Show me the money--Players turning pro

[jcarter7669]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

When I got my Financial Aid package, it included a Stafford Loan, which is a federal loan - but it was given to the school to award, and given directly to the school. I never saw the money. I think that counts as the school receiving funding, even if it is just specifically for loans.

For your tuition, that you will payback???

Technically you could demand the money to which BU would cut you a check and send you a bill.

How can you not see the difference between a school receiving public funds and a student using federal backed loans (note, the federal gov't doesnt give out loans until next year. Stafford is a loan program not a loan)??

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

NSF funding goes to investigator's that submit grants. Not to Universities.

Keep trying.

Universities also apply directly for funding, so your statement is flat wrong. Try actually reading the link I sent - table A-9 specifically addresses money that goes directly to a school and is then passed down to "subrecipients," who are individual professors, etc.

I suppose your next argument will be that if a physics department applies for a grant, that doesn't count either, since the physics department is not "the university."

I'm done slicing that onion.

 

[jcarter7669]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

Universities also apply directly for funding, so your statement is flat wrong. Try actually reading the link I sent - table A-9 specifically addresses money that goes directly to a school and is then passed down to "subrecipients," who are individual professors, etc.

I suppose your next argument will be that if a physics department applies for a grant, that doesn't count either, since the physics department is not "the university."

I'm done slicing that onion.

There is no table A-9 and you clearly do not understand how funding works. I used to think Cornell was a good school but I now have determined that all 5 of the Cornell students I know are unbelievably ignorant.

Do you think NSF is going to write a check for 500K to an individual person to dole out over the course of the grant? No they send it to the school, and give the researcher a budget account to draw from.

And the physics dept writing a grant? Whisky-tango-foxtrot is wrong with you? Of course the Physics Dept. doesn't write a grant. The chair may write a grant for his own research, heck sometimes collaborations between PI's occur, but grants are given out to individual researchers. To say otherwise is just ignorant.

Here' s a hint on one way you can tell .....

Go to this site http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/

Then look under Awardee information. See the part where is says "principal investigator" That's there because a PI writes the freaking grant for their research.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

There is no table A-9 and you clearly do not understand how funding works. I used to think Cornell was a good school but I now have determined that all 5 of the Cornell students I know are unbelievably ignorant.

Do you think NSF is going to write a check for 500K to an individual person to dole out over the course of the grant? No they send it to the school, and give the researcher a budget account to draw from.

And the physics dept writing a grant? Whisky-tango-foxtrot is wrong with you? Of course the Physics Dept. doesn't write a grant. The chair may write a grant for his own research, heck sometimes collaborations between PI's occur, but grants are given out to individual researchers. To say otherwise is just ignorant.

Here' s a hint on one way you can tell .....

Go to this site http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/

Then look under Awardee information. See the part where is says "principal investigator" That's there because a PI writes the freaking grant for their research.

Wait, so now I'm confused. The money DOES goes to the department to dole out, but this doesn't count in your mind as federal funding of the university because an individual filled out the actual form? Perhaps you should write a grant to study how an abstract concept like a "department" could fill out a form on the web. I'd also love to hear your theories on why the indirect costs (which go to pay for the school's facilities and administrative costs) associated with a PI's proposal do not constitute federal funding of the school.

As for table A-9, here's a small hint: when a table or figure number in a technical document starts with a letter, that's usually an indication that it's in the section of the document titled with that letter, which would be Appendix A in this case. Since I'm guessing you still won't find it, the answer is that over $16B in NSF funding went directly to private universities for them to pass on to subrecipients.

 

[JB]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

Again, is their evidence that a private school receives funding from the public, and I will specify for clarity, directly?

I don't have the exact specifics of how Private Schools receive funding that the government counts toward title IX. I am fairly sure the government considers research grants part of that formula, as the Professor uses the schools facilities amongst other things.

What I do know is if the school receives zero federal dollars they are not bound to the rules of title IX. The issue is there are few if any Universities that meet that requirement because the Feds (and the courts) consider their research dollars to count in the title IX rules.

I am not going to argue if it is right, just that it is!

 

[jcarter7669]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

I don't have the exact specifics of how Private Schools receive funding that the government counts toward title IX. I am fairly sure the government considers research grants part of that formula, as the Professor uses the schools facilities amongst other things.

