Scruffy Dan: I call bullroar. Your 'bootstraps' writer should hone it all down to twitter size for our sanity.
No one with a mind could have read all the way thru that nonsense. For instance you cannot use UW with a straight face when there are hundreds of cheaper schools for your tuition argument.
ScruffyDan, I think the point is reached about 4 paragraphs from the end...
the author admits that using his math and assuming she's being truthful with having scholarships paying 90% of her tuition, she would be able to scrape by on his hypothetical budget. What he doesn't factor in is that during the summer, either she will NOT be working only 30 hours a week, or she will not be working for the same wage. He also missed the fact that she works for slightly more than minimum wage. It's doable, which makes the picture NOT a lie.
Ok.. Scruffy, let's start with a quick math lesson, then.
How about the massively outlandish bullshit that these squatters represent 99% of the population.
But let's look at your "proof" shall we?
Ok.
First thing.. you conveniently started with Seattle as your "base". Alright.. first of all, you pick one of the most expensive areas in the U.S. to live.. might as well choose Manhattan. Great Falls, Montana, for example, costs more than 25% less to live in (and has State University to boot).
So.
Let's start with the rent that he says is WAYYYY too low of $465.00 per month.
Well, I had a quick look at Craig's list myself, and, lo and behold, you can find all sorts of places in Great Falls, Montana for much less than $465.00 per month in a shared accomodation.
How about a 1 1/2 bathroom 3 bedroom house for $225.00 each?
How about a 4 bedroom house for $225.00 each?
Of course these are houses.. when I was a student, I rented a basement room (yes, I know, there was no big screen tv, and I had to share a kitchen with the landlady, but, better than camping out in the cold with a bunch of squatters)..
Well. Look what I found - $200 per month. Nice.
Ok.
Now - the rent includes utilities, so, bye bye $50 utility bill.
She needs a cell phone? Really? How did I manage without a phone for three years? So - no cell bill. I shared a phone with the owner and only paid for long distance - I'm sure Sally can too.
I could go on.. but why bother.
I worked through University.
Borrowed a grand total of $13,000.00.
I would ride my bike to school, lived on ramen noodles and stale-dated weiners. I didn't go to movies (though I did spring for Springsteen I'll admit), I didn't buy new clothes, and I didn't, ever, in seven years of University, buy prescription medication.
The point, however, isn't even that this "mythical student" represents the "average" or even any real students at all.
The point is that most people in the U.S. and Canada can point back at most one or two generations to immigrant parents who made something from nothing, and had much less help to do it than we have today.
My mother's parents came to this country without education, without marketable job skills, without speaking English.. and managed to eak out a living, and through the educational system, raised a women who eventually did pretty well for herself.
My father's parents spoke English, but, likewise, started with pretty much nothing and raised five children in a two room house in the middle of the barren prairie.. and raised a son who did pretty well for himself.
And they passed on to their children that there is no free lunch. That complaining is for losers. That adversity is meant to be welcomed and overcome.
What is there to admire about some over-educated, lazy hipster losers laying around complaining about how "life isn't fair".
Nothing.
Admiration should be reserved for those who accept that life isn't fair, and work through incredible odds to over-come that reality.
There is a reason that the U.S. has 12 million illegal immigrants and waiting lists a mile long for legal applicants.
Because while the current system is hardly perfect, it is by and large the best and most open system in the world today to give the small guy a chance.
Thanks everyone for absolutely missing the point. I suggest you re-read that link... all the way to the end because the most important stuff is not near the top.
My parents didn't pay dime one for my education - true, that was many years ago, and true, tuition has increased quite a bit since then.
But here's the deal:
18,248,128 students enrolled in post-secondary education in the U.S.A. according to 2007 U.S. Department of Education figures.
That's 70.1% of high school graduates.
Sure - that means 29.9% of high school graduates aren't attend post-secondary education.
And, personally, I think that funding post-secondary education is a good investment for the state (hence why I live in Canada and not the U.S.) - but the bottom line, as you say, isn't the fact of whether or not the sign is true - it's the message.
You say the message is ignoring the facts.
I say the Occupiers' message and the talking heads and Hollywood faces are ignoring the facts.
That no where in the world do the downtrodden have a better opportunity to overcome class barriers than in the U.S.A. and Canada.
That fact is made clear by the Gallup Poll referred to in my most recent blog, and by the millions of illegal aliens breaking into (not out of) the U.S.A. for "a chance".
Are we perfect?
Hardly.
But, as I blog - we're the best imperfect system in the world - and I think we risk some serious damage if we take too seriously the message that "corporations are evil", while at the same time arguing against corporate person-hood.
We run a great risk if we demonize success and profit. The excesses and abuses of people like Lehman Brothers and AIG are NOT the norm - and the Occupiers know that - but, apparently over-generalizing and selective use of facts is only acceptable when it's in the name of the occupiers.
Don't presume to know my thoughts on the Occupy movement based on my comments here. They were directed solely at the contents of this post.
But this was too much to let slide.
"That fact is made clear by the Gallup Poll referred to in my most recent blog, and by the millions of illegal aliens breaking into (not out of) the U.S.A. for "a chance"."
Clear as mud.
The poll is interesting of course, but the opinions of people who do not live in the US is hardly conclusive data to support your premise. Perceptions can be very slow to change.
The number of illegal immigrants even less so. That really just means that the US is a better country to live in than Mexico (which is currently in the midst of a drug war). Which is a very low bar.
