Donald Trump

ikiT

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Did you see him being a fucking creep to Macrons wife? 

I'm sure I will see it later, I have no idea what he did or said, but I am NOT surprised by him being inappropriate at any given moment.

I was hopeful that trip would somehow end with Trumpito handing out some French-based insult,  having Macron slap him with a pair of white gloves (Donnie's pompadour getting all flipped over) and finally have Macron challenge his fat ass to a duel with some old pistols.

ikiT

Student loan debt is pretty bad.

Go Beavers

All things being similar, I'd probably give a bump to an Art History major over a business major when hiring. 

mrussel1

Go Beavers said:

All things being similar, I'd probably give a bump to an Art History major over a business major when hiring. 

All other things being equal, I wouldn't.  But it depends on the role.  

PJfanwillneverleave1

Now before anyone blows it out of proportion here is the audio and video from the exchange saying she is in good shape. http://www.tmz.com/2017/07/13/president-trump-brigitte-macron-beautiful-body-comment/

Go Beavers

mrussel1 said:

Go Beavers said:

All things being similar, I'd probably give a bump to an Art History major over a business major when hiring. 

All other things being equal, I wouldn't.  But it depends on the role.  

Which brings up a good point. I'm looking for someone who can look at a problem differently and access a range of thinking and communication styles.

Depending on the position, liberal arts majors don't do too bad. They start out a little behind, but eventually catch up to other college majors. Interesting article here:
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2015/11/13/liberal-arts-degrees-critics/?source=dam

JC29856

lakefront brewery white!
quadrupole homicide around the corner!

Halifax2TheMax

If anyone really wants to know the how and why of why college costs what it does, go to the college or university of your choice and surf their website looking for the President's Report. They usually are required to make them available, particularly if it's a state school. They exhibit their revenue sources and expenditures and if you drill down, you can get down to source detail. What won't be obvious is that the republicans in congress, gradually over time, shifted the funding burden from the Feds, think block grants to public colleges and institutions, to individuals via mostly private student loans. There's a reason why big banks oppose the Feds administering student loans. Why pay 3% interest to the Feds when you can pay 8% or 10% to Bank of America? Federal student loan programs have been routinely found to have big bangs for the bucks as far as desired outcomes go. But they also fund that scrounge of "liberal" education where kids get brainwashed to vote Hillary or Obama. I would never in a million years send a kid to a for profit school.

The Juggler

Tiki said:

Student loan debt is pretty bad.

"I'm the king of debt."
-Donald J Trump (thread integrity)

ikiT

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Did you see him being a fucking creep to Macrons wife? 

Yeah DJT needs a much stronger filter.  Holy shit.

JC29856

Halifax2TheMax said:

If anyone really wants to know the how and why of why college costs what it does, go to the college or university of your choice and surf their website looking for the President's Report. They usually are required to make them available, particularly if it's a state school. They exhibit their revenue sources and expenditures and if you drill down, you can get down to source detail. What won't be obvious is that the republicans in congress, gradually over time, shifted the funding burden from the Feds, think block grants to public colleges and institutions, to individuals via mostly private student loans. There's a reason why big banks oppose the Feds administering student loans. Why pay 3% interest to the Feds when you can pay 8% or 10% to Bank of America? Federal student loan programs have been routinely found to have big bangs for the bucks as far as desired outcomes go. But they also fund that scrounge of "liberal" education where kids get brainwashed to vote Hillary or Obama. I would never in a million years send a kid to a for profit school.

good points...always making it a dem gop issue. aren't you saying it's a $ issue?
what's the presidents of U salary? board of directors? tenured professors? employee soft costs?
you were generous to WF with 8%to10% especially considering that there borrow from the Fed at .005 then in turn loan it at 8to10.
cars housing education, outrageous! why? bankrupt, why catastrophic injury. to quote easy e..."easy access baby". don't cage the cub. 
banksters loan the money bec they know it will end up in there hands, interest or their brethrens salary.
I do not approve this message. lakefront.

my2hands

JC29856 said:

Tiki said:

I will not pay for a wall.

no, you currently and have been paying 15 cents on every dollar you earn to kill innocent civilians in the middle east. a wall is your breaking point?

We're on the same team with this one 

Lizard

Tiki said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Did you see him being a fucking creep to Macrons wife? 

I'm sure I will see it later, I have no idea what he did or said, but I am NOT surprised by him being inappropriate at any given moment.

I was hopeful that trip would somehow end with Trumpito handing out some French-based insult,  having Macron slap him with a pair of white gloves (Donnie's pompadour getting all flipped over) and finally have Macron challenge his fat ass to a duel with some old pistols.

