Obama vs Hillary Debate Tonight

[Back]

Booooooring.

I can’t wait until one of them gets to debate John “My Friends” McCain.

Overall though, its was mostly civil. Hillary took the offensive which in my opinion is bad for her. Obama responded well, made no mistakes, and really lead the discussion.

While it was pretty boring I give Hillary -1 for the salvo and Obama +1 for taking it and not getting raw about it.

[Davenshire]

The last debate I thought it was pretty close.

This debate I thought Hillary got owned badly.

Anyone wanna chime in with a non biased view? I've heard some Republicans give it to Clinton, but can only assume they want her to win the nomination over a strong candidate like Obama.

I really thought he trashed the hell out of her.

[Back]

I doubt many republicans (other than McCain’s operatives) were watching. I could be very wrong though.

Yes, it would be interesting to hear what republicans thought about this. There was a substantial amount of Bush and McCain bashing.

[Gan]

I watched it.

It was pretty lame.

:(

[Whimsi]

I doubt many republicans (other than McCain’s operatives) were watching.


I doubt you understand Republicans very well.

[TheEschaton]

I thought it was rather even, I thought hillary made a good point in that health care has to be universal otherwise people can game the system by not paying in and then reaping the benefits.

I didn't see the latter half, though, I had to go meet some people.

[Tsa`ah]

All in all it was a pretty bland debate. The only thing we're sure of is Clinton's inability to answer a question.

The Univision anchor ... Ramos (and bless him for being impatient with bullshit) had to as Clinton questions twice. First he asked about sitting down with Castro (Raul) .... twice of Clinton. And then there's ....


RAMOS: Senator Clinton, yesterday you said, and I'm quoting, "One of us is ready to be commander in chief."

Are you saying that Senator Obama is not ready and not qualified to be commander in chief?

Clinton: Blah blah blah blah blah bla bla bla h, from day one, blah blah .

RAMOS: Let me try again, and not in Spanish, OK?

And Backlash ... there were probably as many Republicans watching the debate as their were Democrats. "Conservative" media personalities, party insiders, so on and so forth. They're looking for things to use, they're looking for ways to tailor McCain's rhetoric ... the exact same things Democrats would be doing if McCain actually had to debate.

[TheEschaton]

She actually went back to answer the Health Care question which she didn't feel was fully responded to because CNN cut to commercial, which is why the question was asked again.

And the Castro follow-up question was a clarification - he just wanted to make sure he got her answer right.

But I'm glad to see you have the blinders on and are charging full steam ahead.

-TheE-

[Crazy Bard]

I think it was boring because of how tight the race is. Most of Hillary's supporters have general interest in Obama, but their loyal with Hillary. Thats what prevents her from going on the offensive ..people don't want to hear that from neither side.

From what I heard yesterday, and how McCain handles himself I think Obama would have no problem debating McCain.

[Parkbandit]

I liked how Obama classified attacks on him as "Silly politics" yet, in the same breath had no problem bashing Bush.

Personally, I think Obama did slightly better than Hillary. I enjoy listening to Obama speak.. I just keep hearing an old fashion cash register every time he says what some of his plans are.

$4,000 a year to every kid going to college? I am ALL about affordable college.. but this handout isn't the answer. Universities will see it as a way to increase their tuition and make more money on my dime.

[Daniel]

So whats the answer?

[Parkbandit]

So whats the answer?

1) Increase loans available to students with basement bottom interest rates. Loaning people.. even at NO interest is better than just handing them free money.

2) Pressure on the Universities to lower costs... but keeping in mind they are companies that are structured to make money.

3) Tax breaks to new universities to spur supply and competition.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Parkbandit
2) Pressure on the Universities to lower costs... but keeping in mind they are companies that are structured to make money.

Although in some ways I agree with you about loans vs handouts (although everytime i write a check for my student loans part of this mentality dies) I'm not sure how you apply this pressure to achieve the desired goal. Universities from my experience would rather cut programs to make their budget than lower costs.

[Sean of the Thread]

There needs to be some more oversight on student loans as well.

