Occupy UC Davis and Tuition Hikes

[toker]

With the latest events at UC Davis, one wonders what moved the Board of Regents to even think tuition hikes were necessary. The story on why the UC system is choosing to hike tuition fees on students is a long and complicated one. Certainly it starts with budget cuts.

Another factor is the rising cost of education. Every year universities across the country have to compete with one another for top professors and administrators. And a key way universities attract talent is with big paychecks. But how big have those paychecks gotten? Huge. Keep in mind that the U.S president's salary, not including perks and benefits, is $400,000. In 2010, 19 professors and administrators at UC Davis alone received paychecks over $400,000. At UC Berkeley, two head coaches make over a $1,000,000. UC Irvine has 21 professors and administrators who receive paychecks over $400,000. UC San Diego has two employees making over $1,000,000 and 45 staff making over $400,000. And at UC Los Angeles, seven employees received paychecks exceeding $1,000,000, and 72 professors and administrators received paychecks of over $400,000.

The LAO report goes on to state "the university...believes that it may have to raise tuition more...in order to fund its entire share of pension costs in the future." So the UC system, and those administrators and faculty who have been making over $400,000 a year, have not paid any money into their pension system for two decades. And now students have to make up the difference.

Why the UC system is pushing for tuition hikes - Sacramento liberal | Examiner.com

Less hikes and LOTS more Occupy is what we need in America.

Occupy UC Davis is about the economic inequality that has been enforced by the top 1 percent. Occupy movements should be on college campuses because universities are one tool the 1 percent have used to maintain their economic hegemony. The increasing the cost of higher education, and the privatization of education, have lead to fewer low income and minority students having access to education. Furthermore, it has lead to higher education institutions which are no longer free from corporate sponsorship. Our universities are no longer free market places of ideas. And while that is a problem, the deeper issue of why they have become this way needs to be addressed. Why have corporations been allowed to fill the Board of Regents of the UC system? And why has the UC system been allowed to reach a point where a public institution now relies more upon private money to run than on public money? Occupy UC Davis, as with all the Occupy movements, need to not lose sight of the deeper economic violence that sparked this movement.

Occupy UC Davis is occupying Dutton Hall and releases demands - Sacramento liberal | Examiner.com

[AmateurFlix]

That's something that I can get on board with. A state college here just hired a new football coach with a $4 million per year base salary eligible for $700k in annual bonuses. That is at a taxpayer funded public university, for someone to teach people to play an essentially meaningless game!

Likewise they hit a nerve about the corporate sponsorship. I witnessed that sort of transformation at a small college that I used to attend nearby. It used to be a great school with very competent faculty; however a little over the last decade it has grown into something with lots of corporate sponsorship and corporate partnerships, the quality of the education has diminished very significantly, and some of the faculty are simply incompetent. The buildings look much nicer than they used to and by all superficial measurements, it looks like a good college; however, it really isn't a college anymore, it's more of a vocational training center, and it's hard to believe that anyone attending it now is going to walk away from it with the quality of education that I received.

Although it sounds harsh I think Ron Paul has the right idea about cutting off federal backing for college loans. By providing an endless source of easy credit for college loans it has permitted universities to continuously raise their tuitions to pay for things mostly unrelated to their supposed core mission, which should be to educate students in a meaningful way. By removing the easy credit, the colleges will be forced to reduce their rates significantly if they want to keep enrollment up, which should result in more affordable education for students. Admittedly, they'll probably have to set high salaries and modern architecture as lower priorities than actual education.

[NobleSavage]

University education is the next bubble to pop.

[GForce]

University education is the next bubble to pop.

Could very well be. Easy access to school loans has been fueling the growth of a lot of schools for years. Often for worthless degrees. As long as the federal government continues to back these loans it will continue the course. The only hitch is that the bankruptcy laws were changed to keep people from getting school loans discharged.