Hmm Interesting found this article about Excelsior College

[emichele20]

@ryoder and CMOS- that sounds nice but what about the kids who have parents that are struggling as middle class and cannot afford to pay for them out of pocket or the family who has a husband or wife that want to return to school to finish but cannot due their income. I mean come on. Yes it would be nice if all of us had 100k plus jobs to be able to pay our tuition all the time and the employers paid tuition but that is not the case. Honestly how would you be able to get the job without the education that was financed either by you or your parents??

Standardization would be a solution not complete removal of the system. Our society and nation is built on improving thyself. If you take away the FA it would take away the playing field with equality. You would have the poor always being poor because they cannot afford education and you would have the rich always being rich. Atleast with FA and other gov't programs it allows individuals to keep their head above water and have a fair chance at succeeding.

[sanantone]

A powerful central government, far away from the people it serves can be oppressive. Take a look at the healthcare legislation which forces people to purchase healthcare. This is power that is not granted to the feds anywhere in the constitution.

From wikipedia:

The enumerated powers are a list of items found in Article I, section 8 of the US Constitution that set forth the authoritative capacity of the United States Congress.[1] In summary, Congress may exercise the powers to which it is granted by the Constitution, and subject to explicit restrictions in the Bill of Rights and other protections found in the Constitutional text. The 10th Amendment states that all prerogatives not vested in the federal government nor prohibited of the states are reserved to the states and to the people, which means that the only prerogatives of the Congress (as well as the Executive Branch and the Judicial Branch) are limited to those explicitly stated in the Constitution.

That has nothing to do with what I said, but okay. The constitutionality of federal and state laws are tried all the time, but that has nothing to do with my opinion on the broad language of the Constitution. Because of the way the constitution is worded (necessary and proper clause, regulate interstate commerce), the Constitution can be interpreted to give the federal governmewnt broad powers. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, it's just the way it is. The states have a history of being oppressive too and the federal government has had to step in to protect citizens from the states.

[ryoder]

I paid for my undergrad out of my own pocket. I worked 35 hours per week at $6.50 an hour, shared an apartment with my girlfriend and paid my tuition and books. My parents didn't have enough money to help out with school but they made too much money for me to receive any grants and I am not in a protected class. When my girlfriend took off at my third year of college, I was forced to go into the job market without a degree and was paid not based on my degree or what school I attended but on my ability.

sanatone - I totally understand your interpretation of necessary and proper and the commerce clause and the idea that states are oppressive and the feds are not. This is a very common viewpoint among those who believe in a very powerful federal government and a very powerful world government like a UN on steroids.

I believe that the nucleus of power should be within the individual, the family, the community, the state and finally very limited power should be in the federal government. The founders believed this as well. That is why the term enumerated powers was used in the constitution. They specifically only gave the feds a few powers.

You know there was no federal income tax for many years and despite that, we had schools and transportation and all of those things. It wasn't until the 16th amendment in 1909 that we had a real income tax and it was very low.

This country is not a socialist country so don't be surprised when people balk at the thought of widespread wealth redistribution, high taxes and social programs such as safety nets.

[sanantone]

Where did I say that the states are oppressive and the federal government is not? I said the states can be oppressive too which means in addition to the federal government. That's why our system is set up to have checks and balances not only between the three branches of government, but between the national and state governments. Given the history of oppression in my state, those checks and balances are very much needed. Thank goodness for the supremacy clause and the Supreme Court or I wouldn't even be able to attend certain schools.

[emichele20]

I paid for my undergrad out of my own pocket. I worked 35 hours per week at $6.50 an hour, shared an apartment with my girlfriend and paid my tuition and books. My parents didn't have enough money to help out with school but they made too much money for me to receive any grants and I am not in a protected class. When my girlfriend took off at my third year of college, I was forced to go into the job market without a degree and was paid not based on my degree or what school I attended but on my ability.

sanatone - I totally understand your interpretation of necessary and proper and the commerce clause and the idea that states are oppressive and the feds are not. This is a very common viewpoint among those who believe in a very powerful federal government and a very powerful world government like a UN on steroids.

