2020 US Presidential Election

   #61  

D-Dub

Verified VCDS User
Verified
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
620
Reaction score
628
Location
US 2014 GTI Drivers Edition/DSG
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=272151
btw, the simplest solution would be for mexico to join the united states (not as a single state, but split upon region).

then they wouldn't be immigrants, we would all have one single government, everyone could come and go as they pleased and all be bound by the same rules.

of course canada as well would be welcome along the same reasoning, but I don't think there is as much a contention about the northern border, eh.
 
   #62  

DV52

Verified VCDS User
Verified
Joined
May 16, 2014
Messages
3,699
Reaction score
4,113
Location
Melbourne, Australia
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=194404
D-Dub: I suspect that your paradigm-shift suggestion will be viewed with horror by many Americans - but it's worth remembering that the land-of-the-free only has preeminence in global affairs because it's so "Yuge" (to quote your POTUS). Unlike more personal matters -there can be no doubt that size really does matter in geopolitical brinkmanship!

Lot's of folk believe that America is the wealthiest country in the world and GDP is often quoted as proof of that claim. Without being too accurate - USA has about 25% of the world's GDP (GWP) and China's number is somewhere around 15% (give-or-take).

I'm not an economist by any definition, but it's debatable whether GDP is the correct metric when measuring the size of a country's economy (by some alternative metrics like Purchasing Power Parity- China is already the largest economy in the world). In any event, I guess it really doesn't matter and even if GDP is used, there is growing consensus that because of the relative disparities in GDP growth rates between the two countries, China's economy will exceed America's in about 2030.

Which brings me back to your "horror" suggestion - if integration of the American continent into a single political/economic entity (kind-of like the European Union) can be achieved (big call - I suspect), then it can have more fundamental benefits. But I suggest that we both don't hold our breath for this to happen - because my take from reading replies here and from reports in the press is that America wants to be more isolationist (an interesting strategy when the principle threat to the country is growing bigger)

Of course - the other paradigm-shift solution is for the Trump government to impose a requirement on every citizen to procreate more (much more) and to decrease the minimum working age (only joking - but just about the second bit)!! ;)



Don
 
Last edited:
   #63  

Mike R

Ross-Tech Employee
Staff member
Ross-Tech Employee
Joined
Apr 10, 2014
Messages
425
Reaction score
499
Location
Virgo Supercluster
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=126524
Why you you think government should determine how much people are paid?

-Uwe-
Because I've seen what happens when capitalism goes completely unchecked in this country. Not everyone is as benevolent as you, in fact I'd wager to say that hardly any are.
 
   #64  

Mike R

Ross-Tech Employee
Staff member
Ross-Tech Employee
Joined
Apr 10, 2014
Messages
425
Reaction score
499
Location
Virgo Supercluster
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=126524
I take one exception, it’s the HC Industry and the UNIVERSITIES.
The universities and Student Loan businesses feed off one another. The universities keep raising their rates because the Student loans keep increasing, they snow ball off of one another. To deny that is akin to denying the earth is a sphere.
 
   #65  

Mike R

Ross-Tech Employee
Staff member
Ross-Tech Employee
Joined
Apr 10, 2014
Messages
425
Reaction score
499
Location
Virgo Supercluster
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=126524
Almost every candy bar in the UK has been reduced in size, but with no change in price, as part of a "Government initiative" to reduce the amount of sugar children eat - but they just eat more candy bars...
It's a win-win for them. They reduce cost of production, and give the false mantra of being more health conscious. Children's mentality towards eating comes primarily from their upbringing. From what I've heard, ask Santos about his daughters, it's a good example.
 
   #66  

Mike R

Ross-Tech Employee
Staff member
Ross-Tech Employee
Joined
Apr 10, 2014
Messages
425
Reaction score
499
Location
Virgo Supercluster
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=126524
I kind like Buttigieg and Harris but until Mitch is holding the Senate nothing will happen. If they would work out between 2 of themselves as POTOS AND VP then that would be a great combo. I'm neither D or R. I also wish we would have more parties than 2.
Yup. This is the biggest flaw with our political system. Until any 3rd party is given time at a main debate stage, I refuse to vote. "To partake in a corrupt system, is to accept it."
 
   #67  

Mike R

Ross-Tech Employee
Staff member
Ross-Tech Employee
Joined
Apr 10, 2014
Messages
425
Reaction score
499
Location
Virgo Supercluster
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=126524
I wish parties didn't exist in politics - in any party political system all that happens is that all "representatives of the people" think they are right and that anyone from another party is wrong. Working together in the best interests of the country is of no interest to them, just personal gain and power - even if it screws the country.

Frankly, it's just like rooting for your favorite sports team. Simply liking them for affiliation.
 
