patrick.net

Michael D says

I think college is essential for 99.99% of people,

This quote is the exact reason why college has become so darned expensive. I teach high school, and, we as teachers, are INSTRUCTED to have "college talk" sprinkled throughout our lessons each day. I ignore such admonitions. I regularly tell my students the exact opposite...college is NOT for everybody (or 99.99%). If it was, why do people CHOOSE to attend and why are there admissions requirements?

Also, the mentality that "college is for everybody" is not lost on university trustees. If the demand is infinite among the population, why wouldn't they continuously raise tuition? It will only be when a significant percentage of our population divorces itself from this post-Vietnam mentality that "college is for everybody" that we will see tuition come back down to affordable levels for those who TRULY belong there and who will benefit from it.

thomas.wong1986 says

volstad says

I can't tell you the number of younger, educated (BS or above) developers I have worked with who really don't have a clue what they are doing. It is reflected in some of their crappy code I have to fix.

Oh I agree! Seen lots of problems on my side as well.

nothing new, old guys complaining about young guys and young guys complain about the old guys being slow and uncreative just as vocally. being in the middle, I look to the older guys for inspiration, but the younger guys as threats. they are much farther along at age 25 then when I was that age. The kids have more tools to succeed and I dont underestimate their abilities as they can move faster along if they have the right stuff. if all you have is experience, you will lose to them when they eventually get some years under their belt. 28 year old managers, 35 year old executives leading an older team is pretty common.

I went to a 2yr community college, then 2 yr state univ. My total student loan was $6500. I put my aids and grants money in stocks and made some money. Paid off my loan in 5 months after graduation easily.

I now am a senior manager of a big SW company. One guy under me was from MIT, another from UCB. Both with huge loans. The way I see it, expensive college are overrated.

SFace says

The kids have more tools to succeed and I dont underestimate their abilities as they can move faster along if they have the right stuff.

Their tools are no different than the tools everyone else uses.
The same tools I used decades ago... nothing shiny here!

Its takes more than age to succeed, it takes maturity and discipline. 26-36 is just a journey to that end. and many journeys after that.

SFace says

35 year old executives leading an older team is pretty common.

Reminds of some of the financial restatement more recently due to inexperienced staff. A lot of money riding from investors getting it right the first time. Oh well, crap happens.

Waitingtobuy says

Of course you're allowed to say Jews. But thanks again for proving that your first stereotype (elitist Jews attending school while the rest of the world works) was no fluke, backed up by calling me Uncle Leo.

I think if you got out and push, you can get more mileage out of that.

Of course it wasn't a fluke it was the truth, that the Jewish kids I knew growing up all went to college. I never faulted them for it, or called them elitists. You don't know me or where I grew up or the circumstances.
I have many Jewish friends and always have. I've had this conversation with them before. The bottom line is Jews are more involved with your kids futures, especially more so 20 or 30 years ago that most other American families, White or Black. What's wrong with pointing that out? How come it's common speak to mention how the Asian view education for their kids, and that's acceptable, but mention how education is important to Jewish people, and I'm Hitler.

Geesh, but its fine when you mention trailer parks, even if you weren't retorting someone you erroneously thought was being antisemitic. The difference in me and you is, I'm not bent out of shape about your statement. Even if you were looking for friction when I wasn't.

That's right Nomograph I wouldn't dispute that at all.

Jerry Goldstein Jewish Carpet installer and professional horse race handicapper. He would do a large flooring job, then use the proceeds to place on a horse at Calder Race Track. I actually worked with one time, and then ended up being his window better for a year. I was 21 he was 52, he taught me a lot about life and people in general. A very important person in my life, I was glad I met.

He might have not be a college grad, but he wasn't a slouch.
He was more eccentric than a Mad hatter though.
And could have been a Millionaire with his handicapping skills, if the underlying Gambling addiction illness didn't make him blow all of his winnings on bets he didn't handicap.

The guy would call a race down to the order of the horses that would cross the finish line. But only those races, where all of the variables lined up from his research. Those bets always won.

But then he'd have a revelation at the track after winning then bet the farm on a hunch. And lose it all back. My job was supposed to be to reason with him, not to bet those instances, but in the end. There is no rationalizing with a Gambling addict.

One day I'll write a book on his methods, I'll make more money from that, than he ever made at the track.

The GOP says

The bottom line is Jews are more involved with your kids futures, especially more so 20 or 30 years ago that most other American families, White or Black. What's wrong with pointing that out?

