Raising the Quality of Higher Education
December 13th, 2003 | by mtpolitics |How do you think something like that should be tacked?
Smaller class sizes? That would be nice.
More money for scholarships? That would probably help.
Why, of course. That’ll fix everything.
People wonder why taxpayers are getting tired of sinking money into these places.
12 Responses to “Raising the Quality of Higher Education”
By Chris Laslovich on Dec 15, 2003 | Reply
I understand the frustration of some taxpayers when they look at these sorts of additions to college campuses, but you need to look beyond the apartments and cable TV to the actual problem.
The reason colleges and universities across the nation are building these sorts of facilities is to attract more students (especially out of state students). Why do these schools have to entice prospective students this way? Because state governments (like Republican-controlled MT) fail to adequately fund education.
The fact remains that schools such as the U of M in Missoula are desperate for out-of-state students to pay the higher tuition rates to make up for budget shortfalls created by a legislature who would rather save money for fires that haven’t happened yet than fund higher education.
I am sick of people like yourself who point to examples as you have provided to justify not funding education. High-speed internet!? Are you kidding me!? God-forbid Montana keeps up with changing technology…
Damn you educated workforce.
By mtpolitics on Dec 15, 2003 | Reply
Chris–
I am sick of people like yourself who think I should just roll over and open my wallet for every little “perk” for higher education that comes down the pike.
You seem to think that I’m against funding higher education, which I’m not. However, until some more fundamental issues get addressed, I’m not willing to pay for extravagant housing complexes with cable TV, and high-speed internet so they can clog 80% of the bandwidth with P2P traffic. Besides, every unit of higher education in Montana already has high-speed internet access.
Call me nuts, but maybe a better way to attract students might be to increase the quality of the product.
By Craig's Spousal Unit on Dec 15, 2003 | Reply
“Call me nuts, but maybe a better way to attract students might be to increase the quality of the product.”
Makes sense to me.
Cammy
By Chris Laslovich on Dec 15, 2003 | Reply
You guys are right, I would much rather roll over and open my wallet to give businesses like Walmart tax breaks while failing to adequately fund education. Give me a break.
Sure, there is questionable spending going on all the time, we can’t control every cent of our tax dollars. Higher education needs to be funded more; bottom line. These so-called perks are necessary. You are out-of-touch if you think the “quality of the product” is the sole basis in how students decide where to go to school.
You can thank Republicans for the current education mess. Republicans are the ones who drove up the cost of tuition, Republicans are the ones who have forced higher education institutions into a market where they have to compete for out-of-state students because of a lack of state funding.
By bonkrood on Dec 15, 2003 | Reply
Now I honestly don’t care one way or another really but I will say that the school I attended in Wyoming had free cable (including HBO) for everyone living in housing.
I did have a private bedroom one semester and a private apartment the other three. But I paid extra for that–a lot extra. It’s not like they don’t charge higher fees for these types of things. I felt that the added expense was justified and therefore I paid for my privacy.
On the other hand, we were one of the only schools in the state that didn’t have phones provided for us. If we wanted a phone, we had to lay down the cash for that.
There are really pros and cons both ways, but having attended schools in both Wyoming and Montana–as a student who WANTS to LEARN but certainly doesn’t want to do so in an unheated hut with a dirt floor, I think Montana should really take some cues from Wyoming’s Higher Education Network. The education I recieved in Wyoming was top notch, and the administration was accessible, efficient and friendly. My eductation in Montana has thus far been hit-or-miss and the administrations at my Montana schools have been distant, out-of-touch, and sometimes it is like jumping through hoops to get anything accomplished administratively.
Just one student’s point of view.
And high-speed internet is also immeasurably helpful for someone who WANTS to study and learn. Schools can block most P2P access by closing some server ports. It’s not much of an issue at Montana Tech.
By Tony Rosen on Dec 16, 2003 | Reply
***You guys are right, I would much rather roll over and open my wallet to give businesses like Walmart tax breaks ***
At least Walmart employees some part of the population while providing goods at a reasonable cost …. you know, something that educational institutions are incapable of doing ….
Besides, you don’t think your university gets a tax break?
By mtpolitics on Dec 16, 2003 | Reply
Chris–
If you can explain to me how a tax break for someone else comes out of my pocket, I’m all ears.
By Chris Laslovich on Dec 17, 2003 | Reply
Amazing. You guys are really out of touch. Tony, Walmart is a non-union company that is the king of the 39.5 hr work week. They screw over their employees, provide few actual benefits, and pay low wages. Goods at a reasonable cost! Well, isn’t that dandy! I am glad I can support a business that exploits workers and forces local SMALL BUSINESSES out of business. Good point though Tony.
If certain companies are free from paying certain taxes, then that lost revenue must come from somewhere else…..like…YOU and ME!!!
I honestly can’t believe you asked me that question: “If you can explain to me how a tax break for someone else comes out of my pocket, I’m all ears.” The answer should be obvious.
“WALMART-Always low wages. Always.”
By mtpolitics on Dec 17, 2003 | Reply
If it’s so obvious, answer the question.
Please, Chris, share your wisdom with us unwashed.
By Chris Laslovich on Dec 17, 2003 | Reply
I answered your silly question in the second paragraph of my last response. In addition…
…tax breaks create one or both of the following consequences: 1. tax increase for other taxpayers, or 2. cuts in public services.
So….”If you can explain to me how a tax break for someone else comes out of my pocket, I’m all ears”…
Simple. Tax breaks for businesses create higher taxes for others. That money comes out of your pocket and mine.
Enough said.
By mtpolitics on Dec 17, 2003 | Reply
I was in a hurry when I read your reply, so I missed that, but I do have to say that it’s pretty funny.
As is being proven right now in front of our very noses, tax breaks create more jobs, which in turn creates more taxpayers, which does jack squat to my taxes. More taxpayers means more revenue.
As to cutting some services, frankly, I don’t have a problem with that.
You and I obviously don’t agree on this, and probably never will. I have attempted to keep the tone civil, and I will ask you to do the same. I am not an idiot, nor am I a fool.
By Chris Laslovich on Dec 18, 2003 | Reply
I apologize for the strong tone of my previous comments. I realise that education is one of many issues that we differ on. Though I disagree with your opinions, in nonetheless respect your beliefs.
And yes, I do realise you are not an idiot or a fool, you are in fact something far worse: you are a Republican. (laughing…)
I must admit however, I enjoy this Blog as it addresses important issues that affect our state. Merry Christmas. Blog-on.
-Your ’secret’ Democrat