Andy Strum's Blog, page 4
November 12, 2010
I Hope the President Dislikes my Children
The President doesn't seem to care for our hard working citizens that have incomes above $200,000 and since I would like my children to be financially successful, I hope the President doesn't care for them.
The President also likes to lump those making a few hundred thousand dollars a year with those making multi-millions of dollars a year. Hardly seems to make sense. It seems to just make for a good sound bite. It appears he would like them to fund his spending habits. At the sign of resistance, he berates them for not paying their fair share.
Successful individuals:
1.Start businesses that employ people in their neighborhoods.
2.Pay their wages, social security taxes, provide health insurance and other benefits.
3.Pay a multitude of business related taxes and personal taxes on all levels. (Federal, State and Local)
4.Pay real estate taxes on homes and business properties that support the local school systems. At the same time, in many cases, send their children to private schools, lessening the burden on public schools.
5. Donate their time, money and energy to local organizations and causes.
6.Spend their money which supports other services and businesses.
7.In most cases they raise a respectful family which carries on their ideals.
The list continues, but needless to say they contribute in a large way to society. And, yes, they are the beneficiary of many things our great country has to offer. They have taken those benefits and used them to their own and many other peoples' advantage.
Look around and you'll see hospital wings, college buildings, ball fields, parks, museum wings, theatres and more with people's names on them. In most cases, those people donated the money to fund those items. Houses of worship often rely on these people for personal donations and help with expansion projects and fundraisers.
Well-to-do people, like others, may not be perfect, but they shouldn't be vilified by the President just because they won't fund his programs. Maybe the President would be better off asking for their input and advice. Make them part of the decision making process instead of the ones required to fund the outcome.
Our country has an employment problem. Businesses of America do the employing. It's time to ask them what the government can do to make them comfortable enough to start hiring again. Let's stop asking them to fund unemployment.
Back to my kids
It would be a pleasure to have them included in "Successful Individuals"
Let them make a good income, hire others, pay taxes, raise a good family, donate their time money and energy to worthy causes and be disliked by the President.
Please see exceprts from my book:
"Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle Class American" By: Andy Strum
on Amazon at:
http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Fed-Up-Middle-Class-American/dp/1453640460/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1289578712&sr=1-1
The President also likes to lump those making a few hundred thousand dollars a year with those making multi-millions of dollars a year. Hardly seems to make sense. It seems to just make for a good sound bite. It appears he would like them to fund his spending habits. At the sign of resistance, he berates them for not paying their fair share.
Successful individuals:
1.Start businesses that employ people in their neighborhoods.
2.Pay their wages, social security taxes, provide health insurance and other benefits.
3.Pay a multitude of business related taxes and personal taxes on all levels. (Federal, State and Local)
4.Pay real estate taxes on homes and business properties that support the local school systems. At the same time, in many cases, send their children to private schools, lessening the burden on public schools.
5. Donate their time, money and energy to local organizations and causes.
6.Spend their money which supports other services and businesses.
7.In most cases they raise a respectful family which carries on their ideals.
The list continues, but needless to say they contribute in a large way to society. And, yes, they are the beneficiary of many things our great country has to offer. They have taken those benefits and used them to their own and many other peoples' advantage.
Look around and you'll see hospital wings, college buildings, ball fields, parks, museum wings, theatres and more with people's names on them. In most cases, those people donated the money to fund those items. Houses of worship often rely on these people for personal donations and help with expansion projects and fundraisers.
Well-to-do people, like others, may not be perfect, but they shouldn't be vilified by the President just because they won't fund his programs. Maybe the President would be better off asking for their input and advice. Make them part of the decision making process instead of the ones required to fund the outcome.
Our country has an employment problem. Businesses of America do the employing. It's time to ask them what the government can do to make them comfortable enough to start hiring again. Let's stop asking them to fund unemployment.
Back to my kids
It would be a pleasure to have them included in "Successful Individuals"
Let them make a good income, hire others, pay taxes, raise a good family, donate their time money and energy to worthy causes and be disliked by the President.
Please see exceprts from my book:
"Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle Class American" By: Andy Strum
on Amazon at:
http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Fed-Up-Middle-Class-American/dp/1453640460/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1289578712&sr=1-1
November 11, 2010
Earmarks, Entitlements, and Pork (Bribery????)
We have the best government that money can buy. - Mark Twain
"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy..." - Alexander Fraser Tytler, Scottish lawyer and writer, 1770
Approximately 9,000 earmarks costing about $8 Billion were included in the 2009 Omnibus Spending Bill. If the $8 Billion was excluded, the tax bill for 800,000 families would be reduced by $10,000 each, a real tax relief to America's Middle Class. And that example was just for the Omnibus Spending Bill in 2009. In fiscal year's 2008 Total Federal Budget, there were approximately 11,500 earmarks totaling about $16.5 Billion for the year. This means in 2008, 1 ½ million families could have saved over $10,000 each in taxes. Again, this would be meaningful tax relief for the middle class. A Billion here and a Billion there and pretty soon you're talking serious money; if Congress only knew. Although the party in power gets the majority of earmarks included in a bill, earmarks do not belong to any one party alone. Each political party is guilty; a factual wakeup call for all the American public. The public hears of transparency, earmarks are an area where transparency would be appreciated. The larger the total budget, the less any one earmark becomes 'meaningful.' Therefore, Congress may have a selfish motive to continually spend and increase the budget. In 2008, the total Federal Budget was a little less than $3 Trillion. With earmarks at $16.5 Billion, they represented "only" 0.55% of the total, a little more than ½%. Now that doesn't sound so bad. The larger the total budget, the less ominous each earmark. Congress has a way of using percentages instead of real dollar figures to fool the public. Of course they've had years and years of practice.