Because it sidetracks the topic to race. If anything though, you're supporting college by suggesting that Jewish people are going to college and having more successful careers than others.

While college isn't necessarily useful as far as learning goes, and we can all agree it's overpriced, most would agree it gives you a leg up over someone without a degree. Americans should be going to college, they just shouldn't be saddled with massive debt for doing so.

Just Reality says

If it was, why do people CHOOSE to attend and why are there admissions requirements?

Admission Requirements:
1) Good graduates in the workplace make the school look good.
2) Bad students failing out means lost money for the school.
3) Bad students are more likely to cause problems for other students.
4) Kids get to feel like they won the lottery just to go there.

Just Reality says

Also, the mentality that "college is for everybody" is not lost on university trustees. If the demand is infinite among the population, why wouldn't they continuously raise tuition?

My alma mater has doubled their tuition since 2000. Doubled. Why not if they have max enrollment every year?

Clara says

I went to a 2yr community college, then 2 yr state univ. My total student loan was $6500. I put my aids and grants money in stocks and made some money. Paid off my loan in 5 months after graduation easily.

That would be great if everyone did this, but people are lemmings. They're going to keep going to expensive colleges on a 4 year plan and stay in debt forever. The government needs to stop the banks from taking these stupid kids lives when they're too young to know how screwed they'll be. There needs to be loan limits, for everything really, but especially for college.

StoutFiles says

and we can all agree it's overpriced, most would agree it gives you a leg up over someone without a degree.

Yes I agree, my counter parts that went to college were making 80K or more with in a few years of graduating. It took me over 10 years of experience to make that. Though my method gave me a broader breadth and scope of the technologies. I know folks that graduated in 1999 or 2000, and are still stuck in the technology they were taught.

Thought before I go any further, I would say it's not that college isn't necessary. But rather, kids should be taught they can still succeed with out it. They should be taught self sufficiency, and the concept of trading up in life skills.
College scholarships shouldn't have a shelf life either.
In fact Colleges should require two to three years of real world work experience(in any job) before you can enroll.

Back when I went to school, there were more blue collar support for students, pupils weren't made to feel like they would be second citizens if they didn't go to a major University.

A student that didn't go to college had just as good of a shot, getting hired at a manufacturing company on the ground floor, and working their way to a high payed job, making the same as their Educated counter part by time they were 30 to 40.
Just as much as the College student had as graduating and ending with that same position.

Only recently has Learning been comoditized, and those that can't afford to go, are made to feel inferior.

I'm just here to say Poppycock! and Bullshit!

The problem with a College education, there's no guarantee it will all stick. Or I would still be on the floor humping carpet.

I received my master's degree in 1998 and had a total of $17,000 in loans when I graduated and paid it off in two years. A master's degree looks good on a resume, but I could have succeeded without it. College education in general is overvalued, while vocational education is undervalued. Nurses who studied at vocational schools earn more than many PhDs. Airplane mechanics, electricians, etc. do pretty well. Many people who go to college view it as a status thing and are like the couples who bought the McMansion at the height of the housing bubble. Most people look down on these blue collar jobs.

Whenever the government decides to subsidize education or housing, the actual cost goes up proportionaly. Politicians, particularly on the left, refuse to acknowledge this to the point that many in this country are now debt-slaves. Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Sallie Mae have made the poor even poorer.

I agree with Stoutfiles, The GOP. You have switched the discussion from being about college to being about religion and ethnicity. You may not realize it, but painting Jews as college-educated elitists while many people are struggling (including Jews) pits one group against another. (and BTW, Fox News using the term "Hollywood" is code for Jews).

To me, it's fine that you say that Jewish people value education. No slur intended there and that stereotype actually holds up pretty well. (although my Jewish uncle was a cop, ex brother in law works at an auto parts store, and I know a Jewish family that is in the vending machine business, all not very education-oriented. Jesus was a carpenter, remember?).

You have to be very careful about saying "some of my best friends are Jewish". So what? Most of my friends, including my wife, are Christian. That's a rationalization. I've studied a lot about the Holocaust and visited Auschwitz this past summer, something everyone should do, because it is life changing, seeing everyone, not just Jews (150K Poles died there), who were killed because of stereotypes and scapegoating. I'm now committed to fighting all types of bigotry.

