Didn't Conservatives staple teabags to their faces because of this very thing?

[LV426]

But you could still save hundreds of millions by cutting off all those Pell Grants to people who have no intention of attending class

OK, so how do you find out who those people are?

You'd have to expand the program to include an enforcement division, and that would require more spending.

Also, this feels like a judgy, personal thing for you...like that you were lazy as fuck in class and think of yourself as undeserving of whatever you might have achieved or was handed.

I notice you do that quite a lot; you project your own weaknesses on others.

Wouldn't it be far easier, and cheaper, and less draconian to just make all public colleges free like they do in most other countries?

 

[Flash]

I also don't understand the argument; so because some level of fraud exists, we should just get rid of both programs?

Do you...do you know how much fraud exists in the private sector?

You don't read and make up stuff. I never said get rid of the programs, I said reform the way they operate so eliminate much of the fraud and waste. That would even give more to the people who really need it. Government funds based on numbers, so it is in their interest to spend as much as possible.

I have no doubt there is fraud in the private sector--much of the fraud comes from their contracts with federal programs because government is so lax in overseeing these programs. Much of the rebuilding in Afghanistan and Iraq is shoddy, never completed, dangerous, etc. The Inspector General in charge of auditing these programs said he asked the military people why this happens and they say they are evaluated based on how many contracts they hand out, not whether they are ever completed.

But I am free not to do business with private firms who engage in fraud or activities I don't like.

 

[LV426]

My plan is more practical than tuition free public colleges

No it's not, because your "plan" would require an enforcement agency that would have to be funded with more spending to find out who the Pell Grant recipients are who don't attend class.

Personally, I don't think you'd find any. Because Pell Grants aren't just handed out willy-nilly, you have to qualify for them and maintain good grades to keep them, filling out the application each year.

So this is really more of your inexperience showing, Flash.

 

[Flash]

WTF are you talking about?

Do you think people don't go to class because they get Pell Grants?

WTF?

You are clueless.

I did not say people don't go to class because they get Pell Grands (READ). I said there are many people who get Pell Grants who never attend class, quit attending, or never do any work to pass a class.

I spent 40 years in higher ed and had 1-3 students in every class of about 30-35 who never attended the entire semester. There were many reasons, but the majority of them received a grant and had picked up their residual cash and never returned. They started taking out the tuition money before giving them the grant because some never paid their tuition.

You are clueless about how these programs actually work. Many people are greedy, whether in government or the private sector, and will do whatever maximizes their salary, position, status. Small colleges can attract thousands of students by offering very easy online classes. Students get easy, quick, credits and colleges get a lot of money.

 

[LV426]

I said reform the way they operate so eliminate much of the fraud and waste.

OMG, why did no one else think of that? Simply reform the system with magic and everything will be hunkey-dorey!

But wait a second - you mean they did with the ACA and that's why there's the change to Medicare reimbursement that saves us $700B in Medicare spending?

Oh, you mean Flash doesn't know about that or forgot about it?

Shocking.

The problem with saying you can wave a magic wand and eliminate the fraud and waste is that you don't know what "fraud" and "waste" there actually is.

The ACA reformed Medicare significantly that reduced waste in Medicare spending while improving outcomes, for example.

 

[LV426]

I have no doubt there is fraud in the private sector--much of the fraud comes from their contracts with federal programs because government is so lax in overseeing these programs.

So you're saying enforcement by the government is lax...gee, I wonder why that is...could it be that cuts to government spending programs end up affecting their operational capacity, which creates room for waste, fraud, and abuse to thrive!?

Your solution is to...cut spending.

Brilliant.

 

[Flash]

OMG, why did no one else think of that? Simply reform the system with magic and everything will be hunkey-dorey!

But wait a second - you mean they did with the ACA and that's why there's the change to Medicare reimbursement that saves us $700B in Medicare spending?

No, the way Bill Clinton did with welfare reform. Fund government based on how many people they get off welfare and into jobs rather than how many people they can get on welfare. Welfare rolls dropped by 50%.

