The wasted vote: What concerns me is that the disaffected, with but half their conscience remaining out of the casket of political elitism, cannot follow my un-entrenched mutinous logic. We are not stealing someone else’s car here folks. We are deciding how we shall spend our own gift card money on something we should suspect will not fit us four years from now- some of us are just too brainwashed to realize it. A colleague tried to demonstrate that voting is like archeology, whereby we are judged by the voting record fossils we leave behind, like a ride on a see-saw where a side must be chosen, or like a tug of war. His tug of war supposition was that a side must be chosen and that each person must strain to pull the other side into the cesspool in the middle. In my brand of the event, there is nothing in the middle but a well-heated pool of water and a set of Independents already wading therein as judges. Behind both the democrats and republicans is a pit of mud dug before the Independents jumped into the middle. The two sides strain to defeat the other with both sides leveraging their weight in vain, seeking to gain ground, in effect, by backing up. Meanwhile, the defiant, deliberate and inventive Independent produces a pair of scissors and cuts the Gordian Knot* which holds them together. Both parties fall back into the pit of mud and the Independent is the improbable victor for not having engaged in the nonsensical contest to begin with. The benign Independent has found a way to succeed, because of the shortsighted and ineffectual duo.
The wasted vote II: Actually, most unenlightened voters use their vote like it is some sacrosanct weapon they intend to unsheathe before the eyes of St. Peter, who may judge the merit of their existence because they didn’t break the ungodly “wasted vote rule.” Wield your vote as if it is the best thing to do at the time and maybe for generations to come. Traditionally, a pen of sheep considering how to defeat the wolf, show more independence and originality than the average voter. I feel compelled to reiterate, in a presidential election which features a republican candidate, John McCain, that not too many conservatives were happy with after the primary season and a democratic candidate, Barack Obama, that has offered no new ideas, but plenty of platitudes, voting in another manner should come more easily.
Eat your vegetables: Voting independent is only good for you if you do it- much like actually eating the fruits and vegetables that you were healthy-minded enough to bring home from the produce department of the grocery store. You can’t gain nutrients if they are stored in a zucchini rotting in your crisper.
Education short: I read somewhere a comparison of the United States with Uganda in terms of how much 1 dollar of education money actually get to the classroom- 3 cents in Uganda, 60 cents in USA. The day we are finding pride in that comparison is the day we should start medicating a loon for suffering through post-partem depression.
Calm down I: I know my opinion on the events surrounding the republican national convention and the conditions surrounding the current republican vice-presidential nominee are in high demand, but I only have a few lines to spend. The riots outside the convention in St. Paul were directly attributable to hurricane Gustav. The republican vice-presidential nominee, Sarah Palin, has at least two unrelated ethics-ish investigations ongoing (for the dismissal of Alaska’s public safety commissioner for being unwilling to fire her former brother-in-law and because she, as a former Independent, was among a group of people that have, on occasion, sought a vote on whether Alaska should secede from the United States), etc. None of the nonsense we were made aware of is important. She just had a child that has Down's Syndrome, her unwed 17-year-old daughter is pregnant; her husband was arrested 22 years ago for drunken-driving (not last week); a dog she owned as a teenager stole a bone. Shocking stuff. Palin's immediate superior might drop dead at any time due to age and the idea that his head sits back too far on his neck has caused him to suffer from contiguously-swollen-cheek-syndrome, etc. are major factors for not voting for republicans?
Calm down II: You really want me to believe all that? Right, and a cow named Apple will successfully chase a bear from her favorite tree. Huh? See this Associated Press article from August 18, 2008- “Cow Chases Bear Away from Her Favorite Tree” http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26273923/. The word “chase” is a matter of opinion. What is next? Sheep bahs and inflicts eardrum damage on tarantula? There is little cause for concern because all politicians have ghosts in their attic- some have more or bigger ghosts than others. Is the desire to secede from the union that big of a deal? The biggest problem among them is the firing of the state public safety commissioner. And we all know that the ACLU is probably all over that one- considering how quickly they acted to empower some of those released the day they were arrested for displays of protest on the streets of St. Paul that were deemed confrontational. Just relax. Just keep electing public officials for the purity they display to the naive, the pomposity they display to the forsaken and the ambivalence they exhibit to the sheep, despite words to the contrary. You have a problem with the amount of time spent vetting the proposed republican second in line to the presidency? Sarah Palin’s counterpart, Joe Biden, has been a U.S. senator for 35 years and you would choose the democratic ticket on that basis, considering congressional approval ratings? And Biden was probably only chosen because John Edwards had an affair with a PAC-hired filmmaker. You cannot make this stuff up . . . well you could, but no one would read it. (Note: for two excellent editorials on the topic of Palin as the proposed V.P. nominee, see “A Bold Choice” by William Kristol of the New York Times and “A Reckless Roll of the Dice” by E.J. Dionne Jr. of the Washington Post.) The republican ticket looks better than I thought. Candidates can make all the promises in the world, but they cannot achieve everything they say they want to without help; I wonder how long it will take a republican or democrat to manage the public's expectations with some words of honesty. Please, someone- McCain, Obama, publicly concede that you cannot completely control how 100 senators and 465 representatives will vote. If any of them could state where the office of president is weak, it would make them a stronger candidate. Have they not invented words that might assist them in this endeavor?
