On Wed, 01 Oct 2014 22:31:10 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/1/2014 9:46 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 30 Sep 2014 22:08:10 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Under the U.S. system, students incur tens of thousands of dollars in debt.

===

Or their thrifty, hard working parents forgo a few luxuries for the
sake of their children.



Harry says it should be "free". Problem is nothing is "free".


===

Yes, and if it even appears to be free, it cheapens the value.

On Wed, 01 Oct 2014 22:41:26 -0400, KC wrote:

On 10/1/2014 10:31 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/1/2014 9:46 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 30 Sep 2014 22:08:10 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Under the U.S. system, students incur tens of thousands of dollars in
debt.

===

Or their thrifty, hard working parents forgo a few luxuries for the
sake of their children.



Harry says it should be "free". Problem is nothing is "free".



I know very few who could send their kids to an Ivy League college just
by "forgo-ing a few luxuries"... but then again, most of the folks I
know are middle and upper middle class, no uber rich since I left Essex...

===

My wife and I lived no more than an upper middle class life style and
we sacrificed a lot to send our kids to top schools. I used to have
this battle with my younger son all the time when he was in high
school. We had high expectations for him and insisted that he apply
himself, study hard and do his best to get into a top school. I'd be
rewarded for that effort by him telling me that it would be a lot
cheaper for me if he did something less. I told him that he didn't
understand teamwork: His job was to get into the best school
possible and my job was to figure out how to pay for it. He's now
earning 3 or 4 times more than I ever did as a VP at a first rate
firm.

On 10/2/14 12:13 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 01 Oct 2014 11:45:56 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 10/1/14 11:41 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 01 Oct 2014 10:58:06 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/1/2014 10:05 AM, KC wrote:


Can't be verified, it's not true. krause lied about Yale long before
Google ruined most of his reported history


In fairness I think he only said he took a course or two at Yale. I
don't think he ever claimed to have obtained a degree from Yale.

Hey I took "a course or two" at American University, U Md, Edison
State and FSU.
I didn't know that counted.



No wonder you like Sarah Palin. I spent some time at FSU in a worthy
pursuit...I sat on the steps of the library and watched all the gorgeous
gals walk by...

I am not sure about the Sarah Palin reference but I assume I can
answer it by saying these were not diploma courses. You take them and
you are done.

Most colleges have pretty girls but so do most places with girls that
age.



Sarah attended a significant number of colleges, too, although unlike
you, it is not apparent she learned anything.

My FSU reference was to a fun day I had waiting outside the library for
my wife, who was inside the library working on some arcane research
project. The library's front entrance steps presented a terrific vista
for girl watching, which was a four credit hour course, if memory
serves.

On 10/1/14 10:31 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/1/2014 9:46 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 30 Sep 2014 22:08:10 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Under the U.S. system, students incur tens of thousands of dollars in
debt.

===

Or their thrifty, hard working parents forgo a few luxuries for the
sake of their children.



Harry says it should be "free". Problem is nothing is "free".



Where did I say or imply college should be free? I didn't. I simply
reported that in Germany, students don't have to burden themselves with
tuition fees. Obviously, the costs are spread out over society as a
whole, which benefits from having a highly educated citizenry. Society
also benefits from having a healthy citizenry. Interesting to me, at
least, how society is moving forward in some parts of the free world and
is moving backwards in our part of the free world.

In article ,
says...


I am a firm believer that you should acquire the level of education that
best utilizes the capabilities you were born with and then make the most
of it. The world is full of examples of successful, contributing
members of society who don't have degrees from prestigious schools. In
fact, the networking and peer connections that Wayne speaks of is
probably why we have so many incompetents in high places.

Networking and peer connections work well when working with good, honest
people. Nobody who is competent and honest recommends the opposite.
Of course "birds of a feather" works both ways.
It's always a judgment call.

On 10/1/2014 10:46 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/1/2014 10:13 PM, KC wrote:
On 10/1/2014 10:07 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 01 Oct 2014 09:45:41 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

People who struggled through
school attending community colleges and then continue on to a four year
degree are just as valuable (if not more) to most employers than the
graduate of a prestigious Ivy League University.

===

People who graduate from a first rate (prestigious) school gain access
to a vast network of peer acquaintances and referrals however. That
can be priceless.


It's called "pay to play".. it keeps the riff-raff on the outside. On
the whole it's great for those who can afford it, but probably not so
great for society in general as it keeps a lot of the creme from rising
to the top...


The vast majority of college grads did not attend Ivy League schools. If
you plan to be a lawyer, doctor or politician I guess it's important but
to the average work-a-bee the school you attended doesn't mean as much
as the fact that you have a relevant degree.

I was answering the post above me which was in reference to "first rate
(prestigious) school"... try to keep up, instead of just looking to
contradict me personally.

On 10/1/2014 10:41 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/1/2014 10:07 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 01 Oct 2014 09:45:41 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

People who struggled through
school attending community colleges and then continue on to a four year
degree are just as valuable (if not more) to most employers than the
graduate of a prestigious Ivy League University.

===

People who graduate from a first rate (prestigious) school gain access
to a vast network of peer acquaintances and referrals however. That
can be priceless.



I understand but the average Joe in the workforce is not going to
benefit in that way. Most companies really don't care what school you
went to as long as your education meets the job requirements and you
have the knowledge and skill sets.

He wasn't talking about the average joe, and he wasn't talking about
"job requirements", he was talking about the "good old boys network" you
become a part of if your parents can afford to send you to one of the
more "prestigious schools"...

On 10/1/2014 11:01 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
In
fact, the networking and peer connections that Wayne speaks of is
probably why we have so many incompetents in high places.


Isn't that what I just said? Good for the rich kids, not so good for
society....??

On 10/1/2014 11:50 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 01 Oct 2014 22:41:26 -0400, KC wrote:

On 10/1/2014 10:31 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/1/2014 9:46 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 30 Sep 2014 22:08:10 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Under the U.S. system, students incur tens of thousands of dollars in
debt.

===

Or their thrifty, hard working parents forgo a few luxuries for the
sake of their children.



Harry says it should be "free". Problem is nothing is "free".



I know very few who could send their kids to an Ivy League college just
by "forgo-ing a few luxuries"... but then again, most of the folks I
know are middle and upper middle class, no uber rich since I left Essex...

===

My wife and I lived no more than an upper middle class life style and
we sacrificed a lot to send our kids to top schools. I used to have
this battle with my younger son all the time when he was in high
school. We had high expectations for him and insisted that he apply
himself, study hard and do his best to get into a top school. I'd be
rewarded for that effort by him telling me that it would be a lot
cheaper for me if he did something less. I told him that he didn't
understand teamwork: His job was to get into the best school
possible and my job was to figure out how to pay for it. He's now
earning 3 or 4 times more than I ever did as a VP at a first rate
firm.



So, you gave up more than a "few luxuries"... in fact by your own words
you "sacrificed a lot"... again, exactly what I said 5 posts ago but
some are just too eager to contradict me even when the eventually get to
agreeing with me after a few posts... lol. Again, the problem with "old
boys networks"... snerk

On 10/2/2014 8:12 AM, KC wrote:
On 10/1/2014 10:46 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/1/2014 10:13 PM, KC wrote:
On 10/1/2014 10:07 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 01 Oct 2014 09:45:41 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

People who struggled through
school attending community colleges and then continue on to a four
year
degree are just as valuable (if not more) to most employers than the
graduate of a prestigious Ivy League University.

===

People who graduate from a first rate (prestigious) school gain access
to a vast network of peer acquaintances and referrals however. That
can be priceless.


It's called "pay to play".. it keeps the riff-raff on the outside. On
the whole it's great for those who can afford it, but probably not so
great for society in general as it keeps a lot of the creme from rising
to the top...


The vast majority of college grads did not attend Ivy League schools. If
you plan to be a lawyer, doctor or politician I guess it's important but
to the average work-a-bee the school you attended doesn't mean as much
as the fact that you have a relevant degree.

I was answering the post above me which was in reference to "first rate
(prestigious) school"... try to keep up, instead of just looking to
contradict me personally.



Scott, my comment was a general one in response to the discussion of
schools and education. It was directed at no one. Your paranoia and
feelings of persecution are flaring up again.