL THEIR DREAM AND “rise above the crowd.”
I had three brothers. Two were engineers, one an accountant , and myself a lawyer . Think of how much the four of us have paid in taxes
to more than justify the HELP the government gave us by basically making higher education tuition free and in reach of the masses.
again I stress 99 % of the population were violently anti communist. We stated many times ”I would rather be dead than red .” Very very conservative by today’s standards both D’s and R’s
I consider myself a moderate politically. But I firmly believe if my parents generation was willing pay the price to make higher education within the grasp of ALL Citizens we can damn sure do the same in a society much,much richer than my parents were born into.
MAYBE ITS BECAUSE THEY DIDNT THINK ALWAYS ABOUT THEMSELVES. IT WASNT ALL ABOUT THEM . RATHER THEY FOCUSED ON MAKING THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE FOR THEIR CHILDREN AND THEIR NEIGHBORS CHILDREN.
NOTHING SOCIALIST OR COMMUNIST ABOUT THAT . IT JUST MADE SENSE TO THEM . ALLOW EVERY KID TO REACH HER FULL POTENTIAL AND YOU WILL RECEIVE MANY TIMES OVER YOUR EXPENDITURE WHEN THEY PAY INCREASED AMOUNTS OF THE TAXES .
Last edited:
They’re always “moderates”.
Read your third paragraph out loud to yourself and then butt that up against the crap product these institutions are pushing out today. Times have changed. This isn’t 75 years ago. You can virtue signal all you want and think you’ve staked a claim to a moral high ground, doesn’t mean I’m going to play along with that pathetic weakness.
Again, there are ample opportunities for young people today to earn it. Let’s help those that are working hard and are attempting to excel not just another blanket it’s all “free” folks, come and get it.
After WW2 in the 50’s FDR instituted a 94% tax rate on any income over 400k. This was after the Great Depression and the wars so income essentially needed capped. It’s a very different time nowadays. Supplying a “free education” doesn’t make sense because as it stands today the universities are price gouging. Just like income needed to be capped first thing you need to do is set a tuition cap if you want to go the free education route.
It's definitely an issue but I am 100% against making those that never took out the loans being put on the hook for paying on the loans. My position is that the student loan program should have never been created and the sooner it ends the better. Are you aware of how tuitions have skyrocketed ever since this program was created?
Government is extremely inefficient..but by your logic, we'd all be better off if they provided everything and just collected more tax from us all, to pay for it. Im sorry, but you're not a moderate if you believe we can tax ourselves into prosperity.
My entire post is literally talking about how tuition has increased to a ridiculous degree since the program was implemented and a tuition cap being put into place being necessary. I’ll remain respectful but this is a really bizarre response to what I posted.
And yes, I’m well aware of how much they have gone up since the program was implemented as it was implemented the first year I had to start taking loans, at a preposterous 6.5%. If you knew how much my wife and I owed in student debt when we graduated your head would probably explode.
Last edited:
So you are saying you actually agree with me? There are definitely sides to this is where you through me off. You have noticed there are those arguing here that they think it should be free to all students and agreed upon previous loans should be forgiven?
Bringing up sides was in response to this post acting if college should be looked and handled the same as K through 12.
Madhuvan said:
"You’re just making it K thru 16 instead of K thru 12. There’s nothing substantially different other than that."
Last edited:
I’ve agreed with you the entire time, but there is truth in the middle. When state taxes paid universities tuition was significantly less because there was only so much you could get a loan approved for so tuition was basically somewhat capped. When the federal government said “we’ll loan out whatever” it exploded. There needs to be a fine line. You saying “we shouldn’t pay any taxes at all!” is an unrealistic extreme because believe it or not we need doctors, engineers, and teachers to run a functional society. So we should pay taxes to help cover that as it’s a benefit to all but if we pay taxes we should have the power to cap the tuition so it’s not out of control either. The solution needs to be in the middle. Right now the system is insane.
Thanks for the clarification.
Most of these Universities are mega wealthy from grants outside of just what they collect in extortionate tuitions, housing, books etc. My belief is they could still make a nice profit without all the tax dollars they receive while also lowering tuitions substantially.
For me to think all the public investment in these institutions is worthwhile would require me to believe this education would not be available to enough of those who need it to benefit our society without it and I just don't see that as being the case. If you disagree and believe it is essential that is fine as we do not have to be in total agreement about everything.
Last edited:
While he was taking his CC courses he also got a check for $1,500 each semester to pay for his living expenses.
You have people to blame. One, the universities and their rush to free money. Two, yourself, likely, because people tend to take what they can get and don’t think about how taking more today means more for tomorrow (maybe you ignored the COA but most people I fear just accept the COA and get all that is offered). Third, Congress and politicians. They eliminated accountability for the loans so schools could offer silly majors that had no marketability and run amenities costs through the roof.
When politicians wanted to gift people their loan debt, there was no talk of how universities would participate or how politicians would address a problem that was not going to end. Rather, they just placed the financial burden on the taxpayer and acted as if the system would somehow self-correct.
There needs to be a major overhaul. College should not be the best four years of anyone’s life, except for those who face tragedy soon after graduation. It should have a pragmatic goal, especially if people want taxpayers to flip the bill.
I know people in Germany who stay in school for years because the system encourages that.