I was going to stop there: The morning after Sarah Palin’s stirring and rhetorically effective speech, I was listened to a Minnesota conservative talk show. The Echo Narcissist conducting services was actually demanding that conservatives get on the bandwagon to flip the republican ticket from McCain-Palin to Palin-McCain on the basis of one 40 minute speech, 10 minutes of which consisted of applause. Usually, only liberals who think that whispering into the microphone is effective subtlety are that reactionary. When a conservative caller expressed to the host the sobering opinion that perhaps the request was hasty, the host acted in a manner equivalent to a little child who is made to come out of the toy aisle at Target before she had planned. The host dumped the call and said that “we don’t need that type of negative talk” or something very like it. My brain couldn’t process the infantile disgust the host expressed and the words he chose to express it at the same time. Mr. Morning Echo Narcissist sir- if your wife tells you to return the: “Redistribution of wealth sucks” T-shirt that you purchased on sale from Kohls will you pout and cry in the familiar manner of your fellow hypocrites or can you just deal with it should your desires not match each member of mankind? Conservatives are well-suited to the use of IEDs in political discussions; to the untrained mind IED stands for Incendiary Electronic Devices (or roadside bombs) and not Impudent Emotional Despair. This host, seeming more calm than most conservative windbags, was fairly subdued and able to suppress his tension by the use of a controlled, non-shrieking intonation. I was almost prepared to be proud of him. Sometimes I get the feeling that most conservative pundits and hosts (Limbaugh, Hannity, etc.) are so uptight that they would forget that a tension rod is a suspension stick, used in the bathroom to hold a plastic curtain and is braced between two opposing walls for the purpose of keeping droplets of water in the shower stall. It has little to do with a high strung conservative’s inability to get and/or maintain an erection that’s origin can be traced to their giddy school-boy love of chasing chimerical truth. Moving on to education. . . really.
Sibling rivalry: We were out to eat the other night at a local restaurant and I spotted a bug scaling the window outside. I pointed it out to my son as I identified it as a grasshopper. My daughter, 19 months younger, who has developed a not irrational (for a toddler) hesitancy in embracing most members of the insect brotherhood, referred to it as a “bud” (bug). My son then called it a grasshopper . . . my daughter then, in pre-pre-panic mode, called it a bug. This kind of fervent disagreement can lead to an all out throw down between them. They have been known to fight to the death for the right to play with inoperable flashlights and under-inflated beach balls or some other toy neither of them will know exists five minutes later. Such is the way with politicians. Some issue is escalated to the forefront by the media, current events, a natural disaster (it was speculated that hurricane Gustav could push gas to $5 a gallon if it was significantly destructive), the public or even by politicians (consider Minnesota congressman John Kline’s highlighting of federal earmark spending). The issue is discussed ad nauseum without a resolution, and then we all move onto the next topic and its angst-ridden life cycle. The discussions and suspected negotiations between the two major parties often feature one party that is more properly correct in detailing the certain features than is the other party. One party accurately calls something a bug and the other more astutely refers to the general bug as a specific grasshopper, with never a solution in sight.
Who is winning?: Case in point- during the primary debates, the Iraq war and foreign policy was a chief concern until the economy started to turn even more south than it already had been. The moderators turned their attention to the likelihood of Bush’s economic stimulus plan (which amounted to a mailed refund that cost the federal government how much to distribute?) and potential subsequent other options for assisting the economically downtrodden. When the 35W bridge collapsed in Minnesota, it opened up a nationwide panic concerning the probable structural unsoundness of thousands of bridges in even more extreme stages of decay. Not too much national media attention focused on that issue these days. The battle between the two major parties is mindful of a swing-set race between two kids at the park. One child claims he is winning when he is thrusting forward as the other child is swinging backward. The nationwide polls conducted in the aftermath of each convention are reminiscient of this swing-set race. The previous swing's victor, in the course of one-half swing, is now losing- as he trails the previous half-swing’s failure. The ultimate champion is a matter of debate every two seconds and it is fruitless to attempt to crown a champion even after they are done swinging- even if the poll numbers are influenced by the fury of a democratic or republican national convention. The two parties remind me of two old men who are unaware that hearing loss is tied to Viagra and have no clue that some dame is interested in an illicit sexual encounter because they are benighted in the ways of non-verbal cues.