 

[LV426]

Much of the rebuilding in Afghanistan and Iraq is shoddy, never completed, dangerous, etc. The Inspector General in charge of auditing these programs said he asked the military people why this happens and they say they are evaluated based on how many contracts they hand out, not whether they are ever completed.

Ummm...it's 2019.

Those things happened 15 years ago and they're only getting to it NOW?

Obamacare tackled the fraud and waste abuse in Medicare by changing how providers were reimbursed for care.

Here's an example of how the ACA did that:

Prior to the ACA, if you're a senior and you went in for -let's say- a gallbladder removal and while in recovery, you developed a staph infection, Medicare would pay for the gallbladder removal and the staph infection. Post-ACA, Medicare will only pay for the gallbladder removal and it's on the provider to eat the cost of the staph infection because it's a condition that arose from poor treatment by the provider.

So the ACA shifted to an outcome-based reimbursement model which saves us over $700B in Medicare spending, and forces providers to improve outcomes.

 

[LV426]

I did not say people don't go to class because they get Pell Grands (READ). I said there are many people who get Pell Grants who never attend class, quit attending, or never do any work to pass a class

How do you know that? Please don't say it's anecdotal.

I spent 40 years in higher ed and had 1-3 students in every class of about 30-35 who never attended the entire semester.

And you went for the anecdote.

Why do you do that?

Why is your compulsion to lean on things you know can never be verified?

There were many reasons, but the majority of them received a grant and had picked up their residual cash and never returned.

How would you have known that as their professor?

As their professor, you had access to their financial aid records?

I think you're exaggerating here. Or you're making it up. I don't buy it.

They started taking out the tuition money before giving them the grant because some never paid their tuition.

Well, your inexperience is showing because every year, Pell Grant recipients have to re-apply for their Pell Grants. The process includes having to submit your grades, and the university submits attendance records or anything that might be pertinent to the decision. We know this because it's on the freaking website under applications and "how do I maintain my grant".

So I think you're bullshitting me.

I don't believe you had any idea which students in your class got Pell Grants and which didn't.

I think you are exaggerating and falsifying your claims because you cannot do so with evidence that can be verified and confirmed.

Weak fucking sauce, bad faith, Flash.

 

[LV426]

No, the way Bill Clinton did with welfare reform

All the welfare reform of the 90's did was change the distribution to block grants.

Block grants that red states use a portion of to close their budget deficits that come from their artificially low tax rates.

So most all red states literally use welfare to close their budgets, which would make them all welfare states.

That's your solution to health care?

Fund government based on how many people they get off welfare and into jobs rather than how many people they can get on welfare. Welfare rolls dropped by 50%.

Welfare rolls dropped because fewer people qualified for it because they changed the qualifications for it.

So you cut welfare, but then what happened next decade? OH RIGHT, PERSONAL SAVINGS DROPPED AND HOUSEHOLD DEBT INCREASED.

So by cutting welfare, you placed more out-of-pocket burdens on people, which forced them to borrow more and/or dip into the equity of their homes.

And BTW - Conservatives are still whining about welfare today, which means the welfare reform of the 90's accomplished exactly nothing other than propping up failed right-wing states who rely on federal welfare block grants to close their budget deficits...just like Jesus and Reagan intended, right?

 

[Flash]

No it's not, because your "plan" would require an enforcement agency that would have to be funded with more spending to find out who the Pell Grant recipients are who don't attend class.

Personally, I don't think you'd find any. Because Pell Grants aren't just handed out willy-nilly, you have to qualify for them and maintain good grades to keep them, filling out the application each year.

So this is really more of your inexperience showing, Flash.

You would not need an enforcement agency. The instructor turns in the names of students who never attended and the school requires the grant be repaid before the student can re-enroll.

