[barmar]

I'm not a youngster, but I think I still have some of the idealism of youth (maybe it comes from being single and successful -- my lifestyle is still pretty much the same as it was 30 years ago). When the campaign started, I just assumed Hillary would be the nominee, and expected to vote for her. But since Sanders actually seems like a viable alternative, I've shifted over. I like his curmudgeonry, he seems really motivated to try to change things.

[Al_U_Card]

It is interesting to note that such a reference (white/black/hispanic/etc.) would even be made. Symptomatic of the paranoid/schizo nature of the US mind-set. Isn't referring to the poor/disenfranchised/unrepresented sufficient?

[barmar]

kenberg, on 2016-February-12, 10:28, said:

Humor works best when it is based on truth. The candidates are asked if they would like to address the frustrations and hopes of struggling whites, and the thought that anyone would ask a Democrat such a question leads to laughter. And this laughter is from Democrats.

The changes in the overall economy in the past decade or so have hit just about everyone except the very rich. But even though more white people are struggling than before, that hardly means that non-whites are catching up. They've almost certainly been hit even harder than whites. Regardless of the numbers of non-whites, it's still far better to be a white man in America, and I expect that will still be true when whites become a minority (what was the percentage of whites in South Africa during Apartheid?).

We need to improve things for everyone, but non-whites still need extra help to make up for decades and centuries of history that have put them at the bottom of the ladder.

[kenberg]

barmar, on 2016-February-12, 13:45, said:

The changes in the overall economy in the past decade or so have hit just about everyone except the very rich. But even though more white people are struggling than before, that hardly means that non-whites are catching up. They've almost certainly been hit even harder than whites. Regardless of the numbers of non-whites, it's still far better to be a white man in America, and I expect that will still be true when whites become a minority (what was the percentage of whites in South Africa during Apartheid?).

We need to improve things for everyone, but non-whites still need extra help to make up for decades and centuries of history that have put them at the bottom of the ladder.

It has been my view for as long as I can remember that I am very lucky to live here and at this time. That doesn't mean I would not be happy to be French and living in Paris, I am sure I would be, But I feel very lucky.

Generally I liked the debate, I thought the candidates were left free to develop their thoughts.

It is in the best interests of everyone that every young person grow into responsible adulthood. A truism, of course. But I would like to see the political class miss no opportunity to remind us all of this, The school system, at its best, is remarkable. There was something in the WP today about a 14 year old getting a perfect score on the Calculus AP. He attends a Catholic school but my grandson attends a public school and while he has not done anything that would interest the WP, his experience far exceeds anything that was available to me in the 1950s. But there is a wide range. My 1950s high school, my alcoholic teacher and all, looks pretty good compared to some out there. We need better. If kids can be taught, then they have options.

Back in 1970 I taught for a semester at a historically black college as part of some NSF sponsored program. Let me tell you, those youngsters did not mind that I was white. Not in the least. We need to get some good instruction into some places where it is most needed. White, black, who cares. The students can be white or black, the instructors can be white or black.
And yes, I realize that going for one semester and then saying so long, best wishes, is only of limited help.

We need to get past this business of noting at every turn whether this or that participant in a good or bad event was white or black. I had a summer job at NASA in 1960 after my BS and before I started grad school. By far the most helpful person to me was black, but who cares? He knew what he was doing and he was generous with his help. Thanks Burree, if you are reading this.

I don't want anyone in jail, or shot, or down the lost highway. Of course if jail is needed, then it is needed. But I hope that we can provide and that they will take better alternatives. It's fair enough to note that black kids have problems that a white kid like me didn't have. No argument. But a white parent, just like a black parent, is interested in how to keep her son off drugs and out of jail. How to keep her daughter from becoming a mother at 17.

So, anyway, I thought both candidates did a decent job of addressing this once Gwen Ifill brought it up. But Ms. Ifill shouldn't have had to.

[cherdano]

Thought of the day.
You are welcome to vote for Sanders.
You are welcome to complain about polarisation.
But if you want to do both, you have got some explaining to do.

[akwoo]

I'm slightly worried - not that I'm thinking it is likely but that it's not inconceivable - that the next Senate will simply refuse to confirm any judges, or even any Cabinet appointees, unless they get their choices. That's a Constitutional crisis of the first order, worse than Roosevelt's court-packing attempt and comparable at least to the Senate trying to forbid Johnson from firing Cabinet members.

[kenberg]

akwoo, on 2016-February-13, 20:00, said:

I'm slightly worried - not that I'm thinking it is likely but that it's not inconceivable - that the next Senate will simply refuse to confirm any judges, or even any Cabinet appointees, unless they get their choices. That's a Constitutional crisis of the first order, worse than Roosevelt's court-packing attempt and comparable at least to the Senate trying to forbid Johnson from firing Cabinet members.

I agree with the general sentiment here, except that I am more than slightly worried. We seem to be in some destructive loop where extreme statements are met with more extreme statements and working together is a sign of weakness. Voters need to send a forceful message to candidates, all of them, that we expect better.

[Flem72]

akwoo, on 2016-February-13, 20:00, said:

I'm slightly worried - not that I'm thinking it is likely but that it's not inconceivable - that the next Senate will simply refuse to confirm any judges, or even any Cabinet appointees, unless they get their choices. That's a Constitutional crisis of the first order, worse than Roosevelt's court-packing attempt and comparable at least to the Senate trying to forbid Johnson from firing Cabinet members.

Leahy-Reed-Obama brought this upon themselves when they pursued the so-called Nuclear Option; it was a nakedly political power grab, and as Graham and others have said, and said when it happened, this kind of thing has consequences. So I'd not expect any judges to get confirmed during O's remaining term unless they are solidly consensus nominees. But the next president, whomever, will get nominees confirmed. Cabinet, who cares, they don't serve for life.

And IMHO, on the scale of egregiously political exercises of constitutional power, this is nowhere close to the court-packing scheme, which manifested, pure and simple, callous disregard for separation of powers.

[PhantomSac]

Looking forward to being a laughing stock while travelling to other countries as an american again lol. Was so bad with "How did you guys re-elect Bush?" but if TRUMP can actually win a nomination it might be even worse haha. Go...Rubio!

[jjbrr]

PhantomSac, on 2016-February-19, 18:11, said:

Looking forward to being a laughing stock while travelling to other countries as an american again lol. Was so bad with "How did you guys re-elect Bush?" but if TRUMP can actually win a nomination it might be even worse haha. Go...Rubio!

In the age of reality TV and entertainment news, why is there any surprise that entertainment politics dominates the media?

[PhantomSac]

jjbrr, on 2016-February-19, 22:24, said:

In the age of reality TV and entertainment news, why is there any surprise that entertainment politics dominates the media?

Case in point: I definitely watched the republican debates religiously for some WWE type entertainment, while I missed many of the dem debates. Still think there is a reasonable shot we get to see a BROKERED CONVENTION which should be great entertainment! And then some third party stuff!

Oops, forgot this is actually to elect the leader of the most powerful *****in millitary in the world. Scary stuff.

[PassedOut]

Bernie Sanders often points out that a college education today plays the role that a high school education did decades ago. He makes the argument that the US would be better off if college were tuition-free to those who desire it.

An article in today's Post explains that American students can get a tuition-free education by moving to a more prosperous country: Americans can study in Germany for free, in English. An increasing number are doing it.

Quote

Tuition to U.S. universities has surged 500 percent since 1985 and continues to rise. But German universities offer free education to everyone -- including Americans.

The number of American students enrolled in German universities has risen steadily in recent years. Currently, an estimated 10,000 U.S. citizens are studying at German colleges -- nearly all of them for free, according to NBC News.

German universities in most federal states have traditionally been free for German citizens as well as many foreigners, including many American, Chinese and British students. One reason German taxpayers foot the bill is to help attract more skilled workers to the country.

Of course Americans also have other options for tuition-free college. I know of both Norway and Finland, and I expect that there are more.

I do believe that the US would become more competitive if we made education (of all kinds, not just college) more easily available, without having to travel overseas. It really shouldn't be necessary for companies in the US to rely so heavily upon other countries to fill skilled positions here. Having a better educated work force would help to raise the standard of living in the US closer to that of more prosperous countries, in my opinion.

[kenberg]

PassedOut, on 2016-February-20, 17:29, said:

Bernie Sanders often points out that a college education today plays the role that a high school education did decades ago. He makes the argument that the US would be better off if college were tuition-free to those who desire it.