Easily distracted?: When an issue hits, it is easier to distract concentrated orange juice, particularly in the past tense, but not by much. Voters are even much easier to distract- as they are distracted by the hope of change or someone's devotion to country, having served a fate in a war and a capacity in peace of which few could ever dream. I am thinking of McCain here, whose bravery is unquestioned. What I do question is the relentless, repeated broadcasting of his many feats of valor at the republican convention. We get it, you are a war hero. Now, HOW will you control the price of gas and food; HOW will you resolve the price of education, or co-sourcing/sub-contracting American's work out to dozens of other countries; HOW will you avoid holding the taxpayer responsible for the Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae mortgage debacle. When did America's foremost choclatier get into the banking business? I have interviewed old war veterans and researched enough to know that those with war-time experience are fairly non-descript when it comes to discussing their military fortitude and are embarrassed when others do it for them. I cannot believe that one's military experience is the single most important aspect of their character qualifying them for the presidency and cannot believe that the republicans, for the most part, restricted their speeches to the constant reminder of McCain's gallantry at the expense of communicating the composition of potential policy issues.
Last time: I began writing about education generally (the bug), with much of the focus on the unlikely prospect of future generations of middle class kids being able to afford a post-secondary education if tuition costs, loan interest amounts, the cost of books, and room and board continue to rise, while grant money dwindles (the grasshopper). I have a few more pieces of information to communicate in that area and will also touch on primary education. However, as to the latter, it will do me no good to harp on the inadequacies of the education system in terms of how horribly our fifth-graders are about knowing the state capitals or how deficient our third-graders are with their reading- for that- read Dobbs’ chapter (pages 157-172) “A Generation of Failure” in his WMC book. The reasons- the cost, in terms of dollars, cannot be measured at that point in a child’s life and I am very far removed from the first-hand experience of elementary and middle school. No one in this country ought to be satisfied with where we are in regards to our children’s collective primary education performances- should they be made aware of it, in comparison to the rest of the world. So, it would be a waste of time for me to spend four pages preaching to the choir. I will spend a limited number of words on non post-secondary concerns before re-engaging in that area.
Minneapolis school referendum: This election year I learned there will be a Minneapolis school district referendum- see the article written by Bill Blazar, which appeared in the Opinion Exchange section of the Minneapolis StarTribune on August 17, 2008- “Can Schools Improve on $60 Million Each Year?” Blazar wonders if the achievement goals (in terms of student performance) of passing a referendum of that magnitude will be reached. This question is asked- “Should students be required to meet or exceed state standards, no exceptions?” I have been a milk drinker for long enough to know that the milk manufacturers put an expiration date on the container for one very important reason- it often tastes rancid 2-4 days after it expires. Of course it is important to force educators to get students to meet state standards that is why they are set, but there are always going to be exceptions. Managing the reasons for those exceptions is in the best interest of the state, country and individual. You don’t ask a puma that is about to go to the trouble of dragging an antelope carcass up a tree if it is going to eat the leg that might be dangling over the limb upon which it rests. Have some expectations and follow through on them by being diligent enough to be your own hunter; expect to kill your own antelope. That makes perfect sense doesn’t it?
Referendum specifics: Blazar’s contribution to the specific grasshopper, ah subject (the proposed referendum) is fairly minimal. Lynell Mickelson, simply identified as a writer from southwest Minneapolis, which makes her no more qualified to comment on the proposed referendum than the cricket that wandered into my garage two nights ago before I could close the door. She attempts to answer Blazar’s questions. Blazar is identified as a senior vice president of public affairs and business development with the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce; Mickelson is married to a teacher- same/same. Mickelson writes that “A school referendum is like a colonoscopy. It comes up every five to 10 years, but you swear to God you just had one.” That good huh? Not quite. A colonoscopy is actually a much more pleasurable experience than a $60 million school referendum. And next time, I plan on buying the non-generic laxative concoction in order to prove that. At least you know that you will be on the toilet for hours feeling miserable for a good cause- colonic health. It is difficult for a proponent of a school referendum increase to demonstrate the benefit of it. In the history of school referendums I am not sure if one has even tried.
Referendum specifics II: It is not indicated in the article what the money will be used for. An un-itemized justification is a big problem if you are looking to convince people to keep opening their wallet. This isn’t a garage sale, where you’re bartering for a lamp. It is simply indicated that if the levy passes, Minneapolis will raise the amount of money spent on each student from $615 to $1,200 and where that would rank Minneapolis statewide. I rank Goofy among the most objectionable cartoon characters of all time; arguing on behalf of the side that would raise the ranking of something that is that rank doesn’t really convince me. If the levy is not passed, Mickelson, suggests that 350 Minneapolis school teachers could be out of a job. It seems, that Minneapolis could hardly afford that. However, if simply keeping the same number and types of teachers employed to work with kids who are annually achieving less is the objective, perhaps a $60 million panacea is not the answer. I would want to know what percentage of that increase is really going to school administration and bureaucracy and what will change if it is approved by the voters. Mickelson maintains that “It’s a problem to apply a business model to something as deeply human and complicated as kids, families and learning.” It’s a problem but it is part of the solution. Even education is a business- especially when you are paying $60 million and asking Minneapolis homeowners to pay $17 more a month in property taxes (for those who own a house valued at $256,000).