I believe that the nucleus of power should be within the individual, the family, the community, the state and finally very limited power should be in the federal government. The founders believed this as well. That is why the term enumerated powers was used in the constitution. They specifically only gave the feds a few powers.

You know there was no federal income tax for many years and despite that, we had schools and transportation and all of those things. It wasn't until the 16th amendment in 1909 that we had a real income tax and it was very low.

This country is not a socialist country so don't be surprised when people balk at the thought of widespread wealth redistribution, high taxes and social programs such as safety nets.

okay ryoder no offense but what year was this that you went to school and paid for everything yourself? After I graduated high school in 6/2000, I was working full-time at the airport and attended my local community college around 9/2000. I made about $6.50 as well at the time and my bring home was around $500 or so every two weeks I think. My salary at that time was only enough to pay for my books. There was no way even back then I could afford to pay the 2k tuition on my own per semester for full-time. I used grants that i won the first semester. The next my mom paid out of pocket but I had to reimburse her once she found out I could get veterans benefits from my dad being 100% service connected. Even though with the benefits it was still not enough to cover 1 whole semester. I wish I could have lived on my own or shared an apartment but with me paying my car insurance at $250 per month as a new driver there was no way.

Your situation was very rare. I do not know if you lived in an area where the cost of living was not so expensive but where I grew up and lived it was.

[ryoder]

Here are my numbers.
35*6.5 = roughly $800 a month. I was a computer tech back then. I started out as a computer tech in high school at 17 years old and I could do on site service for people for $35 per hour so I actually put in a few hours here and there and made a good $1K per month.

My rent was $500 a month split two ways so that left me with $750 for food, insurance, fun, clothes, car upgrades etc.
I paid my car off before getting the apartment so I lived at home for part of my first year.

I got my first apartment in Tampa in 1995/1996 and tuition at USF was $55 per credit hour or about $200 a class fully loaded. I took 4 classes per semester at a cost of $1000 or so with tuition and books. I had a 2K per year scholarship through my mom's work so school had a net cost of $0 for me.

All I had to pay for was my own living expenses, gas, insurance, car pmts etc and $1k per month was more than enough to do that. Those were some of the happiest times in my life working, playing, going to the beach, studying and enjoying freedom in the good old USA.

[emichele20]

@ ryoder..wow $55.00 a credit?? I would of have had two degrees lol . honestly I think that it is the location of where you live. The south has always been cheaper cost of living wise when compared to the northern states. I was in PA and my tution was $166.00 per credit hour back then. This is part of the reason we re-located to the south because with our high mortgage, utilities, car notes etc it was just too much. I only wish I relocated when I was younger

[Ace_King]

Dang...1995/1996? I was 5 years old! Wow I feel like a baby. Lol =]

[dcan]

I actually think the Constitution is short and vague in order to give the government broad and flexible powers as a backlash to the Articles of the Confederation. If you want very limited government, look at the Texas constitution which is the longest in the country. The Texas constitution was written to be so restrictive, it needs an amendment for just about everything. We have over 400 amendments and our governor is still one of the weakest of all the states.

Bzzt, wrong. Alabama has the longest in the WORLD.

At 340,136 words, the document is 12 times longer than the average state constitution, 40 times longer than the U.S. Constitution, and is the longest still-operative constitution anywhere in the world.

About 90 percent of the document's length, as of 2011, comes from its 827 amendments. About 70 percent of the amendments cover only a single county or city, and some deal with salaries of specific officials (e.g. Amendment 480 and the Greene County probate judge). This gives Alabama a large number of constitutional officers.

The way it is set up, you need a statewide amendment to raise a salary in a minor town, or to build a school on the other side of the state. Our constitution REQUIRES you to bend a knee to Goat Hill (the legislature) and beg for favors to do ANYTHING in the state.

[dcan]

How many here have seen a for-profit school website indicate they are accredited, only to find out it is an obscure accreditation and nothing that an RA school will accept.

Not only that, but I read of one school that was accredited by an accrediting body in another state. The accrediting body was founded by the president of the one school it accredited...