RE: Universities to “lose all federal financial aid” (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

youngsubgeoff -> RE: Universities to “lose all federal financial aid” (11/14/2007 6:04:29 PM)

Ive said it before, and Ill say it again. The reason albums arent selling these days is because most of todays music SUCKS! Also, the stuff actually worth listening to isnt promoted like it should be. Im going to say this again, as well. FUCK THE RIAA.



Bufotenin -> RE: Universities to “lose all federal financial aid” (11/14/2007 6:22:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

Well, it's pretty obvious then why music artists start their own labels.
Why be "handing out money" to all those middle men.
Have your own people to do it.


Actually, if you're talking about well-known artists, their "own labels" are predominantly vanity labels (which is just a mini label within a bigger label). They get a cut of the revenue the lesser-known artists they sign to their vanity labels generate, and those artists get free publicity through association. Other than that, it's basically in name-only and the parent label handles all the work and gets most of the revenue.  



Lordandmaster -> RE: Universities to “lose all federal financial aid” (11/14/2007 6:28:23 PM)

Fargle, do you know what you're talking about?  What lobbying costs do universities have?

Besides, I don't understand what "market segment" federal funding for universities supposedly creates.  Demand for a college education is caused by the employment market.  Tuitions are high because the cost of a college education is high.  You can do it the European way, on the cheap...and you get what you pay for.

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

I suggest that in fact, federal funding *does* increase the end-user costs of education, as it creates an entire market segment for their product which wouldn't exist otherwise.

And then there's the costs incurred by the institution in lobbying, etc...



farglebargle -> RE: Universities to “lose all federal financial aid” (11/14/2007 8:35:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

Fargle, do you know what you're talking about? What lobbying costs do universities have?

Besides, I don't understand what "market segment" federal funding for universities supposedly creates. Demand for a college education is caused by the employment market. Tuitions are high because the cost of a college education is high. You can do it the European way, on the cheap...and you get what you pay for.

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

I suggest that in fact, federal funding *does* increase the end-user costs of education, as it creates an entire market segment for their product which wouldn't exist otherwise.

And then there's the costs incurred by the institution in lobbying, etc...



Actually, so very little of the "employment market" requires any college education. Tuitions are whatever the traffic will bear. Access to federal grants and student loans artificially increases the amount the customer has to spend.

My hypothesis is that 60 - 75% of the workforce doesn't require higher education, but rather apprenticeships in skilled trades. Once you clear out those folks, for whom differential equations is a waste of time, then the remaining students can better utilize the limited resources.



Lordandmaster -> RE: Universities to “lose all federal financial aid” (11/15/2007 12:58:01 AM)

Yes, tuitions, like everything else, are as high as the market will bear.  How are you going to change that?  As I said, you can try the European way, where people pay little or no tuition at all, and you get what you pay for.  A university education is a very expensive thing.  It's not as though universities don't have real costs--or as though they're not doing anything to face the social problem.  For example, there's a quiet but meaningful movement afoot, at least among the richest universities, to raise enough money so that they never have to charge tuition again.  If you're admitted, you're in for free; as long as the university's endowment is huge enough to cover the costs, there's no reason not to do it.  But that's not going to happen tomorrow, and it's going to start at the TOP, not at the bottom.

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

Actually, so very little of the "employment market" requires any college education. Tuitions are whatever the traffic will bear. Access to federal grants and student loans artificially increases the amount the customer has to spend.

My hypothesis is that 60 - 75% of the workforce doesn't require higher education, but rather apprenticeships in skilled trades. Once you clear out those folks, for whom differential equations is a waste of time, then the remaining students can better utilize the limited resources.



Alumbrado -> RE: Universities to “lose all federal financial aid” (11/15/2007 6:45:35 AM)

quote:

My hypothesis is that 60 - 75% of the workforce doesn't require higher education, but rather apprenticeships in skilled trades.


What skilled trades?  Making televisions or shoes or cars or bicycles?  The jobs requiring those skills were outsourced overseas a long time ago, and no amount of fantasy dreaming will bring them back.




mnottertail -> RE: Universities to “lose all federal financial aid” (11/15/2007 6:49:32 AM)

while I do have some issues with the premise, I would like to buffer this by saying that with the worldwide political unrest and the plummeting dollar, it may be that forward looking companies (if there are any) are on the brink of bringing home the bacon, because it is going to be cheaper to build the mousetraps here and we know our devils, politically.

Dreyfus

edit: ssssssssssssssshit! 



farglebargle -> RE: Universities to “lose all federal financial aid” (11/15/2007 9:44:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alumbrado

quote:

My hypothesis is that 60 - 75% of the workforce doesn't require higher education, but rather apprenticeships in skilled trades.


What skilled trades? Making televisions or shoes or cars or bicycles? The jobs requiring those skills were outsourced overseas a long time ago, and no amount of fantasy dreaming will bring them back.


Ok, so that's a valid point. But it doesn't mean that they still need a college education to be successful.



Alumbrado -> RE: Universities to “lose all federal financial aid” (11/15/2007 12:35:52 PM)

Unfortunately, the dumbing down of education means that simple things like reading and writing, rational thought, balancing a checkbook, and so forth are barely taught until the college level anymore. Without a degree, the employer is taking a big gamble, and most are likely to assign that pool of workers to menial dead end positions. 
It is no longer a matter of  someone with a degree thinking they are better, it is a matter of someone with a degree being barely qualified.



tightlockup -> RE: Universities to “lose all federal financial aid” (11/15/2007 1:24:59 PM)

I wouldn't stress. Federal funds are supposed to be withheld from universities that do not permit military recruiting, and that's not happening either.

The music industry is centered around a big lie. The artists and fans are perpetually screwed by these unneccessary gatekeepers. I'd prefer to see a music production situation where the artists have more control and get more money from their work, and fans have more control over getting the music they want, and how much they end up paying for it.



Zensee -> RE: Universities to “lose all federal financial aid” (11/15/2007 3:50:20 PM)

In addition to tightlockup's observations, I think the new digital reality means a return to the concert performance as a necessary skill for artists. Since CDs can be easily replicated, artists need to either make CDs that are unique and worthy artifacts AND to be able to interpret and perform their studio work, live and on stage.

Better music for everyone... eventually.


Z. 



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.171875