An article in today's Post explains that American students can get a tuition-free education by moving to a more prosperous country: Americans can study in Germany for free, in English. An increasing number are doing it.


Of course Americans also have other options for tuition-free college. I know of both Norway and Finland, and I expect that there are more.

I do believe that the US would become more competitive if we made education (of all kinds, not just college) more easily available, without having to travel overseas. It really shouldn't be necessary for companies in the US to rely so heavily upon other countries to fill skilled positions here. Having a better educated work force would help to raise the standard of living in the US closer to that of more prosperous countries, in my opinion.

This fascinates me. I would love to learn who is doing this, why they are doing it, and how it is working. My daughter spent her junior year studying in Madrid. Her daughter did also, although I think it was just a semester. I am not sure if these enrollments are included in the numbers.

I would like to really understand about the finances. My own experience, long ago, was in a different world, but let me mention one thing. During my senipr year in high school, my parents, after consideration, announced that if I wished to go to college I could continue to live at home without paying rent. This was very helpful. The question of them paying tuition was not even raised. Eventually I moved out, but I had time to work out how to do it.

The point is not, or not only, how much the world has changed. Here is another point. These students who go to Germany do not pay tuition. Fine. Who pays the rent? Who buys their food? Who paid their airfare? I am having trouble visualizing a student from a financially strapped background hopping on a plane to Berlin and living on his own while attending college, even if tuition is free.

No doubt things were easier when I was young. No joking, no question about it. I wish for a young person today to have the opportunities that I had. Talented young people of modest economic means should be helped, it is of benefit to everyone. I wish to understand. I would like to know if the American kids in Germany have economic circumstances similar to what mine were, and if so then how are they paying the rent?

[y66]

The Voice of God is backing Clinton.

[awm]

kenberg, on 2016-February-20, 19:11, said:

No doubt things were easier when I was young. No joking, no question about it. I wish for a young person today to have the opportunities that I had. Talented young people of modest economic means should be helped, it is of benefit to everyone. I wish to understand. I would like to know if the American kids in Germany have economic circumstances similar to what mine were, and if so then how are they paying the rent?

It's not actually the very poor who struggle to afford college. Poverty creates a lot of issues, but there are actually a lot of college scholarships (from the federal government, state government, and from schools themselves) available for kids who succeed academically despite coming from an family without money. At my wife's school (almost all low-income kids in downtown San Jose) the only student really worried about affording college last year was the "rich kid" whose parents had a household income around $60k (yes this is probably the low-end of middle class in the bay area, but a lot of the kids come from a family with income much less than this). The rest of the students had big financial aid packages, and he was worried that he would be ineligible for those programs.

The families that really struggle with paying for college are usually the ones we think of as middle class. They have enough money for their kids to be ineligible for a lot of the need-based programs, but not the kind of money to afford the $30k-plus per year that a lot of four-year colleges cost in the US these days. If the kids go to school in the US, their parents might be expected to contribute $10k per year and then they are expected to pay off the other $20k through some combination of work-study and loans. If the kids study in a country like Germany, the parents same $10k contribution might cover room and board, and then the kid comes out with no loans on the tail end (plus the experience of studying abroad).

[jjbrr]

Just to add a data point to this discussion, I literally made a profit by going to college. I admit I'm not sure what free college tuition would do to ameliorate the shitty state of elementary, middle, and high school educations. Seems like a nice way to get votes without addressing a real problem though!

[Phil]

PhantomSac, on 2016-February-19, 18:11, said:

Looking forward to being a laughing stock while travelling to other countries as an american again lol. Was so bad with "How did you guys re-elect Bush?" but if TRUMP can actually win a nomination it might be even worse haha. Go...Rubio!

Going into the bumper-sticker business if he wins.

"I didn't vote for Trump. Are you fu*king kidding me"?

[kenberg]

awm, on 2016-February-20, 22:46, said:

It's not actually the very poor who struggle to afford college. Poverty creates a lot of issues, but there are actually a lot of college scholarships (from the federal government, state government, and from schools themselves) available for kids who succeed academically despite coming from an family without money. At my wife's school (almost all low-income kids in downtown San Jose) the only student really worried about affording college last year was the "rich kid" whose parents had a household income around $60k (yes this is probably the low-end of middle class in the bay area, but a lot of the kids come from a family with income much less than this). The rest of the students had big financial aid packages, and he was worried that he would be ineligible for those programs.

