What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

  • Thread starter Thread starter Priceless
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

Priceless said:
Only Commies need some fancy book learnin'! Real 'Muricans can do fine with just a high school diploma or a GED before starting their career at McDonald's or Wal*Mart.
Click to expand...

It's always worthwhile to get the perspective of a man of experience.
 
Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

pirate said:
Integrity? We don't need no stinkin' integrity.


And now Tufts and BC are 'elite' institutions? I 'got it' when people referred to Harvard as elite. Many would say that Tufts and BC are schools that were second on the list below the Ivies, can they also be elite? Or will we soon be in a world where only community college or UPhoenix is regular and every 4 year institution is 'elite'?
Click to expand...

Only if they're in the running for a major bowl.
 
Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

Kepler said:
Nice.
Click to expand...

The only part of the story that I don't like is that it was a PPP robo-poll. It would be a lot funnier to imagine some poor schmuck autodialing a few hundred respondents and asking that one live, in person.
 
Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

Looks like there will be a referendum on same sex marriage in Maryland as well as in-state tuition for illegals. Still not sure if the gerrymander made the ballot or not. The state is solid blue, but it may make election night interesting in Annapolis and for the Governor's hopes for national office in 2016.
 
Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

In State Tuition for Illegals? How does this make sense?
 
Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

walrus said:
In State Tuition for Illegals? How does this make sense?
Click to expand...

I've seen some proposals that do make sense. Generally, it means that the children of illegal immigrants pay the same tuition rate to go to a state school that any other state resident would pay, and they are not threatened with deportation if they enroll. For states that are trying to upgrade the quality of their labor force, it may make good economic sense, and it also makes sense to turn people into employable taxpayers instead of recipient of public services. Often, the people promoting that legislation also hope to turn the beneficiaries into another special-interest voting bloc.
 
Last edited:
Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

Kepler said:
Tufts certainly has particular programs (Medicine) that qualify as "elite." Once upon a time at least BC's Philosophy department was very strong.

I have a problem with calling any particular university "elite." It all comes down to what you study. When I was an undergrad (insert dinosaur joke here) there were a hundred schools with better math programs than Cornell or better hard science programs than Harvard. And of course once you get to graduate school the university label becomes literally meaningless -- it's just a matter of who you study with.
Click to expand...

i agree, my intention was more to point out that the word elite, which I disagree with as a descriptor, was now starting to be used against people who didn't go to Harvard or Yale.

We classify anybody making more than $250k a year as 'the rich', then there is the tag on anybody going to a top university as 'elite'. The word pandering gets tossed around a lot on here, I think the use of these terms(rich and elite) is intentional. What does it mean? To me it is another way to divide, another way to demean the achievements of those who have worked hard, another way to make those outcomes seem 'bad' or their perspective to be invalid. It plays to the middle of the pack.

Used to be the term snob got thrown around, and it was more of a personality trait, somebody acted like a snob. Now, just by going to the top schools in the country, which are 'elite', you by extension must be elitist. That isn't how those people act per se, that is just a tag put on entire groups of people based on performance.


So,
 
Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

pirate said:
i agree, my intention was more to point out that the word elite, which I disagree with as a descriptor, was now starting to be used against people who didn't go to Harvard or Yale.

We classify anybody making more than $250k a year as 'the rich', then there is the tag on anybody going to a top university as 'elite'. The word pandering gets tossed around a lot on here, I think the use of these terms(rich and elite) is intentional. What does it mean? To me it is another way to divide, another way to demean the achievements of those who have worked hard, another way to make those outcomes seem 'bad' or their perspective to be invalid. It plays to the middle of the pack.

Used to be the term snob got thrown around, and it was more of a personality trait, somebody acted like a snob. Now, just by going to the top schools in the country, which are 'elite', you by extension must be elitist. That isn't how those people act per se, that is just a tag put on entire groups of people based on performance.
Click to expand...

Nicely put....though to me it is not even "putting a tag on people based on performance" but more "labelling people because of perceived traits which they may or may not actually have."

This divisiveness is really unhealthy: "let's pick out a few people here, too small to be anything other than symbolic, and demonize them as a way to rally others behind us." I saw an economic analysis that the so-called "Buffett rule" really would only make a significant difference in taxation to about 400 people. Clearly you cannot address our deficit problem that way.
 
Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

FreshFish said:
Nicely put....though to me it is not even "putting a tag on people based on performance" but more "labelling people because of perceived traits which they may or may not actually have."

This divisiveness is really unhealthy: "let's pick out a few people here, too small to be anything other than symbolic, and demonize them as a way to rally others behind us." I saw an economic analysis that the so-called "Buffett rule" really would only make a significant difference in taxation to about 400 people. Clearly you cannot address our deficit problem that way.
Click to expand...

The path is leading to excuses for anyone who doesn't excel and sour grapes towards anybody that does. Since nobody can suceed unless they were born into a billionaire family, it is really easy to set expectations for the rest of america.

Meanwhile, the offspring of billionaires are rarely successful themselves...if you provide everything for them, set no expectations and cover up their failings with excuses and money it usually leads to failure. The good thing is that only happens to the children of billionaires, anybody else thrives in that type of environment.
 
Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

pirate said:
Meanwhile, the offspring of billionaires are rarely successful themselves...if you provide everything for them, set no expectations and cover up their failings with excuses and money it usually leads to failure. The good thing is that only happens to the children of billionaires, anybody else thrives in that type of environment.
Click to expand...

Not sure how to present data on this idea one way or the other....your "if" is hugely important. Many founding billionaires DO set high expectations, and it shows.

The Rockefellers, for example, seemed to produce generation after generation of successful people, at least based on a cursory glance....same with the Ford family, the Pritzkers, the Dillons....again, not much direct personal knowledge, just a few anecdotal observations (though I had to laugh on a visit to the Dillon family office, there was a framed political cartoon in the reception area about the battle to expand the federal debt ceiling....from the Johnson administration, when a Dillon was Secretary of the Treasury!).

Many of the "billionaire" families set up charitable foundations that receive the bulk of the family fortune, so that the children have enough in trust only to cover basic lifestyle needs. If they want more than that, they have to go out and earn it. Many times, the successor generations work in the foundation itself, which in theory at least is a great way to teach them responsibility and stewardship and how to give back in a responsible way.


I think a few prominent celebutards have skewed popular perception. I would not generalize from them. What matters most is the foresight exercised by the founding billionaire in how they set up their dispository documents.
 
Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

walrus said:
In State Tuition for Illegals? How does this make sense?
Click to expand...
Yah. So an illegal gets to pay in state tuition, but a kid from the next state over pays out of state tuition. Such things are all too common in this nation anymore.
 
Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

pirate said:
iThe word pandering gets tossed around a lot on here, I think the use of these terms(rich and elite) is intentional. What does it mean? To me it is another way to divide, another way to demean the achievements of those who have worked hard, another way to make those outcomes seem 'bad' or their perspective to be invalid. It plays to the middle of the pack.
Click to expand...

The left tends to demonize the rich and the right tends to demonize the educated. Each party does the Working Class Hero drag act to harvest votes. Partly it appeals to unhealthy envy and partly to the healthy desire to explode conceits. I doubt it's ever been any different.

I’ll mountebank their loves,
Cog their hearts from them, and come home beloved
Of all the trades in Rome. -- Coriolanus, act 3, scene 2
Click to expand...
 
Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

Bob Gray said:
Yah. So an illegal gets to pay in state tuition, but a kid from the next state over pays out of state tuition. Such things are all too common in this nation anymore.
Click to expand...

So you consider a person born in the United States an illegal alien? In your view, how many generations does a family have to live here to be considered an American citizen?

And while we're on the subject, perhaps you can tell us how many generations your family has been in this country. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top