Wednesday, September 28, 2011

The Growing "American" Hatred of Higher Education

 DISCLAIMER: I am writing this article fully knowing I am working in the Higher Education Field. I fully recognize my bias of supporting higher education. I also fully recognize that we must look at the criticisms of higher education to validate the importance of our economic labor producers.

As early as the 19th Century, higher education played a pivotal role in maintaining and creating economic markets by providing skilled labor. Even today, many desired positions with desired income levels require or prefer some sort of advanced degree above a high school diploma. Not only is this an economic necessity, it has also become part of the American middle class social status. That is, you may be looked down upon in many middle class circles if you do not have a degree. 

With the obvious benefits being stated, the United States must look at why there is a growing hatred for higher education institutions to calm down social tension as well as finding more effective and efficient ways of creating the skilled labor force. This, now more noticeable, hatred can be described by economic, political, and social reasoning. 

Economic
The economic reasoning for this hatred is quite simple noticing the economic hardship we are seeing today. Since higher education institutions have played a pivotal role in the labor markets, people are wondering why job vacancies are left unfilled due to lack of skilled laborers in those particular fields.

Political
The primary reason for any anger politically are taxes. Since tax dollars are used to support higher education and unemployment at a record high, Americans are upset that institutions are not living up to their pivotal role to appease the economic labor markets. A typical tax-hating citizen would wonder why they have to pay into a system that doesn't work.

Digging more historically in the political hatred, Americans, in general, have had an individualistic ethic. From the British Government to the New Deal of President Roosevelt, there has always been American anxiety of public expansion. When noticing the history of higher education, one can see a consistent growth of access to higher education, number of institutions, and federal/state programs that help increase access to all who want it. For example, the GI Bill (allowing funding for soldiers to go to college) was a significant policy that some regard the gate opening allowing many who, before then, could not go. One could tie the American anxiety of large public entities to the modern growth of higher education.

Social
Last but not least, there has been a modern social trend in which high school students are socialized by numerous social institutions to get a college degree, regardless of what students want to do. Adding that to the graduated college student struggling to find work in a sluggish economy, one can see the social uproar towards any higher education institution. 

With this being a general overview of criticisms, one can point out many specifics that could demonize higher education institutions. At the the end of the day, we have to realize the importance of higher education, as well as how we can accommodate the criticisms that have been highlighted in the bad economic times in the 21st Century. Higher education has become a beacon of opportunity for many students. Unfortunately, the more students have access to such opportunity, the more students have to separate themselves from the growing pack.

The Situationalist
Written by Mike Lampe

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

Obama and the "Buffett" Rule

As stated in a previous article, President Obama's Administration has provided details on the Jobs Plan he promised to release after Labor Day. This plan is set to cost around 300 Billion Dollars and seems to be round 2 of where Speaker Boehner and the President ended last time while discussing the debt ceiling. 

Besides the tax cuts that are set to give incentives for businesses to hire within the United States, media outlets are hooked on has been coined the "Buffett" Rule. Obama discussed the situation in which Warren Buffett, A successful investor on Wall Street, pays less taxes that his receptionist does.

Therefore, the Obama Administration proposed that when "Buffett"-like tax situations millionaires get into,  their taxes would default to the middle class tax rate. Thus eliminating the complicated minimum alternative tax as well as changing the concept of a "flat tax," only the flat tax would be for the wealthy income earners. 

In the article, Lampe: Its the Economy Stupid, Mike Lampe had recommended to get rid of the Bush Tax Cuts to the rich and implement a tax break that is more job specific. Although not getting rid of the Bush Tax Cut for the wealthy entirely, this approach sends a message of compromise and the perception that fresh ideas are going through the Oval Office at the White House. 

Although it is quite clear that Obama will not get everything he asks for, it will be interesting to see how the Republicans will respond to this bill. There is already the anti-tax movement of the Republican Party that suggest the government should not tax "job creators."


Wednesday, September 7, 2011

BREAKING NEWS: Huntsman joins Perry-Romney battle in Tonights Republican Debate

In the Reagan Presidential Library, the 2012 Republican Presidential Debate was held on MSNBC to determine who might be the next Republican Candidate to run against Barack Obama. There are three groupings of candidates that showed up at the debate; 1. the Governors, 2. The Opportunists 3. The Left Behind.

1. The Governors
A secondary title to this article was the battle of the Governors. Everyone knew and expected a back and forth between Gov. Perry from Texas and Gov. Romney from Massachusetts. There was a great interaction between the two on the most important issue, job creation. The exchange argued the rankings of each state while they were in office. However, another Gov. Huntsman from Utah gave Perry and Romney a run for their money. After the small exchange, Huntsman pulled a fast one and shared that his state was #1 in job creation during his administration.

2. The Opportunists
Of course, I would have to say that the three governors took the main stage. Now for those who I would consider to be on the side "free stage," I put Michele Bachmann and Herman Kane. Michele Bachmann was putting an aweful amount of time talking about Obamacare, especially during the job creation discussion. Did she not remember how the Democrats lost the congressional elections is 2010? (Focusing more on health care than on job creation/economy)

3. The Left Behind
Although I called Ron Paul the winner of the first Republican Debate, I'm surprised to see him somewhat off his game tonight. Since the whole field was somewhat hostile, Ron Paul's normal strategy was overshadowed. Santorum was not strong and Gingrich is known not to have a good foundational campaign for Republicans to throw support at him.

SUMMARY:
- Perry will remain the front runner, but Romney also took impressive swings
- Huntsman may get a bump in the polls for being on par with the other front runners
- Bachmann and Paul will diminish more in polls
- Herman Cane 9-9-9 Tax Plan was catchy and may stick.