<p>bn12gg- “In short, the middle class top 3% kid will come to UCF
rather than FSU because they can’t afford FSU.”</p>
<p>How do you mean? That those top 3% living in the Orlando area will attend UCF and stay at home instead of going to FSU?</p>
<p>The current cost of attending FSU is nominally the same as UCF considering that BF Scholarship money can be used at either.</p>
<p>Dad- You can live at home and attend UCF. Why would you pay dorm/or
other housing plus meals, travel etc at FSU when you can’t afford it with
the demise of BrightFutures. FSU gets a token of its’ students from Tallahassee.
Without Brightfutures $$'s, metropolitan Florida kids will go to metropolitan SUS
schools. Heck, only FSU and UF are out in the sticks. They may just get less
affordable without Brightfutures. Hmm? Debt to go to FSU or pay as you go
for UCF? I say FSU looses that one more often as we move forward without
Brightfutures. No?</p>
<p>.02 David</p>
<p>edit- the “middle class” meritorious kid is the one on the financial
bubble. (the poor kid maybe as well)</p>
<p>Hence my question- How do you mean? I was trying to guess your meaning. You may be right, who knows? Although I’m suspect that significant amounts of college ready young adults are going to opt to be commuter students, giving up the full college experience, due to a $1500 per semester award. Undoubtedly some will but probably not enough to make a noticeable difference.</p>
<p>Florida in-state tuitions, with or without BF, are an outright bargain and a steal compared to almost every out-of-state options, public and private. FSU & UF obviously survived and thrived long before the BF program was instituted. I expect they will continue to do so.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree that the top OF THE MIDDLE CLASS will stay closer to home without BF. They will eek out enough for tuition, but not be able to find the money for room and board. Even worse, the students not close to the U’s will stay home and go to community college/state college. But I do see UF and FSU holding on to more students. I see less kids from Tampa going to UCF, FIU. I see less kids from Orlando going to FAU, FIU, UNF. etc. The second tier of state U’s will go back to being a larger percentage of commuter students.</p>
<p>But given the cost of education, I think top students will still be staying in state. I do not see a rush OOS. There is only so much merit aid available at private or OOS state U’s. And there are only so many of these top students eligible for financial aid. There are only so many slots available at Ivy’s and top 25 U’s. I think FSU and UF will stay competitive.</p>
<p>Dad— We agree FSU and UF will do reasonably well in the new
nonBrightfutures environment. Impact eh, but there will be some
impact. The metropolitan SUS schools will benefit. Table is tilted ^^.</p>
<p>The “full college experience” died with web based online coursework.
It isn’t like our college experience in 2011. Some kids take the majority
of their coursework at the computer, not in the classroom.</p>
<p>Tuition? This one is going up, and up fast. Watch the tuition bill this
Spring. Again, that makes the loss of Brightfutures all that more
significant-- $'s. Tuition increases replace corporate tax breaks.</p>
<p>Again, corporations over kids. I rest my case.</p>
<p>.02 David</p>
<p>Y’all are starting the wake a little early…Bright Futures isn’t dead yet. Tell your legislators now to keep Bright Futures alive.</p>
<p>I don’t get the “without Bright Futures, kids will stay closer to home” claim. Already a lot of kids do that- I can’t tell you how many people of my graduating class there are that ended up at USF. The year before mine FSU was the “popular” college, but in my year the vast majority ended up at USF, with only 3 that I know of going to FSU. </p>
<p>People will go where:
<p>With or without Bright Futures. If you live in Orlando but want to major in something that UCF doesn’t have, you’ll go where you can major in what you want. </p>
<p>And honestly, I know it’s very anecdotal, but I know way more people that are here from Tampa or Miami than I do that are from Tallahassee.</p>
<p>The point of Brightfutures is to make college more affordable for the meritorious. #3, If
you don’t have the coin you adjust-- I suggest a local SUS school.
This is just common sense. Kids adjust majors frequently #2 – the
% is high (I just don’t have an off hand number). And, #1 kids like
their local metropolitan school. Numbers 1, 2, and 3 simply tilt the
playing field for meritorious students toward the SUS metropolitan
schools. FSU and UF have their following, but when push comes to
shove financially, the local SUS school benefits. </p>
<p>Turn it around, how does the loss of Brightfutures for meritorious
Florida kids help FSU and UF? </p>
<p>.02 David</p>
<p>Referring back to fat cats -</p>
<p>David,</p>
<p>I’ve taken economics and accounting…taxing corporations simply transfers the tax to the consumers of the corporate goods. High corporate tax rates provide one incentive for corporations to relocate to areas with lower operating costs. Of course corporations, as stewards of investors’ monies, aren’t crazy - they balance operating risks with costs so not many corporations relocate to Iran or Yemen.</p>
<p>Progressive tax systems…which we have in the US work, until the incentive to invest and take risk (which must be rewarded for the incentive to work as desired) is removed. Socialist systems inevitably run out of other people’s money to spend (love that quote from Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.” - Margaret Thatcher). </p>
<p>Illinois, as a state, especially is suffering from tax flight (real and threatened) due to excessive taxation, much like New York, California and so on.</p>
<p>We have to come up with a better solution than just upping the tax rate when public coffers run dry. We are spending more than we can afford - and I don’t want a World War III to occur to get us out of bad habits.</p>
<p>I don’t think Bright Futures should be 100% eliminated, but like any government program, it can probably be cut back some.</p>
<p>Just because a program spends money on a desirable thing does not necessarily mean that the program should not be cut.</p>
<p>The government spends money on many desirable things. It can’t spend money on EVERY desirable thing.</p>
<p>For example, one of my pet peeves is that if you have a blister on your toe, it is covered, but if you need a root canal or other work on your teeth, this is NOT covered, because it counts as dental work. Why should your mouth be any different than your toe? So in my opinion, dental care should be treated the same as medical care. But does the government have money for all of that?</p>
<p>^ Go to a podiatrist for your dental work and then your insurance coverage will pay for dental work.</p>
<p>P2N and Dad-- It’s all about priorities and values. P2N, my father was
a CFO with a multi-national corp. I know what real corporate America looks
like and my take on these guys these days is that they are lazy! Yep, lazy.
They just can’t compete be/c they aren’t smart. It’s much easier to pay
off congress or the legislature, hit up county governments for tax breaks
and not do the day to day hard work of marketing product or service. In
short, the private sector value system isn’t what is use to be. Sad.</p>
<p>Dad, with regard to health care, be it a tooth or broken up foot, I’m not a
liberal, I’m a socialist. We need a single payer system (yep, Medicare from
cradle to grave). Let’s put the health insurance industry out of buisiness.
Yep, sell auto and life insurance – no more preying on the American people
by these guys. The guys in the paragraph above ^^^ should be pleased
getting the health care monkey off their backs.</p>
<p>Just my .02 David</p>
<p>FSU’s Professor Hu is working on his Bright Futures research study right now, but he won’t be done with report for about three years. One of the purposes of the study is to determine the impact of Bright Futures on school enrollment. Three years out might be too late to help students the next couple of years.</p>
<p>[FSU</a> professor receives grant to study Bright Futures | FSView | fsunews.com](<a href=“http://www.fsunews.com/article/20110702/FSVIEW/110702006/FSU-professor-receives-grant-study-Bright-Futures]FSU”>http://www.fsunews.com/article/20110702/FSVIEW/110702006/FSU-professor-receives-grant-study-Bright-Futures)</p>
<p>bn12:</p>
<p>I am an attorney. I deal with the government every day. The probate court. The IRS.
The motor vehicle department. Believe me, you do not want the government running your health care. Take a look at Canada. If you need basic health care, their system is good. However, when Canadians need serious health care, they come to
America. If America goes the way of Canada, then what will happen is that people who need serioius health care will wind up having to go to private clinics set up in Costa Rica.
I had a bypass operation three years ago. I got GREAT care under the system you call evil. Go to a government run hospital, and see what the care is like !!! YOU can have that kind of care if you want, but don’t force the rest of us to have it. My health care premium is $1,100 a month. My wife’s is $700. That is a ton of money. So you would think we would be logical candidates to be in favor of the kind of system you advocate. Well, we are not. As far as being a socialist, that issue has long ago been decided. Compare South Korea to North Korea. Or East Germany to West Germany. Or the Cubans of Cuba to the Cubans of Miami.
