Health Insurance Premiums Rising Faster Than Wages, Contrary to Promises Made When Obamacare Was Being Voted On

Health insurance premiums have increased faster than wages and inflation in recent years, rising an average of 28 percent from 2009 to 2014 despite the enactment of Obamacare, according to a report from Freedom Partners.

President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law on March 23, 2010, and Wednesday is the law’s sixth anniversary.

The Obama administration expressed concern in 2009 about skyrocketing health care premiums in a report entitled, “The Burden of Health Insurance Premium Increases on American Families.” They were concerned that premiums had increased by 5.5 percent from 2008 to 2009.

However, from 2010 to 2011 in the first year after Obamacare was enacted, premiums increased by 9.4 percent.

“In 2009, when the [Executive Office of the President] issued its report, states had seen premiums increase on average by 30 percent between 2004 and 2009,” states the Freedom Partners report. “But since 2009, health insurance premiums have continued to grow faster than wages in nearly every state, averaging a 28 percent increase from 2009 to 2014, resulting in a greater amount of disposable income being consumed by rising premiums.”

According to the report, while premiums increased by 28 percent from 2009 to 2014, wages increased by only 7.8 percent.

The data also finds that health care costs have exceeded the rate of inflation. “The average annual cost of a family’s employer-sponsored health insurance policy was $17,545 in 2015, which marks a 4.2 percent increase from the 2014 average of $16,834, while the inflation rate remained low at 0.1 percent,” states the report. “With health care costs still rising faster than inflation six years after passage of the Affordable Care Act, it is clear that the law is not helping lower the burden of health care expenses for American families.”

Americans can expect their health care costs to rise again in 2017. According to Stephen Parente, a scholar at the University of Minnesota, each type of health care plan on the exchanges can expect to see an average premium increase of 7.3 percent for families and 11 percent for individuals.

“The Administration claimed the ACA would bend the cost curve, but our report shows it bent in the wrong direction—premiums didn’t slow down under the Affordable Care Act, they sped up,” said Nathan Nascimento, senior policy adviser at Freedom Partners. “No wonder the White House is trying to change the national conversation away from health care costs. By their own standards, the Affordable Care Act has failed.”

The Department of Health and Human Services naturally did not respond to requests for comment by press time.

You think healthcare cost increase was a result of Obamacare? LOL

Must be a Trump supporter.

bonafide Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You think healthcare cost increase was a result of
> Obamacare? LOL
>
> Must be a Trump supporter.

Now they blame the entire for profit fascist death care system they cling to with a death grip on the left.

Their little useful idiot monkeys call it Obama care on forums=) lol.

Trump Supporter

^^^

Got more money than a Hillary lover.
Attachments:

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> bonafide Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You think healthcare cost increase was a result
> of
> > Obamacare? LOL
> >
> > Must be a Trump supporter.
>
> Now they blame the entire for profit fascist death
> care system they cling to with a death grip on the
> left.
>
> Their little useful idiot monkeys call it Obama
> care on forums=) lol.

Uh, what? You finally agree that the democrat labeled Obamacare is a failure? Is that because both Hillary and Bernie say so? No more love for obumblefuck?

My insurance rates have doubled because of Obamacare. More money for Obama's corporate buds, less care for my children.

FUCK FUCK FUCK LIBS!!!!!

G2 is a blabbering idiot Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My insurance rates have doubled because of
> Obamacare. More money for Obama's corporate buds,
> less care for my children.
>

Awesome. Your misery makes me happy. I hope it doubles again next year. Fuck you teabagger.

Whats the Republican solution you fucking Republican piece of shit?

Better yet, is there a problem that Republicans recognize with health care you fucking Republican piece of shit?

Ask your Republicans whether there is a problem you Republican piece of shit. First make sure your Republicans even recognize there is one you Republican piece of shit.

Thanks for doing your part to get your party somewhat competent.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/25/2016 07:17PM by Gerrymanderer2.

Oh that's right, you're current front runner Trump is going to do something with lines to fix health care?

Lines right? lmao you pieces disgusting filthy rotten useless shit.

Republicant don't want to fix Healthcare. They want to get into power by doing whatever it takes to stand against Obama. The fact that he managed to get healthcare, keep the economy from going off a cliff, extract most of our troops from iraq/iran, and said fuck you to Netanyahu was a miracle in itself. I wish he could stay for another 4yrs.

Headline - Eight of the REMAINING eleven health exchanges on verge of collapse.

DUH. Could have told you that. Free Shit Army will eventually figure out free ain't free for long. Want everything for free? Eventually, those paying throw up their hands and walk away. You can't tax enough for everything the left wants "for free".

The entire health care system is dysfunctional, dying and eating the economy alive.

And you little faggot, transitioning to a single payer system will eventually be an existential necessity whether you stupid fucks nearly bankrupt us first or not.

Fuckin losers.

You idiots are history anyway. You faggots will be irrelevant in 10 years. No use in trying to reason with you morons anymore.

Fucking libcuck faggot fuck. We ain't going nowhere mfer. Suck this dick bitch.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The entire health care system is dysfunctional,
> dying and eating the economy alive.
>
> And you little faggot, transitioning to a single
> payer system will eventually be an existential
> necessity whether you stupid fucks nearly bankrupt
> us first or not.
>
> Fuckin losers.

Hey, at least you realize what a failure Obamacare is.

FrankR. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fucking libcuck faggot fuck. We ain't going
> nowhere mfer. Suck this dick bitch.


You're gone bitch, you're already gone.

Three Coil Steamer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Headline - Eight of the REMAINING eleven health
> exchanges on verge of collapse.
>
> DUH. Could have told you that. Free Shit Army will
> eventually figure out free ain't free for long.
> Want everything for free? Eventually, those paying
> throw up their hands and walk away. You can't tax
> enough for everything the left wants "for free".

Teabaggers saying it's costing them an arm and a leg and you're saying it's free? You guys are so fucking stupid.

When will Obamacare cover more people than before? Currently, more Americans don't have healthcare than before obumblefuckcare.

Lib failure continues Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When will Obamacare cover more people than before?
> Currently, more Americans don't have healthcare
> than before obumblefuckcare.

You're a filthy disgusting lying piece of shit.

Time for single payer.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lib failure continues Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > When will Obamacare cover more people than
> before?
> > Currently, more Americans don't have healthcare
> > than before obumblefuckcare.
>
> You're a filthy disgusting lying piece of shit.
>
> Time for single payer.
_________________________________________________
Fuck you, you nigger loving faggot.

whut?? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Three Coil Steamer Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Headline - Eight of the REMAINING eleven health
> > exchanges on verge of collapse.
> >
> > DUH. Could have told you that. Free Shit Army
> will
> > eventually figure out free ain't free for long.
> > Want everything for free? Eventually, those
> paying
> > throw up their hands and walk away. You can't
> tax
> > enough for everything the left wants "for
> free".
>
> Teabaggers saying it's costing them an arm and a
> leg and you're saying it's free? You guys are so
> fucking stupid.


It's essentially free for those who receive subsidies. Which now is about 80% of those in the program.

Meanwhile, those of us who are self-employed now have to pay about double what we were before for plans with even higher deductibles than the old high deductible plans in order to make of the difference to cover them.

listen you fucking faggots. Put up or shut up. Put up or shut the fuck up.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> listen you fucking faggots. Put up or shut up.
> Put up or shut the fuck up.


Those of us who have to pay for the crappy ass program are putting up.

You're not.

put up a solution to a broken system no one in the world is insane enough to even attempt. Solutions you idiots. SOLUTIONS!!!!!!

So what you are saying is, Obama fucked the healthcare system up so bad that it is beyond repair. Therefore if the Republicans can't fix it just take it up the ass and like it? Wha, vote Hillary? She will fuck it up worse the Obama.
Attachments:

/
Attachments:

This needs to be the new image of the republican party.

I've got an idea. How about the government stops driving healthcare costs up by providing subsidies?

Government provided Student Loans is what caused education costs to go up.

Government subsidized mortgages are what caused the housing bubble and drove prices up.


Starting to see a pattern here? Government causes the problems and then tell you government is the only way to fix it.

NoTea Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've got an idea. How about the government stops
> driving healthcare costs up by providing
> subsidies?
>
> Government provided Student Loans is what caused
> education costs to go up.
>
> Government subsidized mortgages are what caused
> the housing bubble and drove prices up.
>
>
> Starting to see a pattern here? Government causes
> the problems and then tell you government is the
> only way to fix it.

Stop fucking blaming the government for everything. People are fucking greedy is why shit is going up. People were taught they need to go to school to get a good job to get that house in the hamptons to get that mcmansion so they're willing to go into $200k worth of debt for a journalism major. How about people are fucking stupid? How about people like to lie, cheat, steal to make a dollar.

If you're blaming the fucking gov't for your problems then you're an idiot.

The new face of the Democratic party, is she can stay out of jail!?
Attachments:

facedis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The new face of the Democratic party, is she can
> stay out of jail!?

Hilliary, Shilliary, Jilliary, whatever. 0 chance she loses to Trump or Cruz. That must suck for you to concede redneck.

There's no reasoning with dipshit libtards. They love everything about big government. Dumb fuckers should move to Scandinavia with all their sand nigger buddies. At least we wouldn't have to deal with their insane bullshit anymore.

twitty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NoTea Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I've got an idea. How about the government
> stops
> > driving healthcare costs up by providing
> > subsidies?
> >
> > Government provided Student Loans is what
> caused
> > education costs to go up.
> >
> > Government subsidized mortgages are what caused
> > the housing bubble and drove prices up.
> >
> >
> > Starting to see a pattern here? Government
> causes
> > the problems and then tell you government is
> the
> > only way to fix it.
>
> Stop fucking blaming the government for
> everything. People are fucking greedy is why shit
> is going up. People were taught they need to go
> to school to get a good job to get that house in
> the hamptons to get that mcmansion so they're
> willing to go into $200k worth of debt for a
> journalism major. How about people are fucking
> stupid? How about people like to lie, cheat,
> steal to make a dollar.
>
> If you're blaming the fucking gov't for your
> problems then you're an idiot.


Yes, people are greedy and when the government says we will pay whatever is necessary for someone to own a home, then the greedy are going to raise the prices. If the government says they will subsidize education costs, the the price goes up. This is because the government is making the demand more than the supply. That's what causes prices on anything to rise.

If Colleges, as an example, continued to raise prices, then fewer could afford to go and they would soon have to lower them instead of relying on government subsidies.

So I think it's very clear to anyone reading this that you truly are the idiot here.

Now go ahead and get mad and go an a little hissy fit as usual when you have been shown to be wrong.

NoTea Wrote:
>
>
> Yes, people are greedy and when the government
> says we will pay whatever is necessary for someone
> to own a home, then the greedy are going to raise
> the prices. If the government says they will
> subsidize education costs, the the price goes up.
> This is because the government is making the
> demand more than the supply. That's what causes
> prices on anything to rise.
>
> If Colleges, as an example, continued to raise
> prices, then fewer could afford to go and they
> would soon have to lower them instead of relying
> on government subsidies.
>
> So I think it's very clear to anyone reading this
> that you truly are the idiot here.
>
> Now go ahead and get mad and go an a little hissy
> fit as usual when you have been shown to be wrong.

WTF are you talking about? People are paying 200k to go to college. How does that make ANY sense? The colleges are corrupt as fuck and you're blaming the gov't? You sound like the asshole who accepts affluenza as a valid argument. Just stop and think you fuck. People are stupid. It's not the governments fault.

Community colleges cost like 5-10k all in but people would rather spend 200k going to some named school. The fact that people will vote for Trump right there would indicate the stupidity and yet it's the governments fault?

Nevermind, I'm retarded
Attachments:

Guess that means I win and you're a dope redneck. Let's blame the gov't for my failings and stupid decisions. Let's blame the gov't because I didn't graduate Highschool. It's all the gov't fault that my life is in shambles.

,
Attachments:

You know Twitty, sometimes I just meet people who simply lack the intellect to carry on a conversation, even when confronted with facts. Here is another fact for you

• The average tuition and fees at private National Universities jumped 179 percent.
• Out-of-state tuition and fees at public universities rose 226 percent since 1995.

• In-state tuition and fees at public National Universities grew the most, increasing a staggering 296 percent.


http://www.wsj.com/articles/federal-aids-role-in-driving-up-tuitions-gains-credence-1438538582






Please return to your mindless rants with other like-minded here.

NoTea Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You know Twitty, sometimes I just meet people who
> simply lack the intellect to carry on a
> conversation, even when confronted with facts.
> Here is another fact for you
>
> • The average tuition and fees at private
> National Universities jumped 179 percent.
> • Out-of-state tuition and fees at public
> universities rose 226 percent since 1995.
>
> • In-state tuition and fees at public National
> Universities grew the most, increasing a
> staggering 296 percent.
>
>
> http://www.wsj.com/articles/federal-aids-role-in-d
> riving-up-tuitions-gains-credence-1438538582
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Please return to your mindless rants with other
> like-minded here.

You just argued my point dumb fuck. People are greedy. You want another fact? Yale has a 26B endowment fund. 26 motherfucking billon for a 1 college. And you're still blaming the gov't you stupid motherfucker?

twitty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NoTea Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You know Twitty, sometimes I just meet people
> who
> > simply lack the intellect to carry on a
> > conversation, even when confronted with facts.
> > Here is another fact for you
> >
> > • The average tuition and fees at private
> > National Universities jumped 179 percent.
> > • Out-of-state tuition and fees at public
> > universities rose 226 percent since 1995.
> >
> > • In-state tuition and fees at public
> National
> > Universities grew the most, increasing a
> > staggering 296 percent.
> >
> >
> >
> http://www.wsj.com/articles/federal-aids-role-in-d
>
> > riving-up-tuitions-gains-credence-1438538582
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Please return to your mindless rants with other
> > like-minded here.
>
> You just argued my point dumb fuck. People are
> greedy. You want another fact? Yale has a 26B
> endowment fund. 26 motherfucking billon for a 1
> college. And you're still blaming the gov't you
> stupid motherfucker?


Yale is a private college you dumbshit. lol

uehFU Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> twitty Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > NoTea Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > You know Twitty, sometimes I just meet people
> > who
> > > simply lack the intellect to carry on a
> > > conversation, even when confronted with
> facts.
> > > Here is another fact for you
> > >
> > > • The average tuition and fees at private
> > > National Universities jumped 179 percent.
> > > • Out-of-state tuition and fees at public
> > > universities rose 226 percent since 1995.
> > >
> > > • In-state tuition and fees at public
> > National
> > > Universities grew the most, increasing a
> > > staggering 296 percent.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.wsj.com/articles/federal-aids-role-in-d
>
> >
> > > riving-up-tuitions-gains-credence-1438538582
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Please return to your mindless rants with
> other
> > > like-minded here.
> >
> > You just argued my point dumb fuck. People are
> > greedy. You want another fact? Yale has a 26B
> > endowment fund. 26 motherfucking billon for a
> 1
> > college. And you're still blaming the gov't
> you
> > stupid motherfucker?
>
>
> Yale is a private college you dumbshit. lol

So they can't be greedy redneck? Are you even reading this thread?

Why no talk about this anymore?

twitty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NoTea Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You know Twitty, sometimes I just meet people
> who
> > simply lack the intellect to carry on a
> > conversation, even when confronted with facts.
> > Here is another fact for you
> >
> > • The average tuition and fees at private
> > National Universities jumped 179 percent.
> > • Out-of-state tuition and fees at public
> > universities rose 226 percent since 1995.
> >
> > • In-state tuition and fees at public
> National
> > Universities grew the most, increasing a
> > staggering 296 percent.
> >
> >
> >
> http://www.wsj.com/articles/federal-aids-role-in-d
>
> > riving-up-tuitions-gains-credence-1438538582
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Please return to your mindless rants with other
> > like-minded here.
>
> You just argued my point dumb fuck. People are
> greedy. You want another fact? Yale has a 26B
> endowment fund. 26 motherfucking billon for a 1
> college. And you're still blaming the gov't you
> stupid motherfucker?

