DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Lerpenoaneway** · 06-20-2012, 07:29 PM

1) Well again, if there's a problem this somehow exaberates, I would like to know what that is before I worry about it. You're right that right now all we have is an on the surface description, but the aims and goals of the thing seem pretty solid.

2) Whether or not a school is for-profit has nothing to do with size. A school can be for-profit and have hundreds of thousands of students across the country. Even a small one raking in 20 million in revenue a year would hardly be a "small business". Any kind of college isn't going to be a Mom and Pop's bar 'n' grill, its still a large organization with the possibility of waste and corruption.

3) Why he made it an EO instead of floating it to Congress -well it is a pertinent issue affecting millions of veterans, and if we take the argument of him serving as "commander in chief" to its logical conclusion, he does have an indirect responsibility to ensure to the best of his ability that his "command" doesn't get screwed over after separation. Though you're right this is no doubt self serving - but we can say that about almost anything any politician does.

The closest thing to small business, not necessarily a one-to-one match.

I'm not saying (and haven't been) that this whole proposal in principle is 100% positive or negative. With the combination of the elements involved, lack of urgency, lack of vetting, convenience of timing, etc. It brings one to wonder what we're not being told here.

The concept of tuition rates rising for institutions currently non-compliant being forcibly made compliant is fairly straightforward when we apply common sense to it. If an institution has to adjust its recruiting practices to meet certain wickets there is a potential for it to lose customers, so if it should wish to remain profitable it's best recourse is to raise the revenue it receives from existing customers, quite a few ways to skin the cat but it never looks pretty in the end. Most organizations don't deliberately opt towards failing

Again though, the combination of political elements involved and timing really should raise suspicion here, I grant you it's 100% possible I'm being overly cynical, but when it looks and smells like excrement, I don't automatically assume roses will grow from it.

06-20-2012, 07:29 PM	#17
Lerpenoaneway Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 442 Senior Member	1) Well again, if there's a problem this somehow exaberates, I would like to know what that is before I worry about it. You're right that right now all we have is an on the surface description, but the aims and goals of the thing seem pretty solid. 2) Whether or not a school is for-profit has nothing to do with size. A school can be for-profit and have hundreds of thousands of students across the country. Even a small one raking in 20 million in revenue a year would hardly be a "small business". Any kind of college isn't going to be a Mom and Pop's bar 'n' grill, its still a large organization with the possibility of waste and corruption. 3) Why he made it an EO instead of floating it to Congress -well it is a pertinent issue affecting millions of veterans, and if we take the argument of him serving as "commander in chief" to its logical conclusion, he does have an indirect responsibility to ensure to the best of his ability that his "command" doesn't get screwed over after separation. Though you're right this is no doubt self serving - but we can say that about almost anything any politician does. The closest thing to small business, not necessarily a one-to-one match. I'm not saying (and haven't been) that this whole proposal in principle is 100% positive or negative. With the combination of the elements involved, lack of urgency, lack of vetting, convenience of timing, etc. It brings one to wonder what we're not being told here. The concept of tuition rates rising for institutions currently non-compliant being forcibly made compliant is fairly straightforward when we apply common sense to it. If an institution has to adjust its recruiting practices to meet certain wickets there is a potential for it to lose customers, so if it should wish to remain profitable it's best recourse is to raise the revenue it receives from existing customers, quite a few ways to skin the cat but it never looks pretty in the end. Most organizations don't deliberately opt towards failing Again though, the combination of political elements involved and timing really should raise suspicion here, I grant you it's 100% possible I'm being overly cynical, but when it looks and smells like excrement, I don't automatically assume roses will grow from it.
	Quote