Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
scaredyclassic
ParticipantConcerts are too loud anyway
ParticipantI just finished a great courses cd on us- Arab relations, 1914 to 9/11.
May 16, 2016 at 8:17 PM in reply to: The dire climate of CA public university admissions for freshmen #797623Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=no_such_reality][quote=FlyerInHi]BG, I’m not talking resale value of the toys. I’m talking prioritizing education over toys. All the toys over 2 decades can pay for a top education.
Lots of the foreign students you don’t like coming here… The vast majority of those families are not filthy rich; they just want upper middle class jobs for their kids. . Their families prioritize, and education is top priority. Same goes for many American families who value education.
Families who value education want the top schools, private and public. It’s not just the UC campuses, but UT Austin, university of Michigan, etc… It’s like people who like trucks want the badass trucks, or people who like American Harleys, or sports cars….whatever. We want the best brands and are willing to pay (money, time or effort)[/quote]
If you’re willing to pay then why are we funding it with tax dollars? If they’re willing to pay then let’s treat it like the business it is and real a profit. From the decades of investment te tax payers have made and channel than funding back to provide for the masses.
And I agree, I do have some resentment about the increased competition. But it isn’t about having to compete, it’s about having to compete where Lance Armstrong doping is the norm. Pop Warner coaches getting suspended over bounty programs for knocking players out, parents doing their kids mission project. And the use of tutors and kimono when it gets so prevalent that teachers adjust their curriculum assuming you are have at least one.[/quote]Agree NSR. My main beef with non-residents taking up CA university slots which should go to residents is that the vast majority of them never paid any taxes in this state (which, in turn, fund our university systems). They’re taking up thousands upon thousands of slots for resident applicants who didn’t get admitted simply because they pay less tuition. And at the UC, non-residents have been admitted in droves since 2011 under less stringest criteria than residents, according to the recent state audit.
If CA’s graduating HS seniors cannot get admitted to public university right out of HS (preferably one within commuting distance to parents’ homes), then they have no other choice but CC (for a publicly-funded college education). And completion of a transfer degree at a CC no longer guarantees admission to CSU/UC as a junior (esp a campus within commuting distance of their parents’ homes) …. the reason being that the bar of entry is now nearly 4.0 GPA (CC overall GPA) for locally-based, transferring-in juniors (at least to SDSU). Of course, it may very well be less for campuses located in CA’s “armpit” and its rural areas which don’t have a HUGE body of incoming freshmen from HS districts in their immediate areas which they offered admission guarantees to and they ALSO don’t have a HUGE amount of non-resident apps to consider (both from prospective freshman and transfers).
It’s not right to leave prospective qualified CA HS graduate-applicants swinging in the wind (rejected for admission) with only CC choices all the while admitting non-residents in their place! CA University systems are supposed to exist, first and foremost, for CA residents. Every qualified HS graduate who desires a public university education in their own damn state is entitled to one. I don’t care what anyone else thinks.
I have no problem with CA private institutions (ie Stanford, USC, the Claremont Colleges, Cal Tech, Pepperdine, etc selling ALL of their seats to the highest bidder from in state, OOS, OOC or even from Mars! That’s their perogative as CA taxpayers are not funding them in any way, shape or form.[/quote]
Taxpayers are funding the whole enchilada with a giant flow of student loans propping up tuition prices.
May 15, 2016 at 7:31 PM in reply to: The dire climate of CA public university admissions for freshmen #797588Participant[quote=AN][quote=scaredyclassic]I think the Jews still dominate, percentagewise related to their pop. Share. But I could be wrong. Probably because Facebook and both Google founders are jews, they’re hoping for the next big donors?[/quote]
I wasn’t talking about % related to their population but % of total admit.[/quote]What will mark zuckerbergs kid count as percentwise, Asian or jew…
May 15, 2016 at 5:27 PM in reply to: The dire climate of CA public university admissions for freshmen #797584ParticipantRetired high-ranking Chinese official asks why Jews are so smart
Even Chinese govt officialso ponder why jews are so smart…
May 15, 2016 at 5:14 PM in reply to: The dire climate of CA public university admissions for freshmen #797583Participant[quote=AN][quote=bearishgurl][quote=AN][quote=bearishgurl]I vote that CA re-institute the writing portion on the SAT, ACT and TOEFL and apply the applicant’s essay/writing score to their composite score.
This is how it was done when I took the ACT … way back in the day.
This would most certainly weed out thousands of Chinese applicants, who would fail this portion miserably, causing their composite scores to plummet.
Too bad … so sad.[/quote]
LoL, in your dreams.[/quote]So, AN, are you saying here that you don’t think the essay portion of the SAT/ACT will ever be brought back into consideration for admission into the UC/CSU?[/quote]I’m saying that Asian dominated the UC admittance as soon as they remove Affirmative Action, even with essay. If they bring back essay, Asian will still dominate the admittance %. You don’t have to look any further than at the HS level. Which group score the highest in standardize testing, have the highest GPA, etc.[/quote]
I think the Jews still dominate, percentagewise related to their pop. Share. But I could be wrong. Probably because Facebook and both Google founders are jews, they’re hoping for the next big donors?
