PDA

View Full Version : PC crap at colleges gretting out of control or not??



garhkal
03-10-2016, 05:43 PM
I am just wondering, when is it that we went from where colleges/universities were places where people STUDIED and learned, so they could go out into the real world and get work, to where 'social justice was the and all/be all' and students get to demand anything/everything they want from the owners of said college, and if you didn't bow down to those demands you were wrong??

Is this whole PC push on campuses geting to be too much??
Students at the Western Washington University want the dean to build a NEW college campus dedicated to social justice, and that the students have the power to fire anyone they feel is being "micro-aggressing'??

Sorry, but when the heck do students get the right to demand anything? And what the hell ever happened to freedom of speech??

http://conservativeangle.com/western-washington-u-students-demand-college-for-social-justice-indoctrination/

http://www.michiganstandard.com/37049/western-washington-u-students-demand-college-for-social-justice-indoctrination/

http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/07/washington-college-students-demand-power-to-fire-police-who-microaggress-them/

http://college.usatoday.com/2016/03/09/western-washington-u-students-demand-new-college-of-power-and-liberation/

Mjölnir
03-10-2016, 06:00 PM
I am just wondering, when is it that we went from where colleges/universities were places where people STUDIED and learned, so they could go out into the real world and get work, to where 'social justice was the and all/be all' and students get to demand anything/everything they want from the owners of said college, and if you didn't bow down to those demands you were wrong??

Is this whole PC push on campuses geting to be too much??
Students at the Western Washington University want the dean to build a NEW college campus dedicated to social justice, and that the students have the power to fire anyone they feel is being "micro-aggressing'??

Sorry, but when the heck do students get the right to demand anything? And what the hell ever happened to freedom of speech??

http://conservativeangle.com/western-washington-u-students-demand-college-for-social-justice-indoctrination/

http://www.michiganstandard.com/37049/western-washington-u-students-demand-college-for-social-justice-indoctrination/

http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/07/washington-college-students-demand-power-to-fire-police-who-microaggress-them/

http://college.usatoday.com/2016/03/09/western-washington-u-students-demand-new-college-of-power-and-liberation/

1. Depends on the college. There are some that I would not attend because of the issues you describe. Some focus on the education.

2. Depends on the major. Along the same lines as someone who goes to college in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan then complains about the winter ... did they think it would be balmy up there?
If you have someone who is studying social issues, I expect that department or even university might have more of a 'social' mindedness to it. Depends on what you want to study.

3. Some of this is a self licking ice-cream cone of thought-action-thought.

Mjölnir
03-10-2016, 06:01 PM
I am just wondering, when is it that we went from where colleges/universities were places where people STUDIED and learned, so they could go out into the real world and get work, to where 'social justice was the and all/be all' and students get to demand anything/everything they want from the owners of said college, and if you didn't bow down to those demands you were wrong??

Is this whole PC push on campuses geting to be too much??
Students at the Western Washington University want the dean to build a NEW college campus dedicated to social justice, and that the students have the power to fire anyone they feel is being "micro-aggressing'??

Sorry, but when the heck do students get the right to demand anything? And what the hell ever happened to freedom of speech??

http://conservativeangle.com/western-washington-u-students-demand-college-for-social-justice-indoctrination/

http://www.michiganstandard.com/37049/western-washington-u-students-demand-college-for-social-justice-indoctrination/

http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/07/washington-college-students-demand-power-to-fire-police-who-microaggress-them/

http://college.usatoday.com/2016/03/09/western-washington-u-students-demand-new-college-of-power-and-liberation/

1. Depends on the college. There are some that I would not attend because of the issues you describe. Some focus on the education.

2. Depends on the major. Along the same lines as someone who goes to college in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan then complains about the winter ... did they think it would be balmy up there?
If you have someone who is studying social issues, I expect that department or even university might have more of a 'social' mindedness to it. Depends on what you want to study.

3. Some of this is a self licking ice-cream cone of thought-action-thought.

efmbman
03-10-2016, 07:30 PM
And what the hell ever happened to freedom of speech??

Freedom of speech has always been about the government suppressing speech. I'm pretty sure that is not happening in this case, so that does not apply.

Rainmaker
03-10-2016, 07:36 PM
Freedom of speech has always been about the government suppressing speech. I'm pretty sure that is not happening in this case, so that does not apply.

Public Universities are State Institutions. Most of them were founded by state Governments

efmbman
03-10-2016, 07:50 PM
Public Universities are State Institutions. Most of them were founded by state Governments

True, but you missed the point (or I was unclear). I still don't see where any government entity is suppressing free speech. Who's speech is being suppressed and by whom?

garhkal
03-10-2016, 08:05 PM
True, but you missed the point (or I was unclear). I still don't see where any government entity is suppressing free speech. Who's speech is being suppressed and by whom?

How is wanting to punish anyone for 'micro-aggressions' not wanting to suppress speech?

Rainmaker
03-10-2016, 08:38 PM
True, but you missed the point (or I was unclear). I still don't see where any government entity is suppressing free speech. Who's speech is being suppressed and by whom?

I got the point and am not agreeing or disagreeing. You bolded government. So, just pointing out that if a state University were found to be suppressing free speech, then they are technically a state institution.

efmbman
03-10-2016, 09:46 PM
How is wanting to punish anyone for 'micro-aggressions' not wanting to suppress speech?

Is anyone doing that? There are lots of things I want to do, but (fortunately for many) those desires are held in check due to laws. You tend to get all riled up about things that aren't even happening. If it was happening, I would be with you, but man... life is too short to get so upset about things that are proposed by some idiot that never have a chance of happening. Look at it like trolling on the national level. Best to just not respond.


I got the point and am not agreeing or disagreeing. You bolded government. So, just pointing out that if a state University were found to be suppressing free speech, then they are technically a state institution.

Gotcha. I did bold government so I see how that was miscommunication. My fault.

Rainmaker
03-10-2016, 10:51 PM
Is anyone doing that? You tend to get all riled up about things that aren't even happening. Look at it like trolling on the national level. Best to just not respond.

Yes this sort of stupidity is widely reported at the local levels. But largely downplayed by the national media.

I recently went to my son's commencement and the first 20 minutes of the university president's speech was like drinking EEO cultural awareness training through a fucking firehose.

It was one bleeding heart wrenching story after another about some non white starving art major or a foreign kid on an H1b visa with a job waiting at Google getting to live out his dream on the taxpayer dime.

Luckily, Afterwards we went to my kids commissioning ceremony and got de-programmed.

See,The problem with tolerating this kind of Marxist proggie Bullshit is that it's like a cancer that metastasizes & kills the host if left unchecked.

garhkal
03-11-2016, 04:11 AM
See,The problem with tolerating this kind of Marxist proggie Bullshit is that it's like a cancer that metastasizes & kills the host if left unchecked.

And with the push for MORE campuses to have 'free speech zones rather than ALL the campus being one, along with the push for more colleges to be 'social justice active/anti-micro-aggression zones, that programming is getting harder and harder to avoid.

sparks82
03-11-2016, 02:44 PM
I am just wondering, when is it that we went from where colleges/universities were places where people STUDIED and learned, so they could go out into the real world and get work, to where 'social justice was the and all/be all' and students get to demand anything/everything they want from the owners of said college, and if you didn't bow down to those demands you were wrong??

Is this whole PC push on campuses geting to be too much??
Students at the Western Washington University want the dean to build a NEW college campus dedicated to social justice, and that the students have the power to fire anyone they feel is being "micro-aggressing'??

Sorry, but when the heck do students get the right to demand anything? And what the hell ever happened to freedom of speech??

http://conservativeangle.com/western-washington-u-students-demand-college-for-social-justice-indoctrination/

http://www.michiganstandard.com/37049/western-washington-u-students-demand-college-for-social-justice-indoctrination/

http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/07/washington-college-students-demand-power-to-fire-police-who-microaggress-them/

http://college.usatoday.com/2016/03/09/western-washington-u-students-demand-new-college-of-power-and-liberation/

So...some students are "demanding" things done? Are they being done? I couldn't find a news article that stated these things were actually going to be done. Just that these students are demanding a social justice college and demanding separate dorms for racial groups. Plus it's a new group that was just recently formed according to this: http://college.usatoday.com/2016/03/09/western-washington-u-students-demand-new-college-of-power-and-liberation/

Sounds like a bunch of whiny college kids to me. Unless any colleges actually make these changes, I don't see the issue. I see college students exercising their free speech (no matter how absurd it is).

Honestly if people want to be segregated again, then they apparently need to do some research on history and see how well that went the first time. But if they want to be separated and be their racist selves then go ahead and let them.

The president of the college replied with this: Western Washington University President Bruce Shepard, in an email statement obtained by USA TODAY College, said that “the proposal would fundamentally contradict our policies, practices, mutually bargained contracts, and federal law and policy on such matters as faculty evaluation and discipline, student conduct and discipline, the investigation of alleged racist behaviors, and the planning of facilities, spaces, and residence halls. I further find, in the proposal, language possibly threatening our core commitments to campus-wide inclusivity and, again possibly, to academic freedom.” The proposal, he added, “is also problematic for it would have large budgetary impacts but is missing a critical component of any complete proposal; namely, a credible approach for funding.”

I don't think it's happening. Just entitled, whiny college kids who think they need the world handed to them on a platter.

garhkal
03-11-2016, 05:49 PM
No it doesn't seem to actually being done. BUT the fact we seem to be seeing more and more college groups, DEMAND stuff from the college, and do all sorts of antics on campus (and off) till they get it, is imo alarming.

UncaRastus
03-11-2016, 05:56 PM
What did you expect, after being raised in a society where kids were/are being given trophies for attending sports events, when they didn't win? When the kids were validated on their self worth, constantly? Where children were passed on through the schooling system, when they would've failed at any other time? When the USA fell from the top five nations in schooling, to it's present standing?

Them there kids be entitled, I tells ya!

sparks82
03-11-2016, 06:07 PM
No it doesn't seem to actually being done. BUT the fact we seem to be seeing more and more college groups, DEMAND stuff from the college, and do all sorts of antics on campus (and off) till they get it, is imo alarming.

Well when you tell children they are entitled to everything without working for any of it...this is what you get. It's not all this generation. I've seen some older people involved but it is mostly these college aged kids now.

I'm not sure why any college caves into them. You pay to go to a certain college (well someone pays for it) and if you didn't research before you went, that's your problem.

If there are legitimate issues going on and actually violations in regards to race, religion, gender, etc then fine. Bring them up. But it doesn't sound like any of them are real. People want "safe spaces." Fine. Give them a space off campus. No one is forced to attend college.

Rainmaker
03-12-2016, 01:44 AM
20 "Great Value" Colleges with "safe spaces" for the special snowflakes....

http://www.greatvaluecolleges.net/20-great-value-colleges-safe-spaces/


As the nation saw with the University of Missouri’s system’s uprising and the resulting resignation of its president and the chancellor of the flagship campus in November 2015, safe spaces are becoming a perceived necessity among minority and LGBT students.

The concept of “safe space” originated in the women’s movement where it “implies a certain license to speak and act freely,” according to activist Moira Kenney in her book “Mapping Gay L.A.: The Intersection of Place and Politics”.

God save us from all these dumb fucks.

Rainmaker
03-12-2016, 02:45 AM
Students at Lena Dunham’s college offended by lack of fried chicken.....

"Students at an ultra-liberal Ohio college are in an uproar over the fried chicken, sushi and Vietnamese sandwiches served in the school cafeterias, complaining the dishes are “insensitive” and “culturally inappropriate.”

http://nypost.com/2015/12/18/pc-students-at-lena-dunhams-college-offended-by-lack-of-fried-chicken/

"Yes we can!"

garhkal
03-12-2016, 06:08 AM
Well when you tell children they are entitled to everything without working for any of it...this is what you get. It's not all this generation. I've seen some older people involved but it is mostly these college aged kids now.

I'm not sure why any college caves into them. You pay to go to a certain college (well someone pays for it) and if you didn't research before you went, that's your problem.

If there are legitimate issues going on and actually violations in regards to race, religion, gender, etc then fine. Bring them up. But it doesn't sound like any of them are real. People want "safe spaces." Fine. Give them a space off campus. No one is forced to attend college.

I fully agree. No college should be forced to cave into these (IMO) thugs. If they want to spend so much time protesting and social justice activism then when the heck are they in their damn classes??
What next, being told the school can't expell them cause they missed too many classes/tests?

Rainmaker
03-25-2016, 02:10 AM
Emory University Students Express Discontent With Administrative Response to "gasp".... TRUMP CHALKINGS???!!!

http://emorywheel.com/emory-students-express-discontent-with-administrative-response-to-trump-chalkings/

Roughly 40 students gathered shortly after 4:30 p.m. in the outdoors space between the Administration Building and Goodrich C. White Hall; many students carried signs featuring slogans such as “Stop Trump” or “Stop Hate” and an antiphonal chant addressed to University administration, led by College sophomore Jonathan Peraza, resounded “You are not listening! Come speak to us, we are in pain!” throughout the Quad.

Peraza opened the door to the Administration Building and students moved forward towards the door, shouting “It is our duty to fight for our freedom. It is our duty to win. We must love each other and support each other. We have nothing to lose but our chains.”

“I’m supposed to feel comfortable and safe [here],” one student said. “But this man is being supported by students on our campus and our administration shows that they, by their silence, support it as well … I don’t deserve to feel afraid at my school,” she added.

One student asked if Emory would send out a University-wide email to “decry the support for this fascist, racist candidate”




Here's a photo of one of the terrifying "chalkings" that caused these special snowflakes to tremble with fear....

http://www.campusreform.org/img/CROBlog/7411/Emorystairstrump.jpg

garhkal
03-25-2016, 03:00 AM
If seeing "Vote trump" scrawled in chalk on the sidewalk or steps 'makes them feel pain and get in such a huffy, i gues not a single one of these turds, watch the news then.. Since you can't go 30 minutes on ANY news channel without something Trump related cropping up...

Mjölnir
03-25-2016, 10:58 AM
As much as they are crying about it ... you would think someone asked them to run a mile and a half or exercise a bit.

UncaRastus
03-25-2016, 01:40 PM
Mjölnir, you don't think that carrying protest signs and doing chants are enough PT for the poor misunderstood college students? Weeping and feeling terrified by the appearance of Trump chalking on the steps doesn't move you to feeling that they have a point about not feeling safe?

They must be coddled! You must go to the campus and tell the unsafe children that they are correct, and that the Armed Forces were created to protect them from students that write such a dangerous name on those steps, or that have a different point of view, than that which they hold dear!

You must chide any other student that has a different viewpoint than whatever viewpoint that they hold! As a matter of fact, to protect them, you must sit up in the bell tower with a sni...

PROTECT THEM!!!

Down with pigs! Down with the man! Down with the establishment!*

;)

*Not necessarily the views of UR.

Mjölnir
03-25-2016, 02:25 PM
Mjölnir, you don't think that carrying protest signs and doing chants are enough PT for the poor misunderstood college students? Weeping and feeling terrified by the appearance of Trump chalking on the steps doesn't move you to feeling that they have a point about not feeling safe?

They must be coddled! You must go to the campus and tell the unsafe children that they are correct, and that the Armed Forces were created to protect them from students that write such a dangerous name on those steps, or that have a different point of view, than that which they hold dear!

You must chide any other student that has a different viewpoint than whatever viewpoint that they hold! As a matter of fact, to protect them, you must sit up in the bell tower with a sni...

PROTECT THEM!!!

Down with pigs! Down with the man! Down with the establishment!*

;)

*Not necessarily the views of UR.

Nah, I pretty much think that someone offended by a chalk writing of a political candidate they don't like is probably falling into the 'wall flower' category.

I am more finding humor in that some people I know (not necessarily here) who are talking about how weak these kids are, are the same ones that join the US Armed Forces and then whine and bitch about having to maintain a (all things considered) truly low standard of physical fitness.

