Why is College so Expensive? (USA)

Davidson College has recently made waves in the USA by claiming its students gradute debt-free.

The truth is, only a small percentage of its students are given free tuition. Middle-class students still have to take out loans, and with tuition around $35,000 a year, this often results in significant debt. It's great that valedictorians with low income can attend Davidson for free, but why should middle-class students with the same achievements have to graduate with $60,000+ in debt? It's not like the degree is going to allow them to make back that kind of money anytime soon.

Davidson College has a much smaller endowment than most Ivy Leagues, and 45.1 % of its students are receiving free or discounted tuition right now. These tuition discounts are funded by its endowment, so there's no reason other schools with much more money couldn't follow suit.

Why don't elite universities make more room for students who can't afford $30,000 a year tuition? Why don't they just make tuition cheaper overall, and cut out this whole grant-giving process?

Well, college isn't really the stepping-stone that we pretend it is, in America. Admissions data at the richest colleges in the nation suggest that these schools are only increasing the income gap, not helping bright students make the best of themselves. Schools with the most money admit MORE underachieving students, but only if these students are rich and white. Back in 2008, "15 percent of freshmen enrolled at America's highly selective colleges are white teens who failed to meet their institutions' minimum admissions standards." So, the schools that could afford to admit the most students in need, are instead choosing to give those spots to privileged young people who have already squandered many of the advantages life has offered them.

Way to go, American dream.

Happy Labor Day, America!

To celebrate, let's read this comic from Questionable Content:

Damn. I'd better get back to reporting on this stuff. Or else that bird is going to steal my job from me, but he'll make it depressing instead of fun.

Housing is Too Good for Arizona's Prisoners

Jails overcrowded? No problem, just start putting the prisoners outside. In tents.

That's seriously what Maricopa Sheriff Joe Arpaio is doing right now, in Phoenix, Arizona. And it seems most of the prisoners chosen to live in the "tents" are Hispanic and nonwhite citizens.

The sheriff has said that he doesn't see any problems with housing inmates in tents because "some members of the U.S. military live in tents."

Some members of the U.S. military also have to fight in deadly combat and get killed by enemies of the state. I suppose sending our prisoners to do this is the next step when we run out of room in the tents?

This Tent City Jail also forces its inmates to wear pink underwear and sells guided tours so that paying citizens can come gawk at the prisoners.

Tonight, there will be a rally for the closing of the tent city, led by the immigrant rights group Puente Arizona and the Unitarian Universalist Association, a national church group.

Did you Know? Amphicars!

An interesting tidbit from the National Park Service:

the Amphicar: the only car that ever was a BOAT!

Built in Germany from 1961 to 1968, the Amphicar is the only civilian amphibious passenger automobile ever to be mass produced. A total of 3,878 vehicles were produced in four colors: Beach White, Regatta Red, Fjord Green (Aqua), and Lagoon Blue--the color of President Johnson's Amphicar.

President Johnson enjoyed surprising unsuspecting guests when taking them for a ride in his Amphicar.

The President, with Vicky McCammon in the seat alongside him and me in the back,was now driving around in a small blue car with the top down. We reached a steep incline at the edge of the lake and the car started rolling rapidly toward the water. The President shouted, "The brakes don’t work! The brakes won’t hold! We’re going in! We’re going under!" The car splashed into the water. I started to get out. Just then the car leveled and I realized we were in a Amphicar. The President laughed. As we putted along the lake then (and throughout the evening), he teased me. "Vicky, did you see what Joe did? He didn’t give a damn about his President. He just wanted to save his own skin and get out of the car." Then he’d roar. --Joseph A. Califano, Jr
***
So, our former President tricked his passengers into thinking they were about to die, just so he could see how loyal they were? That's either the most brilliant people skills ever, or sadistic torture. Maybe, it's both.

Stop Blaming Testosterone

Today, we have some feminist critique of the viewpoint that men "can't help" oogling women. Inspired by the trendy article, "5 Ways Modern Men are Trained to Hate Women," and it's scathing response; "Mysogyny isn't caused by male horniness."

Even after reading this critique, which makes a great point that hey, maybe women and men don't act differently just because of biology, but because of what society teaches us, some guy still found the need to cry out (comment #265: mcguinty):

You’ll also notice that I never said the average male traits make the average male better than the average female. I just said it makes the average male different from the average female. Personally I would like to be able to have some of the average female traits: better social intelligence, better empathy, and so on. But I can’t because of my biology.

O. M. Gee.

Our response:
Dear @mcguinty. by assuming these male SOCIAL traits are biological, you just spit out a whole bunch of disabling sexism. " I would like to be able to have some of the average female traits: better social intelligence, better empathy, and so on. But I can’t because of my biology." What the hell? ANYONE can have better social intelligence and better empathy, all you have to do is make an effort and try to LEARN.

Women are told from day 1 that they must consider other's feelings in everything they do, and give up their own needs to support others. This is why women have these traits in wider abundance than men, not because it's "biological." You using biology as an excuse as to why you don't have them, is just making a lame excuse to justify your continued behavior as a selfish, offensive asshole. Biology is not an excuse to treat women badly, or act like an asshole in general. That is is the whole problem with this cracked article, and this why it DOES matter if men's different behavior is based in biology or not.

If it was really based in biology, then it could not be changed. (If that was actually true, then I think all men should be imprisoned and removed from all positions of power, since they "naturally" are inclined to hurt women.) But if macho, objectifying, tit-gazing behavior is LEARNED, then we can UNLEARN it, which would be a HUGE SOCIAL IMPROVEMENT. We need to stop blaming biology and recognize the social conditioning that is all around us.

So. Why is this so hard to understand? Because I have heard men who claim to be "progressive" blame their biology all the time. You almost might think, that they don't want to understand it..