State stiffs universities, tuition goes up

Parent Cafe
1

<p>State</a> stiffs universities, tuition goes up - Chicago Sun-Times</p>

<p>
[quote]
Illinois’ nine public universities are owed more than half a billion dollars by the state, part of an ongoing debt that contributes to rising tuition, spending cuts and increasing class sizes on some campuses.</p>

<p>...</p>

<p>The University of Illinois, awaiting $305.98 million, has been able to cover the gap using money from tuition, research grants and other sources. Still, “There are fewer classes with fewer than 20 students, and more classes with more than 50 students in them,” said U. of I. spokeswoman Robin Kaler.</p>

<p>Meanwhile, tuition has been marching upward. At the Urbana campus, entry-level tuition and fees for a full-time resident taking 30 credit hours were $14,414 this year, up nearly 45 percent from five years earlier.

[/quote]
</p>

2

<p>[Corbett</a> swings budget ax at schools, colleges](<a href=“http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11067/1130526-100.stm]Corbett”>http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11067/1130526-100.stm)</p>

<p>And in Pennsylvania, we now rank 49th in state funding for public/higher education, and Penn State has the highest tuition of any public university in the country…</p>

3

<p>Have no problem with what Corbett is doing…it is time that Universities that get significant funding from the state taxpayers start living in reality…The excesses at some of these state schools is mind numbing…If my tax dollars were going to pay tuition for those in need, I am ok with that…When it goes to fund sports programs,stadiums, et al, no way.</p>

4

<p>I really hate to see this. I have nieces attending cc in IL who plan on transferring to these schools next year and it’s tough enough financially already for them. So although qdogpa I think that you have a point, it’s really hard for a lot of folks.</p>

5

<p>Agree with qdogpa - when someone I knew visited Penn State and came back raving about the “heated sidewalks” they have on campus, I knew that the school’s expenditures were out of control (needless to say, if heated sidewalks made economic sense, it would be very common - but since you don’t see heated sidewalks anywhere, you can be sure that the economics of it do not make sense). </p>

<p>States schools that get a lot of funding from taxpayers have to start living within a much more reasonable budget. We just can’t afford such extravagances as heated sidewalks.</p>

6

<p>Unfortunately, when tax dollars subsidize anything it rarely lowers the cost of it, but rather the opposite. Higher education is a great example of this in action.</p>

7

<p>The whole concept of the “state universities” being “owed” anything by the state shows that the author is in la-la land. The state doesn’t owe anything. The state has no money. All the money from the state comes from the tax paying residents of the state - they “own” the university. The economy is in the dumper and there is a lot less tax revenue generated. The administrators of the universities need to get real. Have you heard the phrase “do more with less”? Well, it is time to do less with less.</p>

8

<p>I’d love to see the ax hit some of the administrator’s salaries and perks. Imo, there’s still a lot of wasteful spending that needs to go before hitting the taxpayers and students again.</p>

9

<p>I wrote a nice long post about the above mentioned article but when I went back to double check something in the article, I realized that this was the PROPOSED budget - not the one that passed in the summer.</p>

10

<p>^^would you rather pay more in taxes? ^^^ because that is the only way to keep funding at recent levels.i am of opinion students and their families should pay more in tuition,why should those taxpayers(retired persons, those with no children) support state colleges with their tax money…</p>

11

<p>State funding for state universities will continue to decrease especially in states where the average tax payer’s child doesn’t have a prayers chance of attending one of theses universities. </p>

<p>On CC we have a unique subset of people focused on hs grades, test scores, the right ECs and more. This is not the case for 90% of the taxpayers.</p>

12

<p>"why should those taxpayers(retired persons, those with no children) support state colleges with their tax money… "</p>

<p>Because…education is a social good that adds to the betterment of society…and even old people care about the future of our society…</p>

13

<p>

</p>

<p>That’s the theory, anyway.</p>

14

<p>I agree there is waste at large U’s (just like large corporations). There is only one stretch of heated sidewalk at UP, over by the IST building. I wouldn’t want someone to think the whole place is covered with techy sidewalks, and it was part of LEED certification. The softball and baseball venues were paid for with privately raised funding, not with state money. Now, of course, there’s a good argument that if you can raise money for THOSE, why not raise money for STUDENTS? Likewise, the new hockey facility was funded by a ginormous gift. None of this is to excuse wastefulness, but it’s demoralizing to hear the commonwealth reaction be “glad to see you get poked in the eye”. </p>