What I do know is if the school receives zero federal dollars they are not bound to the rules of title IX. The issue is there are few if any Universities that meet that requirement because the Feds (and the courts) consider their research dollars to count in the title IX rules.

I am not going to argue if it is right, just that it is!

Lynah already posted title IX which says if a school accepts students that receive federal financial aid.

Frankly, I am not arguing about title IX in any way, I am only responding to OsroJr that Universities receive public money. They don't. Lynah doesn't seem to get.

Yes a private university is in possesion of public monies with regards to grants, but it isn't their money. Its the same thing as saying a bank receives money from private investors because you deposit your paycheck there. The money doesn't go to the college, its not their money. If you give money to a lawyer to start a trust, it isn't the lawyers money.


As for the issue of researchers using school facilities, they do, and they also pay for it. They provide a service for which they are paid by the investigator who got money from the gov't for a grant the investigator got. The university did not get money directly from the federal gov't.

I mean by that logic UVM is heavily subsidized by the gov't because they get money from investments on General Dynamics which has contracts with the military funded through DOD a part of the Gov't. I mean the assertion is just silly.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

I mean by that logic UVM is heavily subsidized by the gov't because they get money from investments on General Dynamics which has contracts with the military funded through DOD a part of the Gov't. I mean the assertion is just silly.

A public university that's subsidized by the gov't? Say it ain't so!

You are splitting the finest of hairs when saying that NSF grant money does not go to the universities (and I still contend that other public money does go directly to them). If the NSF stopped giving out money tomorrow, private universities would have to lay off tens of thousands of faculty and staff, and it would effectively close dozens if not hundreds of private universities. Therefore, those universities only exist because of the public money, no matter whose money you call it.

 

[jcarter7669]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

A public university that's subsidized by the gov't? Say it ain't so!

You are splitting the finest of hairs when saying that NSF grant money does not go to the universities (and I still contend that other public money does go directly to them). If the NSF stopped giving out money tomorrow, private universities would have to lay off tens of thousands of faculty and staff, and it would effectively close dozens if not hundreds of private universities. Therefore, those universities only exist because of the public money, no matter whose money you call it.

You don't see the relationship. A research getting NSF grants is more like a sub-contractor then a University employee. If they failed to get grants their employment would end. Assuming they are non-tenure.

By saying a University receives public money the meaning is that they are getting money to operate on.
With grants that is not the case. They receive the money which is for the research to operate on. The University has no entitlement, say over, or rights to that money. It isn't theirs.

That's all I'm saying. A private University to my knowledge does not get public funds that go into their account for them to operate on.

 

[Osorojo]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

You don't see the relationship. A research getting NSF grants is more like a sub-contractor then a University employee. If they failed to get grants their employment would end. Assuming they are non-tenure.

By saying a University receives public money the meaning is that they are getting money to operate on.
With grants that is not the case. They receive the money which is for the research to operate on. The University has no entitlement, say over, or rights to that money. It isn't theirs.

That's all I'm saying. A private University to my knowledge does not get public funds that go into their account for them to operate on.

I attended a private, endowed university on a New York State Regents College Scholarship. The state did not deposit the money in my account, but in the university's account. The university spent it. The same thing has happened to hundreds of thousands of college students in New York State, and presumably some other states offer their high school graduates attending private schools academic (not athletic) scholarships. Those of you sufficiently desperate to protect your ignorance about public aid and private institutions can ignore or try to equivocate about these facts, but doing so won't change the truth.
Nobody's claiming that government does not profit from the money it invests in higher education institutions. The Pentagon and the NSA often demand results from their investmnets, especially those made in "liberal/socialist" universities, but these are two-way deals. The claim that government scholarships and grants do NOT support private colleges and universities is blatant dishonesty at its unconvincing worst. In close second place is the claim that it's ethical and ultimately profitable to subordinate academics to athletics in colleges and universities.

 

[JB]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

That's all I'm saying. A private University to my knowledge does not get public funds that go into their account for them to operate on.

I think you are mssing the point actually.

A public university gets operating funds from the State. In the case of UNH for example it is really, reall small amount. Private Universities don't get these operating funds from the State. I am not sure these funds from the State actually count on the Federal title IX law.

I am no title IX expert but I don't think the Federal backed student loans count, as those are loans to students that are then paid to the University "by" the student - even if this process is a bit of a shell game. I think these operate more along the line of ho you think the grants operate. From a title IX view of the world I believe the grants are the killer and that is the money the feds are paying attention to reference this compliance.