#hypocrisymuch

UncaRastus
03-25-2016, 04:56 PM
I think that I understand what you just said. Some of the peeps that gripe about the 'wussiness of the college protestors' are the same that bitch about the low standards of the PT regimen, in the service.

I do recall having done the run, to graduate DI School at MCRD Parris Island, SC, MCRD. For me, I had arrived mid class. I was tossed into training with 5 mile runs. Not that big a deal. But having gone through the first half of the next class, after completing the second half, my running was a bit degraded, because I was at 5 mile runs again. Not to say that I didn't get to do the 10 mile runs with the class that I first attended.

Anyway, I had to do a 15 mile run. 40 pounds in the rucksack. A shelter half. Two full canteens. An entrenching tool. A gas mask. A first aid kit. Full uniform, with boots. An M16. And the old 10 pound steel pot helmet.

That all ended up at around 80-85 pounds. I had to run the course by myself, except for spotters from the school, to make sure that I kept on running.

Kind of reminds you of the recon run, maybe?

I did the run. I graduated. Near the end of my tour as a DI, I went to see the reenlistment NCO. I was told that in ten years, I had to return to either PI or to San Diego, or to the officer's school, after going through DI School again.

My thought at the time, was that I had to do the run, all over again, 10 years down the line. That didn't really appeal to me. So I did the unthinkable, and asked him where the nearest USN recruiter was.

I arrived at Great Lakes, on the recruit side. I was put into the OSVET program. Even though there was a guy that was a rank above me, I was assigned to be their Company Commander, and he had to wait for the next class to form.

We never once did any PT, in the OSVET class.

I was sent over to the other side, to go through the USN Hospital Corpsman class. Again, I was assigned to take the class through it's time there.

No PT.

Arrived at Camp Pendleton, and the problem without having done scheduled PT ended, pretty quickly. Luckily, I did my own PT during the time I since I was first sent to Great Lakes.

Yeah, I heard a lot of young corpsmen sounding off at having to conform to the USMC PT regimen, while going through the FMS schooling. I just laughed and asked them what they expected, after putting in for orders to the FMS?

At the ten year mark, since I had joined the Navy, I asked someone that had completed the DI School that year, about the 15 mile run. The DI asked me what in the hell I was talking about. He told me that DI School didn't have that in it's schedule.

What a doofus, eh?

UncaRastus
03-25-2016, 04:56 PM
repeat delete

Rainmaker
03-25-2016, 09:08 PM
As much as they are crying about it ... you would think someone asked them to run a mile and a half or exercise a bit.

Sandsjames need some safe space.

garhkal
03-26-2016, 03:34 AM
I think that I understand what you just said. Some of the peeps that gripe about the 'wussiness of the college protestors' are the same that bitch about the low standards of the PT regimen, in the service.
..snip..

What a doofus, eh?

Sounds like a bunch of the new boot campers we got when i transfered to 22 NCR.. Whining about having to do company PT.

garhkal
04-13-2016, 05:18 PM
Well, at another school, the students got their nickers in a twist cause someone used the 'free speech wall' to promote Trump and his phrase "Build the wall", and are pulling Greek week activities in protest (bunch of whiny babies). While another uni, is refusing to bring back Western civilization studies, cause it promotes colonialism, capitalism, sexism and all the other 'isms'.. but has no problem having dream and sleep studies, or a course in sex in modern culture...

Mjölnir
04-13-2016, 07:02 PM
Well, at another school, the students got their nickers in a twist cause someone used the 'free speech wall' to promote Trump and his phrase "Build the wall", and are pulling Greek week activities in protest (bunch of whiny babies). While another uni, is refusing to bring back Western civilization studies, cause it promotes colonialism, capitalism, sexism and all the other 'isms'.. but has no problem having dream and sleep studies, or a course in sex in modern culture...

I don't agree with many of the things you cite. That said, it a student does not want to attend a university because of its stance for (or against) freedom of speech or expression (either conservative or liberal), the student (they are adults) should transfer somewhere else.

I wouldn't go to McDonalds looking for gourmet Italian, I wouldn't go to UC Berkley and expect a haven or acceptance for conservative expression.

Rainmaker
04-13-2016, 08:48 PM
the student (they are adults) should transfer somewhere else.



The problem with basically just saying "well if you don't like it, you should go and pick another college" is that Hundreds of Billions of Our Tax Dollars are going to Colleges and Universities both Public and Private thru .Pell grants, R&D grants etc. etc... And Trillions more thru government (read taxpayer) backed Student loans, the majority of which are never going to be paid back (by these unemployable idiots they are producing) and so are a ticking time bomb waiting to collapse the banking industry.

Now, Colleges and Universities have crossed the line from simply having a Liberal bias to being Breeding grounds of Radical Communist Ideology and Anti-White American activities. With all their mandatory racial-cultural "awareness" training and Identity Politics and Bullshit concepts Like "White Privilege" (which, is the very embodiment of Racist ideology) they must and will be Rejected by Right thinking Americans.

But, The best thing is going to be watching the inevitable, coming backlash to all the years of Leftist insanity. They've sown the wind by pushing the pendulum so far left that it breaks out of the coo-coo clock . and if/when the shit-show collapses, they'll reap the whirlwind.

Mjölnir
04-13-2016, 10:21 PM
The problem with basically just saying "well if you don't like it, you should go and pick another college" is that Hundreds of Billions of Our Tax Dollars are going to Colleges and Universities both Public and Private thru .Pell grants, R&D grants etc. etc... And Trillions more thru government (read taxpayer) backed Student loans, the majority of which are never going to be paid back (by these unemployable idiots they are producing) and so are a ticking time bomb waiting to collapse the banking industry.

Now, Colleges and Universities have crossed the line from simply having a Liberal bias to being Breeding grounds of Radical Communist Ideology and Anti-White American activities. With all their mandatory racial-cultural "awareness" training and Identity Politics and Bullshit concepts Like "White Privilege" (which, is the very embodiment of Racist) they must and will be Rejected by Right thinking Americans.

But, The best thing is going to be watching the inevitable, coming backlash to all the years of Leftist insanity. They've sown the wind by pushing the pendulum so far left that it breaks out of the coo-coo clock . and if/when the shit-show collapses, they'll reap the whirlwind and will be hunted down like the dogs that they are and be strung up from their necks by piano wire on the campus light poles to serve as a warning to all future Bolsheviks. So take heart because By hook or by Crook we're Going To Make America Great Again. Starting in Cleveland. Trump/Deez nutz bitches.

Yes, tons ... literally TONS of federal, state and local dollars go to colleges and universities and the education 'business'. I think what you describe (many public / taxpayer funded universities becoming overly politically or socially ideological) is wrong & in some cases morally negligent ... but probably not illegal. I have no problem with a private university taking a firm political or social tone, but think that public (taxpayer funded) universities should not.

We have a problem with higher education becoming a place where personal belief and intellect is not challenged but coddled. People not learning how to be challenged without acting like a delicate flower or a anger fueled rage-moster further devolves our society.

That said, why have so many public universities / the education system in general gone so liberal? IMO:

1. Socially minded people are more drawn to education / teaching. In part:
a. Willing to work for a very secure but lower paying job than they would find in the corporate/private sector.
b. Job security again, the teachers unions have made firing teachers (even those who are criminals) very difficult.
c. Generally lower expectations of performance than the private sector.
d. Less personal accountability.

*ironically many of these arguments bode for many in the military who probably should not stay as long as they do.

2. Conservatives in large part surrendered the 'battlefield' that is our education system:
a. Frustration with the bureaucracy.
b. Better wages in private schooling or private sector business.
c. More flexibility to move along in the private sector.

If we want to make the education system better, we won't argue or even legislate a good solution. The solution is people. Good (unbiased) teachers are going to present an academic environment that allows various political ideologies to be discussed intelligently and true debate can take place. Shouting matches where people talk past or over each other (sorta like many conversations here) aren't educational, nor do they change anyone's mind ... they brew anger, fear, resentment etc.

sandsjames
04-13-2016, 10:28 PM
I don't agree with many of the things you cite. That said, it a student does not want to attend a university because of its stance for (or against) freedom of speech or expression (either conservative or liberal), the student (they are adults) should transfer somewhere else.

I wouldn't go to McDonalds looking for gourmet Italian, I wouldn't go to UC Berkley and expect a haven or acceptance for conservative expression.

Kind of like "If a state wants slavery and you don't agree with slavery, you can move to a different state".

Mjölnir
04-13-2016, 10:33 PM
Kind of like "If a state wants slavery and you don't agree with slavery, you can move to a different state".

Or you could work from within the state to change the law.

Slavery was the law, slaves really had no choice to not participate.

Attendance at any one particular university is not required, if you don't want a conservative education, don't go to Catholic University, if you don't want a liberal education don't go to a liberal university.

Want less liberal influence in education in general? Get more conservative educators.

sandsjames
04-13-2016, 10:34 PM
There was an episode of Law and Order we watched a couple weeks ago that hit on this situation. What was ultimately determined (not sure how this relates to actual law or not) was that the college campus in question was a "city" because it had stores, theater, and other things you would find in a township, hence the law stated that students could not be limited on speech on the campus any more than any person could be in public, no matter what the stance.

sandsjames
04-13-2016, 10:37 PM
Or you could work from within the state to change the law.

Slavery was the law, slaves really had no choice to not participate.

Attendance at any one particular university is not required, if you don't want a conservative education, don't go to Catholic University, if you don't want a liberal education don't go to a liberal university. I agree with you. Private colleges can have whatever rules they want. The problem is that the only "conservative" colleges out there are private while almost all public colleges are liberal.


Want less liberal influence in education in general? Get more conservative educators.One should not be able to tell if an educator is liberal or conservative. That's not education, that's indoctrination.

Mjölnir
04-13-2016, 10:57 PM
I agree with you. Private colleges can have whatever rules they want. The problem is that the only "conservative" colleges out there are private while almost all public colleges are liberal.

Mostly, yes.


One should not be able to tell if an educator is liberal or conservative. That's not education, that's indoctrination.

Agree, I think the best teachers are those who can present many sides of an argument. At the same time it would be hard to find someone who teaches say ... "Womens Studies" or "The Economics of Communism" without a liberal slant. I don't mind people in whom I can identify their politics, however, if a professor cannot separate their personal ideology from how they instruct & grade, there is a bigger problem ie. if a student is marked down for disagreeing.

garhkal
04-14-2016, 04:55 AM
I don't agree with many of the things you cite. That said, it a student does not want to attend a university because of its stance for (or against) freedom of speech or expression (either conservative or liberal), the student (they are adults) should transfer somewhere else.

I wouldn't go to McDonalds looking for gourmet Italian, I wouldn't go to UC Berkley and expect a haven or acceptance for conservative expression.

While i agree with the latter part, Don't go to X if you are looking for Y, i disagree with the "if you don't like it, go elsewhere".. To me that is effectively seceded that school TO liberalism.. And imo far too many HAVE been seceded over..



Now, Colleges and Universities have crossed the line from simply having a Liberal bias to being Breeding grounds of Radical Communist Ideology and Anti-White American activities. With all their mandatory racial-cultural "awareness" training and Identity Politics and Bullshit concepts Like "White Privilege" (which, is the very embodiment of Racist) they must and will be Rejected by Right thinking Americans.

Exactly. Schools/universities used to be places ALL could go to (if they worked hard enough and paid), to study and get experience in ALL points of view. These days a LOT of those public (but funded by the govt via loans etc) universities/colleges, have become havens for "If you don't like hearing X, we will just ban it from here".. They feel they gotta wrap their students in a coddling blanket, 24/7, or those students will rant, demonstrate and throw a hissy..

I am sorry, but these people are supposed to be ADULTS, and acting like that? WTF over.
Then you have some of them who are spending so much time DOING those demonstrations, activism etc, that their school work has suffered like crazy, and now they are doing MORE demonstrations and riots ordering the schools they are attending, to "Give them a pass, cause we are spending so much time NOT doing our school work"..

I am sorry, but again. What the heck?? NOT doing your job, then throwing a riot to demand you get passed anyway?


We have a problem with higher education becoming a place where personal belief and intellect is not challenged but coddled. People not learning how to be challenged without acting like a delicate flower or a anger fueled rage-moster further devolves our society.

Not just coddled, but almost expected to flourish. For well over a decade now, we have seen more and more instances of this or that, conservative speaker, politician etc, being ranted at and shouted down, before they can even DO any speaking.. All cause these (Imo anarchists) plebs, don't want to be tolerant of anyone else's viewpoint. Heck they can't believe that people even HAVE an opposing viewpoint, and that scares them imo..


1. Socially minded people are more drawn to education / teaching. In part:
a. Willing to work for a very secure but lower paying job than they would find in the corporate/private sector.
b. Job security again, the teachers unions have made firing teachers (even those who are criminals) very difficult.
c. Generally lower expectations of performance than the private sector.
d. Less personal accountability.

Spot on with All of those. Especially C and D..


If we want to make the education system better, we won't argue or even legislate a good solution. The solution is people. Good (unbiased) teachers are going to present an academic environment that allows various political ideologies to be discussed intelligently and true debate can take place. Shouting matches where people talk past or over each other (sorta like many conversations here) aren't educational, nor do they change anyone's mind ... they brew anger, fear, resentment etc.

That is true, we DO need more conservative minded people to get into education. BUT the issue as i see it, is just like Hollywood, when the current education system finds a conservative minded teacher, they effectively blackball them..


I agree with you. Private colleges can have whatever rules they want. The problem is that the only "conservative" colleges out there are private while almost all public colleges are liberal.

Damn skippy SJ. If they are private, they can be liberal or conservative as they damn well please.. If public they should be 'tolerant' of all sides of the spectrum. BUT as we see in a lot of things liberals do, they toss around the whole tolerance and equality mantra, but are some of the biggest bigots and intolerant hacks around.


One should not be able to tell if an educator is liberal or conservative. That's not education, that's indoctrination.

I agree. Same with judges, especially those on the Scotus. BUT these days, most judges seem to be as politically one sided as politicians are.


Agree, I think the best teachers are those who can present many sides of an argument. At the same time it would be hard to find someone who teaches say ... "Womens Studies" or "The Economics of Communism" without a liberal slant. I don't mind people in whom I can identify their politics, however, if a professor cannot separate their personal ideology from how they instruct & grade, there is a bigger problem ie. if a student is marked down for disagreeing.

Though what i would love to know, is what the frak, are many of those 'liberal social studies' degrees GOING to do for those folk?? Sure some might get a job working for a town govt's welfare office or such. BUt not all.
Same with 'sex in modern culture, or women's studies'. What exactly are those degrees supposed to DO for you?

And as to that 'marking you down' thing.. Have you seen some of the news articles on that? In one school supposedly, students were marked down for using too many "White words", or showing a "too proud in the US point of view which is micro-aggression cause it praises colonialism"..

Rainmaker
04-14-2016, 02:35 PM
There was an episode of Law and Order we watched a couple weeks ago that hit on this situation

Hollywood and TV are spewing constant Disinformation (See: Operation Mockingbird). It's turning your brain to mush. Please turn it off before you become a Hermaphrodite-Hipster and start driving a Smart Car.




Want less liberal influence in education in general? Get more conservative educators.

A better bet would be to Get rid of the Depart of Education (which has been no value added, since it was created in 1979) and let the States Run their Education systems without a bunch of Tenured Fat Cat, Perverted, "Educators" leeching off the system


Private colleges can have whatever rules they want.

No they can't.

Ever wonder why Ivy League, Liberal Universities (that were originally founded under Religious Principles) have lowered admission standards and give free rides to Minorities and go out of their way to promote other insanity like Hosting Queer Resource Centers?

It's because Affirmative action demands that the % of full-time, dependent, minority students be equal to that of a public university.

If they don't comply then they could lose their "non profit" status and actually have to start paying taxes on their Multi-Billion dollar endowments.