[Gan]

We could always nationalize universities and cap all costs/expenditures associated with running a university...

[TheEschaton]

Universities are not-for-profits, which is why I don't understand why it takes 35k a year to attend my school. BC has, say, 10,000 students counting the undergrads, so that's 350,000,000 they pull in EVERY YEAR whether it's from students or the financial aid they pull in.

Now - take away the cost of professor's salaries. Say you get paid 100k to be a professor/faculty/staff on average, how many people could there be that work for the university? 500? That's 50 million. Even 1000 employees averaging 100k is 100m

250-300 million is spent on what? I can imagine upkeep of the buildings might cost a pretty penny, but that much?

Not to mention the school gets all sorts of other crazy income, that 350m is from student tuition alone.

-TheE-

[radamanthys]

Departmental funding, research grants, paying grad students, heat/electricity for dorms and buildings, salaries, pensions, sports, equipment, student organization funds. It adds up.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Radamanthys
Departmental funding, research grants, paying grad students, heat/electricity for dorms and buildings, salaries, pensions, sports, equipment, student organization funds. It adds up.

Most of thats covered by endowments.

[Back]

I doubt many republicans (other than McCain’s operatives) were watching. I could be very wrong though.


I doubt you understand Republicans very well.


And Backlash ...

Thus my statements above. I have to say I’m glad I was wrong. This election seems to be drawing people together already, and that to me is extremely refreshing coming out of 8+ years of bitter division.

[Keller]

Couple of observations: One, the market for a good education is pretty inelastic so starting new schools isn't going to help lower the tuition costs that much because people will pay a premium for pedigree.

Two, why do we need schools to be cheaper? I think we've got entirely too many college educated people today as it is. The market will work itself out if prices stay the same or continue to go up. As we get an oversaturation (I'd say we already have it) or educated workers and the return on investment decreases -- kids (and maybe more importantly parents) will recognize that entering the work force or maybe a trade school isn't a bad after high school option for a kids who isn't hell-bent on X profession.

Third, this is more anecdotal and not really relevant to this thread -- but I remembered it. My school has traditionally held a small graduation ceremony separate from the University. In the past it's been at 10 am on Saturday and the University commencement is 2 pm the same day. This year, because they've received complaints from staff members about having to work on Saturday, our commencement will be FRIDAY at 2 pm. So all of our families, and half of my class is from the east coast, have to fly in on Thursday night and skip their lives on Friday so as not to inconvenience the staff! Further, why the fuck can't they take a few grand out of the coffers and pay them for their inconvenience instead of just changing the date! Until my lazy nature set in, I had considered organizing a student-run commencement ceremony for our parents on Saturday

[Tsa`ah]

$4,000 a year to every kid going to college? I am ALL about affordable college.. but this handout isn't the answer. Universities will see it as a way to increase their tuition and make more money on my dime.

You left out two important details.

1. It's a tax credit.
2. It would require 100 hours of community/civil/social work.

Personally I think it's a great idea. It enables those who will likely drop out due to financial difficulties to stay in. It also gives the surrounding community some astonishing resources.

Imagine the impact it would have on an area such as DeKalb if a quarter of the student body worked for the tax credit locally. That's 587,800 man hours.

[Tsa`ah]

She actually went back to answer the Health Care question which she didn't feel was fully responded to because CNN cut to commercial, which is why the question was asked again.

And the Castro follow-up question was a clarification - he just wanted to make sure he got her answer right.

But I'm glad to see you have the blinders on and are charging full steam ahead.

-TheE-

The Castro question she jumped back to after she felt the doom of applause that was for Obama and not for her. Of course I referred to her dodge of a direct question about "qualifications" ... particularly her comment that Obama was less qualified.

She dodged the question and she was asked a second time .... and still dodged it.

[Parkbandit]

You left out two important details.

1. It's a tax credit.
2. It would require 100 hours of community/civil/social work.

Personally I think it's a great idea. It enables those who will likely drop out due to financial difficulties to stay in. It also gives the surrounding community some astonishing resources.

Imagine the impact it would have on an area such as DeKalb if a quarter of the student body worked for the tax credit locally. That's 587,800 man hours.

1) And this is important because? It's still a free $4,000 per kid. Hell, that would be $32K back in my pocket... so it would definately benefit me personally (unless Obama thinks I'm too rich again)

2) OH NO! A WHOLE 2 WEEKS OF 'WORK' FOR 4K! Have you ever actually DONE any community, civil or social work? 90% of it is a joke.

It's one more handout program that we cannot afford. What's the latest tab for all of these Obama 'changes'? Have we hit a trillion dollars a year yet? We're damn close.

[Gan]

The Castro question she jumped back to after she felt the doom of applause that was for Obama and not for her. Of course I referred to her dodge of a direct question about "qualifications" ... particularly her comment that Obama was less qualified.

She dodged the question and she was asked a second time .... and still dodged it.

Discussion around the office about that very instance and the fact that more than one person flat out perceived that Hillary dodged questions until she could gauge the crowd's reaction when Obama answered. And the fucking moderators encouraged giving her a second chance!!!

If you cant see through Hillary at this point - you're blind, deaf, and dumb.

[Tsa`ah]

1) And this is important because? It's still a free $4,000 per kid. Hell, that would be $32K back in my pocket... so it would definately benefit me personally (unless Obama thinks I'm too rich again)

2) OH NO! A WHOLE 2 WEEKS OF 'WORK' FOR 4K! Have you ever actually DONE any community, civil or social work? 90% of it is a joke.

Have you listened to what he has planned for this community service? Expanding the Peace Corps, working in homeless shelters, Habitat for humanity, tutoring in inner city schools .... we're not talking about fluff, we're talking about an actual effort to improve areas of social concern.

I don't know about you, but in the past 10 years have given over 1000 hours to Habitat for Humanity ... and it's far from a joke.


It's one more handout program that we cannot afford. What's the latest tab for all of these Obama 'changes' ? Have we hit a trillion dollars a year yet? We're damn close.

And yet it's still less than this war we're in. I'm sorry you view it as a hand out. I view it as a scholarship program with strings.

[Warriorbird]

Yeah... I'm still waiting for the "change costs too much" people to explain the great Republican economic growth programs mixed with catastrophically fucking stupid spending.

[Davenshire]

I'd like to pose that very little of the volunteer situation is a joke currently and IF it is- then only because it is so undependable.

If you know you are going to have a large group of intelligent youth comming in from colleges you can plan accordingly rather then have half assed jobs available until you know they are dependable or not.

During college I worked VA contracts at our local Veterans Hospital in their Physical Therapy Department. It was a wonderful source of income during college, and having younger people comming itno a VA to meet with old/wounded soldiers was a great boon to those living there.

I'd go in and see all these complacent jaded PT aids and nurses. The indifference to the patients there was sickening at times, but it was turned around because of the constant influx of fresh faces ready to actually get something done and learn about Physical therapy also.

My time spent in college benefiting from this program due to being in the military was exceptional. Opening this up to include any college students that want to apply is a great idea.

ESPECIALLY helping out teachers, ameri corp etc.

[Bobmuhthol]

Yeah... I'm still waiting for the "change costs too much" people to explain the great Republican economic growth programs mixed with catastrophically fucking stupid spending.

Epic lmao.

[Daniel]

1) Increase loans available to students with basement bottom interest rates. Loaning people.. even at NO interest is better than just handing them free money.

Two Things:

1. Giving people loans @ 0% interest is equivilent to handing out free money.

2. The issue has never been about the lack of loans.




2) Pressure on the Universities to lower costs... but keeping in mind they are companies that are structured to make money.


Uh..Sure. Like how?





3) Tax breaks to new universities to spur supply and competition.

Rofl.

So..yea. I take it you've never heard of the University of Pheonix?

It's well below cost of most universities. However, do you think UPENN, Harvard, or any other school that can expect applications on name recognition alone (read: Best colleges) really give two fucks?