Referendum specifics III: Mickelson’s best argument is this- “. . . when schools complain about this stuff, they’re routinely told to quit whining, shut up and act more like a business. But you want to see whining? You want to see excuses? Try demanding fuel-efficient standards from automakers. Or tell Wall Street to shut up, suck up and forget about a bailout.” It is really hard to argue with her. And it is hard to wrestle from the iron grip of a 3 ½ year old the kitty piano toy that would apparently complete him. The educators, administrators and superintendants better start justifying that amount of money, just as businesses and corporations should be made to solve some of their own problems sans bailouts. The middle class cannot continue to supplement the mistakes of either and certainly not of both.
Education and business: I had, in part 34, remarked that school, even post secondary education, sometimes does little to prepare the future graduate for the work-force. This article- “Don’t Just Take Aim at the Schools; Work With Them” written by Charlie Kyte, which appeared in the Star Tribune on August 22, 2008 addresses that issue. Kyte writes about measurable goals such as allowing teachers to visit “businesses to see firsthand the skills your employees need to be successful,” and “create a media marketing/advertising campaign that will embed the belief in students and parents that obtaining an education will provide a better future.” Hopefully this is not the first time these types of things have been proposed. I cannot believe how disconnected it seems the institution of education is from business. It is simply ludicrous; we focused more attention on the medal count during the Olympics and more attention on who the respective vice-presidential candidates might be than on how our kid’s scholastic achievements are transferable to the work world. Kyte even mentions Blazar’s (from above) desires- that Blazar “wanted a demonstration of accountability from the school system” asking for the $60 million. That is a more reasonable request than a frog of a campaign manager telling his aquatic larval-staged underlings/tadpoles that when he wants them to focus on the swing vote, it has nothing to do with the highly sought after vote of toads who exchange sexual partners for fun.
Dobbs writes: “. . . we’re spending $8,287 annually for each child in our public schools. Thirty years ago, we were spending less than half that amount. The cost of education has outpaced almost every other economic benchmark for more than a generation.” (pg. 159) This speaks to my point about Mickelson (see above) not being able to justify the increased expenditure until we discover the root of the problem. To be fair, I don’t know that it is as simple as saying “we’re spending $8,287 annually for each child” when plenty of experts would dispute that total expenditure based on state, regional and school district discrepancies. If that is the average of all students in the nation, that is quite an important component of the sentence to leave out. This is something Dobbs doesn’t mention until page 162- “What people don’t realize when they say schools need more money is, first, how much we spend. It’s almost ten thousand dollars per child per year now on average in the United States. And people don’t realize that we’ve doubled per-pupil spending, adjusted for inflation, over the last three decades.” Dobbs goes on to write about a lack of achievement, poor graduation rates relative to the increased expenditure, etc. This would be pure speculation- but I wonder if the collected tax issued, or referendum money distributed, to the various school districts is being equitably rationed to the students with an overall concern for their performance rather than allotted to the administrators and the management of the student’s education? The departments of transportation are issued millions of dollars that the taxpayer might assume should be allocated to the building and repair of streets and bridges but is rather redirected to mass transit or to those with administrative responsibilities thereof. For primary education level administrators and superintendents, key in a Google search of “corrupt school administrator salaries”- I believe you will obtain some results.
For the post-secondary equivalent: “While top U of M administrators give themselves fat pay increases, they are hypocritically demanding clerical, health-care and technical workers at the U accept a meager 2.25% wage increase. With the cost of living estimated to increase by 3.5% annually (i.e. inflation), a 2.25% raise amounts to a pay cut!” Now, where have I heard about the cost of living increase not matching the rate of inflation before? “U of M president Bob Bruininks, who makes $450,000 annually (and gets a free mansion too!) just gave himself a 17.5% raise the next two years, on top of the $100,000 increase awarded him since 2003.” What else can we expect from the CEO-equivalent of a major university? (See- Socialist Alternative.org “Solidarity 101: Support the Strike at the University of Minnesota” Sept 5, 2007. I am not altogether proud of having to quote from an axe to grind source, but I confirmed his salary. Look up “Bob Bruininks salary” on Google. What is happening at the U of M is not uncommon among colleges and university adminstrators and is the essence of capitalism, so it seems. Hopefully there is only an indirect relationship between an administrator's ability to flourish and the bankruptcy of a set of smart, driven, middle class kids struggling to acquire marketable skills.