Earmarks should not be included in proposed bills. Each earmark should be reported to the public (transparency) and should include: The sponsor, the amount, the purpose and the local or national benefit to the public. Earmarks should be voted on separately, based on merits only. A bill coming before Congress should have a theme, an easily distinguishable commonality. Any proposals, additions, or amendments must match the theme of the proposed bill. If not, a separate vote is essential. Congressmen should not force millions of taxpayers to fund their pet projects by burying them in otherwise worthwhile legislation. It's our money they're spending, not theirs.
In the political system there is also a practice of adding special provisions to a bill to get one or more congressman's support. These provisions are different than the earmarks discussed above and may actually benefit the Congressman's state or district residents; however, the provisions are only being added to secure a vote and not to enhance the proposed bill. They do not add value to the entire country. In 2009, we saw this happen with the Health Reform Bill. Hundreds of millions of dollars were added so that a few areas of the country would benefit at the expense of the rest of the country. This was only done to get enough votes to pass the bill. Without these provisions being added, it is doubtful that the bill would be passed. In other words, on the merits of the bill alone, there would not have been passage.
Adding entitlements and earmarks to an existing bill needs to be stopped and should only be part of a bill if they speak to the main message of the legislation. These special interest amendments should be voted on separately instead of holding the main bill hostage. Unless these practices are eliminated, the American public will continue to suffer financially. Enough cannot be said for the amount of unnecessary tax money that is paid by working families to support these actions. More spending does not solve problems; efficient spending does. And, extraneous spending is shameful.
This is an excerpt from the book "Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle Class American" By: Andy Strum Available on Amazon at:http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Fed-Up-Middle-Class-American/dp/1453640460/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1289489134&sr=1-1
"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy..." - Alexander Fraser Tytler, Scottish lawyer and writer, 1770
Approximately 9,000 earmarks costing about $8 Billion were included in the 2009 Omnibus Spending Bill. If the $8 Billion was excluded, the tax bill for 800,000 families would be reduced by $10,000 each, a real tax relief to America's Middle Class. And that example was just for the Omnibus Spending Bill in 2009. In fiscal year's 2008 Total Federal Budget, there were approximately 11,500 earmarks totaling about $16.5 Billion for the year. This means in 2008, 1 ½ million families could have saved over $10,000 each in taxes. Again, this would be meaningful tax relief for the middle class. A Billion here and a Billion there and pretty soon you're talking serious money; if Congress only knew. Although the party in power gets the majority of earmarks included in a bill, earmarks do not belong to any one party alone. Each political party is guilty; a factual wakeup call for all the American public. The public hears of transparency, earmarks are an area where transparency would be appreciated. The larger the total budget, the less any one earmark becomes 'meaningful.' Therefore, Congress may have a selfish motive to continually spend and increase the budget. In 2008, the total Federal Budget was a little less than $3 Trillion. With earmarks at $16.5 Billion, they represented "only" 0.55% of the total, a little more than ½%. Now that doesn't sound so bad. The larger the total budget, the less ominous each earmark. Congress has a way of using percentages instead of real dollar figures to fool the public. Of course they've had years and years of practice.
Earmarks should not be included in proposed bills. Each earmark should be reported to the public (transparency) and should include: The sponsor, the amount, the purpose and the local or national benefit to the public. Earmarks should be voted on separately, based on merits only. A bill coming before Congress should have a theme, an easily distinguishable commonality. Any proposals, additions, or amendments must match the theme of the proposed bill. If not, a separate vote is essential. Congressmen should not force millions of taxpayers to fund their pet projects by burying them in otherwise worthwhile legislation. It's our money they're spending, not theirs.
In the political system there is also a practice of adding special provisions to a bill to get one or more congressman's support. These provisions are different than the earmarks discussed above and may actually benefit the Congressman's state or district residents; however, the provisions are only being added to secure a vote and not to enhance the proposed bill. They do not add value to the entire country. In 2009, we saw this happen with the Health Reform Bill. Hundreds of millions of dollars were added so that a few areas of the country would benefit at the expense of the rest of the country. This was only done to get enough votes to pass the bill. Without these provisions being added, it is doubtful that the bill would be passed. In other words, on the merits of the bill alone, there would not have been passage.
Adding entitlements and earmarks to an existing bill needs to be stopped and should only be part of a bill if they speak to the main message of the legislation. These special interest amendments should be voted on separately instead of holding the main bill hostage. Unless these practices are eliminated, the American public will continue to suffer financially. Enough cannot be said for the amount of unnecessary tax money that is paid by working families to support these actions. More spending does not solve problems; efficient spending does. And, extraneous spending is shameful.
