Contact
Subscribe


I'm The Tree On Which The Money Grows

Nov 20, 2009
By .
Effluvia

Let's start with my patent bias: I'm a California taxpayer.

Yesterday University of California students protested proposed tuition hikes, engaging in tried and true protester stuff like taking over buildings and linking arms to block people and shouting slogans and stuff.

University officials said the $505 million to be raised by the tuition increases is needed to prevent even deeper cuts than those already made because of California's persistent financial crisis.

Protesting students said the hike will hurt working and middle-class students who benefit from state-funded education.

There's no dispute that California has a huge budget crunch, created by a combination of a shitty economy (and therefore reduced tax revenue) and out-of-control spending. There's no dispute that the UC system is facing deep cuts as a result, and has to find the money to operate somewhere.

What these students seem to be saying is that it ought to come from me — the taxpayer. Someone explain their point to me in short words that even a dumb guy can understand — is there some way to spin their argument as something other than "gimme your money or we'll disrupt things?"

Last 5 posts by Ken

17 Comments
Tags

17 Comments

  1. Patrick  •  Nov 20, 2009 @2:07 pm

    The occupation is limited to buildings owned by the University of California. They're only disrupting their fellow students.

  2. Rougman  •  Nov 20, 2009 @2:21 pm

    Ken, you selfish bastard, its for the children!

  3. Ken Chan  •  Nov 20, 2009 @3:02 pm

    These kids are looking at this all wrong. Instead of bitterly protesting their new $10,000/year college tuition, they should be celebrating in the streets considering that despite California's economic woes, our generous taxpayers will still be footing the $10-20,000/year difference that their tuition would have cost had they attended a private college. Show some gratitude kids.

  4. Hunter  •  Nov 20, 2009 @3:04 pm

    Perhaps they all wish the state would balance other parts of its budget first.

  5. Al  •  Nov 20, 2009 @3:05 pm

    It's all your fault because you voted for Prop 13.

  6. Ken  •  Nov 20, 2009 @3:07 pm

    Actually, I was 9 years old when Prop 13 passed. But I would have voted for it.

  7. Scott Dubya  •  Nov 20, 2009 @3:07 pm

    Most of the graduate programs at the public universities cost as much as the private ones. The issue is the cost of an undergraduate degree. If you believe that a college education should only be an option for wealthy families, then I would agree with your desire to keep your taxes out of the college system. I think that there should be a public university option for kids who work towards it. Graduating students with $50-100k in debt is not good for anyone. California had a world class public university system, despite one of the worst primary educational systems in the country. From what I understand, only 15% of the budget comes from the state, with a huge majority of funding coming from research grants.

    My wife and I both work at UC Davis and the budget cuts started by weeding out the dead wood, which initially was a good thing. The furloughs are counterproductive and now we are starting to see significant cuts into important services for students as the budget cuts deepen. Shifting the burden on to students is not a good solution. The horrible mismanagement by the regents and the UC Office of the President compound the problem, as does the overwhelming mess in Sacramento. All I can do is complain- I have no idea where to start in order to find a solution.

  8. Patrick  •  Nov 20, 2009 @3:14 pm

    Well, the world needs ditch-diggers too.

  9. Brent Royal-Gordon  •  Nov 20, 2009 @3:17 pm

    It could be worse. I'm going to a university in England, and the Socialist Workers' Student Society (I am not making this up) is constantly protesting the £3,000/year (less than $5,000) tuition. It should be free—after all, a student will go into a whole £9,000 of debt to pay for their career-enhancing years of specialized training. And with as much as eight hours a week in class in almost half the weeks of a year, they don't have a spare moment to work some of that off.

    (Meanwhile, foreign students like me pay four times the tuition, since we aren't subsidized. We're also forbidden to work except in a part-time job for an existing company—British Jobs For British Workers and all that. The Socialist Workers' Students have no idea how good they have it.)

  10. SG  •  Nov 20, 2009 @5:51 pm

    Well, I purport two approaches :

    1. Universities are for having a better career and giving your country an edge in today's world competition and all that. Then, on the one hand, you could say that it's an investment just like any other, and that people should pay if they want to have a better career (and give their country an edge). On the other hand, if one is to pay to live, pay for being ill, have mortgages for education, and housing, and whatnot, and ultimately pay for his funeral, then I don't see any way for the "pursuit of happiness" other than adhering to the "no future" creed and go commit some antisocial violence just for the fun of it (we'll call that the "Clockwork Orange" method).

    2. Universities are primarily for the furthering of human beings and minds, not careers or countries. Then, on the one hand, it seems fair to pay for such a beautiful thing – provided one gets it, and frankly, I don't know how the classes are at the UC, but I know of a good number of classes here (and I'm supposed to be in one of France's best universities) that aren't worth a rotten apple. But on the other hand, the horrendous socialist that I sometimes tend to be could purport that such a furthering should be a right, not a luxury. Nor is that particularly loony : the idea of a free, and even mandatory, education to ensure the "enlightenment" of every one is an old idea. The problem is that primary or secondary education won't give that to you, and universities will barely start to.

    Perhaps if we ensured that pre-college education is used to develop intelligence, instead of teaching such audacious and mind-provoking subjects as the national history and how to be a good citizen for Your Government Who Loves You, there wouldn't be any problem about college education…

  11. TomH  •  Nov 21, 2009 @6:15 am

    What is the increase in tuitions? I live in one of the most heavily taxed states and counties in America, just outside New York City. What I know is, in this land of generally high incomes and high taxes, the local community college gets grief when the tuition goes up one or two hundred dollars a semester, while my tax bill increases by twice as much.

    Alas, if I, a homeowner, complain or take over a government building, it's off to the pokey for me.

  12. matthew  •  Nov 21, 2009 @5:06 pm

    Maybe if the students are allowed to pay with IOU warrants (like the state can when it's broke), they won't complain as much.

  13. Dave (ND)  •  Nov 23, 2009 @9:58 am

    Universities need to pay football coaches and University presidents. That money has to come from somewhere.

  14. Daniel  •  Nov 23, 2009 @9:01 pm

    I'm a UCLA student, and while I don't support the fee increases, I'm one of the lucky few to understand their necessity, that we are in a budget crisis, and that money HAS to come from somewhere. Teachers are being cut, and students need to share some of that burden.

    It's an unpopular thought, but better than rioting and protesting for nothing, with no care or idea where the money needed for our education will come from.

    Blame the government who is quite wasteful. If the fees weren't increased, we would be in more of a screwup situation with MORE dropped classes/profs.

  15. Andrew  •  Nov 24, 2009 @5:48 pm

    The students have NOT protested against the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan, the threats to civil rights, and so on, but an extra $3k a year is worth their attention. I have no sympathy at all.

  16. Patrick  •  Nov 25, 2009 @4:05 am

    What if they believe the war in Afghanistan is a just one Andrew?

  17. Daniel  •  Nov 25, 2009 @2:14 pm

    It's actually an extra 2500. Afghanistan / Civil rights doesn't affect them directly like fee increases do.