A photo op mask for Trump who doesn't do any actual work. . . . Trying to hide from the impeachment. Ain't working, Donnie Boy.
douglas burke wrote:
This was nice
https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2019/10/14/little-league-champs-fly-home-on-air-force-one-with-president/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRWdWpgDHDA&t=2sdouglas burke wrote:
This is why I voted for President Trump, It shows Great Character and Great Humanity when you help the most downtrodden in society. Helping the most unfortunate is Truly A Big part of what makes America Great.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRWdWpgDHDA&t=72s
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/salvadorhernandez/no-donald-trump-didnt-let-a-homeless-woman-live-in-a-hoteldouglas burke wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRWdWpgDHDA&t=2sdouglas burke wrote:
This is why I voted for President Trump, It shows Great Character and Great Humanity when you help the most downtrodden in society. Helping the most unfortunate is Truly A Big part of what makes America Great.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRWdWpgDHDA&t=72s
Masterclass is a terrible word wrote:
X-Runner wrote:
You’d be surprised at how many of these blue collar workers you are defending wish better for their children and would love for their children’s college to be free.
The demand for laborers decreases and the demand for IT workers increases as technology creates efficiencies in job functions.
You seem to want to train today’s kids for today's jobs instead of for tomorrow’s jobs.
Not so sure about your assumptions here. While some people want better for their kids, there definitely is a sub-set of folks on the right that are bitter with a significant “victim mentality” who actually work against their own children’s interests. Similar to the “cancel culture” of the left there exists a “punishment mentality” on the right—both are severely misguided.
Like the saying goes—if you want others to struggle because you struggled and “turned out fine” you, in fact, have not turned out fine.
^This. Especially the bolder part.
R. U. Cirius wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
Dude, seriously? Truck drivers, electricians, and other service workers are hardly yesterday's jobs. People who don't have the ability to go to college will need to find jobs somewhere, and there will still be jobs for people like that well after you and I are dead.
Beyond just that though, none of that means we need to use tax payer dollars to send people to college.
Apparently you don’t realize that we already use tax payer dollars to send people to college.
Lolz
Conundrum wrote:
Make America Great Again wrote:
Remember what Reagan said? Are you better off than you were four years ago?
American people are better off today than our ancestors were in 1860s. Wouldn't you agree?
So by your logic Obama was a better president that Lincoln and Washington?
I do wonder about you trumpsters.
Do you ever get what people are saying?
Ever?
Flagpole wrote:
X-Runner wrote:
You’d be surprised at how many of these blue collar workers you are defending wish better for their children and would love for their children’s college to be free.
The demand for laborers decreases and the demand for IT workers increases as technology creates efficiencies in job functions.
You seem to want to train today’s kids for today's jobs instead of for tomorrow’s jobs.
That is a good point. The problem is that not everyone is equipped to go to college. We will still have a need for electricians, construction workers, tons of people needed in service industries. Every fast food place has a manager that makes a decent living. Available money for college doesn't magically make people equipped to go to college.
You may want to read this report if you haven't already done so. Just the first figure on page 2 may make you think.
https://cew.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/Americas-Divided-Recovery-web.pdfFlagpole wrote:
Yesterday’s News wrote:
More like yesterday’s jobs.
Flagpole has demonstrated repeatedly that he is not the most forward thinking person around.
The world still needs lamplighters, pinsetters, and switchboard operators, right flaggy?
Dude, seriously? Truck drivers, electricians, and other service workers are hardly yesterday's jobs. People who don't have the ability to go to college will need to find jobs somewhere, and there will still be jobs for people like that well after you and I are dead.
Beyond just that though, none of that means we need to use tax payer dollars to send people to college.
Yeah, dude. Seriously.
Of course there will be a need for these jobs and there will always be people to fill these jobs. No one has said otherwise. However, these types of jobs aren’t growing as fast as sectors that require people with degrees.
You are under the impression that suddenly everyone will want to go to college. Won’t happen. Free college will allow a lot of those who can’t go or have to drop out for financial reasons to go or stay in college.
It is a great idea. It’s a shame that you are so shortsighted to see it.
And, dude, today we use tax dollars to send people to college. Ever wonder why private colleges cost more than public ones? Or why in-state costs less than our-of-state? Fed money too.
You can post on this subject again, but I likely won’t respond unless you demonstrate that you have at least made an attempt to become educated on the subject.
UsedToBeKnowItAll wrote:
Conundrum wrote:
College debt is a problem for those who made horrible decisions and took out unrealistically large loans. Granted colleges have some responsibility selling college to those whom they knew couldn't afford it and were unlikely to make out well financially. These kids had many choices to go a less expensive route but picked colleges they obviously couldn't afford. This involves mostly middle class kids because truly poor kids get free rides.
The loans should not be erased. Its their responsibility to pay. But they certainly deserve to have low interest rates. Many truth in advertising laws needs to be passed where kids need to be informed about good less expensive options and need to be explained the financial hole they will mostly be in upon graduation. This should be a requirement of school before they take money from kids for tuition.
Our high school seniors need greater protection.
It is weird. I remember we had counselors in high school that were supposed to talk to us about college, but I don't remember them ever talking about the cost and potential income that could be earned, and what cheaper/more expensive options existed. That seems like it would be a worthwhile thing for the counselors to do with all the juniors that are starting their post-high school planning.
High school counselors should do that, I agree.
But I also think colleges have a responsibility in this too. You can't take out a loan for a house or car without someone checking if you get pay it back. But not an 18 yr. Old taking out a loan for college.
But kids who pass on cheaper state schools for expensive private schools should not be bailed out.
Conundrum wrote:
But I also think colleges have a responsibility in this too. You can't take out a loan for a house or car without someone checking if you get pay it back. But not an 18 yr. Old taking out a loan for college.
But kids who pass on cheaper state schools for expensive private schools should not be bailed out.
I agree with that. One problem might be that the loans are given out with a success-oriented outlook. I think a lot of the people that get into financial problems with college debt either drop out before finishing their degree, or they switch majors to a less profitable major.
Conundrum wrote:
college educated person not making tons of money wrote:
Do you have any shame in telling outright lies?
You are the same person who argues that income inequality is not increasing, against all the evidence, so I guess not.
College debt is a problem for those who made horrible decisions and took out unrealistically large loans. Granted colleges have some responsibility selling college to those whom they knew couldn't afford it and were unlikely to make out well financially. These kids had many choices to go a less expensive route but picked colleges they obviously couldn't afford. This involves mostly middle class kids because truly poor kids get free rides.
The loans should not be erased. Its their responsibility to pay.
FINALLY! A reasonable person here.
I would like to see some flexibility from the government where if it determined there is a shortage in a certain area (teachers, physicians, programmers, HVAC people, whatever) that it can jump on those specific areas and make the training free or even give monetary incentives for those who go into that occupation for X amount of time. There could even be whole categories (Education, Manufacturing, Service Industry, etc.) and if you take a job in one of those fields during a time of need, you flat out get a check from the US Government after so many years.
Paying for a kid to go to college so that he can barely graduate with a degree in economics and then go make millions of dollars in his Dad's firm just isn't the right thing (that's a real world example of a guy I know).
UsedToBeKnowItAll wrote:
Conundrum wrote:
College debt is a problem for those who made horrible decisions and took out unrealistically large loans. Granted colleges have some responsibility selling college to those whom they knew couldn't afford it and were unlikely to make out well financially. These kids had many choices to go a less expensive route but picked colleges they obviously couldn't afford. This involves mostly middle class kids because truly poor kids get free rides.
The loans should not be erased. Its their responsibility to pay. But they certainly deserve to have low interest rates. Many truth in advertising laws needs to be passed where kids need to be informed about good less expensive options and need to be explained the financial hole they will mostly be in upon graduation. This should be a requirement of school before they take money from kids for tuition.
Our high school seniors need greater protection.
