after a month of clicking the submit button and typing in my dad's credit card number I've applied to twelve PhD programs…limboing my way into the future.
― silby, Thursday, 15 December 2011 01:42 (twelve years ago) link
godspeed
http://chronicle.com/article/Income-Gap-Widens/129980/
― iatee, Thursday, 15 December 2011 01:49 (twelve years ago) link
i always rmde when i read abt the 'rare skill set' thats required to run these institutions like any fourth grader cant read a powerpoint presentation someone else made
― є(٥_ ٥)э, Thursday, 15 December 2011 01:55 (twelve years ago) link
it requires skill to effectivize a university's brainput
― nice catch cuauhtemoc blanco niño (dayo), Thursday, 15 December 2011 01:55 (twelve years ago) link
also I'm willing to say okay yeah not *anybody* could run harvard or whatever, but $2m a year to run...mountain state university???
― iatee, Thursday, 15 December 2011 01:57 (twelve years ago) link
well i think its probably much rarer to have the 'skill set' it takes to become president of harvard or any big corp but i dont believe it takes an real skill or set of abilities to run one.
― є(٥_ ٥)э, Thursday, 15 December 2011 02:01 (twelve years ago) link
yeah I think it would be pretty hard to fuck it up
"hey guys lets change the school's name"
that's pretty much it?
― iatee, Thursday, 15 December 2011 02:02 (twelve years ago) link
also mountain state university dude making $1.8/m = university in beckley, west virginia where:
The median income for a household in the city was $28,122, and the median income for a family was $38,110. Males had a median income of $35,780 versus $23,239 for females. The per capita income for the city was $18,912. About 16.4% of families and 20.9% of the population were below the poverty line, including 33.9% of those under age 18 and 9.5% of those age 65 or over.
what does someone even do w/ that kinda money there
― iatee, Thursday, 15 December 2011 02:03 (twelve years ago) link
every time i get in a big argument w/ dad abt stuff like this im like 'putting together ikea furniture is harder than running exxon mobil' and he gets really mad but i firmly believe that to be true
― є(٥_ ٥)э, Thursday, 15 December 2011 02:05 (twelve years ago) link
drill more wells
― nice catch cuauhtemoc blanco niño (dayo), Thursday, 15 December 2011 02:15 (twelve years ago) link
I think it's ultimately a combination of
1. a child's take of 'how capitalism works'...'no u see we have a perfectly competitive market for literally everything in america, including college presidents and that's just the going rate to bag a good one, here's a supply/demand curve, nothing we can do'
2. everyone secretly hopes that people at the top of our important institutions are actually these hyper competent beasts instead of...mostly regular people socialized into certain roles.
― iatee, Thursday, 15 December 2011 02:16 (twelve years ago) link
does your dad run exxon mobil? can he put together ikea furniture? xps
― silby, Thursday, 15 December 2011 02:16 (twelve years ago) link
http://www.quickanded.com/2011/12/credits-credentials-and-collective-consciousness.html
this is also interesting
― iatee, Thursday, 15 December 2011 04:53 (twelve years ago) link
i'm taking that course!
also signed up for the human-computer interaction course in january
― HOOS aka driver of steen, Thursday, 15 December 2011 05:07 (twelve years ago) link
what do you think of it so far?
― iatee, Thursday, 15 December 2011 05:32 (twelve years ago) link
some of it goes over my head, so i'm not exactly pulling a 4.0, but it's really enlightening overall. highly recommend future outings.