<p>I thought that traditionally, state U’s were intended to be what community colleges are now in many places. A spot for smart, motivated, but lower/middle-class people to go to college w/o debilitating debt. I think Corbett’s plan was punitive grandstanding, and I voted for him.</p>

15

<p>

</p>

<p>The legislature appropriated the money. The governor signed the appropriation. You may think they should not have done that, but they did, and the moment the governor’s signature was complete, the universities were legally entitled to the money. So yes, the state universities are owed the money.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Gee, what a quaint concept. I’m old enough to remember when most people actually believed that.</p>

<p>Our public education system has been one of the most important factors in the American success story. That we are now in the process of systematically trashing it - from kindergarten through undergraduate college - will not serve our children, or their children well.</p>

<p>But what should we care? We’ve all got our 48-inch wide screen TVs and our SUVs and our 401Ks.</p>

16

<p>[Harvard?s</a> Role As a Nonprofit | Opinion | The Harvard Crimson](<a href=“http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2009/5/21/harvards-role-as-a-nonprofit-harvard/]Harvard?s”>Harvard’s Role As a Nonprofit | Opinion | The Harvard Crimson)</p>

<p>Hmmmm…
Hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars…maybe more…every year in taxpayer subsidies…</p>

<p>Can I opt out…I don’t want my tax dollars going to Harvard…
I would rather see my tax dollars go to UC Berkeley…a public school.</p>

<p>"Harvard University is a nonprofit, not a business. This is one of the central arguments that we hear professors, politicians, and students make when they advocate for Harvard to be more socially and morally responsible. But does this claim mean anything? Should Harvard act any different as a nonprofit than as a business? The answer is yes—Harvard gains huge financial benefits as a nonprofit, and with these benefits come additional responsibilities toward the community that businesses do not always have.</p>

<p>The key difference concerns taxes. As a nonprofit, Harvard receives tax exemptions, deductions, and privileges that for-profit institutions must forgo. For example, besides innovative investing techniques, Harvard was able to build its endowment from $4.7 billion in 1990 to $37 billion in 2008 because it did not pay taxes on those gains. Relative to businesses, the federal government is subsidizing Harvard’s investment fund.</p>

<p>In addition, Harvard does not pay real-estate taxes. Instead, it makes voluntary payments in lieu of taxes. Last year, for all of Harvard’s property, it paid $1.9 million in lieu of taxes to the City of Boston. Boston officials estimate these payments would be 10 times as large if Harvard paid real-estate taxes. Partly due to these reduced expenses, Harvard currently owns over 923,000 square feet of property in Allston that are neither developed for Harvard’s purposes nor leased to Allston businesses. Harvard would be less likely to hold these land lots for long-term construction projects if it had to pay real-estate taxes on them.</p>

<p>As a nonprofit, Harvard also benefits from tax-deductible donations and a significant amount of federal grant money. Last year, Harvard received $651 million in donations. If donations to Harvard were not tax-deductible, this number would be a small fraction of this total. According to Harvard’s Office of Government, Community, and Public Affairs, Harvard received $535 million in federal grants in fiscal year 2008 that accounted for 82 percent of Harvard’s research revenue. Under the federal stimulus package, federal grants to Harvard are expected to increase considerably. Non-federally funded research is made possible through tax deductions on donations made by corporations and foundations."</p>

17

<p>’ Social good’ could be done at lower cost to taxpayers…I am for public support of K-12 schooling(my children go to private schools), but I am for significantly less public tax support at the college level…</p>

18

<p>^^^^ I agree.</p>

19

<p>And so only the rich will be able to send their kids to college?</p>

20

<p>I would think that this whole discussion is starting to cross the line on the kind of political discussion now forbidden on CC. But just in case I’m wrong, I’ll pipe in. </p>

<p>I think the term “living within our means” is code word for republican tea party rubbish where people think it’s smart to deprive the current generation of students of the education they need to create jobs and grow the economy so that they don’t have to pay taxes. </p>

<p>Go ahead and destroy the University of California system, the University of Illinois system. Destroy local school districts by laying off teachers, increasing class size and eliminating anything that doesn’t impact test scores or football. If kids can pass the graduation requirements in 10th grade, kick 'em out of school because they are a drain on the system and we shouldn’t have to pay for AP classes. Crash and burn the all federal, state and local governments everywhere so that you don’t have to pay taxes. No government, no public anything, let 'em all eat cake. Teachers are all just in it for the money anyway. Just lower taxes and send us deeper and deeper into bizzaro world. The tax money is mine, mine, mine. </p>

<p>Good to get that off my chest.</p>