Supply and...

[Lewkowski]

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-signs-st...192938653.html

"The cost of college remains extraordinarily high. It's out of reach for a lot of folks," Obama said, calling it a burden as well on families who have to balance other priorities, like buying a home, with helping fund their children's educations. "We've got to do something about it."

Hey Mr. President - what happens when you get more people wanting to get into college? What happens when you make it easier to borrow money to get into college? Oh you increase Demand - which raises costs. Nifty little circle ain't it? Oh and guess what. The more people who get degrees the less impact they have which means... tomorrows Master's degree is today's Bachelors. Yaaaaay more time to indoctrinate lazy college students into liberalism.

The rising cost of college has everything to do with the ridiculous expectation that everyone should go to college.

[Lebanese Dragon]

tomorrows Master's degree is today's Bachelors. Yaaaaay more time to indoctrinate lazy college students into liberalism.

I love this line, this actually support the superiority of liberalism and the insignificance of conservatism. It's like saying hurray educated tend to be liberal, and less educated tend to be conservative.

[GGT]

"The legislation links student loan interest rates to the financial markets. It offers lower rates this fall because the government can borrow money cheaply at this time. If the economy improves in the coming years as expected, it will become more costly for the government to borrow money, and that cost would be passed on to students."

Since banks can borrow fed money with near-zero interest rates, locking in low-interest rates for student loans isn't much different than low-interest mortgage rates or small business loans. Sounds fair enough in that context, especially since students can't discharge that debt in bankruptcy like banks, businesses, or homeowners can.

[Asmodian]

The more people who get degrees the less impact they have which means... tomorrows Master's degree is today's Bachelors.

Yes, and before being able to read and write was considered the equivalent of masters degree, now this ability has been clearly devalued and it totally supports your point that by limiting access to education we preserve its value to the individual but are you sure society as whole does not benefit.

[Veldan Rath]

I love this line, this actually support the superiority of liberalism and the insignificance of conservatism. It's like saying hurray educated tend to be liberal, and less educated tend to be conservative.

If read on the surface, yes. But you know better, right?

[Lebanese Dragon]

If read on the surface, yes. But you know better, right?

I'm a liberal, but I have no problem with the basic premises of conservatism. I have a problem with the actual party itself: In my mind a conservative would support:

1. Gay marriage- Why because this support personal freedoms. Gay marriage violates no one's rights, yet let's us be more free.

2. They would accept Global Warming, they would welcome the rise of alternative energy sources- The first is a scientific fact (but since they get supported by the oil companies who tend to lose because of this fact they are put in a position they don't want to be in), the second is the natural evolution of society, and is just the free market at work, filling the void that tomorrow's problems bring, It's like being mad at someone for inventing a car that travels using less fuel, it's just progress. (but because of their ties to the oil companies they are against it).

3. I do understand though they're lack of a support for universal health care, and various subsidies. They don't want to add to our nations debt, they want people to compete fairly without government backing, don't want to create market distortion which we have to artificially maintain against the pressure of the market itself. I'm fine with this stance. I personally support some of these investments because I think the trade off is wroth it (if done right), but on these points I'm fine.

As other have said before me, because of how the conservatives raise revenues they are forced to deny reality on many important issues.

[Enoch the Red]

I'm a liberal, but I have no problem with the basic premises of conservatism. I have a problem with the actual party itself: In my mind a conservative would support:

1. Gay marriage- Why because this support personal freedoms. Gay marriage violates no one's rights, yet let's us be more free.

2. They would accept Global Warming, they would welcome the rise of alternative energy sources- The first is a scientific fact (but since they get supported by the oil companies who tend to lose because of this fact they are put in a position they don't want to be in), the second is the natural evolution of society, and is just the free market at work, filling the void that tomorrow's problems bring, It's like being mad at someone for inventing a car that travels using less fuel, it's just progress. (but because of their ties to the oil companies they are against it).

