Yappi Sports - THE Ohio Prep Sports Authority  

Go Back   Yappi Sports - THE Ohio Prep Sports Authority > General Sports > Debate Forum

Hello Guest!
Take a minute to register, It's 100% FREE! What are you waiting for?
Register Now
Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #91  
Old 01-10-17, 08:14 AM
eastisbest eastisbest is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 08-27-06
Posts: 15,357
eastisbest is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by lotr10 View Post
My point was that at least with the "sciences" & "engineering" degrees corporations expect a lot more from a persons college education than proof that they are "smart" as you put it.

Which was exactly the topic of my post, and you protested. I posted, corporations have off-loaded to the universities, training previously done in-house and you objected. Now you post what appears to be my position with the implication that it's been yours all along.


Maybe if you defined (as I did) what you mean by "a lot more." Or maybe we simply don't disagree, you'll recognize I was right because you know, my livelihood, I know what I'm talking about on this subject and we can move on.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 01-12-17, 01:40 AM
gobluetom gobluetom is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 10-21-01
Location: 2016 Outright GCL Champs
Posts: 11,668
gobluetom can only hope to improve
The government has NO RIGHT to spend taxpayer dollars on University education, PERIOD.

If someone wants to attend a University, it is their responsibility to finance that education, not mine!!!
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 01-12-17, 01:44 AM
gobluetom gobluetom is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 10-21-01
Location: 2016 Outright GCL Champs
Posts: 11,668
gobluetom can only hope to improve
Quote:
Originally Posted by SWMCinci View Post
Don't see a real difference in an 18 year old middle of the road HS student having to take out loans to go to college or the state taking money from Taxpayers to allow the same thing...... except in one case there is a consequence for the student for their poor HS record (they have to pay back the loans OR screw up their credit if they don't).

Admittance standards are extremely flexible for a college if the prospective student has the funds to go to college (cash or loan). If the state is paying the bill I would expect to see even more flexibility in the pursuit of dollars.

I hope you aren't serious!!

I want you to personally send me money, and remove the government as the middle man. After all, my betterment is up to you(the taxpayers) not me???

I can't believe people actually follow this line of thinking?????
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 01-12-17, 08:23 AM
SWMCinci SWMCinci is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 02-20-07
Location: Outside of Ohio..... Now
Posts: 15,736
SWMCinci is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by gobluetom View Post
I hope you aren't serious!!

I want you to personally send me money, and remove the government as the middle man. After all, my betterment is up to you(the taxpayers) not me???

I can't believe people actually follow this line of thinking?????
You misread my point (something UM folks would have a hard time understanding after the FSU game)...... I was responding to a poster that was addressing admissions policies. With regard to a substandard student that applied to a school and whether or not they would be accepted, I pointed out that the school wouldn't care whether the student paid their tuition with borrowed money or a state grant, they will find a place for them. But there is a difference, in one case it's someone else's money and in another they are responsible for the money used in their education.
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 01-12-17, 09:35 AM
Jim Lahey Jim Lahey is offline
Cooling Off
 
Join Date: 10-09-16
Location: Sunnyvale
Posts: 2,342
Jim Lahey can only hope to improve
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMud2002 View Post
The government doesn't have the "right" to do a lot of things. That doesn't necessarily mean that it shouldn't.

If a fair and open democratic process is followed, and a society collectively decides that it is in the best interest of their society to fund college education, then by all means, they should do it.
^^ I agree with this. I don't necessarily agree with funding college education, but this process I agree with.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 01-12-17, 12:02 PM
Con_Alma Con_Alma is offline
All American
 
Join Date: 02-24-06
Posts: 1,704
Con_Alma is an unknown quantity at this point
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMud2002 View Post
The government doesn't have the "right" to do a lot of things. That doesn't necessarily mean that it shouldn't.

If a fair and open democratic process is followed, and a society collectively decides that it is in the best interest of their society to fund college education, then by all means, they should do it.
Agreed. IN addition, those things that are not defined as individual rights can be restricted by the collective if society deems it best.
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 01-12-17, 12:13 PM
Con_Alma Con_Alma is offline
All American
 
Join Date: 02-24-06
Posts: 1,704
Con_Alma is an unknown quantity at this point
We have courts to determine that when a disagreement exists.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 01-12-17, 12:35 PM
eastisbest eastisbest is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 08-27-06
Posts: 15,357
eastisbest is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by gobluetom View Post
The government has NO RIGHT to spend taxpayer dollars on University education, PERIOD.