These Limousine Liberals that have destroyed our Country don't give a Flying fuck about Multi-Culturelessism (other than how they can make a buck off it).

sandsjames
04-14-2016, 03:02 PM
Hollywood and TV are spewing constant Disinformation (See: Operation Mockingbird). It is called fiction for a reason.





No they can't.

Ever wonder why Ivy League Liberal Universities (that were originally founded under Religious Principles) have lowered admission standards and give free rides to Minorities and go out of their way to promote other insanity like Hosting Queer Resource Centers?

It's because Affirmative action demands that the % of full-time, dependent, minority students be equal to that of a public university. If they don't comply then they could lose their "non profit" status and actually have to start paying taxes on their Multi-Billion dollar endowments.

These Limousine Liberals that have destroyed our Country don't give a Flying fuck about Multi-Culturelessism (other than how they can make a buck off it).What I'm saying is that, as far as I'm concerned, private colleges can do whatever they want. I know they can't legally but I have no problem if they do.

Rainmaker
04-14-2016, 03:43 PM
It is called fiction for a reason..


There is no fiction. There is only Truth and Lies (permissible and non-permissible)

sandsjames
04-14-2016, 05:18 PM
There is no fiction. There is only Truth and Lies (permissible and non-permissible)I don't know if you are joking or not, but this is pretty stupid, even for you.

Rainmaker
04-14-2016, 06:48 PM
this is pretty stupid, even for you.

An assumption not based on a fact is also a lie.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epimenides_paradox

Back in the days Before Transgendered Chicano Studies became all the rage, Logic used to be part of the curriculum (to get students into the habit of thinking critically)

Try turning off Law & Order and picking up a book Cretan!

sparks82
04-14-2016, 06:54 PM
There was an episode of Law and Order we watched a couple weeks ago that hit on this situation. What was ultimately determined (not sure how this relates to actual law or not) was that the college campus in question was a "city" because it had stores, theater, and other things you would find in a township, hence the law stated that students could not be limited on speech on the campus any more than any person could be in public, no matter what the stance.

You do know Law & Order is dramatized right?

sandsjames
04-14-2016, 07:28 PM
You do know Law & Order is dramatized right?

No shit? I mean, I know I only said "not sure how this relates to actual law or not) and used the term "fiction" in my prior two statements. Next you're going to tell me that Santa Claus and Professional Wrestling aren't real either, right?

sandsjames
04-14-2016, 07:30 PM
An assumption not based on a fact is also a lie.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epimenides_paradox

Logic used to be part of the curriculum, to get students into the habit of thinking critically (Back in the days Before Transgendered Chicano Studies became all the rage)

Try turning off Law & Order and picking up a book Cretan!

Entertainment is neither an assumption nor a lie. Fiction is known to be false which, by definition, makes it not a lie.

I do love the irony of you linking a Wikipedia article when speaking of truth and lies.

Rainmaker
04-14-2016, 07:37 PM
Entertainment is neither an assumption nor a lie. Fiction is known to be false which, by definition, makes it not a lie.



If you make an assumption (believing that it's based on fact) and it turns out that it's not based on facts, then you're lying. If you tell me something is Fiction before you tell me, Then, You're not lying because, you told me it wasn't true. This means that fiction is the Truth or a Permissible Lie. So, There is no fiction really. See In this world, There is only Truth and Lies Grasshopper, which is why the Holy Bible endorses lying (sometimes).



I do love the irony of you linking a Wikipedia article when speaking of truth and lies.

So What? Is Wikipedia not on your Anti Defamation League Party-approved censors list of acceptable websites? And by the way.... The preceding statement is false!

Rusty Jones
04-15-2016, 06:00 PM
Garhkal, tell me what you think about this video:


https://www.facebook.com/reggiehoodofficial/videos/1049735151736594/

Rainmaker
04-15-2016, 06:54 PM
Garhkal, tell me what you think about this video:


https://www.facebook.com/reggiehoodofficial/videos/1049735151736594/

Communist homosexual hypocrite, who lied about his synagogue being attacked, argues that the white race doesn't actually exist, but choses to live an all white neighborhood, so that he doesn't have to be bothered by any of the brown people that he claims to be advocating for......oh wait....You were asking garhkal. So...Never mind.

Rusty Jones
04-15-2016, 07:17 PM
Communist homosexual hypocrite, who lied about his synagogue being attacked, argues that the white race doesn't actually exist, but choses to live an all white neighborhood, so that he doesn't have to be bothered by any of the brown people that he claims to be advocating for......oh wait....You were asking garhkal. So...Never mind.

LOL, so what message boards do you follow where everyone went out of their way to discredit him? Storm Front? Some other white nationalist site?

For one thing, the claims of his synagogue being attacked were never debunked. Secondly, he's under no obligation to live in a certain neighborhood, especially when he's got the money to live somewhere else. That would be akin to a black person running into money, and staying in the 'hood all in the name of "keeping it real." In other words... it's stupid.

garhkal
04-15-2016, 07:26 PM
Garhkal, tell me what you think about this video:


https://www.facebook.com/reggiehoodofficial/videos/1049735151736594/

Interesting. Especially coming FROM a white guy. While i agree, some of what he said may be historically accurate, i don't think some of what he said was spot on, more hovering around the truth..

To counter, what do You say about this??

http://www.whiteprivilegeconference.com/white_privilege.html

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2014/1208/Notre-Dame-s-White-Privilege-Seminar-Racist-indoctrination-or-education

http://www.startribune.com/always-room-in-the-budget-for-white-guilt/119508364/

Rusty Jones
04-15-2016, 07:38 PM
Interesting. Especially coming FROM a white guy. While i agree, some of what he said may be historically accurate, i don't think some of what he said was spot on, more hovering around the truth..

To counter, what do You say about this??

http://www.whiteprivilegeconference.com/white_privilege.html

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2014/1208/Notre-Dame-s-White-Privilege-Seminar-Racist-indoctrination-or-education

http://www.startribune.com/always-room-in-the-budget-for-white-guilt/119508364/

Okay, I looked at these articles; and "white privilege" is not what I'm talking about.

What I'm talking about is this: whether or not working class whites want to acknowledge it, they're in the shitter just like minorities, however... rich whites are blinding them to that fact. Afterall, if working class whites and minorities stood together... we'd all be a threat to the system.

Realizing this, rich whites threw a few bones to working class whites in order to prevent that from happening.

Martin Luther King even acknowledged this, and Michael Dyson discussed this. Take a look:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNSCyFpxxLU

Rusty Jones
04-15-2016, 07:46 PM
When I think back 20 years ago when I was in high school, one thing that I've noticed is that kids who were of the lowest social status (like kids with Asperger's) were never bullied by the jocks. Sure, the jocks engaged in some bullying, but it was normally on "middle" status kids.

Who bullied the low status kids? The kids who weren't much higher than they were.

If I'm not mistaken, it's the same way in the animal kingdom. Only beta males bully omegas. Alphas don't.

What does this illustrate?

The closer to the bottom of the social ladder you are, the greater the contempt you're going to have for the people lower than you.

However, you're not going to change your situation unless you look UP. Because that's where the real problem is.

Rainmaker
04-15-2016, 08:59 PM
]


LOL, so what message boards do you follow where everyone went out of their way to discredit him? Storm Front? Some other white nationalist site?

Never heard of the guy before..... But, didn't need to go to any White Nationalist blogs in order to figure out that this guy was a Leftist clown

It became clear within the first couple of sentences of the video, as soon as he said "Before 1670 there was no such thing as the white race". Which is a total Lie and demonstrably false statement.


For one thing, the claims of his synagogue being attacked were never debunked.

something like that should be a matter of record. so, I tried to look it up. But, strangely couldn't find anything about a Synagogue being burned to the ground by white supremacists in Nashville, TN circa 1980. I can't imagine there having been more than a couple synagogues in Nashville back then. Wonder what the name of it was?

Rainmaker
04-15-2016, 09:06 PM
Interesting. Especially coming FROM a white guy.

People like Tim Wise don't consider themselves to be "White" in the same sense and the same meaning that the rest of us do.

This Race Hustler is nothing more than a parasite making a living in the Grievance Industry by blaming the majority of the population for all of the minority population's failures

Rusty Jones
04-15-2016, 09:23 PM
People like Tim Wise don't consider themselves to be "White" in the same sense and the same meaning that the rest of us do.

This Race Hustler is nothing more than a parasite making a living in the Grievance Industry by blaming the majority of the population for all of the minority population's failures

Clearly, there's no hope for you. You went ahead and dismissed the guy without even taking the time to address what he said.

Rusty Jones
04-15-2016, 09:31 PM
Interesting. Especially coming FROM a white guy.

I don't think that this really makes him exceptional. What he's expressing, for the most part, I could really only come from the white perspective.

sandsjames
04-15-2016, 09:39 PM
Okay, I looked at these articles; and "white privilege" is not what I'm talking about.

What I'm talking about is this: whether or not working class whites want to acknowledge it, they're in the shitter just like minorities, however... rich whites are blinding them to that fact. Afterall, if working class whites and minorities stood together... we'd all be a threat to the system.

Realizing this, rich whites threw a few bones to working class whites in order to prevent that from happening.

Martin Luther King even acknowledged this, and Michael Dyson discussed this. Take a look:



So you don't think that I should be content being a working class white? I have a very comfortable life with a good job and a happy family. What reason should I have to "stand" with anyone? What do I have to be afraid of?

Rusty Jones
04-15-2016, 09:46 PM
So you don't think that I should be content being a working class white? I have a very comfortable life with a good job and a happy family. What reason should I have to "stand" with anyone? What do I have to be afraid of?

And that is exactly why this manipulation is so easy.

sandsjames
04-15-2016, 09:50 PM
And that is exactly why this manipulation is so easy.

I'm not being manipulated. Nobody told me that I should be content with where I am. I just am content with it.

Rainmaker
04-15-2016, 10:00 PM
Clearly, there's no hope for you. You went ahead and dismissed the guy without even taking the time to address what he said.

I don't have 3 extra minutes to waste listening to a revisionist moron that states "there was no such thing as the white race before 1670".

I have a closing & then have to entertain some clients. Then I have to file my taxes to support a roofer from Guatemala (and his obese wife and 12 kids) that I've unknowingly been oppressing by being born white.

garhkal
04-16-2016, 03:39 AM
Okay, I looked at these articles; and "white privilege" is not what I'm talking about.

What I'm talking about is this: whether or not working class whites want to acknowledge it, they're in the shitter just like minorities, however... rich whites are blinding them to that fact. Afterall, if working class whites and minorities stood together... we'd all be a threat to the system.


Which was a fact i was acknowledging, even if i might not agree with how he was presenting it.. but the 'white privilege' issue (white shaming) was a somewhat related topic.. Where the left seems to love making people feel guilty for being white..


When I think back 20 years ago when I was in high school, one thing that I've noticed is that kids who were of the lowest social status (like kids with Asperger's) were never bullied by the jocks. Sure, the jocks engaged in some bullying, but it was normally on "middle" status kids.

Who bullied the low status kids? The kids who weren't much higher than they were.

If I'm not mistaken, it's the same way in the animal kingdom. Only beta males bully omegas. Alphas don't.

What does this illustrate?

The closer to the bottom of the social ladder you are, the greater the contempt you're going to have for the people lower than you.

However, you're not going to change your situation unless you look UP. Because that's where the real problem is.

That's a good parallel rusty..


I don't think that this really makes him exceptional. What he's expressing, for the most part, I could really only come from the white perspective.

It was more how he seemed to be coming across.. Being at a (more than likely) highly paid speech, and saying its all 'rich white guys fault', but i am not one of "those people"..

Rusty Jones
04-16-2016, 05:19 AM
It was more how he seemed to be coming across.. Being at a (more than likely) highly paid speech, and saying its all 'rich white guys fault', but i am not one of "those people"..

There's a famous speech that Malcolm X once gave about the difference between the field negro and the house negro during slavery.

To sum it up, it's like this: the house negro did the light housework indoors, protected from the elements. He was given certain luxuries - better clothes, food, etc - than the slaves who did the work out in the field, regardless of the weather.

Now, although the house negro was treated better... at the end of the day, he was still a slave. But he was less aware of the fact that he was a slave than his counterparts on the field.

So when the field negro developed a plan for escape and approached the house negro with it, guess what? The house negro looked at the field negro as if he lost his mind. That house negro didn't want to run.

The field negro hated his master. The house negro loved his master.

Now... think of the "rich white guys" being the master. And think of working class whites... as the house negro.

Hey... we can all escape. We can all put an end to all the bullshit that we're subject to. But... we can only do it together.

sandsjames
04-16-2016, 12:36 PM
There's a famous speech that Malcolm X once gave about the difference between the field negro and the house negro during slavery.

To sum it up, it's like this: the house negro did the light housework indoors, protected from the elements. He was given certain luxuries - better clothes, food, etc - than the slaves who did the work out in the field, regardless of the weather.

Now, although the house negro was treated better... at the end of the day, he was still a slave. But he was less aware of the fact that he was a slave than his counterparts on the field.

So when the field negro developed a plan for escape and approached the house negro with it, guess what? The house negro looked at the field negro as if he lost his mind. That house negro didn't want to run.

The field negro hated his master. The house negro loved his master.

Now... think of the "rich white guys" being the master. And think of working class whites... as the house negro.

Hey... we can all escape. We can all put an end to all the bullshit that we're subject to. But... we can only do it together.

Your point is almost the same as the point the people burning witches during the witch trials. "If we light her on fire and she doesn't escape, she wasn't a witch".

The only options your point leaves is for me to say "Yes, I'm being manipulated" or "No, I'm not", with your response being that I only answer that way because they've got me right where they want me.

So I'll concede your point, just to save myself some time, and say that I'm perfectly happy being the house negro, long as massa keeps putting biscuits on my plate.

Rusty Jones
04-16-2016, 03:37 PM
Your point is almost the same as the point the people burning witches during the witch trials. "If we light her on fire and she doesn't escape, she wasn't a witch".

The only options your point leaves is for me to say "Yes, I'm being manipulated" or "No, I'm not", with your response being that I only answer that way because they've got me right where they want me.

So I'll concede your point, just to save myself some time, and say that I'm perfectly happy being the house negro, long as massa keeps putting biscuits on my plate.

Not a shocker. You've always bragged on and have been proud of the fact you that you prefer to take the path of least resistance.

USN - Retired
04-16-2016, 04:51 PM
Hey... we can all escape. We can all put an end to all the bullshit that we're subject to.

So from what are you trying to "escape"? I get the impression that you want to "escape" from responsibility.

If I have to pay more taxes to support people who don't want to work for a living, then the "escape" didn't work out well for me.

If you really want to "escape" and you don't want anyone to control you then you should be a Libertarian.


But... we can only do it together.

Count me out.

garhkal
04-16-2016, 08:13 PM
So from what are you trying to "escape"? I get the impression that you want to "escape" from responsibility.

Exactly. We kee hearing that the 'rich need to pay their fair share', but when a lot of those getting handouts, don't even PAY in, after all their deductions, credits and such, what exactly IS someone's "Fair share"?

sandsjames
04-16-2016, 10:32 PM
Not a shocker. You've always bragged on and have been proud of the fact you that you prefer to take the path of least resistance.

That's right. There are plenty of activists fighting for what they believe in. I am already living the life I believe in. No reason to create problems where there aren't any.

sandsjames
04-16-2016, 10:33 PM
Exactly. We kee hearing that the 'rich need to pay their fair share', but when a lot of those getting handouts, don't even PAY in, after all their deductions, credits and such, what exactly IS someone's "Fair share"?


Do you think that you'd pay any less taxes if they didn't go to the people who you feel are leeching from you?

Rusty Jones
04-16-2016, 11:39 PM
So from what are you trying to "escape"? I get the impression that you want to "escape" from responsibility.

If you call remaining a faithful slave to the master and keeping tabs on those out in the field in order to ensure the wellbeing of the one keeping ALL of you as slaves "responsibility," you're damned right I want to escape.


