University Students SUCK

[Elspode]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

In many ways we were better off without the “safety nets” because they have too many holes in them and too many people have come to expect too much from them.

I would agree that there is a certain segment of society that has figured out a way to do as little as possible and live off of the teat of social programs, and that's certainly their prerogative if they have no higher aspirations than that, and are able bodied and not mentally deficient. Our current social programs keep people from living as though the USA was a Third World Country, but not a lot more.

I have to do what I can to make sure he doesn’t drown.

And this fact alone makes you so much better than most people, Bruce. While I'm sure most of us give to some worthy cause, either a big one or a personal one, you embody what is best about human nature, and those who know you are fortunate to count you as friend. Mrs Elspode and I always make a point to share what we've got. Sometimes it is very, very little, and sometimes it is okay. Either way, as long as we've got a place to live indoors, no one we know will go homeless, and as long as we have food, no one who asks for a meal will go hungry. That being said, we couldn't begin to feed everyone in Grandview who might need a sandwich, and we can't provide support for all the people who want to work, but who are unable to do so effectively.

My son *wants* nothing more than to have a 8-5 job in a boring office somewhere...but his brain injury won't allow it. Therefore, he works as hard as he can in the only job he's been able to keep for more than a couple of months. That job isn't enough to keep him in a slum apartment by itself, and we aren't always going to be around to help him.

A civilized society supports its needy to a reasonable extent. When the historical pendulum swings to the Right, big business is given breaks and the needy are shoved aside to help give it to them, since those businesses are going to create more jobs and therefore more money for everyone (well, in India and China, anyway). When the pendulum swings to the Left, we tax the rich and feed the poor. Robin Hood would be proud. And it probably *is* highway robbery.

There's not a perfect answer, but I know that my son's standard of living got lowered by about 15% beginning September 1, and there's not a damn thing he can do about it. He simply isn't capable.

Originally Posted by wolf

Isn't Antioch the school where you had to specifically ask "May I touch you on the shoulder?" "May I stroke your hair?" "May I fuck you like a dog in heat?"

I don't think that's a ringing endorsement of the school or it's administration.

The students in your class suck, Bri, because they lack experience of the world, and only know what their favorite bloggers tell them about it.

From Antioch's Web Page:


Who Attends Antioch College

Antioch College students are unique individuals who come from all over the world to participate in our distinctive educational program. It is hard to typify who our students are, but the data below might give you a better sense of the kinds of students who come to Antioch.

ANTIOCH COLLEGE - FALL 2005
Profile Of New Entering Students

New Students 70

Entry Type
First Year Students 71%
Transfer Students 29%

Gender
Female 53%
Male 47%

SAT Scores (middle 50%)
SAT-Verbal 620
SAT-Math 550
SAT-Combined 1170



Top Academic Area of Interests

English Literature 14%
Visual Arts 11%
Communications 8%
Political Science 6%
Undecided 5%
History 4%
Philosophy 4%


Comparative Institutional Research Program (CIRP)
Higher Education Research Institute - The American Freshman 2004
Item Antioch College 4-Year Highly Selective Colleges

General

Travel more than 500 miles to attend college 55.9%
Have both parents alive and living with each other 48.3%
View themselves as being compassionate 86%
View themselves as creative 75.4%
Had the school in which they enrolled as first choice 79.3%


Year before coming to college

Attended religious services 57.9%
Discussed religion/spirituality with friends 51.7%
Participated in organized demonstrations 81%
Were likely to discuss politics 77.6%

Objectives in going to college

Becoming accomplished in one of the performing arts 27.1%
Becoming an authority in my field 51.7%
Influencing the political structure 58.6%
Influencing social values 74.6%
Being well-off financially 22.4%
Writing original works (poems, stories, novels) 46.3%
Creating artistic work 50%
Becoming successful in a business of my own 24.1%
Becoming involved in programs to clean up the environment 44.8%
Developing a meaningful philosophy of life 84.2%
Participating in a community action program 58.6%
Keeping up to date with political affairs 70.7%
Becoming a community leader 44.8%

Reasons for deciding to go to college

To get a better job 51.7%
To gain a general education and appreciation of ideas 82.8%
To make me a more cultured person 70.2%
To be able to make more money 27.6%
To get training for a specific career 36.2%
Plan to go on to obtain a Ph.D. 29.4%

Sounds like the "may I fuck you like a dog in heat crowd" to me.

[Radar]

Originally Posted by Brianna

As long as he asks nicely...

...of course, you guys are right. It's really due to the fact that they are kids and (most) have been through very little indeed. I feel better. Level heads prevail and all that!

And, just curious, Radar---if you don't want a welfare state, what do you propose as an alternative? Who cares for the elderly and the kids without parents? Foster kids recieve Medicaid to cover their medical bills (and here in Oh. they want to nix their dental benefits--perfect!) so--who takes care of them?