3. I do understand though they're lack of a support for universal health care, and various subsidies. They don't want to add to our nations debt, they want people to compete fairly without government backing, don't want to create market distortion which we have to artificially maintain against the pressure of the market itself. I'm fine with this stance. I personally support some of these investments because I think the trade off is wroth it (if done right), but on these points I'm fine.

As other have said before me, because of how the conservatives raise revenues they are forced to deny reality on many important issues.

I don't think conservatism means what you think it means.

[earthJoker]

Isn't conservative (from to conserve - to keep) just the protection of the status quo, no matter what that is.

[Veldan Rath]

LD, you totally missed the point. Lewk is not saying that getting a higher education makes you liberal. It's the educators and their bias. If that is all you get for 4 plus years in the final stages of your development, you might just turn out that way....

[Loki]

Studies on the subject suggest otherwise (i.e. professors are really left-wing, but this doesn't make students more left-wing).

[Veldan Rath]

That may be true, but it was the point Lewk was making that LD was missing.

[Lebanese Dragon]

That may be true, but it was the point Lewk was making that LD was missing.

Whether he realizes it or not, or you for that matter. The claim is that professors (highly educated people) are generally liberal. I think becoming informed will naturally make you liberal, and realize the status quo is not all that important. Wearing pants, or skirts, or if this band is popular or that band, all in all doesn't matter. Or if a person has a different culture than you. Most of that you become more open to through being educated, and realizing logically the differences on many fronts are obsolete. I think if people looked at the world objectively the majority of them would be liberal, and the minority conservative. The more educated of populace we have the more liberal our country will become, a lot of conservatism comes from ignorance/fear of what we don't know.


So, why are there ANY smart people who are also conservative?? there are 2 primary reasons for this:

1. They thought about the issues and came to the conclusion that the tried and true traditional methods are best for the country.

2. They didn't apply their intellect to issues and are merely a mirror of the theirs parents, and simply never out-grew that stage in their life (which is hard, grown adults become indoctrinated, I don't necessarily fault them for this.) If everyone around me was an obama-hater, and really conservative it'd be hard for me to have my own pure thoughts to form a real answer to the question. I think #2 is the main reason most liberals say they are liberal, and the main reason most conservatives are say they're conservative (that's how you were raised.). If you have a different philosophy than those immediately around you, at the minimum you can say you're an independent thinker. If you often think alike with your family/close surroundings then you as most human are genetically prone to be are a follower/attempting to fit in your social paradigm. This is the real reason there exists die-hard liberals, and die-hard conservatives (which by conservatives i refer to Republicans).

It's human nature to conform. Why is everyone that is born in India Hindu? Or everyone born in the States a Christian, even very smart people. It's not that they applied their critical thinking skills, and said yes I want to be a Christian, or Yes I want to a Republican. Some did do just that, but the MAJORITY just conforms to how they were raised, to what every input of society is telling them is the case.

I think being more educated, if you apply that education, which to some degree every college person will, will tend to liberalize you, simply because you will be exposed to more options, more ways of thinking about things, and some of them you will realize will work just fine, even though your current society is opposed to the change or doesn't do it that way.

[Veldan Rath]

Wow, do you know how insulting that was?

How about, some of the liberal professors, if they stepped into the real world would fall flat on their face if they tried to make a living with all us idiots, and are only secure being in their jobs due to being protected by tenure?

[Lebanese Dragon]

Wow, do you know how insulting that was?

How about, some of the liberal professors, if they stepped into the real world would fall flat on their face if they tried to make a living with all us idiots, and are only secure being in their jobs due to being protected by tenure?

I apologize, and I do realize it's a bit insulting. Even as I type it, I'm like "I sound like a dick here". However, a part of me thinks this is the only way to get through to some people, is to shock them with strong wording. Another part of me thinks what I'm typing makes sense so why sugar coat it up. Honestly, if i was talking to open minded people, and not say Lewk, my wording would be MUCH different. My argument would be essentially the same.