If I have to pay more taxes to support people who don't want to work for a living, then the "escape" didn't work out well for me.

And, of course, you're falling for the same trap that Tim Wise discussed. The master is the problem. Not the people you look down on.


If you really want to "escape" and you don't want anyone to control you then you should be a Libertarian.

Libertarianism, unfortunately, does nothing to prevent the master from exerting an even tighter grip on you.

Rusty Jones
04-16-2016, 11:40 PM
Exactly. We kee hearing that the 'rich need to pay their fair share', but when a lot of those getting handouts, don't even PAY in, after all their deductions, credits and such, what exactly IS someone's "Fair share"?

Those getting handouts and not paying in? You mean the rich?

Rusty Jones
04-16-2016, 11:42 PM
Do you think that you'd pay any less taxes if they didn't go to the people who you feel are leeching from you?

A person who makes $50,000 a year only pays $36 a year for TANF, WIC, SNAP, and public housing/Section 8.

sandsjames
04-17-2016, 01:00 AM
A person who makes $50,000 a year only pays $36 a year for TANF, WIC, SNAP, and public housing/Section 8.

Yep...it's not much.

sandsjames
04-17-2016, 11:56 AM
Those getting handouts and not paying in? You mean the rich?The people I know who complain about this the most are married people with kids. They pay in a couple grand and get $10k back, thanks to all the credits. I never hear them complaining about it then.

Rusty Jones
04-17-2016, 04:05 PM
The people I know who complain about this the most are married people with kids. They pay in a couple grand and get $10k back, thanks to all the credits. I never hear them complaining about it then.

Those same people should stop complaining about where their "tax dollars" are going if it's going back into their wallets anyway, wouldn't you agree?

sandsjames
04-17-2016, 05:07 PM
Those same people should stop complaining about where their "tax dollars" are going if it's going back into their wallets anyway, wouldn't you agree?I do agree. That's kinda the point I was making.

garhkal
04-17-2016, 08:00 PM
Do you think that you'd pay any less taxes if they didn't go to the people who you feel are leeching from you?

Yes i do. If the govt actually was concerned about Fraud and abuse of the welfare system, and reigned it in, there would be less NEED for all the taxes they take, imo at least 5-15% of it... Which would mean less in taxes paid out.


Those getting handouts and not paying in? You mean the rich?

Mostly poor, but it goes across the board. If cause of deductions, loopholes, handouts, tax credits etc, you end up getting MORE back than you paid in taxes, how are you paying "your fair share".. And since i know quite a few in that 'poor' camp, who DO get so much back, cause of all the credits/deductions etc to where their end result is they paid in NO taxes period, then they are NOT paying their share...
Which is why i do love the idea of a flat 10% or so tax across the board, that EVERYONE pays. No deductions. No tax credits for this or that, no loop holes. No nada.


The people I know who complain about this the most are married people with kids. They pay in a couple grand and get $10k back, thanks to all the credits. I never hear them complaining about it then.

Or the single parents! Heck, the two years i assisted our commands Vita reps, i saw several instances of someone's Tax amount owed, being 0 or a Negative number cause of the # of kids they got credits for, and all their other deductions..

sandsjames
04-17-2016, 09:30 PM
Or the single parents! Heck, the two years i assisted our commands Vita reps, i saw several instances of someone's Tax amount owed, being 0 or a Negative number cause of the # of kids they got credits for, and all their other deductions..Not just single parents. I work with married E-5s who get back over $10k every year. I don't blame them. I would if I could. It's just a point about who our tax dollars go to.

garhkal
04-18-2016, 05:07 AM
Not just single parents. I work with married E-5s who get back over $10k every year. I don't blame them. I would if I could. It's just a point about who our tax dollars go to.

BUt according to the left, its all about who's paying and in their eyes, its OK to have no tax burden what so ever if you are poor/married with kids, but wrong if you are rich, and using those same laws/deductions etc to have your tax burden being nothing (or lower than what it would be)..

sandsjames
04-18-2016, 10:38 AM
BUt according to the left, its all about who's paying and in their eyes, its OK to have no tax burden what so ever if you are poor/married with kids, but wrong if you are rich, and using those same laws/deductions etc to have your tax burden being nothing (or lower than what it would be)..

According to a lot of the middle class/working class right, it's also ok. I have yet to hear one of my right wing military friends complain that they don't feel they are paying their fair share when they get all that money back.

Mjölnir
04-18-2016, 11:52 AM
A couple of points that get missed a lot:

The rich (higher income people) in the US do in fact pay taxes. In tax year 2014, people with adjusted gross income above $250,000 paid just over half (51.6%) of all individual income taxes, though they accounted for only 2.7% of all returns filed (IRS: https://www.irs.gov/uac/SOI-Tax-Stats-Individual-Income-Tax-Returns). Their average tax rate (total taxes paid divided by cumulative AGI) was 25.7%.

People with incomes of less than $50,000 accounted for 62.3% of all individual returns filed, but they paid just 5.7% of total taxes. Their average tax rate was 4.3%.

The tax burden on wealthier Americans has gone up, while it has gone down on those making less. IRS data covering tax years 2000 through 2011, states that people who made between $100,000 and $200,000 paid 23.8% of the total tax liability in 2011, up from 18.8% in 2000. Filers in the $50,000-to-$75,000 group, on the other hand, paid 12% of the total liability in 2000 but only 9.1% in 2011.

When a taxpayer goes from the top 1% with a tax rate of 22.83% to the top . 1% with a tax rate of 21.67% they pay a smaller percentage but more than not a higher total dollar amount. The top .01 pays a tax rate of 19.53% and the top .001% (adjusted gross income over $62,000,000) pays a tax rate of 17.60.

When people talk about the rich not paying taxes, this is a misrepresentation that is meant / targeting the ‘super’ rich, the top .01 or .001% of the wealthy.

While some politicians and activists call to raise the top income tax rate to 90 percent, where it was back in the 1940s and 1950s, this ignores that fact that this would do very little to help the other 99.999 of the population and won't take a huge bite out of inequality, particularly not among the super-rich.

A few problems with our tax code/system:

Many have no skin in the game. Too many people have no tax burden whatsoever, but draw heavily on the system and support politicians that promise & deliver a string of social benefits that really does not incentivize rising beyond the bottom of the income bracket. Too many people are happy to have their basic needs and many wants met, while living in poor conditions because they don't have to do anything to get what they get.

Too many people don't understand what taxes are paying for. Things like the military (which ironically gets more federal funds for medical research than anything else). Roads, infrastructure, technical research, education (like it or not, the federal government puts a lot of money into it ... for good or bad). In many, many cases the money is not spent wisely but examining federal appropriations is very educational.

Too many people don't properly plan for their tax burden. To many people don't properly plan their deductions and then get a big dollar bill in April and this generates anger.

Too many people don't understand the law & fall prey to pithy memes on Facebook. Agree with the 16th Amendment or not ... it is the law. I have heard people say taxes are unconstitutional: false ... per the 16th Amendment. I have heard people say the 16th Amendment was never legally ratified: false.

sandsjames
04-18-2016, 01:23 PM
A couple of points that get missed a lot:

The rich (higher income people) in the US do in fact pay taxes. In tax year 2014, people with adjusted gross income above $250,000 paid just over half (51.6%) of all individual income taxes, though they accounted for only 2.7% of all returns filed (IRS: https://www.irs.gov/uac/SOI-Tax-Stats-Individual-Income-Tax-Returns). Their average tax rate (total taxes paid divided by cumulative AGI) was 25.7%.

People with incomes of less than $50,000 accounted for 62.3% of all individual returns filed, but they paid just 5.7% of total taxes. Their average tax rate was 4.3%.

The tax burden on wealthier Americans has gone up, while it has gone down on those making less. IRS data covering tax years 2000 through 2011, states that people who made between $100,000 and $200,000 paid 23.8% of the total tax liability in 2011, up from 18.8% in 2000. Filers in the $50,000-to-$75,000 group, on the other hand, paid 12% of the total liability in 2000 but only 9.1% in 2011.

When a taxpayer goes from the top 1% with a tax rate of 22.83% to the top . 1% with a tax rate of 21.67% they pay a smaller percentage but more than not a higher total dollar amount. The top .01 pays a tax rate of 19.53% and the top .001% (adjusted gross income over $62,000,000) pays a tax rate of 17.60.

When people talk about the rich not paying taxes, this is a misrepresentation that is meant / targeting the ‘super’ rich, the top .01 or .001% of the wealthy.

While some politicians and activists call to raise the top income tax rate to 90 percent, where it was back in the 1940s and 1950s, this ignores that fact that this would do very little to help the other 99.999 of the population and won't take a huge bite out of inequality, particularly not among the super-rich.

A few problems with our tax code/system:

Many have no skin in the game. Too many people have no tax burden whatsoever, but draw heavily on the system and support politicians that promise & deliver a string of social benefits that really does not incentivize rising beyond the bottom of the income bracket. Too many people are happy to have their basic needs and many wants met, while living in poor conditions because they don't have to do anything to get what they get.

Too many people don't understand what taxes are paying for. Things like the military (which ironically gets more federal funds for medical research than anything else). Roads, infrastructure, technical research, education (like it or not, the federal government puts a lot of money into it ... for good or bad). In many, many cases the money is not spent wisely but examining federal appropriations is very educational.

Too many people don't properly plan for their tax burden. To many people don't properly plan their deductions and then get a big dollar bill in April and this generates anger.

Too many people don't understand the law & fall prey to pithy memes on Facebook. Agree with the 16th Amendment or not ... it is the law. I have heard people say taxes are unconstitutional: false ... per the 16th Amendment. I have heard people say the 16th Amendment was never legally ratified: false.

A few problems with our tax system? That's the understatement of the year.

Honestly, I don't care what I'm paying for. I know it's not a whole lot, really. Throughout the years I've been paying taxes, my overall rate has changes so little it's really not even noticeable...doesn't matter what party is in power...doesn't matter what the economy is like.

Hell, the IRS could be using my tax dollars for hookers and blow and it wouldn't bother me much. That's how insignificant it is for working/middle class, as individuals, to pay taxes.

Mjölnir
04-18-2016, 02:31 PM
A few problems with our tax system? That's the understatement of the year.

I tend to underwhelm ...

Rainmaker
04-18-2016, 03:51 PM
To illustrate a point.....Let's take a Hypothetical example....... Say that you were an Extremely talented, Hardworking, Charming and Ruggedly Good-looking, 40 something year old Retired E-7 over 22 yrs (30% VA rated) that busted your ass 50-60 hours a week, to produce an AGI for your family and select friends and charities of $427K per annum.

For argument's sake....Let's pretend that you filed Head of Household, with 3 qualifying dependents. It would put you in the 33% bracket (34% marginal rate). In that case (without employing tax mitigation strategies) your Federal taxes for 2015 would've been $107,150.00. ($8,929.15 per month).

Now, do any of you Liberal Fuckwads (that are constantly whining about "the rich" not paying their "fair" share) think this type of "Progressive" Federal Tax System encourages or discourages individuals from engaging in Legal Tax avoidance?

sandsjames
04-18-2016, 04:06 PM
To illustrate a point.....Let's take a Hypothetical example....... Say that you were an Extremely talented, Hardworking, Charming and Ruggedly Good-looking, 40 something year old Retired I thought this was supposed to be hypothetical?


E-7 over 22 yrs (30% VA rated) that busted your ass 50-60 hours a week, to produce an AGI for your family and select friends and charities of $427K per annum.

For argument's sake....Let's pretend that you filed Head of Household, with 3 qualifying dependents. It would put you in the 33% bracket (34% marginal rate). In that case (without employing tax mitigation strategies) your Federal taxes for 2015 would be $107,150.00. ($8,929.15 per month).

Now, do any of you Liberal Fuckwads (that are whining about "the rich" not paying their "fair" share) think this type of "Progressive" Federal Tax System encourages or discourages tax avoidance?Who's whining about it? I've got no problem with what they pay. I'm pretty sure Garkhal didn't have a problem with it. It didn't sound like our SuperMod had an issue.

Mjölnir
04-18-2016, 04:09 PM
I thought this was supposed to be hypothetical?

It is ... I am not retired ;)

Rainmaker
04-18-2016, 04:13 PM
I thought this was supposed to be hypothetical?

Who's whining about it? I've got no problem with what they pay. I'm pretty sure Garkhal didn't have a problem with it. It didn't sound like our SuperMod had an issue.

If the shoe don't fit.....Then Don't try to fill these shoes Boy!

sandsjames
04-18-2016, 04:25 PM
If the shoe don't fit.....Then Don't try to fill these shoes Boy!

It's pathetic, really. Maybe if you actually read other's post then you wouldn't embarrass yourself by creating an issue where there wasn't. Though, for someone extreme as you, I can see the allure of thinking that it's you against the world. That's fine...keeping creating imaginary conflict so you can rationalize your adolescent name calling.

Rainmaker
04-18-2016, 04:37 PM
That's fine...keeping creating imaginary conflict so you can rationalize your adolescent name calling.

Hey halfwit, I wasn't talking to you.

SomeRandomGuy
04-18-2016, 05:08 PM
Not just single parents. I work with married E-5s who get back over $10k every year. I don't blame them. I would if I could. It's just a point about who our tax dollars go to.

You do realize the bulk of the "return" they get is actually their own money back, right?

A Married E5 with 10 years of service makes $37,285 in base pay. If said person claims "Married and 0" they pay 10% tax on the first $18,450 and then 15% on the rest of their income.

18450*.10 =$1845
18835*.15 =$2825.25
Total Tax paid =$4670.25

When said person sits down to do his taxes let's assume he has a wife and 3 kids. Standard deduction is $6300 which he and his wife claim. Then he gets $1000 per child. $13,000 + $3000 gets deducted from income of $37,285 which brings it down to $21,285. The tax said person should have paid is 10 on first $18,450 then 15% on the next $2835 which is 425.25. So correct tax burden is $425.25 plus $1845=$2270.25

There's more though. Said person is making $37250 and has three kids. That qualifies them for the EITC. From the table on the IRS website said person gets a credit of $3368.

So here's how their taxes look:
Taxes Paid: 4670.25
Taxes due: 2270.25
Overpayment:2400.00

EITC 3368
Refund 2400
Total 5768

So, said person comes in to work and says, "woohoo! I'm getting back $5768 on my federal tax return"

Cool story, bro. You are actually getting back $2400 which you loaned to the government interest free for the entire year. On top of that you are getting $3368.


As far as the whole $10K number you quoted, that's quite literally impossible for a married E5.

sandsjames
04-18-2016, 05:34 PM
As far as the whole $10K number you quoted, that's quite literally impossible for a married E5.You are so incorrect on this. I work with 2 married E5s, both with 2 children, and both got returns of over $10k (minus what they actually paid in, just to keep you happy). Throw in 3-6 months of tax free due to deployment.

Even with your numbers, though, they are getting back more than they paid in, which is fucking ridiculous. So whether it's $1k, or $10k, it's still happening.

garhkal
04-18-2016, 06:21 PM
A few problems with our tax system? That's the understatement of the year.

Honestly, I don't care what I'm paying for. I know it's not a whole lot, really. Throughout the years I've been paying taxes, my overall rate has changes so little it's really not even noticeable...doesn't matter what party is in power...doesn't matter what the economy is like.

Hell, the IRS could be using my tax dollars for hookers and blow and it wouldn't bother me much. That's how insignificant it is for working/middle class, as individuals, to pay taxes.

To you maybe. I for one would like to know my taxes i am forking over are actually Doing something just and good.. Not just going to fill someone else's coffers.


I thought this was supposed to be hypothetical?

Who's whining about it? I've got no problem with what they pay. I'm pretty sure Garkhal didn't have a problem with it. It didn't sound like our SuperMod had an issue.