If someone wants to attend a University, it is their responsibility to finance that education, not mine!!!

How do "rights" enter the discussion? Government doesn't have any? They have responsibilities and those are fluid.

We can argue this is infrstruction, which it is and easily under government purview.

We can argue is it wise, in which can I can make arguments both against and for. Being a "Formative Socialist" and a conservative, I do believe it wise investment to seek out talent regardless where it's at and help it to become a service to the whole. I certainly think it's in the best interests to assist those without means but who have demonstrated competitive if not academic skills, a shot at further education. This is the purpose of public education.

But I can also argue that government going wholesale into the financing of public institutions takes the burden off the alum and this should not happen. The real strength of an educational institution, private or public is the alums. Are they believers to the point, they're willing to invest and assist those that helped them along.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 01-12-17, 03:14 PM
gobluetom gobluetom is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 10-21-01
Location: 2016 Outright GCL Champs
Posts: 11,668
gobluetom can only hope to improve
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMud2002 View Post
The government doesn't have the "right" to do a lot of things. That doesn't necessarily mean that it shouldn't.

If a fair and open democratic process is followed, and a society collectively decides that it is in the best interest of their society to fund college education, then by all means, they should do it.
I 100% disagree.

A society should NEVER decide that it is the best interest to steal my wages to finance other people bettering themselves, that is called theft. It is up to each individual to pursue there own interest, without the government acting as a 3rd party and taking my money and giving it to someone else.

However if I decide to invest in an individual and we reach an agreement that he repay me for financing his education, that is between us and none of the governments business.

I always find it interesting that people continue to defend government intervention on these matters, especially in the area of public education given the horrible track record and results of their efforts.
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 01-12-17, 03:20 PM
gobluetom gobluetom is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 10-21-01
Location: 2016 Outright GCL Champs
Posts: 11,668
gobluetom can only hope to improve
Quote:
Originally Posted by eastisbest View Post
How do "rights" enter the discussion? Government doesn't have any? They have responsibilities and those are fluid.

We can argue this is infrstruction, which it is and easily under government purview.

We can argue is it wise, in which can I can make arguments both against and for. Being a "Formative Socialist" and a conservative, I do believe it wise investment to seek out talent regardless where it's at and help it to become a service to the whole. I certainly think it's in the best interests to assist those without means but who have demonstrated competitive if not academic skills, a shot at further education. This is the purpose of public education.

But I can also argue that government going wholesale into the financing of public institutions takes the burden off the alum and this should not happen. The real strength of an educational institution, private or public is the alums. Are they believers to the point, they're willing to invest and assist those that helped them along.
To your point, it is not the governments job to seek out talent and help it become service, that is up to each individual to determine.

If someone wants a chance at further education after high school, financing should be the responsibility of the individual not society as a whole.

To clarify, the responsibility should always fall on the individual, as if it does not and the government assumes this role, something is taken by force from one person to benefit another, that once again is called theft.
Reply With Quote
  #101  
Old 01-12-17, 03:48 PM
SWMCinci SWMCinci is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 02-20-07
Location: Outside of Ohio..... Now
Posts: 15,736
SWMCinci is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by eastisbest View Post
How do "rights" enter the discussion? Government doesn't have any? They have responsibilities and those are fluid.

We can argue this is infrstruction, which it is and easily under government purview.

........
The government has no "rights", it has a set of enumerated responsibilities and supposedly a LOT of limitations on what it can do. Your argument for "infrastructure" is why the government is bloated, wasteful, and negatively impacting the citizens lives - there's always someone that wants to stretch a definition. The 1st act of government when it attempts to stretch a definition to acquire more power should be that someone proposes a law to limit that definition so that government can't expand.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 01-12-17, 04:24 PM
gobluetom gobluetom is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 10-21-01
Location: 2016 Outright GCL Champs
Posts: 11,668
gobluetom can only hope to improve
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMud2002 View Post
It is what you are characterizing as "stealing" and "theft".
Absolutely, because it is.