This is an excerpt from the book "Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle Class American" By: Andy Strum Available on Amazon at:http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Fed-Up-Middle-Class-American/dp/1453640460/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1289489134&sr=1-1
November 9, 2010
He Ain't Heavy, He's An American
Use now and then a little Exercise a quarter of an Hour before Meals, as to swing a Weight, or swing your Arms about with a small Weight in each Hand; to leap, or the like, for that stirs the Muscles of the Breast. - Benjamin Franklin
Americans are considered to be overweight and unhealthy. Billions of dollars are spent annually on fitness equipment, diet plans, supplements, smoking cessation programs and medical care. However, spending practices do not match desired results. Americans are drawn to the easy fix. They want the "only ten minutes a week" and you can lose ten pounds, or "these pills will help you lose weight without changing your diet." Wear a patch, chew this gum or get hypnotized and you can stop smoking. Instead of taking the tough road to self improvement, we look for the easy way out. Not only do American's desire painless solutions to being fit they also don't want to accept the blame for their dilemmas. Let's shift the blame to corporate America. After all, we are told they sell us the wrong food, fill menus with fatty foods, entice us to smoke; then the insurance companies don't pay us to be cured. This type of attitude will not solve our problems. Until we are willing to face up to our failings and take the responsibility for both what we put in our bodies and our level of physical activity, we are destined to poor health. Companies do produce the products that can lead to an unhealthy lifestyle. However, they also produce the products that can make us the healthiest country on Earth. No one forces us to choose the former.
In 1994, a law was passed requiring nutritional labeling on packaged foods. More than 15 years later, the United States still has a problem with overweight individuals. The problem is not with the lack of information about the product; the problem is that Americans continue to eat what and how much they want.
Our Government, not intentionally, rewards those who lead a less than healthy lifestyle by providing them with the same health care benefits as those who work hard to stay healthy. This doesn't make sense. If you lead a self-indulgent lifestyle, you should not receive the same benefits as others. Healthy behavior should be rewarded. The recent Health Care Legislation does not require anyone to lead a healthy lifestyle to receive the benefits. Someone can eat poorly, smoke, drink, and lead a generally unhealthy lifestyle and still receive health care benefits. They won't need to worry about pre-existing conditions and they might have other taxpayers fund their medical care. How can this lead to a healthier America?
This is an excerpt from "Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle Class American"
Available on Amazon at:
http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Fed-Up-Middle-Class-American/dp/1453640460/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1289314461&sr=1-1
Americans are considered to be overweight and unhealthy. Billions of dollars are spent annually on fitness equipment, diet plans, supplements, smoking cessation programs and medical care. However, spending practices do not match desired results. Americans are drawn to the easy fix. They want the "only ten minutes a week" and you can lose ten pounds, or "these pills will help you lose weight without changing your diet." Wear a patch, chew this gum or get hypnotized and you can stop smoking. Instead of taking the tough road to self improvement, we look for the easy way out. Not only do American's desire painless solutions to being fit they also don't want to accept the blame for their dilemmas. Let's shift the blame to corporate America. After all, we are told they sell us the wrong food, fill menus with fatty foods, entice us to smoke; then the insurance companies don't pay us to be cured. This type of attitude will not solve our problems. Until we are willing to face up to our failings and take the responsibility for both what we put in our bodies and our level of physical activity, we are destined to poor health. Companies do produce the products that can lead to an unhealthy lifestyle. However, they also produce the products that can make us the healthiest country on Earth. No one forces us to choose the former.
In 1994, a law was passed requiring nutritional labeling on packaged foods. More than 15 years later, the United States still has a problem with overweight individuals. The problem is not with the lack of information about the product; the problem is that Americans continue to eat what and how much they want.
Our Government, not intentionally, rewards those who lead a less than healthy lifestyle by providing them with the same health care benefits as those who work hard to stay healthy. This doesn't make sense. If you lead a self-indulgent lifestyle, you should not receive the same benefits as others. Healthy behavior should be rewarded. The recent Health Care Legislation does not require anyone to lead a healthy lifestyle to receive the benefits. Someone can eat poorly, smoke, drink, and lead a generally unhealthy lifestyle and still receive health care benefits. They won't need to worry about pre-existing conditions and they might have other taxpayers fund their medical care. How can this lead to a healthier America?
This is an excerpt from "Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle Class American"
Available on Amazon at:
http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Fed-Up-Middle-Class-American/dp/1453640460/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1289314461&sr=1-1
November 3, 2010
The Election is Over – Will Tough Fiscal Decisions be Made?
Okay, the election is over and Congress has a more conservative slant. That sounds good, but they still need to step up to the plate and make some tough financial decisions. If you click on the link below; it will take you to a chart that indicates we have a spending problem, not a tax revenue problem. What might we do?
Our economic woes have been in the making for years. Like the straw that broke the camel's back, the housing crisis, not our only problem, seemed to be that straw. We now need to chip away, wherever possible, to correct the problem. Chipping away means making tough decisions and not allowing any savings to seem too small. (A Billion Dollars seems small to a politician dealing with a Trillion Dollar budget, but it is still a large amount. After all, 100,000 families need to pay $10,000 each, in taxes, to fund a Billion Dollars.)
Let's start with freezing the budget. Not adding one dime to any program, earmark, entitlement, or project. Along with the budget freeze, initiate a directive that EVERY government agency will have their budget cut by 5%, each year, for the next 5 years. Let productivity, innovation, smarter decision making, and the elimination of, "nice" but not absolutely needed programs take the lead. Let's try this until we find that government cannot operate. Once that happens, we can add resources to those programs that are failing. (Actually failing, not just complaining.