The families that really struggle with paying for college are usually the ones we think of as middle class. They have enough money for their kids to be ineligible for a lot of the need-based programs, but not the kind of money to afford the $30k-plus per year that a lot of four-year colleges cost in the US these days. If the kids go to school in the US, their parents might be expected to contribute $10k per year and then they are expected to pay off the other $20k through some combination of work-study and loans. If the kids study in a country like Germany, the parents same $10k contribution might cover room and board, and then the kid comes out with no loans on the tail end (plus the experience of studying abroad).

The problem has many faces, and I appreciate the direct experience of the kids at your wife's school.

One problem that I have been noticing: It is not very easy for a senior in high school, and his family, to quickly and accurately learn what it would actually cost to go to a specific school.. There are, as you say, aid packages. Let's say a kid from a 60K family is exceptional. Maybe he cold succeed at Stanford. What would it cost? No doubt there would be financial help, but can he get in? If he can get in I imagine the aid package could be variable depending on whether he just barely qualifies for admission or clearly qualifies for admission. When I was a freshman in high school a senior I knew was going off to Stanford the next year. He was the quarterback on our football team, I imagine this helped. I didn't even know where Stanford was.

For me, I am forever grateful that I could go to the University of Minnesota. Tuitiion was low, and a scholarship covered that cost, the cost of books, and even left me with maybe 200 bucks for the year. A sizable amount in the 50s. By then I knew people who were going off to Stanford and to MIT. It was ok. There were very good opportunities at Minnesota, and I had friends going there as well.


Back to the cited article for a moment. I am guessing that it is something like this: The families these kids come from are, often, the middle class you are talking about. The kids were going to go to college. But an opportunity to study abroad is attractive, and the free tuition made it manageable. The kids study, the parents pay, the free tuition is very useful But I don't know if that is what it is going on there.

Anyway, there are many aspects to this problem.

[PassedOut]

kenberg, on 2016-February-21, 07:37, said:

Back to the cited article for a moment. I am guessing that it is something like this: The families these kids come from are, often, the middle class you are talking about. The kids were going to go to college. But an opportunity to study abroad is attractive, and the free tuition made it manageable. The kids study, the parents pay, the free tuition is very useful But I don't know if that is what it is going on there.

Anyway, there are many aspects to this problem.

Yes. It helps to have relatives to stay with, as is in the specific cases I know about--one in Norway and one in Finland. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that to be true of some of the students going to Germany also.

But the chances of that being possible affects such a small set of students, it seems to me that it would be a lot better to work on making education/trade schooling in the US easier to get. And to view schooling as something more than an opportunity to load up the young with mountains of debt at high interest. I suspect that a lot of the support for Sanders comes from young people, and their parents, who've experienced dealing with that.

[kenberg]

PassedOut, on 2016-February-21, 08:04, said:

Yes. It helps to have relatives to stay with, as is in the specific cases I know about--one in Norway and one in Finland. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that to be true of some of the students going to Germany also.

But the chances of that being possible affects such a small set of students, it seems to me that it would be a lot better to work on making education/trade schooling in the US easier to get. And to view schooling as something more than an opportunity to load up the young with mountains of debt at high interest. I suspect that a lot of the support for Sanders comes from young people, and their parents, who've experienced dealing with that.

All of this debt is a total disaster. To me, it is one of those things that simply cannot be right. I really like it the way it was 60 years ago. Tuition wasn't free, books weren't free, rent wasn't free. But it was manageable. At least it was manageable for me to go to the state university. I don't think that we have to find ways for every kid to go to MIT or Cal Tech or Princeton etc. Space is limited anyway, and there is nothing wrong (my view) in expecting people to take cost into account. If there is truly some 8 year old Einstein walking around in rags, someone will make notice and get him/her to where s/he belongs. Most of us do fine at a quality school that is not MIT. We don't need perfection in solving this problem, but we need to do a lot better.


It would be interesting to know just what motivates the young for supporting Sanders. Pocketbook issues? Idealism? Maybe they just like the guy. I like the guy. But I expect to vote for Hillary. Becky? Maybe Sanders.
I wasn't an idealist when I was young. Naive, no doubt. But not really an idealist. And I was busy. I can't quite imagine myself as a 25 year old Bernie follower. They say that if you can remember the 60s then you weren't part of it. That's me.