A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

In discussing the finances of Whazzits State Univ, Scott asserts:
======================
But there's profit to be made nonetheless.
================

Profits!!!! Profits!!!???? A public university makes a profit! Surely
you jest. Help me with this. Point me to a source.

No, the hospitals and clinics who hire med school graduates make the
profits. They support the med schools so they have graduates to hire.



Scott:
================
While the Governor does appoint regents for all other colleges,
====================

OK, and then you presume to tell me that the government exercises NO
control over the affairs of the universities and colleges?!

Other than appointing the Regents, no.


Sounds like a direct link from the governor's mansion into the
university president's office.

He may have persuasive power, but no legal authority except over a very
small portion of the budget.

And the CU president is well known for not giving a damn what a conservative
Governor has to say, since the president is appointed by the CU Regents, not
the governor.

--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser

"Scott Weiser" wrote in message
...
A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

In discussing the finances of Whazzits State Univ, Scott asserts:
======================
But there's profit to be made nonetheless.
================

Profits!!!! Profits!!!???? A public university makes a profit! Surely
you jest. Help me with this. Point me to a source.

No, the hospitals and clinics who hire med school graduates make the
profits. They support the med schools so they have graduates to hire.

=================
That's a stretch and I think you're making that up. It's OK to admit that
there are institutions in the USA that do not operate according to the
profit principle (police for instance). And your state universities fit into
that category. And in those universities, the med schools are a terrible
drain on resources. They are everywhere.
===============




Scott:
================
While the Governor does appoint regents for all other colleges,
====================

OK, and then you presume to tell me that the government exercises NO
control over the affairs of the universities and colleges?!

Other than appointing the Regents, no.

================
Well, in our other threads, you've demonstrated a number of characteristics,
but naivete was never one of them.

If the governor appoints the Regents, they also get certain "marching
orders".
========================



Sounds like a direct link from the governor's mansion into the
university president's office.

He may have persuasive power, but no legal authority except over a very
small portion of the budget.

====================
All he needs is persuasive power.
================


frtzw906

A Usenet persona calling itself frtzw906 wrote:


"Scott Weiser" wrote in message
...
A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

In discussing the finances of Whazzits State Univ, Scott asserts:
======================
But there's profit to be made nonetheless.
================

Profits!!!! Profits!!!???? A public university makes a profit! Surely
you jest. Help me with this. Point me to a source.

No, the hospitals and clinics who hire med school graduates make the
profits. They support the med schools so they have graduates to hire.

=================
That's a stretch and I think you're making that up. It's OK to admit that
there are institutions in the USA that do not operate according to the
profit principle (police for instance). And your state universities fit into
that category. And in those universities, the med schools are a terrible
drain on resources. They are everywhere.
===============

Hey, there are *lots* of opportunities to make a profit, even in police
departments. Do you think the police officers, or the professors and
custodians work for FREE?

Profit drives almost every institution. Rare indeed is the organization in
which *nobody* profits. Not even the Red Cross is "profitless."





Scott:
================
While the Governor does appoint regents for all other colleges,
====================

OK, and then you presume to tell me that the government exercises NO
control over the affairs of the universities and colleges?!

Other than appointing the Regents, no.

================
Well, in our other threads, you've demonstrated a number of characteristics,
but naivete was never one of them.

If the governor appoints the Regents, they also get certain "marching
orders".
========================

Perhaps, but not in any formal way. Besides, CU Regents are not appointed by
the governor, and they are the only state university with a med school.




Sounds like a direct link from the governor's mansion into the
university president's office.

He may have persuasive power, but no legal authority except over a very
small portion of the budget.

====================
All he needs is persuasive power.
================

All anyone needs is persuasive power. So what? If the Regents don't want to
be persuaded, the Governor has little recourse.


--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser

Scott:
===========
Hey, there are *lots* of opportunities to make a profit, even in police
departments. Do you think the police officers, or the professors and
custodians work for FREE?
============

I'm not clear on what you're trying to say.

You're right, I don't work for free. But that still doesn't explain how
a university (a state university) makes a profit.

frtzw906

A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Scott:
===========
Hey, there are *lots* of opportunities to make a profit, even in police
departments. Do you think the police officers, or the professors and
custodians work for FREE?
============

I'm not clear on what you're trying to say.

You're right, I don't work for free. But that still doesn't explain how
a university (a state university) makes a profit.

I didn't say the university made a profit, I said, quite specifically,
"there are profits to be made."

Universities are profit generators. That the university itself doesn't show
a profit is irrelevant, they are a huge part of the economy of most
communities, not just from wages and compensation for employees, but to the
community that serves the students and faculty. And then there are the
scientific discoveries that universities foster and patent. They, and the
public, share in the profits accruing from such things.

People support universities not simply because they provide advanced
knowledge, but because they are massive profit-generating engines for the
communities and the nation as a whole.
--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser

Scott Weiser wrote:
A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:


Scott:
===========
Hey, there are *lots* of opportunities to make a profit, even in police
departments. Do you think the police officers, or the professors and
custodians work for FREE?
============

I'm not clear on what you're trying to say.

You're right, I don't work for free. But that still doesn't explain how
a university (a state university) makes a profit.


I didn't say the university made a profit, I said, quite specifically,
"there are profits to be made."