Now, some socialism mixed in with a capitalist system is not bad (e.g, Sweden), but socialist countries eventually become pure dictatorships.</p>
<p>Also look at England - socialized medicine was brought to the population with the scarcity of WWII, now the [British</a> NHS is the LARGEST employer in England](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Health_Service_(England)]British”>National Health Service (England) - Wikipedia). Indeed, the British NHS rivals the Chinese People’s Army as an employer. What does it produce, other than less unemployment for an underutilized population? For an anecdotal story - a Brit neighbor here left his business in England as he needed a heart bypass ASAP and was waaay down the list in Britain with the NHS. So he and his wife completely withdrew their retirement savings, moved to Florida, downsized to a small condo and he promptly received his bypass surgery, likely saving his life. </p>
<p>Greece now has a huge problem with too many “state” workers and not enough other people’s money.</p>
<p>Sweden has a small, homogenous population that endures the confiscatory socialist tax rates for who knows what reason. Hard to impart the Swedish model onto the USA.</p>
<p>Sunny is an MD, I’d like to hear her take on the matter. It means more than an academic discussion to her.</p>
<p>Dad- The systems you sight are working well. I work with faculty
from the countries you speak of— they don’t want our system of
health care. They wish to keep their socialized or quasi socialized
systems. They laugh at ours.</p>
<p>I worked for a decade at Rush Presbyterian St. Lukes, a big private
in Chicago, plus was a consultant at Hines VA, west of Chicago.
Both provided excellent health care. You are misinformed re: the
VA. </p>
<p>The Canadians I work with believe you are operating off anecdotal
case information about their system. By the way, Americans cross
the border into Canada for certain procedures plus to buy fairly
priced drugs. </p>
<p>Please read my remarks again. Our health care providers are hardly
evil-- it’s the health insurance industry that preys on people that
needs resection or reformed. A Canadian single payer system would
work just fine in our country. Heck, Americans love their Medicare
system. Yep, it’s a government socialized system using some of the
finest providers in the world – our docs and nurses. It needs to be
extended down to the cradle. </p>
<p>Reading your remarks I’m surprised you have anything to do with FSU
afterall it’s a government school. Socialized, isn’t it? </p>
<p>Thanks for your thoughts-- sincerely.</p>
<p>.02 David</p>
<p>Bn12:</p>
<p>To respond to your last point, I fully admit that I am no expert in health care, and I note that this thread has stopped talking about Bright Futures.</p>
<p>That being said, however, I don’t know where you got the idea that a government plan will be any better than the plans now being administered by insurance companies.</p>
<p>For example, in England, the public became outraged because the waiting times at emergency rooms were so long under their government plan. So a rule was instituted that emergency rooms had to treat people within X amount of time.</p>
<p>So how did the wonderful government bureaucrats that you seem to put some much trust in act to handle this problem? They decided not to formally admit the patients into the emergency rooms, and instead, had the ambulances dump the patients in the parking lots outside of the emergency room!!! Where they continued to wait forever for treatment, but now, the waiting time did not count under the government statistics. True story. </p>
<p>I want super good care for my kid, and I have it now. It is true that it is very expensive, but at least I have it. It is also true that many people are uninsured. But under your system, my health care will be dragged down to that of the level of a New York City public hospital. When you enter such a hospital as a patient, your presence there is basically viewed as an annoyance to the staff, because they have absolutely no incentive to do a good job for you. My friend’s wife was a psychiatrist at such a hospital. No one even cared what she did, and she spent a good part of her day going shopping, and running errands. THAT is the true world of government run health care.</p>
<p>In a way, this is related to Bright Futures, because the standards to qualify for Bright Futures, I understand, have become unduly low.</p>
<p>Dad- You make a couple good points-- we have hijacked this thread and
we should not have done that. 2ndly, any program public or private should
be open to modification, and that includes Brightfutures. I would have no
problem with representatives (with good intent of course) studying the
qualification criteria and modifying it to make it a true merit program. With
increased demonstrated academic achievement possibly we could increase
the dollar amount to the qualified while reducing the numbers qualifying – bottomline
saving total dollars but improving funding to outstanding kids. What bothers
me are representatives who wish to kill everything “government.” </p>
<p>.02 David</p>
<p>After you guys solve how to get decent affordable healthcare for everyone in the U.S., then you can work on the more challenging problem of straightening out the mess we face with the ongoing college athletic conference realignments. Work on Florida Bright Futures scholarships too while you’re at it.</p>
<p>Tlassie-- After we solve all of this country’s problems we intend to
focus on the world’s most difficult issues. We both recognized that the
thread had wandered just a tad. I hope you accept my apology.</p>
<p>Please note above that I believe more Brightfutures dollars ought to be
given to more qualified Florida kids yet the overall dollar amount might
go down a little in the context of a tough economy.</p>
<p>.02 David</p>
<p>ps- Am I back on track?</p>