Sorry you are incapable of basic mental function. Yes, I do agree with you people are greedy. Now, did you get that? Let me repeat it since you don't seen capable of understanding things unless they are repeated over and over. YES, PEOPLE ARE GREEDT. Did you get it that time? Good!!

Now, if you give greedy people money, what are they going to do with it? Correct, they are going to want more. Do we agree? Excellent. Now when you give them more, they are going to want even more, aren't they? God Twitty, seems like if we repeat the same thing enough times, you are capable of some rudimentary learning skills.

Now can you tell me what happens when the government comes in and hands these greedy Colleges even more money? That's right, the raise their tuitions even more. Now, Twitty, I want you to think real hard here. Based on what we know, what happens when governments subsidize things like College Tuitions, Subsidizes interest on Mortgages and provide unlimited funding for Healthcare. Come on Twitty, I know you can noodle this one out.

afdaf Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why no talk about this anymore?
>
> src="http://rabidrepublicanblog.com/wp-content/upl
> oads/2012/02/Obama-Gas-Prices.bmp"/>


I'll talk about it as soon as you explain what Obama did to cause gas prices to drop.

NoTea Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> twitty Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > NoTea Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > You know Twitty, sometimes I just meet people
> > who
> > > simply lack the intellect to carry on a
> > > conversation, even when confronted with
> facts.
> > > Here is another fact for you
> > >
> > > • The average tuition and fees at private
> > > National Universities jumped 179 percent.
> > > • Out-of-state tuition and fees at public
> > > universities rose 226 percent since 1995.
> > >
> > > • In-state tuition and fees at public
> > National
> > > Universities grew the most, increasing a
> > > staggering 296 percent.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.wsj.com/articles/federal-aids-role-in-d
>
> >
> > > riving-up-tuitions-gains-credence-1438538582
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Please return to your mindless rants with
> other
> > > like-minded here.
> >
> > You just argued my point dumb fuck. People are
> > greedy. You want another fact? Yale has a 26B
> > endowment fund. 26 motherfucking billon for a
> 1
> > college. And you're still blaming the gov't
> you
> > stupid motherfucker?
>
> Sorry you are incapable of basic mental function.
> Yes, I do agree with you people are greedy. Now,
> did you get that? Let me repeat it since you don't
> seen capable of understanding things unless they
> are repeated over and over. YES, PEOPLE ARE
> GREEDT. Did you get it that time? Good!!
>
> Now, if you give greedy people money, what are
> they going to do with it? Correct, they are going
> to want more. Do we agree? Excellent. Now when you
> give them more, they are going to want even more,
> aren't they? God Twitty, seems like if we repeat
> the same thing enough times, you are capable of
> some rudimentary learning skills.
>
> Now can you tell me what happens when the
> government comes in and hands these greedy
> Colleges even more money? That's right, the raise
> their tuitions even more. Now, Twitty, I want you
> to think real hard here. Based on what we know,
> what happens when governments subsidize things
> like College Tuitions, Subsidizes interest on
> Mortgages and provide unlimited funding for
> Healthcare. Come on Twitty, I know you can noodle
> this one out.


You're giving him way too much credit. lol

NoTea Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> afdaf Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Why no talk about this anymore?
> >
> > >
> src="http://rabidrepublicanblog.com/wp-content/upl
>
> > oads/2012/02/Obama-Gas-Prices.bmp"/>
>
>
> I'll talk about it as soon as you explain what
> Obama did to cause gas prices to drop.

Ask your fellow rightards on rabidrepublicanblog.com when they were blaming obama for the gas prices 4 years ago dumb twat.

NoTea Wrote:
> Sorry you are incapable of basic mental function.
> Yes, I do agree with you people are greedy. Now,
> did you get that? Let me repeat it since you don't
> seen capable of understanding things unless they
> are repeated over and over. YES, PEOPLE ARE
> GREEDT. Did you get it that time? Good!!
>
> Now, if you give greedy people money, what are
> they going to do with it? Correct, they are going
> to want more. Do we agree? Excellent. Now when you
> give them more, they are going to want even more,
> aren't they? God Twitty, seems like if we repeat
> the same thing enough times, you are capable of
> some rudimentary learning skills.
>
> Now can you tell me what happens when the
> government comes in and hands these greedy
> Colleges even more money? That's right, the raise
> their tuitions even more. Now, Twitty, I want you
> to think real hard here. Based on what we know,
> what happens when governments subsidize things
> like College Tuitions, Subsidizes interest on
> Mortgages and provide unlimited funding for
> Healthcare. Come on Twitty, I know you can noodle
> this one out.

Again stop blaming the fucking gov't you cunt. What the fuck is wrong with you? People aren't getting free money to go to school (excluding scholarships) from the gov't. It's still fucking 200k they are borrowing and will be repaying for the next 10/15yrs. No one is giving anyone a free ride. I know you'd like to blame everyone for your problems but it's simply not true. Take some self responsibility for once. Damn it's like you republicans preach self reliance but are the first to blame the BIG Gov't for shit. Stop it!

afda Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Ask your fellow rightards on
> rabidrepublicanblog.com when they were blaming
> obama for the gas prices 4 years ago dumb twat.


^

twitty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NoTea Wrote:
> > Sorry you are incapable of basic mental
> function.
> > Yes, I do agree with you people are greedy.
> Now,
> > did you get that? Let me repeat it since you
> don't
> > seen capable of understanding things unless
> they
> > are repeated over and over. YES, PEOPLE ARE
> > GREEDT. Did you get it that time? Good!!
> >
> > Now, if you give greedy people money, what are
> > they going to do with it? Correct, they are
> going
> > to want more. Do we agree? Excellent. Now when
> you
> > give them more, they are going to want even
> more,
> > aren't they? God Twitty, seems like if we
> repeat
> > the same thing enough times, you are capable of
> > some rudimentary learning skills.
> >
> > Now can you tell me what happens when the
> > government comes in and hands these greedy
> > Colleges even more money? That's right, the
> raise
> > their tuitions even more. Now, Twitty, I want
> you
> > to think real hard here. Based on what we know,
> > what happens when governments subsidize things
> > like College Tuitions, Subsidizes interest on
> > Mortgages and provide unlimited funding for
> > Healthcare. Come on Twitty, I know you can
> noodle
> > this one out.
>
> Again stop blaming the fucking gov't you cunt.
> What the fuck is wrong with you? People aren't
> getting free money to go to school (excluding
> scholarships) from the gov't. It's still fucking
> 200k they are borrowing and will be repaying for
> the next 10/15yrs. No one is giving anyone a free
> ride. I know you'd like to blame everyone for
> your problems but it's simply not true. Take some
> self responsibility for once. Damn it's like you
> republicans preach self reliance but are the first
> to blame the BIG Gov't for shit. Stop it!


And at a public university, who is it that's charging them the $200K?

Which nobody actually pays unless you're completely fucking stupid, but focus on the question for the moment.

Student loan

Another proposed cause of increased tuition is U.S. Congress' occasional raising of the 'loan limits' of student loans, in which the increased availability of students to take out deeper loans sends a message to colleges and universities that students can 'afford more,' and then, in response, institutions of higher education raise tuition to match, leaving the student back where he began, but deeper in debt.[17]

However, many empirical studies that have tested the effects of student loans on college tuition find no evidence of an increase in tuition, especially net of scholarships and after taking into account increases in the quality of education funded by increases in tuition.[18] Moreover, the widespread availability of private student loans makes it unlikely that public student loan availability limits demand for education.[19]

An additional rebuttal to the student loan theory is the fact that even in years when loan limits have not risen, tuition has still continued to climb, and tuition has increased more at public institutions than at private institutions.[20][21] Public college tuition has jumped 33 percent nationwide since 2000.[22]

^^^^^

Another stupid redneck gets shut down again.

I love the government and I can't function without it. Government is my one and only true love.

twitty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ^^^^^
>
> Another stupid redneck gets shut down again.


Not unless you're an idiot and don't understand what you're reading.

Oh wait...

Are you fucking going to sit there and tell the Government is responsible for the housing and tuition bubble? Holy shit you're so stupid I can't stand it. Trump is right, you people just suck on the teat of Big Government until you become beholden to them. Keep sucking pigs!