Earmarks should not be included in proposed bills. Each earmark should be reported to the public (transparency) and should include: The sponsor, the amount, the purpose and the local or national benefit to the public. Earmarks should be voted on separately, based on merits only. A bill coming before Congress should have a theme, an easily distinguishable commonality. Any proposals, additions, or amendments must match the theme of the proposed bill. If not, a separate vote is essential.
Debt Ceiling - The amount of debt the Government may have at any time. It's hard to consider the debt ceiling a real number. It is constantly raised by the sitting Congress. It is often used for political purposes. Since it is the tax payer's money; the taxpayers should vote on whether to allow the debt ceiling to be raised. There should be a box on every year's the tax return; YES or NO.
I will have more comments on upcoming posts. Remember to click on the link illustrating spending vs. tax revenue.
http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/growth-federal-spending-revenue
Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle Class American" By: Andy Strum
See previews on Amazon at:
http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Fed-Up-Middle-Class-American/dp/1453640460/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1288795915&sr=1-1
Our economic woes have been in the making for years. Like the straw that broke the camel's back, the housing crisis, not our only problem, seemed to be that straw. We now need to chip away, wherever possible, to correct the problem. Chipping away means making tough decisions and not allowing any savings to seem too small. (A Billion Dollars seems small to a politician dealing with a Trillion Dollar budget, but it is still a large amount. After all, 100,000 families need to pay $10,000 each, in taxes, to fund a Billion Dollars.)
Let's start with freezing the budget. Not adding one dime to any program, earmark, entitlement, or project. Along with the budget freeze, initiate a directive that EVERY government agency will have their budget cut by 5%, each year, for the next 5 years. Let productivity, innovation, smarter decision making, and the elimination of, "nice" but not absolutely needed programs take the lead. Let's try this until we find that government cannot operate. Once that happens, we can add resources to those programs that are failing. (Actually failing, not just complaining.
Earmarks should not be included in proposed bills. Each earmark should be reported to the public (transparency) and should include: The sponsor, the amount, the purpose and the local or national benefit to the public. Earmarks should be voted on separately, based on merits only. A bill coming before Congress should have a theme, an easily distinguishable commonality. Any proposals, additions, or amendments must match the theme of the proposed bill. If not, a separate vote is essential.
Debt Ceiling - The amount of debt the Government may have at any time. It's hard to consider the debt ceiling a real number. It is constantly raised by the sitting Congress. It is often used for political purposes. Since it is the tax payer's money; the taxpayers should vote on whether to allow the debt ceiling to be raised. There should be a box on every year's the tax return; YES or NO.
I will have more comments on upcoming posts. Remember to click on the link illustrating spending vs. tax revenue.
http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/growth-federal-spending-revenue
Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle Class American" By: Andy Strum
See previews on Amazon at:
http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Fed-Up-Middle-Class-American/dp/1453640460/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1288795915&sr=1-1
October 29, 2010
Harry Reid's Comments this past week
Some of the comments (below) by Harry Reid are extremely interesting.
when Wall Street collapsed, we fell further than anyone else. - At that time, didn't the President vilify companies and CEOs for holding conventions in Las Vegas. I'm sure those, small businesses, waiters, casino workers, hotel workers, etc that were effected by the decline in conventions were not happy with the President's comments. Couldn't Mr. Reid have asked him to tone down the rhetoric?
"I've done the best I can, doing everything I can to help the state of Nevada , - When someone says they've "done" the best that they can; then what's left? If, with a all the power he should have, a very accommodating Congress and a friend in the White House, he could not do better for Nevada, why would the future be brighter?
Whether or not Sharon Angle would be better than Harry Reid is not the point. Mr. Reid should be able to run on what HE has done for Nevada and not why he thinks Sharon Angle is not qualified. The voters will make that decision.
Reid Defends Record
Such resentment, says University of Nevada political scientist David Damore, is precisely why Reid, for all his power in Washington, could well be toppled by his fellow Nevadans.
"What we've seen in Nevada, I think, is [what] you've seen in a lot of other states ... just this sort of anger, this inchoate anger lashing out at the establishment; that if you're establishment, you are part of the problem," Damore said.
At a recent get-out-the-vote rally in Henderson, Nev., Reid seemed to feel he had to defend his record even to supporters.
"We've been going through a lot in Nevada," he said. "For 20 years, we were at the top of the economic food chain, and when Wall Street collapsed, we fell further than anyone else.
"But I want everyone to know here it isn't a secret, I didn't cause the financial collapse."
The one determining factor for who's going to win is going to be about who has effectively made the election about the other person.
- University of Nevada political communications expert Joseph Valenzano
Later, Reid explained why many voters believed he hadn't done enough for Nevada.
"I've done the best I can, doing everything I can to help the state of Nevada , but whoever is concerned about my not doing enough should understand that Sharron Angle has committed to doing nothing," Reid said. "She wants to throw sand in the gears, she wants to slow things down, she wants to get rid of Social Security, Medicare."
Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle Class American" By: Andy Strum
Sample chapters on Amazon at:
http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Fed-Up-Middle-Class-American/dp/1453640460/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1288365393&sr=1-1
when Wall Street collapsed, we fell further than anyone else. - At that time, didn't the President vilify companies and CEOs for holding conventions in Las Vegas. I'm sure those, small businesses, waiters, casino workers, hotel workers, etc that were effected by the decline in conventions were not happy with the President's comments. Couldn't Mr. Reid have asked him to tone down the rhetoric?
"I've done the best I can, doing everything I can to help the state of Nevada , - When someone says they've "done" the best that they can; then what's left? If, with a all the power he should have, a very accommodating Congress and a friend in the White House, he could not do better for Nevada, why would the future be brighter?
Whether or not Sharon Angle would be better than Harry Reid is not the point. Mr. Reid should be able to run on what HE has done for Nevada and not why he thinks Sharon Angle is not qualified. The voters will make that decision.
Reid Defends Record
Such resentment, says University of Nevada political scientist David Damore, is precisely why Reid, for all his power in Washington, could well be toppled by his fellow Nevadans.
"What we've seen in Nevada, I think, is [what] you've seen in a lot of other states ... just this sort of anger, this inchoate anger lashing out at the establishment; that if you're establishment, you are part of the problem," Damore said.
At a recent get-out-the-vote rally in Henderson, Nev., Reid seemed to feel he had to defend his record even to supporters.
"We've been going through a lot in Nevada," he said. "For 20 years, we were at the top of the economic food chain, and when Wall Street collapsed, we fell further than anyone else.
"But I want everyone to know here it isn't a secret, I didn't cause the financial collapse."
The one determining factor for who's going to win is going to be about who has effectively made the election about the other person.
- University of Nevada political communications expert Joseph Valenzano
Later, Reid explained why many voters believed he hadn't done enough for Nevada.
"I've done the best I can, doing everything I can to help the state of Nevada , but whoever is concerned about my not doing enough should understand that Sharron Angle has committed to doing nothing," Reid said. "She wants to throw sand in the gears, she wants to slow things down, she wants to get rid of Social Security, Medicare."
Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle Class American" By: Andy Strum
Sample chapters on Amazon at:
http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Fed-Up-Middle-Class-American/dp/1453640460/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1288365393&sr=1-1
October 28, 2010
The Rising Cost of College, Who's Fueling the Increase?
Below is a link to an article in the October 28, 2010 Wall Street Journal
"Tuition, Pell Grants Rise in Tandem"
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303443904575578651983962836.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Tuition at public colleges up about 8%
Here's my take on the rising cost of college, who pays and why?
College education in our country is an objective by many. College, unlike kindergarten through 12th grades, is not a right but a privilege. (The Government seems to be leaning towards a college education becoming a right and not a privilege.) College has become a financial burden to the American family. College costs have gone up approximately 5% per year over the past ten years; higher than the inflation rate over the same time period. The Government doesn't criticize the increase in cost. The Government's answer to solving the increasing cost is to throw more money at the problem. Not more competition, not accountability by the schools, students or parents; but spending more with little or no accountability. The Government feels they must find a way to help students afford this increase. The Government often chastises other industries when their prices exceed inflation. They put pressure on those industries to reduce prices. Colleges seem to be immune from this rhetoric. Economics, taught at these same colleges, teaches that if more money is available to purchase a good or service the price of that good or service will increase. By making more money available to students to pay for a college education, the Government is fueling the fire, not creating a solution. By all economic teachings, more available money drives cost up.
The money used for these programs is tax payer money. Many of these taxpayers do not intend for their children to go to college. Their children are interested in other venues. They plan to go into a trade (carpentry, plumbing, construction, etc.) or into the military or some other vocation. They question why their money is funding another child's potential livelihood and not their child's.
Those who do attend college are finding themselves with more debt than they imagined. Parents also can be saddled with debt. Although college education has become the standard in education, just as a high school education was a couple of generations ago, the value of the education compared to the cost is being questioned. Although many companies require a college education, is the cost of a college education worth the potential job? Colleges need to find ways to make their tuition and fees more affordable to students. The schools need to enhance their efficiency, cut their costs, facilities and services to meet the students' ability to pay without subsidies from the government. Education is the product they offer. Fancy dormitories, health club facilities and other non-educational amenities should be examined to see if they are worth the cost. Professors getting published, staffs employed to get grants, high salaried athletic coaches and other non-school related items, should not be at the cost of student's tuition. It is argued that these facilities and positions bring money and prestige to the institution. If they are bringing in money, why does the tuition continue to rise? What is being done with the money?
If colleges want to pursue activities that do not directly benefit the student body, it should be financed by some other means than tuition.
The Government admonishes many industries, health care for example, when their rates increase higher than inflation; why do they give a free ride to colleges?
Endowments at some colleges are in the Billions. At $100,000 for a 4 year college education, $5 Billion would allow 50,000 students to go for free. Is tuition being used by the schools so they can keep a substantial war chest? Why does a college need $5 Billion in an endowment fund? If a college feels the need to keep such a large amount on hand, maybe they would be willing to part with the annual investment return on their endowment fund. Average annual returns of 8% on $5 Billion would yield $400 Million per year. This would be enough to fund the annual tuition for 16,000 students at $25,000 per year. Wouldn't that be a great return on investment by giving an education to 16,000 students while maintaining a $5 Billion fund? It's time colleges are held accountable. It's time the Government stops answering the education problem by throwing more tax payer money at it. That cure (Government lending programs) continues to be worse than the disease.