The government is acting as a 3rd party to take what is mine and give it to someone else.

It is no longer up to the individual to better him or her self.


If I put a gun to your head and steal from you to finance my college education, I go to prison. The government does it and it's validated as for the better good. What a sad commentary on what society has become.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 01-12-17, 04:25 PM
SWMCinci SWMCinci is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 02-20-07
Location: Outside of Ohio..... Now
Posts: 15,736
SWMCinci is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMud2002 View Post
It is what you are characterizing as "stealing" and "theft".
Nooo, he's actually correct. Taking property from someone against their will for the benefit of someone else without receiving a benefit is the literal definition of theft. The fact that it's the government doing it only means that the thief didn't have the courage to take it directly.

Government is supposed to be of the people and for the people. Taxes are intended for the operation of the government, not for wealth redistribution. We hold it as a fundamental truth that government is only fair when it seizes the assets of all, equally and provides services that benefit all, equally. If it were providing a pool of money for everyone in the state to do what they wanted for themselves, go to college, learn a trade, buy a car, start a business, and everyone had access to the same amount, I'd listen (I would think it was a wasteful program that would be better served by letting people keep more of their own money and decide how to spend it for their own benefit). But your argument would be better served.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 01-12-17, 04:26 PM
gobluetom gobluetom is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 10-21-01
Location: 2016 Outright GCL Champs
Posts: 11,668
gobluetom can only hope to improve
Quote:
Originally Posted by SWMCinci View Post
The government has no "rights", it has a set of enumerated responsibilities and supposedly a LOT of limitations on what it can do. Your argument for "infrastructure" is why the government is bloated, wasteful, and negatively impacting the citizens lives - there's always someone that wants to stretch a definition. The 1st act of government when it attempts to stretch a definition to acquire more power should be that someone proposes a law to limit that definition so that government can't expand.
That's the key word, and you are 100% correct.

Big government is NEVER the answer it is always the problem.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 01-12-17, 09:51 PM
eastisbest eastisbest is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 08-27-06
Posts: 15,357
eastisbest is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by SWMCinci View Post

1) The government has no "rights", it has a set of enumerated responsibilities and supposedly a LOT of limitations on what it can do.

2) Your argument for "infrastructure" is why the government is bloated, wasteful, and negatively impacting the citizens lives -

3) there's always someone that wants to stretch a definition. The 1st act of government when it attempts to stretch a definition to acquire more power should be that someone proposes a law to limit that definition so that government can't expand.
1) for being able to read and replicate my post, while pretending you wrote something original. Our country, not sure about yours, has in place a system of fluidity, a means to change laws, moves limits to the demands of the people. I don't believe there is any debate, this is a fact. It is written.

2) If you believe if a nano-meter razor's edge of a definition, it's bloated or it's not bloated.

3) A country is more than a theory. You're arguing that a definition of "infrastructure" that includes people is a stretch?

The country was founded on the principal that the people ARE the infrastructure. What are you arguing?


And what of my arguments against government funding?
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 01-12-17, 09:59 PM
eastisbest eastisbest is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 08-27-06
Posts: 15,357
eastisbest is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by gobluetom View Post
1) To your point, it is not the governments job to seek out talent and help it become service, that is up to each individual to determine.

2) If someone wants a chance at further education after high school, financing should be the responsibility of the individual not society as a whole.

To clarify, the responsibility should always fall on the individual, as if it does not and the government assumes this role, something is taken by force from one person to benefit another, that once again is called theft.
1) Are you quoting a law? Or is this just on your wish list?

2) Then why even up to high school? It used to be middle school, when that was all the "government" ( you know, the people) determined IT needed. Then it became "high school." It's fluid to meet the needs of the country. Always has been, right?

3) Taxes are theft now? How do you propose getting to work without roads? You going to hack a path through the jungle? Can I ask how you made your living without using things paid for by money "taken" from others?

Like SWC, your posts sound more like theory. Where's your line of practice?


Quote:
Originally Posted by gobluetom View Post
Absolutely, because it is.

4) The government is acting as a 3rd party to take what is mine and give it to someone else.

