Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
70% of GDP is public sector .. UK is broke as shat ...
The european model is just not sustainable ... Taxes cripple economic development and public sector can't dynamically adjust to bad times as fast as the private sector does...
With more private sector prosperity.. public sector grows more and more like a cancer .. service levels and reach expand .. but private sector doesn't expand forever and has downturns .. potentially even has limits ... What happens when you hit those? The private sector adjusts.. people adjusts .. but that stubborn public sector.. oh they cannot and will not adjust ...
And on come the protests/riots .. What a lovely model people keep ranting and raving about ...
I would say in the next decade, I'd be surprised to see the European Union still existing as a whole.
This has application when one views California as U.S's wannabee Europe.
I also think state workers should have an across the board, 10-20% pay cut, in addition to pension reform. Yes this includes police, fire, prison guards, legislature, etc...everyone.
This is a great idea but it will never happen. Dont forget illegals reform as well.
Another texas vs. california debate.. First off, your statement about California's public Universities is just false.. It's shocking to see, coming from the east coast, that I've never heard people yap so much about California colleges in my life.. Literally, no one has ever heard of a lot of your so called 'amazing' public schools on the east coast.. Like, never even heard of them....Then again, I can't for the life of me stop running into Cal grads on a daily basis in the valley who seem to think their avg. tier state college somehow holds rank against an Ivy League school .. If you go on usnews you will continue to find that 90-100% of the top 10 schools are private.. going deeper off the top 10 you will still keep noting that the top schools are private...
California's public universities are good .. Good .. Lets get that clear.. Outstriping the collective impact of private schools nationwide? Give me a break .. now I know you're just cheerleading.
Try leaving California and uttering Univ. ______ calif .. Univ. Cal _____ .. People will be like, UC_ U_C who ? But yeah, from what I can see, California does good at eating their own dogfood (grads).
These statements are distorted and inaccurate. I have no affection for the UC system, but I'm not going to deny that it has some excellent attributes, as do other public systems around the country.
Your analysis falls apart on several levels.
Firstly, I contend that that the USNews methodology is flawed.
A. The valuable Peer Assessment component was recently distorted by the addition of rankings by high school counselors. I disagree with this selection because I don't see how HS counselors are experts on the quality of universities.
B. Student selectivity is not a valid criterion. It measures the quality of incoming students and therefore doesn't assess the value of instruction imparted after admission.
C. The rigid class size criteria distort reality. A 250 person class is treated the same as a 51 person class, but a 18 person class is different from a 21 person class.
Secondly, you fail to adjust for school size.
While the overwhelming majority of institutions in the USNews top 50 are indeed private, you need to look at the number of students enrolled to get the full picture. I crunched the numbers, and 62.18% of students enrolled at USNews top 50 national universities attend public universities.
Thirdly, your anecdotal East Coast perspective is flawed.
The East Coast has a strong tradition of private higher education and weaker public higher ed. The exact opposite is true in the Midwest and West.
Hard work? Is that what you call folding your arms and crying like teething babies?
The California GOP has proven themselves to be utterly obsolete, totally out of touch, uncompromising at the most critical time when they should have been willing to compromise, andIRONICALLY their undoing is going to be the very citizens committee redistricting panel they pushed so hard to pass at the ballot box.
Its all poetic justice really.
Enjoy your lower standard of living.
Back the rhetoric dump truck up a bit. The democrats have been in control of this state for thirty (30) years. The last eight years our governor (Kennedy) being a RINO. How can there be poetic justice when there hasn't been choice in decades.
Give credit where credit is due. This is one of the most liberal states, ran on liberal views and governed by liberal politicians. Nothing ever gets done, but money is burned on social programs and public workers golden f'n deals that we can little afford. If there were only one Republican left in office, Democrats would fall over themselves to blame him/her for their failed policies. It's laughable. Poetic justice will be the day this state files bankruptcy.
The people evacuating southern California (head east young man) says it all. Looks like all those ivy league states are running into the fire while the people who are tired of being burned are getting smart. The beautiful weather has been trumped by failed business policies and over taxation. The luster has been tarnished.
These statements are distorted and inaccurate. I have no affection for the UC system, but I'm not going to deny that it has some excellent attributes, as do other public systems around the country.
Your analysis falls apart on several levels.
Firstly, I contend that that the USNews methodology is flawed.
A. The valuable Peer Assessment component was recently distorted by the addition of rankings by high school counselors. I disagree with this selection because I don't see how HS counselors are experts on the quality of universities.