I was almost as naive as you are when I started. The maintain good grades rule said the student could continue to receive grants if he was eligible to re-enroll in that school. So the schools simply allowed the student to enroll every semester. Few students actually "flunk out" of many colleges because the dean or vp is allowed to allow that student to enroll by putting them on probation.

Then, the government got smart (See, it is not that hard to reform) and said they had to have a C average. If the student did not keep a C, there are rules allowing end-runs around that rule also---the student changed majors. But, the easiest way was to put pressure on faculty to be easy and give everyone at least a C.

There are some things that don't always operate the way they appear on the surface. And the private, for-profit schools are a whole other subject that DeVoss just made worse by removing some of Obama's regulations.

 

[Flash]

All the welfare reform of the 90's did was change the distribution to block grants.

Block grants that red states use a portion of to close their budget deficits that come from their artificially low tax rates.

So most all red states literally use welfare to close their budgets, which would make them all welfare states.

That's your solution to health care?




Welfare rolls dropped because fewer people qualified for it because they changed the qualifications for it.

So you cut welfare, but then what happened next decade? OH RIGHT, PERSONAL SAVINGS DROPPED AND HOUSEHOLD DEBT INCREASED.

So by cutting welfare, you placed more out-of-pocket burdens on people, which forced them to borrow more and/or dip into the equity of their homes.

And BTW - Conservatives are still whining about welfare today, which means the welfare reform of the 90's accomplished exactly nothing other than propping up failed right-wing states who rely on federal welfare block grants to close their budget deficits...just like Jesus and Reagan intended, right?

See my point--sometimes government programs don't work the way intended or they work inefficiently. You mean people on welfare had savings accounts?

 

[LV426]

You would not need an enforcement agency. The instructor turns in the names of students who never attended and the school requires the grant be repaid before the student can re-enroll.

Don't professors already submit attendance records?

Mine all did.

Also, how would a professor know who gets Pell Grants and who doesn't? Professors wouldn't know that stuff, but those in the Financial Aid or Registrar's office might. So you'd have to set up some liason or process with every single school to rout attendance information to the Pell Grant administrators even though applicants have to do that every year.

I was almost as naive as you are when I started. The maintain good grades rule said the student could continue to receive grants if he was eligible to re-enroll in that school. So the schools simply allowed the student to enroll every semester. Few students actually "flunk out" of many colleges because the dean or vp is allowed to allow that student to enroll by putting them on probation.

OK, but "flunking out" is different from "intentional truancy".

Also, this has nothing to do with the fact that Pell Grants were frozen from 2003-2006, despite tuition costs rising about 3% per year.

So...if your Pell Grant stays the same, yet your tuition cost rises 3% each year, then that means what? That you have to pay more out of pocket or borrow more to afford tuition.

So it gets back to precisely what I was saying before; that rising costs and stifled federal spending force people to dip into their savings and/or home equity, just like we saw during Bush the Dumber.

 

[LV426]

See my point--sometimes government programs don't work the way intended or they work inefficiently. You mean people on welfare had savings accounts?

Hold on a second, because Welfare Reform of the 90's is working exactly the way Conservatives intended; by subsidizing artificially low taxes in bottom-feeding red states at the expense of the poor and needy who rely on those programs so they don't have to go into debt or liquidate their savings.

And yes, people on welfare did have savings accounts. You can still save money and be on welfare. Welfare qualifications were broader, but were then narrowed by the reform which allowed individual states to create their own qualifications. What did red states do? Raise those qualifications as much as possible so they could keep more of that sweet welfare block grant money to subsidize their low taxes.

Every single red state is guilty of doing that.

Every. Single. One.

Every single red state is a welfare state. All of them. No exceptions.

 

[Flash]

How do you know that? Please don't say it's anecdotal.

And you went for the anecdote.

Why do you do that?

Why is your compulsion to lean on things you know can never be verified?

How would you have known that as their professor?

As their professor, you had access to their financial aid records?

I think you're exaggerating here. Or you're making it up. I don't buy it.


