<p>bonnie, that teacher worked more than my former boss who IN ONE YEAR earned over $1 million in salary and cashed in $8 million in stock options after driving the department into the ground. And you bet he’ll be collecting social security too. </p>
<p>It’s ALL out of whack.</p>
<p>I’m sure there are many examples of people who received a high return for very little work. But the sheer number of public union employees receiving/will receive excessive pensions far outweighs them. And there’s a difference between a private sector employee cashing in, which mainly affects shareholders, vs public employees. Taxpayers are footing the bill, and the quality and quantity of public services, especially education, is severely affected. Tax money will now go to pay retirements rather than providing quality education offered at a reasonable price.</p>
<p>yea, blame it all on the worker folk, it’s all their fault</p>
<p>Oh wow. Just when I though the cut in Federal Pell Grant for Summer School and reduction in Federal Pell Grant for 2011-2012 was already bad. :(</p>
<p>There’s a race to the bottom in all these situations. Universities, public and private, should all be affordable, and people shouldn’t have to mortgage their homes or use their retirement funds to pay for their child’s undergraduate degree. All workers should get a decent pension and affordable health insurance. My neighbor told me she has paid half a million dollars for her daughter to become a veterinarian. $500,000! That could easily happen to someone who goes to medical or veterinary school. Meanwhile, the executives of Transocean were awarded safety bonuses of $19.5 million in the same year of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill disaster. It’s madness!</p>
<p>Well, let’s hope the middle class kid with good UC stats will do better at an private with merit, because forget UCLA/UB, many will not get into UCSD,UCD,UCI,UCSB and now Cal Poly SLo has a waiting list for the kids who might get into UCSC or UCR. SDSU is off the charts in number of years to graduate- but still very competitive. So yes, the Hi-Stat average 4.0 with 1900 SAT with mainly honors not AP are not getting multiple acceptances from the most of the 6 UC’s. Yes they qualify, but it is to 2-3 of the campus’ they don’t want to attend. So it is the mid CSU’s these kids get accepted to and that is when the OSS/Private options come into play. It’s not money, it’ the uber high stat kid and the kid from a low income/low performing school get accepted at the top 6. </p>
<p>One thing to keep in mind is the “networking” piece- most UC’ students are from instate, most grads prefer to stay in CA, and the CA employers are very aware that only the best and brightest gain admission to the UC’s. Employers know this from 1) their own family experience 2) the news every year 3)from their other employee’s.</p>
<p>Small LAC in the mid-west or south or east just arn’t going to give you much of a prestige bump out here when loking for a job. </p>
<p>UC’s have hyper local cred. And, as noted up thread, with all the AP’s needed to compete for admission, moststudents come in as Sophomores, can graduate in 3 to 3.5 years, or double major for 4 years AND study internationally. That is true up until now. Who knows in the coming years.</p>
<p>Besides the cost issue, there is also the issue of the brain drain from the UCs. I’m not referring to the students, but instead the faculty. I was perusing the Brown website today and noticed that the new provost is from Cal and the new Dean of the Engineering school is from UCSD. Much as Brown is a prestigious school, I’ve got to believe that these two scholars had a pretty nice life living in Berkeley and La Jolla. But, they gave up the nice California weather for the rains of Rhode Island. Leads me to believe that the UC faculty are pretty unhappy, which is NOT good.</p>
<p>Totally agree with camathmom - the decline of the UCs (should it happen, god forbid) is the decline of the state as a whole, its economy and future possibilities. </p>
<p>And to OlympicLady I will add: the UCs also have enormous international cred. I went to Cal, and after graduation traveled in Europe with a woman who graduated from Brown. EVERYBODY had heard of Berkeley. My Ivy League friend was chagrined when the name of her school met with a polite but blank look. My public school heart really liked the irony because she turned down Cal in favor of the prestige of Brown.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And that is a problem. The theory behind the state university system is that is available, both academically and financially. This is supposed to be the place where reasonably bright and motivated students can go for an education which will give them a reasonable shot at jobs requiring a degree. The UC system was never intended to be SPYH.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am not sure the budget cut is the cause of this brain drain.</p>
<p>According to my son, one of his favorite profs at MIT went to UCSD last year. I don’t remember the name.</p>
<p>UCSD also brought in some others from MIT and Harvard.</p>
<p>[UCSD</a> Mathematics: Faculty Profile](<a href=“http://math.ucsd.edu/people/profile.php?id=9478]UCSD”>http://math.ucsd.edu/people/profile.php?id=9478)
[UCSD:</a> Global Information Industry Center](<a href=“http://giic.ucsd.edu/faculty.php]UCSD:”>http://giic.ucsd.edu/faculty.php)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But is that a good reason to increase tax on all the families in California. If there has to be increase in some respect to fill the education expenditure then it has to be the students attending the UCs. Students are the one who are going to gain from this and so should be bearing the cost.