I was very fortunate to have parents that gave me educational opportunities. I took advantage of every opportunity and then some. Took jobs in everything imaginable, from working at a car wash, a bus boy, a waiter, to working on a cruise ship and at a rental car company, etc. I even went back and got an MBA, with my money. I can only credit the fact that I am where I am today through hard work, and yes, my college and graduate school education. I wouldn't have even gotten interviews for some of my positions without an advanced degree. And now I run my own business and am starting another one. My education allows me to snuff out BS pretty quickly in business. Common sense alone won't do it.

Germany has it right--read the book "Were You Born on the Wrong Continent?". They value college education, but have a very good trade and vocational school system. Not everyone is cut out to go to college. And you know what? Germany's economy has been humming right along through the financial crisis.

College has become an elite country club, something it wasn't intended ever to be. You have to apply, get recommendations, pay exorbitant membership dues, and hopefully you leave a better informed person, with huge debt, unless you have saved ahead of time.

My university tuition now costs 5 x what it did when I left in 1989. 5x. It also means one year now, with living costs included, is what it costs for 4 years 20 years ago. Think about that.

The President of the UC system, who makes $800K/yr, recently floated a tuition increase so that in 4 years, tuition would be $23K in-state, and room, board, and everything else together would mean someone would have the privilege of attending for almost $45K/year. He was panned and delayed the increase. Many people need 5 years to get through the system because they cant get all the classes. So $225K for four years.

I'm pretty angry that no one, except the Occupy protesters, have done anything about all of this. You speak up and you get pepper sprayed by the campus police who are supposed to be protecting you.

In fact, my state legislator's biggest piece of legislation after 8 years in the state Assembly and Senate is a law preventing anyone under 18 from using tanning beds. Seriously?

The older generation and businesses don't care that Prop 13 is robbing the state of revenue to run the schools (because I got mine, jack), the banks have heisted all this loot, and the rest of us are stuck with the bill in the form of higher property, income, and sales taxes.

Underdark says

I received my master's degree in 1998 and had a total of $17,000 in loans when I graduated and paid it off in two years. A master's degree looks good on a resume, but I could have succeeded without it. College education in general is overvalued, while vocational education is undervalued. Nurses who studied at vocational schools earn more than many PhDs. Airplane mechanics, electricians, etc. do pretty well. Many people who go to college view it as a status thing and are like the couples who bought the McMansion at the height of the housing bubble. Most people look down on these blue collar jobs.

Whenever the government decides to subsidize education or housing, the actual cost goes up proportionaly. Politicians, particularly on the left, refuse to acknowledge this to the point that many in this country are now debt-slaves. Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Sallie Mae have made the poor even poorer.

worth quoting

Underdark says

Whenever the government decides to subsidize education or housing, the actual cost goes up proportionaly. Politicians, particularly on the left, refuse to acknowledge this to the point that many in this country are now debt-slaves. Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Sallie Mae have made the poor even poorer.

That's actually incorrect. Government has been subsidizing college since right after WWII. Ever heard of the GI Bill? What about the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s when the government subsidized education? How was tuition back then? Why is it that everyone thinks the private market solves everything? Try attending any good private school without financial assistance and tell me its affordable. It is 2x the cost.

It is only now, when government has cut back substantially in grants, loans, and state funding of public universities that tuition has skyrocketed.

Waitingtobuy says

a tuition increase so that in 4 years, tuition would be $23K in-state, and room, board, and everything else together would mean someone would have the privilege of attending for almost $45K/year. He was panned and delayed the increase. Many people need 5 years to get through the system because they cant get all the classes. So $225K for four years.

4 years times $23k = $92k debt.

that's a ridiculous amount for just any old degree.

from what i've seen the typical person isn't going to be able to pay down $100k of debt easily. even for me, it would take about 2-3 years to pay off and i've got a decent paying job.

a typical recent graduate would be lucky to pay it off in 10 or 15 years.

All these graduates need to do is buy a house or two after they graduate, get 100k+ HELOC and use it to pay off student loan. Then walk away from house/declare BK.

Student debt paid off in a few years with almost no principal payments. THATS HOW ITS DONE.

Almost all the money is payment to individuals ("Civil servants") either Professors or nonteaching employees, either salary or bennies.

I haven't met or heard from such a person yet who complained about what a crappy job or lack of security they had. On the contrary, all the non-faculty I've ever known who worked for UC or CSU felt pig-lucky to have those Civil Servant jobs. I worked along side of some of them for awhile as an (unpaid lab-researching) grad student during the afternoon, working in low wage jobs in the Real Economy in the mornings and weekends. Got to see upfront, first hand, the Civil Servant Work Ethic.

