Tuition was raised by an average of 6.6% over last year. Overall, it could be said that inflation (Consumer Price Index), has outstripped average wage increases. It is so much a part of common knowledge that it no longer outrages anyone and people just shrug their shoulders and say 'what can you do?' in resignation. Clearly, this is not the case for everyone, but for a large number of Americans, it is.
If there was one thing that some of the Post-WWI Democratic Presidents did, it was address the gaping difference in income between the wealthy and the poor. What this did initially was to increase the size of the Middle Class. It was soon discovered that a well-financed Middle Class was the key to powering an economy, especially if they were in the majority. This expanded our economic power and enabled us to have enough money to throw around to field foreign armies without blinking.
Then, Reagan came in with his "Trickle Down Economics". The assumption here was that you give breaks to the wealthy and the effect would be that they'd have a greater surplus of cash and give more pay to those below them and so on. Whatever: That just increased the disparity of income as the wealthy did nothing of the sort, and still don't. Reagan also introduced Fiscal Irresponsibility: Decreasing taxes while increasing spending and paying for it with the National Debt. Republicans still think that's a good idea, but then again, they do have enough money not to really worry about it, don't they and besides, they keep giving their wealthy friends tax breaks to keep financing their elections, so why not? What else did Reagan do? Oh yeah... Dramatically increase military spending, privatized the Savings and Loan industry so he and his wealthy friends could get stinking rich off of the Middle Class and retirees and when it went south just lumped the bailout into the National Debt so that we'll continue paying on it's interest (and their publicly-funded ski trips), for generations. And, he almost singlehanded destroyed the strength of many unions (especially the Air Traffic Controllers union). He invaded Grenada and Panama and gave ransom money to Iran to free hostages by selling weapons in Central America to a military regime and forced a Colonel to act as patsy so he wouldn't be unsainted. Yeah; Nice guy, huh? But I digress.
With tuition increasing in sizable chunks every year, the gulf between the haves and havenots increases. When my two boys go to college, how are they going to pay? I won't be able to afford tuition for either of them, much less both of them. Do I spend all my retirement for it and if so what am I to do about retiring? Even then, I wouldn't have enough. Do they have to get this massive loan that is guaranteed and cannot be bankruptcied against? They'd be paying large sums each month for years and years to pay it off and would the monetary benefit of going to college be enough to make all that debt worth it? Is this a gamble? Is sounds increasingly like this murky word the Republicans use in "interesting situations"... investments. We're told it's an investment in their future. Sounds increasingly like a lottery with worsening odds. It sounds more and more like privatization of retirement income. "It's your money. You know better than the government how to invest it". Right. Talk about a cash cow for the Republicans and their wealthy cronies. Not happy with destroying retirement incomes via the S&L debacle they want to institutionalize the stealing of it by those that can afford money managers. The stock market is a two-edged blade. You don't make money unless someone else loses money and believe me when I tell you that the salivating Bush and Co. was exhibiting when trying to privatize retirement income was no illusion. They sought new sources of income and that was your retirement.
It's not like there aren't enough forces working against the Middle Class aren't urgent enough. Now, we have to fret over the cost of actually trying to become one of the Jones. When you destroy opportunity (which you do by increasingly raising tuition), how is the Middle Class to remain? There's enough pressure by the Right to milk the Middle Class of every penny they have without undermining the opportunity the Middle Class has of replenishing it's numbers and buying power. It is the Middle Class that powers the economy. The rich are very few relatively and hold 90% of the wealth, but spend very little because of their numbers. The poor usually don't make enough to get ahead and often rely on the Middle Class to help them out. All the stoves and houses and condominiums and cars and vacations and clothes and toys are purchased by the Middle Class. Squeeze them too much and they'll stop throwing their extra money into the stock market. They'll stop buying those new houses and settle with what they have or rent an apartment. They'll stop buying new cars every year or going that extra two days on vacation. When the Middle Class is gone, so too will America. There is little economy without it.
If there was one thing that some of the Post-WWI Democratic Presidents did, it was address the gaping difference in income between the wealthy and the poor. What this did initially was to increase the size of the Middle Class. It was soon discovered that a well-financed Middle Class was the key to powering an economy, especially if they were in the majority. This expanded our economic power and enabled us to have enough money to throw around to field foreign armies without blinking.
Then, Reagan came in with his "Trickle Down Economics". The assumption here was that you give breaks to the wealthy and the effect would be that they'd have a greater surplus of cash and give more pay to those below them and so on. Whatever: That just increased the disparity of income as the wealthy did nothing of the sort, and still don't. Reagan also introduced Fiscal Irresponsibility: Decreasing taxes while increasing spending and paying for it with the National Debt. Republicans still think that's a good idea, but then again, they do have enough money not to really worry about it, don't they and besides, they keep giving their wealthy friends tax breaks to keep financing their elections, so why not? What else did Reagan do? Oh yeah... Dramatically increase military spending, privatized the Savings and Loan industry so he and his wealthy friends could get stinking rich off of the Middle Class and retirees and when it went south just lumped the bailout into the National Debt so that we'll continue paying on it's interest (and their publicly-funded ski trips), for generations. And, he almost singlehanded destroyed the strength of many unions (especially the Air Traffic Controllers union). He invaded Grenada and Panama and gave ransom money to Iran to free hostages by selling weapons in Central America to a military regime and forced a Colonel to act as patsy so he wouldn't be unsainted. Yeah; Nice guy, huh? But I digress.
With tuition increasing in sizable chunks every year, the gulf between the haves and havenots increases. When my two boys go to college, how are they going to pay? I won't be able to afford tuition for either of them, much less both of them. Do I spend all my retirement for it and if so what am I to do about retiring? Even then, I wouldn't have enough. Do they have to get this massive loan that is guaranteed and cannot be bankruptcied against? They'd be paying large sums each month for years and years to pay it off and would the monetary benefit of going to college be enough to make all that debt worth it? Is this a gamble? Is sounds increasingly like this murky word the Republicans use in "interesting situations"... investments. We're told it's an investment in their future. Sounds increasingly like a lottery with worsening odds. It sounds more and more like privatization of retirement income. "It's your money. You know better than the government how to invest it". Right. Talk about a cash cow for the Republicans and their wealthy cronies. Not happy with destroying retirement incomes via the S&L debacle they want to institutionalize the stealing of it by those that can afford money managers. The stock market is a two-edged blade. You don't make money unless someone else loses money and believe me when I tell you that the salivating Bush and Co. was exhibiting when trying to privatize retirement income was no illusion. They sought new sources of income and that was your retirement.
It's not like there aren't enough forces working against the Middle Class aren't urgent enough. Now, we have to fret over the cost of actually trying to become one of the Jones. When you destroy opportunity (which you do by increasingly raising tuition), how is the Middle Class to remain? There's enough pressure by the Right to milk the Middle Class of every penny they have without undermining the opportunity the Middle Class has of replenishing it's numbers and buying power. It is the Middle Class that powers the economy. The rich are very few relatively and hold 90% of the wealth, but spend very little because of their numbers. The poor usually don't make enough to get ahead and often rely on the Middle Class to help them out. All the stoves and houses and condominiums and cars and vacations and clothes and toys are purchased by the Middle Class. Squeeze them too much and they'll stop throwing their extra money into the stock market. They'll stop buying those new houses and settle with what they have or rent an apartment. They'll stop buying new cars every year or going that extra two days on vacation. When the Middle Class is gone, so too will America. There is little economy without it.
Comments