Hahhaa. .thanks for the awesome visual.

Halifax2TheMax

JC29856 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

If anyone really wants to know the how and why of why college costs what it does, go to the college or university of your choice and surf their website looking for the President's Report. They usually are required to make them available, particularly if it's a state school. They exhibit their revenue sources and expenditures and if you drill down, you can get down to source detail. What won't be obvious is that the republicans in congress, gradually over time, shifted the funding burden from the Feds, think block grants to public colleges and institutions, to individuals via mostly private student loans. There's a reason why big banks oppose the Feds administering student loans. Why pay 3% interest to the Feds when you can pay 8% or 10% to Bank of America? Federal student loan programs have been routinely found to have big bangs for the bucks as far as desired outcomes go. But they also fund that scrounge of "liberal" education where kids get brainwashed to vote Hillary or Obama. I would never in a million years send a kid to a for profit school.

good points...always making it a dem gop issue. aren't you saying it's a $ issue?
what's the presidents of U salary? board of directors? tenured professors? employee soft costs?
you were generous to WF with 8%to10% especially considering that there borrow from the Fed at .005 then in turn loan it at 8to10.
cars housing education, outrageous! why? bankrupt, why catastrophic injury. to quote easy e..."easy access baby". don't cage the cub. 
banksters loan the money bec they know it will end up in there hands, interest or their brethrens salary.
I do not approve this message. lakefront.

Republican budgets have repeatedly cut funding to all forms of education. Except for increasing the tax breaks for "for profits," charters and home schooling. I didn't make it an issue, republicans did. Part of their grand scheme to dumb down the populace. Can't have critical thinking now can we, Boris?

mrussel1

Halifax2TheMax said:

If anyone really wants to know the how and why of why college costs what it does, go to the college or university of your choice and surf their website looking for the President's Report. They usually are required to make them available, particularly if it's a state school. They exhibit their revenue sources and expenditures and if you drill down, you can get down to source detail. What won't be obvious is that the republicans in congress, gradually over time, shifted the funding burden from the Feds, think block grants to public colleges and institutions, to individuals via mostly private student loans. There's a reason why big banks oppose the Feds administering student loans. Why pay 3% interest to the Feds when you can pay 8% or 10% to Bank of America? Federal student loan programs have been routinely found to have big bangs for the bucks as far as desired outcomes go. But they also fund that scrounge of "liberal" education where kids get brainwashed to vote Hillary or Obama. I would never in a million years send a kid to a for profit school.

Yes, the Banks would rather have access to this market vs the Feds.  But I'm not sure how that explains the rise in costs, unless I'm inappropriately conflating your points.  Remember that federal loans need to be qualified to receive, the income threshold is not particularly high.  You can defer the payments on private loans through companies like SLM and Discover, but interest is still accruing in the background. You would be a fool to take private if you qualified for federally subsidized, but not everyone does.  
Couldn't agree more with the for profit college.  They are incentivized to keep people in school, paying, so regardless of grades, attendance, etc, they'll push you through.  I would never recommend it for a student that had options.  

Go Beavers

Quote from lil' trump about the wall from yesterday. Maybe he could do a flyover on the border and see how the "violent and vicious" Rio Grande is basically down to a trickle.

"But we are seriously looking at a solar wall.  And remember this, it's a 2,000 mile border, but you don't need 2,000 miles of wall because you have a lot of natural barriers.  You have mountains.  You have some rivers that are violent and vicious.  You have some areas that are so far away that you don't really have people crossing.  So you don't need that.  But you'll need anywhere from 700 to 900 miles."
 

mrussel1

Go Beavers said:

mrussel1 said:

Go Beavers said:

All things being similar, I'd probably give a bump to an Art History major over a business major when hiring. 

All other things being equal, I wouldn't.  But it depends on the role.  

Which brings up a good point. I'm looking for someone who can look at a problem differently and access a range of thinking and communication styles.

Depending on the position, liberal arts majors don't do too bad. They start out a little behind, but eventually catch up to other college majors. Interesting article here:
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2015/11/13/liberal-arts-degrees-critics/?source=dam

I agree.. I think Art History is a little bit of a stretch, but someone with a liberal arts major can usually construct a complete sentence, which is more than can be said about some degrees.  At the end of the day, people that are motivated, positive, able to think in an integrated way and are persuasive can succeed at most "business management" jobs.  Some jobs are specialized of course and that's where I get into my statement about funding "in need" jobs.  They aren't marketing and business admin jobs.  They are applied math, engineering fields, etc.  An Art History major would have a tough time being successful in such a field.  