Could be wrong but that is how I have understood it.

 

[unh_hockey]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

NSF funding goes to investigator's that submit grants. Not to Universities.

Keep trying.

I have been the PI to several federal grants, and if you are submitting with a letter of commitment from the U, you need to factor in their cut. For NSF if a professor within the system was applying ( as was the case during my graduate years), the university gets 60% right off the bat. Most NSF grants are geared towards research efforts, ergo universities. Even if a PI such as myself who represent a private entity or a not-for profit , the U will still get their cut. its like the mafia.

College is a business.

 

[jcarter7669]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

I attended a private, endowed university on a New York State Regents College Scholarship. The state did not deposit the money in my account, but in the university's account. The university spent it.

FOR YOUR TUITION. YOU GOT A SERVICE FOR IT.

That's different then when a state college is given money directly from the state budget.

Gawd, I give up. In 10 years remind me to tell my kids not to apply to Cornell.

 

[jcarter7669]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

I have been the PI to several federal grants, and if you are submitting with a letter of commitment from the U, you need to factor in their cut. For NSF if a professor within the system was applying ( as was the case during my graduate years), the university gets 60% right off the bat. Most NSF grants are geared towards research efforts, ergo universities. Even if a PI such as myself who represent a private entity or a not-for profit , the U will still get their cut. its like the mafia.

College is a business.

The precentage varies greatly, but the University just doesn't get that money for nothing. It is for secondaries no? Your lab, lights, electricity, water, building maintanence, etc? No different then the feds giving a kid a pell grant that goes directly to the school. The gov't is giving YOU the money to pay secondaries to the school. Just like the gov't gives the kid a pell grant to give to the school.


If NSF didn't give you a grant, do you still have to pay secondaries...**** skippy
If Uncle Sam doesn't give a kid a pell grant does he still have to pay tuition....you bet.

If nothing at all happens does New Hampshire still give UNH a buget line item. Yup.


Again, I will note, I am not talking about nor have mentioned, other then to respond, title IX. I was responding to Osorojr's assertion that private universities receive public funding.

Please note: Junior hockey programs waste their own money when they make foolish decisions; nearly every college receives substantial public funding, so guess whose money they waste when they make foolish decisions?

Just how ARE things in la-la land?

My point is merely that a private institution when the make a foolish decisions, like admitting OsroJr, waste their own money, not taxpayer money. The assertion is false, and that is all I'm saying. Title IX only came into this due to the logic that if a college is subject to title IX then they have to receive public money.


For those interested in Title IX, there are two qualifiers as to why a college like Cornell for example is subject to Title IX. The first is that in fact student financial aid is a qualifier, even though it is noted that the it is an attenuated relationship and secondly, the NCAA is subject to Title IX and any school participating in NCAA athletics is subject to their by-laws regardless of public funds.

You can read the entire SCOTUS decision but here is the excerpt regarding student aid.

"In Grove City College v. Bell, 465 U.S. 555, 563—570 (1984), we held that a college receives federal financial assistance when it enrolls students who receive federal funds earmarked for educational expenses."

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

The precentage varies greatly, but the University just doesn't get that money for nothing.

This whole time, though, you've been arguing that the University doesn't get public money, period. Now you're saying that they DO get public money, but it doesn't count because it's a payment for a service.

Seems like we all understand where the money comes from, who gets it, and who spends it for what, so now it's just a semantics argument of whether that all adds up to "public money going to private universities." For me, it boils down to what I posted before - if the NSF (and other federal agencies) stopped handing out research money tomorrow, the budget of essentially every single private university in the US would immediately shrink and they would lay off faculty and staff. That is reality - everything else is handwaving and smoke-n-mirrors.

 

[Osorojo]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

FOR YOUR TUITION. YOU GOT A SERVICE FOR IT.

That's different then when a state college is given money directly from the state budget.

Gawd, I give up. In 10 years remind me to tell my kids not to apply to Cornell.

jcarter:

Thanks for reminding me "YOU GOT A SERVICE FOR IT" (the money government paid my alma mater for my tuition), but I have never forgotten this fact. You stubbornly insist that money paid for a service does not constitute support of the service provider?! If true, this insight will certainly shock and astonish every businessman and capitalist alive. You should publish your unique economic theory. The Nobel Committee might even show their lack of support for you by awarding you prize money.
I applaud your decision to keep your offspring away from Cornell.