Using the definition of Conservative as someone not wanting change:
1. Conservatives support the Status Quo
2. Learning new ideas will inevitably lead to finding at least one improvement on the status quo, thus making you more liberal than how you were raised.
3. Conclusion education tends to liberalize people.

Using the definition of Conservative as in a Republican:
I also think education would make them more liberal because they'd begin to see that Global Warming is real, that gay marriage is clearly a must. Also that there's nothing sacred about tradition, it can be wrong, it can be improved upon, and it was at one time invented, and many times changed.


It'd be rare for you to do a lot of research and then just realize everything you were doing before was absolutely right and the best way to do things. Perhaps some ideas will not be changed, but some others will.

College doesn't just liberalize through becoming educated, it liberalizes you because you come in contact with sooo many different cultures, belief systems, and PoVs that in order to evaluate them on their merits, and to interact with these people a compromise/balance of values is forced, and you begin to become open-minded. Open-mindedness is the first key to discovering yourself, and to discovering anything that could be called "true" in the world.

In short, interacting with new ideas liberalizes you, I don't think that's a hard claim to support or follow. That's exactly what college is, or even moving to a new town could have some liberalizing effects.

[Lewkowski]

Yes, and before being able to read and write was considered the equivalent of masters degree, now this ability has been clearly devalued and it totally supports your point that by limiting access to education we preserve its value to the individual but are you sure society as whole does not benefit.

I'd argue that much of college is wasted learning non-important skills or NOT LEARNING at all. I went to a public university - passing required a pulse. I'm positive other fields and other colleges were different but a huge portion of students going to college go to public or community colleges. And again - pulse = degree.

[Veldan Rath]

Yet Loki points out that is not actually the case.

A conservative that goes to college comes out an educated conservative.

I'm a social liberal, yet a fiscal conservative...care to square that circle?

[sheadunne]

I'd argue that much of college is wasted learning non-important skills or NOT LEARNING at all. I went to a public university - passing required a pulse. I'm positive other fields and other colleges were different but a huge portion of students going to college go to public or community colleges. And again - pulse = degree.

Yet I've failed many a student. Maybe you're just smarter than you give yourself credit for.

[Veldan Rath]

That's cause you like inflicting emotional distress.

[sheadunne]

That's cause you like inflicting emotional distress.

I do what I can.

[Lebanese Dragon]

Yet Loki points out that is not actually the case.

A conservative that goes to college comes out an educated conservative.

I'm a social liberal, yet a fiscal conservative...care to square that circle?

I think you misunderstand what i'm saying. I'm not saying most Republicans/Conservatives graduate and become Democrats/Liberals. I agree that most conservatives go in-come out conservative, but I'd still say more than likely if you did a pre and post graduation survey many of their answers will come out to be more liberal, especially on the social side of things. Even if they still identify with the Republican party.

I'd even go so far as to claim that the reason many don't become even more liberal than that is that it is VERY hard to change core beliefs of people, beliefs that people define they're identity by. This can cause a lot of emotional turmoil in a person, and often you'll find people compartmentalize their beliefs just to avoid this trauma, your brain does it on it's own. This is why so many Christians just shut-down when you get into a debate on Evolution, the brain is shutting down to avoid this emotional turbulence, this inconsistency that is causing them to define themselves in an unpleasant way. The same is true for politics.

[Lewkowski]

Yet Loki points out that is not actually the case.

A conservative that goes to college comes out an educated conservative.

I'm a social liberal, yet a fiscal conservative...care to square that circle?

Sure - the Right / Left diagram for politics is stupid. Politics should be based on the Liberty vs. Government spectrum. Currently there are "conservatives" that want moral legislation. Currently there are "liberals" who want the government out of their lives. Ultimately the Republicans and Democrats will morph from the crazy split personality nature they have now. Its always puzzled me why someone who is generally suspicious of big government wants to hand that same government MORE power. (I'm referring to Republicans being opposed to drugs, prostitution and gambling).