A long time ago, we had no government welfare programs. Schools were privately funded from within the communities they served. And people in need would rely on their friends, family, neighbors, churches, or private charities. Back then they got MORE help than they do now, and they had more incentive to stand up on their own.

Government is like King Midas, but instead of gold, everything government touches turns to shit. The "war on poverty" resulted in more poor people. The "war on drugs" has resulted in more people using drugs, and now the "war on terror" has resulted in more terrorism.

If you genuinely care about something, you should never let government get involved. Private organizations are more efficient and get more help to those in need 100% of the time.

Government keeps 85 cents of every dollar marked for social programs as overhead and only gets 15 cents to those in need. You can reverse those numbers for private charities. Some people stupidly claim that people wouldn't give to charity if they could keep what they own. The truth is more people would give to charity if they weren't convinced that government programs actually help people, or if they had more money to give.

If we elminate all the unconstitutional parts of government, we'll have more money to give, more people will give because they know Uncle Sam is not looking after their loved ones and others in need, and less people will need help because with more people keeping what they earn, we'd have more businesses created, more jobs, and more opportunity for people to take care of themselves.

If 1/3 of the money stolen from people at the point of a gun were collected, those in need would have MUCH MORE help than they currently get from government. Those who were not responsible and did not prepare for thier retirement, healthcare, etc. would serve as an example to others to be careful and to be responsible.

People are not owed anything based on their percieved "needs" or desires.

I would also give people and businesses a dollar for dollar tax credit for any money they spend on social programs that government is currently is involved in (all of them are unconstitutional). This means if you wanted, you could choose to send poor kids to private schools where they'll get a better education. You can choose to give money to a shelter, to a retirement home, to handicapped people, to charities that give a stipend to those in need, to food banks, etc.

Every dollar you spend would be a dollar off of your normal tax burden. It would give people the choice on where their tax money goes. Rather than having money stolen from you at the point of a gun, you can have some control on where your money goes. If you don't want your money to fund an unconstitutional war of aggression, an insane drug war, etc. you can make sure it's spent on those who need it and owe no taxes at the end of the year.

Originally Posted by Elspode

Strange...my kid's Medicaid was cut back recently, yet no one has come knocking on the door to offer to pick up the financial loss. Using your logic, if he loses something, something else will come to replace it, but it hasn't happened.

Did I miss the mail-in or something? Is there a website for applying for this new font of charity and assistance? Do I just call the Libertarian Party and ask for the Help Desk?

The thing about charity, is you have to ask for it. They generally don't go door to door asking if you need something.

Ask yourself if all medicaid, social security, medicare, welfare, public education, etc. were totally and completely cut off immediately, do you think people would be more apt to help you? My guess is yes. Right now many people don't donate to charity because they are under the mistaken assumption that government programs (funded with stolen money) are actually "helping" people. If everyone knew that there were none of these programs anymore, and they got to keep 100% of what they earn, they'd be more apt to give to those in need. And if they didn't get to keep their own money, they'd at least be able to choose where their money went..... if we were using my system.

Keep in mind, you are not owed money because you have a sick kid. You are not entitled to the money of other people based on yours or your kids needs. Forced charity is not charity; it's robbery. If someone puts a gun to my head and says they want my money so they can spend it on orphans and elderly people, it's still robbery. The fact that they are going spend it on those in need does not make it any less of a robbery.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by marichiko

Who Attends Antioch College

Antioch College is better than sliced bread... BLAH BLAH BLAH...

I'm sure Antioch College is a fine school.

The first thing I notice here is that the Freshmen only make up 70% of the incoming students. The rest are upperclassmen who are transferring in from elsewhere. For them to be transferring in, that would normally mean there have to be vacant slots for them to fill. How many open slots? Well, normally we are talking about sophomores when we talk about transfers. Each year, after spending their first year at Antioch, apparently 30% of the students can't wait to get the hell away.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Radar

A long time ago, we had no government welfare programs. Schools were privately funded from within the communities they served. And people in need would rely on their friends, family, neighbors, churches, or private charities. Back then they got MORE help than they do now, and they had more incentive to stand up on their own.

Ah, the good old days, when men were real men, and women were real women, and small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri were real small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri. Kids these days just don't understand. Back in my day...

[Trilby]

Poverty went up as a result of Reagan's supply-side economics. Investor's didn't invest in the US, they invested in Mexico, India, etc. The rich got richer and the poor got poorer and it's only getting worse. This country has lots of money--it's just all going to Cheney. I wonder--how much money does he need? All of it?

Then what?

Originally Posted by glatt

Each year, after spending their first year at Antioch, apparently 30% of the students can't wait to get the hell away.

I glanced at the stats for my alma mater, the University of Colorado. About 29% of their new students are transfer students each year. Maybe they lost their 29% to Antioch. I believe an attrition rate of 25- 30% is fairly normal - kids drop out and work for a while, tranfer to other colleges, whatever. No biggie.

