Why Does College Cost So Much?

  College tuition is a hot topic these days. For a long time, people did not pay much attention to tuition. Today, things are changing. More and more, people are realizing how high tuition has gotten and now they want that to change. In the following essay, I have tried to tackle a very difficult topic. The problem with this topic was that, during research, I found that almost all of the information regarding it was attack after attack on the college administrations. I found no writings by college administrators even attempting to defend themselves. When I started the research for my first paper this semester, I thought I would just be cruising through another English course, effortlessly composing the required essays, and spewing other peoples' thoughts on topics I could not care less about. That all changed when I discovered the awful truth about how much college tuition had gotten out of control over the years. I walked around campus in a daze as dollar-signs clouded my vision and ringing cash registers stung my ears. I couldn't help wondering and worrying about how much I would be paying by the time I graduated in three years. Then I went to my counselor and heard the dreadful news that, because of the major I recently declared, I would be in school for, at least, another four and a half years!
After the shock subsided, I began rethinking my topic. I dropped the emphasis on current legislation regarding the matter and decided to research what is causing tuition to rise and what students can do about it. There are many theories on why college costs so much these days. Students and their parents are battling with school administrators to get them to stop giving them weak justifications for the increase and start showing them where the money is going.
Students have every right to be angry about the state of college tuition. In the past 20 years, "tuition increased twice as fast as the overall cost of living (Larson, 63)." Between 1980 and 1990, the average cost of attending public and private colleges increased by 109% and 146%, respectively (Hood, 10). To put these figures into perspective, we can compare them with other rising costs during the same 10-year period. For example: medical care costs rose 117%, new home costs went up 90%, and the cost of a new car went up a mere 37%; meanwhile, median family income only grew by 73% (Hood, 10).
Those who can afford these outrageous prices, can usually also ignore it. As for the rest of us, when every penny counts, you want to know where every penny is going. College administrators continually give us vague answers by telling us that it is all due to rising costs. "What costs," you ask? Well, conveniently enough, a "cost" is anything the college chooses to spend it's money on (Sowell, 16). In his article "Why College Tuition Costs So Much," Dr. Thomas Sowell believes that administrators� claims that tuition does not cover the full cost of an education are not valid, pointing out that "there is no more reason why tuition should cover all the costs of a college than there is for magazine subscriptions to cover all the costs of producing a magazine (18)." Research is to a college what advertisers are to a magazine (Sowell, 18).
So where are these rising "costs" coming from? Well, college faculty is one source. Although average faculty salaries were about the same in 1990 as they were in 1970, the number of faculty members increased by 76% (Hood, 11). Meanwhile, total student enrollment had only grown by 59% -- that's 17% less than increase in faculty (Hood, 11). Which makes many wonder if that many faculty are truly necessary.
Of course, such drastic increases in tuition cannot be solely blamed on extra faculty. There are numerous causes for this phenomenon. A rare cause, but a cause nonetheless, was discovered in a federal investigation of "costs" charged against government research grants by Stanford University. The investigation revealed such "costs" as: a $3,000 cedar-lined chest and $2,000 a month for flower arrangements (both at the home of Stanford President Donald Kennedy), more than $180,000 depreciation on a yacht donated to the athletic department, and $17,500 as part of the cost of a wedding reception when Mr. Kennedy got remarried (Sowell, 16).
The last cause for tuition inflation that I want to discuss (although there are many, many more out there) involves financial aid. It starts off, however, with the exploitation of an American dream. It has become painfully obvious that the American public is being taken advantage of. Americans see college as an important key to being successful later in life. We also believe that, as Americans, we have a right to have the tools to become successful within our reach. Higher education is highly valued by most Americans, but, sadly, many cannot afford to attend colleges or universities.
It seems that colleges and universities know how much employers look for employees with a college education. Both the American public and the college administrators are aware of the effect a college education has on a person's financial success later in life. Knowing how much people value higher education, colleges are constantly pushing the envelope, seeing how much they can squeeze out of their students. In response, students are forced to apply for financial aid.
"The fastest-growing expense at Penn and nearly every other university is financial aid (Larson, 67)." Like many other universities, Penn has nearly half of its students receiving some form of financial aid. The cost of financial aid is one of the most commonly used excuses for rising tuition. This is where what I call the 'run-around' begins. It seems logical (and feasible) that if colleges lowered their tuition, students would require considerably less financial aid and, consequently, schools would not feel forced to raise tuition. The key to this is to stop going in circles.
Unfortunately, it is highly unlikely that colleges will be catching on to this difficult concept anytime in the near future. So it seems that it is up to us, as students to make the change. There are two ways that we can do this, the political way and the personal way.
The political way requires students (and their parents) to make their voices be heard. Keep yourself up-to-date with what is going on around campus. Most importantly, watch out for your school's tuition hearings and be sure to attend them! Tuition hearings are a great opportunity to have your voice be heard. Encourage your friends and parents to attend also. Don't be afraid to tell them how you feel about the status of tuition.
Another way to make your voice be heard is to contact the offices of your state legislators. Ask about their positions on the state of college tuition. If they feel the same as you do, ask about how you can get involved in getting bills passed that may positively affect college tuition. If they don't have anything you can get involved in, be sure they know that you support them, that the status of college tuition is a very important topic to you, and offer to volunteer your time if anything concerning tuition comes up.
For those of you who prefer to be quiet protesters, there is a more personal way you can deal with the continuing rise of college tuition. Eventually, if enough people follow plans like this one, administrators will hopefully get the hint and lower tuition. The key to this plan is remembering that an education is what you make of it.
Step one is to figure out what kind of education you want. Four year colleges aren't the only way to go. Take into consideration junior colleges and vocational schools. You may also want to think about taking a year off to travel or work before continuing your education (Lieber, 82). Many people find that the time off helps them figure out what they really want to do which pays off in the long run because they don't waste time and money taking classes they don't need. Knowing what you want to do can save you lots of money.
The second step is to figure out what you want and need in a school. TIME magazine and The Princeton Review have put out a guide called "The Best College for You and How to Get In." The magazine is filled with many factors you need to consider when choosing a school. They suggest that you start out by getting out a piece of paper and writing down 20 of your interests and goals, then cut it down to your top 10 and start find the schools that match up (Anonymous, 21).
Step three is to gather as much information about the schools you want to apply to as you possibly can. If possible, try to visit them all (preferably on a day classes are in session � this gives you the best feeling of the school possible). If you can't visit all the schools, ask if they have any video tours available.
The last (and most important) step in you silent protest is to pick the most affordable school from your list. I can't emphasize enough that an education is purely what YOU make of it. Just because a school is expensive doesn't necessarily mean that you will automatically get the best education. Likewise, an affordable school does not always mean you will be doomed to a lesser education. As long as you study hard and make the most of your classes, you will do well wherever you go.
Neither of these plans are guaranteed to take tuition down immediately. Over time, however, something good is bound to come of it. If enough people get out there and speak their minds, people will hear it and, eventually, someone will listen. Luckily for the schools, we value our education too much to engage in a boycott of the system to get our way. Instead, with a silent boycott, we can stay away from over-priced schools knowing that we can still get a good education at an affordable price. If enough people participate in this silent boycott, administrators are bound to see what's happening and, hopefully, get the hint that it is time for a change.

