<p>POIH, no wonder you don’t want to pay any money for the UCs. It’s the “I’ll be damned if I spend any more money on public school system I don’t use.” Makes total sense now. Even Marie Antoinette had more noblesse oblige.</p>
<p>In post #131 LASMA said that they anticipate turning away 400,000 students next year. What percentage of those are Californians, and what percentage are OOS? That is 10% of the population of the entire state according to the census bureau. Does that count the student who applies to more than one school? </p>
<p>If a student applies to 10 California schools, and gets into say 5, then he has 5 rejections. If there are 1,000 students in that position, then you have 5,000 applicants turned away, but not 5,000 students turned away.</p>
<p>The 400,000 students mentioned is 400,000 California residents trying to take classes at their local community college . Not students applying to multiple universities.</p>
<p>^^ I wasn’t clear, silverlady; sorry about that. The California community colleges anticipate turning away 400,000 students next year. The UCs and the CSUs are a whole separate problem.</p>
<p>
[California</a> community colleges: California community colleges to slash enrollment, classes - Los Angeles Times](<a href=“http://articles.latimes.com/2011/mar/31/local/la-me-0331-community-colleges-20110331]California”>California community colleges to slash enrollment, classes) </p>
<p>Here’s a synopsis of the overall situation, and how the problems at each of the 3 systems are impacting the others:
[Editorial:</a> Colleges brace for big cuts - The Reporter](<a href=“http://www.thereporter.com/opinion/ci_17791238]Editorial:”>http://www.thereporter.com/opinion/ci_17791238)</p>
<p>[“Students seeking to transfer to Cal State and the University of California will be denied access, those students unable to get into Cal State and UC and who desperately need to get into a community college will be denied, as well as those who are out of work and are coming to us for retraining,” Scott said. “We will do the best we can, but we will not be serving the needs of students or meeting our education goals.”]</p>
<p>This is a problem around the country but community college costs in our area are a lot higher - $140 to $160 per credit/hour. My read on CCs in our area is that courses can be difficult to get into but that it isn’t impossible to enroll.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Irony is that I’ve been paying taxes for ever without using the public school system. Certainly I don’t want to pay more taxes to allow politicians to spend it without ever thinking about efficiency or cutting the spending.</p>
<p>Many of us pay huge tax bills for all sorts of things we don’t support or use, and public education is certainly one of the LEAST objectionable things I can think of. We also are NOT talking about tax increases— we are talking about extending the taxes we (Californians— I am a 4th generation) are already paying. It is also simplistic to blame the current mess on “politicians don’t think about efficiency or cutting spending”.</p>
<p>I don’t see the positions as contradictory. We all pay taxes for things we don’t use. At the same time if a hundred bucks isn’t getting a vital job done adequately, merely putting a hundred and twenty isn’t a guarantee that anything improves if all that happens is that the people who initially took the hundred now lay claim to the new money and do nothing differently.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You can twist it whatever way you want but if the existing taxes can fix the problem we would not be in this mess to begin with.</p>
<p>Point is taxing won’t fix the problem because problem is inefficiency, un accountability and unnecessary spending. By putting the onus on the user of the system by increasing the tuition the efficiency will bound to increase because if people have to pay more they will demand more efficiency from the system.</p>
<p>How likely is it that the UC tuition will double? :(</p>
<p>^^ That is undetermined right now. It depends on whether the politicians who agree with POIH keep insisting on tax cuts (or more precisely, not extending the taxes already in place. These people want a tax cut and they want students to pay for it).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No more precisely, we want people to decide if they want to pay for their students or let the students pay from their future earnings instead of asking others to pool in to pay for their students.</p>
<p>Keep the big picture in mind. We have to remember that not extending the taxes will not just affect the state universities, cc, and k-12 schools. There will also be cuts that will adversely affect all state agencies from the jails to public works. I agree that cuts are necessary but not with such a sweeping blow that it hurts our state even more.</p>
<p>^^^:First politicians need to start cutting spending then goto voters for extension of taxes. If the politicians shows considerable effort in cutting spending then voters may pass extensions on these taxes. But first I think spending needs to be cut.
As part of reducing deficit the UC’s tuition should increase to at least $18K before the voters vote on extension of the taxes.</p>
<p>LOL ok. I’ll amend: These people want a tax cut and they want students or their families to pay for it. </p>
<p>This is a great example of Marie Antionette Syndrome, which I mentioned earlier.</p>
<p>“No more precisely, we want people to decide if they want to pay for their students or let the students pay from their future earnings instead of asking others to pool in to pay for their students.”</p>
<p>Bingo. I always wonder why people think they deserve a world class education provided for them by others. The cost of getting a great education that will provide healthy future earnings should be borne by the receipient, not the taxpayers who are on the hook for absolutely everything else.</p>
<p>“LOL ok. I’ll amend: These people want a tax cut and they want students or their families to pay for it.”</p>
<p>I’m confused, here. Is saying that you don’t want your taxes to be raised again to pay for others college tuition (to a school that your own kid might not even get into), after paying for their K-12 education also…wanting students or their families to pay for a tax cut? Did I misinterpret that somehow? Isn’t that just wanting the students or their families to pay for their OWN education, instead of continuing another tax on one of the highest taxed states in the nation?</p>
<p>LasMa:post#155</p>
<p>You’re entitled to your opinion but you’ll agree that we don’t want to make USA a communist country. So we would prefer if people pay their share for the services being used. Education is subsidized but to the extent that it doesn’t hurt other services or people. I think the priority should be to save K - 12, Community Colleges, and CSU in that order.</p>
<p>UCs are research universities and should not be an unnecessary burden on the tax collection. It is getting enough subsidies now time has come to fix the rest of the issues with increasing tuition instead of increasing taxes</p>
<p>Well POIH, I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree (as we usually do 
). I appreciate that you are always civil.</p>
<p>Another local to chime in that…Governor Brown is proposing NOTHING to rein in the excessive state level spending in California. I am not impressed with his ideas. This state government has not been responsible with taxpayers’ money for a long time.
I don’t like UC system being used as a threat or bargaining chip. A modest increase in fees at UCs makes sense to me, but not doubling.
Meantime, look at all the state level commissions and bloated public education system in CA - LOTS of fat to cut.</p>