[Rock Steady]

Originally Posted by Radar

A long time ago, we had no government welfare programs. Schools were privately funded from within the communities they served. And people in need would rely on their friends, family, neighbors, churches, or private charities. Back then they got MORE help than they do now, and they had more incentive to stand up on their own.

This is compleat fiction. These rose colored glasses were developed in the '60s, now fashionably worn by a new generation of reactionaries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactionary

I was already tired of hearing that baloney about 30 years ago.

A long time ago, people got sick and died. Shit happened and it was ugly.

In the 1830s, the entreprenuers of the day ripped up each other's train track, treated workers like slaves and floated phoney stock to fleece the public. They called these guys Robber Barons for a good reason. More bullshit hits the fan in 1929. Now, government regulation of the financial markets is now taken for granted. Labor laws protect employees.

Today's "Welfare Reform" now "Workfare" puts already working mothers on a second job, bussed 25 miles out of the city for something that barely covers the extra child care costs.

[Rock Steady]

Actually, Brianna, transfer to anywhere to get away from Dr. LovesHimself. You are in a comprimised situation at school. You should transfer and get a clean slate; where the faculty don't know you from Adam or Eve. Out of Dayton is best.

[Radar]

Robber barrons had nothing to do with capitalism. They were criminals, and the only difference that would happen with these criminals under socialism is that instead of being wealthy criminals, they'd be wealthy members of a totalitarian government.

[slang]

Originally Posted by Brianna

What about stuff people have no control over?

What about the stuff that people DO have control over? That's my objection. And the fact that many of these people feel that somehow I am totally responsible for all their sorrows.

Those people can simply fuck off.

For many others, I'll help in one way or another. Many times I'll actually enjoy doing so. Those cases arent the fucking useless eaters that demand my money and effort though. Those that insist that I OWE them something for something that happend to them or their family.

[Rock Steady]

Originally Posted by Radar

Robber barrons had nothing to do with capitalism. They were criminals, and the only difference that would happen with these criminals under socialism is that instead of being wealthy criminals, they'd be wealthy members of a totalitarian government.

They WERE Capitalism. Some of their names are still with us today. Carneige Hall, Carneige-Mellon University: Andrew and Andrew. They were not the worst, but they had a spotted record. The american industrial revolution did great things for this country, but it was not without it's otrocities.

Jay Gould was a real sleaze ball.

Legacy

In his lifetime and for a century after, Gould had a firm reputation as the most unethical of the 19th century American businessmen known as robber barons. He routinely tested the boundaries of the law, finding ways to turn a situation in his favor when other businessmen might have settled on breaking even. He pioneered the practice, now commonplace, of declaring bankruptcy as a strategic maneuver. He had no opposition to using stock manipulation and insider trading (which were then legal but frowned upon) to build capital and to execute or prevent hostile takeover attempts. As a result, many contemporary businessmen did not trust Gould and often expressed contempt for his approach to business. Even so, John D. Rockefeller named him as the most skilled businessman he ever encountered.


List of businessmen who were called robber barons

* John Jacob Astor (real estate, fur)
* Andrew Carnegie (steel)
* Jay Cooke (finance)
* Daniel Drew (finance)
* James Fisk (finance)
* Henry Flagler (railroads)
* Henry Ford (automobile)
* Henry Clay Frick (steel)
* Jay Gould (finance, railroads)
* Edward Henry Harriman (railroads)
* Collis P. Huntington (railroads)
* James J. Hill (railroads)
* J. P. Morgan (banking)
* John D. Rockefeller (oil, the Standard Oil company)
* Leland Stanford (railroads)
* Cornelius Vanderbilt (railroads, shipping)

[Rock Steady]

Note: I have role played Jay Gould at GameCons using feeder RRs and skilled insolvency to win games of 1830. "RS sells all shares of the New York Central and gives up presidency."

If people would play more RailRoad board games, they would learn some relevant 19th century history lessons.

[Rock Steady]

Originally Posted by Radar

Robber barrons had nothing to do with capitalism. They were criminals, and the only difference that would happen with these criminals under socialism is that instead of being wealthy criminals, they'd be wealthy members of a totalitarian government.

The main problem with this country is the polarized arguments. Black and White. You're a capitalist or a socialist. You're left wing or right wing. You're religious or atheist.

That is bullshit. You're radar is broken because of passive aggressive listening. I've bought and sold companies, stock options, stock, real estate, Oil & Gas Partnerships, ...

Where in all that do you read socialist?

I really don't want my assets nationalized as they did to people in Hungary and other Soviet Sattelites.

????????

You make no sense.

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by marichiko

Transfer to Antioch if you can, Brianna, you'll get a better education and be surrounded by people who have actually have two thoughts in their brains that they can rub together!

Hey, one of my uncles went to Antioch! Let's see, last I checked he works as a... oh yes, a security guard. Real world-changer, that one. Pride of the family.