Is competition good or bad?

   Competition is happening all around us, and it's inevitable and unstoppable in the society. Let's see whether it's good or bad.

  Many organizations around the world fear competition. They are scared that another bigger badder organization is going to come along that can offer the same features and benefits but will offer them: quicker, cheaper, with more customization, with better customer service, etc. Competition is actually a good thing, in fact it’s a great thing.

  Without competition Apple would have never created their Ipod, Microsoft would have never created Windows, and Google would probably be non-existent. Competition is essential because it leads to one very important thing, innovation.

  People are always looking for products with more features and capabilities, products that cost less but can do more, and products that just plain solve their needs or wants better than any other product can. When companies compete, consumers get what they want.

  But what do the companies get? Well, when companies compete they set new standards for other companies to either match or to beat. When a company sets a new standard, it gets more recognition and an increase a revenue. Then another company comes along and raises the bar, that company now gets the recognition and the increase in revenue. And so the companies dance, until someone makes a wrong step, then the dance is over.

  The reality is competition is everywhere, I know competition is not encouraged in many schools, which to me seems like educators are depriving students of a valuable life skill (and fact). Sure you can tell kids or students that everyone is a winner. However, what happens when they get out in the real world and realize that everyone is competing for that same job at that same company?

  

  On the contrary, people considered that if those company would have worked together, the products we have today would be far better. "Competition isn't essential because it's not the only way to lead to important things, innovation." Competition leads to unnecessary enemies.  