7 comments:
Do the math. This is a lie.
http://persephonemagazine.com/2011/10/dont-even-get-me-started-mythical-bootstraps-college-student/
Scruffy Dan: I call bullroar. Your 'bootstraps' writer should hone it all down to twitter size for our sanity.
No one with a mind could have read all the way thru that nonsense. For instance you cannot use UW with a straight face when there are hundreds of cheaper schools for your tuition argument.
ScruffyDan, I think the point is reached about 4 paragraphs from the end...
the author admits that using his math and assuming she's being truthful with having scholarships paying 90% of her tuition, she would be able to scrape by on his hypothetical budget. What he doesn't factor in is that during the summer, either she will NOT be working only 30 hours a week, or she will not be working for the same wage. He also missed the fact that she works for slightly more than minimum wage. It's doable, which makes the picture NOT a lie.
Ok.. Scruffy, let's start with a quick math lesson, then.
How about the massively outlandish bullshit that these squatters represent 99% of the population.
But let's look at your "proof" shall we?
Ok.
First thing.. you conveniently started with Seattle as your "base". Alright.. first of all, you pick one of the most expensive areas in the U.S. to live.. might as well choose Manhattan. Great Falls, Montana, for example, costs more than 25% less to live in (and has State University to boot).
So.
Let's start with the rent that he says is WAYYYY too low of $465.00 per month.
Well, I had a quick look at Craig's list myself, and, lo and behold, you can find all sorts of places in Great Falls, Montana for much less than $465.00 per month in a shared accomodation.
How about a 1 1/2 bathroom 3 bedroom house for $225.00 each?
How about a 4 bedroom house for $225.00 each?
Of course these are houses.. when I was a student, I rented a basement room (yes, I know, there was no big screen tv, and I had to share a kitchen with the landlady, but, better than camping out in the cold with a bunch of squatters)..
Well. Look what I found - $200 per month. Nice.
Ok.
Now - the rent includes utilities, so, bye bye $50 utility bill.
She needs a cell phone? Really? How did I manage without a phone for three years? So - no cell bill. I shared a phone with the owner and only paid for long distance - I'm sure Sally can too.
I could go on.. but why bother.
I worked through University.
Borrowed a grand total of $13,000.00.
I would ride my bike to school, lived on ramen noodles and stale-dated weiners. I didn't go to movies (though I did spring for Springsteen I'll admit), I didn't buy new clothes, and I didn't, ever, in seven years of University, buy prescription medication.
The point, however, isn't even that this "mythical student" represents the "average" or even any real students at all.
The point is that most people in the U.S. and Canada can point back at most one or two generations to immigrant parents who made something from nothing, and had much less help to do it than we have today.
My mother's parents came to this country without education, without marketable job skills, without speaking English.. and managed to eak out a living, and through the educational system, raised a women who eventually did pretty well for herself.
My father's parents spoke English, but, likewise, started with pretty much nothing and raised five children in a two room house in the middle of the barren prairie.. and raised a son who did pretty well for himself.
And they passed on to their children that there is no free lunch. That complaining is for losers. That adversity is meant to be welcomed and overcome.
What is there to admire about some over-educated, lazy hipster losers laying around complaining about how "life isn't fair".
Nothing.
Admiration should be reserved for those who accept that life isn't fair, and work through incredible odds to over-come that reality.
There is a reason that the U.S. has 12 million illegal immigrants and waiting lists a mile long for legal applicants.
Because while the current system is hardly perfect, it is by and large the best and most open system in the world today to give the small guy a chance.
Thanks everyone for absolutely missing the point. I suggest you re-read that link... all the way to the end because the most important stuff is not near the top.
I read your piece, Scruffy, start to finish.
My parents didn't pay dime one for my education - true, that was many years ago, and true, tuition has increased quite a bit since then.
But here's the deal:
18,248,128 students enrolled in post-secondary education in the U.S.A. according to 2007 U.S. Department of Education figures.
That's 70.1% of high school graduates.
Sure - that means 29.9% of high school graduates aren't attend post-secondary education.
And, personally, I think that funding post-secondary education is a good investment for the state (hence why I live in Canada and not the U.S.) - but the bottom line, as you say, isn't the fact of whether or not the sign is true - it's the message.
You say the message is ignoring the facts.
I say the Occupiers' message and the talking heads and Hollywood faces are ignoring the facts.
That no where in the world do the downtrodden have a better opportunity to overcome class barriers than in the U.S.A. and Canada.
That fact is made clear by the Gallup Poll referred to in my most recent blog, and by the millions of illegal aliens breaking into (not out of) the U.S.A. for "a chance".
Are we perfect?
Hardly.
But, as I blog - we're the best imperfect system in the world - and I think we risk some serious damage if we take too seriously the message that "corporations are evil", while at the same time arguing against corporate person-hood.
We run a great risk if we demonize success and profit. The excesses and abuses of people like Lehman Brothers and AIG are NOT the norm - and the Occupiers know that - but, apparently over-generalizing and selective use of facts is only acceptable when it's in the name of the occupiers.
Don't presume to know my thoughts on the Occupy movement based on my comments here. They were directed solely at the contents of this post.
But this was too much to let slide.
"That fact is made clear by the Gallup Poll referred to in my most recent blog, and by the millions of illegal aliens breaking into (not out of) the U.S.A. for "a chance"."
Clear as mud.
The poll is interesting of course, but the opinions of people who do not live in the US is hardly conclusive data to support your premise. Perceptions can be very slow to change.
The number of illegal immigrants even less so. That really just means that the US is a better country to live in than Mexico (which is currently in the midst of a drug war). Which is a very low bar.
Post a Comment