- 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: JBE drops the hammer
Posted on 4/13/16 at 11:28 am to LSU_Saints_Hornets
Posted on 4/13/16 at 11:28 am to LSU_Saints_Hornets
quote:
frick NO! That is what is wrong with government today. The government will bend over backwards to take care of those who buy what they want and beg for what they NEED.
No offense but your family is no different from those people who pull up in a brand new car buying crawfish with a louisiana purchase
Lol...yea. Actually earning TOPS with hard work and intelligence is exactly the same as just getting free shite for being poor.
2
Posted on 4/13/16 at 11:30 am to Tigeralum2008
quote:
I personally feel it is time we adopt a new Louisiana Constitution eliminating all of the fiscal protections for state agencies while also developing a more stable source of revenue.
I hate when people make this argument. They are protected because they are essential. What do you propose we cut from? Here are the dedicated departments.
Executive
Veterans Affairs
Elected Officials
Economic Development
Culture, Recreation and Tourism
DOTD
Public Safety
Social Services
Natural Resources
Revenue
DEQ
Workforce Commission
Wildlife and Fisheries
Civil Service
Retirement
Judicial
Legislative
These departments have already been cut to the bone. In Jindal's last three years, hiring was frozen. It's still frozen. Every Dept is doing more with less. You can tell how that's going with all of the articles about Social Services not having enough case workers to visit abused kids. The only place you can cut is from Higher Ed and DHH unless you want to lose services. When you start listying the services the state provides and people suddenly want to keep them. You think this is a new idea. This has been debated for years.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 11:31 am to Ryne Sandberg
quote:
Wow, what a sad existence you must live. If a student meets the requirements for TOPS, they should be able to receive the money. End of story. There should be no exceptions for race, family income, etc. That's fair.
My sister wears a $10k watch. Why does the state need to pay for her education? It's kind of silly when you sit back and think about it, it's not like LSU offered her a full academic ride, or any other school for that matter. To call TOPS and academic scholarship is a little disingenuous.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 11:32 am to Commandeaux
quote:
I hate when people make this argument. They are protected because they are essential. What do you propose we cut from? Here are the dedicated departments.
I don't trust any Louisiana elected official to decide what funds are "essential"
Posted on 4/13/16 at 11:33 am to Barf
I've told you this already and I'll tell you one more time. I love your handle.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 11:33 am to Commandeaux
quote:
I hate when people make this argument. They are protected because they are essential.
Oh frick off, dude. The state has piss poor management at best. It's bloated beyond repair. You dorks are part of the problem.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 11:35 am to Barf
quote:
My sister wears a $10k watch. Why does the state need to pay for her education? It's kind of silly when you sit back and think about it, it's not like LSU offered her a full academic ride, or any other school for that matter. To call TOPS and academic scholarship is a little disingenuous.
Except that's exactly what it is. The requirements are academic. I can't help that your sister was born with a silver spoon. Not every child with wealthy parents is having their parents pay for college. Just because your family has money shouldn't disqualify you because once you hit 18 you're legally on your own.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 11:35 am to Barf
quote:
sister wears a $10k watch. Why does the state need to pay for her education? It's kind of silly when you sit back and think about it, it's not like LSU offered her a full academic ride, or any other school for that matter. To call TOPS and academic scholarship is a little disingenuou
Why is it not an academic scholarship? If you're smart you get it. That's the basics of an academic scholarship. The poors already have enough free shite they don't actually earn. TOPS doesn't need to be another one.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 11:35 am to Barf
quote:
My sister wears a $10k watch. Why does the state need to pay for her education? It's kind of silly when you sit back and think about it, it's not like LSU offered her a full academic ride, or any other school for that matter. To call TOPS and academic scholarship is a little disingenuous.
It isn't an academic scholarship anymore, it's a handout. So that's correct.
It SHOULD be an academic scholarship. It should have a 26 or higher requirement. It should have had that all along and we wouldn't be in this mess. Low-income students making average or below grades have a plethora of options to attend college cost and debt-free.
(Although the bigger questions is if even that should be the case. It shouldn't because all of this is why college tuition has dramatically risen, but if this is going to be how things are, then smart kids from any background should have some options that aren't tied to often politically motivated private/non-profit application processes.)
Posted on 4/13/16 at 11:52 am to Ingeniero
quote:
The requirements are academic
To a certain extent. While the TOPS requirements are based off of test scores and GPA, it's not the same as a true full academic scholarship that a university would give.
TOPS at it's core was a very good idea, it just became too bloated by the time everyone put in their two cents. It turned into something it was never intended to be as well as a bargaining chip for political games. I'm not sure it did anything to stop or slow the export of degrees.
I would rather see TOPS fund education to people with the stipulation that you stayed in state for work as well as a way to get our residents in less than optimal economic situations into a position to succeed.
People like my little sister aren't eligible for grants. So why should she be eligible for TOPS?
I don't have the answers, but I would like to think I'm not far off in thinking TOPS needs a full overhaul.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 11:57 am to Barf
My son made a 29 on the ACT. ULL offered him $1200/semester for 4 years; LSU offered $750 per semester for 4 years.
That leaves a chunk without TOPS which is fine.
My question is had TOPS never been around, I wonder if the scholarship offers would have been more? Not just in his case but in those with 30+.
Based on last years ULL fees, without TOPS we'd be paying $3344 per semester; with TOPS at last years levels & the ULL scholly, we'd be paying $341/semester.
Not complaining, just musing what the situation would be tuition cost/scholarship wise had TOPS never been available.
That leaves a chunk without TOPS which is fine.
My question is had TOPS never been around, I wonder if the scholarship offers would have been more? Not just in his case but in those with 30+.
Based on last years ULL fees, without TOPS we'd be paying $3344 per semester; with TOPS at last years levels & the ULL scholly, we'd be paying $341/semester.
Not complaining, just musing what the situation would be tuition cost/scholarship wise had TOPS never been available.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 11:59 am to Freauxzen
quote:Agree. And dropouts should have to reimburse the state. I was too old to get the gov't cheese, but my sister got it, she lives OOS now.
it's a handout.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 12:04 pm to White Bear
quote:
And dropouts should have to reimburse the state
I think students should PAY and be reimbursed if they make the grades. And I have a graduating high school senior so I've got a dog in the fight. I always thought pay it back would be ok but they'll spend more money to try to get the money back than it's probably worth.
DOn't give it out until the grades are in.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 12:16 pm to Barf
quote:So you're saying that unless this kid gets a $10K/year education there's no way they're getting a 26 on the ACT?
Of course they have the same opportunity because a $10k/year private school and a public school in an impoverished neighborhood are equal
quote:Poor people are keeping poor people poor. They're getting more than enough help as it is and they're still poor.
Nobody said it had to be easier but keeping the poor people poor doesn't help anyone.
quote:Our tax dollars are already doing enough. We're subsidizing their housing, meals at home, meals at school. Paying for their school. Hell, we're even paying for their private school. I can't take the goddamn tests for them too. What exactly are they doing for themselves?
This is just silly, it's not the kids fault. We should do everything in our power to educate our kids to the best of our abilities.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 12:21 pm to Epic Cajun
quote:
You think there is no correlation at all between test scores and future success?
Future academic success, sure. Financial? I'm not so sure. I'm talking degree for degree here. It's not fair to compare a harvard degree to LSU.
The qualities that separate staff/middle management from executives isn't seen in an ACT score.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 12:25 pm to Commandeaux
quote:
I hate when people make this argument. They are protected because they are essential. What do you propose we cut from? Here are the dedicated departments.
6th highest state worker per capita
note: non-educational state worker
quote:
Veterans Affairs
Economic Development
Culture, Recreation and Tourism
these 3 departments could be sliced up
veteran affairs concerns can be handled by the federal agency
economic development and tourism should be combined, streamlined, and gutted. let the market dictate these things
Posted on 4/13/16 at 12:25 pm to Ryne Sandberg
quote:
Wow, what a sad existence you must live. If a student meets the requirements for TOPS, they should be able to receive the money. End of story. There should be no exceptions for race, family income, etc. That's fair.
Are you fricking retarded? That is a waste of money. That is why tops is only open to students who go to public school. If you can afford private school you don't need tops.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 12:28 pm to LSU_Saints_Hornets
quote:
Are you fricking retarded? That is a waste of money.
based on your argument, the entire program is a waste of money?
TOPS is a program meant to keep our top students in school here in LA (for a number of reasons), not populate open admissions colleges
quote:
If you can afford private school you don't need tops.
what does need have to do with anything?
or let me throw this around. if you believe need is the basis, then our top unis need a higher level of student
they do not need perceived fairness
Posted on 4/13/16 at 12:28 pm to tylercsbn9
quote:
Lol...yea. Actually earning TOPS with hard work and intelligence is exactly the same as just getting free shite for being poor.
Earning Tops is not fricking HARD dumb arse. It is fricking tops we are not talking about the Rhodes Scholarship. All y'all public trough eating mother frickers make me sick.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 12:28 pm to tylercsbn9
(no message)
This post was edited on 4/13/16 at 12:29 pm
Page 17 of 25
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News