Yep, I'm starting another generational thread

[naginiF]

I truly hate how the word "assimilation" has come to invoke feelings of something sinister.  Assimilation is supposed to be about creating, growing and improving society, not loss of freedom, dignity, civil liberty or self-worth.  Unfortunately, I believe it was the third reich who coined using the former to justify the latter, and so today the popular reaction is a knee-jerk to oppose assimilation at all costs, something that seems like a good idea until the established society (read: not people) starts to push back, thereby forcing a perpetuation of the aforementioned connotation.

And in a day and age where everything is highly politicized, you're either pro-assimilation or anti-assimilation, both of which carry dire consequences.  And if you believe that the answer lies somewhere in the middle, the pervasive "with us or against us" mentality means you're hated by all.

Dichotomy kills democracy.

I'm with you on the contortion of the word 'assimilation' both sides are enriched through natural assimilation.  So what do we call forced/systemic assimilation like the Dutch are implementing?  'programming' immigrants?  extreme nationalism?  political tribalism?

[WarriorDad]

Where has trickle down worked?

Supply Side economics has worked in the USA and in other countries. It has also failed in the USA and other countries. The same can be said about Keynesian policies, failures and successes.  Having economists agree on anything is akin to herding cats, or watching Supreme Court justices all come together. 

It usually comes down to interpretation and how much success one promises vs delivering.    If a person receives a tax break and more money as a result, they have only several options.  Put it in the bank  or keep in your pocket where it does very little.  Invest it, which is usually a long term potential benefit where any benefits won't be known for some time.  Spend it, which does boost the economy as inventories are depleted, more products made to fill inventories, keep jobs to make those products.  Typically what has happened is the very rich invest or pocket it, because they already have money to dispose of.  Trickle down from the rich is small.  For the middle class and poor, that is usually not the case, as they will either spend or invest, one having a bigger impact short term than the other.

The challenge, which supply siders usually fail in, is there growth from cuts do not reach their promises.  There is growth, but not enough growth.  In some years tax receipts do great, but too often they don't. That's the other side of the equation, you can't be a supply sider and not also cut spending, or you are screwed.

Keynesians make the opposite mistake.  Raising taxes and raising spending, eventually the tipping point is reach, jobs are cut, corporations go overseas to lower tax havens.

[MU82]

What, you think the guy that claims to do everything, know everyone, and be everywhere is perhaps a complete fraud?

9-9-9 is make-believe? Who'da thunk it?[/list]

[Herman Cain]

9-9-9 is make-believe? Who'da thunk it?[/list]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPTq9ki_oAs

[naginiF]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPTq9ki_oAs

So........an east coast elitist sexual predator?  Gotta give you props, you nail that persona.[/list]

[Benny B]

I'm with you on the contortion of the word 'assimilation' both sides are enriched through natural assimilation.  So what do we call forced/systemic assimilation like the Dutch are implementing?  'programming' immigrants?  extreme nationalism?  political tribalism?

Wow... this goes a lot deeper than I realized.  Not only is Denmark indoctrinating a bunch of immigrants to Danish culture, but the Danes' strings are being pulled by shadow actors in The Netherlands.  Which begs the question... what does Amsterdam want with Copenhagen? 

Perhaps they want to assimilate Holland into Scandinavia.  Nevertheless, it looks like Germany is going to get caught in the middle of this... but far be it for Germany to complain about involuntarily being wrapped up in somebody else's proxy war.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

I'm looking forward to my visit to Copenhagen this summer.

[Benny B]

I'm looking forward to my visit to Copenhagen this summer.

Say hi to the Dutch while you're there.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

Say hi to the Dutch while you're there.

A visit to Amsterdam 20+ years prompted a concern with the Dutch among my friends.  The word "Dag"means hello and goodbye.  We figured the Beatles song was confusing when translated, "You say Dag, and I say Dag, Dag, Dag...."

[naginiF]

Wow... this goes a lot deeper than I realized.  Not only is Denmark indoctrinating a bunch of immigrants to Danish culture, but the Danes' strings are being pulled by shadow actors in The Netherlands.  Which begs the question... what does Amsterdam want with Copenhagen? 

Perhaps they want to assimilate Holland into Scandinavia.  Nevertheless, it looks like Germany is going to get caught in the middle of this... but far be it for Germany to complain about involuntarily being wrapped up in somebody else's proxy war.

I'm torn between which reply i should post, so i'll give you three options:

#1)  i was hoping the time stamp from my reply would allow me to believe i was drinking.  Nope, just an idiot.
#2)  meh, they all look alike to me.  and,
#3)  you know nothing-you are nothing but a partisan hack trying to demean those who see the world different than you.

[Benny B]

I'm torn between which reply i should post, so i'll give you three options:

#1)  i was hoping the time stamp from my reply would allow me to believe i was drinking.  Nope, just an idiot.
#2)  meh, they all look alike to me.  and,
#3)  you know nothing-you are nothing but a partisan hack trying to demean those who see the world different than you.

1) "I was drinking when I posted" is the Internet equivalent of "my dog ate my homework."
2) Not really sure that's an appropriate response.  Maybe you are drinking.
3) Evidently, you are drinking.  Good for you.

Don't drink and Scoop.

[jesmu84]

Slight bit of hoopalooping..

