Visit Counter

Monday, January 9, 2012

Columbia Teaches How to "Occupy" at $5001.09




On a tip from Ed Kilbane










Recently, Columbia University in New York proposed offering a class in Occupy Wall Street. I suppose the class will teach people how to camp out in a city park. Under a continuation of the Obama administration, this might actually become a good life skill.

One facet of the class that I want to point out is its cost. There is an ongoing debate over the cost of a college education and if it is worth it. In general, a typical student completes a degree in four years. Masters students, course of study is compressed, two years. Time and money become a real constraint when selecting classes.

The cost for one year of undergraduate education at Columbia is roughly $53,345 all in. That includes room, board, books, tuition, and fees. Divide that by how many credit hours a normal student takes (32/yr) and you arrive at $1667.03 per credit hour. Masters students pay more per credit hour for their classes.

If you are borrowing money to go to school, the actual cost of the credit hour goes up because it will cost you more when you repay the loan. And if you are on government aid, the American taxpayer gets to pay for it!

Given that the Occupy Wall Street class is a three credit hour class, it costs an undergrad $5001.09 to learn how to camp out in a park and beat a drum while articulating a far left manifesto. I shouldn’t forget to mention that the student ought to consider what a future employer might think when they see that class on a transcript. I suppose if you are going to work for a far left non-government organization it would look favorable. But, I don’t think it will look particularly sharp if you are trying to get a job in a field like consulting.

If students began looking at classes on a cost/benefit basis and extrapolating how the chosen class will help them in the future, we would see less fluff and more real stuff. Maybe it’s not the actual cost of a college education that is the real problem. It’s the classes that are taken while they are there.


Recently, Columbia University in New York proposed offering a class in Occupy Wall Street. I suppose the class will teach people how to camp out in a city park. Under a continuation of the Obama administration, this might actually become a good life skill.

One facet of the class that I want to point out is its cost. There is an ongoing debate over the cost of a college education and if it is worth it. In general, a typical student completes a degree in four years. Masters students, course of study is compressed, two years. Time and money become a real constraint when selecting classes.

The cost for one year of undergraduate education at Columbia is roughly $53,345 all in. That includes room, board, books, tuition, and fees. Divide that by how many credit hours a normal student takes (32/yr) and you arrive at $1667.03 per credit hour. Masters students pay more per credit hour for their classes.

If you are borrowing money to go to school, the actual cost of the credit hour goes up because it will cost you more when you repay the loan. And if you are on government aid, the American taxpayer gets to pay for it!

Given that the Occupy Wall Street class is a three credit hour class, it costs an undergrad $5001.09 to learn how to camp out in a park and beat a drum while articulating a far left manifesto. I shouldn’t forget to mention that the student ought to consider what a future employer might think when they see that class on a transcript. I suppose if you are going to work for a far left non-government organization it would look favorable. But, I don’t think it will look particularly sharp if you are trying to get a job in a field like consulting.

If students began looking at classes on a cost/benefit basis and extrapolating how the chosen class will help them in the future, we would see less fluff and more real stuff. Maybe it’s not the actual cost of a college education that is the real problem. It’s the classes that are taken while they are there.





Share/Bookmark

Saturday, January 7, 2012

Kim Jung Un




Courtesy of Harvey Hallberg  USMC.....................





I am really concerned about North Korea's appointment of the "dear leader", Kim Jung Ill's youngest son to be the new leader of North Korea -- a nuclear power!

After all, Kim Jung Un (pronounced Kim's young-un?) had NO military experience whatsoever before daddy made him a four-star general in the military. This is a snot-nose twerp who has never accomplished anything in his life that that would even come close to military leadership: he hasn't even so much as led a cub scout troop, let alone coached a sports team or commanded a military platoon. So, setting that aside, next they make him the "beloved leader" of the country. Terrific!!!

Oh, crap! I'm sorry. I just remembered that we did the same thing here, we took a community organizer who has never worn a uniform and made him Commander-in-Chief; a guy who has never led anything more than an ACORN demonstration and made him the leader of this country. Never mind.


 


Share/Bookmark

Thursday, December 22, 2011

Manny M. Dorlors´





Allow me to introduce to you my fictitious friend Manny M. Dorlors´.  Pronounce Dorlors´ with a Spanish inflection like...Dor--lors´


I like to think the M stands for More.


Manny today is a rather clean-cut intelligent young man who came to this country with his family legally when he was still a boy.  Coming from Cuba they were almost broke. To compound the problem no one in the family could speak a word of English but over time they learned how. To be fair Manny and his little sister quickly learned to speak English fluently and his Mom and Dad did well enough to get by. Settling in Miami they avoided culture shock and were surprised to discover every time they turned the lights on they actually worked. 


Well as time went by, and Manny graduated from high school, his father a taxi driver, could not afford to send him to college. Manny instead began looking for work. He was a hard worker but could only find dead end jobs.  Nevertheless, Manny strived to get ahead and at his new job he always volunteered to work overtime as a forklift operator at the J and C warehouse.

I think it was around 1999 when Manny had saved enough money to buy himself a laptop computer. When he brought it home he couldn't even figure out how to turn it on. However, over a very short period of time he became infatuated with it. Soon he understood with great clarity computer technology. It wasn't long before he could take a computer apart and put it back together almost blindfolded.

 Manny began to realize the potential of earning money with his newly aquired skills. In the computer magazine he subscribed to they sang the praises and income potential of website development. He decided to investigate. 


 That Manny was something...when he saw an opportunity look out Loretta. Everyday, and I mean everyday, Manny taught himself, and became immersed, in website development. He would stay up all night, go to work, come home, and only go to sleep every other night. He did this for two years only sleeping soundly on weekends. It wasn't long before he filed for two patents. Several companies offered him a tidy sum for the patent rights. Although tempted, he turned them down. A better outcome was just a short hop away. Why sell the patent rights when he could develop it himself he thought? What he did may have been a gamble but it also quenched the urge to take care of his family.


Six and a half years after Manny was first offered $450,000 by Sincom Systems he had created MMD Web Developers MMD for short. Today the privately owned company is worth over 165 million and employs 26 people and Manny is considering going public with a IPO.


To his credit he took care of his Mom and Dad and  little sister. They lived the life never dreamed of in Cuba. But Manny also indulged in living large. He takes home an annual salary of $10 million but spends over $12 million. Although he has never married he has 4 homes (and throws lavish parties), six cars, an 85 foot custom Hatteras, and a Cessna Citation. His credit cards are maxed out. The IRS is breathing down his neck for some serious back taxes. Trans Union, Equifax, and Experian have all downgraded his A-1 credit rating of 809 to 362.


What is Manny's problem?


A.   Simple... he needs more revenue.


B.   He spends to much.




 The correct answer is A according to Obama and the rest of the Democratic Party.









Share/Bookmark

Monday, December 19, 2011

An absolute pathological liar





Reminder America - Obama Didn't Over Promise.






Over promised!!!



This is how it started, and why he came to be ridiculed as the Messiah. He could do all this with a wave of the hand as the assholes behind him are cheering.


...this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal... 


 Surely if he could  bring all this about, shutting off the BP oil spill would have been a minor miracle for him which he failed to perform. 

You are witnessing living proof of what happens when no challenge is ever presented by the MSM. He can say anything, do anything, with impunity. If it wasn't for the blogosphere no one would get the truth.




Update:


This was edited out of the 60 minutes interview above. The only reason I can think of is to conceal his delusions of grandeur.


Sometimes... even I am astonished.


"I've gotten more done then any president except Lincoln, FDR, and LBJ."


In other words he is better than George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, JFK, and Ronald Reagan. When in reality no modern day president has been worse. He makes Carter look almost Reaganesque.


Egotism is the anesthetic that dulls the pain of stupidity.  -Frank Leahy






Share/Bookmark

Saturday, December 17, 2011

And so it goes...My view on the Iowa debate and the final countdown



First I thought all the candidates did pretty well and personal attacks were kept to a minimum.

I am going to try to put them in order of how they stack up. The candidate with the least chance of winning given the higher number or the first to drop out if you will.



Number 7
Jon Huntsman

Seems like a nice guy but kind of shallow, afraid to jump in with both feet. I question if his heart is really in it for the long haul.  Has tons of money probably helped by his father who is a billionaire. Comes across as a little to plain vanilla and is someone who would be hard to rally around. When he kicked off his campaign it had all the flare of opening a bottle of flat ginger-ale.


Number 6
Michelle Bachmann

Very attractive candidate in more ways then one. Teaparty favorite. Yet sometimes it's as though she's a little mouse crying for attention in the back of the room. Unfortunately she was the only bomb thrower at the debate. Lobbed a few at Paul and Newt. It was a desperate attempt to score some poll numbers and I understand why she did it. She is so far down in the polls she had to roll the dice. I like her and would support her if I thought she had a chance. Sadly it is not to be.


Number 5
Rick Santorum 

I truly feel bad for Rick a former senator. He looks good, speaks well, and I agree with his postions. No one has worked their ass off campaigning more then Rick Santorum. What is there not to like? The poor guy just can't get any traction which is a mystery to me.


Number 4
Ron Paul

This may come as a surprise to some but if Ron Paul became a two term president, under a Republican congress, I bet he could slash the national debt by 80%. That is his strong point. On the negative side he projects someone who is weak on national defense. When he makes remarks like.. I'm paraphrasing here..."I don't care if Iran builds a nuclear bomb or not." Scary to say the least. 
We should elect a president predicated on substance. The reality is, unconsciously or not, appearance has a lot to do with winning the White House. Can you visualize him as president; his wife as first lady? Paul comes across to me as a Barney Fife-like character. On top of that (unless he changed his tune recently) he said if he didn't get the nod he would not support the Republican nominee. He may attempt a third party run which would probably divert just enough votes for the Messiah to get a second term. In other words, he may do for the Republicans what Ralph Nader did for Democrats.


Number 3
Rick Perry


Rick Perry jumped into the campaign like God's gift to America. It was reminiscent of Hillary's campaign... preordained to become the next president... until the Messiah came along. He was totally unprepared entering the race and stated some rather half-baked views on illegals which shot him in the foot early and has still not recovered. The little...Have a heart lecture comes to mind.
That said this last debate I thought he did quite well. His credentials speak for themselves. Probably the most successful governor in the United States. Just sometimes he comes across as a little dumb which would be ok if he was a Democrat running for the VP spot. Bottom line. He admits he's not a great debater which will kill him against the Messiah. For some reason I still like this guy and he has no problem with campaign contributions. Maybe he's diamond in the rough.


Number 2
Newt Gingrich

Hands down the smartest person on the stage. An historian extrodinaire. He could tell you what color tie FDR wore when he made his famous...A date which will live in infamy speech before congress. The MSM is beginning to realize he is a serious threat and are readying themselves for an all out attack. Newt's got a lot of dirty laundry which has been washed by the years but still shows some stains here and there. Married three times, admitted extramarital affairs, the Fannie and Freddie incident, $500,000 shopping spree at Tiffany's, etc. The commercial with Pelosi on Global Warming (climate change back then) was particularly revolting. He suffers from the O'Reilly syndrome. Smart, dead on with the issues, but do you really like him? That is the big issue with Newt, like-ability-electability. Can he go the distance? Can America overlook some personality traits and say...hell with liking him we need someone who can fix America? Oh...and one more thing. I would pay to see Newt debate the Messiah. He would mob the floor with him. We'll just have to wait and see it play out.  


Number 1
Mitt Romney

No candidate is perfect. Some conservatives are still waiting for their night in shining armor to ride in and save the day.  We must work with what we have and in Mitt Romney we have a damn good viable candidate unlike 2008. For starters Romney has the look, the air of a president. I can visualize him in the White House. I can see his wife as first lady bringing back the dignity to the White House once exemplified by Laura Bush .

Does Romney have his share of faults ? Yes. But you have to put  it in proper context. Romney was a Republican Governor in the bluest state in the union Massachusetts, that is a big difference from lets say Perry coming out of Texas. Romney-Care and his flip-flop on abortion is his Achilles heel. But this much I can assure you. There will be no dirt, no matter how many rocks the MSM tries to turn over. There will be no shady business dealings, no mistresses coming out of the woodwork claiming 13 year affairs. Surely the onslaught of being a Mormon will continue. I can only say this... isn't  a Mormon better then the Muslim, or whatever religion he is currently practicing? 

Romney has character and a great track record in the private sector. He is a uniter not a divider. If I could give him some advice I would like to see a little more...fire in the belly..from him but I guess it's just not his style.

I hope and pray Mitt Romney is the next president of the United States.


That said I will support 100% any of the candidates above if they become the nominee.

Good luck to all of them and may God give them guidance.


The country is in such a mess they sure as hell are going to need it.












Share/Bookmark