PJ_Soul

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

cincybearcat said:

JC29856 said:

unsung said:

JC29856 said:

unsung said:

HesCalledDyer said:

unsung said:

HesCalledDyer said:

Question:
How does one go about not paying Federal taxes?  I'd like to know because I'd like to a part of that.  I mean, you hear it all the time.  This person owes 12 years of taxes, that person owes tens of thousands of dollars in taxes.  Doesn't Floyd Mayweather alone owe the government $22 million?  If these people can get away with it, I'm sure the Feds wouldn't miss my $5k a year.  I'm certainly not down for paying for a fucking wall, so the government really has no business taking my money.  I don't think there's anything in the all mighty Constitution stating that citizens are required to pay taxes, is there?

Unfortunately there is.  

Feb 1913 found the passage of the 16th Amendment.  It just so happened that the Federal Reserve (private banking system) was created in Dec 1913 and have conveniently been devaluing the dollar / stealing wealth from the non-rich ever since.

Ahh, I appreciate the info.

Actually I am looking at this wrong.  The 16th Amendment gives Congress the authority to tax income, but it doesn't require them to nor does it set numbers.

Your personal requirement is based on your desire to be kidnapped and thrown in a cage.  So I suppose it is up to each individual.

I always thought the "cage" was having a mortgage most of the adult life.

No, that is student loan debt.

yeah...notice how there is never any national discussion on why it costs $30k-60k a year for a college education? where does the money go?

I think a lot of that depends on what degree you pursue as well....someone that takes 5 years to graduate with an art history degree and can't get a job to pay off the loan doesn't get a lot of sympathy from me.

This is a topic I really like to debate and one that we talked about quite a bit when Sanders was in the race.  
I agree with your statement 100%.  And I'm 100% against free tuition for people who select degrees for which there is no demand on the job side.  
Third, the student loan debts that these kids walk out of college with are completely debilitating to their next 15 financial years AND lead them to make bad short term decisions.  Example... I have a team in SW Florida.  It's a client facing team and I need college grads at the entry level.  I pay 40k to start.  Not the best, but pretty good considering I'll take liberal arts majors.  Plus we promote like crazy.  I've sent people straight to FGCU to recruit directly and people turn down the job becuase they need 60k at 23 because of their student loans.  It's like Cousin Eddy holding out for a management position. 

I think this attitude threatens society. I think it is very harmful to make things like art and history and literature unnecessary in society. This attitude pisses me off to no end. Also, it completely dismisses the fact that there are TONS of worthy professions that come out of such areas of study. Attitudes like this basically equate to calling for the death of art, philosophy, history, literature, and critical thinking. I can think of few things more dangerous to a civilization than to focus education only on areas where job demand is high. It is an insanely narrow-minded attitude that is ignorant to what the arts actually do for humankind. And then there is the part about crushing young souls in the name of capitalism.

I"m sorry you think that.  I'm not arguing there shouldn't be these degrees nor am I arguing that there should not be federally subsidized loans for these degrees.  I'm saying that if the Bernie people want free tuition, that it should be something where there is a societal demand.  If we run out of Art History majors and we need them, great.. then we re-calibrate that and include it in the "free" programs.  Until then, we should focus on nursing, STEM, etc.  I'm not sure if you know about the number of unfilled jobs in this country because we don't ahve the skills, but it's a huge issue.  https://www.bls.gov/news.release/jolts.nr0.htm

Yikes. That is a pretty scary proposition IMO. It's basically punishing artistic people financially. I'm thinking that lack of skilled workers stems from something other than too many people choosing to do arts degrees. But FYI, a lot of those in high demand jobs started with arts degrees. The better solution is to just grow the education programs that focus on those skilled professions that have a demand for labour. Market them better, make them more accessible, and encourage all the various choices starting at a younger age, and encourage more women to get into the maths and sciences and trades. You don't find the solution by making artistic people pay and making it free for those who don't choose the arts. All that would do is cause those who should be in the arts choose something else purely because they couldn't afford what they wanted to do. That's awful.

Go Beavers

And Sander's plan of taxpayer funded tuition would have helped the current problem of jobs left open due to lack of specific skills. It could also have been applied to a specific trade school so people with almost zip income could eventually fill those open jobs rather than sit idle in an low wage, unskilled position.  

PJfanwillneverleave1

Wall update folks.... http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/politics/no-need-for-full-border-wall-trump-says/ar-BBEmI3z?li=AAadgLE&ocid=spartanntp