It is weird. I remember we had counselors in high school that were supposed to talk to us about college, but I don't remember them ever talking about the cost and potential income that could be earned, and what cheaper/more expensive options existed. That seems like it would be a worthwhile thing for the counselors to do with all the juniors that are starting their post-high school planning.
CORRECT! When my oldest was still in high school, the guidance counselors made all the seniors and their parents come to a 2-hour presentation about going to college. They didn't talk about the cost of it at all other than to say, "Your parents will have the final say on that." I did some serious research on the cost of college, preparing for our daughter (our oldest) to go to college, including what kinds of financial aid elite colleges in this country provide (we are in an exceptional school district with many kids who qualify to go to "elite" colleges, and my daughter ended up at an elite college). I included the non-elite colleges too. I prepared some info on that and sent it to my daughter's guidance counselor. He said he would include that info in his presentations from then on, and when my son was a senior, lo and behold, he had included it...how to find out ahead of time what you will really pay, list of colleges that give full financial need, details about the most commonly attended schools from the high school, etc. Sometimes you need to make happen what you want to happen. I was driven to action because one of the guidance counselors used an Ivy League school as an example of a really expensive school (and didn't qualify that statement at all), but, of course, for people who know, unless you make more than $150,000, Ivy League colleges offer some amazing financial aid. Most other top colleges out of the Ivy League follow that same model.
Fat hurts wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
Correct! In today's world, in America, about half (perhaps a tad fewer) of high school graduates should attempt college at all, and then some of them won't make it...due to laziness, personal issues, etc.
PART of the reason that the Democrat Party has lost blue collar workers in recent years is the elitism displayed by the Democrats. "FREE COLLEGE" is a slap in the face to those people who work hard, who provide very necessary services but who don't have college degrees.
I have auto mechanics I respect and appreciate. I have a guy who treats my lawn. We had a new bathroom put in a couple years ago, and new siding. These were all skilled professional people who did not go to college. This is honorable work. They shouldn't be left out by once again seeing the haves and the will haves get more and more.
I get what you are saying and mostly agree, but the skilled professionals you are talking about often need health care.
So "Medicare for All" sounds better to them than it does to college graduates who already have health insurance.
There is something for everyone in the Warren and Sanders plans. (Well, not so much for the billionaires)
I am MUCH more amenable to Medicare for All than free college.
R. U. Cirius wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
Dude, seriously? Truck drivers, electricians, and other service workers are hardly yesterday's jobs. People who don't have the ability to go to college will need to find jobs somewhere, and there will still be jobs for people like that well after you and I are dead.
Beyond just that though, none of that means we need to use tax payer dollars to send people to college.
Apparently you don’t realize that we already use tax payer dollars to send people to college.
Not everyone for free we don't.
Conundrum wrote:
college educated person not making tons of money wrote:
Do you have any shame in telling outright lies?
You are the same person who argues that income inequality is not increasing, against all the evidence, so I guess not.
College debt is a problem for those who made horrible decisions and took out unrealistically large loans. Granted colleges have some responsibility selling college to those whom they knew couldn't afford it and were unlikely to make out well financially. These kids had many choices to go a less expensive route but picked colleges they obviously couldn't afford. This involves mostly middle class kids because truly poor kids get free rides.
The loans should not be erased. Its their responsibility to pay. But they certainly deserve to have low interest rates. Many truth in advertising laws needs to be passed where kids need to be informed about good less expensive options and need to be explained the financial hole they will mostly be in upon graduation. This should be a requirement of school before they take money from kids for tuition.
Our high school seniors need greater protection.
ok, after some research, I found that graduate school is 40% of government loans...not sure how the private market for grad school loans fits in here. That could push it to over half. This article suggests that households with advanced degrees make up 51% of all debt. Which is close to what I claimed, but not exactly.
I'll give myself 1 pinochhio for that - not all the facts are in.
https://www.npr.org/2019/08/14/751235991/graduate-students-are-increasingly-shouldering-the-countrys-student-debtsorry, this is the article:
https://www.businessinsider.com/graduate-student-loan-debt-nationwide-crisis-2019-8
Just Another LRC Idiot wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
That is a good point. The problem is that not everyone is equipped to go to college. We will still have a need for electricians, construction workers, tons of people needed in service industries. Every fast food place has a manager that makes a decent living. Available money for college doesn't magically make people equipped to go to college.