Well, your inexperience is showing because every year, Pell Grant recipients have to re-apply for their Pell Grants. The process includes having to submit your grades, and the university submits attendance records or anything that might be pertinent to the decision. We know this because it's on the freaking website under applications and "how do I maintain my grant".

So I think you're bullshitting me.

I don't believe you had any idea which students in your class got Pell Grants and which didn't.

I think you are exaggerating and falsifying your claims because you cannot do so with evidence that can be verified and confirmed.

Weak fucking sauce, bad faith, Flash.

You think they keep records of student attendance and Pell Grants? It is not anecdotal when it is direct observation and the same experience with every other faculty member.
Universities do not keep attendance records and many professors, especially in large classes, never take attendance.

As usual, you ignore the real topic and attack the person providing the information and show how naive you are by telling me what the website says. It is not going to list all the exceptions and how those rules are sometimes ignored or loosely applied.

When a student never attended or quit attending, I liked to drop them so they would not fail the class. Sometimes I would call financial aid to check on them and they would tell me the student had picked up their check. Other times I had to sign an attendance sheet for students receiving child care funding and they had to be on a grant to qualify. Sometimes students would try to talk me into a higher grade so they could keep getting their grant.

Bad faith is claiming a person is lying when you have nothing to contribute about a subject you know nothing about. You can't stand to admit a federal program has waste or cheating. I could give you even worse examples about federal job training programs or congressional pork projects I was involved in. The point is that we could cut a lot of federal spending without hurting a person who really needs it.

 

[Flash]

Hold on a second, because Welfare Reform of the 90's is working exactly the way Conservatives intended; by subsidizing artificially low taxes in bottom-feeding red states at the expense of the poor and needy who rely on those programs so they don't have to go into debt or liquidate their savings.

And yes, people on welfare did have savings accounts. You can still save money and be on welfare. Welfare qualifications were broader, but were then narrowed by the reform which allowed individual states to create their own qualifications. What did red states do? Raise those qualifications as much as possible so they could keep more of that sweet welfare block grant money to subsidize their low taxes.

Every single red state is guilty of doing that.

Every. Single. One.

Every single red state is a welfare state. All of them. No exceptions.

Sounds like a good argument to gut that program. We don't want those red states getting our taxes.

 

[LV426]

You think they keep records of student attendance and Pell Grants?

I don't think professors do.

I don't think you did.

I think you were making assumptions of your students and/or exaggerating to make a point on this thread.

 

[LV426]

It is not anecdotal when it is direct observation and the same experience with every other faculty member

This is an anecdote.

And furthermore, how the fuck would you know which students in your class got Pell Grants?

I've never heard of a professor ever getting financial aid info on their students. Never. In fact, that information is highly confidential. I don't even think the Dean can get that info.

So something in your story here is fishy.

 

[LV426]

As usual, you ignore the real topic and attack the person providing the information

By questioning the sincerity and truthfulness?

You are the one who said you knew what students in your class got Pell Grants and which didn't.

But you couldn't have known that information unless the students told you, or someone in the Financial Aid office violated those students' confidentiality just for you.

I have a real hard time accepting anecdotal bullshit as evidence of anything other than continued bad faith and lying on your part.

By questioning your qualifications and anecdotes, I'm attacking you?

Maybe stop bullshitting me, that way you can feel less attacked when I question your bullshit.

 

[LV426]

When a student never attended or quit attending, I liked to drop them so they would not fail the class. Sometimes I would call financial aid to check on them and they would tell me the student had picked up their check.

BULLSHIT.

How would you have known what students were picking up checks to call Financial Aid and ask?

This is all bullshit.

You're fucking lying to me, aren't you?

Man, that pisses me off.

It pisses me off that you think you're more clever than me, and that you can lie and bullshit your way through a thread because you lack any actual, real support of your nonsense.

This thread was about how tax cuts cause deficits which cause less spending...and Pell Grant spending was frozen for four consecutive years during Bush the Dumber, the same period of time that saw massive increases to household debt and massive declines to personal savings.