― HOOS aka driver of steen, Thursday, 15 December 2011 05:34 (twelve years ago) link
haha feeling kinda queasy thinking abt the 'opportunities for intimate engagement' @ stanford
― є(٥_ ٥)э, Thursday, 15 December 2011 06:02 (twelve years ago) link
theres probably a better thread for this but:
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/14/the-politics-of-the-1-percent/#more-20281
― є(٥_ ٥)э, Thursday, 15 December 2011 06:57 (twelve years ago) link
haha well this thread has been pretty flexible and I think can be used to discuss anything relating to how we're systemically fucked in the long-term
I think the key part on that article is this:
The 1 percent cares more about deficits than the economy. When asked to name the most important problem facing the country, 32 percent of respondents said the deficit and 11 percent said the economy. By contrast, in an April 2011 CBS News/New York Times poll, 49 percent of Americans said the economy or jobs and only 5 percent said the deficit.
if wall st. (and friends) spent its political capital and PR money pushing for fiscal stimulus - which would actually help them most really - they'd be (slightly) harder to demonize. same dynamic exists w/ big business and universal health care - who would benefit most from not having to worry about health care spending? and yet.
this is ultimately why it's hard to take anything they do or say in good faith.
― iatee, Thursday, 15 December 2011 16:15 (twelve years ago) link
don't they care mostly about inflation, though?
― by (mennen), Friday, 16 December 2011 23:32 (twelve years ago) link
well I said 'wall street' and not 'rich people' because although all superrich are rentiers on a certain level and have reasons not to want inflation, the financial sector ultimately depends on "productive capitalism"/economic growth (whether or not it creates it itself is up for debate) and has a lot more to lose from a double dip recession than from moderate inflation.
― iatee, Saturday, 17 December 2011 00:50 (twelve years ago) link
http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/rogoff87/English
― iatee, Monday, 19 December 2011 14:51 (twelve years ago) link
Fourth, today’s capitalist systems vastly undervalue the welfare of unborn generations
*head explodes*
― nuhnuhnuh, Monday, 19 December 2011 19:17 (twelve years ago) link
Has anyone here done a masters in ol' Britisherland? How did you pay for it? Student loans? How much did all factor up to cost? I r starting to look at courses to maybe take up next year. And starting to pay off debt in the hope to mebbe save some too.*
*Of course I might just change my mind a fuck off travelling for 6 months instead with savings.
― big popppa hoy, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 08:14 (twelve years ago) link
look into cheaper EU degrees maybe? brits can do that, right?
― iatee, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 14:35 (twelve years ago) link
http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2011/12/future-0
that's a good article! Is undervaluing the welfare of future generations related to declining interest in having children in the global North?
― by (mennen), Tuesday, 20 December 2011 16:37 (twelve years ago) link
depends on your views on the 'welfare of existence' I guess
― iatee, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 16:41 (twelve years ago) link
eh I think that's too abstract: I just mean that if you have kids then you have a p concrete reason not to want the environment to go to pot. I don't have enough experience to know if the opposite's the case & I suspect sample matters a lot here since its not just liberal-types who go kidless
― by (mennen), Tuesday, 20 December 2011 16:45 (twelve years ago) link
there are stronger trends that go in the other direction, like very religious people have more kids, very religious people more often than not buy the conservative belief package w/r/t global warming. poorer people have more kids, less likely to be highly-educated. etc.
― iatee, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 16:49 (twelve years ago) link
p skeptical of religious=don't care about environment claim
― by (mennen), Tuesday, 20 December 2011 16:56 (twelve years ago) link
I hate to be this guy, but literal zero percent interest on student loans is basically like paying someone to borrow money (time value of money, inflation, etc.). Plus your incentive would be to pay it off absolutely as slowly as possible.
I guess if the government is the only lender in the game, that's all fine because you don't have to give the government incentives to lend. But then there's another problem, which is that schools will just take advantage of the endless flow of money by jacking up tuition insanely (which, to be fair, is already sort of what happens). Better solution: take more of the money that would go to loans and instead just massively subsidize public universities in every state.
― Hurting, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 16:57 (twelve years ago) link
http://rpgp.berkeley.edu/religion_global_warming
― iatee, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 16:58 (twelve years ago) link
BTW this fits into my new theory that public-private hybrid solutions are always the worst of both worlds. Fully private universities that couldn't rely on public-backed loans would at least have to compete for your money and keep tuition reasonable; proper public universities would be run for the public good and not the bottom line. But when private schools have access (indirectly) to public funds, it's like an all-you-can-eat buffet.
