<p>Or you just cut financial aid. Higher education isn’t a right. You want to go to a top tier school, YOU pay for it. If everyone paid their own tuition, this would never be a problem. I am not saying financial aid is bad, but in a time where we are bankrupt and schools have to consider shutting down etc, the obvious choice is to stop giving away free money.</p>
<p>^ Gotta agree with hijynx on this argument but I know many disagree and I know its controversial. I pay full tuition and get 0 aid. If people want an excellent education system, you gotta pay for it. That means no handouts. The reason why the UC system is now having drastic budget cuts is because they give too many handouts.</p>
<p>Yup, I pay full tuition with no aid nor help from my parents. People always say to me “ZOMG BUT WITHOUT AID I CANT GO!!!” but they just don’t want to take out a full loan. </p>
<p>It’s pretty ridiculous. And the UC system is filled with such p*ssies that they can’t say “sorry guys, cutting back aid for poorer students, time to take loans” and they rather just close down entire schools. Yes, let’s deny education to those who are WILLING to pay so that we don’t have to tell the other kids we won’t pay for them and that they need to take out larger loans.</p>
<p>Despite the fact I think UCR is a dump and a third rate school, I still see no reason to shut it. It serves its purpose. For those who want to attend a UC but could not get into a good UC, it’s suitable (despite I personally rather attend CSUN). So if people wish to pay to attend, they should be able to do so. </p>
<p>I personally think paying for school yourself does a few things: Makes you more appreciative, makes you take it more serious, and teaches you responsibility. God knows I would never risk doing poorly in a class since I don’t want to throw away $3500 in a quarter.</p>
<p>Seriously dude, UCR can’t be that bad lol. I know you wont believe this, but people do choose to go to UCR instead of a “better” UC because they like it more.</p>
<p>well i guess agree with part of hijynx last words, </p>
<p>Lets cut financial aid for the top UC’s such as SD, LA, and berkeley. </p>
<p>If they are truly worth what they claim they are. Then people will not hesitate to pull out loans or dig deep in their pockets. </p>
<p>Although i think we should keep financial aid for the lower UC’s like SB, Riverside, SC, and Merced, simply to encourage people to go there and try to make them a top tier school.</p>
<p>If these three schools are high and mighty, how about they separate themselves from the UC system (sorta) and raise their tuition to 35k or more. Then they can use those new funds to fund their campuses only and not need to deal with the budget cuts the rest of the UCs need to go through.</p>
<p>I agree CALI!</p>
<p>Children of Reagan, do not fear what lies ahead.</p>
<p>what’s with the hating, and did anyone notice the OP put uci as one of the schools to be closed down when it didn’t even mention that in the article</p>
<p>^^Try reading it again</p>
<p>I think it would be very beneficial to close down a couple of the campuses, I also don’t think that it would ever happen. Something needs to be done though or the top UC’s are going to suffer a lot. There’s just not enough money to support the students and all of the UC’s. I hate to say it, but I think Berkley and UCLA will be dragged down because of the lower tier schools, actually IMO they already are.</p>
<p>Wrong, Cali. You don’t have to raise tuition to 35k. It doesn’t help at all if you are giving away the tuition. You could in fact LOWER the tuition of all the UCs if you just got rid of financial aid. If everyone paid their fair share tuition probably would be 30-40% lower.</p>
<p>The downside is people will actually have to take responsibility for their own education and take out loans rather than having someone else pay for them. Fat chance that will ever happen.</p>
<p>California already cut CalGrant by 80% and totally eliminated the Competitive CalGrant, which was a major portion of financial aid.</p>
<p>Are those cuts effecting fall? Because I have a few friends who qualified for 5-9k in money for this upcoming year and they haven’t had any cuts. Also do you have any articles with information about those cuts? I am interested in seeing some more detailed numbers.</p>
<p>ah my bad, misread the article. </p>
<p>Arnold D0uchebagger proposed it, but looks like the package will be saved. Except it’s the staff that will suffer to compensate for the state deficit. But it’s sad nonetheless, the UC system is going down the drain. $2 billion decrease in state funding for higher education, and the UC system cutting additional $800 million or so from the staff salary to make up for the lost budget… sad.</p>
<h2>But I disagree with totally eliminating the financial aid system like you proposed. If the main source of college funding comes from private loan company, there is a potential for a second coming of loan crisis may come, except this time from education loan, not mortgage. If loaning was not the alternative but the only option, there is a higher risk that those loan will not ever be paid back. What happens to the loan company then? They do not even have the benefit of having to do background check on those students, like the home mortgage. Very risky for the company as well as for the economy. </h2>