B. Student selectivity is not a valid criterion. It measures the quality of incoming students and therefore doesn't assess the value of instruction imparted after admission.
C. The rigid class size criteria distort reality. A 250 person class is treated the same as a 51 person class, but a 18 person class is different from a 21 person class.
Secondly, you fail to adjust for school size.
While the overwhelming majority of institutions in the USNews top 50 are indeed private, you need to look at the number of students enrolled to get the full picture. I crunched the numbers, and 62.18% of students enrolled at USNews top 50 national universities attend public universities.
Thirdly, your anecdotal East Coast perspective is flawed.
The East Coast has a strong tradition of private higher education and weaker public higher ed. The exact opposite is true in the Midwest and West.
I don't recall I said California's public schools were bad.. I said they were good .. and I also reflected on the rankings.. To show relatively how good they are to private institutions .. Pick your poison .. There are several ranking agencies ... The trend will be the same.
Ivy League schools are Ivy League .. again, I draw to this idea in California that their public school system can be compared to Ivy League.. You can in your own heads but no one else in industry (especially outside of California) is going to see it that way.
Everything in California isn't gold .. and if people were to get out of this state more, they'd realize that ..
Quote:
Originally Posted by barney_rubble
Secondly, you fail to adjust for school size.
While the overwhelming majority of institutions in the USNews top 50 are indeed private, you need to look at the number of students enrolled to get the full picture. I crunched the numbers, and 62.18% of students enrolled at USNews top 50 national universities attend public universities.
Not really .. I have just come to understand that the majority of K-12 students aren't cream of the crop.. Just as the majority of college students aren't ... Quality over quantity .. which was my point before.
I don't want this to become a debate about public/private.. Private colleges are small by emergent design .. They don't have to accept any old fool that applies.. It's not in their interest to become large .. they don't get funding to become large.. Like public colleges do .. they have a more stricter/focused non-state influenced agenda/criteria and that creates for a different college environment and outcome.
In California, they do this w/ public schools w/ a tiered structure ...
at the low scale you have the crap public school any fool can attend (which are the bigger universities).. at the higher tier you have a school like Berkeley... (which are the smaller ones) w/ more stricter criteria.
I think its great that California has good schools.. But to sit and try to compare California's public school system to the private at the top tier .. Please .. Data reference after data reference, you will come up short. Pick any rating agency you'd like.
Top 10 .. now we must consider the top 50 in order to capture something of value .. The smaller %'age of the population is highly skilled/has enough aptitude and the top ranking colleges in terms of (size) served is structured that way.
I re-iterate .. California's colleges are good .. they're great in some cases .. but no, they don't compare to the top private universities ... and the top ones are 90-100% private .. as you slide down the top 5 .. top 10 .. to 15.. top 20 .. top 50 .. you start to see more and more public schools. Above other states, California's public schools ...
If you have a high aptitude and intelligence, you're going to rise to top no matter where you attend school ... this goes for public school and Universities....
The K-12 experience is largely of sorting out the cream from the crop.. this happens all throughout life..
The majority are found not to have the highest aptitude or potential .. that's just life and math.
I came from a state/school w/ "educational" issues... The minority were in honors/ap/gifted courses.. the minority got good grades.. the minority went off to good colleges ...
You begin getting weeded out before you even know it in life ... I feel it a harsh reality .. but that's just life.
I don't recall I said California's public schools were bad.. I said they were good .. and I also reflected on the rankings.. To show relatively how good they are to private institutions .. Pick your poison .. There are several ranking agencies ... The trend will be the same.
Ivy League schools are Ivy League .. again, I draw to this idea in California that their public school system can be compared to Ivy League.. You can in your own heads but no one else in industry (especially outside of California) is going to see it that way.
Berkeley, UCLA, and to a lesser extent UCSD and UCSB are recognized as some of the top research universities in the world. Anyone in academia knows this. You can check almost any ranking you please.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yeahthatguy
Not really .. I have just come to understand that the majority of K-12 students aren't cream of the crop.. Just as the majority of college students aren't ... Quality over quantity .. which was my point before.
I don't want this to become a debate about public/private.. Private colleges are small by emergent design .. They don't have to accept any old fool that applies.. It's not in their interest to become large .. they don't get funding to become large.. Like public colleges do .. they have a more stricter/focused non-state influenced agenda/criteria and that creates for a different college environment and outcome.
You say that a relatively small number of the top schools are public. Okay. But because these public universities are much larger - on average - than privates, there isn't as much need for a large number of them. Therefore, it isn't accurate to say that private colleges are better because there are a larger quantity of institutions ranked highly. Your interpretation was flawed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yeahthatguy
Top 10 .. now we must consider the top 50 in order to capture something of value .. The smaller %'age of the population is highly skilled/has enough aptitude and the top ranking colleges in terms of (size) served is structured that way.
I re-iterate .. California's colleges are good .. they're great in some cases .. but no, they don't compare to the top private universities ... and the top ones are 90-100% private .. as you slide down the top 5 .. top 10 .. to 15.. top 20 .. top 50 .. you start to see more and more public schools.
I encourage you to peruse the methodology of this world ranking focused on legitimate academic factors. Since you haven't seen fit to respond to any of my critiques of the painfully flawed USNews ranking system, my alternative wins by default unless you can offer cogent criticisms.
EDIT:
Quote:
Originally Posted by yeahthatguy
If you have a high aptitude and intelligence, you're going to rise to top no matter where you attend school ... this goes for public school and Universities....
Exactly. And that's why including selectivity metrics as a primary criterion in ranking universities - as USNews does - is idiotic.
Sadly, with all the budget cuts along with the inefficient government of CA, I'm beginning to believe that the UC's will soon lose their charm in boasting some of the best Universities in the world.
Berkeley, UCLA, and to a lesser extent UCSD and UCSB are recognized as some of the top research universities in the world. Anyone in academia knows this. You can check almost any ranking you please.
You say that a relatively small number of the top schools are public. Okay. But because these public universities are much larger - on average - than privates, there isn't as much need for a large number of them. Therefore, it isn't accurate to say that private colleges are better because there are a larger quantity of institutions ranked highly. Your interpretation was flawed.
I encourage you to peruse the methodology of this world ranking focused on legitimate academic factors. Since you haven't seen fit to respond to any of my critiques of the painfully flawed USNews ranking system, my alternative wins by default unless you can offer cogent criticisms.
EDIT:
Exactly. And that's why including selectivity metrics as a primary criterion in ranking universities - as USNews does - is idiotic.
According to your own link ... ARWU 2010
How many public U.S universities are in the top 10? I spot one off the top of my head.. Berkeley .. Like i said, you have to go down to top 15 .. top 20 .. top 50 to start hitting a good pocket of public schools ... For which I acknowledged.. California's public schools get hit first ...No matter what ranking system you want to use.. you will see this .. WHY is that?
This was never a debate about the quality of public/private.. Rather the emergent quality that Private schools (and select public schools) have in being able more closely adjust their acceptance criteria ...
My comment was directed at K-12 if you go back many posts .. I extended the same concept to Universities .. The majority of people are not cream of the crop .. and thus the general structure of 'great' universities is to cater to this reality .. a smaller amount of seats that cater to the cream of the crop in close cohabitation. .... Put more cream of the crop people together and separate them from the people that don't want to learn (especially in the lower grades) and magically they do better... the same goes for how college populations are filled...
So, in drawing criticism to this state's stats and that state's .. I pointed out the most important factor : aptitude/parents/kids ... from when a child can speaks they begin getting sorted into achievement groups.. My comments were most focused on this for K-12 and how (past a certain) point tax dollars don't do sh*t ... At the university level ... There is a 'weed out' on several levels :
> Getting accepted to the college
> Getting accepted to a major (some majors are harder than others to get accepted to)
> Getting by the weed out courses (some professors have a fixed curve... a certain %'age will get an A,B,C,D,F .. the scale slides based on achievement)
> Actually graduating....
and it goes on and on in life... Why do private Universities populate the top 10 rankings per your own link? ARWU 2010
Are they better schools? No... I never said that.. They simple have more choice in being selective and are able to choose a better student body...
Go to your top public highschool in California right now.. Pick out the students from the regular courses and place them in AP courses... and see how good they do ...
Go to your top university in America and enroll a bunch of people from the local community college..
It's not the tax dollars.. It's most often not the university.. It's the people and the students.. and when you put more of the best/brightest and those that want to work harder/smarter/learn together .. they reinforce each other and achieve more . Private universities have more control over this important aspect of enrollment than public schools do... and by their smaller size don't have to bloat enrollment w/ underachievers/sub-par achievers.... Which goes back to the same difference that exists in K-12 Public/Private schools ... which is all i wanted to say.
Even in K-12 there are great public schools that rank w/ the Private schools.. How is this achieved? selective enrollment ... Achieved most probably due to being located in a school zone where only the wealthy live (where kids are raised better and parents are better) ... or actually being able to filter enrollment based on aptitude/iq tests.
Has jack shat to do w/ taxes past a basic level...
Quote:
Originally Posted by barney_rubble
EDIT:
Exactly. And that's why including selectivity metrics as a primary criterion in ranking universities - as USNews does - is idiotic.
Sure it does... Agreed.. I said pick your favorite ranking agency and the trend will be the same... and it is ...Private colleges dominate the top rankings...
Why is that? .. Due to 'selectivity'. I think were saying the same thing.. Although, I don't care to try to make some declarative statement that California's Universities just kick so much arse compared to the Private ones because California has high taxes....
California's Universities in fact don't kick soo much arse compared to Private ones as noted by your own link...
California's Universities are great (the ones that have more selective enrollment) .. for which an ever growing percentage of enrollees are non-CA residents.
Last edited by yeahthatguy; 06-30-2011 at 03:14 PM..
According to your own link ... ARWU 2010
How many public U.S universities are in the top 10? I spot one off the top of my head.. Berkeley .. Like i said, you have to go down to top 15 .. top 20 .. top 50 to start hitting a good pocket of public schools ... For which I acknowledged.. California's public schools get hit first ...No matter what ranking system you want to use.. you will see this .. WHY is that?
This was never a debate about the quality of public/private.. Rather the emergent quality that Private schools (and select public schools) have in being able more closely adjust their acceptance criteria ...
My comment was directed at K-12 if you go back many posts .. I extended the same concept to Universities .. The majority of people are not cream of the crop .. and thus the general structure of 'great' universities is to cater to this reality .. a smaller amount of seats that cater to the cream of the crop in close cohabitation. .... Put more cream of the crop people together and separate them from the people that don't want to learn (especially in the lower grades) and magically they do better... the same goes for how college populations are filled...
So, in drawing criticism to this state's stats and that state's .. I pointed out the most important factor : aptitude/parents/kids ... from when a child can speaks they begin getting sorted into achievement groups.. My comments were most focused on this for K-12 and how (past a certain) point tax dollars don't do sh*t ... At the university level ... There is a 'weed out' on several levels :
> Getting accepted to the college
> Getting accepted to a major (some majors are harder than others to get accepted to)
> Getting by the weed out courses (some professors have a fixed curve... a certain %'age will get an A,B,C,D,F .. the scale slides based on achievement)
> Actually graduating....
and it goes on and on in life... Why do private Universities populate the top 10 rankings per your own link? ARWU 2010
Are they better schools? No... I never said that.. They simple have more choice in being selective and are able to choose a better student body...
Go to your top public school in California right now.. Pick out the students from the regular courses and place them in AP courses... and see how good they do ...
Go to your top university in America and enroll a bunch of people from the local community college..
It's not the tax dollars.. It's most often not the university.. It's the people and the students.. and when you put more of the best/brightest and those that want to work harder/smarter/learn together .. they reinforce each other and achieve more . Private universities have more control over this important aspect of enrollment than public schools do... and by their smaller size don't have to bloat enrollment w/ underachievers/sub-par achievers.... Which goes back to the same difference that exists in K-12 Public/Private schools ... which is all i wanted to say.
Even in K-12 there are great public schools that rank w/ the Private schools.. How is this achieved? selective enrollment ... Achieved most probably due to being located in a school zone where only the wealthy live (where kids are raised better and parents are better) ... or actually being able to filter enrollment based on aptitude/iq tests.
Has jack shat to do w/ taxes past a basic level...
Let's go back to the beginning. You said that "no one has ever heard of a lot of your so called 'amazing' public schools on the east coast," that Cal is nothing but an "avg. tier state college" which you don't believe can "rank against an Ivy League school," and finally that "the top schools are private" even "going deeper off the top 10."
These statements are factually inaccurate. And the underlying reasoning is based on flawed interpretation of the available data.
I have not denied that many of the finest colleges and universities are private, and I will not do so in the future. While I am enrolled at a public university, it is not in the UC system and I have no stake in this particular fight. In fact, I personally believe that many public universities are overfunded and that perhaps the pursuit of top-level prestige in academia is a poor use of taxpayer funds. But regardless of this, I have a deeply held dislike for misinformation and I will continue to raise a red flag every time I see it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.. Data reference after data reference, you will come up short. Pick any rating agency you'd like.