New article.

https://www.businessinsider.com/biggest-financial-problems-for-millennials-2018-8#millennials-are-burdened-with-student-loan-debt-thats-higher-than-ever-1

[jesmu84]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2018/09/04/why-student-loans-swamp-millennials-job-pay-hasnt-kept-up-with-school-costs/

[mu03eng]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2018/09/04/why-student-loans-swamp-millennials-job-pay-hasnt-kept-up-with-school-costs/

The question is, how much of the debt to salary ratio in total is represented by the insane example represented in this article.....$200,000 debt to obtain an English Major.....how is that every economically justified??? If you told me the person took on $200K in debt to get a STEM degree and the same principles were at work, you have something but the anecdotal evidence the article depends on is stupid insane.

Having said that, I also think it represents something people overlook that I think Benny often highlights...it's not really the millineal's fault that the boomer generation was so damn selfish. Clearly parents were not planning for their children's education while simultaneous voting the educational coffers dry so let's not let them off the hook.

Further, let's talk about the university that charges someone $50K a year to get an English major....how can they possibly justify that???

Bottom line, everyone sucks, let's not say well pay people more to close the loop (though I do agree that wage growth is a problem).

[GGGG]

Further, let's talk about the university that charges someone $50K a year to get an English major....how can they possibly justify that???

1. Because someone will pay for it.

2. There are a number of fields for English majors that can have a decent compensation - technical writers for example. 

But your larger point is a good one regarding student loan debt.  The average graduate in the Class of 2016 had $37,000 in loan debt.  Using the federal rate of 5%, and taking 20 years to pay off, that's about $250 per month.  A staggering amount?  No.  Still worth it in the long-run?  Very likely yes.  But is it enough to put a crimp in one's lifestyle?  No doubt. 

[warriorchick]

1. Because someone will pay for it.

2. There are a number of fields for English majors that can have a decent compensation - technical writers for example. 

But your larger point is a good one regarding student loan debt.  The average graduate in the Class of 2016 had $37,000 in loan debt.  Using the federal rate of 5%, and taking 20 years to pay off, that's about $250 per month.  A staggering amount?  No.  Still worth it in the long-run?  Very likely yes.  But is it enough to put a crimp in one's lifestyle?  No doubt.

Pfft.  Most millenials spend at least $250/month on avocado toast, artisanal cocktails and manbun maintenance.

[Archies Bat]

Pfft.  Most millenials spend at least $250/month on avocado toast, artisanal cocktails and manbun maintenance.

That's not a bad price, where does Glow go for his?

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Further, let's talk about the university that charges someone $50K a year to get an English major....how can they possibly justify that???

Do some universities charge different amounts for different majors?

[warriorchick]

Do some universities charge different amounts for different majors?

Marquette does - but it is not much of a difference.

[warriorchick]

Think of it this way:

$250 a month is roughly $2 an hour if you work full time (once you take out payroll taxes).  My guess is the majority of students who graduate with a degree will probably end up making at least that much more per hour than if they hadn't attended college at all, and that spread will continue to increase as their careers progress.

Sounds like a bargain to me.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I wish I only had to pay $250 a month for student loans. Over double that for me. Personally, I went into a field that doesn't make more than I would have made if I didn't go to college. Garbage men make more than I do. But this is the work that I enjoy and want to do and I needed a degree in order to do it. That was my decision.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Marquette does - but it is not much of a difference.

Is it an actual different in tuition?  Or is it because of associated fees (lab fees, etc.) or number of classes required with a particular major?

[warriorchick]

Is it an actual different in tuition?  Or is it because of associated fees (lab fees, etc.) or number of classes required with a particular major?

I stand corrected.  They used to charge a few hundred more for engineering and a couple of other majors, but it doesn't look like they do that anymore.

http://marquette.edu/mucentral/bursar/documents/rate-guide-18-19.pdf

[dgies9156]

Further, let's talk about the university that charges someone $50K a year to get an English major....how can they possibly justify that???

I have raised that question to everyone from Father Pilarz to Dr. Lovell. Yet to get a strong answer from anyone.

The fact is that if you are a middle- to upper-middle class family with more than one college age child, Marquette may be close to out of reach. Assume you are going after a Communications degree and you're from Davenport, Iowa. Your family has reasonably good income and three children. You are a child, parent and academic advisor who is choosing between Marquette at $50,000+ all-in annually and the University of Iowa, with about a $15,000 to $18,000 all-in cost.

You come out with a Marquette degree, for which you paid $200,000 and have God-knows how much debt, or an Iowa degree with a $72,000 cost, all-in, with far less debt. You work for the Daily Wizzbang in Outer Bumfork and you make $36,000 annually. Which option makes your life better?

I love Marquette but I fear the university is pricing itself out of the market for too many good candidates.

[Benny B]

I have raised that question to everyone from Father Pilarz to Dr. Lovell. Yet to get a strong answer from anyone.

The fact is that if you are a middle- to upper-middle class family with more than one college age child, Marquette may be close to out of reach. Assume you are going after a Communications degree and you're from Davenport, Iowa. Your family has reasonably good income and three children. You are a child, parent and academic advisor who is choosing between Marquette at $50,000+ all-in annually and the University of Iowa, with about a $15,000 to $18,000 all-in cost.

You come out with a Marquette degree, for which you paid $200,000 and have God-knows how much debt, or an Iowa degree with a $72,000 cost, all-in, with far less debt. You work for the Daily Wizzbang in Outer Bumfork and you make $36,000 annually. Which option makes your life better?

I love Marquette but I fear the university is pricing itself out of the market for too many good candidates.

Daily Wizzbang was recently acquired by Gannett.  Salaries were cut to $29,000.