<p>^^^: Certainly past is no indication of what to come in the future and that is why we can’t use the same tactics to solve current problems.</p>
<p>The current problem need a different thinking and need a revamp of UCs tuition and hence a drastic increase of tuition to $24K.</p>
<p>It’ll provide enough funding to not only resolve present issue but also provide resources to expand UCs to the next level.</p>
<p>Why all this resentment and hatred for California’s public university? The last time I checked, every state had a land grant public university courtesy of the Morrill Act of 1862. Why don’t we compare ourselves to the University of Michigan (2011-2012 in-state tuition $11837), the University of Virginia (2011-2012 in-state tuition $10,836)? Oh, I see, UC’s tuition is comparable, if not slightly higher…</p>
<p>It is to everyone’s benefit for the populace to have access to higher education, whether vocational or academic. I strongly believe we all benefit if our workforce is skilled, our tech innovators are cutting-edge, our creative minds work in Hollywood, our medical centers are world-class, our universities attract international students (big business), our teachers are well-prepared, our citizens are bilingual, our video game designers are hot, our writers, artists and musicians are world-famous, our winemakers are renowned, our researchers are Nobel-prize winners …they bring fame, business, tourists and money to the state. </p>
<p>Or we can go for the lowest-common denominator in our race to the bottom.</p>
<p>I don’t get it either, tptshorty. Californians are very lucky to have the community colleges, state colleges and public universities that they do. No other state residents have such a wealth of good choices at a good price. IMHO it’s something that should be treasured and protected.</p>
<p>sorry, OlympicLady, but I clearly said in my post systemwide. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, no I did not know who the author was…I picked it up from another post. And now that I found your original full quote, I can see that it was out of context. But my broader point is still correct: there are ample slots at a UC campus for those that qualify. The fact that folks don’t want to attend Merced…well, see below.</p>
<p>And no, I have no problem with the UCs; indeed, I have stated just the opposite on numerous occasions. I do feel that sometimes the Regents act as political hacks, but that is a different story. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And that’s what I also want and increasing UCs tuition is the only way to protect this treasure. Not increasing the tuition will not only deteriorate the UCs but may end up closing some of them all together.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>POIH, I thought you were an immigrant? </p>
<p>I’m a CA resident from the get-go. Parents went to UCs and CSUs. Between me, my siblings and my spouse, we have 11 UC and CSU degrees, undergrad and grad. We all donate to our alma maters. D1 is breaking a long tradition by going to an OOS private. </p>
<p>And as a CA resident, I’m willing to pay increased taxes in order to preserve the greatness of California’s public university system.</p>
<p>My best guess is that the UCs are going to try to avoid the problems with state funding by becoming less and less reliant upon state funding. UC Berkeley has really ramped up its efforts to accept OOS (particularly international students) into its undergrad schools over the past few years.</p>
<p>[UC</a> Berkeley-CEG Summer Select Program ¥[¦{¬f§JµÜ¤j¾ÇÀu¨q¾Ç¥Í¿ï©Þp¹º](<a href=“http://www.chinaedugrp.com/berkeley/news2.html]UC”>http://www.chinaedugrp.com/berkeley/news2.html)</p>
<p>Of course while this may retain the quality of the UCs, the top UCs will become less and less accessible to California residents.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In some way we all are, but Yes, I’m a naturalized citizen. Since I landed in CA and stayed here forever so that’s why I said from the get go.</p>
<p>As a California resident I’m not willing to pay more taxes and favor increase UCs tuition to preserve the greatness and enhancement of California’s public university system.</p>
<p>POIH, As tuition increases, fewer and fewer students can attend. As others have pointed out, this results in a less-educated population. A less-educated population is associated with every kind of social ill: higher crime (which affects the rich), lower property values (which affects the rich), lower-quality workforce (which affects the rich), lower productivity (which affects the rich), poorer health (which affects the rich), poorer infrastructure (which affects the rich), and on and on. Even the very wealthiest people have a vested interest in seeing that higher education is accessible to everyone. </p>
<p>I don’t know if you’re aware of the GI Bill. This was federal legislation passed at the end of WWII, which made it possible for the returning servicemen to get a college education. Of course, it was vehemently opposed at the time by people like you, who were horrified at the idea – it was a disincentive to work, it was requiring rich people to pay for poor people’s education, it was socialism. Thank goodness there were wiser people running the country back then, people who saw it as the best investment we could possibly make in our country. And sure enough, what followed was decades of prosperity for EVERYONE, including the people who hated the idea. </p>
<p>We have reversed that trend and we have returned to your ideal of “I’ve got mine, you’re on your own to get yours.” That’s going to come back to haunt rich people as well as poor people.</p>
<p>Somehow, when I read your posts, Marie Antionette always comes to mind. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>California public education system is a three -tier system and there is a reason behind it.</p>
<p>Community Colleges: The purpose of which is to educate masses to overcome this problem.