You may want to read this report if you haven't already done so. Just the first figure on page 2 may make you think.
https://cew.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/Americas-Divided-Recovery-web.pdf
I understand about the recovery for college-educated people vs. non-college-educated people. I am not sure all of you are understanding my point here. Let me be as clear as I know how to be.
1) Not everyone is smart enough to graduate from college. Yes the recovery hasn't been as good to them. That sucks, and we should work to find an answer for that, but that fact doesn't magically makes those people smart enough to go to (to graduate from) college.
2) Right now, about 70% of high school graduates attempt college, but currently only about 36% of Americans who are old enough to have a college degree do have a college degree. That will climb a little as more go today than did once upon a time, but there are still a ton who try college and can't hack it.
3) We already have some very affordable options for people to go to college. Community Colleges, SATELLITE state colleges, lower-level colleges. Then there are scholarships available to those who are outstanding, there is amazing financial aid at a ton of colleges based on need. People can go part time and work, etc.
4) The graduation rate and transfer to 4-year colleges from Community Colleges is abysmal. The vast majority of these people who drop out do so because they can not handle college-level classes, not due to not being able to pay tiny amounts to go.
5) I am not against people going to college. I am against making it free for everyone, because not everyone needs to be going to college. We already have too many who attempt it who are not equipped to go. People need to be realistic about their talents. I wish I could have played major league baseball. People in hell want ice water. Not everyone is smart enough to graduate from college. You have to play the hand you're dealt.
Flagpole wrote:
Conundrum wrote:
College debt is a problem for those who made horrible decisions and took out unrealistically large loans. Granted colleges have some responsibility selling college to those whom they knew couldn't afford it and were unlikely to make out well financially. These kids had many choices to go a less expensive route but picked colleges they obviously couldn't afford. This involves mostly middle class kids because truly poor kids get free rides.
The loans should not be erased. Its their responsibility to pay.
FINALLY! A reasonable person here.
I would like to see some flexibility from the government where if it determined there is a shortage in a certain area (teachers, physicians, programmers, HVAC people, whatever) that it can jump on those specific areas and make the training free or even give monetary incentives for those who go into that occupation for X amount of time. There could even be whole categories (Education, Manufacturing, Service Industry, etc.) and if you take a job in one of those fields during a time of need, you flat out get a check from the US Government after so many years.
Paying for a kid to go to college so that he can barely graduate with a degree in economics and then go make millions of dollars in his Dad's firm just isn't the right thing (that's a real world example of a guy I know).
as for inequality not increasing - the Economist made exactly that question its cover story this week. A long story saying that many economists are taking a deeper look at the numbers and finding that people like Piketty are using deeply flawed methodology and data. And a better look shows that inequality is a lot less than it is billed, and not growing.
Ultimately, the data are just too hard to get on this to come up with a hard and fast ruling. But there is a real case for what I have been saying and the Economist agrees.
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2019/11/28/inequality-could-be-lower-than-you-thinkSDSU Aztec wrote:
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/salvadorhernandez/no-donald-trump-didnt-let-a-homeless-woman-live-in-a-hoteldouglas burke wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRWdWpgDHDA&t=2s
Just another Trumper fool who believes Trump has any kind of good will in that black heart of his. He is a criminal. He's a serial liar. He makes fun of people with disabilities, grabs women by the p*ssy, runs fraudulent organizations (Trump Foundation, Trump University, and you'd better believe it, The Trump Organization). He has cheated now in both US elections that he's been a part of. He's an adulterer, he's a supposed Christian who never goes to church. He's a f*cking loser with no good qualities whatsoever.
Yesterday’s News wrote:
You can post on this subject again, but I likely won’t respond unless you demonstrate that you have at least made an attempt to become educated on the subject.
I know WAY more about this subject than you do...WAY more.