You all must have graduated from colleges like BGSU, where critical thinking about these "general fees" is frowned upon, because when you graduate from a university that doesn't encourage oversight on spending that serves no purpose you put students like this into the world:
Bleeding Orange wrote:The IRS and the FG does not give us a choice as to where that money goes, and rightfully so. - as said
Maybe my many years of education are failing me, but last time I checked we were in a democracy. The difference between the federal government (which, by the way, includes a branch known as the IRS) and these colleges is that they encourage oversight. I can call my congressmen right now and talk to him on the phone if I want to, there's still 3 hours left in the day and they probably aren't doing much after the big horse slaughter bill vote yesterday. If I pose a good enough argument, supported by years and years of research reaching the same conclusion (as I have here) than the congressmen will probably buy it, realize that my idea is better for his constituents, form a coalition and -- before you know it -- a change in the taxes. I.e. if you voted for Bush you got what you wanted: lower taxes.
BGSU and all the colleges that fail to give their students any oversight over these fees, even fail to make what the fees are spent on readily available on the appropriate web sites, are teaching there students an awful lesson: that they have no say in their government. Maybe this is why we are in this whole problem in the first place?
If there was a breakdown of fees, such as a hyperlink right next to the fees schedule listed on the bursars web site, then students and parents could click on it and see that we are billed 13 times more money for athletics than we are for student organizations. Go figure. Novel idea. But, alas, it will remain hidden so as to quelch such uprisings among students and parents. That way these administrators can continue this misinformed spending.
This train of thought brings us to an important point that I have only touched on briefly in my small columns: Why do will this spending continue indefinitely? Why will it get worse and worse year after year? Well, first, as we are all well aware, the administrators and coaches at these universities are convinced -- despite all the evidence to the contrary -- that every dollar put into athletics will benefit the university in dramatic ways. We now know this is wrong for many reasons that I have listed and encouraged you to go check out.
So, yeah, they think it will benefit us students that are already in debt. Second, we have to be better than the next school so we have to continue spending more money.
Third, now that we are spending this much money, no administrator or coach is going to pick up the students' cause and cut this spending in half across all intercollegiate athletics programs at once (thereby leveling the playing field). Let's keep in mind that the only differences between my plan and the current plan is that 4x as many students can play, 2x as many sports will be available, and the cost will be 5x less for students -- no difference in how we perform or how much recognition/notice/sponsorship we get. no difference. no difference. no difference.
So, now that these coaches are making this much money they will do nothing to help us because it would cost them their salaries and they know it. They know that they are getting paid by us poor college students, the future of this country (the national security of which depends on education) and they will do nothing to help us. These are the people who know the NCAA best! The people that could very easily unite coaches together to cut this ludicrous spending. But they won't. They will leave it to everyone else.
"Everyone else" is either parents or students. Now, maybe parents would find time in their busy schedules to unite and lobby their colleges and the NCAA, but probably not. We have already discussed why students won't. Because they are totally unorganized and unmotivated. They don't even have the motivation to find out that they are paying $30,000 an athlete.
In order to end the arms race, there has to be a massive lobbying effort by the students or parents. That is the only way to cut down the number of scholarships and the exorbent size of the salaries. I am all for the facilities, the equipment, even the cost of the programs, but when it comes to spending $300,000 so we can recruit the better footbal coach I am out damn it. Out. I say the NCAA sets maximums all at once for the whole division and in the end we will have a level playing field for all times and a complete end to the athletics arms race.
Next, I would like to comment on what Warthog said. First of all, in neither of my columns have I suggested that we eliminate sports. I realized when I re-read it today that I may have come across as saying that athletics serves absolutely no benefit at all. This is not true. I only meant that the wasteful spending serves no benefit. For those who participate and are still able to get in the learning they should be getting out of college, athletics will serve many benefits. It will keep them healthy, improve their teamworking skills, build their confidence, and probably a few other things I am forgetting. Some of them (even under my plan) will receive full scholarships that will make it easier to succeed once they get out of college. So, anyways, providing for athletics competition between colleges does serve as a benefit to the participants. It also improves school spirit and is a source of entertainment for millions every weekend. But spending $13 million on pigskin, uniforms, players and coaches is obviously a waste of money. Someone said on here that there were no "$40,000 toilet seats." You're right abotu that (as far as I know). However, there are $30,000+ college athletes. That is just wrong, especially when you consider who is footing the bill: students that don't even wish to attend the games or can't (because they are working to pay off that money they were billed).