Taxing everyone to benefit few is not the correct way to fix budget vows.
The tuition at UCs should be increased to $18 to $20K for UCs to cover the budget deficit. The financial aid can be increased to offset the burden on the families making less than $80K by increasing the UC tuition to $24K. Full paying students at UCs have to bear the cost of financial aid as full paying students at private university do.</p>
<p>Water seeks its own level. When UC becomes more expensive, students go somewhere else. Funny how the market works!</p>
<p>Coolweather: What caught my attention was the loss of SENIOR faculty from the UCs, as my understanding is that lower level faculty do move sometimes regardless of budget issues. The UC Berkeley gentleman is currently Dean of Bio Sciences, and the UCSD gentleman is currently the Chair of Electrical/Computer Engineering. But, I am not an academic, so I could be misreading this and you may be correct.</p>
<p>i think the tuition SHOULD increase. Less people would be a plus for me</p>
<p>Parent of Ivy Hope, I believe EVERYONE in California benefits from a dynamic university system and EVERYONE should pay into it. Universities generate jobs, pump money into local economies, prompt building, investment and growth. Why do you think Silicon Valley is where it is? Because of the talent from Stanford and Berkeley that fueled unprecedented growth. Same with the Miracle Mile outside of Boston - it exists because students and researchers at the zillion of schools around Boston stayed near by and started high tech companies. Southern California wasn’t a medical mecca, bringing with it industry and wealth, until UCLA became a world-class medical school. There are many examples of how superb universities help create thriving communities, and that is certainly the case in California.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Everyone is paying into it because if all the support is taken out then the cost will become same as the private universities. The current problem is to reduce the deficit and it should be target to those who are the direct beneficial of it.</p>
<p>I’m among those skeptics who believe the deficit would shrink instantaneously if those who should pay taxes actually paid them. And I don’t mean California’s middle class, its state employees, bus drivers, even its correctional workers or middle school shop teachers. But no, we musn’t offend that top 1% which controls 40% of America’s wealth, and whose net worth rises every year while the buying power of the rest of us has stayed stagnant for the last 30 years.</p>
<p>cedars-sinai medical center was a medical powerhouse long before ucla/geffen med came around!
just needed to point that out. </p>
<p>this thread is exceedingly toxic. how many of you complaining are actual, bonified, honest-to-goodness, CURRENT california residents?!?</p>
<p>I plead guilty, calimami: DH’s academic career took us out of California. Still have all our family there, still plan to retire there, still love and root for the state and its great schools.</p>
<p>PS Good call about Cedars-sinai, but I think you’d agree that the sheer intellectual power of southern California’s medical establishment grew exponentially with the growth of UCLA’s med school. My own dad, who suffers from strokes, spends a fortune each year – his money, not the insurance company’s – on UCLA’s doctors, whom he considers the best in the world in this particular area. In fact, he moved, at considerable expense, to be nearer to the school after conducting extensive research where his illness would have the greatest chance of being managed.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>California resident from the get go. I certainly feel that the time has come to bring the tuition of UCs at par with other states public universities.</p>