 

[jcarter7669]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

Its not semanitics, its a fundamental difference.

Case A.)

Gov't awards a student a grant to go to school, ANY SCHOOL he chooses. He chooses a college money is sent. If he doesn't go to that school the money does not.

Case B.) Vermont Legislature appropriates x million dollars to go to UVM. Kid X doesn't go. Money still goes to UVM.


The idea that because a student or investigator gets money from the gov't and then uses that to pay expenses at a school and therefore the school gets public funding is absurd.

Next you will be saying we all are supporters of communism, since we pay taxes to Uncle Sam who uses it to pay debt to communist China.

Osro
"You stubbornly insist that money paid for a service does not constitute support of the service provider?"

That's not what I'm saying at all, and since you still havn't figured it out I must be insane to try and do so again.

Money provided for a service constitutes support for the service provider. Its the question of whose money it is. When the bank loans you money to buy a new car and transfers it directly to the dealer does that mean you never bought the car and the bank did? Does the Bank register the car? Does the Bank insure the car? No you do because YOU BOUGHT THE CAR. Not the bank that loaned you the money.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

Its not semanitics, its a fundamental difference.

Case A.)

Gov't awards a student a grant to go to school, ANY SCHOOL he chooses. He chooses a college money is sent. If he doesn't go to that school the money does not.

Case B.) Vermont Legislature appropriates x million dollars to go to UVM. Kid X doesn't go. Money still goes to UVM.

So which case does research funding fall into? If you call up the NSF and say, "hey, I've got a great research proposal, and I'm not currently affiliated with any university, but just go ahead commit to giving me the money and I'll go find a university where I can do the research and you can give it to me once I get there," I think that would be a rather short conversation. The fact is that professors at private universities apply for public funding as agents of the universities they represent, not as truly independent entities.

 

[jcarter7669]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

So which case does research funding fall into? If you call up the NSF and say, "hey, I've got a great research proposal, and I'm not currently affiliated with any university, but just go ahead commit to giving me the money and I'll go find a university where I can do the research and you can give it to me once I get there," I think that would be a rather short conversation. The fact is that professors at private universities apply for public funding as agents of the universities they represent, not as truly independent entities.

Let's try it this way, maybe you will see my point more clearly. If not I don't care, I'm done with this pointless exercise in futility.

- you are a researcher at University X and you receive a 5 year award from NSF
- after year 2, you apply for and are offered a position at University Y

For Year 3-5 does your NSF grant go to University Y or University X?

If it goes to University X then funding would be to the University.
If it goes to University Y then funding would be to the researcher.

Good luck.

 

[jcarter7669]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

"hey, I've got a great research proposal, and I'm not currently affiliated with any university, but just go ahead commit to giving me the money and I'll go find a university where I can do the research and you can give it to me once I get there,"

Oh and just FYI, NSF doesn't look at or determine funding for individual researchers. There is a committee of other researchers that decide funding. Your phone conversation would be short, because NSF would tell you to stop bothering them.

 

[ts8801]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

How so cynical? The primary mission of junior hockey programs is to develop professional hockey players. Junior hockey does not recruit indifferent, untalented hockey players nor offer recruits college courses. Those are facts, and facts are neither cynical nor benevolent.

Applying precisely the same logic to colleges and universities: The primary mission of colleges and universities is to develop educated graduates. (fact)
No valid arguement has appeared to suggest colleges and universities should compromise their academic goal by permitting athletic potential and performance to supercede academic potential and performance. This conclusion seems much more realistic than cynical. We don't always like the truth, but it's suicidal to deny it.

K this is where your living in la la land. You are assuming that because the kids leave early and do not graduate they are indifferent and untalented. The kids that play college hockey have met the academic requirements to attend that university. In theory a kid could have a 4.0 gpa and leave early. They leave early because a better opportunity had presented itself. If someone walked up to you and said they would pay you a 1 mil a year to leave your job and come work for their company you would do so.

Your argument fails because you assume the kids graduating early didn't value and never wanted to finish their degree. They very well could have planned on staying all 4 years and completing their degree, until that team representative called them and offered them 300K+ a year to play hockey with the potential of making much, much more.

and btw your wonderful private school degree failed you also as you cannot spell argument.