Also while people who identify themselves as conservative may remain conservative - many people have yet to form a specific political belief system when they hit college. Food for thought - as a larger percentage of the population goes to college has the size of government increased or decreased? Its increased - dramatically. We may be still split roughly 45-45 across the country but the country as a whole has taken a huge turn to the left.

[GGT]

I don't think conservatism means what you <Lebbie> think it means.

Isn't conservative (from to conserve - to keep) just the protection of the status quo, no matter what that is.

And then we have Lewk's definition of conservative, which begins with the premise that "government is bad", and falls into some Alice in Wonderland tunnel where size is the most important metric for function.

"Conservative" has become a confusing and conflated term in American politics. It's no wonder that so many great debates end in people 'picking sides', as if "Liberal" and "Conservative" are polar opposites (which they're not). Party affiliation plays on that, with the desire to simplify complicated and complex issues, along party lines.

I think there's an activist (and well-funded) sub-group within the (R) party that wants to tap into (ie, exploit) the Tea Party / Patriot / Libertarian sentiments, along with Evangelical Christian / Faith and Family / Moral Majority groups....that has a Neo-Confederate ideology.

[Aimless]

Sure - the Right / Left diagram for politics is stupid. Politics should be based on the Liberty vs. Government spectrum. Currently there are "conservatives" that want moral legislation. Currently there are "liberals" who want the government out of their lives. Ultimately the Republicans and Democrats will morph from the crazy split personality nature they have now. Its always puzzled me why someone who is generally suspicious of big government wants to hand that same government MORE power. (I'm referring to Republicans being opposed to drugs, prostitution and gambling).

Also while people who identify themselves as conservative may remain conservative - many people have yet to form a specific political belief system when they hit college. Food for thought - as a larger percentage of the population goes to college has the size of government increased or decreased? Its increased - dramatically. We may be still split roughly 45-45 across the country but the country as a whole has taken a huge turn to the left.

It may help you to recognize that for most people castle-in-the-sky moral systems come second to an almost irrational desire to live and participate in a society that isn't a total shithole of crime, violence, poverty and suffering. So they vote in ways that they believe might give them the society they think they want while single-issue people such as yourself try your best to preserve the personality you constructed for yourself in highschool. Frankly I'm not surprised to learn you're puzzled by real people even though i know that if the government ever gave you someone else's money you'd grab it with two greasy salty hands and never let go

[Lewkowski]

It may help you to recognize that for most people castle-in-the-sky moral systems come second to an almost irrational desire to live and participate in a society that isn't a total shithole of crime, violence, poverty and suffering. So they vote in ways that they believe might give them the society they think they want while single-issue people such as yourself try your best to preserve the personality you constructed for yourself in highschool. Frankly I'm not surprised to learn you're puzzled by real people even though i know that if the government ever gave you someone else's money you'd grab it with two greasy salty hands and never let go

Detroit.

[Aimless]

Detroit.

Sure, but the question had to do with your puzzlement by the motives of normal people, not about the fate of a mismanaged American city.

[Veldan Rath]

Real/Normal people eh? These same people you put forward voted themselves into oblivion in above said city and got the results they were trying to avoid. Thus it has to be part of the question.

[Wraith]

Isn't conservative (from to conserve - to keep) just the protection of the status quo, no matter what that is.

No. The meanings have evolved since they were first applied a couple centuries ago.

[Loki]

The meaning of political ideologies vary across time and space. The term liberal in particular has a million mutually exclusive meanings. Conservatism does tend to include resistance to change, but the specifics vary.

[Aimless]

Real/Normal people eh? These same people you put forward voted themselves into oblivion in above said city and got the results they were trying to avoid. Thus it has to be part of the question.

That sounds like an oversimplification of the decline of Detroit

[Veldan Rath]

That sounds like an oversimplification of the decline of Detroit

Mayhap, but you can bet it was a contributing factor.