Rofl.





Yeah... I'm still waiting for the "change costs too much" people to explain the great Republican economic growth programs mixed with catastrophically fucking stupid spending.


Epic lmao.





x2.

I'd also throw in there ghastly military expenditures. Our navy NEEDS a rail gun TODAY despite the fact that they are 30 years beyond any other navy in the world. The Army also needs a few trllion bucks to field a new vehicle platform, despite the new one that was released 3 years ago and the fact that our vehicles are 20 years beyond any other military.

[Parkbandit]

Giving people loans @ 0% interest is equivilent to handing out free money.

You are all sorts of stupid, aren't you. How about I put it in simple terms even you might be able to understand:

I give Billy $5.00

I give Billy $5.00, but he has to give me back $5.00 next week.


Now Danny, do you see the difference here?



I'd also throw in there ghastly military expenditures. Our navy NEEDS a rail gun TODAY despite the fact that they are 30 years beyond any other navy in the world. The Army also needs a few trllion bucks to field a new vehicle platform, despite the new one that was released 3 years ago and the fact that our vehicles are 20 years beyond any other military.

We already talked about this in another thread. Didn't we both agree you were stupid there with your thinking?

[Daniel]

You are all sorts of stupid, aren't you. How about I put it in simple terms even you might be able to understand:

I give Billy $5.00

I give Billy $5.00, but he has to give me back $5.00 next week.


Now Danny, do you see the difference here?



I was going to go into the economic analysis of allowing people to get an education and the return to the government vis a vis, higher tax collections and general return to society, but I doubted you would appreciate it.

Thanks for zeroing in on the one thing you could respond to and saving me the trouble.

In this case, there is a difference. However, if that $5 only buys you what $2 would have last week then you have effectively given away $3.


See the difference?



We already talked about this in another thread. Didn't we both agree you were stupid there with your thinking?

No. Allow me to reply the conversation for you.

You made some gross exhaggeration that I said we stop all R & D research for the military.

I laughed at you.

Then I pointed out that A) I didn't and B) not all research or expenditures are neccessary for our military superiority or national security. Moreso they are the result of a congressional member allocating money to his constituents.

You of course ignored this, content on the sageness of freely spending any and all money "specified" as for national security.

I laughed some more at you.

[Apathy]

Two, why do we need schools to be cheaper? I think we've got entirely too many college educated people today as it is. The market will work itself out if prices stay the same or continue to go up.


This deserves repeating. Why is this supply/demand product different than any other product in our economy that it deserves federal gov't intervention?

[Parkbandit]

I was going to go into the economic analysis of allowing people to get an education and the return to the government vis a vis, higher tax collections and general return to society, but I doubted you would appreciate it.

Thanks for zeroing in on the one thing you could respond to and saving me the trouble.

In this case, there is a difference. However, if that $5 only buys you what $2 would have last week then you have effectively given away $3.


See the difference?

Ah.. so if we get the 2 million people (Obama's estimation) a year a college education that would otherwise not go to college, the country would automatically add 2 million higher paying jobs every year for the graduating classes!

Well done... except that's not exactly how it happens in the real world.




No. Allow me to reply the conversation for you.

You made some gross exhaggeration that I said we stop all R & D research for the military.

I laughed at you.

Then I pointed out that A) I didn't and B) not all research or expenditures are neccessary for our military superiority or national security. Moreso they are the result of a congressional member allocating money to his constituents.

You of course ignored this, content on the sageness of freely spending any and all money "specified" as for national security.

I laughed some more at you.


Research and Development should NEVER stop. You claim all other countries are 30 years behind us.. which is extremely ignorant on your part. You really believe that China is 30 years behind us? Like they are still in the 1970's?

:rofl:

[Warriorbird]

Ah.. so if we get the 2 million people (Obama's estimation) a year a college education that would otherwise not go to college, the country would automatically add 2 million higher paying jobs every year for the graduating classes!

I dunno. College education is signalling behavior.

[Parkbandit]

I dunno. College education is signalling behavior.