May 12, 2016 at 7:41 PM in reply to: The dire climate of CA public university admissions for freshmen #797531Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]I know scaredy said that law school is a bad investment. But seems like there are plenty of slots for smart kids. Why not a law career?
There’s slots. But the smart kids are not applying.
Participant[quote=harvey]”Make America Great Again” implies that America is not great now.[/quote]
“Make america less shitty” not as catchy, but basically the same slogan.
May 11, 2016 at 8:51 PM in reply to: The dire climate of CA public university admissions for freshmen #797502Participant[quote=njtosd][quote=flu]I’ll offer an alternative theory. I’m actually pushing myself to try to be the richest, most selfish person I can be, and trying to accumulate as many properties and resources that produce passive income as possible. That way, my kid can just inherit it and live a significantly less stressful life.
College is only for the purpose of if my kid has a personal interest in something, to have a paper that says my kid isn’t a complete idiot, and to teach basic principles of math, science, accounting, finance, and to meet people.
Afterall, the best way to make $10million, is to start out with $8million. And to be able to buy your way into things, like a diploma, or connections, etc. Just like…. Trump.[/quote]
Years ago, a woman I knew had a baby and shortly thereafter began to cry telling her husband that she didn’t want anything to happen to the baby. He said – the baby’s fine, there’s no problem. And she said “No, I mean I don’t want anything to happen to him ever.” I respect and am impressed by your plans, but don’t forget that people without the need to earn a living can go a bit off the deep end. Too much time on ones hands can lead to bad results. Sometimes what we want to give our kids and what is best for them are two different things.[/quote]
Even little tiny kids like to do it “all by myself”. I’m over 50 and I still don’t like help from mom…
The struggle is what makes it real.
The goal is to get them out. Although I often ask my wife if it might not have been wiser to emotionally hobble them so they’d be more dependent on us
May 11, 2016 at 2:26 PM in reply to: The dire climate of CA public university admissions for freshmen #797482ParticipantThe competition is brutal. My kid was wait listed at Irvine with a 97th percentile sat and over a,4.0 GPA.
Participant[quote=harvey][quote=flyer]After all, that’s so much easier than actually earning it. [/quote]
But not as easy as inheriting it.[/quote]
Living ones dream often involves a subsidy
Participant[quote=flyer]I realize not everyone shares my opinions, as I do not share theirs, but I do think it’s very interesting to read what others think.
BG, we haven’t decided if we’ll vote in this election. If we don’t, it would be the first time in our lives, but we have serious concerns about the presumptive nominees on many levels, so we’ll see if anything changes between now and November. In our opinion, the positive things either candidate offers is far outweighed by the negative, so we’re not apathetic, just cautious.
That said, with regard to your other questions–we don’t believe in age discrimination–and are shocked to see that happening even to people in their 40’s–would I like to see changes legislated in that regard–absolutely–but until a more noticeable majority of younger people find themselves out of a job as they age–and the trends reveal they will–with the magic number appearing to be somewhere around 50 or so–I doubt if most politicians will be compelled to act on this issue.
We also don’t believe anyone is entitled to anything–including the home of their dreams–but if people want to go for it at all costs, including possibly jeopardizing their financial future–they have the right to do so–and I don’t know enough about the ACA to make any judgment calls on that.
Regarding other questions–Yes, we do understand what it’s like to raise a family in CA. My wife and I have raised three children who have all finished college and have great careers and homes.
As far as financial success or failure in life, I really think one major reason people (especially in CA) find themselves in difficult financial positions later in life is that they may have failed to admit they lived beyond their means most of their lives–because they chose to.
Admitting one can’t afford a particular lifestyle along the way may be the lesser of the evils in the long run. That, or don’t complain if you find yourself with zero options in the final lap of life.[/quote]
Even having lived frugally, you’re not gonna make it from 50 to 80 with no real job.
Not voting is voting.
Vermin supreme in 2016!
ParticipantThe Show RAISING HOPE, which my kid watches incessantly, is about happiness with lowered expectations. Son with kid lives with parents who live all together in demented great gramma’s house and watch her.. It’s a wildly funny comedy about Americans happy in relative poverty because, well, they’re close.
Tonight we had potatoes and also PBJ, not due to financial constraints, just how it played out…was fun…
Participant[quote=flyer]I was focused and speaking from a financial/economic perspective–since that seems to be the emphasis of the empty rhetoric we are enduring from both sides–and the way candidates are reeling in desperate voters. Although my statement was clear in my mind, I can understand how it may have seemed a broad generalization with unintended inferences.
My Dad was a Naval Admiral as well as a real estate investor/developer (that’s how our entire family got into the business early in life–aviation came after college for me) among other things, so, yes, coming from a military family, I understand and appreciate your point.[/quote]
Nothing will change. I’ve been recently listening to a Great Courses lecture series on u.s. involvement in the middle east, 1914 to 9/11. Basically, whoever is in charge will try to control Arab states one way or the other, and the West will to to keep the Arabs in line. I’m also taking a car commute class on Bach.
-
AuthorPosts