NoTea Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Are you fucking going to sit there and tell the
> Government is responsible for the housing and
> tuition bubble? Holy shit you're so stupid I
> can't stand it. Trump is right, you people just
> suck on the teat of Big Government until you
> become beholden to them. Keep sucking pigs!

Have you completely lost your mind redneck?

Here, I'll even give your dumb ass a hint...

At a public university, who is it that's charging them $200K?

Answer the question you twit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here, I'll even give your dumb ass a hint...
>
> At a public university, who is it that's
> charging them $200K?

WTF are you talking about cunt? Public school v/s Private school? Who fucking cares? Tech is 20k instate and 40k out of state (gmu is 26k in state and 46k out of state). Stop being a twat and keep telling everyone it's the governments fault. Someone already disproved your stupid ramblings about student loans being the cause of rising tuition. Dumb fuck trying to recover from a bitch slap looking even more stupid.

Douchebag thinks 80k/100k tuition is chump change. Typical elitist rich turd.

,
Attachments:

Obama has said it himself, "i don't control the price of gasoline" So shut the fuck up. Obama, the Green President? Fracking has been going on during his term in record numbers. So again, shut the fuck up libatards.

footnote Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Obama has said it himself, "i don't control the
> price of gasoline" So shut the fuck up. Obama, the
> Green President? Fracking has been going on during
> his term in record numbers. So again, shut the
> fuck up libatards.

You cuntbag rightards like to say this when gas is low and the opposite when gas was high under Obama. Go fuck yourself redneck.

twitty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Answer the question you twit Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Here, I'll even give your dumb ass a hint...
> >
> > At a public university, who is it that's
> > charging them $200K?
>
> WTF are you talking about cunt? Public school v/s
> Private school? Who fucking cares? Tech is 20k
> instate and 40k out of state (gmu is 26k in state
> and 46k out of state). Stop being a twat and keep
> telling everyone it's the governments fault.
> Someone already disproved your stupid ramblings
> about student loans being the cause of rising
> tuition. Dumb fuck trying to recover from a bitch
> slap looking even more stupid.


You're too dense to even get it with a hint. lol

Answer the question stupid...

At a public university, who is it that's charging them "$200K?"


Bonus question: Who services and profits from virtually all student loans issued?

Did you know the Saudis themselves with Royal Shell have a huge stake in American refining. In a balanced market the amount of refined gasoline in America drives the price of oil world wide.

Thats what happened under Bush and then the speculators got in on the action. Why? Because they knew they could get away with it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/26/2016 01:19AM by Gerrymanderer2.

Answer the question you nit twit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You're too dense to even get it with a hint. lol
>
> Answer the question stupid...
>
> At a public university, who is it that's
> charging them "$200K?"
>
>
> Bonus question: Who services and profits from
> virtually all student loans issued?

Another douchebag wannabe intellectual playing 21 questions. Get to the point dumbass and explain to us how student loans are causing education cost to rise even though studies have already proven you wrong. Or are you trying to change the topic to something else so you don't look so incredibly stupid. I'll wait for a response cunt.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Did you know the Saudis themselves with Royal
> Shell have a huge stake in American refining. In a
> balanced market the amount of refined gasoline in
> America drives the price of oil world wide.
>
> Thats what happened under Bush and then the
> speculators got in on the action. Why? Because
> they knew they could get away with it.



March 17, 2016 at 11:41 p.m.

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Royal Dutch Shell PLC and Saudi Arabian Oil Co. will split up the assets of their joint U.S. venture, which will see the kingdom's state-owned producer take full ownership of America's biggest oil refinery, the companies said late Wednesday.

The Port Arthur, Texas, refinery, located about 90 miles east of Houston, handles some 603,000 barrels of oil a day, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. It had been part of a 50-50 joint venture between the two companies called Motiva Enterprises LLC, which formed in 1998.

^ That's what happened under Obama last week.

And who was it in office in 1998?

Gerry the 'oil expert' who has no fucking clue. lol

twitty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Answer the question you nit twit Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You're too dense to even get it with a hint.
> lol
> >
> > Answer the question stupid...
> >
> > At a public university, who is it that's
> > charging them "$200K?"
> >
> >
> > Bonus question: Who services and profits from
> > virtually all student loans issued?
>
> Another douchebag wannabe intellectual playing 21
> questions. Get to the point dumbass and explain
> to us how student loans are causing education cost
> to rise even though studies have already proven
> you wrong. Or are you trying to change the topic
> to something else so you don't look so incredibly
> stupid. I'll wait for a response cunt.


It's the same 1 question.

Do you really not understand who runs PUBLIC universities dumbshit?

In that case, then I'm sure you're completely fucking unaware that the Federal government is the one raking in the cash from student loans. Just ask your hero Lizzie "Heap-o-Wampum" Warren.

T3KdE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Did you know the Saudis themselves with Royal
> > Shell have a huge stake in American refining. In
> a
> > balanced market the amount of refined gasoline
> in
> > America drives the price of oil world wide.
> >
> > Thats what happened under Bush and then the
> > speculators got in on the action. Why? Because
> > they knew they could get away with it.
>
>
>
> March 17, 2016 at 11:41 p.m.
>
> DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Royal Dutch
> Shell PLC and Saudi Arabian Oil Co. will split up
> the assets of their joint U.S. venture, which
> will see the kingdom's state-owned producer take
> full ownership of America's biggest oil
> refinery, the companies said late Wednesday.
>
> The Port Arthur, Texas, refinery, located about 90
> miles east of Houston, handles some 603,000
> barrels of oil a day, according to the U.S. Energy
> Information Administration. It had been part of a
> 50-50 joint venture between the two companies
> called Motiva Enterprises LLC, which formed in
> 1998.
>
> ^ That's what happened under Obama last week.
>
> And who was it in office in 1998?
>
> Gerry the 'oil expert' who has no fucking clue.
> lol


Are you fucking stupid? What kind of stupid question is that.

Im talking about physics and this fucker says Einstein liked turtles.

From now on I dont want you dumb motherfuckers responding to me. Not once has anything any of you has said improved on any discussion. Just thank me for sharing knowledge and stfu while youre at it.

nit twit needs multiple choice Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's the same 1 question.
>
> Do you really not understand who runs
> PUBLIC universities dumbshit?
>
> In that case, then I'm sure you're completely
> fucking unaware that the Federal government is the
> one raking in the cash from student loans. Just
> ask your hero Lizzie "Heap-o-Wampum" Warren.

That's what I figured. Change the fucking topic when your initial assertions are proven wrong. So what? Banks borrow from the Fed all the time. Yippee. What else would you like to blame the gov't for cunt?

LOL Twitty thinks if he screams "You are an idiot" enough, it will make it true. If Twitty only knew how many intelligent minds were laughing at his moronic rants. LOL

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> T3KdE Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Did you know the Saudis themselves with Royal
> > > Shell have a huge stake in American refining.
> In
> > a
> > > balanced market the amount of refined
> gasoline
> > in
> > > America drives the price of oil world wide.
> > >
> > > Thats what happened under Bush and then the
> > > speculators got in on the action. Why?
> Because
> > > they knew they could get away with it.
> >
> >
> >
> > March 17, 2016 at 11:41 p.m.
> >
> > DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Royal
> Dutch
> > Shell PLC and Saudi Arabian Oil Co. will split
> up
> > the assets of their joint U.S. venture,
> which
> > will see the kingdom's state-owned producer
> take
> > full ownership of America's biggest oil
> > refinery, the companies said late
> Wednesday.
> >
> > The Port Arthur, Texas, refinery, located about
> 90
> > miles east of Houston, handles some 603,000
> > barrels of oil a day, according to the U.S.
> Energy
> > Information Administration. It had been part of
> a
> > 50-50 joint venture between the two companies
> > called Motiva Enterprises LLC, which formed
> in
> > 1998.
> >
> > ^ That's what happened under Obama last week.
> >
> > And who was it in office in 1998?
> >
> > Gerry the 'oil expert' who has no fucking clue.
> > lol
>
>
> Are you fucking stupid? What kind of stupid
> question is that.