</p>
<p>I’ll never be in favor of making the tuition increases at CC.</p>
<p>California State University: This is at the crux of building skilled work force because can be geared towards trade schools or tech schools (like polytechnic SLO).
I’ll only recommend little changes to tuition at this level.</p>
<p>University of California: This is suppose to be research universities and should not be a drain on the california tax revenues but should be a contributing resource. The purpose here is to not educate masses but to produce quality leaders, scientists, professionals.
This should be the place for maximum tuition increase because the students who study here can accomodate paying back loans.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you increase tax burdens either by increasing income tax or sales tax your are putting the burden of educating rich people on the shoulder of poor people.</p>
<p>The UCs are populated un proportionately by richer Californians than by poor Californians.</p>
<p>^^So it’s your idea that the UC system should be a profit center for the state of California?</p>
<p>And BTW, tuition is increasing at the CCs, but even that is not the major problem there. The big problem is that there isn’t anywhere near enough space for the students. They are anticipating turning away 400,000 students next year. What should be done about that?</p>
<p>And the CSUs also have large and growing problems. Even with the tuition increases there (which eliminates some students), those attending are having increasing difficulty getting the classes they need. How should that problem be solved? Where is our future skilled workforce going to come from?</p>
<p>POIH’s attitude is likely to change overnight if/when his kiddo doesn’t get into that Ivy, LOL. How much should we bet he’ll be screaming “that outrageous UC tuition!”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Neither a profit center nor a tax revenue drain too.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>About half that try for a four-year degree don’t succeed.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I think that you’re reaching here.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Massachusetts is the most educated state in the country going by the
percentage of the adult population with undergraduate degrees. I can
think of a lot of other states that have lower crime rates.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Why is this a negative?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Does your education level affect the quality-level of the products
that you produce? Do the Toyota and Honda plants in less educated
states produce lower quality vehicles than those in better educated
states? Did BMW locate their manufacturing plant in South Carolina
because of the quality of their college graduates?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>See above.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>This is an educational issue but well below college.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I guess that you haven’t driven the highways of Massachusetts lately.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Sure.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>The current statistics show that there is an incredible amount of
waste in higher education and we might be better off if those higher
education dollars spent on people that are not going to succeed, go to
K12 preparation to give more people the potential to succeed.</p>
<p>Katalia ^^^ F U N N Y ! ^^^</p>
<p>What choice does Brown have when CA people don’t want to increase taxes?</p>
<p>I am willing to pay some more taxes but it’s not easy for the tax increasing proposal get passed. When talking about taxes, the top income taxpayers object, the middle class taxpayers object, and the ones who don’t pay a single dime of taxes also object and these last two groups will decide the fate of the proposal.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>DD is a full pay student ($55K) at a non Ivy.
DD HS tuition of $35K was far greater than the proposed $24K for a UC education.</p>
<p>BCEagle points are well taken, there is a huge amount of waste in education across the board, and anyone, ANYONE, accepted to the UC system should not need any remedial course work, if they do, they should be in CC first. Same with CSU. The amount of remedial classes needed is such a high % it is shocking. If someone needs remedial- no matter what the reason, economic, LD, whatever…they are not ready to be accepted into a University system- both CSU and UC’s. What is happening is the UG degree is becoming almost worthless as an indicator to employers, so a MA,MS and even Phd is needed. Are we going to be required to educate to populous to that degree with tax payer dollars? No, so the answer is K-12, fix it and educate all. University is not suppose to be High school. </p>
<p>So, it’s not that everyone should not have access to a University education, it is everyone needs to qualify academically first. No remedial, no excuses. Fix primary education, and the expense of remediation will be eliminated. Also, the recent increase of mental heath support required at the Universities in recent years is a real drain. Why do the students require more than students 20 or even 10 years ago? Not the Universities mission. That’s for hospitals and other special facilities.</p>
<p>^ I agree too and I think the quantity and the quality of students going to the UC should be re-evaluated.</p>
<p>OlympicLady:</p>
<p>Approximately 50% of ALL Cal State Frosh require remediation in math and/or English. At some campuses it is 90% that require remediation before they can even take a college-level math course. In essence, taxpayers are funding Cal State for students to repeat high school work… dunno what the number is at UC.</p>