It is no longer up to the individual to better him or her self.


5)If I put a gun to your head and steal from you to finance my college education, I go to prison.
4) I think there are islands you can buy that have no government, which is really just people. No people. Some prefer. I believe it hasn't gone so far as the government does the study and takes the tests for the individual so I think you can stop worrying about this one. It is still the individual "bettering" themselves. The issue here is public education or not.

5) Where you can have paid for you, a free college education, 3 squares, sewage and water. Quit your beatchin.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 01-13-17, 08:09 AM
SWMCinci SWMCinci is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 02-20-07
Location: Outside of Ohio..... Now
Posts: 15,736
SWMCinci is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by eastisbest View Post
.....
3) A country is more than a theory. You're arguing that a definition of "infrastructure" that includes people is a stretch?

The country was founded on the principal that the people ARE the infrastructure. What are you arguing?

And what of my arguments against government funding?
You'll have to show me a document where it states that people are to be a service of the government like roads or ports (ACTUAL infrastructure) or in some way are intended to be improved by government. If part of the citizen/government dynamic is to be considered infrastructure, it would be the government, not the people.

If the State wants to provide free college, I'm all for it. But it shouldn't be capped at some arbitrary income level. The monies should be collected from every citizen and every QUALIFIED applicant should be able to take advantage of the program - whether black or white, rich or poor, male or female, young or old. The ability to tap into those funds should be determined by HS transcripts and grades, entrance exams, etc. If your case is that it is for the general welfare, then make it so, don't just make it another wealth transfer scam that is used to take money from some and bestow it on people that did nothing to earn it.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 01-16-17, 05:27 PM
chs1971 chs1971 is offline
All Ohio
 
Join Date: 07-30-16
Posts: 563
chs1971 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by gobluetom View Post
The government has NO RIGHT to spend taxpayer dollars on University education, PERIOD.
If you were better educated you would understand that the government doesn't have the "right"to do anything.
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 01-16-17, 05:40 PM
lotr10 lotr10 is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 08-26-03
Location: fairfield, ohio
Posts: 18,942
lotr10 will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by SWMCinci View Post
You'll have to show me a document where it states that people are to be a service of the government like roads or ports (ACTUAL infrastructure) or in some way are intended to be improved by government. If part of the citizen/government dynamic is to be considered infrastructure, it would be the government, not the people.

If the State wants to provide free college, I'm all for it. But it shouldn't be capped at some arbitrary income level. The monies should be collected from every citizen and every QUALIFIED applicant should be able to take advantage of the program - whether black or white, rich or poor, male or female, young or old. The ability to tap into those funds should be determined by HS transcripts and grades, entrance exams, etc. If your case is that it is for the general welfare, then make it so, don't just make it another wealth transfer scam that is used to take money from some and bestow it on people that did nothing to earn it.
Actually this is the ONLY way that you could equate "people" to an infrastructure project. If a college degree is as important to society as roads, airports, damns, bridges & other infrastructure than ANY student who has the qualifications should receive a free college education. Family income shouldn't matter. This is the same as when you drive down the highway it doesn't matter if you're dirt poor or a billionaire, you're both using the same road.

My only caveat would be to raise the bar on "qualified". Just like we want good bridges & roads we want smart & hard working students. I would also take a hatchet to the curriculum eliminating half the current majors. Again applying the infrastructure analogy we don't build bridges to nowhere so we shouldn't fund majors in Queer Studies or Afrocentric History or Social Justice.
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 01-17-17, 11:25 AM
gobluetom gobluetom is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 10-21-01
Location: 2016 Outright GCL Champs
Posts: 11,668
gobluetom can only hope to improve
Quote:
Originally Posted by chs1971 View Post
If you were better educated you would understand that the government doesn't have the "right"to do anything.

Sorry,

I should have said shouldn't have the right.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FREE Clinics (Mills, Schalles, Randy Lewis), $1500 in Gear, Disney Duals Entry Fee+++ Ohio TofC Wrestling 0 03-09-16 05:47 PM
What schools am I missing? Campolongo Wrestling 13 05-02-14 10:03 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:35 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Registration Booster - Powered By Dirt RIF CustUmz