Are you fucking high tonight or just your usual stupid self?

It wasn't a question dumbshit. You were talking about the Saudis owning US oil refineries...

> > > Did you know the Saudis themselves with Royal
> > > Shell have a huge stake in American refining.

And how that happened under Boooooosh.

> Thats what happened under Bush and then the
> speculators got in on the action.

I posted a news story noting the Saudi's completely taking over the US refinery that YOU were talking about. Which just happened last week under Obama. And the partnership started under Clinton to begin with you fucking retard. Neither of which you the 'oil expert' obviously had no clue about.

Christ... lol

You stupid motherfucker. The Saudis arent the point you piece of shit. The entire oil refining industry in the U.S. was in on it. Focus you fucking retard. Saudis just had a small seat at the table.

What am I debating with this dumb ass hillbilly. Completely lost.

NoTea Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LOL Twitty thinks if he screams "You are an idiot"
> enough, it will make it true. If Twitty only knew
> how many intelligent minds were laughing at his
> moronic rants. LOL

Let me guess. You're considering yourself an intelligent mind? Do tell us again why student loans are causing a rise in the cost of education again? Oh wait, that was already disapproved and you look like an asshole.

What else is the gov't at fault for in your mind oh intellectual one?

studgie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Student loan
>
> Another proposed cause of increased tuition is
> U.S. Congress' occasional raising of the 'loan
> limits' of student loans, in which the increased
> availability of students to take out deeper loans
> sends a message to colleges and universities that
> students can 'afford more,' and then, in response,
> institutions of higher education raise tuition to
> match, leaving the student back where he began,
> but deeper in debt.[17]
>
> However, many empirical studies that have tested
> the effects of student loans on college tuition
> find no evidence of an increase in tuition,
> especially net of scholarships and after taking
> into account increases in the quality of education
> funded by increases in tuition.[18] Moreover, the
> widespread availability of private student loans
> makes it unlikely that public student loan
> availability limits demand for education.[19]
>
> An additional rebuttal to the student loan theory
> is the fact that even in years when loan limits
> have not risen, tuition has still continued to
> climb, and tuition has increased more at public
> institutions than at private institutions.[20][21]
> Public college tuition has jumped 33 percent
> nationwide since 2000.[22]


Sorry but the Federal Reserve disagrees with your theory.


http://college.usatoday.com/2015/08/20/report-federal-aid-rising-tuition/

twitty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> nit twit needs multiple choice Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It's the same 1 question.
> >
> > Do you really not understand who runs
> > PUBLIC universities dumbshit?
> >
> > In that case, then I'm sure you're completely
> > fucking unaware that the Federal government is
> the
> > one raking in the cash from student loans.
> Just
> > ask your hero Lizzie "Heap-o-Wampum" Warren.
>
> That's what I figured. Change the fucking topic
> when your initial assertions are proven wrong. So
> what? Banks borrow from the Fed all the time.
> Yippee. What else would you like to blame the
> gov't for cunt?


I thought maybe that I could use the Socratic method to force you to see your own stupidity for yourself but you're obviously too fucking dumb for that. It's not changing the subject, you're just to dumb to understand.

Let me see if I can lay it out your stupidity in a way that even a moron like you can understand...

Your started off blaming greed as the cause:

> Stop fucking blaming the government for everything.
> People are fucking greedy is why shit is going up.

The other guy posted the information (and your own later Wiki quote says the same, showing the PUBLIC tuition has risen more than private.

Now, who runs PUBLIC universities? I'll make it easy for you this time and make it multiple choice:

a. The government
b. The government
c. The government
d. All of the above

Salaries and benefits are the major cost at a university. Who benefits from tuition paid by students?

a. Government employees
b. Government employees
c. Government employees
d. All of the above

Who profits from student loans:

a. The government
b. The government
c. The government
d. All of the above

Now you'll have to figure this last part out on your own. You an do it.

Given your earlier claim that the increases are the result of greed, the entity which would be greedy in this case is _______________?

Gerry,

Why do you like big-fucking-ass government? Why do you trust rather average people to make your decisions for you?

Doesn't this embarrass you? Have you no pride? It's worst than being a slave, since you're choosing to suck some asshole's dick.

What is it, exactly? I don't understand why anyone would choose a big-fucking-ass government, which only results in fewer freedoms, over a smaller, limited, "government is a necessary evil" type of government.

Why would you worship a bunch of politicians who don't give a rat's ass about you?

It reminds me of little girls who worship movie stars, pinning pictures over their mirrors.

twitty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NoTea Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > LOL Twitty thinks if he screams "You are an
> idiot"
> > enough, it will make it true. If Twitty only
> knew
> > how many intelligent minds were laughing at his
> > moronic rants. LOL
>
> Let me guess. You're considering yourself an
> intelligent mind? Do tell us again why student
> loans are causing a rise in the cost of education
> again? Oh wait, that was already disapproved and
> you look like an asshole.
>
> What else is the gov't at fault for in your mind
> oh intellectual one?


No, Twitty you are proven wrong again. First by Forbes, now by the Federal Reserve. Maybe instead of desperately clinging to anything that saves your fragile little ego from being crushed, you should learn to find out if something is true before looking like an ass. Maybe try reading something other than DemocRAT Underwear or Drag Us Down dot orgasm

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You stupid motherfucker. The Saudis arent the
> point you piece of shit. The entire oil refining
> industry in the U.S. was in on it. Focus you
> fucking retard. Saudis just had a small seat at
> the table.

YOU were the one talking about the Saudi's you fucking idiot. lol

All that I did was correct your own bullshit.

Beyond that, people have been speculating on oil, gas, and finished petroleum products, long before Bush was even around. Nothing changed with Bush in that regard.

Quit trying to bullshit and act like you know things that you don't and I'll quit making you look like the fool that you are.

NoTea Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No, Twitty you are proven wrong again. First by
> Forbes, now by the Federal Reserve. Maybe instead
> of desperately clinging to anything that saves
> your fragile little ego from being crushed, you
> should learn to find out if something is true
> before looking like an ass. Maybe try reading
> something other than DemocRAT Underwear or Drag Us
> Down dot orgasm

C'mon Tea... Now who are you going to believe, the Federal Reserve or a half-assed out of context cut and paste from Wikipedia?

lol

99npx Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NoTea Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > No, Twitty you are proven wrong again. First by
> > Forbes, now by the Federal Reserve. Maybe
> instead
> > of desperately clinging to anything that saves
> > your fragile little ego from being crushed, you
> > should learn to find out if something is true
> > before looking like an ass. Maybe try reading
> > something other than DemocRAT Underwear or Drag
> Us
> > Down dot orgasm
>
> C'mon Tea... Now who are you going to believe, the
> Federal Reserve or a half-assed out of context cut
> and paste from Wikipedia?
>
> lol


Ha ha, I was trying to be nice since the poster of that article did so in a civil manner. Now, Twit is another issue since it's obvious he has certain mental deficiencies. LOL

NoTea Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> studgie Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Student loan
> >
> > Another proposed cause of increased tuition is
> > U.S. Congress' occasional raising of the 'loan
> > limits' of student loans, in which the
> increased
> > availability of students to take out deeper
> loans
> > sends a message to colleges and universities
> that
> > students can 'afford more,' and then, in
> response,
> > institutions of higher education raise tuition
> to
> > match, leaving the student back where he began,
> > but deeper in debt.[17]
> >
> > However, many empirical studies that have
> tested
> > the effects of student loans on college tuition
> > find no evidence of an increase in tuition,
> > especially net of scholarships and after taking
> > into account increases in the quality of
> education
> > funded by increases in tuition.[18] Moreover,
> the
> > widespread availability of private student
> loans
> > makes it unlikely that public student loan
> > availability limits demand for education.[19]
> >
> > An additional rebuttal to the student loan
> theory
> > is the fact that even in years when loan limits
> > have not risen, tuition has still continued to
> > climb, and tuition has increased more at public
> > institutions than at private
> institutions.[20][21]
> > Public college tuition has jumped 33 percent
> > nationwide since 2000.[22]
>
>
> Sorry but the Federal Reserve disagrees with your
> theory.
>
>
> http://college.usatoday.com/2015/08/20/report-fede
> ral-aid-rising-tuition/

That's not correct. The paper that was cited clearly states:

This paper presents preliminary findings and is being distributed to economists
and other interested readers solely to stimulate discussion and elicit comments.
The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily
reflect the position of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York or the Federal
Reserve System. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the authors.

