<p>I still don’t get, then, how I went to college when my family was earning far below the median.</p>
<p>posterX, you’re very good at throwing out generalizations, but you refuse to show sources or give me a good reason why I was able to afford an education if things are so dire.</p>
<p>UCLAri, he is looking at trends. </p>
<p>UCLA is just an average school?</p>
<p>I don’t think so.</p>
<p>dstark,</p>
<p>Trends are only useful if they’re put in a context. What posterX is talking about is something that appears to be happening in plenty of other big economies, even the once “egalitarian” Japan.</p>
<p>I tend to think that UCLA is a pretty average-priced, average-academics university. Then again, I also have been on CC.com for a long time, so I may have my compass out of whack. The point is that I managed to get a BA and MA without my family contributing a cent. It’s not like there aren’t Pell grants, Cal grants (for us Californians), scholarships, university grants, etc. available to many undergrads and grads. I wasn’t asked to work a day at UCLA, and I have only done minimal work at UCSD as a TA. Education is available at good universities for those who want it and cannot afford it.</p>
<p>I just don’t see how it’s apocalyptic.</p>
<p>What posterx is talking about as far as wealth transfers and income transfers to the top 1% is happening in the US.</p>
<p>But Cal public colleges are still a good deal and community colleges are definitely not expensive.</p>
<p>“I tend to think that UCLA is a pretty average-priced, average-academics university. Then again, I also have been on CC.com for a long time, so I may have my compass out of whack.”</p>
<p>I think your compass is way out of whack but you are the one who went there. :)</p>
<p>dstark,</p>
<p>Yes, I agree wholeheartedly that wealth disparities are growing in the US-- I’ve acknowledged this. But the idea that that “average” American will be living in a mud hut and eating cardboard (not far off from what posterX has suggested) is not supported in ANY of the economic literature I’ve read. </p>
<p>Nor is it the case that the average middle-class family cannot afford to send their child to college. Sure, they may not be able to afford HYPMSC if there isn’t some aid involved, but many more universities continue to be well within reach. </p>
<p>There are also similar issues occurring in previously “egalitarian” countries like Japan. Did you know that some old people in Japan die every year from starvation? And that many of the children I taught there couldn’t afford to go to high schools good enough to go to good colleges? </p>
<p>These issues, primarily wealth distribution, seem to be pandemic, and I suspect that Europe will see itself suffering much like the US did. Are we so quick to forget that French youths were just up in arms and protesting not too long ago because of labor issues?</p>
<p>What’s unemployment in Germany at now?</p>
<p>
??? - And this would be whose fault? Certainly not mine, or society’s, or rich people’s. First of all, I suspect that there are very few if any people who fit the quoted description but if there are any, they did it to themselves. I suppose if one decides to spend every cent they earn and more throughout the “50 years” they could find themselves in that situation but that’s something they did themselves. Anyone who can work for “50 years of 50 hour weeks” should be doing quite well. I had more than that amount saved over 30 years ago while I was going to college, 100% supporting myself, and working at the same time. </p>
<p>The ultra-rich aren’t the problem. People so blinded by envy that they don’t progress themselves are the only ones holding themselves back.</p>
<p>
I think the UCs are a good deal and the CalStates are even less expensive but so are the colleges of many other states. ASU is less expensive than the UCs. So are UVA, U of Wisc, U of Mich, U of Colo and many others.</p>
<p>UCLAri, I will let posterx defend himself but I think it is called poetic license.</p>
<p>I’m not sure why you mention Japan which has been in a recession for 17 years or Germany which merged West and East Germany and had a few extra costs along the way.</p>
<p>dstark…
The candidates for President and the Congress ARE the top 1%.
I live one block from Barack. A true urban mansion. His wife makes $400,000k a year at the U of C in a PR job. I have no idea what his book brings in.