Universities are profit generators. That the university itself doesn't show
a profit is irrelevant, they are a huge part of the economy of most
communities, not just from wages and compensation for employees, but to the
community that serves the students and faculty. And then there are the
scientific discoveries that universities foster and patent. They, and the
public, share in the profits accruing from such things.

People support universities not simply because they provide advanced
knowledge, but because they are massive profit-generating engines for the
communities and the nation as a whole.

================

Man Scott, you're sounding more and more left-wing by the hour. Have you
finally started taking your meds? ;-)

You sound just a tad weaselly what with: 'I said, quite specifically,
"there are profits to be made.'"

But, you are quite right in your assessment of the impact of
universities on their communities. However, that still leaves us with
your initial assertion that med school respond to market demand for
doctors.

The answer is still "Nope." They respond to "political" or government
demand for more admissions into med school. Simply because, from a
purely market perspective, there's "nothing" in it for the university to
invest in all that is involved in running a med school. Much cheaper to
open another 20 section in the MBA program. But "society" (read
government) recognizes that we sure as hell don't need more MBA's (or
lawyers), but we (USA and Canada) do need more nurses and doctors. So,
as per my previous post, the government mandates (recall that direct
line between the governor's mansion and the University president's
office -- via the Regents) that admissions to the med schools be increased.

This is all part of the non-private, not-for-profit part of the economy
(polity) that you like to deny and disparage.

But, it seems, from this post, you do GET IT! WELL DONE!

frtzw906

A Usenet persona calling itself frtzw906 wrote:

I didn't say the university made a profit, I said, quite specifically,
"there are profits to be made."

Universities are profit generators. That the university itself doesn't show
a profit is irrelevant, they are a huge part of the economy of most
communities, not just from wages and compensation for employees, but to the
community that serves the students and faculty. And then there are the
scientific discoveries that universities foster and patent. They, and the
public, share in the profits accruing from such things.

People support universities not simply because they provide advanced
knowledge, but because they are massive profit-generating engines for the
communities and the nation as a whole.

================

Man Scott, you're sounding more and more left-wing by the hour. Have you
finally started taking your meds? ;-)

Nope, I'm still as crazy as a fox. There is, and has always been a method to
my madness.

Free market economic reality is hardly left-wing.

You sound just a tad weaselly what with: 'I said, quite specifically,
"there are profits to be made.'"

Yes, I'm really good at that. It's one of my trademarks and techniques. It
helps weed out the illiterati and identify those truly interested in a
probative debate. It encourages people to pay close attention to what is
*actually* said, rather than what they may have *perceived*. The difference
is often substantial. When people start actually paying attention, the level
of the debate rises markedly, as we have seen. Still, there are the
bottom-dwellers who haven't the wit to participate at a higher level of
discourse who continue to try to drag the debate back down in the gutter.
Try to eschew these Netwits. I do like to bait them and watch them melt
down and make fools of themselves. But that's just for fun.

But, you are quite right in your assessment of the impact of
universities on their communities.

That's all I'm saying.

However, that still leaves us with
your initial assertion that med school respond to market demand for
doctors.

Sure they do. At least down here. Every business responds to market demands,
even universities.

The answer is still "Nope." They respond to "political" or government
demand for more admissions into med school.

They may do so *also,* but that's not the only motivator, by any stretch of
the imagination. And that model is not the one we use down here, though I
recognize that it may well be the case in Canada.

Simply because, from a
purely market perspective, there's "nothing" in it for the university to
invest in all that is involved in running a med school.

Don't be silly! There's billions of dollars in it for a vast array of people
and businesses.

Much cheaper to
open another 20 section in the MBA program.

MBAs don't buy MRI machines or surgical suites.

But "society" (read
government) recognizes that we sure as hell don't need more MBA's (or
lawyers), but we (USA and Canada) do need more nurses and doctors. So,
as per my previous post, the government mandates (recall that direct
line between the governor's mansion and the University president's
office -- via the Regents) that admissions to the med schools be increased.

Well, of course, in a socialist system that may be true, but down here,
neither the state nor federal government sets quotas for med school
admissions. They can't. They don't have that power. The Governor has never
so much as explicated such a demand.

In Canada, however, I can easily see how the central government would do
exactly that, of necessity, because potential med school students don't want
to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a medical school education that
they will never recover from a de facto government-controlled wage system.

So, the government has to mandate admissions, which the schools have to
accomplish by cutting the costs to the med students and by lowering
admission standards to draw from a larger potential pool, which inevitably
results in "bracket creep" and an inferior education through government
mandated "inclusiveness."

The Canadian way is the way of mediocrity and ambivalence, and you end up
with inferior doctors and nurses as a result.

This is all part of the non-private, not-for-profit part of the economy
(polity) that you like to deny and disparage.

Darned right I do! And for the very good reason that such systems don't
produce the finest doctors in the world, because there's no future economic
incentive for potential doctors to go through the grind. They'd just as soon
be MBAs and make more money in the stock market, which even Canada doesn't
try to control.

In response to this rejection by highly qualified MD candidates of an
inferior educational system that will provide an inferior profit potential
in the long run, the schools have to compromise their admission standard,
and their educational programs, to get *somebody,* anybody, through the
system to provide some sort of medical care to the polity.

But, it seems, from this post, you do GET IT! WELL DONE!

Thanks! When will you get it, I wonder?

--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser