Yeah my heart goes out to them, but should federal gov't step in and make every decision for states instead?
There is a difference between making sure people's rights are protected and forcing states to change how their taxes or something else works. When it comes to social issues I couldn't care less about a state's rights. In fact, in my experience that is the only time the state's rights folks ever complain. Have never heard any complain that a U.S. base violates their states right or that highway funding and regulation is unconstitutional. State's right is just an excuse people fall back on.
So you're more along the lines that gay marriage is a civil rights issue and should get federal intervention.
yes.
No, you said you'd like to restrict the numbers by raising the standard of admission, so those who got in could get it for free.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
no i said if the university system was smaller, it would be easier to financially manage. that is the only financial principle i brought up. ditto the polytechnic system. if they were separated, funding could be sourced and apportioned more meaningfully and efficiently.
ie Free University for "studious and intellectual types", which is to say you and the narrow elite you'd like the taxpayer to surround you with, an apprenticeship is good enough for everyone else.i'd like to see the govt give free college education to everyone.....free university education is entirely possible. all you have to do is become a little firmer with what the definition of a 'degree education' really is (read: actual standards of admission, only intaking actually studious and intellectual types to 'real' universities).
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2013-07-12 00:50:10)
Fuck Israel
That girl in your avatar has a fat person face.
What is the point of skinny girls? They're annoying and useless.
Fuck Israel
Skinny girls won't eat a whole pizza
Last edited by Macbeth (2013-07-12 01:01:18)
lol i cannot believe you are affronted by the idea university should be kept for studious types that actually want to spend 3 years studying.Dilbert_X wrote:
No, you said you'd like to restrict the numbers by raising the standard of admission, so those who got in could get it for free.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
no i said if the university system was smaller, it would be easier to financially manage. that is the only financial principle i brought up. ditto the polytechnic system. if they were separated, funding could be sourced and apportioned more meaningfully and efficiently.ie Free University for "studious and intellectual types", which is to say you and the narrow elite you'd like the taxpayer to surround you with, an apprenticeship is good enough for everyone else.i'd like to see the govt give free college education to everyone.....free university education is entirely possible. all you have to do is become a little firmer with what the definition of a 'degree education' really is (read: actual standards of admission, only intaking actually studious and intellectual types to 'real' universities).
i'm not proposing labour camps and extermination for all the rest. just a better use of their time. something that will teach them more useful skills, give them better employment prospects, and perhaps even inspire and motivate them more in life. yes, i think there are far too many pointless institutions with zero entry requirements. that's because everyone has been given a bullshit new labour ideal of university education that is not tenable. a university education should stand for something.
Germany has a good system. Lots of good trade/technical schools. Not everyone is cut out for uni work, that's why my uni has a 7% failure rate across the board. Lots of kids scrape by and what not.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
lol i cannot believe you are affronted by the idea university should be kept for studious types that actually want to spend 3 years studying.Dilbert_X wrote:
No, you said you'd like to restrict the numbers by raising the standard of admission, so those who got in could get it for free.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
no i said if the university system was smaller, it would be easier to financially manage. that is the only financial principle i brought up. ditto the polytechnic system. if they were separated, funding could be sourced and apportioned more meaningfully and efficiently.ie Free University for "studious and intellectual types", which is to say you and the narrow elite you'd like the taxpayer to surround you with, an apprenticeship is good enough for everyone else.i'd like to see the govt give free college education to everyone.....free university education is entirely possible. all you have to do is become a little firmer with what the definition of a 'degree education' really is (read: actual standards of admission, only intaking actually studious and intellectual types to 'real' universities).
i'm not proposing labour camps and extermination for all the rest. just a better use of their time. something that will teach them more useful skills, give them better employment prospects, and perhaps even inspire and motivate them more in life. yes, i think there are far too many pointless institutions with zero entry requirements. that's because everyone has been given a bullshit new labour ideal of university education that is not tenable. a university education should stand for something.
7% failure rate? is that supposed to be high? check france's higher-education system, where everyone is encouraged to go to a university or college of some sort, with zero real entry tests or requirements (except for institutions like the grand ecoles). essentially everyone gets to go and 'have a bash', before settling for a polytechnic or course that is more suited to them. france's current enrollment system has a 40% dropout rate. 40%. four-zero. but their funding is generous so the gross inefficiency only hurts the state, rather than the student (lesser of two evils, i suppose).
and yep, i said germany has the right system. excellent youth employment, booming industry and grad careers. why? there's no shame in going to a technical school to learn a trade. dilbert is the only person instituting a 'hierarchy' here between "elitists" and "lesser people". in germany they have a happy plurality. i don't think a university student is above a person with a technical diploma or an advanced trade or industrial job. i do think a studious university student is above someone who is only there to fuck around and kill 4 years-- but that's something else entirely.
and yep, i said germany has the right system. excellent youth employment, booming industry and grad careers. why? there's no shame in going to a technical school to learn a trade. dilbert is the only person instituting a 'hierarchy' here between "elitists" and "lesser people". in germany they have a happy plurality. i don't think a university student is above a person with a technical diploma or an advanced trade or industrial job. i do think a studious university student is above someone who is only there to fuck around and kill 4 years-- but that's something else entirely.
We don't have an open system like france. Our uni only accepts the top 20% of secondary students (top 4% and 0.1% for commerce and law/medicine respectively). So it's pretty high failure rate for top students of a country not hacking the university system.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
7% failure rate? is that supposed to be high? check france's higher-education system, where everyone is encouraged to go to a university or college of some sort, with zero real entry tests or requirements (except for institutions like the grand ecoles). essentially everyone gets to go and 'have a bash', before settling for a polytechnic or course that is more suited to them. france's current enrollment system has a 40% dropout rate. 40%. four-zero. but their funding is generous so the gross inefficiency only hurts the state, rather than the student (lesser of two evils, i suppose).
drop-out rates in most other 'selective' unis tends to be as low as possible, because it's not something to be bragged about. it's one of those stats a university will do as much in its power as it can to keep low. if you have high acceptance rates, you should not also have a high drop-out rate. that shows your 'tough' admissions process is not working properly. my course acceptance rate was 8.5% of all applicants, and except for people with medical/extenuating circumstances, hardly anyone dropped out. the department wanted to retain as many as possible. it looks bad if you have really elitist standards but then loads of people still don't make the grade. it suggests you're not getting the 'elite' that your entry requirements posit.
we have an "atar" system that ranks people by percentiles and what not, so when you apply you know the cut off marks and your chances of getting in are pretty much guaranteed as long as youre above the cut off. idk, lots of asian kids burn out at uni and start drinking/partying, explains the high failure rate.
yay for being sheltered.
well at least they got into a great uni in the country! make everyone so proud until they bring great shame when they get booted.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
yay for being sheltered.
Who are you to decide what other people do with their time, or that the taxpayer should fund a narrow elite through 'academia' so they can then decide what the plebs should do with their time.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
lol i cannot believe you are affronted by the idea university should be kept for studious types that actually want to spend 3 years studying.
i'm not proposing labour camps and extermination for all the rest. just a better use of their time. something that will teach them more useful skills, give them better employment prospects, and perhaps even inspire and motivate them more in life. yes, i think there are far too many pointless institutions with zero entry requirements. that's because everyone has been given a bullshit new labour ideal of university education that is not tenable. a university education should stand for something.
I think the average taxpayer would be mortified to see the kind of crap they're funding.
Fuck Israel
yeah, they would. be mortified. because they're funding a lot of shit. not 0.1% of the budget that goes on education. how about wars. people were mortified at that. largest ever street demonstration. 1+ million people. didn't change anything. keep paying your taxes. stop going on about "ancient texts" like most people give a shit it gets 1/25th of that 0.1% of the education budget. you sound like you have an irrational fixation with this stuff.Dilbert_X wrote:
Who are you to decide what other people do with their time, or that the taxpayer should fund a narrow elite through 'academia' so they can then decide what the plebs should do with their time.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
lol i cannot believe you are affronted by the idea university should be kept for studious types that actually want to spend 3 years studying.
i'm not proposing labour camps and extermination for all the rest. just a better use of their time. something that will teach them more useful skills, give them better employment prospects, and perhaps even inspire and motivate them more in life. yes, i think there are far too many pointless institutions with zero entry requirements. that's because everyone has been given a bullshit new labour ideal of university education that is not tenable. a university education should stand for something.
