Current Congress "the worst" since the Civil War, and it's mostly due to the GOP

http://www.npr.org/2012/04/30/151522725/even-worse-than-it-looks-extremism-in-congress

These are the writers of "The Broken Branch" about Congress' dysfunction under the Bush admin. Apparently now it's even worse. Both parties have their issues, but the authors put the bulk of the blame on the GOP for espousing a dangerously extremist and dysfunctional position on most issues. And don't think that is a biased Bill Maher/New Yorker/liberal accusation, as one of the authors works at the American Enterprise Inst (and hasn't been fired for writing this book). This flies in the face of the typical "both parties are rotten and basically the same" argument, which masks GOP transgressions under an incorrect assumption of parity. Some critics may claim, "Come on, we always think present day is the worst ever, but in the long lens of history, past Congresses have been worse." Maybe so say the authors, but are we really comfortable comparing our current Congress to the one that couldn't resolve its differences and contributed to plunging the nation into the bloody Civil War? That's like saying the Afghan War is OK because it's not as bad as Vietnam.

This pretty much sums it up: "One of the two major parties, the Republican Party, has become an insurgent outlier — ideologically extreme; contemptuous of the inherited social and economic policy regime; scornful of compromise; unpersuaded by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition."

So even though BO and his administration haven't been dream leaders, let's do what we can this election season to block these GOP cancers on our nation from gaining more power. Socioeconomically, they basically want to return the nation to the "grand old 1920's" (conveniently forgetting what their policies led to), and militarily they sound fairly similar to Bush with less bravado. Then after Nov, maybe we can pressure BO into some real gov't reforms as he should be more concerned about legacy than his future in politics.

MBA students have highest cheating rates

http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_4433207

Undergrads seem to have much higher cheating rates (into the 80%s!) But the survey is limited by self-reporting, and the data range is fairly narrow (56-45% over most majors). Though those principled humanities and social sciences students were the most ethical, down at a 39% cheating rate (because they know that even a 4.0 GPA won't stop them from being poor for life LOL). Interestingly law students had low cheating rates too, or maybe they just lied on the survey!

Some possible reasons for this:
- With so much competition for top education and jobs (and those factors greatly influence lifetime earning and even quality of life), grades and scores are more critical than ever.
- Education is more and more seen as a means to an end, with grades as the goal instead of mastery of a subject (in that case, cheating would be counter-productive).
- Students are exposed to way more examples in the popular culture and mainstream media of cheaters prospering (or at least getting away with it), rather than cheaters getting punished and honest people prospering.
- Anti-cheating tech lags far behind cheating-enabling tech
- Parents and society are emphasizing individual accomplishment, status, and material wealth more than selflessness and personal character (maybe humanity has always been like this to a certain extent, but as an example of how character used to trump even survival under different social expectations: http://www.northcountrypublicradio.org/news/npr/150421710/why-didn-t-passengers-panic-on-the-titanic)

More on the "cheating culture" in the US: http://www.kqed.org/a/forum/R201204240900

-------

Yes good point. Students and their families feel like they are forking over so much $ that they are "entitled" to get good grades and good jobs. And they know they will be under financial pressure right when they graduate, which is a potent motivator. Apparently student loan interest rates may double this summer, unless Washington gets its act together and extends the deadline.

-------

Definitely growing up college degree was never a question in my household, it was a "must" requirement before my sister and I moved into adulthood. So we took out student loans and followed down the yellow brick road.

But we weren't talking $100k like some of these recent grads interviewed by NPR and Yahoo in recent months.

I wonder at what price point does college degree becomes "not worth it"?  When I was in college, $100k debt was something that was only associated with JD or MD, whole another 3-4 yrs of education.  However, apparently college tuition has soared since those days that college grads are leaving with 6 figure debts (either I'm really old or tuition has gone up at alarming rate)

I understand that the job market is getting tougher and college degree has become somewhat of a norm, but may be then it's time to change that social perception? May be we as regular persons and employers should be open to seeing more people not going to 4 yr college? I wonder if that is possible.

Also, what is the driver behind the rising cost of higher education, higher than that of rise of standard of living, inflation etc? most schools are classified as "non- prof" orgs so I assume it isn't for profit.I'm sure the schools have their "reasons" but where is it (money) going? who actually ends up with them?

-------

First off, tuition since my son started college 3 years ago has gone up 80% in that time.  Professors haven't had raises(unless they were promoted) in the last 10 years.  Meanwhile, the administrators enjoy an average 10% increase annually in that same timeframe.

Secondly, the reason tuition is going up is because the regents of these not for profit schools who, at one time, were committed to the education of Californians, have been taken over by privatization hounds.   

http://ucsdfa.org/ucsf-chancellor-susan-desmond-hellmann-corporate-privatizer-and-union-buster-wants-ucsf-out-of-the-uc-system/530
-------

And funding from tax dollars has become so precarious for some public schools that they are shifting the costs to students or semi-privatizing (professional schools can do this easier). And with the surge of cheap credit in the '90s and promise of lucrative jobs in the bull market, I guess the regents felt they could keep raising fees above inflation as students and their families became less price sensitive. Now that the recession has hit (it hit school endowments and donations too) and some families are over-leveraged, school really looks unaffordable, yet demand is inelastic because a bachelor's or above is so critical for better pay and more stable employment.

Since elite colleges are so pricey and hard to get into, some org's are looking into giving "substitute degrees" or "open universities" to students who learn over the web. Our economy is in such need for skilled tech labor, and there is an untapped talent pool in Asia (and at home) that can't access or afford top Western tech schools. So by getting similarly rigorous online classes and some sort of certificate, hopefully they can be eligible for jobs in the West too. I am sure it won't be a fix-all, but we need to rethink alternatives to the expensive and arguably obsolete 4-year university system - and no I don't mean Univ. of Phoenix. Maybe there can be more tiers of degree types beyond just associate and bachelor's.

http://www.kqed.org/a/forum/R201204091000

Regarding the UCSF situation, I think that is sick also. Since UCSF is a grad school, its cost structure is a lot different, and because it is an elite health science hub, of course it is more profitable than UC Riverside. But the UC charter is to serve the interests of the PEOPLE OF CA. And within the UC System, the strong should support the weak, meaning UCSF is supposed to subsidize UC Riverside. Just like there is a net outflow of federal taxes from places like NY and CA to places like AL and SC. That is part of being in a community, unless we want to espouse social Darwinism like the Romney types promote.