Also it admits,

"This issue has been at the forefront of the policy discussion for many years. Even the
more muted tuition and student aid trends in the 1980s, prompted the then-Secretary of
Education William Bennett (1987) to argue that “[...] increases in financial aid in recent
years have enabled colleges and universities blithely to raise their tuitions, confident that
Federal loan subsidies would help cushion the increase,” a statement that came to be
known as the “Bennett Hypothesis.” Exploding tuition costs and loan balances in recent
years have similarly attracted much policy attention (for example, Obama, 2013). Despite
the importance of this issue, little empirical evidence exists on the link between student
loans and college tuition."

I have had the silver plan all along. They diagnosed me with colon cancer about a year ago. Other than a small out of pocket cost everything has been covered. Obamcare has saved my life and saved me from bankruptcy.

Fill in the Blank Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> twitty Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > nit twit needs multiple choice Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > It's the same 1 question.
> > >
> > > Do you really not understand who runs
> > > PUBLIC universities dumbshit?
> > >
> > > In that case, then I'm sure you're completely
> > > fucking unaware that the Federal government
> is
> > the
> > > one raking in the cash from student loans.
> > Just
> > > ask your hero Lizzie "Heap-o-Wampum" Warren.
> >
> > That's what I figured. Change the fucking
> topic
> > when your initial assertions are proven wrong.
> So
> > what? Banks borrow from the Fed all the time.
> > Yippee. What else would you like to blame the
> > gov't for cunt?
>
>
> I thought maybe that I could use the Socratic
> method to force you to see your own stupidity for
> yourself but you're obviously too fucking dumb for
> that. It's not changing the subject, you're just
> to dumb to understand.
>
> Let me see if I can lay it out your stupidity in a
> way that even a moron like you can understand...
>
> Your started off blaming greed as the cause:
>
> > Stop fucking blaming the government for
> everything.
> > People are fucking greedy is why shit is going
> up.
>
> The other guy posted the information (and your own
> later Wiki quote says the same, showing the PUBLIC
> tuition has risen more than private.
>
> Now, who runs PUBLIC universities? I'll
> make it easy for you this time and make it
> multiple choice:
>
> a. The government
> b. The government
> c. The government
> d. All of the above
>
> Salaries and benefits are the major cost at a
> university. Who benefits from tuition paid by
> students?
>
> a. Government employees
> b. Government employees
> c. Government employees
> d. All of the above
>
> Who profits from student loans:
>
> a. The government
> b. The government
> c. The government
> d. All of the above
>
> Now you'll have to figure this last part out on
> your own. You an do it.
>
> Given your earlier claim that the increases are
> the result of greed, the entity which would be
> greedy in this case is _______________?

Even this statement is a bit murky.

Public universities generally rely on subsidies from their respective state government. "The historical data for private and public institutions reveal that public institutions have always been more dependent on external support than have private institutions."[20] Recently, state support of public universities has been declining, forcing many public universities to seek private support. The real level of state funding for public higher education has doubled from $30 billion in 1974 to nearly $60 billion in 2000. Meanwhile, the percent of state appropriations for the cost of schooling per student at public university has fallen from 78% in 1974 to 43% in 2000.[21] The increasing use of teaching assistants in public universities is a testament to waning state support.[22] To compensate, some professional graduate programs in law, business, and medicine rely almost solely on private funding.

Also:

http://www.acenet.edu/the-presidency/columns-and-features/Pages/state-funding-a-race-to-the-bottom.aspx

State appropriations for public higher education have just faced another tough year. And yet, public institutions have faced many such years over the past three decades. Despite steadily growing student demand for higher education since the mid-1970s, state fiscal investment in higher education has been in retreat in the states since about 1980.

In fact, it is headed for zero.

Based on the trends since 1980, average state fiscal support for higher education will reach zero by 2059, although it could happen much sooner in some states and later in others. Public higher education is gradually being privatized

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What am I debating with this dumb ass hillbilly.
> Completely lost.

Because you're the biggest loser ever to post here? Because you have no friends? Because you're insane? Because you're a faggot? Yep, I think that'd be why.

studgie Wrote:

> http://college.usatoday.com/2015/08/20/report-fede
>
> > ral-aid-rising-tuition/
>
> That's not correct. The paper that was cited
> clearly states:
>
> This paper presents preliminary findings and is
> being distributed to economists
> and other interested readers solely to stimulate
> discussion and elicit comments.
> The views expressed in this paper are those of the
> authors and do not necessarily
> reflect the position of the Federal Reserve Bank
> of New York or the Federal
> Reserve System. Any errors or omissions are the
> responsibility of the authors.
>
> Also it admits,
>
> "This issue has been at the forefront of the
> policy discussion for many years. Even the
> more muted tuition and student aid trends in the
> 1980s, prompted the then-Secretary of
> Education William Bennett (1987) to argue that
> “[...] increases in financial aid in recent
> years have enabled colleges and universities
> blithely to raise their tuitions, confident that
> Federal loan subsidies would help cushion the
> increase,” a statement that came to be
> known as the “Bennett Hypothesis.” Exploding
> tuition costs and loan balances in recent
> years have similarly attracted much policy
> attention (for example, Obama, 2013). Despite
> the importance of this issue, little empirical
> evidence exists on the link between student
> loans and college tuition."

LMAO. So fucking Einstein didn't bother reading the actual paper he linked to but instead relied on a report from USA Today? You mean the intellectual dumbass is in fact just a dumbass? Anyone fucking surprised this dimwit Trump supporter asswipe is nothing but an empty suit?

Here's one for you:

NoTea is a:

a) Dickweed
b) Dumbass
c) Retard of the highest caliber
d) All the above

Fucking rightard teabagging cunt.

studgie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> That's not correct. The paper that was cited
> clearly states:
>
> This paper presents preliminary findings and is
> being distributed to economists
> and other interested readers solely to stimulate
> discussion and elicit comments.
> The views expressed in this paper are those of the
> authors and do not necessarily
> reflect the position of the Federal Reserve Bank
> of New York or the Federal
> Reserve System. Any errors or omissions are the
> responsibility of the authors.
>

You're an idiot. That's a standard disclaimer that's put on the cover of all staff research papers done for the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. It's only meaning is that it is not a statement of the board or official Fed policy.


> Also it admits,
>
> "This issue has been at the forefront of the
> policy discussion for many years. Even the
> more muted tuition and student aid trends in the
> 1980s, prompted the then-Secretary of
> Education William Bennett (1987) to argue that
> “[...] increases in financial aid in recent
> years have enabled colleges and universities
> blithely to raise their tuitions, confident that
> Federal loan subsidies would help cushion the
> increase,” a statement that came to be
> known as the “Bennett Hypothesis.” Exploding
> tuition costs and loan balances in recent
> years have similarly attracted much policy
> attention (for example, Obama, 2013). Despite
> the importance of this issue, little empirical
> evidence exists on the link between student
> loans and college tuition."

That is the from the intro to and is the whole point of the study you fucktard - to develop and present such evidence. Had you read past the cover and first page, then you might understand that given that the next 50 pages are devoted to doing just that.

And you conveniently left out the primary conclusion of the study:

"We find that institutions more exposed to changes in the subsidized federal loan program increased their tuition disproportionately around these policy changes, with a sizable pass-through effect on tuition of about 65 percent."

