rob Posted July 1, 2011 Posted July 1, 2011 Only $13,000 left. More than manageable. Thank god I finished school just as Bush, Greenspan, Gramm and the gangbanksters were pulling the rug out! You should have just gone to trade school. It's just as good. Quote
JosephH Posted July 1, 2011 Posted July 1, 2011 Blame Bush, yawn - the stupid one track record is getting boring. There are many reasons costs of universities (both public and private) are rising. Yeah, a lack of state funding which dropped by pretty much the same percentage points as tuition has been raised. It will take a decade to recover from the Bush wars and tax cuts - longer if those tax cuts are renewed (and good golly god dayymmnnn if those tax cuts haven't generated just a mess o' trickle down employment us common folk). Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted July 1, 2011 Posted July 1, 2011 Yeah, a lack of state funding which dropped by pretty much the same percentage points as tuition has been raised. Tuition has been rising at a rate far above inflation for decades. Quote
JosephH Posted July 2, 2011 Posted July 2, 2011 UW tuition increases over the past few years have been solely about state funding... Quote
prole Posted July 5, 2011 Posted July 5, 2011 Is David Brooks supposed to be the voice of reason now? What a douche. Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted July 5, 2011 Posted July 5, 2011 It was a beautiful weekend here in Washington. Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted July 5, 2011 Posted July 5, 2011 Go fuck yourself. Didn't get out again, eh? Quote
prole Posted July 5, 2011 Posted July 5, 2011 Sure I did, I just didn't realize I stumbled into the weekend warrior chest beater forum. Did you wear you picket necklace again? Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted July 5, 2011 Posted July 5, 2011 I didn't realize I stumbled into a politics web site misnamed as a climbing one. Quote
prole Posted July 5, 2011 Posted July 5, 2011 STFU, noob. Spray: If its not climbing, mountaineering, or skiing related, please keep it in here! Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted July 5, 2011 Posted July 5, 2011 Is David Brooks supposed to be the voice of reason now? What a douche. I don't know who Reason's Spokesman is these days, I think that position might have fallen under the budget ax, but the piece seemed reasonable to me. Admittedly, your interchange with KKK is way more interesting. Quote
prole Posted July 5, 2011 Posted July 5, 2011 All 5727 posts of it! Somebody call the WAAHHHBULANCE! Quote
Jim Posted July 5, 2011 Posted July 5, 2011 Is David Brooks supposed to be the voice of reason now? What a douche. I don't know who Reason's Spokesman is these days, I think that position might have fallen under the budget ax, but the piece seemed reasonable to me. ditto The members of this movement have no economic theory worthy of the name. Economists have identified many factors that contribute to economic growth, ranging from the productivity of the work force to the share of private savings that is available for private investment. Tax levels matter, but they are far from the only or even the most important factor. Quote
prole Posted July 5, 2011 Posted July 5, 2011 Is David Brooks supposed to be the voice of reason now? What a douche. I don't know who Reason's Spokesman is these days, I think that position might have fallen under the budget ax, but the piece seemed reasonable to me. ditto The members of this movement have no economic theory worthy of the name. Economists have identified many factors that contribute to economic growth, ranging from the productivity of the work force to the share of private savings that is available for private investment. Tax levels matter, but they are far from the only or even the most important factor. The quoted passage is key. The "range" Brooks tosses out there only represents a range on the narrowest of spectrums. His arguments seem reasonable because they're simply a regurgitation of the same supply-side crap that got us here, like a candidate running on name recognition. Republicans pining for the "reasonableness" of Reagan, Bush, et al is a joke enough, what part of "chickens coming home to roost" do Democrats not understand? I'm not sure Brooks is correct at all about the New Right. What better foil than the Insane Clown Caucus to convince us of the soundness and moderation of the very policies that took us to the brink? Judging by corporate balance sheets and bank accounts of the ultra-rich in the Great Recession, things seem to be going quite well politically. As Brooks does point out correctly, the Obamas are stumbling all over themselves to provide more of the same washed-up trickle down using the language of moderation. If enough Democrats and "sensible" Republicans are providing what the Right wants, the whackos are just what the GOP needs. Republicans are just proving once again that politics are best played by people who know what the fuck they're doing. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted July 5, 2011 Posted July 5, 2011 (edited) Is David Brooks supposed to be the voice of reason now? What a douche. I don't know who Reason's Spokesman is these days, I think that position might have fallen under the budget ax, but the piece seemed reasonable to me. ditto The members of this movement have no economic theory worthy of the name. Economists have identified many factors that contribute to economic growth, ranging from the productivity of the work force to the share of private savings that is available for private investment. Tax levels matter, but they are far from the only or even the most important factor. The quoted passage is key. The "range" Brooks tosses out there only represents a range on the narrowest of spectrums. His arguments seem reasonable because they're simply a regurgitation of the same supply-side crap that got us here, like a candidate running on name recognition. Republicans pining for the "reasonableness" of Reagan, Bush, et al is a joke enough, what part of "chickens coming home to roost" do Democrats not understand? I'm not sure Brooks is correct at all about the New Right. What better foil than the Insane Clown Caucus to