See more information like this in my book:
Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle Class American" By: Andy Strum
Read sample chapters on Amazon at:
http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Fed-Up-Middle-Class-American/dp/1453640460/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1288285582&sr=1-1
"Tuition, Pell Grants Rise in Tandem"
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303443904575578651983962836.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Tuition at public colleges up about 8%
Here's my take on the rising cost of college, who pays and why?
College education in our country is an objective by many. College, unlike kindergarten through 12th grades, is not a right but a privilege. (The Government seems to be leaning towards a college education becoming a right and not a privilege.) College has become a financial burden to the American family. College costs have gone up approximately 5% per year over the past ten years; higher than the inflation rate over the same time period. The Government doesn't criticize the increase in cost. The Government's answer to solving the increasing cost is to throw more money at the problem. Not more competition, not accountability by the schools, students or parents; but spending more with little or no accountability. The Government feels they must find a way to help students afford this increase. The Government often chastises other industries when their prices exceed inflation. They put pressure on those industries to reduce prices. Colleges seem to be immune from this rhetoric. Economics, taught at these same colleges, teaches that if more money is available to purchase a good or service the price of that good or service will increase. By making more money available to students to pay for a college education, the Government is fueling the fire, not creating a solution. By all economic teachings, more available money drives cost up.
The money used for these programs is tax payer money. Many of these taxpayers do not intend for their children to go to college. Their children are interested in other venues. They plan to go into a trade (carpentry, plumbing, construction, etc.) or into the military or some other vocation. They question why their money is funding another child's potential livelihood and not their child's.
Those who do attend college are finding themselves with more debt than they imagined. Parents also can be saddled with debt. Although college education has become the standard in education, just as a high school education was a couple of generations ago, the value of the education compared to the cost is being questioned. Although many companies require a college education, is the cost of a college education worth the potential job? Colleges need to find ways to make their tuition and fees more affordable to students. The schools need to enhance their efficiency, cut their costs, facilities and services to meet the students' ability to pay without subsidies from the government. Education is the product they offer. Fancy dormitories, health club facilities and other non-educational amenities should be examined to see if they are worth the cost. Professors getting published, staffs employed to get grants, high salaried athletic coaches and other non-school related items, should not be at the cost of student's tuition. It is argued that these facilities and positions bring money and prestige to the institution. If they are bringing in money, why does the tuition continue to rise? What is being done with the money?
If colleges want to pursue activities that do not directly benefit the student body, it should be financed by some other means than tuition.
The Government admonishes many industries, health care for example, when their rates increase higher than inflation; why do they give a free ride to colleges?
Endowments at some colleges are in the Billions. At $100,000 for a 4 year college education, $5 Billion would allow 50,000 students to go for free. Is tuition being used by the schools so they can keep a substantial war chest? Why does a college need $5 Billion in an endowment fund? If a college feels the need to keep such a large amount on hand, maybe they would be willing to part with the annual investment return on their endowment fund. Average annual returns of 8% on $5 Billion would yield $400 Million per year. This would be enough to fund the annual tuition for 16,000 students at $25,000 per year. Wouldn't that be a great return on investment by giving an education to 16,000 students while maintaining a $5 Billion fund? It's time colleges are held accountable. It's time the Government stops answering the education problem by throwing more tax payer money at it. That cure (Government lending programs) continues to be worse than the disease.
See more information like this in my book:
Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle Class American" By: Andy Strum
Read sample chapters on Amazon at:
http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Fed-Up-Middle-Class-American/dp/1453640460/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1288285582&sr=1-1
Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle Class American" ...
Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle Class American" By: Andy Strum Read sample chapters on Amazon at:
http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Fed-Up-Middle-Class-American/dp/1453640460/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1288274630&sr=1-1
Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle Class American" ...
Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle Class American" By: Andy Strum Read Sample Chapters on Amazon at:
http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Fed-Up-Middle-Class-American/dp/1453640460/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1288274630&sr=1-1
October 27, 2010
What about those exported jobs?
What about those exported jobs? Doesn't the US Government have a stake in GM?
We can force them to close dealerships owned and manned by Americans but we can't stop them from manufacturing overseas? Sounds easy to complain but hard to stop.
The government required the some car manufacturers to close their dealerships. That would mean a loss of jobs for many. It might also send revenue out of a local economy.
It certainly lessened competition. What does Economics 101 teach? The more competition the lower the price, the greater the selection, more inovation and the natural process of the strong surviving. Maybe the Economic's books need rewriting. OR, maybe they just need to be reread by those in power.
Anyway, take a look at the link. How is this being explained?Buick Lacrosse May Be Produced in Ukraine, now produced in China
Also see previews of my book: (inside the book) "Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle Class American" By: Andy Strum on Amazon at:
http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Fed-Up-Middle-Class-American/dp/1453640460/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1288204357&sr=1-1
We can force them to close dealerships owned and manned by Americans but we can't stop them from manufacturing overseas? Sounds easy to complain but hard to stop.
The government required the some car manufacturers to close their dealerships. That would mean a loss of jobs for many. It might also send revenue out of a local economy.