Do you actually believe that somehow our system will absorb 2 million new college educated people every year with higher paying jobs?

If you do, I have some land just offshore in Florida I would like to sell you.

College education /= higher paying job

No college education /= lower paying job

You increase the CHANCE of landing a higher paying job if you have a college education, but it's not a guarantee. And there is simply no way to create 2 million high paying jobs just because there are 2 million more people graduating every year from college.

[Warriorbird]

I'm sure that businesses would appreciate having less stupid people in the work force. I DEEPLY doubt it would make 2 million new jobs... but I imagine it might very well produce a percentage of new jobs similar to the number of those two million who go on to get higher degrees. People with MBAs and JDs and MDs tend to create opportunities for themselves.

[Bobmuhthol]

I find it hard to believe that there are 2 million people annually that opt to not go to college, but would definitely go given a $4,000 tax credit.

[Warriorbird]

Thus rendering everybody's praise and complaints less poignant. Obama's real evil genius!

[Parkbandit]

I'm sure that businesses would appreciate having less stupid people in the work force. I DEEPLY doubt it would make 2 million new jobs... but I imagine it might very well produce a percentage of new jobs similar to the number of those two million who go on to get higher degrees. People with MBAs and JDs and MDs tend to create opportunities for themselves.

So.. the "change" plan will essentially put 2 million stupid people out of work.

Why do you hate dumb people?

[Parkbandit]

I find it hard to believe that there are 2 million people annually that opt to not go to college, but would definitely go given a $4,000 tax credit.

That number was from Obama's website. I tend to think that number is more or less correct. You can essentially go to a community college for free tuition. I think there are plenty of people that would go for that.

It would have made my early life much easier.

[Bobmuhthol]

Sure, there might be plenty of people, but 2 million every year? I really don't think the few thousand dollars is stopping many people from going to a community college nearly as much as the lack of initiative.

[Parkbandit]

How many people go to college every year currently?

[Bobmuhthol]

We estimate that there were about 1,299,000 college-ready 18-year-olds in 2000, and the actual number of persons entering college for the first time in that year was about 1,341,000. This indicates that there is not a large population of college-ready graduates who are prevented from actually attending college.

http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/ewp_03.htm

Unless something amazingly fucked up happened in the last less-than-a-decade, there are more people who are unable to go to college over $4,000 than people who go to college already.

[Warriorbird]

There were 15 million students enrolled in college in 2000.

[Daniel]

Do you actually believe that somehow our system will absorb 2 million new college educated people every year with higher paying jobs?

If you do, I have some land just offshore in Florida I would like to sell you.

College education /= higher paying job

No college education /= lower paying job

You increase the CHANCE of landing a higher paying job if you have a college education, but it's not a guarantee. And there is simply no way to create 2 million high paying jobs just because there are 2 million more people graduating every year from college.


Are we talking in Republican fairy land or in real life?


From the US population Survey:

Number of
Characteristic workers
(in First First Second Third Ninth
thousands) decile quartile quartile quartile decile
(median)



High school graduates, no college (1)................... 27,997 324 428 604 860 1,175


Bachelor's degree and higher (2)........................ 33,157 519 740 1,072 1,578 2,287




This shows that at all quartiles, the amount of wages earned by those with BA's over those without are almost double.

[Daniel]

Table doesn't work here well, but can find it here:


http://www.bls.gov/news.release/wkyeng.t08.htm

[Daniel]

http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/ewp_03.htm

Unless something amazingly fucked up happened in the last less-than-a-decade, there are more people who are unable to go to college over $4,000 than people who go to college already.

You'd also have to track this at all levels of college.

The problem is not just for 18 year olds. I don't know national demographics but I know for AA, the issue is only partly due to people not goign to college, but also because they can not sustain it for 4 years and end up dropping out.

[Gan]

Two Things:

1. Giving people loans @ 0% interest is equivilent to handing out free money.
Incorrect - there is still the obligation to pay back the principal loan - hence why its called a loan. You're just not having to pay any interest on it.

Just wanted to interject that into the pissing contest.

