General Politics Discussion [ARCHIVED] • Page 177

In a general sense I agree. Small non-profit private colleges that provide low-tuition opportunities are generally pretty good options for kids who can't afford a state school tuition but don't have a CC in the area or don't awnt to go to a CC (and need a place for years 3 and 4 of school)

But, I went to a great non-profit private school and had a great experience, so I'm probably biased.

 

I think there's a difference between a private non-profit school and P3s.

 

Of course, but as far as discussing HilDog's college tuition idea is concerned, the only mention of any private-public thing going on is smaller private schools getting some of the funding. Really not sure where else there's a lot room for it in the general outline of the idea.

 

Right. Let me elaborate. I understand that the struggles of adjunct professors and other forms of labor in the university system aren't particularly known, but what I'm specifically referring to are how cost-cutting, as a goal, will lend itself to hurting the most vulnerable people in the schools. It is a matter of establishing a common sense. It would be comparable to how unions were and are blamed for off-shoring jobs or how public sector unions are blamed for state budgets. Given how administrations have become more like their profit-seeking counterparts in the business world, this is likely, particularly given the tendency to compromise with the status quo elements.

I'm not sure where you've found this tendency. I think Obama's healthcare program has demonstrated this in very stark terms.

 

interesting, interesting...

I Was A Cop In A Country With No Guns: 6 Startling Truths

 

I understand that in a general sense, if the government says "cut spending" to these institutions, you're probably right. But the indication from the proposal is that there will be some oversight over what can be cut. Increasing educational spending on students/educational services probably can't be achieved by cutting the pay/firing adjuncts. The bill would almost definitely have to include language more complex than just "cut costs any way you can".

Tendency of new government spending over the decades. It's usually been "do this now, cut x amount later through different initiatives" that never really come into play as different groups get their hands on the money and than lobby for the spending cuts to never happen because they say they need the funding. As for the ACA in general, it basically helped out the poor and the working poor with the spending at the expense of the middle and upper classes. But in a general sense the biggest "cost-cutting" parts of the law, the higher deductibles for catastrophic/bronze/silver plans are effecting a very small segment of the population, and generally not the worst off, as they qualify for cost-sharing subsidies if they buy the silver plan. The people towards the upper end of the 400% of the FPL are the ones that hurt the most, and it's only those people on the individual insurance market, which is roughly....what, 5% of the country? Higher deductibles elsewhere (i.e. employer provided care) are due to private company decisions, not public policy mandates.

The other big "cost-cutting" measure in the law that I can think of is experimenting with different Medicare payment policies, like taking away payment to hospitals for higher re-admittance rates, which isn't hurting the Medicare beneficiaries themselves.

 

This is a fantastic post.

 

Log Cabin Republicans shocked over the RNC's anti-LGBT platform

Log Cabin Republicans | A Message on the GOP Platform from Log Cabin Republicans President Gregory T. Angelo

 

look i dislike W as much as the next fellow but when Obama starts doing it i swear it's so he doesn't embarrass himself and that's adorable

 

One would obviously think that, and I'm not saying it is only adjuncts that would be targeted, but that, given the common sense, it isn't the upper echelon of the hierarchy that will feel the brunt of these costs. Part of the other ways they are claiming to focus on cost reduction is to shift to online courses and things like that. That cuts against, for example, tenure and more professors, etc., precisely because there is a built-in ability of reducing staff, whilst servicing the students. To your point about ACA, yes, a lot of this has to do with how the market chooses to act and that is precisely what one gets when they allow them a seat at the table, or sculpting policy that tries to use market mechanisms to resolve the crises in health care. The comparison is instructive of the inherent issues with using the market as the mechanism by which we make public policy.

 

Gawker has been running a pretty great series on adjunct professor stories http://gawker.com/tag/adjunct-professors

 

The adjuncts for my law school's school system just voted to unionize because of how terribly exploited they have been. Not a whisper of concern, let alone support, from students-- it was pretty disheartening.

 

If you were ever unsure of whether a Republican is more preferable than an Independent to a Democrat, look no further than IL-13.

Gill faces challenges to congressional bid

I've voted and worked for Dr. Gill for many years and, despite their knowing that he would run and garner lots of support (he lost by 0.3% as a Democrat because of a GP candidate) in his Independent bid, they decided to run a candidate effectively ensuring that Republican sleaze bag Rodney Davis would retain his seat. And now they're trying to get him off the ballot by challenging his petition signatures.

Fuck the Democrats so hard. Maintaining the two party monopoly is more important than policy.

 

An adjunct professor's letter to Father Holtschneider - The DePaulia

My alma matter's smear campaign against adjuncts trying to unionize has been enraging. I could on forever about the absurd grip that neoliberal policies have over it.

 

How many times has birdman been banned in the last 5 years? haha

 

Philly airport workers vote to strike during the DNC

 

Thoughts on this?

 

Not sure if it's just me or not, but in recent weeks Hillary seems to have been talking in a lower register. I can't help but think the sexist complaints about her being "shrill" have caused her to do this purposely, which kind of sucks.

 

The Blairites

I think his intent was to ensure that people were made accountable, but the side-effect is that people are subjected to harassment, which is pretty fucking terrible. I do, however, think there is some cynicism at play here that is comparable to the idea of the "Bernie Bro", which was used to tarnish the Sanders campaign as anti-woman. Either way, it hurts women and others on both fronts.

 

It may have to do with her coughing spells.

 

People are still finding ways to get a vote then, by the look of it. Good for them.

 

Well Mays new cabinet looks like a disaster waiting to happen.

 

Boris Johnson as foreign secretary. Fucking hell.

 

This cycle has really opened the floodgates for terrible celebrity impersonators.

The only good ones have been Larry David as Sanders and that SNL gal as Lindsey Graham.