As for the faculty jobs, they are some of the most coveted jobs in the USA, very competitive to get.

The tax burden in California should not go up any more, because so many working stiffs in low wage jobs are paying high rates of sales tax and state income tax already. While I agree with the concept that the rich can pay more, it is not practical to soak the rich in one single state in the USA. Increasing the state taxes burden will damage the economy more, because it will be more reasons for businesses to expand somewhere else, and it will reduce the purchasing power even more of already overtaxed Working Families.

That leaves tuition hikes on the students to pay for the rich bennies of our UC and CSU servants. The anger of those protesters oughta be directed at them and their unions, who are OK with passing along the costs to the students before sharing the pain with the rest of California. They should not direct their anger at taxpayers.

B.A.C.A.H. says

The tax burden in California should not go up any more, because so many working stiffs in low wage jobs are paying high rates of sales tax and state income tax already. Increasing the state taxes burden will damage the economy more, because it will be more reasons for businesses to expand somewhere else, and it will reduce the purchasing power even more of already overtaxed Working Families.

That leaves tuition hikes on the students to pay for the rich bennies of our UC and CSU servants. The anger of those protesters oughta be directed at them and their unions. Not the taxpayers.

Well, some of this cost can be attributed to salaries. But those have always been there. I think a lot has to do with construction of new facilities and state cutbacks in funding. Ever been on a college campus that doesn't have any construction? Likely not. That should be the first thing they do is freeze all new construction (not necessarily modernization for things like seismic retrofitting) for a period of 5 years. That would save literally billions in the UC system. State cutbacks have killed tuition.

As for taxes, why are the rest of the taxes going up? Because property taxes, which are relatively stable, make up a much smaller percentage of state revenue. Know how much LA County prop tax valuations as a whole have changed over the past year? 1%. Sales and income taxes are much more volatile when the economy heads south. Therefore, they raise our state income and sales taxes to crazy levels, which drives away businesses. Repeal parts or all of Prop 13, lower the other taxes to manageable levels, and we keep business here.

Waitingtobuy says

why are the rest of the taxes going up? Because property taxes

Dude, I live on a block where almost all of my neighbors have jobs like, roofer, janitor, carpenter, NUMMI assembly worker (not anymore!), drapery installer, drywaller, etc. These are real examples. My assessment was less than 300K, and the tax on that was $4221.

I am not complaining; I just pay the tax, it is part of my housing cost.

Prop-13 or not, whatever, $4200 is a lot of money for blue collar working families to pay, either directly as owners or through the rent as tenants, for a less than 300K assessment, when we have 10% income tax on incomes over 30K, and almost 9% (regressive!) sales tax.

New construction is not paid with operating money which is for the most part what Working Families are getting strapped to pay for, and the loan-strapped students for the cushy jobs of faculty and other associated Civil Servants on the campuses.

B.A.C.A.H. we agree. 10% income tax and 9% sales tax are ridiculous.

My question is why are we all paying this much, yet some guy who has owned his $2.5M place in Malibu since 1978 is paying property taxes as if the house is worth $300K? Why are you bearing his burden? Wouldn't you rather be paying 6-7% sales and income tax? And why did your house cost you $300K when in non-Prop 13 states, it would be a lot less? (Hint: no one wants to give up their house, which might be reassessed, so it limits supply) And what about the strip mall owner down the street who skirts reassessment because he bought the property with two other partners, limiting his ownership to under 50%?

The point is you should be complaining. Your anger towards public employees in understandable, but in my opinion, it is misdirected.

Waitingtobuy says

Your anger towards public employees

Please show me that quote, that I am angry with public employees.

Regarding the assessments and taxes myself and my neighbors pay, through the rent or whatever, my assessment is 275K. The recent appraisal is 330K. For that I get, and my blue collar neighbors get, the privilege of a very big 4.2K tax bill. We are not "holding onto our homes" for that coveted prop-13 assessment. Values have fallen enough to make it irrelevant for most of us. I agree with your remarks about the rich and the commercial properties. Everyone needs to feel the pain. Not just the blue collar taxpayers and loan-strapped students. Everyone includes, Civil Servants."

Stop feeding the beasts. That's the only way to "fix" it.

B.A.C.A.H. says

Please show me that quote, that I am angry with public employees.