You obviously haven't been paying attention to what i have been saying. How can someone claim that hypothetical person above is 'not paying their fair share, when the hypothetical single parent (or married parents) of 4 kids, living on say 55k a year, has almost NO tax burden once they use up all the credits, deductions and other loopholes they can.?


You do realize the bulk of the "return" they get is actually their own money back, right?
..snip..

Cool story, bro. You are actually getting back $2400 which you loaned to the government interest free for the entire year. On top of that you are getting $3368.


But the fact that they are not only getting back all their tax due burden, but also MORE than that (hence the "on top of that", means that they have NO tax burden. Ergo how is it 'right and just' to the left that whines millionaires etc who STILL pay 2-300k a year after all is said and done, but cause of loopholes, deductions etc, COULD have paid 6-700k, are not "Paying their fair share", when the above demonstration you gave, shows that the lower income brackets, pay in NOTHING after all is said and done, and in some cases (especially with EITC) get MORE from the government than they paid in??
Which group is 'not paying their fair share' here??

sandsjames
04-18-2016, 06:28 PM
You obviously haven't been paying attention to what i have been saying. How can someone claim that hypothetical person above is 'not paying their fair share, when the hypothetical single parent (or married parents) of 4 kids, living on say 55k a year, has almost NO tax burden once they use up all the credits, deductions and other loopholes they can.? Who is saying this? We've got some kind of disconnect going on here. We are all agreeing on this point.

SomeRandomGuy
04-18-2016, 06:38 PM
You are so incorrect on this. I work with 2 married E5s, both with 2 children, and both got returns of over $10k (minus what they actually paid in, just to keep you happy). Throw in 3-6 months of tax free due to deployment.

Even with your numbers, though, they are getting back more than they paid in, which is fucking ridiculous. So whether it's $1k, or $10k, it's still happening.

The IRS EITC table is at this link

https://www.irs.gov/publications/p596/ar02.html

The absolute maximum credit is $6242 for Married filing jointly with 3 children at the $14,800 earned income mark. I guess if you add $1000 each times 3 kids you can get to $9242. The problem is that the Child Tax Credit is nonrefundable, meaning it can't exceed the amount of taxes you paid. If it gets your liability to $0 it ends.

So, if your married E5 manages to get his earned income down to $14,800 he could collect the entire $6242 EITC and get back any taxes he paid in. The $10K figure is still way to high unless that's combining state and federal returns.

There is no scenario where someone gets a return higher than $6242 that they aren't simply getting their own money back.

There are other scenarios where a person could get their own money as well as education credits (Hope Tax Credit) to get them over $10K. That certainly wouldn't be "every year" though.

sandsjames
04-18-2016, 07:22 PM
The IRS EITC table is at this link

https://www.irs.gov/publications/p596/ar02.html

The absolute maximum credit is $6242 for Married filing jointly with 3 children at the $14,800 earned income mark. I guess if you add $1000 each times 3 kids you can get to $9242. The problem is that the Child Tax Credit is nonrefundable, meaning it can't exceed the amount of taxes you paid. If it gets your liability to $0 it ends.

So, if your married E5 manages to get his earned income down to $14,800 he could collect the entire $6242 EITC and get back any taxes he paid in. The $10K figure is still way to high unless that's combining state and federal returns.

There is no scenario where someone gets a return higher than $6242 that they aren't simply getting their own money back.

There are other scenarios where a person could get their own money as well as education credits (Hope Tax Credit) to get them over $10K. That certainly wouldn't be "every year" though.Whatever you say dude. I'm staring at his return printed straight off of Turbo Tax, and it's been almost identical for the past 3 years. He claims zero deductions through the year. Just over $10,400, and just over $9900 the previous 2 years. You can throw all the link out there that you want. Maybe it just happens that the 2 guys I work with are the exception, but the numbers are right in front of me.

Are you assuming that he's claiming a standard deduction, maybe? Hell, I don't know. I just know what I'm looking at.

Either way, there should never be an instance where a person gets back more than they pay in, especially when that person is then going to bitch that their tax dollars are going to pay for the lazy poor people.

SomeRandomGuy
04-18-2016, 07:41 PM
Whatever you say dude. I'm staring at his return printed straight off of Turbo Tax, and it's been almost identical for the past 3 years. He claims zero deductions through the year. Just over $10,400, and just over $9900 the previous 2 years. You can throw all the link out there that you want. Maybe it just happens that the 2 guys I work with are the exception, but the numbers are right in front of me.

Are you assuming that he's claiming a standard deduction, maybe? Hell, I don't know. I just know what I'm looking at.

Either way, there should never be an instance where a person gets back more than they pay in, especially when that person is then going to bitch that their tax dollars are going to pay for the lazy poor people.

I ran this by a CPA friend of mine. He said that the Additional Child Credit can be refundable. So potentially a person with several kids could get to the $10K number you quoted. For military they'd need to have several kids or at least a few months deployed.

For poverty stricken people they'd want to be down there around $15K in earned income.

As a side note, this has been my argument for $15 minimum wage for a while. Someone making minimum wage ends up getting a massive amount back from EITC. Effectively, tax payers are subsidizing the wages of Wal-Mart and McDonalds employees.


If we take that $6240 EITC credit and divide it by 2000 hours (40 x 52 weeks) they get an additional $3.13 per hour. When you also add in TANF, Section 8, Food Stamps, and Medicaid most minimum wage workers already get $15 per hour it's just that their employer pays less than half of it.

Rainmaker
04-18-2016, 08:03 PM
Clearly, there's no hope for you. You went ahead and dismissed the guy without even taking the time to address what he said.

Now that Rainmaker's finished writing out a Fat check (to support the International Brotherhood of Guatemalan Roofers) and actually had a chance to watch this 3 minutes of drivel, You'll be glad to know that we somewhat agree with Wise' premise (The Elite are using the age old strategy of 'Divide and Conquer' to attack the White Middle/"working" Class).

However, Wise immediately starts out with a false premise when he states: "A rich White man is telling working class white people that their problem is brown people".

What the Rich White man is actually telling them is that the root of their problem is the criminal cartel that has hung them out to dry by engaging in "globalization", which they pretend is just some naturally occurring phenomenon. But, is really nothing more than intentionally Flooding the country with taxpayer subsidized third worlders (to suppress wages) and entering into unconstitutional, one-sided international trade agreements (to maximize profits) at the expense of the LEGAL American citizen/ worker.

Rainmaker also gets a hearty laugh out of this charlatan's saying that the trick was even played on "His Folk" during the civil war....hahaha fucking ha!.... The Swindler would like us believe that he's "white like me". But, he fails to mention his actual lineage(Russian Bolshevik) . .......

It's just like the #OscarsSoWhite meme that is going around.......Demonizing Whitey for everything......But, then not pointing out the elephant in the room (That a certain ethnic group has a near monopoly on Hollywood)

So Yes Rusty, The Elite have long employed this strategy of 'divide and conquer'....... But, today it goes by its more modern Politically Correct name of 'Multiculturalism'.

Rainmaker
04-18-2016, 08:21 PM
As a side note, this has been my argument for $15 minimum wage for a while. Someone making minimum wage ends up getting a massive amount back from EITC. Effectively, tax payers are subsidizing the wages of Wal-Mart and McDonalds employees.


.

Or instead of raising the minimum wage they could just put an import tax on the junk products currently being made overseas in Sweatshops. This would dis-incentivize the offshoring of higher value manufacturing jobs, so that we could have an actual tax base here again and the 10's of Millions of Americans (that want to be self-reliant. but, don't have a STEM degree or special affirmative action hiring preference for a .gov job) could have a job that entails something besides stocking shelves, until they hurt themselves and go on permanent Social Security Disability Insurance.... ..........

Now, Here's a fun game to play....Next time you're at Wally world try finding something made in the USA. (Especially in the clothing section)

Rusty Jones
04-18-2016, 09:02 PM
With all this talk of everyone needing to go to college, and talk of free college or loan forgiveness on the left; I think that there's one solution that neither side will consider.

Think about this: these days, employers are requiring degrees for jobs that shouldn't require one. Jobs that didn't require degrees 10 or 15 years ago. Employers are simply requiring degrees now because they CAN. And it's due to too many people having degrees.

My solution is this: create a multi-tiered minimum wage system based on the level of education that the employer is requiring for the job.

So if employers are requiring four-year degrees for a $10/hr job, the employer has two options: he either has to pay the higher wage that is required for a bachelor's degree, or he's going to have to stop requiring the bachelor's degree. And chances are that he's going to do the latter.

Much better than tax dollars paying for bachelor's degrees for everybody, right?

Problem is... the left won't touch it, because their focus is getting everyone educated as much as possible. The right won't touch it, because they probably feel that it would violate the concept of a free market economy.

But, eventually, something's gotta give.

sandsjames
04-18-2016, 10:14 PM
With all this talk of everyone needing to go to college, and talk of free college or loan forgiveness on the left; I think that there's one solution that neither side will consider.

Think about this: these days, employers are requiring degrees for jobs that shouldn't require one. Jobs that didn't require degrees 10 or 15 years ago. Employers are simply requiring degrees now because they CAN. And it's due to too many people having degrees.

My solution is this: create a multi-tiered minimum wage system based on the level of education that the employer is requiring for the job.

So if employers are requiring four-year degrees for a $10/hr job, the employer has two options: he either has to pay the higher wage that is required for a bachelor's degree, or he's going to have to stop requiring the bachelor's degree. And chances are that he's going to do the latter.

Much better than tax dollars paying for bachelor's degrees for everybody, right?

Problem is... the left won't touch it, because their focus is getting everyone educated as much as possible. The right won't touch it, because they probably feel that it would violate the concept of a free market economy.

But, eventually, something's gotta give.I think it needs to go the other way. Many employers need to get rid of degree requirements for many of the jobs where it's not actually necessary. That would make many jobs much more accessible.

Rusty Jones
04-18-2016, 11:17 PM
I think it needs to go the other way. Many employers need to get rid of degree requirements for many of the jobs where it's not actually necessary. That would make many jobs much more accessible.

Right, but I think that a multi-tiered minimum wage system would create disincentives for employers to require degrees that aren't necessary.

I think that I would actually be content with a $10 minimum wage, if a $15 minimum wage was reserved for jobs that employers are requiring a bachelor's degree for.

Rainmaker
04-19-2016, 01:31 AM
I think that I would actually be content with a $10 minimum wage, if a $15 minimum wage was reserved for jobs that employers are requiring a bachelor's degree for.

If raising the minimum wage is going to be so great for the economy, Then why stop at just $15? Wouldn't it be better to have the Government force "private" employers to pay ALL of their employees $100 an hour?

garhkal
04-19-2016, 03:27 AM
Who is saying this? We've got some kind of disconnect going on here. We are all agreeing on this point.

My bad. I thought you were arguing the other way..


Right, but I think that a multi-tiered minimum wage system would create disincentives for employers to require degrees that aren't necessary.

I think that I would actually be content with a $10 minimum wage, if a $15 minimum wage was reserved for jobs that employers are requiring a bachelor's degree for.

For me one of the biggest issues i see with those pushing for min wage hikes, is what does the firm now have to do for all their employees who were making ABOVE min wage, but less than that 15 (or 10) an hour rate? Are they going to also get kicked up the same amount? Just kicked up to the new min wage?

Mjölnir
04-19-2016, 09:24 AM
A $15 minimum wage creates a paradox for most businesses.

Small businesses do not have the volume nor profit margin to absorb a minimum wage increase without raising prices to cover costs (not only their own employees but the associated costs of their business partners); effectively increasing the cost of living for everyone. While the increase in price of a commodity of 10 to 15 cents is minimal in the micro sense, in the macro the cumulative increase in cost of living nullifies the wage increase.

Sure, people may 'feel better' because their paycheck is bigger, but do they really have more money to use on a per annum basis?

Most businesses in the US are small businesses and more people in the US are employed by small businesses. Large corporations have the profit margin to do this, would they? If they do a secondary effect is to 'incentivize' patronizing corporations over small business; if they don't the wage issue perpetuates with a false sense of improvement. How do you counter the perpetuation? Government price freezes or fixing is one way, but far far far from a free market.

sandsjames
04-19-2016, 10:53 AM
Right, but I think that a multi-tiered minimum wage system would create disincentives for employers to require degrees that aren't necessary.

I think that I would actually be content with a $10 minimum wage, if a $15 minimum wage was reserved for jobs that employers are requiring a bachelor's degree for.

I think it wouldn't hurt to try. Could some with a degree have the option to take the non-degreed position with the lower pay?

Mjölnir
04-19-2016, 10:54 AM
I ran this by a CPA friend of mine. He said that the Additional Child Credit can be refundable. So potentially a person with several kids could get to the $10K number you quoted. For military they'd need to have several kids or at least a few months deployed.

For poverty stricken people they'd want to be down there around $15K in earned income.

As a side note, this has been my argument for $15 minimum wage for a while. Someone making minimum wage ends up getting a massive amount back from EITC. Effectively, tax payers are subsidizing the wages of Wal-Mart and McDonalds employees.


If we take that $6240 EITC credit and divide it by 2000 hours (40 x 52 weeks) they get an additional $3.13 per hour. When you also add in TANF, Section 8, Food Stamps, and Medicaid most minimum wage workers already get $15 per hour it's just that their employer pays less than half of it.

There are specific instances where people get back more than they pay in.

Tax year 2014, the year the adoption of our daughter became final:

Per US Tax Law, we pulled ALL adoption related expenses from the previous 4 years (eligible to pull up to 5) into 2014 as deductions. We got a HUGE amount back above and beyond what we owed & paid in 2014. This one a one off situation. For tax year 2015, now as a family of 3, we did not get a refund and owed (after pre-paid deductions) about $450. Our tax burden was a bit north of 20k for Federal taxes.

So, 2014 was a boon, 2015 is reality; if someone used 2014 as the norm for someone in our income bracket it would be a skewed view of things.

Using an isolated or personal experience and extrapolating it to apply to everyone is generally wrong.

sandsjames
04-19-2016, 11:09 AM
Using an isolated or personal experience and extrapolating it to apply to everyone is generally wrong.

Very true. That's why I'm simply stating that the two E5s with 2 kids each get back more than 5k more than they pay in, with refunds at, or over $10k, for the last 3 years. I know it's a small sample, but it seems pretty consistent.

Mjölnir
04-19-2016, 11:24 AM
Very true. That's why I'm simply stating that the two E5s with 2 kids each get back more than 5k more than they pay in, with refunds at, or over $10k, for the last 3 years. I know it's a small sample, but it seems pretty consistent.

Consistent for them. Consistent for us for some time after I commissioned was that we generally received large refunds (never more than we paid, but we paid much less than we could have until I was an O3E at about 20 years of service) by taking advantage of legal tax write offs / deductions:

-mortgage deductions
-charitable contributions
-deduction for state taxes
-educational expenses

common ones we didn't use but that many do
-child care tax credit
-disability deductions

sandsjames
04-19-2016, 01:21 PM
Consistent for them. Consistent for us for some time after I commissioned was that we generally received large refunds (never more than we paid, but we paid much less than we could have until I was an O3E at about 20 years of service) by taking advantage of legal tax write offs / deductions:

-mortgage deductions
-charitable contributions
-deduction for state taxes
-educational expenses

common ones we didn't use but that many do
-child care tax credit
-disability deductions

This is all a perfect example of why we need a flat rate income tax across the board with zero deductions/zero refunds. Everyone pays their fair share.

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 01:24 PM
I think it wouldn't hurt to try. Could some with a degree have the option to take the non-degreed position with the lower pay?

Right, there are things about this that would be hammered out and you bring up a good point. To rephrase your question to make it a more realistic scenario, it would be "Well couldn't employers leave off the requirement for the degree on a $10/hr job posting, and only hire people with the degree... effectively getting around the hypothetical minimum wage law?"

There are some options to deal with this:

1. No "x degree preferred" on job postings. Either the degree is required or it's not. Technically, this shouldn't even be an "option." It should automatically be a part of the hypothetical minimum wage law.

