If you can vote, who will you vote for; if you can't, who would you want to vote for?

lololo I thought this was about voting in MeepCraft, and typing in a different username other than ur own at the "username" section in voting xD

 

The price of a college education is, in inflation-adjusted dollars, over three times higher than it was 40 years ago. Was that because of your reasonable decisions, or is it possible that someone else is to blame? http://trends.collegeboard.org/coll...oard-over-time-1975-76-2015-16-selected-years

I'm pretty sure that the age of industry and the need for a semi-skilled and educated workforce has more to do with it.

Yes, this explains why our public universities are so much more expensive than the private ones [hint: they're not, and it's not even close].

--- Double Post Merged, May 3, 2016, Original Post Date: May 3, 2016 ---

If college were free (or at least not out-of-control expensive), then you wouldn't be negatively affected, you'd benefit just like your straw man Underwater Basket Weaver majors would.

Also, please don't make the mistake that just because a degree doesn't have a huge market value, it has no social value. In fact, the opposite is true of MBAs - insane market value, but collectively a net negative social value.

 

I have a lot of current and ex classmates who love to whine about how college is a waste of money and time.
You want to know their major?
Gender Studies

--- Double Post Merged, May 3, 2016, Original Post Date: May 3, 2016 ---

The cost of college has actually stayed relatively static. The only thing that has changed was that the taxpayer is now left with covering the majority of the tuition costs, rather than having most of the costs subsidized by the federal government.

On a side note, if young adults don't vote, there will be very little legislature that helps students cover tuition costs and student loans, so GO OUT AND VOTE.

 

Hey guys, not sure about this so please reply but is Ted Cruz dropping out of the race?

 

He did and kasich says he will drop out if trump secures the nomination

 

Source?

I'm pretty sure that the 300%+ increase in private college costs had nothing to do with federal subsidies.

 

I would be negatively affected by it. My taxes would go up, and so would the other hard working individuals. What you said right here is the problem. It should not be free.

This is exactly my point.

 

That's because state schools are funded by the government..... yet still charge $20,000 a year all while having huge sports programs that bring in tens of millions a year. No one is forcing someone to go to a $40,000 a year artsy school that really is a waste. At some point you have to be a smart consumer. One area that I think needs reform is the student loan interest rate. Loans should be to help students go to school not to profit off them. They borrow money at 0% from the FED then loan it out to students at 6%, that's not right at all.

--- Double Post Merged, May 4, 2016 ---

You're missing the point where people can freely choose where they go.....

 

Discuss

 

Hey now, you can't kick out Bernie Sanders quite yet. Sure it looks grim but you don't know, he just might be able to pull it off (yes I know it is slim but just saying).

 

In nearly any presidential election between Trump and not-Trump, the only rational choice is the latter. I don't look at Hillary and see a Stalin or a Palin, so she's an acceptable not-Trump option.

 

Your own education would be free.

The overall population would be better educated, which would drive innovation, research, entrepreneurialism, etc., and the growth in the economy would mean growth in tax revenue, without hiking rates.

A more educated populace also means less crime, drug abuse, teen pregnancy, and other negative behaviors which cost taxpayer dollars to police/prevent/support.

As a result of those last two, your tax rate may actually go down, not up.

--- Double Post Merged, May 4, 2016, Original Post Date: May 4, 2016 ---

You'll get no argument from me that a major driver of college costs is frivolous spending that has no educational value. And if I'm implementing free college education, then one of the first conditions of that is that major sports are no longer funded by educational dollars.

But if you're going to point out state subsidies as a revenue source for public universities, then you also need to consider the massive endowments controlled by private ones.

You're missing the point that all too often people don't go at all, despite lots of potential, because the price is too high at even the cheapest local public uni, and wages are too low to make working your way through realistic.

So instead you take on debt, and take a major where you think there might be jobs and pay... only to find that, within those four years, MBAs have torched the economy, there are no more jobs, and you're a debt serf. Or you find that your chosen field has evaporated - chemists, engineers, and geologists were in hot demand four years ago in the petrochemical field four years ago, and few people would say those are useless majors. Now there are experienced field engineers working as greeters for Walmart, who will snap up the first new job openings whenever they show up, leaving you, the inexperienced college grad to step in to the greeter position to pay college debt interest, and continue sleeping on a hard futon in mom's basement for the next decade, because that's the lifestyle you can afford.

I do find your naïve idea of being in full command of your fate through good choices to be adorable, though.

 

While this is a more extreme look I believe Hillary would do a lot for power.

 

Yeah, that's why I'm going to graduate and get a job because my ideas are adorable.

 

You can surely count him out, look at the super delegate count (its unfair sure but its still there).

Lol, with all the rednecks in America and Obama still being alive I doubt they would be killed.

She's just the typical slimy politician that will get us into stupid wars like Iraq and cause regional instability like Libya. Not saying Trump is good but I rather vote for someone that isn't in the pockets of Wall Street donors. Trump really can't become a Stalin, we have checks and balances. I also think restoring relations with Russia would be a good thing considering Putin and Trump seem to have a bromance going on.

 

Lmao, no.

 

Trump's campaign is largely self-financed, and given that he's the prototypical Wall Street donor, he's deeper in those pockets than anyone. Whenever he needed loans to pay for his next business failure, he was talking to Wall Street bankers.

It's not that he can become Stalin, it's more a personality thing. We know Trump is a greedy, power-mad narcissist, but is he more so than Stalin? I'm going with "no," so in a race between Stalin and Trump, I'll go with Trump. We also know he's incapable of thinking before he speaks, and only embarasses himself (and, if elected, the country he represents) every time he opens his mouth. But is he as head-up-own-rear stupid and embarrassing as Sarah Palin? Tough call, but I'm going with a "no" here, too, so Trump gets my vote if those are the only two options.

Hillary is clearly far smarter than Trump, and the fact that she was able to still serve the Obama administration despite severe disagreements with the president in areas directly related to State business says she's not as evil or self-aggrandizing, either. Could you even imagine the public temper tantrums Trump would have thrown in her place?

So yeah, I don't like Hillary, but I still don't find this to be a difficult choice.