I think the average taxpayer would be mortified to see the kind of crap they're funding.
and i'm not deciding what anyone does with their time. the system is simple: if you want to go to university, get good grades in school and go. it's all on you. you're free to do as you please. again "elite". you're making it a university > polytechnic thing, again. something i am not doing. please refrain.
dilbert you must have a heart attack knowing that the cheapest degree to get in aussieland right now is humanities basedDilbert_X wrote:
Who are you to decide what other people do with their time, or that the taxpayer should fund a narrow elite through 'academia' so they can then decide what the plebs should do with their time.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
lol i cannot believe you are affronted by the idea university should be kept for studious types that actually want to spend 3 years studying.
i'm not proposing labour camps and extermination for all the rest. just a better use of their time. something that will teach them more useful skills, give them better employment prospects, and perhaps even inspire and motivate them more in life. yes, i think there are far too many pointless institutions with zero entry requirements. that's because everyone has been given a bullshit new labour ideal of university education that is not tenable. a university education should stand for something.
I think the average taxpayer would be mortified to see the kind of crap they're funding.
http://www.uac.edu.au/undergraduate/faq … osts.shtml
zomgs useless arts degrees
to dilbert any single $1AUS spent on humanities is a waste. it's "stuck in the 1700's" and "does not uncover truth", apparently. let's not even go there again. half of bf2s's total storage space is eaten up with dilbert venting his irrational spleen.
Why should one school system arbitrarily rate a person before they enter another school? I was a middling student in high school because I cared more about athletics than homework, but once I found my passion in college I aced everything. If the system you want had been set up, I would've been shut out because I hadn't displayed top-of-the-class traits in high school.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
yeah, they would. be mortified. because they're funding a lot of shit. not 0.1% of the budget that goes on education. how about wars. people were mortified at that. largest ever street demonstration. 1+ million people. didn't change anything. keep paying your taxes. stop going on about "ancient texts" like most people give a shit it gets 1/25th of that 0.1% of the education budget. you sound like you have an irrational fixation with this stuff.Dilbert_X wrote:
Who are you to decide what other people do with their time, or that the taxpayer should fund a narrow elite through 'academia' so they can then decide what the plebs should do with their time.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
lol i cannot believe you are affronted by the idea university should be kept for studious types that actually want to spend 3 years studying.
i'm not proposing labour camps and extermination for all the rest. just a better use of their time. something that will teach them more useful skills, give them better employment prospects, and perhaps even inspire and motivate them more in life. yes, i think there are far too many pointless institutions with zero entry requirements. that's because everyone has been given a bullshit new labour ideal of university education that is not tenable. a university education should stand for something.
I think the average taxpayer would be mortified to see the kind of crap they're funding.
and i'm not deciding what anyone does with their time. the system is simple: if you want to go to university, get good grades in school and go. it's all on you. you're free to do as you please. again "elite". you're making it a university > polytechnic thing, again. something i am not doing. please refrain.
I like the current system. They just need to make undergrad grading more rigorous so less people skate by, and more people actually fail out.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
but that's a huge waste of money and debt. taking on people generously who then fail out. it isn't efficient. it makes the institution and the system look bad (poor paper performance). it's better to be more strenuous about entry and to only run universities that are serious about academia. as for people who fucked around in school... np, there are 'alternative' and non-standard entry routes here. it's not a life-long determined thing: you fucked up in school, oops!, university is forever closed to you. there are plenty of ways to get in for people who are serious about learning. and that's the only person i am trying to preserve universities for: serious learners, scholars, researchers, intellectuals. clear the business-people, managerial class, and sports science degrees out to specialist business schools and institutions. all that happens in our system nowadays is those schools are ran as side-shows, mutually acknowledged as being the 'money earners' from an international cadre. nobody on campus respects them. it's a depressing hybridism that only benefits the universities' chancellors.Jay wrote:
Why should one school system arbitrarily rate a person before they enter another school? I was a middling student in high school because I cared more about athletics than homework, but once I found my passion in college I aced everything. If the system you want had been set up, I would've been shut out because I hadn't displayed top-of-the-class traits in high school.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
yeah, they would. be mortified. because they're funding a lot of shit. not 0.1% of the budget that goes on education. how about wars. people were mortified at that. largest ever street demonstration. 1+ million people. didn't change anything. keep paying your taxes. stop going on about "ancient texts" like most people give a shit it gets 1/25th of that 0.1% of the education budget. you sound like you have an irrational fixation with this stuff.Dilbert_X wrote:
Who are you to decide what other people do with their time, or that the taxpayer should fund a narrow elite through 'academia' so they can then decide what the plebs should do with their time.