2. Put some responsibility on job applicants to not list degrees that were not asked for on the job posting.

3. As part of the hypothetical minimum wage law, HRISs used for recruiting (such as Taleo) could be mandated to be complaint with this law by omitting degrees listed in the applicant's profile when the application is submitted for a job that doesn't require the degree. If that same applicant applies for a position that does require a degree, then the degree on the profile will be listed on the submitted application.

4. Or, you could simply do this: if an employer is not requiring a degree for a particular position, and he has x number of those positions... and more than 75% (or some other percentage) of those hired into those positions have a certain degree, then the minimum wage for that degree comes into effect. Of course, if you go this route, then this rule could only apply to employers of a certain minimum size.

In any case, I understand wanting to make college accessible to everyone... but, at the same time, taking action to reduce the demand for degrees in the job market may be the smarter thing to do.

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 01:31 PM
A couple of points that get missed a lot:

The rich (higher income people) in the US do in fact pay taxes. In tax year 2014, people with adjusted gross income above $250,000 paid just over half (51.6%) of all individual income taxes, though they accounted for only 2.7% of all returns filed (IRS: https://www.irs.gov/uac/SOI-Tax-Stats-Individual-Income-Tax-Returns).

Yeah, they pay 52% of all the taxes; but they also make 85% of all the income. Big disconnect here.

Rainmaker
04-19-2016, 01:45 PM
taking action to reduce the demand for degrees in the job market may be the smarter thing to do.

What a great idea! In addition to .gov forcing unrealistic wages on "private" employers, They should also be forcing companies into mandating lowered hiring standards!!! Couple that with Price controls and a graduated income tax ladder (from each according to his means to each according to his needs) and in no time, we should all be living in a "Fair" Utopia with Unicorns Shitting Purple Skittles!

sandsjames
04-19-2016, 01:45 PM
Yeah, they pay 52% of all the taxes; but they also make 85% of all the income. Big disconnect here.

Many of them also employ a lot of people who also pay taxes so the 51.6% isn't a true number of the actual tax burden taken care of by the rich. Also, many of the rich who happen to be business owners also have to pay into insurance/health care/worker comp/etc for their employees.

I also don't like the fact that they lump the $250,000 in with the filthy rich. Someone making $250,000 living in a major city is equivalent to people earning $80k and living in rural areas so, to me, those numbers aren't really useful in determining who's paying what.

sandsjames
04-19-2016, 01:51 PM
What a great idea! In addition to .gov forcing unrealistic wages on "private" employers, They should also be forcing companies into mandating lowered hiring standards!!! Couple that with Price controls and a graduated income tax ladder (from each according to his means to each according to his needs) and we should all be living in a "Fair" Utopia with Unicorns Shitting Purple Skittles.

You think removing the requirement for a degree is lowering employment standards? I guess that's fair if you buy into the racket that is our college/degree system.

Mjölnir
04-19-2016, 02:12 PM
Yeah, they pay 52% of all the taxes; but they also make 85% of all the income. Big disconnect here.

Is your solution to have that group pay 85% of all taxes?


I also don't like the fact that they lump the $250,000 in with the filthy rich. Someone making $250,000 living in a major city is equivalent to people earning $80k and living in rural areas so, to me, those numbers aren't really useful in determining who's paying what.

True, the numbers don't reflect cost of living in various areas. As you say, someone making $250k in NYC has a lower standard of living than someone in Jacksonville NC (for example) making $125,000. Also this doesn't account for the 'super' rich ... Bill Gates earned $11.5 billion in 2013 that is a bit more than 450,000 times my household's combined AGI.

sandsjames
04-19-2016, 02:24 PM
Is your solution to have that group pay 85% of all taxes? Honestly, I don't have a problem with this. That's what a flat tax would ensure. What is also means is that those at the bottom of the ladder would also be paying taxes on their income. Honestly, I don't feel I pay my fair share. Of course I'll take advantage of that while I can. I'm not going to offer extra, but for me to end up paying a total of $2800 a year (after deductions/refunds) on $65k of taxable income is pretty weak. That's just over 4%. I'd be good with 10% for everyone. I'd pay out 2 1/2 times what I do right now and I'm ok with that. The rich would also pay out 10% (only using this number cuz it's easy math) so Bill Gates would pay $1.15 billion. That's fair. If this is the case then it's easy to say that those who earn 82% of all income would pay 82% of all taxes.

Mjölnir
04-19-2016, 02:26 PM
Yeah, they pay 52% of all the taxes; but they also make 85% of all the income. Big disconnect here.

According to this link: http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/top10-percent-income-earners which sources its data from the IRS, that group earns 34% of all income in the US.

Mjölnir
04-19-2016, 02:28 PM
You think removing the requirement for a degree is lowering employment standards? I guess that's fair if you buy into the racket that is our college/degree system.

Is telling a private employer that they can or cannot prefer to hire someone with [whatever] educational background they want the role of the government?

I don't disagree that the business of higher education in the country is out of control. The cost of education has exponentially grown and the quality has gone down.

sandsjames
04-19-2016, 02:32 PM
Is telling a private employer that they can or cannot prefer to hire someone with [whatever] educational background they want the role of the government? No, not at all. Just talking hypothetical.


I don't disagree that the business of higher education in the country is out of control. The cost of education has exponentially grown and the quality has gone down.Thankfully, this brings us back to the thread topic. The quality has gone down for a couple reasons. One, professors are allowed to teach based on their political beliefs and teach history as it fits their own narrative and two, when the college knows that everyone think they need a degree, the college doesn't have to put in the effort to attract people.

Mjölnir
04-19-2016, 02:46 PM
Thankfully, this brings us back to the thread topic. The quality has gone down for a couple reasons. One, professors are allowed to teach based on their political beliefs and teach history as it fits their own narrative and two, when the college knows that everyone think they need a degree, the college doesn't have to put in the effort to attract people.


My first grad degree had nothing to do with my job at all, I wanted to learn about the subject. That mentality is fine, until me and a few thousand people who did the same thing complain that we can't find a job with a degree in Ancient and Classical History and complain about the system being stacked against us. Want a job in finance, get a finance degree; want a job in engineering, get an engineering degree etc.

Our system is one that is really geared for success if people are willing to work for it. For every Bill Gates and Steve Jobs who dropped out of college, had an idea and changed the world or recent college grad who lands a good / dream job and gets wealthy doing it there are thousands of people who don't and end up either going back to school or just doing something else. For the most part our system is about choice, hard work and sacrifice.

I have a thought that many people who obtain higher education in an unmarketable area and find themselves working in minimum wage jobs because there are not enough jobs for art history majors will one day realize that if they want a better job they will have to build their personal tool kit for that job. It may be education, it may be skills, it may be experience.

So how to solve it?

Government control over curricula (political neutralization) at universities?

Allow it to continue as is?

Let students figure it out (via the payment of their tuition)?

I have a feeling once the reality that many of these 'nice to have' vice 'valuable to the employer base' degrees are less than useful for employment, there may be a shift. But seeing that most 18 year olds are picking a university based on football teams, family tradition or the ranking on Playboy's Best Party Schools ... probably not.

Rainmaker
04-19-2016, 02:53 PM
You think removing the requirement for a degree is lowering employment standards?

Well what else would you call it?

The root of the problem is that there's not enough quality employment. Because the government has set conditions (Thru NAFTA, GATT, WTO, Obscene tax rates, etc. etc.) that incentivized off-shoring our tax base and now we have no base left from which to grow.

Communistic measures like wage/price controls and .gov telling private companies who they can and can't hire won't correct the root of the problem.


I guess that's fair if you buy into the racket that is our college/degree system.

College tuition is insanely expensive because of the Government making it easier for people to borrow more money. Going into debt (that can never be discharged) for a college degree is modern day indentured servitude and only worth the Investment, if it's an a field that leads to a definitive career path. Most degrees being offered today don't do that.

And (without employing Legal tax mitigation strategies) Rainmaker would've had AGI of $427K last year in a job that did not require a college degree.

Mjölnir
04-19-2016, 03:00 PM
Rainmaker would've had AGI of $427K last year in a field that did not require a college degree.

So are you "working your way through law school or med school?" :)

Rainmaker
04-19-2016, 03:05 PM
So are you "working your way through law school or med school?" :)

Being A Professional Parimutuel Gambler requires an education but, no formal schooling. NomSayin?

Mjölnir
04-19-2016, 03:08 PM
Being A Professional Parimutuel Gambler requires an education but, no formal schooling. NomSayin?

I just figured there was a pole involved.

Rainmaker
04-19-2016, 03:21 PM
I just figured there was a pole involved.

It's always gonna be Raining at the Pink Pony whenever Sweet Kiwi Nightingale comes from behind to win me the Super Quinella Payoff amount!

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 03:33 PM
Is telling a private employer that they can or cannot prefer to hire someone with [whatever] educational background they want the role of the government?

That's actually not what would be happening. The private employer CAN require the degree if they want to, but they'll have to pay the wage accordingly.

I look at it like this: right now, we're talking about taking every last one of the millions of adults in this country and sending them to college for free, just to accommodate the demands of employers requiring credentials that really aren't necessary. How much is that going to cost the tax payers?

Or... we can make laws that reduce the demand for unnecessary degrees. Won't cost tax payers a dime.

sandsjames
04-19-2016, 03:37 PM
Well what else would you call it? I'd call it hiring based on needs and merit, not on how many degrees you have. Remember, we're talking minimum wage jobs. Who the fuck needs a degree for a minimum wage job?


The root of the problem is that there's not enough quality employment. Because the government has set conditions (Thru NAFTA, GATT, WTO, Obscene tax rates, etc. etc.) that incentivized off-shoring our tax base and now we have no base left from which to grow. There is a shitload of quality employment. Look up jobs for HVAC and other "blue collar" type work. There are thousands of them. However, we tell our children that they all have to get their BA/BS or higher in order to succeed, so none of the people coming out of high school have any intention of getting a blue collar job. Because of the sham of college and degrees, there just aren't enough people to fill these jobs. They are very well paying and are available all around the country.


Communistic measures like wage/price controls and .gov telling private companies who they can and can't hire won't correct the root of the problem. No disagreement here.




College tuition is insanely expensive because of the Government making it easier for people to borrow more money. Going into debt (that can never be discharged) for a college degree is modern day indentured servitude and only worth the Investment, if it's an a field that leads to a definitive career path. Most degrees being offered today don't do that. It's also insanely expensive because everyone thinks they need to go. Supply and demand.


And (without employing Legal tax mitigation strategies) Rainmaker would've had AGI of $427K last year in a job that did not require a college degree.I think this is exactly the point I'm trying to make. One does not need a degree in order to be successful.

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 03:43 PM
My first grad degree had nothing to do with my job at all, I wanted to learn about the subject. That mentality is fine, until me and a few thousand people who did the same thing complain that we can't find a job with a degree in Ancient and Classical History and complain about the system being stacked against us. Want a job in finance, get a finance degree; want a job in engineering, get an engineering degree etc.

Our system is one that is really geared for success if people are willing to work for it. For every Bill Gates and Steve Jobs who dropped out of college, had an idea and changed the world or recent college grad who lands a good / dream job and gets wealthy doing it there are thousands of people who don't and end up either going back to school or just doing something else. For the most part our system is about choice, hard work and sacrifice.

I have a thought that many people who obtain higher education in an unmarketable area and find themselves working in minimum wage jobs because there are not enough jobs for art history majors will one day realize that if they want a better job they will have to build their personal tool kit for that job. It may be education, it may be skills, it may be experience.

So how to solve it?

Government control over curricula (political neutralization) at universities?

Allow it to continue as is?

Let students figure it out (via the payment of their tuition)?

I have a feeling once the reality that many of these 'nice to have' vice 'valuable to the employer base' degrees are less than useful for employment, there may be a shift. But seeing that most 18 year olds are picking a university based on football teams, family tradition or the ranking on Playboy's Best Party Schools ... probably not.

I'm a federal civilian, a GS-11, but it was a 7/9/11 position. My job requires either a bachelor's degree, or 52 weeks time in grade as a GS-5 in a related position.

As a former Navy PS, the only reason I got my job was because of the bachelor's degree. Otherwise, I would've had to start off in 4/5 position - and many former PSs who got out of the Navy without a degree have had to do it. And, of course, they have to wait for a 7/9/11 position to open and hope they get selected.

I can tell you right now... I could still do my job as a federal civilian if I had never gotten that degree. But why do they require that degree? Because they CAN. Because too many people have degrees.

I think that when we have problems spiraling out of control, that's when the government needs to step in. If the government doesn't govern, then what is it there for? If we get to the point people need a PhD to be a janitor, then the government has failed in my opinion.

Rainmaker
04-19-2016, 03:44 PM
Won't cost tax payers a dime.

Ok, in that case, I vote we raise the Minimum wage to $15 an hour. But, only if it means that the dumb-fuck Haji's got working the cash register at the 7-11, has to learn to speak English and do some 1st grade math (like counting Money and giving back correct change).

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 03:47 PM
Ok, I vote we raise the Minimum wage to $15 an hour, if it means that the dumb-fuck Haji's got working the cash register at 7-11, has to learn to speak English and do some 1st grade math (like counting Money and giving back correct change).

The fact that you're still allowed to be here after all these years never ceases to amaze me.

Mjölnir
04-19-2016, 03:54 PM
I'm a federal civilian, a GS-11, but it was a 7/9/11 position. My job requires either a bachelor's degree, or 52 weeks time in grade as a GS-5 in a related position.

As a former Navy PS, the only reason I got my job was because of the bachelor's degree. Otherwise, I would've had to start off in 4/5 position - and many former PSs who got out of the Navy without a degree have had to do it. And, of course, they have to wait for a 7/9/11 position to open and hope they get selected.

I can tell you right now... I could still do my job as a federal civilian if I had never gotten that degree. But why do they require that degree? Because they CAN. Because too many people have degrees.

I think that when we have problems spiraling out of control, that's when the government needs to step in. If the government doesn't govern, then what is it there for? If we get to the point people need a PhD to be a janitor, then the government has failed in my opinion.

But the way you describe it, the government is the one levying the degree requirement for (some) jobs that don't need them.

Rainmaker
04-19-2016, 03:54 PM
The fact that you're still allowed to be here after all these years never ceases to amaze me.

Oh Puh-leeze. Don't act all offended as you Keep posting your race-bating Bullshit from the schools of liberal communism.

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 03:57 PM
Oh Puh-leeze. Don't act all offended as you Keep posting your race-bating Bullshit from the schools of liberal communism.

Oh, because I'm the one using slurs and suggesting that certain races of people need to get their shit together; right? Get the fuck outta here.

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 04:00 PM
But the way you describe it, the government is the one levying the degree requirement for (some) jobs that don't need them.

Or the government can pay for everyone to go to college to meet the demands of these employers. This shouldn't be a difficult choice.

Mjölnir
04-19-2016, 04:03 PM
Or the government can pay for everyone to go to college to meet the demands of these employers. This shouldn't be a difficult choice.

Fundamentally, is it the role of the government to provide an individual with all the qualifications necessary for a specific job, or to provide everyone the equal opportunity to achieve those qualifications if they decide they need them for the vocation/job the individual wishes to pursue?

Mjölnir
04-19-2016, 04:05 PM
Oh Puh-leeze. Don't act all offended as you Keep posting your race-bating Bullshit from the schools of liberal communism.


Oh, because I'm the one using slurs and suggesting that certain races of people need to get their shit together; right? Get the fuck outta here.

Let's try to stay on topic and avoid racial comments and insults.

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 04:09 PM
Fundamentally, is it the role of the government to provide an individual with all the qualifications necessary for a specific job, or to provide everyone the equal opportunity to achieve those qualifications if they decide they need them for the vocation/job the individual wishes to pursue?

Yes. The preamble to the Constitution specifically mentions providing for the general welfare of the people.