B.A.C.A.H. says

Almost all the money is payment to individuals ("Civil servants") either Professors or nonteaching employees, either salary or bennies.

I haven't met or heard from such a person yet who complained about what a crappy job or lack of security they had. On the contrary, all the non-faculty I've ever known who worked for UC or CSU felt pig-lucky to have those Civil Servant jobs. I worked along side of some of them for awhile as an (unpaid lab-researching) grad student during the afternoon, working in low wage jobs in the Real Economy in the mornings and weekends. Got to see upfront, first hand, the Civil Servant Work Ethic.

That doesn't look like you are a big fan. I do agree that everyone, including civil servants, needs to feel the pain.

Regarding the price of your home, it might be right now, but I can tell you a lot of people bought when it wasn't and are now feeling the pain. Prices in my area are still too high, and Prop 13, whether through masking the true cost of property taxes, or limiting supply, has a big role in this and increasing sales and income taxes. The little guy that is working is bearing the burden for the rich cats and people that bought 30 years ago. I'm paying 2x your property taxes, AND 9% sales taxes, and 9% income taxes, just because my neighbor was lucky enough to be born 3 decades before me. He uses the same police and fire department, his grandkids go to my kids' school, and his son will send their kids to the UC system (if they can afford it).

As for UC construction funding, it doesn't come from operating costs, but it does come from general obligation bonds or short-term commercial paper. This debt service requires money, which the state doesn't have, so it moves money from one category (state university operating costs) to another (debt service for GO bonds and commercial paper). Same difference.

This article explains it: http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/newsrel/general/01-10Construction.asp

waiting,

where did I express the anger? Please show me. Everyone needs to feel the pain. Including the Civil Servants.

OK, you win, you didnt expressly show anger. Disdain?

I'm no fan of professors and employees getting lifetime seniority or tenure. However, the real issue to me is lack of funding, and we can point to employees. Freeze the salaries. Great. Still doesn't make up for the funding shortfall.

The major change is the UC system, and K-12 education in California, is that both have been shortchanged over the past 30 years since the onset of Prop 13. Our local school district has had its budget slashed by more than $10M over the past two years. We used to be 13th in state funding of education. We are now 46th, just ahead of Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, and Hawaii, all of which have "stellar" systems. Do we want our education system to be compared with these states?

Waitingtobuy says

Disdain?

I'm no fan of professors and employees getting lifetime seniority or tenure. However, the real issue to me is lack of funding, and we can point to employees. Freeze the salaries. Great. Still doesn't make up for the funding shortfall.

Disdain? No. Balance.
Civil Servants keep complaining about the revenue side of it. They are half-right. But the revenue is not An Entitlement, and they don't wanna talk about the other half of the problem.

At least, other Civil Servants outside of UC/CSU like K-12, public safety, etc. don't have the option to impose "tuition" to their Customers and send them to the arms of Student Loans to pay it. At least not yet.

We agree there. Revenue, and even a job, should not be an entitlement. But freezing and or even cutting salaries won't make up for the loss.

I deal with the K-12 budget a lot. I'm not an employee either. (I won't get into what I do). Budgets have been cut to the bone, and yet we still need people to run school districts. Until robots can teach, education is a people business. 85-90% of all school district budgets, well run and not well run districts, goes to salary and benefits. Same goes for private schools too.

Waiting, the reason you are paying 9K a year in property taxes, is because it was your choice to pay for (or borrow for) > 600K for your house. That is not your Senior Citizen neighbor's fault. S/he did not ask you to bid up the cost of living on his/her street.

What is sad is that, so many people made that choice, to overpay and get over-assessed and paying way too much property taxes that it created a positive feedback loop rising of assessments and revenues which allowed postponement of the reckoning of the whole system. That delay exacerbated all the problems with it and now in blue collar places at least, The Gig is Up.

At least from what it sounds like, you're in The Fortress where the values remain high, and thost who became residents during the recent years of high assessments are affluent enough to pay those bills. It's different over here where it's mostly lower wage folks.

Partially true. I did make that choice, and I've been fortunate enough to build up wealth over the years (and the value of my last home went up, which allowed me to trade up). I am paying my fair share to support services.

However, you can't ignore the fact that a law that allows you to enjoy the same benefits of living on the same street, receiving the same services, reaping increased property values, yet paying 25% of the property taxes I pay, is fair to me or anyone else. (How about giving him a police or fire dept response time that is 75% slower than mine?) And the ability to pass along the home to his kids or grandkids without a reassessment. Not to mention the extra insult of hiking other taxes to pay for his/their windfall.