― Hurting, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 17:00 (twelve years ago) link
1. p old poll2. not worrying about global warming != not caring about environment
― by (mennen), Tuesday, 20 December 2011 17:00 (twelve years ago) link
ake more of the money that would go to loans and instead just massively subsidize public universities in every state.
this itself is
a. a good ideab. not enough to stop tuition inflation
― iatee, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 17:00 (twelve years ago) link
you don't think there is a correlation betweena. being religious and being consevativeb. being conservative and being skeptical about global warming / environmental issues?
I don't think it's a natural aspect of 'being religious', but it's something that exists today on some level
― iatee, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 17:02 (twelve years ago) link
xpost -- Yeah but zero percent loans would INCREASE tuition inflation.
― Hurting, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 17:03 (twelve years ago) link
as a public u employee I applaud massive subsidies
think state control of health care costs through state-run public options could help keep tuition down---though IHE had an article p recently showing that it's not faculty costs tht are mot responsible for tuition jacking but rather admin costs & building costs for fancier facilities
― by (mennen), Tuesday, 20 December 2011 17:03 (twelve years ago) link
Well I know one of the going theories, one that I find convincing is like this: (1) universities are driven by rankings (2) rankings are heavily dependent on spending (3) the current loan system provides a nearly unlimited supply of money, so (4) the incentive is to jack up tuition to capture that supply of money, then spend it on stuff that will keep you competitive in the rankings arms race.
― Hurting, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 17:05 (twelve years ago) link
So that would comport with costs coming from fancier facilities and the like.
― Hurting, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 17:06 (twelve years ago) link
I think there's lots of room between "global warming" & " environmental" issues---the former is politicized (dumbly for the right, duh) but that right-wingers aren't generally "mmmm more coal in the air, smells like victory". Rich right-wingers, yes, but there aren't enough of them to sway elections
― by (mennen), Tuesday, 20 December 2011 17:06 (twelve years ago) link
the first part is not necessarily a bad thing if we're operating w/ the assumption that more people getting a higher education is good for society/the economy/etc. second part shouldn't matter because loan payments should be automatic/income-based.
― iatee, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 17:07 (twelve years ago) link
uhhh are you sure bout that
― iatee, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 17:08 (twelve years ago) link
the *1* GOP candidate willing to speak out on environmental issues (huntsman) already backtracked on it cause it got him nowhere
― iatee, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 17:09 (twelve years ago) link
at this very moment the gop is holding a TAX CUT hostage for an oil pipeline. A TAX CUT.
― iatee, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 17:13 (twelve years ago) link
― iatee, Tuesday, December 20, 2011 5:07 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Permalink
Right, but you're basically just providing an indirect subsidy and not really a "loan" in the traditional sense. It seems like it would be more efficient to just provide a direct subsidy. Unless you think there's some value in having students pay something back -- sort of to feel *ownership* of their education or something.
― Hurting, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 17:14 (twelve years ago) link
well I agree but the bigger issue is that states aren't gonna be doing these huge direct subsidies anytime soon and the federal government can't directly subsidize them in the same manner
― iatee, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 17:19 (twelve years ago) link
But if the fed govt just loans out money to everybody at 0% you're just going to wind up with universities charging whatever they want and profiting from the bonanza. Public money flowing into private hands, bubble economics, etc.
Maybe the federal govt could set some kind of conditions for accepting federal loan money. Not likely to happen, but none of these things are.
― Hurting, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 17:25 (twelve years ago) link
I dunno my money's on a serious overhaul within the next 10 years, higher ed prices are not sustainable atm
and yes, conditions would be key and would allow the gov't to actually keep prices in check, another way this issue compares well w/ health care.
― iatee, Tuesday, 20 December 2011 17:29 (twelve years ago) link