Education and business- Dobbs, pg. 162: “The state of school performance is all the more sordid given our huge education budgets. New York City spends $11,172 per kid in its school system . . . New York admits that only 40 percent of its education budget—which is over $16 billion—actually ends up in the classroom . . . The budget for the bureaucracy [and infrastructure] is bigger than the budget for actual classroom and teaching resources.” Washington D.C. schools “have deteriorated to the point that they had to be taken away from the city and put into the care of a congressional financial oversight board.” The link between education and a prospective future occupation is very real and it is high time we recognize that. Dobbs writes, “With U.S. corporations outsourcing technical work to cheaper overseas foreign labor, hundreds of thousands of high-paying, high-value technology jobs have been lost to foreign markets. Because of this, Americans have diminished incentives to pursue careers in math or the natural sciences. As of mid-2004, computer hardware engineers were experiencing 6.9 percent unemployment, and electrical engineers were at 6.7 percent.” So, if the tax money dedicated to education is not being spent on students, clerical or technical workers or teacher salaries, where is it going? I would rather go to second base with a disabled, skateboarding, Jewish spurred tortoise looking to get laid after ten years of abstinence than believe that the money funding education is being spent wisely. See- the Associated Press article “Turtle Finds Romance After Getting Wheels” http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26273919/. This article appeared the same day as the cow v. bear story above. Maybe the winds of romance were coursing through the air and the cow was just looking for some action. Word is, I’ll have some competition- “a particularly amorous 10-year-old male [tortoise] has been after her.” No worries . . . I bet she misrepresented herself on her Facebook page anyway.
Friedman’s take: I side with Milton Friedman in the area of education on more than any other sub-topic to date. Friedman devoted a chapter, “The Role of Government in Education” in his renowned book “Capitalism and Freedom,” to the issue of education. Friedman brings up a term he identifies as “neighborhood effects.” His description is found on page 85- “circumstances under which the action of one individual imposes significant costs on other individuals for which it is not feasible to make him compensate them, or yields significant gains to other individuals for which it is not feasible to make them compensate him—circumstances that make voluntary exchange impossible.” In short, the neighborhood (as well as city, country and society) obtains some immeasurable benefit by all of its members being educated enough to serve a purpose. I would have to read the whole book again, but I believe this is the only chapter in which Friedman actually condones subsidizing the less fortunate.
Friedman’s other contributions: He addresses a great many auxiliary issues of education, but I have, at least in this case, have prudently decided to forego the vetting of them in lieu of cataloguing them. How happy are you? He writes about the return on the investment of education, private schooling and the paying for such, misuse of vouchers/handouts, teacher salaries, the administration of distributed education money, contractual investments of capital/money on human beings and their future earning potential, the “perverse redistribution of income,” parents being able to spend money on what is valued by them, and collusion- wherein- people may “seek to collude to fix prices, whether through unions or industrial monopolies. But collusive agreements will generally be destroyed by competition unless the government enforces them, or at least renders them considerable support.” (Pg. 96) I fear that this is exactly what the government has done to this point, without any educational regulations in place for combating the excessive rates at which tuition has been rising and only recently have they addressed this at the collegiate level. See the U.S. Senate Finance Committee information in the U of M endowment money paragraph.
No competition = no opportunity: Friedman’s most appealing conclusion for my purposes: “Existing imperfections in the capital market tend to restrict the more expensive vocational and professional training to individuals whose parents or benefactors can finance the training required. They make such individuals a ‘non-competing’ group sheltered from competition by the unavailability of the necessary capital to many able individuals. The result is to perpetuate inequalities in wealth and status.” Thank you Milton; that is exactly my point.
POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION
Well-endowed: I tell my son there is no need to go after your sister with threats of death because you have some kind of origination claim on a set of 10 cent beads you picked up off the street at the Leprachaun day parade. My children’s relationship is like that old cow and bear story, which is not one of Aesop’s Fables (see above). Telling the republicans and democrats to reform the education system might be easier than calming down my son on a day during which he has not napped. A nice place to start to negotiate with the political parties is to make colleges spend more of their endowment money. Phyllis Kim, from The Tartan, writes that “only a certain portion of a college’s endowment can be used and invested each year. The endowment itself is comprised of money-endowed funds, with their purposes decided by the donors.” I can see why a donor wouldn’t want to potentially waste their contributions on tuition for students, no matter the academic’s qualifications, but if the reason for tuition hikes can be traced to infrastructure requirements, then the government should step in and ok that more endowment money should be spent by colleges and universities to shore up monetary infrastructure needs, such as the updating of a library or the building of a science hall. This would appeal to the narcissism of the contributor by guaranteeing a bronze plaque appears at the entrance of the wing or improvement they financed. The U.S. Senate Finance Committee, according to Kim, “aims to limit the [endowment] money colleges can avoid spending . . . [considering proposing a law] “that would require colleges to spend a minimum of 5 percent of their endowments on financial aid.” If the Senate Finance Committee authored, and congress passed, a bill necessitating the devotion of 10-15% of the endowment money on infrastructure, books and post-secondary classroom tools (like scientific or industrial equipment) perhaps the contributors would be more amenable. Again, this would, in theory, reduce tuition costs, making financial aid less necessary if tuition were reduced to begin with. Phyllis Kim’s article, from January 28, 2008, can be found here: http://www.thetartan.org/2008/1/28/news/endowment. She also writes this- “. . . the rising costs of gas, food, and other necessities have prompted many more middle-class families to look to charity for aid.” But I must still be wrong in my assertions.