Why not lower the property tax for EVERYONE to .8% of current residential and commercial values, as well as lower sales and income taxes to 7%? We might be able to attract new businesses, instead of driving them away, and still pay our bills. We have to try something, because the current formula is not working. By doing nothing, we are defending the status quo, and our long slide into mediocrity.

Waitingtobuy says

reaping increased property values,

Your Senior Citizen neighbor, if he lived there a long time, did not reap increased property values. That only happens when he sells, which he did not do. But you already said here that you reaped increased values to trade up. Did your Senior CItizen neighbor complain about that?

That's a canard that Howard Jarvis used. Most of the people involved in writing Prop 13 were apartment owners. There can be exemptions/means testing too. Your assuming he is a senior citizen. He's 57. An even so, he will make out like a bandit if he would ever need to sell the place.

Why should I subsidize him? Because he was born before me? Boo hoo. If he can't afford to pay the taxes to live here anymore, then sell the place, make $900K, and find a place to rent nearby.

I agree with you that locking in low rates for commercial property owners is not the same thing as protecting others from being evicted from their own homes.

But protecting Senior Citizens and others from getting evicted from their own homes because new neighbors overpaid is not a canard for sheltering The Rich from market assessments on their businesses. It is only a canard for the disingenuous who make that argument. There is no good reason why the tax laws cannot be changed.

When you overpaid for that Fortress House, you over committed for your property taxes. It was your choice. He did not, in your words, "reap" from increased property values if he did not sell. But unlike him, you did "reap" as you put it, from increased property values, to trade up. Then after that you made a sarcastic remark about "oh boo hoo". So you got yours, f'ck the rest of them.

Let's reap the benefit and boo hoo for the rest. Welcome to The Fortress. Welcome to The Bay Area. The Cool and Hip Bay Area.

I'm not in the Bay Area. Im in LA.

What does "overpaying" for my Fortress House have anything to do with this? I would be complaining about the 9% income and 9% sales taxes if my house cost $800K or $80K.

My issue isn't the property taxes, although I wouldnt mind them lower. It is that my neighbor and anyone else that has a sweetheart deal on property taxes has forced the rest of us to pay all kinds of higher taxes. It also means we get less services because they aren't carrying their share of the load.

My boo hoo comment is sarcastic. What you are saying is that I should be taking care of someone whose house value has gone up a lot, and could cash out if they wanted, or could take a part time job, etc. If we didn't have Prop 13 (it limits supply), we might have had lower prices to start, at which point the property taxes on the older owner would be assessed lower. (again, there could be means testing or exemptions for people beyond working age).

Of course I'm not in favor of older people getting evicted, but I'm also not in favor of younger people being evicted because they can't afford to pay their mortgage or rent because of high sales, income, and property taxes, who send their kids to schools which don't have enough money to pay the bills, and who can't get to work on time because the roads blow.

So are you saying that the great majority of us should suffer to protect someone whose house is worth 20 times what they paid for it? If so, you won't get any sympathy from me. Or are you happy with the way things are in CA? If so, at ease...If you can't afford the property taxes, get a part time job as a crossing guard for 2 hrs/day, apply for an exemption, take out a reverse mortgage or HELOC, or sell and move to an apartment you can afford (and enjoy the $900K windfall on a trip to Tahiti). A revised set of property tax laws could be architected to avoid hurting the less fortunate, which is what is happening right now to a fair greater share of people.

zzyzzx says

This stuff is mostly due to colleges paying lavish benefits to employees (often unionized) and paying for bloated union labor on construction projects as well.

If the homeowner isn't insulted by your offer...you didn't bid low enough!!!

Yes, how dare the people who spend their days cleaning the toilets at colleges accross this country expect to earn enough to someday be able to send their own kids. Unions aren't the problem. It's all the extras, like fancy, foreign campuses, lavish dining halls and sports programs that routinely run overbudget. Some of the cost increases are justified, as technology forces schools to upgrade certain equiptment perpetually in order to keep their students up to snuff, but the US government writes a blank check in the form of loans so there's no incentive to economize. Tenured professors don't teach anymore; they research and publish, leaving teaching to UNDERPAID adjuncts. Priorities are out of whack because colleges lack fiscal discipline. Limit government backed student aid to a per pupil total, and prices would begin to normalize.

