- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Here is an easy $62.5 million to address the states shortfall.
Posted on 3/3/16 at 1:29 pm to Guava Jelly
Posted on 3/3/16 at 1:29 pm to Guava Jelly
quote:
Take a moment and think critically about the implications of what you're proposing. Do you really think it would be that easy?
I have thought about it for years. We have too many full 4 year universities serving a small number of state residents. The average enrollment is about 10,000, but that is skewed by LSU, ULL and Southeastern. Several of these universities have less than 5000 students. We have two separate boards governing those universities. Each university has to have their own administration, physical plant, etc. This duplication of costs is unnecessary, especially in a state our size.
There is no reason why we need full 4 year universities for each geographic area of the state. People may have to travel to go to school.
I doubt the economic impact is as large as you are stating. Many of the areas with these universities have not grown tremendously due to hosting universities. The Monroe/Ruston area has three universities. The combined population of those two towns is under 75,000. Staggering growth has not occurred. Moreover, none of the smaller schools are world class research universities bringing in millions of dollars via their research.
Yes, people would lose jobs. People are losing jobs all over the state right now. When the budget deficit is as large as advertised hard decisions must be made. Very little reason exists for paying for such a bloated system. We would have a stronger university system if we consolidated and focused what money we do have on building a few very strong, populous universities rather than diluting the state's limited funds to maintain facilities in so many different areas.
As for the brain drain, it has been advertised for years. It has either already happening or is overrated. Closing down universities with small enrollments and no real research facilities will not contribute to brain drain.
Posted on 3/3/16 at 2:11 pm to Macavity92
quote:
There is no reason why we need full 4 year universities for each geographic area of the state. People may have to travel to go to school.
Travel isn't possible for a lot of people who are trying to attend a four year school because of the ever increasing cost of attendance.
quote:
I doubt the economic impact is as large as you are stating. Many of the areas with these universities have not grown tremendously due to hosting universities. The Monroe/Ruston area has three universities. The combined population of those two towns is under 75,000. Staggering growth has not occurred. Moreover, none of the smaller schools are world class research universities bringing in millions of dollars via their research.
Viewed in as small a lens as Ruston, it doesn't seem that great. But dismantling the higher ed system is going to have a significant negative impact on the economy whether or not you think so. To your point that they aren't drawing research money, that's because the state's constant cuts force top-tier researchers out of the state. Even at LSU there is no money for such research.
quote:
es, people would lose jobs. People are losing jobs all over the state right now.
quote:
As for the brain drain, it has been advertised for years. It has either already happening or is overrated.
These two are hand-in-hand. People are losing jobs because the state's economy is so dependent on the oil industry. You know why the state is so dependent on the oil industry? Because so few people got post-secondary educations, electing instead to go to the oilfield. Many of those who did want to advance in other industries leave (I am among them).
Cutting McNeese for example, would eliminate arguably the best engineering program in the region. So you'd be eliminating opportunities for a lot of people who would otherwise get a quality education, forcing them onto the already overburdened oilfield teat. So stagnant oil prices would be felt even more acutely by the school.
Again, all this is fine fodder for a thought experiment. And certainly some schools in very close proximity could be consolidated. But an overhaul including the shuttering of half the schools in the state isn't prudent in the short term. If you want to trim the fat, look into the areas that have enjoyed constitutional protection.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News