It certainly lessened competition. What does Economics 101 teach? The more competition the lower the price, the greater the selection, more inovation and the natural process of the strong surviving. Maybe the Economic's books need rewriting. OR, maybe they just need to be reread by those in power.
Anyway, take a look at the link. How is this being explained?Buick Lacrosse May Be Produced in Ukraine, now produced in China
Also see previews of my book: (inside the book) "Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle Class American" By: Andy Strum on Amazon at:
http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Fed-Up-Middle-Class-American/dp/1453640460/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1288204357&sr=1-1
October 25, 2010
Subject: "I'm 63 and Tired", By Robert A. Hall. Worth Reading
> I'm 63. Except for one semester in college when jobs were scarce and a
> six-month period when I was between jobs, but job-hunting every day, I've
> worked, hard, since I was 18. Despite some health challenges, I still put in
> 50-hour weeks, and haven't called in sick in seven or eight years. I make a
> good salary, but I didn't inherit my job or my income, and I worked to get
> where I am. Given the economy, there's no retirement in sight, and I'm
> tired. Very tired.
> I'm tired of being told that I have to "spread the wealth" to people who
> don't have my work ethic. I'm tired of being told the government will take
> the money I earned, by force if necessary, and give it to people too lazy to
earn it.
> I'm tired of being told that I have to pay more taxes to "keep people in
> their homes." Sure, if they lost their jobs or got sick, I'm willing to
> help. But if they bought McMansions at three times the price of our
> paid-off, $250,000 condo, on one-third of my salary, then let the left-wing
> Congress-critters who passed Fannie and Freddie and the Community
> Reinvestment Act that created the bubble help them with their own money.
> I'm tired of being told how bad America is by left-wing millionaires like
> Michael Moore, George Soros and Hollywood Entertainers who live in luxury
> because of the opportunities America offers. In thirty years, if they get
> their way, the United States will have the economy of Zimbabwe, the freedom
> of the press of China, the crime and violence of Mexico, the tolerance for
> Christian people of Iran, and the freedom of speech of Venezuela.
> I'm tired of being told that Islam is a "Religion of Peace," when every day
> I can read dozens of stories of Muslim men killing their sisters, wives and
> daughters for their family "honor"; of Muslims rioting over some slight
> offense; of Muslims murdering Christian and Jews because they aren't
> "believers"; of Muslims burning schools for girls; of Muslims stoning
> teenage rape victims to death for "adultery"; of Muslims mutilating the
> genitals of little girls; all in the name of Allah, because the Qur'an and
> Shari'a law tells them to.
> I'm tired of being told that "race doesn't matter" in the post-racial world
> of Obama, when it's all that matters in affirmative action jobs, lower
college admission and graduation standards for minorities (harming them the
> most), government contract set-asides, tolerance for the ghetto culture of
> violence and fatherless children that hurts minorities more than anyone, and
> in the appointment of U.S. Senators from Illinois.
> I'm tired of being told that out of "tolerance for other cultures" we must
> let Saudi Arabia use our oil money to fund mosques and mandrassa Islamic
> schools to preach hate in America, while no American group is allowed to
> fund a church, synagogue or religious school in Saudi Arabia to teach love
> and tolerance.
> I'm tired of being told I must lower my living standard to fight global
> warming, which no one is allowed to debate. My wife and I live in a
> two-bedroom apartment and carpool together five miles to our jobs. We also
> own a three-bedroom condo where our daughter and granddaughter live.
Our carbon footprint is about 5% of Al Gore's, and if you're greener than Gore,
> you're green enough.
> I'm tired of being told that drug addicts have a disease, and I must help
> support and treat them, and pay for the damage they do. Did a giant germ
> rush out of a dark alley, grab them, and stuff white powder up their noses
> while they tried to fight it off? I don't think Gay people choose to be Gay,
> but I damn sure think druggies chose to take drugs. And I'm tired of
> harassment from cool people treating me like a freak when I tell them I
> never tried marijuana.
> I'm tired of illegal aliens being called "undocumented workers," especially
> the ones who aren't working, but are living on welfare or crime. What's
> next? Calling drug dealers, "Undocumented Pharmacists"? And, no, I'm not
> against Hispanics. Most of them are Catholic, and it's been a few hundred
> years since Catholics wanted to kill me for my religion. I'm willing to
fast track for citizenship any Hispanic person, who can speak English,
> doesn't have a criminal record and who is self-supporting without family on
> welfare, or who serves honorably for three years in our military.... Those
> are the citizens we need.
> I'm tired of hearing wealthy athletes, entertainers and politicians of both
> parties talking about innocent mistakes, stupid mistakes or youthful
> mistakes, when we all know they think their only mistake was getting caught.
> I'm tired of people with a sense of entitlement, rich or poor.
> Speaking of poor, I'm tired of hearing people with air-conditioned homes,
> color TVs and two cars called poor. The majority of Americans didn't have
> that in 1970, but we didn't know we were "poor." The poverty pimps have to
> keep changing the definition of poor to keep the dollars flowing.
> I'm real tired of people who don't take responsibility for their lives and
> actions. I'm tired of hearing them blame the government, or discrimination
> or big-whatever for their problems.
> Yes, I'm d--- tired. But I'm also glad to be 63. Because, mostly, I'm not
> going to have to see the world these people are making. I'm just sorry for
> my granddaughter..