I've always thought that differences between the Bay Area and the LA Area were mostly all in the minds of Bay Area media types with Major Market Size Envy. Kind of like so many of the professors at the different colleges in the Bay Area who say that "I could've taught at Berkeley, but..."...

The "I cashed ("reaped") my market gain and got mine, but now that I did it, it's not fair" mantra sounds like another thing we have in common, here in the Cool and Hip Bay, with Cool and Hip L.A.

When they write that accepted (congratulations!) offer, buyers choose to buy and they set the price, "congratulations on your new purchase!". They elect to pay the property tax they wrote into their offer. It was a choice that they made, no coercion.

Older folks did not choose to have their reassessment price them out of their homes because younger wealthier people muscled their way in, with cash or their high incomes or loans or whatever. These are people prop-13 voters were fooled into protecting when they voted for it, but it seems like that was only a rider written in to gin up working class people to vote for something that was more about commercial properties. I didn't vote for it, I was a kid at the time, too young to vote.

B.A.C.A.H. says

The "I cashed ("reaped") my market gain and got mine, but now that I did it, it's not fair" mantra sounds like another thing we have in common, here in the Cool and Hip Bay, with Cool and Hip L.A.

I think you have this backwards. Im not suggesting "I got mine, Jack, so backoff". Quite the opposite. I think everyone should pay, no matter the value of the purchase price, including yours truly, that bought at a price I never thought I would pay. As you said, it was my choice. It is the older folks' choice to live in a property that is worth lots more than they paid.

I have voted for our school district bonds. In fact, I ran the campaign, because I believe in good schools. What Im not happy about is others don't feel the same by paying it forward.

This may be the first generation that doesn't feel obligated to provide for the same schools, roads, and public services that their predecessors did. What if, after WWII, the older folks back then said "why should I pay my fair share of taxes for someone else's kids?". These people would never have been educated or had the opportunities they had. Then, Howard Jarvis comes along and says, "you shouldn't pay the same as everyone else. You are special..."and people bought it. What kind of a message does this send to young people that there is a special class of people who don't pay their fair share of taxes?

It isn't my fault that prices have risen, and the fact that my paying $800K for a house benefits the person who was there a long time by an increase in their home value. I'm happy for them and am not jealous in any way. If no one paid what I paid, then they might be sitting on a home worth $80K instead of $800K. Just like it isnt the older folks fault either. The system has limited demand.

When prices rose at our old place, I was ecstatic. I cashed out and rented for 4 years, until we caught the downdraft of the new place we are in (which was worth $1.1M at the peak). Why couldn't someone else take the cash and rent if they can't afford the property taxes?

Again, you haven't answered my question about why it's OK for me and every other working stiff to subsidize someone that bought 30 years ago because that is exactly what we are doing. Just like I will be glad to pay my fair share of taxes if my place increases 10 fold to $8M. If taxes go up, so be it. I'm cashing out again and moving in to a place I can afford..with a wad of cash. Or Im paying my taxes because that's what good citizens do.

Dont complain about college debt.
If you have debt, change countries and the debt stays.
If you want to go to school look overseas, Swiss universities are $1500/year, and Most of Europe has free tuition for Foreign students. My country gives zero interest loans to students and has near zero unemployment.

Countries fight over young hardworking and educated people. Try Australia where you can get a job paying very well without a formal education. Even wages in China are higher than the USA now. Any young person could quickly get wealthy in Asia, its full of high paying jobs and comfortable living with great healthcare.

TylerDurden1 says

Even wages in China are higher than the USA now

No they're not.

Clara says

some money. Paid off my loan in 5 months after graduation easily.
I now am a senior manager of a big SW company. One guy under me was from MIT, another from UCB. Both with huge loans. The way I see it, expensive college are overrated

This describes me too....I have a BS from a California State University. I lived at home and commuted to school. Not the best school by any means. But it cost around $1800/yr at the time plus books and parking. And its a passable school.

I work at the same job as people who went to much more expensive and prestigious schools. I make the same as them and may make more. The head of my division went to a Cal State University also and is over people who went to very expensive private schools.

People run into trouble, like others have said, when they do retarded stuff like spring for private school or to live at a UC AND major in a worthless program(in the future making money sort of way) AND take out loans to do.

If you are borrowing $10K+ a year to eventually make $30-60K/yr, you really are making a HUGE mistake. These people should either live with mom and dad and attend community college then a CSU, or they should work full time and attend a CSU at night.