[Parkbandit]

Are we talking in Republican fairy land or in real life?


From the US population Survey:

Number of
Characteristic workers
(in First First Second Third Ninth
thousands) decile quartile quartile quartile decile
(median)



High school graduates, no college (1)................... 27,997 324 428 604 860 1,175


Bachelor's degree and higher (2)........................ 33,157 519 740 1,072 1,578 2,287




This shows that at all quartiles, the amount of wages earned by those with BA's over those without are almost double.

This shows the results of college.. which I am not questioning. I agree that your chances of landing a higher paying job is MUCH better with a college degree than without.

But that wasn't our discussion. Our discussion was that if you pay for 2 million more people to get their degree.. would our system automatically just make 2 million more high paying jobs per year to accommodate them.

I say no.

[Gan]

This deserves repeating. Why is this supply/demand product different than any other product in our economy that it deserves federal gov't intervention?

Because we need to glut the market with college edjumakated people so we can all refuse to work manual labor jobs at minimum wage so we can import that labor market from Mexico.

Se habla espanol, pinche wedo.

[Daniel]

This shows the results of college.. which I am not questioning. I agree that your chances of landing a higher paying job is MUCH better with a college degree than without.

But that wasn't our discussion. Our discussion was that if you pay for 2 million more people to get their degree.. would our system automatically just make 2 million more high paying jobs per year to accommodate them.

I say no.


??

What exactly are you arguing here? That we shouldn't help people go through college because then people with college degrees will make less money?

That all of a sudden people will get out of college and still have to flip burgers because ALL THE JOBS IN THE COUNTRY ARE TAKEN?

"The creation of 2 million high paying jobs" would be the MARKET working itself out. Which is something republicans are proponents of.

Remember?


Let's recap my argument here:

People with degree's make more money.

Ergo. People who get a degree will make more money.

Thus these people contribute more to society (through taxes, if nothing else) or at least are less of a burden on society (Through Welfare eligibility if nothing else).

Therefore, spending money to get people through college is a wise investment for the government.

[Daniel]

Incorrect - there is still the obligation to pay back the principal loan - hence why its called a loan. You're just not having to pay any interest on it.

Just wanted to interject that into the pissing contest.

Okay. Well, go back to the quick and dirty discussion of inflation. Thanks for the interjection.

[Daniel]

This deserves repeating. Why is this supply/demand product different than any other product in our economy that it deserves federal gov't intervention?


Because we need to glut the market with college edjumakated people so we can all refuse to work manual labor jobs at minimum wage so we can import that labor market from Mexico.

Se habla espanol, pinche wedo.



Because if you don't, you create an environment where only those who are born with the means to attend college are able to do so.

(Unless of course you think that there is a glut of people who work themselves up through college without utilizing government assistance)

I won't spend too much time delving into the implications of this, as I know it won't get me far on these boards. But essentially, there's a reason we moved away from a system where only the rich could (or should) go to college and everyone else worked.

You know...that whole equality thing that this country is founded on.

[Warriorbird]

It's sort of interesting when you've got people who don't want any sort of social spending... yet they want tax cuts.

[Sean]

Ah.. so if we get the 2 million people (Obama's estimation) a year a college education that would otherwise not go to college, the country would automatically add 2 million higher paying jobs every year for the graduating classes!

Except that's not what his webpage says.. It says between 2001 and 2010 2million eligible students wont goto college because they can't afford it. So 2,000,000 people per year is really 200,000 people a year.


Originally Posted by BarackObama.com
Soaring College Costs: College costs have grown nearly 40 percent in the past five years. The average graduate leaves college with over $19,000 in debt. And between 2001 and 2010, 2 million academically qualified students will not go to college because they cannot afford it. Finally, our complicated maze of tax credits and applications leaves too many students unaware of financial aid available to them.

[Tsa`ah]

Essentially the counter argument seems to be nothing more than bitching about the competition that will arise in the degree bearing job market.

Big whoop.

This is a real step toward closing the gap in economic disparity.