Putting a cap on what will be loaned out was huge, and I’m shocked it’s not been talked about more, but whatever. Another easy change would be making the loan bankrupt able. If it was then there would be a system in place to make sure the loan made sense since there would be a chance that it wouldn’t be paid back, so there is a bit of checks and balances in there. What the universities have done is really appalling. Again, looking back at it, what my wife and I owed in student loans when we graduated at a 6.5% interest rate was criminal. I’m mean just laughable. My first year working I was on the “income based repayment” meaning I had a lower monthly payment than the note and by the end of the year I had paid nothing towards the principal and had accumulated an additional 8,000 in interest. I mean how in the world was the university even allowed to get that amount of money, especially since I’m in a high paying profession. I can’t imagine what a kid graduating from BU with a bachelors in psychology is going to do. He’s screwed.
“It is not so very important for a person to learn facts. For that he does not really need a college. He can learn them from books. The value of an education in a liberal arts college is not the learning of many facts but the training of the mind to think something that cannot be learned from textbooks.”
Albert Einstein
1921
Albert Einstein
1921
Let's not forget our own history. We were found to be paying players during our championship years of 1948, 1949 and 1951, but those championships were NOT vacated. We were also on probation when we won the championship in 1978. We shouldn't cast stones.
Lexington Herald-Leader
Section: "UK 100: A Century of Basketball"; Page 36
December 22, 2002
Writers: John Clay, Mike Fields, Mark Story and Jerry Tipton
A LITANY OF WRONGDOING
Scandal has been as much a part of the University of Kentucky's basketball history as triumph. Here are the lowlights:
1952
The aftermath of a severe point-shaving scandal made UK, in effect, the first school to get the death penalty.
In November, the NCAA asked its member schools not to play Kentucky in men's basketball during the 1952-53 season.
The NCAA cited at least four instances over a four-year period of UK supporters giving Kentucky players money.
As a result, UK canceled its basketball season.
Had the Wildcats been allowed to play, a team with stars Cliff Hagan and Frank Ramsey probably would have led Adolph Rupp to his fourth NCAA championship in six seasons.
The examples of illegal subsidization of players came to the attention of the NCAA after they arose in court documents relating to the massive point-shaving scandal of the 1940s.
That national scandal ensnared at least 31 players from around the United States.
Adolph Rupp, who had publicly vowed that gamblers "couldn't get to our players with a 10-foot pole," was embarrassed when ex-UK stars Ralph Beard and Alex Groza admitted accepting cash.
Kentucky's 7-1 center, Bill Spivey, was also accused of shaving points. Though he passed a lie-detector test and a New York jury hung 9-3 in favor of his acquittal, Spivey was nonetheless banned from basketball.
1976
Kentucky hit the daily double of cheating, going on probation in both football and men's basketball at the same time.
Among violations the NCAA cited were cars and cash apparently offered to UK players, as well as some recruits who chose other schools.
At the time, 12 Kentucky boosters were ordered to disassociate themselves from UK athletics.
The basketball program, which was deemed to have the least serious offenses, was given two years of probation and limited to signing three new players in both 1978 and 1979.
Coach Joe B. Hall's Wildcats were on probation when they won UK's fifth NCAA title in 1978.
1985
In a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative series, the Herald-Leader reported that 26 former UK basketball players said they accepted either cash or gifts from boosters.
After investigating for almost three years, the NCAA said in March 1988 that it had been unable to substantiate the infractions by the newspaper. The NCAA reprimanded UK for not cooperating with the investigation.
1988
Some 28 days after the NCAA concluded its previous investigation, an air-freight package sent by UK to the father of a basketball recruit "popped open" in Los Angeles, revealing $1,000 in $50 bills.
In addition to that infraction, the NCAA subsequently alleged that UK player Eric Manuel cheated on his ACT to earn a score high enough to qualify for eligibility.
Ultimately, Kentucky was hit with three years of probation, including a two-year tournament ban and a one-year live TV blackout.
Only the cooperation of then-UK president David Roselle in the investigation kept Kentucky from getting the death penalty, the NCAA said.
We (the SEC) have some catching up to do relative to the ACC.
| | RANK |
| ACC | STANFORD | 4 |
| ACC | DUKE | 7 |
| ACC | CALIFORNIA (BERKELEY) | 15 |
| SEC | VANDERBILT | 17 |
| ACC | NOTRE DAME | 20 |
| ACC | VIRGINIA | 26 |
| ACC | NORTH CAROLINA | 26 |
| SEC | FLORIDA | 30 |
| SEC | TEXAS | 30 |
| ACC | GEORGIA TECH | 32 |
| ACC | BOSTON COLLEGE | 36 |
| SEC | GEORGIA | 46 |
| SEC | TEXAS A&M | 51 |
| ACC | VIRGINIA TECH | 51 |
| ACC | FSU | 51 |
| ACC | WAKE FOREST | 51 |
| ACC | MIAMI | 64 |
| ACC | NCSU | 64 |
| ACC | PITTSBURGH | 69 |
| ACC | SYRACUSE | 75 |
| ACC | CLEMSON | 75 |
| ACC | SMU | 88 |
| SEC | AUBURN | 102 |
| SEC | MISSOURI | 102 |
| SEC | TENNESSEE | 102 |
| SEC | OKLAHOMA | 110 |
| SEC | SOUTH CAROLINA | 127 |
| SEC | KENTUCKY | 143 |
| ACC | LOUISVILLE | 158 |
| SEC | ALABAMA | 169 |
| SEC | LSU | 169 |
| SEC | MISSISSIPPI | 169 |
| SEC | ARKANSAS | 183 |
| SEC | MISSISSIPPI STATE | 208 |