Put yourself in the position of being on the outside looking in: if we were looking at a country with a high employment rate due to a gap between credentials required by employers in that country and credentials that the citizens of that country have... would the government of that country not be drawing negative attention to itself from the rest of the world?

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 04:09 PM
Let's try to stay on topic and avoid racial comments and insults.

I hope Rainmaker's slap on the wrist didn't hurt too bad.

sandsjames
04-19-2016, 04:12 PM
I hope Rainmaker's slap on the wrist didn't hurt too bad.Right?....

Rainmaker
04-19-2016, 04:27 PM
Oh, because I'm the one using slurs and suggesting that certain races of people need to get their shit together; right? Get the fuck outta here.


No because, You're on here posting videos about White privilege (or white skin privilege) Which you know damn well is a Marxist racist theory that teaches that white people aren't successful because of merit. But, only because of their white skin color. I don't really care. But, don't act all prissy, when you get called on your BS.

And FYI Hajji is an Arabic Term of respect for someone who has made the pilgrimage to Mecca. Look it up.

See You'd be happier (and probably more successful) if you could learn to stop assigning YOUR racist meanings to everyone else's words.


Right?....

And enablers like you are part of the problem. Piss off brown-noser.

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 04:39 PM
No because, You're on here posting videos about White privilege (or white skin privilege) Which you know damn well is a Marxist racist theory that teaches that white people aren't successful because of merit. But, only because of their white skin color. I don't really care. But, don't act all prissy, when you get called on your BS.

And FYI Hajji is an Arabic Term of respect for someone who has made the pilgrimage to Mecca. Look it up.

See You'd be happier (and probably more successful) if you could learn to stop assigning YOUR racist meanings to everyone else's words.

Oh, it's the same thing right? Let me ask you ask you something: would you approach a Middle Easter with what you're saying? You probably wouldn't. And if you did, I'm sure that you'd already have your fists balled up because you know damned well you're going to have to use them, saying some shit like that.

Me? I can actually bring up the things I'm talking about to a random white person and have no reasonable expectation of violence to occur.

Please, videotape yourself calling a Middle Easterner a hajji, and let's see if they feel "respected" by it.

sandsjames
04-19-2016, 04:40 PM
And enablers like you are part of the problem. Piss off brown-noser.Not an enabler. Just stating a fact.

retiredAFcivvy
04-19-2016, 04:44 PM
I'm a federal civilian, a GS-11, but it was a 7/9/11 position. My job requires either a bachelor's degree, or 52 weeks time in grade as a GS-5 in a related position.

As a former Navy PS, the only reason I got my job was because of the bachelor's degree. Otherwise, I would've had to start off in 4/5 position - and many former PSs who got out of the Navy without a degree have had to do it. And, of course, they have to wait for a 7/9/11 position to open and hope they get selected.

I can tell you right now... I could still do my job as a federal civilian if I had never gotten that degree. But why do they require that degree? Because they CAN. Because too many people have degrees.

I think that when we have problems spiraling out of control, that's when the government needs to step in. If the government doesn't govern, then what is it there for? If we get to the point people need a PhD to be a janitor, then the government has failed in my opinion.
In your scenario a Degree isn't required. They are allowing a degree to compensate for no experience. Very common in a lot of GS jobs. Now, would you rather fill that position with an applicant with 1 year experience or someone with no experience but a degree? I think you still have that choice.

USN - Retired
04-19-2016, 04:45 PM
and suggesting that certain races of people need to get their shit together; right?

Does that mean that you no longer see a need for white people to "check their privilege"?

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 04:48 PM
Does that mean that you no longer see a need for white people to "check their privilege"?

Well, considering that Rainmaker can say the shit he says and neither he nor you see anything wrong with it; nor will the mod do anything about it...

Rainmaker
04-19-2016, 04:52 PM
. The preamble to the Constitution specifically mentions providing for the general welfare of the people

It says to PROMOTE the general Welfare . Not PROVIDE it.


if we were looking at a country with a high employment rate due to a gap between credentials required by employers in that country and credentials that the citizens of that country have.

And What's supposedly preventing the citizen's of the country from getting the credentials required by the employers?


would the government of that country not be drawing negative attention to itself from the rest of the world?

Yeah, I guess it does and that's why 10's Millions of are taking advantage of unlimited immigration without assimilation to get on the dole. Hell, Maybe if we start getting viewed negatively enough they'll go back to the 'rest of the world' and let them pay for it.


would you approach a Middle Easter with what you're saying? You probably wouldn't. saying some shit like that.

Once again you're assigning YOUR meaning to words. Just because, you're easily 'offended' doesn't mean everyone else is as thin skinned as you////. And yes for your information I've called more than one Middle Easterner (whatever that means) 'Haji' to their face.

USN - Retired
04-19-2016, 04:56 PM
Well, considering that Rainmaker can say the shit he says and neither he nor you see anything wrong with it; nor will the mod do anything about it...

So, are you saying that that your racist attitude is a good and healthy form of racism whereas RM's racism is bad racism?

Rainmaker
04-19-2016, 04:56 PM
Just stating a fact.

Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.

USN - Retired
04-19-2016, 05:04 PM
In your scenario a Degree isn't required. They are allowing a degree to compensate for no experience. Very common in a lot of GS jobs.

I don't see how we can really compare federal civil service employment to real work.

Based on my experiences, here are my thoughts about US federal civil service: never in the course of US history have so many people been paid so much money for so little productivity.

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 05:11 PM
So, are you saying that that your racist attitude is a good and healthy form of racism whereas RM's racism is bad racism?

LOL, a conservative (or libertarian in your case) calling someone a racist is null and void the second it comes out of their mouths. Or fingertips.

Rainmaker
04-19-2016, 05:12 PM
So, are you saying that that your racist attitude is a good and healthy form of racism whereas RM's racism is bad racism?

Obviously one of us has an entitlement mentality and one of us doesn't...... Now, getting back to the original topic. This is what happens after a generation of Marxists teaching these kids in school to hate everything that made America Great (self reliance) and blame Whitey for all the ills of the country.

The whole concept of 'White privilege' is a Racist ideology. But, Rusty pretends it's not because he's 'feels' entitled to be a racist (black privilege) . See, It's just like the term 'Reverse Discrimination' a term which implies that discriminating against Whites is somehow justified (because, they allegedly did it first). In actuality there's no such thing as reverse discrimination. There's only discrimination.

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 05:16 PM
It says to PROMOTE the general Welfare . Not PROVIDE it.

Either way, it still requires action.


And What's supposedly preventing the citizen's of the country from getting the credentials required by the employers?

Money.


Yeah, I guess it does and that's why 10's Millions of are taking advantage of unlimited immigration without assimilation to get on the dole. Hell, Maybe if we start getting viewed negatively enough they'll go back to the 'rest of the world' and let them pay for it.

Then you haven't been paying attention lately. In the case of Mexico, there are more people going back than coming in. In other words, there's a negative net immigration from there now.


Once again you're assigning YOUR meaning to words. Just because, you're easily 'offended' doesn't mean everyone else is as thin skinned as you////. And yes for your information I've called more than one Middle Easterner (whatever that means) 'Haji' to their face.

Yep. Shit every one of the millions of racists on the internet claims to do, yet you never see it happen in real life. I wonder why. Oh yeah, because they're full of shit.

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 05:23 PM
The whole concept of 'White privilege' is a Racist ideology. But, Rusty pretends it's not because he's 'feels' entitled to be a racist (black privilege) .

Ah yes, the classic "I know you are, but what am I" tactic. This is EXACTLY why I told him that accusations of racism coming from him are null and void. That goes for you too.

Rainmaker
04-19-2016, 05:23 PM
LOL, a conservative (or libertarian in your case) calling someone a racist is null and void the second it comes out of their mouths. Or fingertips.


All you have to do is just Substitute the words 'White man' for the words 'a conservative or libertarian' and you'll have an insight into the demented thought process of this racist communist.

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 05:25 PM
All you have to do is just Substitute the words 'White man' for the words 'a conservative or libertarian' and you'll have an insight into the demented thought process of this racist communist.

Nah, because otherwise I would've applied it to Tim Wise, Bernie Sanders, Jimmy Carter, and a few others. There goes that logic.

Rainmaker
04-19-2016, 05:30 PM
Nah, because otherwise I would've applied it to Tim Wise, Bernie Sanders, Jimmy Carter, and a few others..


People that think like you do are only useful idiots to people like them.

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 05:32 PM
People like you are only useful idiots to people like them.

The "I know you are, but what am I" tactic yet again, in response to Tim Wise's message.

USN - Retired
04-19-2016, 05:32 PM
LOL, a conservative (or libertarian in your case) calling someone a racist is null and void the second it comes out of their mouths. Or fingertips.

Are we not allowed to speak and write about your racist attitude? Should we all pretend that you are not a racist even though you are obviously a racist?

I don't understand why you are so upset. You collect a GS-11 paycheck, yet you have to do no real work. You spend your entire workday spewing your racist hate dogma all over this forum. It seems like life is going well for you.

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 05:36 PM
Are we not allowed to speak and write about your racist attitude? Should we all pretend that you are not a racist even though you are obviously a racist?

You can say whatever you want about that subject. But when you say it, it holds absolutely zero meaning.

Like I said, it's an "I know you are, but what am I tactic." You and I both know that neither you nor Rainmaker view me as racist. You simply think that shouting the word back at me louder and more frequently will take the attention away from where it belongs: you and Rainmaker.


I don't understand why you are so upset. You collect a GS-11 paycheck, yet you have to do no real work. You spend your entire workday spewing your racist hate dogma all over this forum. It seems like life is going well for you.

LOL, I'm not at work.

Mjölnir
04-19-2016, 05:43 PM
Yes. The preamble to the Constitution specifically mentions providing for the general welfare of the people.

Put yourself in the position of being on the outside looking in: if we were looking at a country with a high employment rate due to a gap between credentials required by employers in that country and credentials that the citizens of that country have... would the government of that country not be drawing negative attention to itself from the rest of the world?

I was on the outside looking in. My family & my wife's family were poor, very poor. The only reason I attended college (for one year) before the military was a scholarship and a loan. I did poorly at college and joined the military. After a couple years I went back to school, took advantage of grants, TA, scholarships and self funding to complete a bachelor's degree. That led to a better paying job (commissioning) which led to me getting a couple of advanced degrees (one for me, one that was related to my job.) But yes, I was on the outside. I decided what I wanted to do, made specific choices to make it happen (less 'me time' more studying on nights and weekends, paying for some classes out of pocket etc.).

Is education really the cause for unemployment in the US? In some cases, no ... in many cases, yes. But, the fundamental argument remains, is preparing an individual for success the role of the State or the role of the individual? I tend to fall in with the thought that the State has a role to provide the opportunity & the framework for those who want to take advantage of it ... the rest is up to our own free agency

I won't argue that I don't agree if someone wants to be an AC repairman that they need a Bachelor's Degree in Chemistry to work with the gases etc., but if a company wants to make that their criteria so be it. If it causes the company to fail ... that is on the company.

There are already many opportunities for people to receive grants, scholarships, loans etc. for school. again ... for those who wish to make that choice. Now, I do understand that people are sometimes victims of situation they are born into that is beyond their ability to choose (poverty, disability etc.) ... so what to do with / for them? However, I don't agree with a government funded social safety net for 4, 5, 6 etc., years for everyone; not everyone needs that.

Mjölnir
04-19-2016, 05:50 PM
Folks, let's keep off topic / personal back and forth out of this.

garhkal
04-19-2016, 05:50 PM
I think it wouldn't hurt to try. Could some with a degree have the option to take the non-degreed position with the lower pay?

Or as one state is looking to try, Location min wage.. Work in the privy city, get X min wage. Work in lesser pricey township, get Y rate, work in the boonies, get Z rate.


This is all a perfect example of why we need a flat rate income tax across the board with zero deductions/zero refunds. Everyone pays their fair share.

Plus it does away with the whole "Do i qualify for that deduction or this one" issue.



In any case, I understand wanting to make college accessible to everyone... but, at the same time, taking action to reduce the demand for degrees in the job market may be the smarter thing to do. What a great idea! In addition to .gov forcing unrealistic wages on "private" employers, They should also be forcing companies into mandating lowered hiring standards!!! Couple that with Price controls and a graduated income tax ladder (from each according to his means to each according to his needs) and in no time, we should all be living in a "Fair" Utopia with Unicorns Shitting Purple Skittles!

For what it's worth, i do agree with Rusty in that not all damn jobs need a degree, nor should 'it be highly recommended' for them.


I also don't like the fact that they lump the $250,000 in with the filthy rich. Someone making $250,000 living in a major city is equivalent to people earning $80k and living in rural areas so, to me, those numbers aren't really useful in determining who's paying what.

Heck, for some cities, that 250k would be equivalent to 50k in some rural areas.. Such as in LA, or NYC or DC!


Is telling a private employer that they can or cannot prefer to hire someone with [whatever] educational background they want the role of the government?

I don't disagree that the business of higher education in the country is out of control. The cost of education has exponentially grown and the quality has gone down.

Agreed. The politicians shouldn't be dictating to private businesses anywhere near as much as they seem to these days.. BUT is the whole issue on the college degrees not being as worthy as they used to be, more cause schools have dumbed them down to meet even harsher politician pushed 'EO marks" or more cause the college teachers are spending more time indoctrinating those kids into a liberal mindset, and not enough Teaching them the material?


My first grad degree had nothing to do with my job at all, I wanted to learn about the subject. That mentality is fine, until me and a few thousand people who did the same thing complain that we can't find a job with a degree in Ancient and Classical History and complain about the system being stacked against us. Want a job in finance, get a finance degree; want a job in engineering, get an engineering degree etc.

Our system is one that is really geared for success if people are willing to work for it. For every Bill Gates and Steve Jobs who dropped out of college, had an idea and changed the world or recent college grad who lands a good / dream job and gets wealthy doing it there are thousands of people who don't and end up either going back to school or just doing something else. For the most part our system is about choice, hard work and sacrifice.

Which is one of teh reasons i can't understand WHY so many schools Do offer those degree courses that have no practical exposure in the job market. Sure SOME may be great to 'well round someone out historically, socially or mentally', but if its not needed by the work force, WHY push it so much??


I have a thought that many people who obtain higher education in an unmarketable area and find themselves working in minimum wage jobs because there are not enough jobs for art history majors will one day realize that if they want a better job they will have to build their personal tool kit for that job. It may be education, it may be skills, it may be experience.

I have a feeling once the reality that many of these 'nice to have' vice 'valuable to the employer base' degrees are less than useful for employment, there may be a shift. But seeing that most 18 year olds are picking a university based on football teams, family tradition or the ranking on Playboy's Best Party Schools ... probably not.

With the mindset most have today, where its NOT my fault, its someone else's.. And "I don't need personal responsibility" i doubt those students will start realizing their fubar in that regards..


There is a shitload of quality employment. Look up jobs for HVAC and other "blue collar" type work. There are thousands of them. However, we tell our children that they all have to get their BA/BS or higher in order to succeed, so none of the people coming out of high school have any intention of getting a blue collar job. Because of the sham of college and degrees, there just aren't enough people to fill these jobs. They are very well paying and are available all around the country.

And a lot of that is cause parents (and society) has been shoving down kids throats, "You need a college degree to be someone worth a shit", not "you can get by without a degree and still be worth a shit, or get a Journeyman/apprenticeship in trade Y and always be worth a shit..

Continued next post..

garhkal
04-19-2016, 05:58 PM
Or the government can pay for everyone to go to college to meet the demands of these employers. This shouldn't be a difficult choice.

But if its the Employers wanting the degrees, why should it be the govts responsibility to pay for it??


Fundamentally, is it the role of the government to provide an individual with all the qualifications necessary for a specific job, or to provide everyone the equal opportunity to achieve those qualifications if they decide they need them for the vocation/job the individual wishes to pursue?

My point exactly MJ..


