The Republicans really want only the rich to go to university

[Loren Pechtel]

1) Their tax plan removes the exemption that tuition waivers currently get. Oops, now those going for advanced degrees owe income tax approaching their take home. (Generally they're teaching, get a small amount of money and don't have to pay for tuition.)

2) And if that's not enough, now they want to tax the university endowments. The rate would be low but it would still hurt.

 

[bilby]

1) Their tax plan removes the exemption that tuition waivers currently get. Oops, now those going for advanced degrees owe income tax approaching their take home. (Generally they're teaching, get a small amount of money and don't have to pay for tuition.)

2) And if that's not enough, now they want to tax the university endowments. The rate would be low but it would still hurt.

I rather suspect that they don't want anyone going to university, and certainly not for advanced degrees. A very tiny proportion of PhDs vote Republican, and so by preventing PhDs, they hope they can increase their share of the vote.

PhDs also undermine all kinds of GOP policy positions by taking a bizarrely 'fact based' position, when clearly they should be bowing down to the ideology and dogma based positions of the GOP. They are just bad news all around.

 

[Valjean]

They want an aristocracy supported by a vast army of serfs, low enough on the Maslovian pyramid to accept their lot without making waves.

 

[BH]

Part of it might be there are far more college educated and degreed people than there are jobs now requiring their degrees People are frustrated and angry they spent these years in school and can't get a good job now. The way to solve the problem is to gut the number of people getting degrees that a way the Republicans can go back telling people your wage sucks because you don't have a degree even though they spent years telling you to get a degree to make more money only to see demand get filled up and now have to tell you your degree is worth nothing and your wages suck for that reason.

 

[Elixir]

Part of it might be there are far more college educated and degreed people than there are jobs now requiring their degrees

If that were it, they'd be loudly advocating/underwriting attendance at trade schools, where one can enter the workforce at a higher wage than most degree-holders, with less debt, more job opportunities etc.
No, I think Bilby and Seyorni have it right. PhDs are a threat to Republican "alternative facts", which are critical to maintaining the serf community.

 

[sharon45]

Part of it might be there are far more college educated and degreed people than there are jobs now requiring their degrees

If that were it, they'd be loudly advocating/underwriting attendance at trade schools, where one can enter the workforce at a higher wage than most degree-holders, with less debt, more job opportunities etc.
No, I think Bilby and Seyorni have it right. PhDs are a threat to Republican "alternative facts", which are critical to maintaining the serf community.

Republican "alternative facts" are not that complicated.

 

[TSwizzle]

Part of it might be there are far more college educated and degreed people than there are jobs now requiring their degrees People are frustrated and angry they spent these years in school and can't get a good job now. The way to solve the problem is to gut the number of people getting degrees that a way the Republicans can go back telling people your wage sucks because you don't have a degree even though they spent years telling you to get a degree to make more money only to see demand get filled up and now have to tell you your degree is worth nothing and your wages suck for that reason.

I don't know what the tax implications are from the OP but in general, the education system is configured as a money making industry anyway. I think that a lot of degrees do not provide good value for money. And people are so snobby about which school they attend. I work with a number of people who have some sort of business degree and they are basically clerks who couldn't tell their ass from their elbow.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

1) Their tax plan removes the exemption that tuition waivers currently get. Oops, now those going for advanced degrees owe income tax approaching their take home. (Generally they're teaching, get a small amount of money and don't have to pay for tuition.)

2) And if that's not enough, now they want to tax the university endowments. The rate would be low but it would still hurt.

I think if the university endowment is x times larger than the combined tuition of all the students, maybe that wouldn't be a bad idea. Harvard and the likes are sitting on a tremendous amount of capital. Pretty much make it like an estate tax deal that only effects the largest ones.

 

[sharon45]

I work with a number of people who have some sort of business degree and they are basically clerks who couldn't tell their ass from their elbow.

It must be a real adventure for them to just put on underwear.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

1) Their tax plan removes the exemption that tuition waivers currently get. Oops, now those going for advanced degrees owe income tax approaching their take home. (Generally they're teaching, get a small amount of money and don't have to pay for tuition.)

2) And if that's not enough, now they want to tax the university endowments. The rate would be low but it would still hurt.

I think if the university endowment is x times larger than the combined tuition of all the students, maybe that wouldn't be a bad idea. Harvard and the likes are sitting on a tremendous amount of capital. Pretty much make it like an estate tax deal that only effects the largest ones.

The size doesn't matter, the use does. So long as it's used for charitable purpose it should not be taxed.

 

[SimpleDon]

Echoing Sharon, I don't think that the motives are all that complicated. The tax package can only pass the Senate under reconciliation, the Democrats will filibuster it otherwise. It can only go under reconciliation in the Senate if it doesn't raise the debt by less than 1.5 trillion dollars in ten years. So to give their donors the tax cut that they are demanding the Republicans have to offset the 2 trillion tax cut of the reduction in the corporate profits tax and the so-called pass through, S corporation tax by as they have always said, by eliminating tax loopholes. They are of course, eliminating middle class loopholes. As well as cutting medicare and medicaid.

This is nothing but the simple greed of the donor class and their attitude that they deserve a large tax cut after all the years of supporting the Republicans. They are oblivious to the damage that the tax cuts will do to the economy and society as a whole.

The Republicans see this, I think, as their last chance to pass such a large tax cut. They have stretched voter suppression to its limit and SCOTUS will probably back off of its "all's fair in politics" stance on gerrymandering. Demographics is working against them. There are indications that the media is breaking out of its three decades long "both sides have equally valid points, let the listener, viewer, reader decide" slumber, thanks largely to the circus of Donald Trump and the other clowns. The economics mainstream is starting to throw off its Milton Friedman monetarist, neoliberal cast after the shock of the Great Financial Crisis and Great Recession of 2008, although this hasn't yet made it into the popular and political economics.

 

[SimpleDon]

Part of it might be there are far more college educated and degreed people than there are jobs now requiring their degrees People are frustrated and angry they spent these years in school and can't get a good job now. The way to solve the problem is to gut the number of people getting degrees that a way the Republicans can go back telling people your wage sucks because you don't have a degree even though they spent years telling you to get a degree to make more money only to see demand get filled up and now have to tell you your degree is worth nothing and your wages suck for that reason.

I don't know what the tax implications are from the OP but in general, the education system is configured as a money making industry anyway. I think that a lot of degrees do not provide good value for money. And people are so snobby about which school they attend. I work with a number of people who have some sort of business degree and they are basically clerks who couldn't tell their ass from their elbow.

I think that these posts reflect popular but slightly misguided attitudes on two subjects that pertain to the OP.

The more obvious one is that the universities are not expensive, fancy trade schools that exist to teach people how to do a job. They aren't. Universities exist primarily to do research and to train researchers. They are elitist because this job that they do requires them to be elitist. They are charged with sorting through massively large numbers of students to try to find a handful of competent, innovative researchers.

And as an engineer it is hard for me to admit this but there is something to recommend the value of a liberal education to both the student and to society as a whole. There is no way that an university can tradin people to do a job in our economy, other than college professors and a handful of professions. The economy is too varied and dynamic for this. The best that they can do is to teach people how to learn and to study so that they are adaptable to whatever comes in their life. This is true even in the professional schools, doctors, lawyers, teachers, engineers, architects, etc.

The second pertinent point to the OP is that the whole purpose of the economy for society has become heavily skewed to making a few people extremely rich, and away from what it should be, providing the greatest benefit to the largest number of people possible. This is shown quite ably by our current ever growing problem of student debt. It is absolutely insane to be putting so many young people into the economy with so much debt, preventing them from buying homes, marrying, having children, starting businesses, etc. and putting extreme stress into their lives when they should have little stress. The only reason that we do it is to lessen the tax burden which falls quite rightly disproportionately on the rich, those who benefit the most from society owe the most to society. It is that simple.