   #68  

Mike R

Ross-Tech Employee
Staff member
Ross-Tech Employee
Joined
Apr 10, 2014
Messages
425
Reaction score
499
Location
Virgo Supercluster
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=126524
btw, the simplest solution would be for mexico to join the united states (not as a single state, but split upon region).

then they wouldn't be immigrants, we would all have one single government, everyone could come and go as they pleased and all be bound by the same rules.

of course canada as well would be welcome along the same reasoning, but I don't think there is as much a contention about the northern border, eh.
No thanks!
 
   #69  

Jack@European_Parts

NostraJackAss
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
20,668
Reaction score
8,799
Location
Montgomery, NY, USA
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=57337
   #72  

Mike R

Ross-Tech Employee
Staff member
Ross-Tech Employee
Joined
Apr 10, 2014
Messages
425
Reaction score
499
Location
Virgo Supercluster
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=126524
Welp, He's out of the race. You can still take that sort of stance, hell even make a poll advocating for the restrictions of firearms (not that it'd go your way) without making a fool of yourself doing so.
 
   #73  

IndianaMuscle

Banned
Joined
Apr 24, 2019
Messages
233
Reaction score
62
Location
NO ASS no cert no worries
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=368009
The universities and Student Loan businesses feed off one another. The universities keep raising their rates because the Student loans keep increasing, they snow ball off of one another. To deny that is akin to denying the earth is a sphere.
How can a student loan increase against a nonexistent number? The Unies set the prices, the loan companies dole out the cash.
 
   #76  

Jack@European_Parts

NostraJackAss
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
20,668
Reaction score
8,799
Location
Montgomery, NY, USA
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=57337
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/10/us/politics/elizabeth-warren-2020-policies-platform.html


An actual plan.........but I disagree with it in some cases.......


I don't think college should be free and I'd like to see the Government only loan money based on academic performance and not to be done further if someone is bombing out in first years party debt and it should be a 50/50 split where the recipient must be working while going to school to show responsibility or other split criteria to show the student is worthy of such debt to be incurred.

No free ride .........
 
Last edited:
   #77  

Mike R

Ross-Tech Employee
Staff member
Ross-Tech Employee
Joined
Apr 10, 2014
Messages
425
Reaction score
499
Location
Virgo Supercluster
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=126524
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/10/us/politics/elizabeth-warren-2020-policies-platform.html


An actual plan.........but I disagree with it in some cases.......


I don't think college should be free and I'd like to see the Government only loan money based on academic performance and not to be done further if someone is bombing out in first years party debt and it should be a 50/50 split where the recipient must be working while going to school to show responsibility or other split criteria to show the student is worthy of such debt to be incurred.

No free ride .........
The biggest problem I have with giving 100% free college is actually in the nature of accountability and limiting it only to those who actually want to strive to pursue a particular set of skills. Making it 100% free just more or less makes it an extension of high school for a lot of people who truthfully will not make good use of the time and money being put into it. If you see a great number of people who flunk out now, imagine how many people will do so if it's open to anyone and everyone, while not having a financial stake in it. Having some sort of fiscal investment in it personally serves as a motivational factor for those who go and can make good use of it, as well as serves as a deterrent for those who don't really want to get anything out of it, or are frankly unable to.

That said, I am definitely in favor of assisting and enabling those who are ambitious and capable, so long as we can find a good way to accurately determine that. I think machine learning could be a useful asset in such a system.
 
   #78  

DV52

Verified VCDS User
Verified
Joined
May 16, 2014
Messages
3,699
Reaction score
4,113
Location
Melbourne, Australia
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=194404
The biggest problem I have with giving 100% free college is actually in the nature of accountability and limiting it only to those who actually want to strive to pursue a particular set of skills. Making it 100% free just more or less makes it an extension of high school for a lot of people who truthfully will not make good use of the time and money being put into it. If you see a great number of people who flunk out now, imagine how many people will do so if it's open to anyone and everyone, while not having a financial stake in it. Having some sort of fiscal investment in it personally serves as a motivational factor for those who go and can make good use of it, as well as serves as a deterrent for those who don't really want to get anything out of it, or are frankly unable to.

That said, I am definitely in favor of assisting and enabling those who are ambitious and capable, so long as we can find a good way to accurately determine that. I think machine learning could be a useful asset in such a system.
Mike: I'm always cautious when using the word "free" because the term seldom has a common understanding amongst readers - but last century, Australia had "free" tertiary education for a while and it was the principal cause for spawning a plethora of first time graduates from working-class families. My siblings and I were fortunate (and honored) to be among their number!

As for "limiting it only to those who actually want to strive to pursue a particular set of skills" - even if there was a process for analyzing a student's intent for entering a university - I'm not sure that it's the role of educational institutions to do this. And notwithstanding my foreigner status, particularly in a litigious country like America - I'm not sure that these institutions would take-on this accountability (or does America need another reason to further line the pockets of litigators?)