That is, as Federal aid programs were increased, the universities simply passed through the increase in the form of higher tuition.

studgie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fill in the Blank Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > twitty Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > nit twit needs multiple choice Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > It's the same 1 question.
> > > >
> > > > Do you really not understand who runs
> > > > PUBLIC universities dumbshit?
> > > >
> > > > In that case, then I'm sure you're
> completely
> > > > fucking unaware that the Federal government
> > is
> > > the
> > > > one raking in the cash from student loans.
> > > Just
> > > > ask your hero Lizzie "Heap-o-Wampum"
> Warren.
> > >
> > > That's what I figured. Change the fucking
> > topic
> > > when your initial assertions are proven wrong.
>
> > So
> > > what? Banks borrow from the Fed all the time.
>
> > > Yippee. What else would you like to blame
> the
> > > gov't for cunt?
> >
> >
> > I thought maybe that I could use the Socratic
> > method to force you to see your own stupidity
> for
> > yourself but you're obviously too fucking dumb
> for
> > that. It's not changing the subject, you're
> just
> > to dumb to understand.
> >
> > Let me see if I can lay it out your stupidity in
> a
> > way that even a moron like you can
> understand...
> >
> > Your started off blaming greed as the cause:
> >
> > > Stop fucking blaming the government for
> > everything.
> > > People are fucking greedy is why shit is
> going
> > up.
> >
> > The other guy posted the information (and your
> own
> > later Wiki quote says the same, showing the
> PUBLIC
> > tuition has risen more than private.
> >
> > Now, who runs PUBLIC universities? I'll
> > make it easy for you this time and make it
> > multiple choice:
> >
> > a. The government
> > b. The government
> > c. The government
> > d. All of the above
> >
> > Salaries and benefits are the major cost at a
> > university. Who benefits from tuition paid by
> > students?
> >
> > a. Government employees
> > b. Government employees
> > c. Government employees
> > d. All of the above
> >
> > Who profits from student loans:
> >
> > a. The government
> > b. The government
> > c. The government
> > d. All of the above
> >
> > Now you'll have to figure this last part out on
> > your own. You an do it.
> >
> > Given your earlier claim that the increases are
> > the result of greed, the entity which would be
> > greedy in this case is _______________?
>
> Even this statement is a bit murky.
>
> Public universities generally rely on subsidies
> from their respective state government. "The
> historical data for private and public
> institutions reveal that public institutions have
> always been more dependent on external support
> than have private institutions."[20] Recently,
> state support of public universities has been
> declining, forcing many public universities to
> seek private support. The real level of state
> funding for public higher education has doubled
> from $30 billion in 1974 to nearly $60 billion in
> 2000. Meanwhile, the percent of state
> appropriations for the cost of schooling per
> student at public university has fallen from 78%
> in 1974 to 43% in 2000.[21] The increasing use of
> teaching assistants in public universities is a
> testament to waning state support.[22] To
> compensate, some professional graduate programs in
> law, business, and medicine rely almost solely on
> private funding.

It's not murky at all, you're just to stupid to understand what you're cutting and pasting.

State universities are public institutions operated and funded by the state (i.e., the government). Because they may receive some private funding beyond that doesn't change that.

In your "greed" hypothesis, "greed" implies that some party is who do you think is benefiting from said greed. Who do you think that is in the case of a public university? It's certainly not the private donors and partners. Who does that leave?

>
> Also:
>
> http://www.acenet.edu/the-presidency/columns-and-f
> eatures/Pages/state-funding-a-race-to-the-bottom.a
> spx
>
> State appropriations for public higher education
> have just faced another tough year. And yet,
> public institutions have faced many such years
> over the past three decades. Despite steadily
> growing student demand for higher education since
> the mid-1970s, state fiscal investment in higher
> education has been in retreat in the states since
> about 1980.
>
> In fact, it is headed for zero.
>
> Based on the trends since 1980, average state
> fiscal support for higher education will reach
> zero by 2059, although it could happen much sooner
> in some states and later in others. Public higher
> education is gradually being privatized


That's an advocacy piece. A downward trend based on percentage of state revenue does not mean that funding will continue to decline such that it reaches zero. Nobody actually expects that.

In fact, as typical for such discussions, funding has only decreased in percentage terms by some measures. Actual funding levels in most cases are higher. i.e., Because the personal income level of a state increases and/or the overall state budget increases, that doesn't mean that state funding for universities necessarily must increase on a directly proportional basis. And because it may not, that doesn't represent a "cut" other than in the minds of proponents advocating for more funding, particularly when the actual real funding level has increased.

Once again, you're a moron.

stfu you idiot. Republicans dont govern. Thats the basic problem with you. You dont fuckin govern. So stfu and lose like you will.

7HFp7 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> You're an idiot. That's a standard disclaimer
> that's put on the cover of all staff research
> papers done for the Federal Reserve Bank of New
> York. It's only meaning is that it is not a
> statement of the board or official Fed policy.
>
>

Yo dick breath. What it means is that the "Federal Reserve" did not make this statement as you said but rather some lowly staffer just putting out their opinion. Do you understand the difference? It's an opinion piece.

>
> That is the from the intro to and is the whole
> point of the study you fucktard - to develop and
> present such evidence. Had you read past the
> cover and first page, then you might understand
> that given that the next 50 pages are devoted to
> doing just that.
>
> And you conveniently left out the primary
> conclusion of the study:
>
> "We find that institutions more exposed to changes
> in the subsidized federal loan program increased
> their tuition disproportionately around these
> policy changes, with a sizable pass-through effect
> on tuition of about 65 percent."
>
> That is, as Federal aid programs were increased,
> the universities simply passed through the
> increase in the form of higher tuition.

Again, you're a fucking idiot. It's an UNOFFICIAL OPINION. If it were fact, the Fed would be parading it around as such but it hasn't. Even the USA Today article you cited said there is no silver bullet so claiming that it's all the government's fault is BULLSHIT as is your claim to being intelligent. Run away moron. Go pedal your big government conspiracy theories to your fellow Trumpians. Fucking dumbass cunt still thinking he's some intellectual makes me laugh.

Why do Republicans pretend they govern? Theyve had the gerrymandered House for six years. What have these losers done for Americans?

All they do is fight with each other and name call. Shut down government and cant find a speaker. Republicans are filthy animals that want power to waste our time and serve their donors.

And these useful idiots on here are traitors.

G2 is a blabbering idiot Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > bonafide Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > You think healthcare cost increase was a
> result
> > of
> > > Obamacare? LOL
> > >
> > > Must be a Trump supporter.
> >
> > Now they blame the entire for profit fascist
> death
> > care system they cling to with a death grip on
> the
> > left.
> >
> > Their little useful idiot monkeys call it Obama
> > care on forums=) lol.
>
> Uh, what? You finally agree that the democrat
> labeled Obamacare is a failure? Is that because
> both Hillary and Bernie say so? No more love for
> obumblefuck?
>
> My insurance rates have doubled because of
> Obamacare. More money for Obama's corporate buds,
> less care for my children.
>
> FUCK FUCK FUCK LIBS!!!!!

twitty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 7HFp7 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > You're an idiot. That's a standard disclaimer
> > that's put on the cover of all staff research
> > papers done for the Federal Reserve Bank of New
> > York. It's only meaning is that it is not a
> > statement of the board or official Fed policy.
>
> >
> >
>
> Yo dick breath. What it means is that the
> "Federal Reserve" did not make this statement as
> you said but rather some lowly staffer just
> putting out their opinion. Do you understand the
> difference? It's an opinion piece.
>
> >
> > That is the from the intro to and is the whole
> > point of the study you fucktard - to develop
> and
> > present such evidence. Had you read past the
> > cover and first page, then you might understand
> > that given that the next 50 pages are devoted
> to
> > doing just that.
> >
> > And you conveniently left out the primary
> > conclusion of the study:
> >
> > "We find that institutions more exposed to
> changes
> > in the subsidized federal loan program
> increased
> > their tuition disproportionately around these
> > policy changes, with a sizable pass-through
> effect
> > on tuition of about 65 percent."
> >
> > That is, as Federal aid programs were
> increased,
> > the universities simply passed through the
> > increase in the form of higher tuition.
>
> Again, you're a fucking idiot. It's an UNOFFICIAL
> OPINION. If it were fact, the Fed would be
> parading it around as such but it hasn't. Even
> the USA Today article you cited said there is no
> silver bullet so claiming that it's all the
> government's fault is BULLSHIT as is your claim to
> being intelligent. Run away moron. Go pedal your
> big government conspiracy theories to your fellow
> Trumpians. Fucking dumbass cunt still thinking
> he's some intellectual makes me laugh.