<p>UC approves pay cuts, furloughs; will honor Cal Grants
Sacramento Business Journal</p>
<p>The University of California said Thursday an estimated 46,000 students who were awarded Cal Grants for the upcoming fall semester will receive them despite the ongoing state budget crisis.</p>
<p>The announcement comes the same day the UC Board of Regents’ approved a plan to enact pay cuts and furloughs to help offset the system’s $813 million budget cut over the next two years. UC employees will see their pay cut 4 percent to 10 percent and will forced to take between 11 and 26 furlough days.</p>
<p>The news was a little bit brighter for students, however.</p>
<p>UC President Mark Yudof said the university will temporarily use funds from short-term accounts to cover the estimated $125 million in Cal Grants for the 2009 fall semester and expects the state will reimburse the university once a state budget is adopted.</p>
<p>“These students, all of whom have financial need, rely on Cal Grants to pay for their fees and cover other expenses such as books and housing,” Yudof said in a news release. “Their ability to enroll at UC should not be endangered by a late state budget.”</p>
<p>hijynx- I mean I agree with you that financial aid should not be so friendly, but I don’t think we are going to ever take away financial aid. It was just wishful thinking perhaps. I think a much more likely scenario would be having higher tuition for “better” UCs. There already is ridiculous competition to get into UCB/UCLA. If we simply raised their tuition, they could support themselves through the budget cuts. </p>
<p>I do agree that financial aid should be decreased. I don’t know all the facts, but it sure sounds like some people get a ton of money when they don’t really need it.</p>
<p>Absurd. Entitlements should be the VERY first thing to go in a budget crisis. Arnold was dead on. The problem is kids seem to think its their right to get free money for school.</p>
<p>How anyone can say “Let’s not cut free money for HIGHER education, but instead not pay people actually doing WORK” is a real d0uchebag. The same people who stimulate our economy and have to put food on the table. </p>
<p>Your notion that if the money all comes from private loans there will be another crisis is a joke. Unlike other loans, student loans can’t be discharged during bankruptcy. That means you WILL pay it back one way or another. Unless you plan to graduate and never get a job. Not likely. Not to mention, the loans are far less than what people take out in mortgages, making them far easier to pay. </p>
<p>Why can’t you just admit that if you want to attend higher education and the state is too poor to pay for it, you should have to pay for it yourself? No one is forcing you to attend. You could easily attend a CSU if you wanted to save money. Or you could work full time and go to school part time and pay as you can afford it. Or even just save up money from working full time for a few years.</p>
<p>Cali - if you raise tuition you are only going to have to give more financial aid to the people who can’t afford it. It will be a wash. </p>
<p>It is wishful thinking to think we would cut financial aid, but in reality the only way to stop a budget crisis is to stop giving away money.</p>
<p>The problem with your thinking is… you seem to think cutting off funding for EDUCATION is the only way to get out of the budget crisis. Why not just raise taxes? If you’ve taken at least an intro. level Econ course, you should know that raising tax isn’t the ultimate shortcut down to hell. sometimes, tax raise is necessary. The problem with the State is that they only think about cutting expenditures but never about raising the revenue. Thanks to our beloved Republican governator.</p>
<p>Oh and do something about the Union. They are worthless and killing the economy right now.</p>
<p>Why is education in caps? You are suggesting we should cut funding from other programs? I agree. I would love to see funding cut from other entitlement programs, but education certainly should be near the top of the list. </p>
<p>And we are talking about a budget crisis in the EDUCATION system. Therefore the logical thing would be to cut free money in the EDUCATION system.</p>
<p>Why not raise taxes? Probably not the smartest idea in a deep recession. For other facets, ok, fine. I don’t really believe in it, but you could make the case for a small raise in taxes to fund actual job creating programs like infrastructure. Taking more money from citizens so 20 year old kids don’t have to take out loans to attend higher education is ridiculous though.</p>
<p>The problem with the state is they only think about raising taxes and never think about cutting entitlement programs. Thanks to our Democrat run legislature.</p>