The headline: “Equitable Pricing for College Degrees”, August 18, 2007; Minneapolis Star Tribune- Opinion Exchange section editorial- (http://www.startribune.com/opinion/editorials/11148181.html). The content of this story reveals that about half of the larger universities have some form of tuition hike that equates to the student’s having chosen a more expensive major- “substantial tuition differences from one discipline to another appear to be a trend . . . Last spring, [2007] regents of the University of Wisconsin-Madison approved a $500 per semester tuition hike for business students. And UW regents are also considering a tuition hike of more than $1,400 for engineering students.” As if middle class kids weren’t going to have a hard enough time paying for their college degrees. “Price-differential supporters argue that areas like engineering and business need additional funds because they cost more to operate. To remain competitive, they say more must be spent on professors, equipment and research than in other academic areas.” If tuition wasn’t already overpriced to begin with, I would agree with them. Somehow, the states better find a way to make a good secondary education affordable for American students.
Feel bad for the poor old colleges and universities?: “Robbing the Rich to Give to the Richest” Lynne Munson, July 26, 2007, Inside Higher Ed.com- (http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2007/07/26/munson). “Colleges and universities are sitting on a fortune in tax-free funds, and sharing almost none of it. Higher education endowment assets alone total over $340 billion. Sixty-two institutions boast endowments over $1 billion . . . the total worth of the top 25 college and university endowments is $11 billion greater than the combined assets of their equivalently ranked private foundations—including Gates, Ford and Rockefeller.”
Skyrocketing endowments: “Higher education endowments also are growing much faster than private foundations. The value of college and university endowments skyrocketed 17.7 percent last year, while private foundation assets increased 7.8 percent . . . most of the gain is a result of stingy, outdated endowment payout policies that retain and perpetually re-invest massive sums. This widespread practice results in a hoarding of tax-free funds.”
Hoarding: “For too long the government response to skyrocketing tuition has been to increase the size and number of student loans. Now the plan is to make loan repayment easier and increase grant aid again. But making it possible for students and parents to go more deeply into debt only encourages endowment hoarding and runaway tuition.” Only a squirrel employed by "Simon Delivers for rodents" after learning from an inside investment source that the company was about to go bankrupt because of economic reasons would be a more adept hoarder of someone else’s property.
Ranking of the necessary cost of education: “When asked to name an expense that is beyond their reach, people cite ‘paying for college’ more than buying a home, retirement, or anything else.” The reason- because after an education is obtained, and after employment is assured, because of the education, and some money is coming in, it is most directly linked with the ability to afford all of the others. I didn’t need an adjunct research fellow who works for the Center for College Affordability and Productivity to tell me that.
Article chasers: Following Munson’s article is a series of mostly qualified comments on the nature of her findings. One respondent chose to criticize her focus on the wealthiest colleges and universities gathering the largest amount of endowment money. This writer contends that plenty of institutions struggle to provide a quality education for the money they are gathering in tuition costs. Previously, I had found that fresh off of 17% and 13% increases from the state legislature for the next two years for state colleges and universities respectively, the University of Minnesota reported an increased endowment amount of $2.8 billion in 2007 (see next paragraph). If this is true, and the U of M ranked 24th among 785 higher education institutions, perhaps we should be able to withhold the 17% state budget increase we sent their way in 2007, perhaps sending state money to other colleges and universities that might not have faired as well in the endowment area. And, I don’t know, by law, perhaps we could prevent those institutions we overlook because of their endowment fortunes from retaliating through a tuition hike. This would all be reasonable and assist the middle class compete for the opportunities a college degree would provide. One article chaser asks (and believe me, I was drunk enough on the material included in the initial article) “Does Harvard really need access to Pell Grant funds at the same level that an inner city community college does?” Sure, if they want to start quoting employee-alumnists of the aforementioned college to compete with Princeton for the 'most strangely made point sans a sense of reality' honor. (See parts 25 and 34. Have I set the Guinness Book of World Records mark for most cross-references in a set of unread blog columns yet? Glad I could work in a non-beer Guinness reference in a paragraph headed by the word- chasers. Shouldn’t the fact that you are attending Harvard preclude you from gaining much of anything in the way of grants? My being enamored with Friedman’s “neighborhood effects” can only go so far. Again, someone other than a Princeton spokesperson could feel free to answer that question.)