Yes. The preamble to the Constitution specifically mentions providing for the general welfare of the people.

Put yourself in the position of being on the outside looking in: if we were looking at a country with a high employment rate due to a gap between credentials required by employers in that country and credentials that the citizens of that country have... would the government of that country not be drawing negative attention to itself from the rest of the world?

How are you getting "General welfare" means the politicians should be dictating to Private employers how and why they hire whom ever, and that its the Govts responsibility to ensure everyone's educated enough to do so??


I don't see how we can really compare federal civil service employment to real work.

Based on my experiences, here are my thoughts about US federal civil service: never in the course of US history have so many people been paid so much money for so little productivity.

And what get's me, is when the govt does 'shutdown' so parses itself down to "essential personnel only", you see quite a lot of those GS spots that are 'non-essential'. Well if they are Non-essential, why are they filled/paid out for in the first place??

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 06:10 PM
And a lot of that is cause parents (and society) has been shoving down kids throats, "You need a college degree to be someone worth a shit", not "you can get by without a degree and still be worth a shit, or get a Journeyman/apprenticeship in trade Y and always be worth a shit..

But how much truth is there behind that these days? I graduated high school in 1998, thinking that I was going to go that route. It worked out so well that I ended up walking into the Navy recruiter's office, just like everyone else here (or whatever service they joined).

I've got two degrees that, quite frankly, I never really wanted. But, if I wanted to continue working in the same field when I got out of the Navy, and at the same level of responsibility; getting those degrees were a must. If apprenticeships for skilled trades were really out there like so many people claimed, there wouldn't be so many 30-year olds jockeying cash registers like there are now.

sandsjames
04-19-2016, 06:25 PM
If apprenticeships for skilled trades were really out there like so many people claimed, there wouldn't be so many 30-year olds jockeying cash registers like there are now.http://www.indeed.com/q-HVAC-jobs.html

Rainmaker
04-19-2016, 06:30 PM
Then you haven't been paying attention lately. In the case of Mexico, there are more people going back than coming in. In other words, there's a negative net immigration from there now.

That's because they're being undercut from other illegals that are flooding in from even bigger shitholes in Central America and Africa.

See, these Mexicans were getting too pricey for the Internationalists lining their pockets (who've hijacked our republic).

So, they ordered chairman Obamao's handlers to direct him to deport 'em and bring in some Somalis who aren't as demanding!

Rainmaker
04-19-2016, 08:23 PM
But if its the Employers wanting the degrees, why should it be the govts responsibility to pay for it??

By backstopping loans that can likely never be paid back or discharged thru bankruptcy, The government is in bed with banks & selling millions of Americans into a modern day form of indentured servitude.




what get's me, is when the govt does 'shutdown' so parses itself down to "essential personnel only", you see quite a lot of those GS spots that are 'non-essential'.

80% of them exist solely to service the bureaucracy and produce nothing of value. I.e "make work"....During The last .gov shutdown no one much gave a shit besides the beltway media and a bunch of civil servants that overvalue themselves because they can't easily be fired or disciplined & basically have a guaranteed job for life.

Rusty Jones
04-19-2016, 10:55 PM
http://www.indeed.com/q-HVAC-jobs.html

Have you looked at these ads individually? A high school diploma is only good enough if you already have a couple years' experience and certain certifications. Catch 22. Otherwise, you're going to need an associate's degree.

Don't think for one second that just because a job is blue collar, that it's not going to affected by "degree inflation."

garhkal
04-20-2016, 06:47 AM
But how much truth is there behind that these days? I graduated high school in 1998, thinking that I was going to go that route. It worked out so well that I ended up walking into the Navy recruiter's office, just like everyone else here (or whatever service they joined).

I've got two degrees that, quite frankly, I never really wanted. But, if I wanted to continue working in the same field when I got out of the Navy, and at the same level of responsibility; getting those degrees were a must. If apprenticeships for skilled trades were really out there like so many people claimed, there wouldn't be so many 30-year olds jockeying cash registers like there are now.

That imo depends on what apprenticeship program you get.. I know several CB's who got theirs in carpentry, plumbing or electrical that did go to work once they got out in the construction bz..

sandsjames
04-20-2016, 10:55 AM
Have you looked at these ads individually? A high school diploma is only good enough if you already have a couple years' experience and certain certifications. Catch 22. Otherwise, you're going to need an associate's degree.

Don't think for one second that just because a job is blue collar, that it's not going to affected by "degree inflation."

Right, kids can go get apprenticeships with these organizations to get their experience. This was just one specific job that I chose from a huge list of them. The certificates required are earned through the OJT with the technician. Also, once someone earns this certificate, it's a guaranteed job. Hell, you can get you a bag of tools and run your own private business in this area and make very good money.

Nobody is saying that there isn't training required, just that there are plenty of alternatives to college that will end up with a relatively good paying job. I wouldn't call having the required training for a specific job "degree inflation".

I understand that many think that a living wage should be dropped in the laps of high schoolers as soon as they graduate, or even if they don't graduate (hence the living wage minimum wage) but the truth is that people still have to be will to put in some effort, to pay their dues.

sandsjames
04-20-2016, 10:55 AM
That imo depends on what apprenticeship program you get.. I know several CB's who got theirs in carpentry, plumbing or electrical that did go to work once they got out in the construction bz..I'm guessing you meant "Seabees"?

Mjölnir
04-20-2016, 12:17 PM
Right, kids can go get apprenticeships with these organizations to get their experience. This was just one specific job that I chose from a huge list of them. The certificates required are earned through the OJT with the technician. Also, once someone earns this certificate, it's a guaranteed job. Hell, you can get you a bag of tools and run your own private business in this area and make very good money.

Nobody is saying that there isn't training required, just that there are plenty of alternatives to college that will end up with a relatively good paying job. I wouldn't call having the required training for a specific job "degree inflation".

I understand that many think that a living wage should be dropped in the laps of high schoolers as soon as they graduate, or even if they don't graduate (hence the living wage minimum wage) but the truth is that people still have to be will to put in some effort, to pay their dues.

In high school I worked in a Wester Sizzlin' steak house. The manager was the 2d highest paid employee, the highest paid employee was the head cook. He had worked his way up from being a dishwasher.

Not that food service is the "end all be all" ... but many, MANY jobs are the kind you work your way into with experience and time in the company. One of the issues I see a lot (especially my younger GS civilian workforce) is they want to be GS 12's, 13's from the start and don't understand that they have to start at square one.

Rainmaker
04-20-2016, 03:25 PM
Right, kids can go get apprenticeships with these organizations to get their experience. This was just one specific job that I chose from a huge list of them. The certificates required are earned through the OJT with the technician. Also, once someone earns this certificate, it's a guaranteed job. Hell, you can get you a bag of tools and run your own private business in this area and make very good money.

If I was a young man starting out today, The skilled Trades (or military)are the way I would go. Those jobs can never be outsourced and you can take the skills with you wherever you go.


I understand that many think that a living wage should be dropped in the laps of high schoolers as soon as they graduate, or even if they don't graduate (hence the living wage minimum wage) but the truth is that people still have to be will to put in some effort, to pay their dues..

But, we also could have some higher valued jobs for Lower- skilled. we had those back when we actually still made things in this country. My older Brother was able to put himself through Engineering school solely by working full time summers at the Kelly tire plant in Cumberland, MD. There were plenty of adults working there and supporting their families. It was a respectable living and it provided an actual pension.

Local People took pride in that plant. But, Now the plant is closed and the tires are being made in China or Mexico or wherever. So, the unskilled adult is then left to choose between getting on the dole or taking multiple minimum wage Jobs like Flipping burgers and being a stock boy, which used to be done almost exclusively by Kids. Those jobs were never meant to be a career to support a family and provide a 'living' wage. Or he can go $50K in debt to get a college degree and work in call center for $12 an hour until it gets outsourced to India.

But, Tires are still being made. They're just not being made here. Why not? They want to pretend that 'Globalization' was just some naturally occurring phenomenon. But, it's a direct result of the trade policies they put in effect.

Politicians of Both Political parties and the Media are Demonizing these Companies like Wal-Mart and McDonalds, in order to deflect the anger away from themselves for selling us down the river with this Bullshit.

sandsjames
04-20-2016, 03:30 PM
If I was a young man starting out today, The skilled Trades (or military)are the way I would go. Those jobs can never be outsourced and you can take the skills with you wherever you go.



But, we also could have some higher valued jobs for Lower- skilled. we had those back when we actually still made things in this country. My older Brother was able to put himself through Engineering school solely by working full time summers at the Kelly tire plant in Cumberland, MD. There were plenty of adults working there and supporting their families. It was a respectable living and it provided an actual pension.

Local People took pride in that plant. But, Now the plant is closed and the tires are being made in China or Mexico or wherever. So, the unskilled adult is then left to choose between getting on the dole or taking multiple minimum wage Jobs like Flipping burgers and being a stock boy, which used to be done almost exclusively by Kids. Those jobs were never meant to be a career to support a family and provide a 'living' wage.

But, Tires are still being made. They're just not being made here. Why not? They want to pretend that 'Globalization' was just some naturally occurring phenomenon. But, it's a direct result of the trade policies they put in effect.

Politicians of Both Political parties and the Media are Demonizing these Companies like Wal-Mart and McDonalds, in order to deflect the anger away from themselves for selling us down the river with this Bullshit.

I agree with you on this completely. One of the things I really like about England when we were stationed there was that my son went to a local English school where, at age 16, the have the option in the direction of their education. They can take the trade path and have a completed apprenticeship by the time they are 18 or they can take the scholastic route and pursue college.

efmbman
04-20-2016, 03:50 PM
If I was a young man starting out today, The skilled Trades (or military)are the way I would go. Those jobs can never be outsourced and you can take the skills with you wherever you go.

Completely agree. I'm already telling this to my oldest child. Many times I wish I had taken that route.

garhkal
04-20-2016, 05:07 PM
I'm guessing you meant "Seabees"?

Yup/ Its shorthand!


I agree with you on this completely. One of the things I really like about England when we were stationed there was that my son went to a local English school where, at age 16, the have the option in the direction of their education. They can take the trade path and have a completed apprenticeship by the time they are 18 or they can take the scholastic route and pursue college.

I agree. As i have mentioned before, i also like how English schools give everyone a 'work week' where they can get a little hands on experience in at least one company..

garhkal
04-20-2016, 05:09 PM
Now onto other news college related. Saw this on today's Outnumbered, where an 'anti-rape culture' is going dark by spoofing college acceptance letters telling prospective college goers they will be losing their virginity to rapists and such..

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/sexual-assault-awareness-campaign-puts-a-dark-twist-on-acceptance-letters_us_571545b8e4b0060ccda40b78

http://mashable.com/2016/04/18/college-rape-ads-acceptance-letter/#P7DVdutVcEqK

Rusty Jones
04-20-2016, 05:31 PM
That imo depends on what apprenticeship program you get.. I know several CB's who got theirs in carpentry, plumbing or electrical that did go to work once they got out in the construction bz..

But they had to join the military to get it. And only a very small percentage of the population can even get into the military these days.

Rusty Jones
04-20-2016, 05:33 PM
Right, kids can go get apprenticeships with these organizations to get their experience. This was just one specific job that I chose from a huge list of them. The certificates required are earned through the OJT with the technician. Also, once someone earns this certificate, it's a guaranteed job. Hell, you can get you a bag of tools and run your own private business in this area and make very good money.

Nobody is saying that there isn't training required, just that there are plenty of alternatives to college that will end up with a relatively good paying job. I wouldn't call having the required training for a specific job "degree inflation".

I understand that many think that a living wage should be dropped in the laps of high schoolers as soon as they graduate, or even if they don't graduate (hence the living wage minimum wage) but the truth is that people still have to be will to put in some effort, to pay their dues.

I clicked on three or four of these ads, and none of them said anything about apprenticeships. They were ads for HVAC jobs. And they were only going to offer OJT to those who had an associate's degree.

Rusty Jones
04-20-2016, 05:35 PM
Yup/ Its shorthand!

It was actually "CB" first, as it stood for Construction Battalion. "Seabee" was just a way to make a word out of it.

Rusty Jones
04-20-2016, 05:38 PM
Completely agree. I'm already telling this to my oldest child. Many times I wish I had taken that route.

Well... I think that the correct way for Rainmaker to put it was that the jobs can't be offshored. Because, once upon a time, we all thought that being a physician or working on mainframes couldn't be "outsourced." Now, companies will fly people in from India and China to do those jobs.

No job is safe. But, hey, if people want to be so strong on the "free market economy," I guess we shouldn't try to do shit about that.

sandsjames
04-20-2016, 05:59 PM
I clicked on three or four of these ads, and none of them said anything about apprenticeships. They were ads for HVAC jobs. Step 1: Do an apprenticeship with a local HVAC company
Step 2: Apply for one of the 60,000 available jobs
Step 3: Get hired


And they were only going to offer OJT to those who had an associate's degree.Right...if you have an associates, you can get OJT. If you do an apprenticeship, that is OJT, then you can get hired on without the associates. It does still take a little effort on the part of the person looking for the job.

sandsjames
04-20-2016, 06:00 PM
It was actually "CB" first, as it stood for Construction Battalion. "Seabee" was just a way to make a word out of it.I didn't know that. Good info.

Mjölnir
04-20-2016, 07:15 PM
I didn't know that. Good info.

Navy: we take the acronym and make a word out of it ...

Rainmaker
04-20-2016, 07:17 PM
Well... I think that the correct way for Rainmaker to put it was that the jobs can't be offshored. Because, once upon a time, we all thought that being a physician or working on mainframes couldn't be "outsourced." Now, companies will fly people in from India and China to do those jobs.

No job is safe. But, hey, if people want to be so strong on the "free market economy," I guess we shouldn't try to do shit about that.

Agree. They are insourcing as well.

H1 visas are killing the American Tech worker. Which is the main reason the blood suckers running companies like facefuck & Google are pushing open borders.

Pretty soon when you call for a plumber he may be an indentured slave from India. It'll still cost you as much. But, the company will pay him 1/2 the salary of Joe the plumber.

Mjölnir
04-20-2016, 07:19 PM
Agree. They are insourcing as well.

H1 visas are killing the American Tech worker. Which is the main reason the blood suckers running companies like facefuck & Google are pushing open borders.

Remind me to friend (fiend?) you

Rusty Jones
04-21-2016, 01:18 AM
Agree. They are insourcing as well.

H1 visas are killing the American Tech worker. Which is the main reason the blood suckers running companies like facefuck & Google are pushing open borders.

Pretty soon when you call for a plumber he may be an indentured slave from India. It'll still cost you as much. But, the company will pay him 1/2 the salary of Joe the plumber.

Which is exactly why I'm not for laissez faire capitalism.

Mjollnir and garhkal were asking why educational credentials or employer's requiring them should be adjusted (or [dis]incentivized) by the government.

Think about this: in the case of a physician, why are hospitals and practices flying people in from China? Because there aren't enough qualified Americans. Why aren't there enough qualified Americans?

Well... you have to complete a pre-med curriculum as part of your bachelor's program, followed by four years of med school. After you get your MD, you're looking at anywhere from three to ten years of residency, depending on your specialty.

Sure, you get paid for residency and the money isn't bad at all. However... you can't go to med school part time. If you enter med school at the age of 22, you won't finish until you're 26. During those years, you're a full-fledged adult with full-fledged adult responsibilities. You've got to put a roof over your own head, clothes on your own back, and food on your own table. Oh yeah, and you have to pay for med school too.

How many Americans can do that? Not many. Mom and dad has been waiting your whole life to kick you the fuck out of their house so they can go back to acting like teenagers again. You could always find a sugar mama to support you while you're in med school, but good luck with that.

Since there aren't enough Americans to pull that off... you could always bring in a guy from a communist country who has never had to worry about any of that.

So how do we keep hospitals and practices from resorting to that? We... find a way to ensure that there are enough Americans getting the credentials.