Derp. It is not an "opinion piece." lmao

It is a research paper by the staff of the Federal Reserve prepared for and published by the Board of Governors presenting the exact type of empirical research on the subject that you, not reading past the intro, claimed wasn't available.

It's apparent at this point that you're really too fucking stupid to even argue with.

nCcv3 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Derp. It is not an "opinion piece." lmao
>
> It is a research paper by the staff of the Federal
> Reserve prepared for and published by the Board of
> Governors presenting the exact type of empirical
> research on the subject that you, not reading past
> the intro, claimed wasn't available.
>
> It's apparent at this point that you're really too
> fucking stupid to even argue with.

You quoted it but you still didn't understand it.

> The views expressed in this paper are those of the
> authors and do not necessarily
> reflect the position of the Federal Reserve Bank
> of New York or the Federal
> Reserve System.

Fuck you idiot.

7HFp7 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> studgie Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > That's not correct. The paper that was cited
> > clearly states:
> >
> > This paper presents preliminary findings and is
> > being distributed to economists
> > and other interested readers solely to
> stimulate
> > discussion and elicit comments.
> > The views expressed in this paper are those of
> the
> > authors and do not necessarily
> > reflect the position of the Federal Reserve
> Bank
> > of New York or the Federal
> > Reserve System. Any errors or omissions are the
> > responsibility of the authors.
> >
>
> You're an idiot. That's a standard disclaimer
> that's put on the cover of all staff research
> papers done for the Federal Reserve Bank of New
> York. It's only meaning is that it is not a
> statement of the board or official Fed policy.

But you claimed the fed made it via your response:

>> Sorry but the Federal Reserve disagrees with your theory.


>
>
> > Also it admits,
> >
> > "This issue has been at the forefront of the
> > policy discussion for many years. Even the
> > more muted tuition and student aid trends in
> the
> > 1980s, prompted the then-Secretary of
> > Education William Bennett (1987) to argue that
> > “[...] increases in financial aid in recent
> > years have enabled colleges and universities
> > blithely to raise their tuitions, confident
> that
> > Federal loan subsidies would help cushion the
> > increase,” a statement that came to be
> > known as the “Bennett Hypothesis.”
> Exploding
> > tuition costs and loan balances in recent
> > years have similarly attracted much policy
> > attention (for example, Obama, 2013). Despite
> > the importance of this issue, little
> empirical
> > evidence exists on the link between student
> > loans and college tuition."
>
> That is the from the intro to and is the whole
> point of the study you fucktard - to develop and
> present such evidence. Had you read past the
> cover and first page, then you might understand
> that given that the next 50 pages are devoted to
> doing just that.
>
> And you conveniently left out the primary
> conclusion of the study:
>
> "We find that institutions more exposed to changes
> in the subsidized federal loan program increased
> their tuition disproportionately around these
> policy changes, with a sizable pass-through effect
> on tuition of about 65 percent."
>
> That is, as Federal aid programs were increased,
> the universities simply passed through the
> increase in the form of higher tuition.

Lots of papers are put out annually stating various hypotheses. Very few are actually substantiated and accepted as fact. These claims are not validated and thus should not be argued as such.

twitty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> nCcv3 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > Derp. It is not an "opinion piece." lmao
> >
> > It is a research paper by the staff of the
> Federal
> > Reserve prepared for and published by the Board
> of
> > Governors presenting the exact type of
> empirical
> > research on the subject that you, not reading
> past
> > the intro, claimed wasn't available.
> >
> > It's apparent at this point that you're really
> too
> > fucking stupid to even argue with.
>
> You quoted it but you still didn't understand it.
>
> > The views expressed in this paper are those of
> the
> > authors and do not necessarily
> > reflect the position of the Federal Reserve
> Bank
> > of New York or the Federal
> > Reserve System.
>
> Fuck you idiot.


Once again, you're too stupid to even understand what you're reading. That is a standard disclaimer put on ALL staff and contracted papers published by the NY Fed. It is a staff research paper prepared for the board presenting objective empirical research regarding the correlation between funding for Federal tuition programs and the cost of tuition.

494V9 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Once again, you're too stupid to even understand
> what you're reading. That is a standard
> disclaimer put on ALL staff and contracted papers
> published by the NY Fed. It is a staff research
> paper prepared for the board presenting objective
> empirical research regarding the correlation
> between funding for Federal tuition programs and
> the cost of tuition.

So that means you were fucking wrong when you wrote: "Sorry but the Federal Reserve disagrees with your theory."

And then proceed to try and defend it til 3a last night? Fucking self proclaimed intellectuals rarely ever deliver the goods. Citing a USA today article and too dumb to even follow the resource. Everyone knows about Google moron.

studgie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 7HFp7 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > studgie Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > >
> > > That's not correct. The paper that was cited
> > > clearly states:
> > >
> > > This paper presents preliminary findings and
> is
> > > being distributed to economists
> > > and other interested readers solely to
> > stimulate
> > > discussion and elicit comments.
> > > The views expressed in this paper are those
> of
> > the
> > > authors and do not necessarily
> > > reflect the position of the Federal Reserve
> > Bank
> > > of New York or the Federal
> > > Reserve System. Any errors or omissions are
> the
> > > responsibility of the authors.
> > >
> >
> > You're an idiot. That's a standard disclaimer
> > that's put on the cover of all staff research
> > papers done for the Federal Reserve Bank of New
> > York. It's only meaning is that it is not a
> > statement of the board or official Fed policy.
>
>
> But you claimed the fed made it via your
> response:
>
> >> Sorry but the Federal Reserve disagrees with
> your theory.


lol. Is that really all that you've got left to go with?

First of all, I didn't post that. But it makes no real difference.

Would you feel less butthurt if they'd said a Fed staff research paper demonstrating a statistically significant correlation between increased Federal funding for tuition and tuition rates which are charged by universities?

Changes nothing with respect to your claim that there was no relationship or empirical research.


>
>
> >
> >
> > > Also it admits,
> > >
> > > "This issue has been at the forefront of the
> > > policy discussion for many years. Even the
> > > more muted tuition and student aid trends in
> > the
> > > 1980s, prompted the then-Secretary of
> > > Education William Bennett (1987) to argue
> that
> > > “[...] increases in financial aid in recent
> > > years have enabled colleges and universities
> > > blithely to raise their tuitions, confident
> > that
> > > Federal loan subsidies would help cushion the
> > > increase,” a statement that came to be
> > > known as the “Bennett Hypothesis.”
> > Exploding
> > > tuition costs and loan balances in recent
> > > years have similarly attracted much policy
> > > attention (for example, Obama, 2013). Despite
> > > the importance of this issue, little
> > empirical
> > > evidence exists on the link between student
> > > loans and college tuition."
> >
> > That is the from the intro to and is the whole
> > point of the study you fucktard - to develop
> and
> > present such evidence. Had you read past the
> > cover and first page, then you might understand
> > that given that the next 50 pages are devoted
> to
> > doing just that.
> >
> > And you conveniently left out the primary
> > conclusion of the study:
> >
> > "We find that institutions more exposed to
> changes
> > in the subsidized federal loan program
> increased
> > their tuition disproportionately around these
> > policy changes, with a sizable pass-through
> effect
> > on tuition of about 65 percent."
> >
> > That is, as Federal aid programs were
> increased,
> > the universities simply passed through the
> > increase in the form of higher tuition.
>
> Lots of papers are put out annually stating
> various hypotheses. Very few are actually
> substantiated and accepted as fact. These claims
> are not validated and thus should not be argued as
> such.

It is an objective statistical analysis demonstrating, with some distinctions among types of aid and associated programs, a very strong statistical correlation between Federal funding for tuition assistance and tuition rates. The "hypothesis" is proven statistically. Now you might validly argue whether that necessarily "proves" the reality independent of that as you may with any analysis but that wasn't really the issue. Contrary to your claim, there is in fact objective hard empirical evidence of a relationship between increased Federal funding for tuition and tuition rates which are charged by universities.

Yeah, I know that's not as good as your selective half-assed cut and paste from Wikipedia. lmao

Fucking idiots.