University of Minnesota endowment money: From the Minnesota Daily, January 28, 2008 by Emma Carew- http://www.mndaily.com/articles/2008/01/28/72165198: 1) the U of M’s endowment fund reached $2.8 billion; 2) 136 letters were sent to “colleges with the highest endowments” by the U.S. Senate Finance Committee and “charged the leaders of the college to submit data and analysis on the number of enrolled students each year, estimated and actual costs to attend the school, information on financial aid, tuition increases, endowment management, investment management, percent of the endowment spent each year, and compensation associated with campus presidents and endowment managers.” Somebody pinch me. Any chance they will be doing the same thing to oil companies, businesses and corporations with windfall profits? This is a truly apples to apples inquiry; 3) Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa said “ ‘Tuition has gone up, college president’s salaries have gone up, and endowments continue to go up and up . . . It’s fair to ask whether a college kid should have to wash dishes in the dining hall to pay his tuition when his college has a billion dollars in the bank.” I am not concerned with a college student having to work to put himself through school (I did). I am concerned about how much the student owes after he has completed school. Just handing a student all kinds of money, without him contributing during his college career is not a resolution to the problem; 4) the reaction to this measure by the U of M, was not panic as it should have been. Earlier in the article it was divulged that “4.6% - percent of [the] endowment [was] spent by the University in 2007. This number is on par with the national average for endowment assets of over $1 billion dollars.” I would urge that the baseline is unacceptable; when comparing apples to apples, it is best if at least one of them weren’t rotten. More panic-inflicting demands need to be made by the senate finance committee.
More Princeton Logic: From a NJ.com article written by Ana M. Alaya, March 8, 2008 “Colleges' Big Endowments Raise Taxing Questions”** http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/03/colleges_big_endowments_raise.html comes a predictable rebuttal from that dean of ivy league college logic- Princeton. Robert K. Durkee, Princeton’s vice president and secretary, says “ ‘These institutions have managed their endowments very responsibly over a long period of time . . . not only to become the best institutions in the world, but to strike a healthy balance meeting the needs of current faculty and students and being prepared to meet the needs of the future.’ ” Healthy balance? Yes, in much the same way that my son would suppose that a meal consisting of equal parts McDonald’s French fries and cheeseburger is a healthy, balanced meal. Mr. Durkee, your salary would be? I was unable to determine Durkee’s current salary but churning up the wasteland of information from a Google search to that effect, I found that in 1997, Robert K. Durkee, [then] “vice president, public affairs, Princeton University. $147,000.” (See- http://161.58.97.168/199809/80923s02.html.) The chances that his salary isn’t 3-4 times that 11 years later, (considering a like-compensated University of Minnesota president is earning $455,000) with a promotion to vice president of the school rather than of just public affairs- I’ll let you decide. “ ‘It would not be good policy," Durkee added, "to step into that and impose a particular payout.’ ” I beg to differ. It would not be good policy for you. It would be an excellent and fair policy for students. But, considering the type of reasoning that seems prevalent at that institution, it may be best to steer clear of the reason arts. In truth, those who cannot afford Princeton, or any excessively priced college, should not be going there and should not whine about the cost. I have met too many bright, talented individuals who did not spend $150 thousand on college who, given as many breaks and opportunities, could mismanage any fortune 500 company of your choosing- just like the Alexander Hamilton-like highbrows do.
Average college: Considering the information contained in this article at Collegeboard.com- http://www.collegeboard.com/student/pay/add-it-up/4494.html a superintendent or administrator can become quite comfortable with justifying their brand of bureaucracy. I wanted to quote these numbers from an article making the case that education is now affordable to say nothing of how difficult it will be to afford in 16 years. I think I can do this using relatively little space. Their major point is how affordable college can be after being granted financial aid.
“about 56 percent of students attend four-year schools with annual tuition and fees below $9,000.” But only the rich can afford to attend the universities with the specialized degrees that will allow more students the opportunity to pursue their dreams- say perhaps in the area of biomedical engineering. That isn’t a major offered at Normandale Community college. Quite true, collegiate elitists, do not want just anyone sharing the byways of their college campuses- they are too bent on the prestige of self-homage. Not everyone can go to Duke, Yale and MIT unless they can come close to affording it. It is important to dream realistically and not expect others to save us. I think your average college is asking for too much in tuition. Subsequent generations of middle class students deserve an opportunity to matriculate without going bankrupt and deserve the opportunity to attend more than a public two-year college, such as 22 percent of all full-time students attend. What looks better on a resume- Dakota County Technical Institute or University of Michigan?
Granted I: This article (the collegeboard.com) reveals that “After grants are taken into consideration, the net price the average undergraduate pays for a college education is significantly lower than the published tuition and fees. And remember, other forms of financial aid will further reduce the amount your family will actually pay.” Do these people expect the financial aid fairy to descend upon the students who enroll at their college? The article reveals that Public four-year college is up 6.6 percent from last year- to $6,185 and that “More than $130 billion in financial aid is available to students and their families.” They can offer no words that connote guilt along with that poison, I sit here being long-winded in print, dumbfounded.
