Live data from Hacker News

High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

shrewdcuriosity.medium.com

321–326 of 326 posts

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#321
post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public schools are for profit, that profit comes out of tax payers against their will. Just because they have a tax free status doesn't mean they're not lining their pockets with money. Given the massive artificial increases in costs - they are. I've seen it happen in realtime. This doesn't even approach the problem that industry and academics are seperated worlds. Unis lie and tell you everything is "in demand" yet…

> profit comes out of tax payers against their will. And there we have it. The "taxation is theft" heuristic that snaps your perspective into focus. > Private industry should be the one footing the bill and are the most knowleable about what industry wants. Are there any instances where you think this breaks down? There are some industries that very likely would not exist without initial government support because th…

Taxation is theft. That's a fact. In some circumstances that's a necessary evil. However that does not make it always proper to do. You're looking for a way to strawman this instead of addressing the argument.

There is little done in modern academics that legitimately drives innovation. Only select institutions, with significant ties to private industry, generate papers and innovation. Largely these are still already done in R&D at a company somewhere.

Public funding for education that works is effectively subsidizing costs for private industry. Public funding that doesnt work is incompetence that benefits no one other then government employees, and that makes it equal to theft.

Therefore, we remove the subsidy, and students that are worth investing in will be paid for by the billions that companies have sitting around collecting dust.

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public schools are for profit, that profit comes out of tax payers against their will. Just because they have a tax free status doesn't mean they're not lining their pockets with money. Given the massive artificial increases in costs - they are. I've seen it happen in realtime. This doesn't even approach the problem that industry and academics are seperated worlds. Unis lie and tell you everything is "in demand" yet…

You seem to be ideologically opposed to the very idea of public schools, and yet apparently have no problem working for one for years even though there are for-profit private schools or programs that you could be working for. Something doesn't add up. I'm going to assume you are trolling and leave this conversation now.

That philosophy right there is why nothing changes. I'm pointing out the problem square in the face and you choose to ignore it for a fantasy. Address the merits, don't strawman.

I can infact get a government paycheck and also criticize it, knowing where it comes from and how it's obtained. Infact that makes me one of the most knowledgeable people on it.

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#323
post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, how would you propose to generate the political will to just get rid of public institutions? This sounds more like a libertarian pipe dream than a pragmatic solution.

Not all, just the ones we know no longer serve their purpose.

How, though? How would you garner the support to actually make it happen?

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#324
post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> profit comes out of tax payers against their will. And there we have it. The "taxation is theft" heuristic that snaps your perspective into focus. > Private industry should be the one footing the bill and are the most knowleable about what industry wants. Are there any instances where you think this breaks down? There are some industries that very likely would not exist without initial government support because th…

Taxation is theft. That's a fact. In some circumstances that's a necessary evil. However that does not make it always proper to do. You're looking for a way to strawman this instead of addressing the argument. There is little done in modern academics that legitimately drives innovation. Only select institutions, with significant ties to private industry, generate papers and innovation. Largely these are still already…

Taxation without representation is theft. If you live in a modern western democratic society, that is not the case.

In my experience, in both academia and industry, industry often gets the better deal. They can effectively socialize the risks to the public sphere and then when there's a clear path to make profits, take the reins. I think that hybrid system tends to work the best to mitigate the evils of both sides.

A good example is SpaceX. There would be no SpaceX without NASA and most of the earliest flights were self-insured by the govt. Their SpaceAct agreement allows them to have access to all the support and expertise of NASA as long as they share their data. In exchange, the dinosaur of NASA has some new innovation led by the private sector. Once they proved themselves competent, their customer base expanded to private companies because the risk was now lower. I don't think any of that was likely to happen in a non-hybrid approach.

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#325
post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should we mourn the fact that poor people avoid a life of student debt slavery? These aren't private loans that can be discharged. They will stay with you for the rest of your life if you can't pay then. Honestly, your post is one of the most vile and disgusting comments I have ever seen on HN. You think people can't have upward mobility unless they spend $100k per year on tuition? Even if we assume the loan can…

> Honestly, your post is one of the most vile and disgusting comments I have ever seen on HN. > I don't know where these authoritarian people like you are coming from, telling others that they are worthless if they don't sign up for a life of financial suffering. Wow, this is completely nuts! You've wildly, recklessly misinterpreted me. I strongly urge you to reread the HN guidelines. https://news.ycombinator.com/new…

He’s trolling. He’s interpreting everyone’s words at the worst

Re: High tuition costs mostly stem from the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 1993

#326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be ideologically opposed to the very idea of public schools, and yet apparently have no problem working for one for years even though there are for-profit private schools or programs that you could be working for. Something doesn't add up. I'm going to assume you are trolling and leave this conversation now.

That philosophy right there is why nothing changes. I'm pointing out the problem square in the face and you choose to ignore it for a fantasy. Address the merits, don't strawman. I can infact get a government paycheck and also criticize it, knowing where it comes from and how it's obtained. Infact that makes me one of the most knowledgeable people on it.

You can, but it does seem to point to some questionable ethics.

Either you are personally benefitting from an institution you are actively undermining or you are perpetuating an organization that you think deserves to go away. Neither of those actions are ethically admirable. (See: your post about how illogical humans are)

Now I'll grant that your personal ethics are distinct from the issue, but I'm sure you can see why that might raise some eyebrows.

Post reply on HN