No bias here. I may even vote for him. After all his abode is singular (unlike Gore), and modest (compared to Edwards).</p>
<p>The major candidates for president are in the top 1%. I don’t see themselves voting for any large tax increases on themselves.</p>
<p>Some congressman aren’t that rich yet, but they are making contacts. You don’t want to p*** off your contacts. </p>
<p>danas, so why do you like Barack? Do you think he will deliver for the middle class?</p>
<p>
danas can always just teepee his house if he doesn’t perform well as President!</p>
<p>Just trying not to single out Obama among the wealthy.
I think he pretty well skipped the middle class from what I can see. Private schools paid by grandparents. Columbia and Harvard. University of Chicago elite.
I voted for his opponent Bobby Rush in a primary for US Representative a few years back because I thought Rush was more representative of the people in our district. Rush was Minister of Defense for the Black Panthers back in the day and has been our longtime Congressman. His son was killed in the street in a drug deal a couple years back. A seasoned and sober man, the father.
I don’t know how I’m going to vote this year.</p>
<p>danas, that’s not much of an endorsement. :)</p>
<p>Living paycheck to paycheck gets harder…</p>
<p><a href=“http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071019/ap_on_bi_ge/stretching_paychecks[/url]”>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071019/ap_on_bi_ge/stretching_paychecks</a></p>
<p>We are not even in a recession yet.</p>
<p>Don’t worry. Hillary will fix it. ;)</p>
<p>lol…</p>
<p>I hope that was a joke mini. Hillary will not be able to fix any thing and neither will the republicans. Over the last 6 0r so years government spending has increased 50% and the debt has increased to 9 trillion dollars, roughly 30,000 per person in the united states. If the United States Government were a household, it would have debt 3 times what its annual income is. What we need now is to cut government down by at least 40%. With our current debt right now and the growing divide between the rich and the poor, a financial crisis is going to happen. Actually the rich havn’t been this wealthy since the 1920’s and we all know how that ended. Anyway, to cap this off vote for Ron Paul, the only true conservative.</p>
<p>Who’s “we”, kimosabe? “We” can cut government 40% anytime “we” like - it’s called the U.S. Defense Department. But then “we” would definitely be in recession. </p>
<p>I don’t have any debt, thank you. The debt is just a tool to extract more out of my labor to make bankers and those who own them rich.</p>
<p>Hillary will fix it. ;)</p>
<p>I am glad you think that government spending is at a rediculous point. However, considering the past, has any proffesional politician ever cut government spending. And that’s all hillary is, a proffesional politician. I don’t think she has ever had a real job outside of politics since she was in her 20’s. As far as some of polices go, I actually heard a plan a couple of weeks ago that hillary was going to give a baby bond of 5000 dollars upon birth to grow and help pay for their college. Sounds like cutting government spending to me, not.Oh and what about healthcare, she wants to EXPAND it. I am just knocking on hilary because you seem to like her, however, my views are the exact same of the republicans. Yes the Defense budget is very high right now and our overseas empire needs to be taken away immidiatly. However, do you know how much money is used on medicaid and medicare, it’s neary the exact same spent on the entire defense budget. Is that justified. Anyway, most of the government needs to be back in the hands of the people. Think if we ended all of the entitlement and social programs and gave them to the people. How much better do you think you would be at giving your money?</p>
<p>Oh, dealing with Medicaid and Medicare is easy. Just tax the rich. Big time. An assets tax. If they don’t like, let 'em move to Ganghzhou, where government is more to their liking.</p>
<p>It isn’t “we”.</p>
<p>And one doesn’t have to “expand” the health care budget to cover everyone. Just yesterday, the GAO reported that the government spent $15 billion extra by having private insurance companies manage the Medicare prescription drug benefit rather than having Medicare do it. “We” could pay for the entire SCHIP increase simply by having an extraordinarly efficient government entity do it rather than handing it off to the private insurance industry. It’s why every Republican CEO of every health care insurer in the nation supports extension of SCHIP. The problem with HillaryCare is that it is NOT socialized medicine, like I have, right here in the state of Washington.</p>
<p>But “they” wouldn’t like it.</p>
<p>I’m in favor of ending entitlements. Start with the rich.</p>