Granted II: One thing about grants- you have to qualify for them. How do you qualify for grants? You have to show financial need. Again, when I was attending a two year community college for four years, I applied for aid and was turned down. I was working part time, my mom was working two jobs, but had a decent amount of money in her bank account for a reason she would have given the money back to have remedied. I paid $100 a month in rent, so I caught a break there. I put myself through college. She paid for books one semester, because that is all she could realistically afford to do and I never questioned it. My point is that no middle class kid, living at home for reasons that ought to be economically obvious, will qualify for that Pell Grant or other financial aid money. Again, the poor and the rich are well-cared for. The middle class- not quite. In three different websites I went to where a potentially needy student could apply for financial aid, one from Maryland (Maryland Higher Education Commission), one from Wisconsin (State of Wisconsin Higher Education Aids Board- or HEAB generally), and a Federal site which “offered” Pell Grant money, to be found here- http://studentaid.ed.gov/, financial need must be demonstrated. Unless you are a middle class student already good at cooking the books, not being honest about bank accounts and then not getting caught, you are not getting any financial aid, because you cannot demonstrate financial need, at least not enough to satisfy the government. I would rather try to put a 500 piece puzzle together on shag carpeting than reason with these types of people.
One more: The other point addressed in the article is that “For full-time dependent students at public two-year colleges, net tuition and fees are no more than 2% of the family income.” Two things- one, b---sh-t and two, try attending a college without books, a car to get to college if you have a job off campus or room and board money if you have a job on campus.
Nice Times: David Brooks of the New York Times wrote an article speculating (prior to the announcement) that it made the most sense for Obama to have picked Joe Biden as his democratic vice presidential running mate. Brooks refers to another man I’ve never heard of as a potential choice for Obama, but dismisses him as having “impeccably centrist credentials” and then writes that “the country is not in the mood for dispassionate caution.” Mr. Brooks- firstly, the Kevin Costner movie that bears your name was horrendous, and secondly, I would enjoy the opportunity of getting into an adjective or metaphor war with you concerning how ineffectual your party of choice has been in the political world. Have I used the puzzle on shag carpeting analogy yet? Well, if they don’t feel the need to trot out any more new or useful analogies to describe Independents or centrists, I won’t need to waste my pathetic attempts at inventiveness on them. Seriously, I was about to make reference to a dutch belted dairy cow in the most unfavorable light in regards to their (the cows and the republican and democratice extremists*** for that matter) whoring after granny smiths, but I’ll keep at least one bullet in reserve.
Education desires: Two mandatory courses- 1) History of Culture- wherein immigrants and Americans alike must learn of the diverse ways of cultures other than their own- Americans would learn something about Mexican, Muslim, Islam and Russian, among others and Latin Americans and Hmong, Eastern Asians would learn about American customs and culture. This may help us be more civil to one another, and; 2) A high school finance course- where kids would learn about investing, balancing a checkbook and responsible spending.
“I love it when a plan comes together”: This was a line uttered by Hannibal at the end of each episode of the A-Team, an over the top action show from the early 1980s, when the team had successfully completed their mission. I’ll link this reference up in a few sentences. Endowment money and its allocation is a sticky problem. During some of my research I encountered a piece of information that revealed that if a donor wants the money he has donated to be spent on all things Greek, the institution accepting the donation really has its hands tied. The institution referred to in the article as having received the money was Princeton- so they offered more classes in Greek. See http://www.universityworldnews.com/topic.php?topic=World_In_Brief&page=7 and do a find on the word “Greek.” Alaya, from the NJ.com article, also writes that “College officials responded with detailed defenses of their spending, noting gifts often come with strings attached.” (Emphasis mine) Huh, “hands tied,” “strings attached.” Looks like I might have more need for a pair of scissors or a sword to cut this Gordian Knot.**** I love it when a plan comes together. Prior to the 2007-08 school year, Princeton raised tuition 40 consecutive years and with billions of dollars of endowment money just lying around, maybe it is time for congress to change some laws. Cut!____________________________________________________________
* The Gordian Knot is used as a metaphor for an intractable problem, solved by a bold stroke ("cutting the Gordian knot". The whole story is very interesting and too lengthy to reproduce here in full. It involves (what else) a decree, a king, an ox-cart, an oracle, an ancient capital city, a peasant and Alexander the Great. Briefly, Alexander cut the knot with a stroke of his sword. Using a scissors is more modern, less aggressive and more scholastic (given the subject matter- the alteration is fitting). See Wikipedia for more information.
** There is a lot of information on the issue of endowment money and the U.S. Senate Finance Committee investigation of how that money is spent relative to the rise in college tuition and administrator salaries and I know that I have not done it justice. It is now September and the last source I quoted was from early March. I have no idea how the issue has turned out or if the Senate Finance Committee has been beaten back. It appears that nothing has been resolved to this point. This article- "Key Senator Hires Former IRS Official to Oversee Investigation of College Endowments is from April 8, 2008. The reason for this news is that the former senior counsel to senator Grassly resigned for reasons the article does not mention, though upon further digging it seems that former lead investigator Dean Zerbe was highly qualified and diligent in holding universities accountable.
*** To me, a republican or democratic extremist is anyone who continues to excitedly vote for candidates representing one of the two parties.
**** In addition to the result of education (a degree) being a Pyrrhic Victory, it is the foremost Gordian Knot issue. It is not alone among issues that could use their Gordian Knot severed; but I think that Alexander the Great would need help severing this tie that binds.
No comments:
Post a Comment