Rather than focusing on student's intent for entering universities, a more achievable and far better metric IMO is assessing the student's scholastic abilities as a rough surrogate for their capacity to complete studies. Of course, a student's academic prowess (which most definitely is not their IQ) does not equate to their willingness to apply those abilities to studies - but it is a not unreasonable decider for university entry IMO. No problem with the risk of an avalanche of unworthy students because the pass-level for entrance examinations can be tailored to the number of available places. And no problem with accusations about ethnic, or wealth discrimination because everyone is dispassionately treated the same (thereby aligning with your Mr Jefferson's credo)!

Apart from a will of citizens to do it (thru their votes) -one of the reasons why "free" (there's that word again) university was achievable in Australia for a time was the fact that the tertiary institutions were owned and they were directly funded by Government (yes, it was rather socialist in nature - but certainly not in name). So it was simply a case of diverting a greater portion of the tax purse to this new initiative. Not sure that it would be quite this easy for America's education model?

Don
 
Last edited:
   #79  

Mike@Gendan

VCDS Distributor
Joined
Jun 24, 2014
Messages
717
Reaction score
874
Location
Swansea, UK
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=57030
Mike: I'm always cautious when using the word "free" because the term seldom has a common understanding amongst readers - but last century, Australia had "free" tertiary education for a while and it was the principal cause for spawning a plethora of first time graduates from working-class families. My siblings and I were fortunate (and honored) to be among their number!

As for "limiting it only to those who actually want to strive to pursue a particular set of skills" - even if there was a process for analyzing a student's intent for entering a university - I'm not sure that it's the role of educational institutions to do this. And notwithstanding my foreigner status, particularly in a litigious country like America - I'm not sure that these institutions would take-on this accountability (or does America need another reason to further line the pockets of litigators?)

Rather than focusing on student's intent for entering universities, a more achievable and far better metric IMO is assessing the student's scholastic abilities as a rough surrogate for their capacity to complete studies. Of course, a student's academic prowess (which most definitely is not their IQ) does not equate to their willingness to apply those abilities to studies - but it is a not unreasonable decider for university entry IMO. No problem with the risk of an avalanche of unworthy students because the pass-level for entrance examinations can be tailored to the number of available places. And no problem with accusations about ethnic, or wealth discrimination because everyone is dispassionately treated the same (thereby aligning with your Mr Jefferson's credo)!

Apart from a will of citizens to do it (thru their votes) -one of the reasons why "free" (there's that word again) university was achievable in Australia for a time was the fact that the tertiary institutions were owned and they were directly funded by Government (yes, it was rather socialist in nature - but certainly not in name). So it was simply a case of diverting a greater portion of the tax purse to this new initiative. Not sure that it would be quite this easy for America's education model?

Don
In the UK we had "free" university level education, with a points based admission system.
As I remember it (25 years ago now), essentially you apply to a number of universities and they give you an acceptance offer - the number of A, B or C grades you had to achieve in your A-Level school leaving exams for guaranteed acceptance. You then ranked those as your 1st, 2nd, 3rd choice etc. in the system.
(If you missed the target of your offers they would sometimes reduce their offer, or you could find alternative courses via the Clearing system).
As this potentially meant anyone could go to uni, enrolments increased, so universities expanded and offered more and more courses and places.

Then about 20 years ago, due to a looming funding crisis, universities were allowed to charge tuition fees direct to students, rather than local councils covering it through taxes.
It started at £1000, and is still capped, but currently in England students can pay up to £9250 a year for tuition, so with typical courses lasting 3-5 years, just tuition can cost between £30 and 50k, before you even think about living and accommodation costs.

This has led to a lot of university courses offering places to students with incredibly low (or non-existent) criteria for their offers as there are now more places than applicants - so we've gone from a growing system of free education to a shrinking system where admissions are largely down to whether you can afford to pay for the course, rather than whether you're academically suited to it.
 
   #80  

IndianaMuscle

Banned
Joined
Apr 24, 2019
Messages
233
Reaction score
62
Location
NO ASS no cert no worries
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=368009
Apart from a will of citizens to do it (thru their votes) -one of the reasons why "free" (there's that word again) university was achievable in Australia for a time was the fact that the tertiary institutions were owned and they were directly funded by Government (yes, it was rather socialist in nature - but certainly not in name). So it was simply a case of diverting a greater portion of the tax purse to this new initiative. Not sure that it would be quite this easy for America's education model?

Don
Don’t be afraid to mention Socialism. USA has many socialist programs, but they’re only socialist when the republicans say so. Farm subsidies are socialist, but don’t you go mentioning that, those republicans sponsor them.

We should have free access to tertiary education, it’s needed badly here. Even the vets ( and my father is one) for the most part can’t cut it. And we are at peacetime! We need some help educate those with a screw loose, and many recruits I know have just that one loose. But there’s also the South, the loosest screw we have.
 
Top