[Parkbandit]

This is a real step toward closing the gap in economic disparity.

This is a real step towards socialism and redistribution of wealth... and I agree with you.

[Gan]

http://webhome.idirect.com/~twessner/feature/images/drhrc01.jpg

[Tsa`ah]

This is a real step towards socialism and redistribution of wealth... and I agree with you.

Are you really suggesting that this will be funded by the taxes of rich people?

[Stanley Burrell]

I won't spend too much time delving into the implications of this, as I know it won't get me far on these boards. But essentially, there's a reason we moved away from a system where only the rich could (or should) go to college and everyone else worked.

Unless you're talking about the joining the military, then I still think there's a social divide.

It seems so blatant. I don't know if it's the kind of thing you look observe, and then try to come up with a solution as to how you aren't going to have country bumpkins and inner city inhabitants peddle their lives away in Imperialism roulette as college fodder -- And if someone at the pulpit or podium is big enough to harp upon the divide, whether a hypothetical "they" even tries to change it. I don't know if that's possible in America. I doubt it is, at least now, severely.

What I wonder is if the world somehow doesn't become a pile of nuclear waste in 100 years from now, how, exactly, higher education will be provided to the poor and how this will fair in contrast when held up side-to-side with today's social money pyramid. And if anyone ever, at any point, will draw that serious analogy, from then (100 or so speculative years into the future) to now and at least say "Let's fix this, because it is problematic/immoral/primitive/dysfunctional/unethical/etc., etc., etc."

...Sorry, my mind is wandering :-\

[Daniel]

Unless you're talking about the joining the military, then I still think there's a social divide.

It seems so blatant. I don't know if it's the kind of thing you look at and try to come up with a solution as to how you aren't going to have country bumpkins and inner city inhabitants peddle their lives as college fodder -- And try to change it. I don't know if that's possible in America. I don't think it is.

What I wonder is if the world isn't a pile of nuclear waste in 100 years from now, how higher education will be provided to the poor and by what contrast it will display to today's time. And if anyone will draw that analogy, then.

Sorry, my mind is wandering :-\


I said moved away from. I don't, for a second, believe that we've gotten there. There is still too much disparity.

However, I will say that the US is far better than most countries in the world when it comes to social mobility. Although, I may have had to work harder to get where I'm at, it would be down right impossible if not explicitly so in many other countries of the world.

[Stanley Burrell]

I just wonder what it's going to be like down the road. The Earth isn't growing in size, but our population is.

I dunno.

[Daniel]

Essentially the counter argument seems to be nothing more than bitching about the competition that will arise in the degree bearing job market.




Lol. You mean the people who have benefited from an unfair system are afraid that they'll have to engage in fair competition for their wealth and status?

Say it ain't so.


Mark my words. Professional sports was only the tip of the Ice berg.

Take what you want from that comment.

[Daniel]

I just wonder what it's going to be like down the road. The Earth isn't growing in size, but our population is.

I dunno.

I hope it won't be an issue. However, the reality is that even if it's not, there will be something else.

The concept of the middle kingdon, and conflict on it, was derived in Ancient China which probably had an infintisemal fraction of the constraints on resources that we have now. It's inevitable.

[Stanley Burrell]

I hope it won't be an issue. However, the reality is that even if it's not, there will be something else.

The concept of the middle kingdon, and conflict on it, was derived in Ancient China which probably had an infintisemal fraction of the constraints on resources that we have now.

There's a reason why only eight Ch'in Legalists' docs were put in the Ssu-k'u ch'uan-shu. Despite every strong chauvinistic under-the-table statement of China correcting itself, at least philosophically, until 1911 (end of Neo-Conf') the idea of what bookkeeping is and the power of what resources actually meant as well is something that will never repeat itself.


It's inevitable.

Sounded waaay too much like Agent Smith when I read that, LoL.

Anyway, ISBN #0-691-019649 and 0-684-83634-3. Good stuff.

[Daniel]

Anyway, ISBN #0-691-019649 and 0-684-83634-3. Good stuff.

Indeed.