Mohawk Valley Community College will receive a $250,000 federal grant to help students from disadvantaged backgrounds, U.S. Rep. Richard Hanna announced this morning.Wow ... this sounds like great news. Who could be against helping disadvantaged students?
MVCC's Upward Bound program "aims to generate the skills and motivation necessary to complete a higher education degree," according to a news release. Students eligible to participate include first-generation college students, low-income students and those with disabilities.Nice -- but how is this different from what we are already paying for? Aren't our schools supposedly already geared to generate skills necessary to complete a higher education degree?
And how does a federal program generate "MOTIVATION? The implication is that first-generation college students, low-income students, and those with disabilities somehow are not motivated.
Now consider that about 40 cents of every dollar of this grant (or about $100,000) is being borrowed by the federal taxpayer.
One's education is the responsibility of the parents, and ultimately, the students themselves. There are so many opportunities already out there that no one should be lacking the education they want if they are really motivated. No federal program can substitute for what must come from within.
What this program is ... like many others ... is to foster a culture of dependency on the federal government. Look at the "Life of Julia" scenario promoted by the current administration. The implication is that people need the federal government to get by. But they don't . . .
The only thing Upward Bound by this program is our National Debt .... Debt to purchase government control of many people.
12 comments:
And, just imagine how many Congressmen have received similar grants of our money? Then translate this to the layers of taxpayer funded positions at MVCC that it takes to administer and instruct. This is just a small example of feel good programs that sound good and do nothing but drain the Treasury. We wonder why we are $15 trillion in debt? We wonder why we have unfunded liabilities to the tune of $130 trillion. Andn Hanna just keeps playing the game--- with our money.
The prevailing virtue this area seems to prize in its elected officials is their ability to obtain federal and state aid. Year after year, our representatives in the state legislature tout their ability to get funding and aid for this and for that.
And why not? If it were not for federal and state aid, this area would be in even more trouble because of the mismanagement that's occurred for the last forty years.
Sure, the elected officials and the public they claim to represent decry the government, particularly when an office is closed and jobs are lost. But that's the exception that proves the rule.
Time and time again, we've witnessed the private enrichment of Friends With Access with public funds---inefficient use of our money for oftentimes ineffective projects and programs. The money trail is out there. This isn't a figment of the imagination.
And yet, no real accountability is demanded. And I suspect it is because the populace tolerates it in the hopes that, in some way, it will benefit their lives in the long run.
The political project for this area is leading those who aren't wards of the state to unlearn this toxicity and embrace civic virtues again. It's probably too late, though.
Roscoe Conkling still lives in the hearts of Uticans, baby.
Grants, Student loans, its all the same, doesn't matter what you call it.
Interesting points. But, no area can grow being, in effect, wards of the state. Why? Because government jobs do not attract nor fulfill those with real brain power, creativity or innovation skills.
Seems sort of backwards to me. One would think it was more sensible to find the kids that are already motivated and then spend the money.
Being motivated should result in financial help, rather than free money or low interest loans being the driving force to chase them off their lazy butts to get motivated. Seems doomed to failure. The statistics of how many of those "motivated" folks will actually graduate with a degree will probably be disappointing.
Anonymous,do you honestly think that those who design programs as this weigh their logic or consequences? If they were spending their personal money, thbey might. Take a look at job training programs which have been around forever and sound so good. On the Federal level their are roughly 149 of them administered by a host of agencies. One would think that every man, woman and child in America would be super trained by now. Yet, all we hear from Obama on down to the Hannas, Griffos, Picentis, Dave Mathisis of the world is that job training is the answer to our woes. It is a self sustaining, ever growing indusry with large salaries and administrative jobs all paid by the taxpayer decade after decade. None of it makes sense but cdertainly costs some cents from our wallets. The entire system of government granst, loans, programs is upside down, inefficient, wasteful and unproductive( See 50 year War on Poverty). As we descend into national,state and local bankruptcy, look inot the mirror and ask, what the heck have we done to ourselves?
Then there is the demographic that is in it for the grant money, child care reimbursment and other little stipends, and has no intention of ever working. Sucking on the public breast through programs paying for training and re-training becomes a temporary career. When the money dries up, they move on to some other entitlement program to finance their lack of ambition and motivation.
Seems that liberals in government keep on giving, even when the well is dry and the grant programs are being funded while other more important items are being financed through loans and bonding. If the present administration remains in office, stand by for 4 more yrs of the same sort of irresponsible spending on entitlement programs and more government borrowing.
While liberal policies have led to our current situation, I think even liberals, when they think hard about what is going on, will object.
It is no longer about government "helping" disadvantaged. That is only the pretext. It is really about creating a dependant class that is subserviant to the political class ... Ultimately leading to a loss of personal freedom with control by the latter. That is why government seems to get bigger no matter which party is in office.
I think true liberals and conservatives can agree that increased government controls over our lives and loss of personal freedoms would be a bad thing
Hanna is a GIANT disappointment,he has become a part of the washington problem. It didn't take him even two years to become another get along go along representative just like Boehlert before him. A true spineless politican.
As Boehlert, Hanna will probably serve for a very long time. It did not take him long to realize that his district is dominated by ties to government in all respects. Loans, grants, tax breaks, special favors, he will use all to build a dependency base just as Boehlert did. Hanna's big problem is that his district has been changed and that his Democratic opponent is a big liberal who shares, if not exceeds, the same spending philosophy. Either way, we will wind up with a similar rep. Why vote at all? Except with our feet.
Strikeslip is dead wrong. Today's liberal views government involvement in all aspects of our lives as "good", benevolent and productive. The money does not matter to them. Others will always pay whether it be the current "rich" or future generations. Society will be bettet off and more "fair" and "just". Debt has become irrelevant to the liberal, now progrssive, mind set.
Post a Comment