convince us of the soundness and moderation of the very policies that took us to the brink? Judging by corporate balance sheets and bank accounts of the ultra-rich in the Great Recession, things seem to be going quite well politically. As Brooks does point out correctly, the Obamas are stumbling all over themselves to provide more of the same washed-up trickle down using the language of moderation. If enough Democrats and "sensible" Republicans are providing what the Right wants, the whackos are just what the GOP needs. Republicans are just proving once again that politics are best played by people who know what the fuck they're doing. Minor flaw in your logic: if Merka defaults due to the latest tea tantrum, the very balance sheets and stock portfolios wealth concentrators care so much about aren't going to look very good. The truth is probably a bit less fantasy based. Some in the "I've got mine" set (let's remember that not all the hyper weathly are right wing, or unprincipled - I've had several in that set tell me that they really should be paying more in taxes - CUE JAYB FOR THE CUSTOMARY "WELL WHY DON'T YOU VOLUNTEER TO DO SO" sound byte) certainly did support the Baggers. They may even like the hard nut "negotiating" going on right now. I doubt any of them want national default, though. I also doubt they want the baggerz not-so-veiled kristian kult agenda to fuck up such a good thing, but the baggers are certainly trying to do just that. As always, the GOP is a clusterfuck of various single issue, non-reality based agendas, fueled by misinformation and flying in loose formation under a very large Walmart pup tent. The party has put itself at extreme risk with voters. Will the latest scam work? Maybe, maybe not. Past performance is not necessarily an indicator of future success. Edited July 5, 2011 by tvashtarkatena Quote
prole Posted July 5, 2011 Posted July 5, 2011 Minor flaw in your logic: if Merka defaults due to the latest tea tantrum, the very balance sheets and stock portfolios wealth concentrators care so much about aren't going to look very good. The truth is probably a bit less fantasy based. Some in the "I've got mine" set (let's remember that not all the hyper weathly are right wing, or unprincipled - I've had several in that set tell me that they really should be paying more in taxes - CUE JAYB FOR THE CUSTOMARY "WELL WHY DON'T YOU VOLUNTEER TO DO SO" sound byte) certainly did support the Baggers. They may even like the hard nut "negotiating" going on right now. I doubt any of them want national default, though. I also doubt they want the baggerz not-so-veiled kristian kult agenda to fuck up such a good thing, but the baggers are certainly trying to do just that. As always, the GOP is a clusterfuck of various single issue, non-reality based agendas, fueled by misinformation and flying in loose formation under a very large Walmart pup tent. The party has put itself at extreme risk with voters. Will the latest scam work? Maybe, maybe not. Past performance is not necessarily an indicator of future success. The debt ceiling default stuff is rubbish. It's not going to happen. But that won't stop Obama from giving Republicans 90% of what they want. That 90% isn't the armageddon the hypothetical default would be, but will just as surely add grease to the skids. Watching liberals chase their tails around this good cop/bad cop column would be astonishing if it weren't so typical. Check out this line: If responsible Republicans don’t take control, independents will conclude that Republican fanaticism caused this default. They will conclude that Republicans are not fit to govern...And they will be right. It's the policies championed over the last 30 years by the shining lights of American conservatism and the triangulating blue dick Dems that got us here. Which "moderates" are we hearkening back to here? Hindsight being 20/20 (um, well this is America after all), which Republicans were fit to govern? Yeah, the GOP is having a hard time putting the populist genie back in the bottle, let's not let them convince us we need more economic voodoo juice to do it. Quote
j_b Posted July 6, 2011 Posted July 6, 2011 Is David Brooks supposed to be the voice of reason now? What a douche. I don't know who Reason's Spokesman is these days, I think that position might have fallen under the budget ax, but the piece seemed reasonable to me. because it is reasonable to celebrate a "3-to-1 rate of spending cuts to revenue increases", knowing that many of the cuts will affect social programs leaving the bloated war budget essentially untouched? good luck in 2012 Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted July 6, 2011 Posted July 6, 2011 Brooks didn't mention the war budget, but you did, so I guess he did, so you can make your argument, or lack thereof... ...as usual. Lotsa such bullshit on both sides, fo shiz. Quote
j_b Posted July 6, 2011 Posted July 6, 2011 (edited) it's not my fault that you agree with Brooks to balance the budget on the back of working people. btw he does not mention the bloated war budget in the context of a budget and cuts article because he doesn't want to cut the war budget significantly. I'd hope you understand that what is unsaid is as significant as what is said but I was obviously wrong, sorry about that. Please, cut out the "i am a moderate" shtick, it's unbecoming. Edited July 6, 2011 by j_b Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted July 6, 2011 Posted July 6, 2011 At the risk of name dropping, it's true that Mr. Brooks and I often discuss our views on balancing the budget. We agree that our primary objective is to destroy the middle class. It's a self hate thing. I balanced the budget using the NY times interactive thing and reported it, as did others at the time, so for those whose mental illness compels them to, my opinion on the subject is there for the diggin'. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted July 6, 2011 Posted July 6, 2011 it's not my fault that you agree with Brooks to balance the budget on the back of working people. What is the correlation coefficient between infantilism and obtaining a PhD? It's gotta be close to unity. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.