> Robert A. Hall is a Marine Vietnam veteran who served five terms in the> Massachusetts State Senate.
This hit home for me since I share many of these viewpoints in my book:
Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle ClassAmerican"
Excerpts on Amazon at:
http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Fed-Up-Middle-Class-American/dp/1453640460/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1288013011&sr=1-1
> six-month period when I was between jobs, but job-hunting every day, I've
> worked, hard, since I was 18. Despite some health challenges, I still put in
> 50-hour weeks, and haven't called in sick in seven or eight years. I make a
> good salary, but I didn't inherit my job or my income, and I worked to get
> where I am. Given the economy, there's no retirement in sight, and I'm
> tired. Very tired.
> I'm tired of being told that I have to "spread the wealth" to people who
> don't have my work ethic. I'm tired of being told the government will take
> the money I earned, by force if necessary, and give it to people too lazy to
earn it.
> I'm tired of being told that I have to pay more taxes to "keep people in
> their homes." Sure, if they lost their jobs or got sick, I'm willing to
> help. But if they bought McMansions at three times the price of our
> paid-off, $250,000 condo, on one-third of my salary, then let the left-wing
> Congress-critters who passed Fannie and Freddie and the Community
> Reinvestment Act that created the bubble help them with their own money.
> I'm tired of being told how bad America is by left-wing millionaires like
> Michael Moore, George Soros and Hollywood Entertainers who live in luxury
> because of the opportunities America offers. In thirty years, if they get
> their way, the United States will have the economy of Zimbabwe, the freedom
> of the press of China, the crime and violence of Mexico, the tolerance for
> Christian people of Iran, and the freedom of speech of Venezuela.
> I'm tired of being told that Islam is a "Religion of Peace," when every day
> I can read dozens of stories of Muslim men killing their sisters, wives and
> daughters for their family "honor"; of Muslims rioting over some slight
> offense; of Muslims murdering Christian and Jews because they aren't
> "believers"; of Muslims burning schools for girls; of Muslims stoning
> teenage rape victims to death for "adultery"; of Muslims mutilating the
> genitals of little girls; all in the name of Allah, because the Qur'an and
> Shari'a law tells them to.
> I'm tired of being told that "race doesn't matter" in the post-racial world
> of Obama, when it's all that matters in affirmative action jobs, lower
college admission and graduation standards for minorities (harming them the
> most), government contract set-asides, tolerance for the ghetto culture of
> violence and fatherless children that hurts minorities more than anyone, and
> in the appointment of U.S. Senators from Illinois.
> I'm tired of being told that out of "tolerance for other cultures" we must
> let Saudi Arabia use our oil money to fund mosques and mandrassa Islamic
> schools to preach hate in America, while no American group is allowed to
> fund a church, synagogue or religious school in Saudi Arabia to teach love
> and tolerance.
> I'm tired of being told I must lower my living standard to fight global
> warming, which no one is allowed to debate. My wife and I live in a
> two-bedroom apartment and carpool together five miles to our jobs. We also
> own a three-bedroom condo where our daughter and granddaughter live.
Our carbon footprint is about 5% of Al Gore's, and if you're greener than Gore,
> you're green enough.
> I'm tired of being told that drug addicts have a disease, and I must help
> support and treat them, and pay for the damage they do. Did a giant germ
> rush out of a dark alley, grab them, and stuff white powder up their noses
> while they tried to fight it off? I don't think Gay people choose to be Gay,
> but I damn sure think druggies chose to take drugs. And I'm tired of
> harassment from cool people treating me like a freak when I tell them I
> never tried marijuana.
> I'm tired of illegal aliens being called "undocumented workers," especially
> the ones who aren't working, but are living on welfare or crime. What's
> next? Calling drug dealers, "Undocumented Pharmacists"? And, no, I'm not
> against Hispanics. Most of them are Catholic, and it's been a few hundred
> years since Catholics wanted to kill me for my religion. I'm willing to
fast track for citizenship any Hispanic person, who can speak English,
> doesn't have a criminal record and who is self-supporting without family on
> welfare, or who serves honorably for three years in our military.... Those
> are the citizens we need.
> I'm tired of hearing wealthy athletes, entertainers and politicians of both
> parties talking about innocent mistakes, stupid mistakes or youthful
> mistakes, when we all know they think their only mistake was getting caught.
> I'm tired of people with a sense of entitlement, rich or poor.
> Speaking of poor, I'm tired of hearing people with air-conditioned homes,
> color TVs and two cars called poor. The majority of Americans didn't have
> that in 1970, but we didn't know we were "poor." The poverty pimps have to
> keep changing the definition of poor to keep the dollars flowing.
> I'm real tired of people who don't take responsibility for their lives and
> actions. I'm tired of hearing them blame the government, or discrimination
> or big-whatever for their problems.
> Yes, I'm d--- tired. But I'm also glad to be 63. Because, mostly, I'm not
> going to have to see the world these people are making. I'm just sorry for
> my granddaughter..
> Robert A. Hall is a Marine Vietnam veteran who served five terms in the> Massachusetts State Senate.
This hit home for me since I share many of these viewpoints in my book:
Essays From a Fed-Up Middle Aged, Middle ClassAmerican"
Excerpts on Amazon at:
http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Fed-Up-Middle-Class-American/dp/1453640460/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1288013011&sr=1-1