So, warthog, I don't think we should abolish sports. I think we should only be charging students about $50 a semester, instead of $250. And even then, I think we could still offer those students free admission.
Also, warthog, I already touched on your other point: students should have oversight on what a public institution charges its students and spends its money on. I know you were raised in the Soviet Union where things like that never occured, but this is the U.S. and we don't have to keep our mouths shut. We can say if we feel money is being wasted. And by the way, all students and in fact all citizens benefit dramatically from every dime that is being spent on education. They benefit in multiple ways. I am not going to get real deep, but every dollar that is spent on education (even if they aren't enrolled in that particular program) increases the GDP, the per-capita income rate, lowers taxes and raises intelligence.
And then there is ZiggyZoomba who said:
ZiggyZoomba wrote:Hyperbole, thy name is youth....
While I agree tuition prices are out of hand, to compare it to killing via terrorism is just... well... it's apples and oranges. And, based upon his arguments, we can extrapolate that athletes are terrorists.
I thought Maurice Clarett was the only one... I guess they ALL are!
Even though I thought the joke (athletes are terrorists) was funny and laughed a good laugh, there is still something important for me to expand upon here: education is vitally important to our national security.
As you know, american maunual labor isn't worth a damn anymore. For instance, all the levi's jeans (an american product) are made in other countries because the labor is much, much cheaper thereby increasing our profits by leaps and bounds. This is a practice that will continue, tariffs or not (tariffs, by the way are a bad idea because they are a crutch for a dead issue).
The reason, though, that levi's jeans are so popular all over the world is due to the degree-holding laborers at levi's HQ that market those jeans all over the world.
If, as it is projected to happen, the price of higher education in Ohio raises to $86,547 a year by 2028, college students will either have to have extremely rich parents, great scholarships or a s**t-ton of loans. None of those options, in my opinion, will lead us to the number of degree-holders we will need to keep our economy afloat the way it is today.
So, we go back to the breadlines of the 1920s. And are nation will become weaker and weaker until, one day, the ever-powerful nation of China or India, or a bunch of countries in the middle east decide they want our oil or just want to do away with us because they have wanted to for years. And if those (hypothetical) invaders don't kill us, the extreme separation between the classes and the lack of jobs will. When our grandkids are in those lines, ziggyzoomba, will you regret that we charged students $250 a semester so we could feel a measilyy 460 student athletes at a cost of $30,000 per athlete?
I will briefly pass over Rightupinthere's comments, because I basically have the same response to those as i do to Falcon52s': my arguments are emotionally charged for two reasons. The first is that I do want to excite students and get them to read my column. By getting them to read the paper I have accomplished something that most fail to do. I have encouraged them to get involved in their community, to make them feel for the first time in their lives that they actually can have an impact on the community around them no matter how difficult and daunting politicians and other leaders seem to make it. Second, I am emotionally charged because I am several thousand dollars in debt and the money was wasted, it was put into a program that does to little with too much.
The last point I want to cover is one that I will have to argue for the rest of my life. I am not out to make a name for myself. I am a public servant that is out to spread the news. Many of you don't realize it, because you also feel you have no control over your communities, but what I am doing is empowering individuals with information they need to know. Yes, despite what you people say, it is vitally important that we look and re-look how these funds are spent at these very important institutions. I can't believe that anyone would suggest that $8.5 million being charged to students shouldn't have single person give it a look and decide whether it is right. In actuality, this is the marketplace of ideas. That is how democracy works, the more input the better. And that is why I wrote this column.
It is not an article, but a column. That is an important distinction to make, because one is an objective view of the facts (the BG News has covered athletics spending before) the other is a fact-based opinion.
If I wanted to make a name for myself I would have picked a unique topic, not one that has been given over and over again. As I noted here, there are many books that utilize well-researched, statistically-analyzed studies to show that this spending is robbing this country of its future. MULTIPLE STUDIES, MULTIPLE BOOKS, MULTIPLE ARTICLES, and MULTIPLE COLUMNS. I am doing this because I want to get the word out. I want students to at least know what is going on. That is why I wrote the column. The "get my name out there columns" are still to come and (hopefully) will be published in papers across the country.
Peace.