I think the average taxpayer would be mortified to see the kind of crap they're funding.
and i'm not deciding what anyone does with their time. the system is simple: if you want to go to university, get good grades in school and go. it's all on you. you're free to do as you please. again "elite". you're making it a university > polytechnic thing, again. something i am not doing. please refrain.
I like the current system. They just need to make undergrad grading more rigorous so less people skate by, and more people actually fail out.
Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-07-13 07:29:26)
what about serious researchers and intellectuals for business and sports science.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
but that's a huge waste of money and debt. taking on people generously who then fail out. it isn't efficient. it makes the institution and the system look bad (poor paper performance). it's better to be more strenuous about entry and to only run universities that are serious about academia. as for people who fucked around in school... np, there are 'alternative' and non-standard entry routes here. it's not a life-long determined thing: you fucked up in school, oops!, university is forever closed to you. there are plenty of ways to get in for people who are serious about learning. and that's the only person i am trying to preserve universities for: serious learners, scholars, researchers, intellectuals. clear the business-people, managerial class, and sports science degrees out to specialist business schools and institutions. all that happens in our system nowadays is those schools are ran as side-shows, mutually acknowledged as being the 'money earners' from an international cadre. nobody on campus respects them. it's a depressing hybridism that only benefits the universities' chancellors.Jay wrote:
Why should one school system arbitrarily rate a person before they enter another school? I was a middling student in high school because I cared more about athletics than homework, but once I found my passion in college I aced everything. If the system you want had been set up, I would've been shut out because I hadn't displayed top-of-the-class traits in high school.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
yeah, they would. be mortified. because they're funding a lot of shit. not 0.1% of the budget that goes on education. how about wars. people were mortified at that. largest ever street demonstration. 1+ million people. didn't change anything. keep paying your taxes. stop going on about "ancient texts" like most people give a shit it gets 1/25th of that 0.1% of the education budget. you sound like you have an irrational fixation with this stuff.
and i'm not deciding what anyone does with their time. the system is simple: if you want to go to university, get good grades in school and go. it's all on you. you're free to do as you please. again "elite". you're making it a university > polytechnic thing, again. something i am not doing. please refrain.
I like the current system. They just need to make undergrad grading more rigorous so less people skate by, and more people actually fail out.
You display a shocking lack of being able to see anything outside of your own narrow viewpoint. Can't the students in the degree paths you look down your nose at do the same to you in turn? Can't they revel in the utilitarianess of their own studies and thumb their nose at yours? Isn't that what 99% of the arguments on this forum about you and college have been? It doesn't matter if you and your snobby professors and friends look down on others. You study English, a language you've been speaking since you were a toddler. Sure, I'm sure it's difficult at a high level, but you really have to stop with the denigration of others' choices. You sure as hell don't like it when it's done to you.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
but that's a huge waste of money and debt. taking on people generously who then fail out. it isn't efficient. it makes the institution and the system look bad (poor paper performance). it's better to be more strenuous about entry and to only run universities that are serious about academia. as for people who fucked around in school... np, there are 'alternative' and non-standard entry routes here. it's not a life-long determined thing: you fucked up in school, oops!, university is forever closed to you. there are plenty of ways to get in for people who are serious about learning. and that's the only person i am trying to preserve universities for: serious learners, scholars, researchers, intellectuals. clear the business-people, managerial class, and sports science degrees out to specialist business schools and institutions. all that happens in our system nowadays is those schools are ran as side-shows, mutually acknowledged as being the 'money earners' from an international cadre. nobody on campus respects them. it's a depressing hybridism that only benefits the universities' chancellors.Jay wrote:
Why should one school system arbitrarily rate a person before they enter another school? I was a middling student in high school because I cared more about athletics than homework, but once I found my passion in college I aced everything. If the system you want had been set up, I would've been shut out because I hadn't displayed top-of-the-class traits in high school.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
yeah, they would. be mortified. because they're funding a lot of shit. not 0.1% of the budget that goes on education. how about wars. people were mortified at that. largest ever street demonstration. 1+ million people. didn't change anything. keep paying your taxes. stop going on about "ancient texts" like most people give a shit it gets 1/25th of that 0.1% of the education budget. you sound like you have an irrational fixation with this stuff.
and i'm not deciding what anyone does with their time. the system is simple: if you want to go to university, get good grades in school and go. it's all on you. you're free to do as you please. again "elite". you're making it a university > polytechnic thing, again. something i am not doing. please refrain.
I like the current system. They just need to make undergrad grading more rigorous so less people skate by, and more people actually fail out.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat