$$$-Today's College Cost. Is College Worth it?

I know some of you are screaming at this blog, YES YES YES, of course College is worth the cost.

But be honest, many of you went to college in the 1970's, 1980's and 1990's, when College was relatively inexpensive COMPARED TO TODAY.

Today, a 4 year Private School Bachelors Degree, including tuition and living on campus, is 100K-175K. That's right, $100,000!

In the past 5yrs. public Colleges have raised tuition 31% and private Colleges 14%. Last year alone Illinois raised tuition 12% and Colorado raised tuition rates 16%. This is WAY faster than both inflation and more importantly families salaries.

This is why if I were President, I would call for a moratorium on tuition hikes and overall College costs for the next 5 yrs. After that, I would cap the tuition costs at no more than the rate of inflation.

If we don't get a grip on these out of control College costs, soon only the RICH will be able to afford College. Do we really want that kind of society??

And what does that 100K degree get you in terms of starting salary? Between 40-60K.

My 4-year degree cost me about 10K. I graduated in 1994. My education was at a community College for 2 years and 2 years at a public 4-year College. Now going that way would cost 25K. Most of that 25K would be from the 4-year public College.

Plus, after decades of steady increases, the median salary for workers with a Bachelor's degree FELL 4.6% from 2001-2006. However, workers with Professional degrees (MBA, Masters, JD) salaries shot up 4.3% in the same period. This suggests the obvious. Save your money to get that MBA vs. the Bachelor's degree.

But the family that goes deep into debt to pay for their kid's 100K Bachelors degree, in my opinion, is making an investment that is not good.
It is one thing for the person who is getting the degree to go into debt to get that degree, but I think that responsibility should not be put on the parents. In otherwards, you want a college degree, YOU SHOULD PAY FOR IT.

Now I know many of you will disagree with me on this. Certainly, I am not against helping your kid out with College expenses, but not 100K help (unless you have unlimited funds that you want to blow).

What is so wrong with going to a Community College for the first 2 years to save BIG MONEY?

Who cares what the Jones say anyway.

Once finishing that 2 years at the Community College, then I would also recommend (if possible) living at home while attending the last 2 years at the 4-year College. This is a great way for the parents to help. Rent free living while in school will save big $$ vs. living "on campus".

My feeling is, get through College as cheap as possible, taking only the necessary courses to finish with your degree.

Obviously, I think you should take what you are interested in vs. what may only pay well, because doing what you want in a job is PRICELESS compared to being stuck in a job that you hate, only because it pays well.

Here's my reasons for thinking that a 4yr Bachelors degree (one that you are paying 100K for) is overpriced.

1. Search engines such as Google (nasdaq: GOOG - news - people ) have ushered in the era of open-source learning. Society is rapidly progressing to the point where any Googler is on equal footing with a Widener Library pass-holder.
2. Most of today’s higher-paying jobs go to those who exhibit a combination of adaptable intelligence, numeracy, communications skills and a strong work ethic, as opposed to evidence of specific knowledge.

3. Which leads to a third, and no doubt controversial, point. Society once counted on universities to imbue students with the traits named in the paragraph above. It was once assumed, for instance, that a liberal arts degree holder was numerate and literate and knew how to draw lessons from history, weigh evidence, think, write, speak, debate and learn. Or so Larry Summers, the ex-Harvard president, innocently imagined. He thought undergrads should learn about the math-and-science-driven world they’d be entering as adults. This belief conflicted with the postmodern professoriat that prefers cutting rap records to teaching--or, if forced to teach, teaches liberation theology over the American Revolution. Summers lost the battle.

The same forces--technology and globalism--that quelled the wage growth of blue-collar workers may do the same to white-collar workers. Already software writers feel salary pressure from India, cartoon animators from China, classified ad salesmen from Ebay and so on. Despite this, you may conclude that my opinion of the worth of a college degree is nonsense. Degrees have always gone up in value, you think, and always will.

Okay. Allow me to pose a question. Suppose you are an employer and are filling jobs for which no credential is required. In other words, for typical white-collar jobs--product design and engineering, sales, marketing, non-CPA accounting work and so forth. Would you pay a steep salary premium for a four-year degree holder versus a high school grad? You might. Perhaps you’d think the four-year degree speaks to the job applicant’s intelligence, along with a certain facility to set goals and finish them.

But what if you could guarantee those qualities in other ways (military service, missionary work, etc.)? See, I think the Harvard or Yale degree is worth plenty, not because of what Harvard or Yale teaches--the postmodern university can do more harm than good; witness Yale’s admission of a former Taliban spokesman. The degree simply puts an official stamp on the fact that the student was intelligent, hardworking and competitive enough to get into Harvard or Yale in the first place. May I present to the jury Bill Gates? He was smart enough to get into Harvard. Then he proved his financial intelligence by dropping out to start a company.

Why does the price keep rising at these 4-yr. Colleges?

Well for one thing, dumb parents are lining up to hand over $$ checks to these schools.

Families seem to equate the higher price tags with a more quality education.

DUMB DUMB and DUMBER.

If Colleges were spending most of their money on initiatives that improve the quality of education for students, you might regard price hikes running at 2-4 times the rate of inflation as a necessary evil. But instead Colleges are spending their money on palatial dorms, state-of-the-art-fitness centers, hot tubs big enough for 15 people, and a panoply of gourmet dining options.

Now you are saying, "So that is where my 100K went"!

Like oceanfront property, degrees from Harvard/Yale will always command a premium and will probably pay out a terrific ROI. The same is true of degrees from 10 to 20 other private colleges. But beyond those 10 to 20 schools, I suspect the price of a four-year, private college degree--$100,000 to $175,000--will be money poorly invested.

Come on people, let's stop being scammed by these Colleges.

Jimbo

A Great Victory for California Homeschoolers! Homeschooling LEGAL!

That's right. The California Appeals court REVERSED its Feb. decision, making homeschooling in California a LEGAL RIGHT.

In a unanimous decision, the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District today ruled that “California statutes permit home schooling as a species of private school education.”
Today’s decision stands in stark contrast to the opinion this same three-judge panel issued in February, which would have made California the only state in the union to outlaw home education had it remained in effect.

“It is unusual for an appellate court to grant a petition for rehearing as this court did in March,” said HSLDA Chairman Mike Farris, “but it is truly remarkable for a court to completely reverse its own earlier opinion. We thank you for your prayers and give God the glory for this great victory.”

California’s three largest homeschool organizations, California Homeschool Network, Homeschool Association of California and Christian Home Education Association joined together in one brief to defend the right of all parents to homeschool. HSLDA, Family Protection Ministries and Focus on the Family also joined in a separate brief. Numerous other private organizations came to the defense of home education as did California’s governor, attorney general, and superintendent of public instruction.

The United States Supreme Court has held that parents possess a constitutional right to direct the education of their children.
Therefore, I would argue that any restriction on home schooling is a violation of this constitutional right.

So homeschoolers, be happy about this decision, but NEVER stop fighting the forces out there that are against homeschoolers.

Jimbo

Obama's Grand Energy Policy---INFLATE YOUR TIRES

That's right, Obama said last week that "If we inflate our tires, that would help bring down gas prices just as much as drilling for new oil". "Just inflate your tires and get a tune up". This is Obama's grand energy policy.

I have an idea. If Obama becomes President, he can form the Dept. of Tire inflation and John Edwards can be the Secretary of Tire Inflation. Edwards is uniquely qualified because of his "Inflated" ego.

This kind of childish response to solving our energy crisis shows how UNQUALIFIED Obama is.

We need to begin drilling for Oil in all 50 states and off our coast + build new refineries everywhere. Not to mention, build new coal and nuclear plants everywhere.

Think of all the good paying jobs that would be created if we implemented massive new drilling, refining, and coal and nuclear power plants.

But remember, Obama says "all we need to do is inflate our tires".
Sounds like Obama's ego is inflated to me. What a complete idiot.
McCain needs to jump on this with ads playing over and over and over again about inflating your tires as Obama's way to solve the energy crisis.

The question is: will McCain run these ads or chicken out. Will McCain end up in the Bob Dole heap (a big loser to Clinton in 1996).

Remember, it is Obama, Gore, and his cohorts that BLOCK new refineries and new oil drilling.
It is Obama, Gore, and his Environmental cohorts that are RESPONSIBLE for $4.00/gal. gas.

So run out there and INFLATE your tires to bring down gas prices. HA HA HA.

Jimbo

MORE OF AL GORE'S IGNORANT RANTS

Last week, Al Gore went on "Meet the Press" to rant and rave about, what else, "global warming" or what he now calls it, "global climate change".

To hear Al Gore rant about how awful life will be unless we stop emitting carbons, you would think that in 10 years the USA will all be under water or some ridiculous thing.

One word to Al Gore.

CARBONS ARE NOT BAD GREENHOUSE GASES. CARBONS ARE GOOD, NOT BAD.

What? Some of you are saying. "I thought Carbons were Bad" "I thought Carbons will kill us"?
"I thought the Polar Ice Caps at the North Pole were melting fast"?

Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong!

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Carbon Dioxide is emitted by US Humans when we exhale. Plants then take it and use it for growth. So Carbon Dioxide is actually good for the environment.

A review of the research literature concerning the environmental consequences of increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide leads to the conclusion that increases during the 20th Century have produced no deleterious effects upon global weather, climate, or temperature. Increased carbon dioxide has, however, markedly increased plant growth rates. Predictions of harmful climatic effects due to future increases in minor greenhouse gases like CO2 are in error and do not conform to current experimental knowledge.

The fact of the matter is that the climate is always changing and has always changed since back in the Bible after the Great Flood during Noah's time.
There are Sunspots that cause different areas of the Earth to warm while other areas cool. Hurricanes, Tornadoes, Floods, Drought, Snow, Ice, Wind, you name it. All have happened and will continue to happen.

BUT NOT BECAUSE OF MANKIND. These things happen because of God. That's right. God made the Sun and the Earth. Natural disasters happen because of Sin. Remember the Garden of Eden. There was no Natural disasters in the Garden of Eden. But then Sin came and now there are natural disasters. But it has NOTHING to do with us burning coal or drilling for oil or emitting a few extra carbons into the atmosphere.

Fact: In 1989, the UN "warned" us that unless we stopped "global warming", we would all starve, and face horrific natural disasters here in the USA. Well 1989 has come and gone (almost 20 yrs later) and we are still here, doing just fine.

There are over 32,000 scientists who have signed a petition, stating basically that man-made global warming is a hoax and carbon emission is not harmful to the environment. That's right, 32,000 scientists and growing. Take a look at the Oregon petition.
The global warming dissenting scientists now outnumber the environmentalists that attended the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio that actually kicked off the global warming craze.

Here is a transcript of Al Gore on Meet the Press, July 20, 2008.

MR. BROKAW: Let me ask you about your personal lifestyle, because it's been the subject of a lot of dialogue on the blogs, as you know. You and Tipper have bought a big home outside of Nashville, and you had it retrofitted. But for a time there was a comparison between what the president has in Texas at his home as being more environmentally correct than your home. The Building Green Council gave you its second highest award. But Stephen Smith, who is with the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, is troubled by the scale of your home. He said, "We all need to evaluate what we ... need in square footage." Present company included. We all have to look at scale, don't we? Why was it necessary for you to have a 10,000 square foot home? Because that is going to be more energy intensive than a smaller home for just the two of you.

VICE PRES. GORE: Well, there--I don't claim to be perfect, and all of us who care about this issue are, are trying to do our part, but I, I will say this. We buy green energy. The issue is carbon. The issue is carbon, and we have, essentially, a carbon-free home. We buy from wind energy and solar energy. Our roof is covered with solar electric panels, a geothermal system with all these deep wells, and we cut our natural gas bill by 90 percent, and I'm, I'm--we're, we're walking the walk and not just talking the talk. There are always people who are going to try to aim at the messenger if they don't like the message, and I don't claim to be perfect, but we are walking the walk.

MR. BROKAW: How often do you fly on a private jet?

VICE PRES. GORE: I've--much more frequently on public transportation. I'm flying on Southwest Airlines again today. But sometimes the schedule requires that, and sometimes I do that.

MR. BROKAW: Should there be a surcharge on jet fuel, cost for private aviation, which is expanding exponentially in this country, and it leaves a very large carbon footprint.

VICE PRES. GORE: Fine by me. Sounds like a good idea.

It all sounds like a load of crap to me.

Gore got one thing right: He's not perfect.

Jimbo

My Week as a Juror in a First Degree Murder Trial.

I have not posted for a while because I have been soooo busy.

My 8 yr. old son finished his baseball season 8-6. I was the head coach of his team. Being the Head Coach of my Son's baseball team was the highlight of my summer until just this past week (July 14-16).

On Monday July 14, I went to criminal court for jury duty. Now I know that most people do ANYTHING to get out of jury duty. Plus the fact that they only pay $17.20/day further exacerbates the public's unwillingness to serve on the jury. However, if you are called to serve, you must go. Now, actually getting picked on a jury is a toss up. Some get picked, others don't.

I was actually praying that I got picked to serve on a jury. Why you ask. Because I think it is one of the MOST important unique jobs us as Americans can do. Other countries have Legal systems that have only judges decide the defendant's fate. We have a great Legal system that uses the common citizen, the average Joe, to decide whether a person is guilty or not guilty.

Here are the facts of the case: 5 yrs. ago, 3 young men ages 18 (S.K.), 19(N.Z.), and 19(H.G.) drove downtown and the rear passenger (H.G.) opened his window and shot 4 bullets into J.S. age 24, killing him.

The defendant in our 1rst degree Murder trial was NOT the shooter (H.G.); but the driver (S.K.).

The State's Attorney basically said that all 3 masterminded this plan to go downtown in the early hours of April 20, 2003 and kill J.S. According to the State, all 4 were in the Latin Kings and there was a rift between one sect of the Latin Kings and another area's Latin Kings and an S.O.S. (shoot on sight) order went out on J.S.

The State's Attorney said, even though S.K. was NOT the actual shooter of J.S. (remember, H.G. was), since he was driving the car and IF he had prior knowledge what was going to happen, he is JUST as guilty of murder as H.G. is.

In fact the State's STAR witness was in fact the shooter H.G. That's right, the State made a sweetheart deal with H.G. and basically said that if H.G. would testify against S.K. (that he knew about the S.O.S)that H.G.'s 45yrs-Life sentence would be reduced to 25yrs. So that is exactly what H.G. did. He testified in court on day 2 of the trial that S.K. knew about the S.O.S and that S.K. was in fact a member of the Latin Kings, and that S.K. knew that H.G. had gotten a gun for the purpose of killing J.S.

The State had to prove to us the jury that S.K. had this prior knowledge.

On day 3 of the trial S.K. testified saying that he knew NOTHING of the S.O.S and did not know that H.G. even had a gun or that he was planning on killing J.S. He in fact stated that he drove downtown with his cousin N.Z. and H.G. to "look for girls". At 3-4am on Sat. nights, downtown, bars are getting out with loads of girls", according to S.K.
2-3 other witnesses also testified that yes in fact at this location (the location of the killing), there are many girls getting out of bars.

After the shots rang out, S.K. stepped on the gas and got on the Expressway where shortly thereafter, an unmarked police car with detectives pulled S.K. over and arrested all 3 in the car.

S.K. testified that when he heard the shots that he did not know exactly where they came from and hit the gas to get out of there, scared. As he was speeding away, he saw a gun get thrown into the passenger seat from the back and then he realized that either H.G. or N.Z. had fired the shots. Later on the Expressway, either N.Z. or H.G. threw the gun out the window, but police quickly recovered the gun on the road.

I had trouble believing H.G. as I knew that he would say anything since he was getting this deal from the State. Plus, he was the SHOOTER. He was Cold blooded. And he was the Only one who said that S.K. had prior knowledge of the murder.

At deliberations, I was elected foreman of the Jury.

After 1 hr. I took an informal vote. 10-Not Guilty, 2-Guilty. I was one of the Not Guilty votes.

That's right, I believed S.K.'s version and not H.G.'s (the Shooter) version.

I had More than a reasonable doubt that S.K. was even a Latin King, let alone that he had prior knowledge of the murder.

After 2 hrs. of deliberation, the 2 Guilty people changed their vote to Not Guilty after conceding that there was NOT enough evidence to convict S.K. of 1rst Degree Murder.

After I read the Not Guilty Verdict, the Defendant (S.K.) sobbed and sobbed and his family sobbed and sobbed too. I felt that we had done the right thing.

We received a Police escort out of the Courthouse to our Cars since the whole case was Gang related (Latin Kings).

I asked the Lord to lead me to the right decision before I made my decision and I believe we as a jury made the right decision.

This was the highlight of my Summer. This was a once in a lifetime activity where I was able to apply justice to a situation and prevent an injustice from happening (if S.K. had been convicted).

I felt proud as I left the Courthouse on July 16th, 2008.

It feels good to do the right thing.

So please I implore all of you out there, do not neglect or take lightly your jury duty.

It could be a once in a lifetime opportunity for you to exact justice one way or another.

Jimbo

Jesse Helms- A Real Man and Senator

Independence day, July 4th 2008, Senator Jesse Helms went to be with Jesus. He fought the good fight. He was a Real Man.

Jesse Helms was, indeed, unique.

He stood like a rock in a time when most men in public life tended to sway like reeds in whatever direction the political and social winds happened to blow. As he once said, "I did not come to Washington to win a popularity contest.” He came to Washington to wage war for what he knew to be the truth, and he fought for nothing less than absolute victory.

He believed that killing babies in their mother’s wombs was simply cold-blooded murder. He accepted without question the ordained distinction between the sexes.

Jesse Helms refused to join the globalists’ worship of an imperfect United Nations -- and came close to forcing reforms in an otherwise unreformable institution dominated by forces who hated his country.

He worked to prevent the National Endowment for the Arts from funding work he disapproved of.

Helms was known as "Senator No" for his staunch opposition to an array of liberal causes, including arts funding and gay rights.

In later years, Helms worked with Clinton's secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, and U2 singer Bono to fight AIDS in Africa.

Helms was one of only a few rock solid conservative Senators that voted "No" to Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

He was a "Blue-collar", Nationalistic, Conservative.

Oh how I pray that we get more of the Jesse Helms type of Conservatives in Congress.

Senators that will say "No" to smut, gay rights, abortion, globalism, global warming freaks, atheists, God haters, and all those who support such perverted issues.

Jesse Helms was a major influence on American conservatism, but his career provides a blueprint for anyone who represents an embattled minority viewpoint. You can, with persistence and unflinching determination, change the political odds in your favor.

In this and in every other battle he chose to fight, Jesse Helms struck to his guns. He was one of a kind. Dear God find us more like him.

Jimbo

Obama says Sermon on the Mount by Jesus justifies same-sex unions. What is Obama smoking??

Obama is ALL FOR Same-Sex unions and Gay Marriage. He continually lies about not being for Gay Marriage to a centrist crowd, but then tells a liberal crowd that he is for Gay Marriage.

Obama, showing his utter ignorance claimed (back in March 2008) that the Sermon on the Mount by Jesus justifies same-sex unions. What, you don't believe me?
Hear him for yourself.
http://www.cnsnews.com/cns/audio/2008/030308Obama1.wav

Never mind that the Sermon on the Mount does not contradict biblical teaching about marriage. In fact, in that Bible passage Jesus actually strengthens His instructions regarding marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

However, again, Obama disrespected a portion of the Word of God simply because it does not fit his worldview. The text he dismissed, Romans 1:24-32 states that homosexuality is sin (along with greed, envy, murder, strife, deceit, etc.) and condemns people who "give hearty approval to those who practice" such things. To say the least, it's not very reassuring that someone who describes himself as a person of faith would reject God's warning about those who facilitate others' sin.

Recently, in late June 2008, Obama makes another speech where he distorts the Bible again.
In my opinion, he mocks the Bible and the Sermon on the Mount here. Listen once again.

Call to Renewal Keynote - June 28, 2006 40:04 U.S. Senator Barack Obama http://obama.senate.gov Podcast (Listen specifically from 27-29 min. into the speech.)

For those who don't want to listen to the podcast, this is what Obama says,
"Which passages of Scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is OK and that eating shellfish is abomination? How about Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith? Or should we just stick to the Sermon on the Mount -- a passage that is so radical that it's doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application". ha ha ha (Obama laughs along with the liberal crowd).

It's not that Obama simply misunderstands the Bible. His questions about Leviticus and Deuteronomy aren't merely rhetorical, but were posed to create doubts about the sufficiency of Scripture.

Without doubt, the Old Testament is relevant today and teaches us moral truths and principles God used to shape Israel to be His nation. However, it is disingenuous at best for Obama to suggest the dietary laws God delivered specifically to Israel somehow are in play today; nor is it right to imply there is serious discussion on any scale that such laws apply to the New Testament church (Peter's experience in Acts 10:9-16 put this issue to rest).

The same is true about Obama's suggestions regarding the stoning of a child and slavery. For the record:

-- 1 Timothy 1:8-11 condemns slave traders, and the book of Philemon is Paul's passionate appeal to secure the freedom of the runaway slave Onesimus.

-- The story of the prodigal son (Luke 15:11-32) gives insights about the New Testament teaching about how to deal with children who stray from the faith.

Christians who are considering supporting Obama; I have this message for you.

WAKE UP AND READ YOUR BIBLE!

Obama makes a mockery of the Bible when he calls the book of Romans obscure.

The only thing obscure is Obama's knowledge of the Bible. Obama jokingly says, "folks need to read their Bibles". The biggest Folk that needs to read his Bible is Barak Obama himself.

Obama wants to FORCE your Public School Children to learn about the "goodness" of Homosexuality. Make no mistake about it. When you are away at work, Obama's operatives in the Public School system are gonna be SHOVING the HOMOCRAP down your 8 and 9 yr. old's throats.

Obama will be the most pro-gay President EVER. Bill Clinton looks conservative compared to Obama.

When Christians are given the opportunity to vote their values, they should consider the social and political impact of Obama's biblical views as well as how his beliefs affect his spiritual fitness to lead. However, Obama's misappropriation of Scripture to fit his political perspective is more grave than its implications for a presidential election. Indeed, the potential consequences of his scriptural misapplications far exceed the realm of politics -- the repercussions truly could be biblical in proportion.

Jimbo