- 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: Louisiana special session: Failure.
Posted on 3/5/18 at 9:36 am to 90proofprofessional
Posted on 3/5/18 at 9:36 am to 90proofprofessional
quote:
but TOPS is tied to tuition prices
1. It doesn't automatically go up when tuition does now. They changed that about 2 years ago I think? Now the legislature can increase it to match tuition increases, but it takes an action for them to do that. So practically you are correct.
2. I am not sure what that would have to do with my statement. Tuition is not direct state aid.
Do you mean something like: "Well if you cut direct aid, they will just raise tuition, which increases TOPS cost."?
1
Posted on 3/5/18 at 9:39 am to BigJim
quote:
2. I am not sure what that would have to do with my statement. Tuition is not direct state aid.
meaning that reducing direct aid could easily just result in an offsetting increase in the TOPS expenditures, gaining nothing
Posted on 3/5/18 at 10:09 am to Slippy
When has LA ever been governed effectively?
Posted on 3/5/18 at 10:11 am to Slippy
Tell your kid to bust his arse and earn a scholarship. Academic or otherwise.
Or, dont send your kid to LSU.
People got along just fine before TOPS
Or, dont send your kid to LSU.
People got along just fine before TOPS
Posted on 3/5/18 at 10:13 am to the LSUSaint
disappointed that lsusaint failed to engage on this:
i've been curious about how much there actually was to this for a while
quote:quote:
I know that's why it's down, kid. I may fall short in a few areas, but this isn't one. I suggest you take your toys to a different sandbox before you get in over your head, albeit too late
i'll throw the BS flag there
you got some real evidence for that? something good enough to show that it is more to blame than us not having a permian basin + a general fall in prices?
i've been curious about how much there actually was to this for a while
Posted on 3/5/18 at 10:22 am to Spock's Eyebrow
So they should suffer for being responsible parents and having success? Academic scholarships should be merit based just as athletic scholarships.
Posted on 3/5/18 at 10:25 am to LSU7096
quote:
So they should suffer
oh no i have to pay for college i'm suffering
Posted on 3/5/18 at 10:39 am to 90proofprofessional
I joined the military and used student loans to pay for my education.
TOPS should be reserved for students with 3.5 GPA and above. If you can't swing that in HS, you do not deserve to go to college free. If you raise the standards you will lower the cost of the program.
TOPS should be reserved for students with 3.5 GPA and above. If you can't swing that in HS, you do not deserve to go to college free. If you raise the standards you will lower the cost of the program.
This post was edited on 3/14/18 at 6:49 am
Posted on 3/5/18 at 10:41 am to 90proofprofessional
quote:
oh no i have to pay for college i'm suffering
All this is doing is proving that once govt. gives you a perk they can't take it back.
Posted on 3/5/18 at 10:44 am to Slippy
quote:
Naw man. $300 million ain't that much when the objective is to build an educated, trained workforce. To lift people to a higher station. it's not that much at all.
The people in this state can't even agree on whether this is a good investment or not. We are doomed.
How many take the out tax dollars and move to a better state directly out of college? This doesn't help Louisiana at all.
Posted on 3/5/18 at 11:00 am to 90proofprofessional
quote:
meaning that reducing direct aid could easily just result in an offsetting increase in the TOPS expenditures, gaining nothing
And in net top of line numbers you might be correct, BUT there would be a rebalancing.
Direct aid is shared across campuses. TOPS money goes where TOPS students go. Which has been LSU, LaTech and ULL. Exactly the campuses that SHOULD be getting more money. But letting the students choose, you get around the old school system of all the campuses each getting "their fair share."
This post was edited on 3/5/18 at 11:02 am
Posted on 3/5/18 at 11:00 am to BigJim
quote:
The TOPS requirements, low as they are, are HIGHER than every college entrance requirement other than LSU. So I know that my tax dollars that fund TOPS, as opposed to direct state aid to colleges, are going to qualified students.
Well... that's because in order to have enough students for all our public universities, we have to have embarrassingly low entrance requirements.
But this makes me think of a solution.
Keep TOPS where it is... but require every 4 year school in LA to have minimum entrance requirements to be at the TOPS level. A school (like LSU) can go higher, but no lower.
That might cause 4-5 colleges to shut down. Then you save money on the back end.
quote:
Rather than cut TOPS, I think direct state aid should be cut first. Now ideally you fund both. But if it is a choice between them, keep TOPS and fund the better students.
Isn't TOPS now frozen? If that's the case, then cutting state aid = higher tuition, which means the TOPS people (with everyone else) woudl pay more.
Before the freeze, state aid cuts just meant TOPS cost the state more. It was beyond stupid.
Posted on 3/5/18 at 11:00 am to doubleb
quote:
TOPS is a luxury the state can't afford to provide.
If true spending reform were enacted by slashing wasteful programs across the board, then I would be in favor of curtailing or even dropping TOPS.
However, as it stands, TOPS is one of the few avenues for the middle class to recoup a fraction of their hard earned tax dollars currently being squandered by politicians and deadbeats.
Posted on 3/5/18 at 11:01 am to LSU7096
quote:
Academic scholarships should be merit based just as athletic scholarships.
If TOPS went away, the universities would find ways to create more academic scholarships.
Posted on 3/5/18 at 11:04 am to BigJim
quote:
Direct aid is shared across campuses. TOPS money goes where TOPS students go. Which has been LSU, LaTech and ULL.
that's a good point; kind of a backdoor cut for the shitty ones
but over time they could just get all the more shrill in screaming for support
Posted on 3/5/18 at 11:05 am to 2tigergo
quote:
However, as it stands, TOPS is one of the few avenues for the middle class to recoup a fraction of their hard earned tax dollars currently being squandered by politicians and deadbeats.
People in the Film business can rationalize Film Tax Credits. People that work in Nursing Homes can rationalize La. pushing more old folks into nursing homes. Middle Class folks can rationalize TOPS.
That's how it works. You feel better getting something back, but reality is too many get something from govt. that isn't a necessity. It isn't a basic function of govt. And in La. we can't afford all this.
We have enough to do to take care of the indigent, old people, the unfortunates plus educating our young people.
Posted on 3/5/18 at 11:06 am to BigJim
quote:
Direct aid is shared across campuses. TOPS money goes where TOPS students go. Which has been LSU, LaTech and ULL. Exactly the campuses that SHOULD be getting more money. But letting the students choose, you get around the old school system of all the campuses each getting "their fair share."
I always found it funny that the people who want a voucher system for elementary, and secondary schooling oppose TOPS.
Posted on 3/5/18 at 11:07 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
Keep TOPS where it is... but require every 4 year school in LA to have minimum entrance requirements to be at the TOPS level. A school (like LSU) can go higher, but no lower.
That might cause 4-5 colleges to shut down. Then you save money on the back end.
Well yeah, that would be a great solution. (Excluding community colleges of course). But that ain't going to happen. So therefore TOPS acts as a backdoor method of achieve close to the same thing.
quote:
Isn't TOPS now frozen?
It no longer automatically increases with tuition.
quote:
If that's the case, then cutting state aid = higher tuition, which means the TOPS people (with everyone else) woudl pay more.
Not necessarily. Tuition increases are controlled by the legislature. In any case TOPS doesn't cover everything now.
quote:
Before the freeze, state aid cuts just meant TOPS cost the state more. It was beyond stupid.
Agree, it was a perverse incentive. Well at least for those schools that had a lot of TOPS students.
Posted on 3/5/18 at 11:08 am to Slippy
What really chaps me about this is... the legis HAD a deal.
The deal was:
1) Extend a quarter of the new penny in sales tax
2) Remove the deduction for state/local taxes for income tax
3) Cut the remaining deficit in the regular session
It wasn't unanimous but there was enough votes to get it to the Senate. A big issue is they needed 70 votes for the sales tax, but only 53 votes for the income tax bill.
It failed because, THEY COULD NOT AGREE ON WHICH ORDER TO VOTE ON THE BILLS. That is a result of the fact that both parties don't trust each other. The GOP felt that if they passed the income tax bill first, then the Dems would renege on their pledge to vote for the sales tax. The Dems felt that if they voted on the sales tax bill first, since the income tax bill would then only need 53 votes, the GOP would add in all sorts of stuff that was not agreed to, and force the dems to either vote for a bill they no longer wanted, or be painted as the party that votes to raise sales taxes on the poor but not income taxes on the rich.
This was absolute political BS. This had nothing to do with actual law or policies, but rather, personality conflicts and a lack of trust.
I don't know what you call the opposite of a "statesman" but that's what these clowns are.
And yet... based on this here thread... a lot of people are cheering this. It's crazy. We can't be mad at the politicians if the politicians are doing exactly what we want them to do.
The deal was:
1) Extend a quarter of the new penny in sales tax
2) Remove the deduction for state/local taxes for income tax
3) Cut the remaining deficit in the regular session
It wasn't unanimous but there was enough votes to get it to the Senate. A big issue is they needed 70 votes for the sales tax, but only 53 votes for the income tax bill.
It failed because, THEY COULD NOT AGREE ON WHICH ORDER TO VOTE ON THE BILLS. That is a result of the fact that both parties don't trust each other. The GOP felt that if they passed the income tax bill first, then the Dems would renege on their pledge to vote for the sales tax. The Dems felt that if they voted on the sales tax bill first, since the income tax bill would then only need 53 votes, the GOP would add in all sorts of stuff that was not agreed to, and force the dems to either vote for a bill they no longer wanted, or be painted as the party that votes to raise sales taxes on the poor but not income taxes on the rich.
This was absolute political BS. This had nothing to do with actual law or policies, but rather, personality conflicts and a lack of trust.
I don't know what you call the opposite of a "statesman" but that's what these clowns are.
And yet... based on this here thread... a lot of people are cheering this. It's crazy. We can't be mad at the politicians if the politicians are doing exactly what we want them to do.
Posted on 3/5/18 at 11:08 am to Slippy
quote:
House Republican leaders favor sales taxes, while Democrats, particularly the Black Caucus, prefer income taxes.
of course they do
Page 4 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News