  Furthermore, Microsoft and Apple would not have developed windows or O/S or the I-pad if they didn't want the end product to be better. What about the Wilbur and Orville Wright and the modern airplane? What drove them to invent the first plane? What about the wheel? Did billions of our ancestors build it because of competition? 

  The answer would be no. People invented it as they felt the need for it. Need and competition follow parallel tracks but need stays a little ahead. When competition starts leading and need lagging, the problems start. 

  Moreover, Scientific studies have shown that people having no competition produce more creative and innovative results than those who were competing when they have to solve a problem.

  Finally, in my opinions, I think competition is good when it really makes people innovative and the world better, otherwise competition is never good when you're the one who lose.

   

Are athletes and actors and actresses very greedy people?

Do not get me wrong, acting is hard work, some of my friends have done their fair share of voluntary acting in the past and they needed the script by them at all times.
It does take up time and the actors do earn their money, but no job in the world is worth millions upon millions of dollars for one good six months work.
Athletes on the other hand, are even more overpaid and all they do is depending on the sport, score a goal or bat a run in. Sports are fun to watch and root for while watching, but when it comes to monetary gain, the athletes and coaches themselves do not deserve the money they're paid.
Anyone could walk over to a basketball hoop and drop a basketball into it, anyone can grab a baseball bat and hit a fastball down the middle of the plate.
The general public might not be able to do it as good, but how does performing those skills at a high level deserve to become more appreciated over what a lawyer does or what a doctor does, or even a construction worker that builds the homes we live in and the shopping mall our grocery stores are in? I can tell you that it does not deserve to be appreciated more.
A soft spot in my heart is teaching and I think teaching young kids is the most rewarding career there is out there, and they do not get paid that much and they should, and to me they deserve to be overpaid and highly paid at that.
It just makes me sick that the general public is to be blamed for athlete's and actor's over inflated salaries, when it is the agents and the leagues that type up the contracts and make it attractive enough for the person to sign their name on the dotted line.

Arts in airport

Flowers

Is torture ever justified?

YES
  Imagine this scenario: A terrorist has planted a nuclear bomb in New York City. It will go off in one hour. A million people will die. You capture the terrorist. He knows where it is. He's not talking. If you have the slightest belief that hanging this man by his thumbs, or some other method of torture, will get you the information to save a million people, are you justified in doing so? Not only is it permissible; it is a moral duty.

However rare the cases, there are circumstances in which torture would be required to acquire life-saving information. And once you've established the principle, the argument is not whether torture is ever permissible, but when—in other words, how big, how imminent, how preventable does the threat have to be to justify it?

In 1994, 19-year-old Israeli Corporal Nahshon Waxman was kidnapped by Palestinian terrorists. The Israelis captured the driver of the car used in the kidnapping and tortured him in order to find where Waxman was being held.

Faced with a similar choice, an American President would have a similar obligation. To do otherwise—to give up the chance to find your soldier lest you sully yourself by authorizing torture of the person who possesses potentially lifesaving information—is a deeply immoral betrayal of a soldier.

There is much to admire in those who refuse on principle ever to take up arms (or, in this case, torture) under any conditions. One should be grateful for the saintly among us. And one should be vigilant that they not get to make the decisions upon which the lives of others depend.

 NO
  To fight terrorism we need intelligence. But the intelligence we collect must be reliable and acquired humanely, under clear standards understood by all. Using torture, even for the best of reasons, is wrong and should not be legal. To do differently not only offends our values as Americans but undermines our war effort, because abuse of prisoners harms—not helps—us in the war on terror.

First, subjecting prisoners to abuse leads to bad intelligence, because under torture a detainee will tell the interrogator anything to make the pain stop. Second, mistreatment of our prisoners endangers U.S. troops who might be captured by the enemy, if not in this war, then in the next.

Third, prisoner abuses exact a terrible toll in the war of ideas, because inevitably these abuses become public. When they do, the actions of a few darken our reputation in the eyes of millions. American values should win any war of ideas, and we can't let prisoner abuse tarnish our image.

We are Americans, and we hold ourselves to humane standards of treatment of people—no matter how evil they may be. America stands for a moral mission, one of freedom and democracy and human rights at home and abroad. We are better than these terrorists, and we will win. The enemy we fight has no respect for human life or human rights. They don't deserve our sympathy.

But this isn't about who they are; it's about who we are. These are the values that distinguish us from our enemies, and we can never, never allow our enemies to take those values away.

How does technology improve your daily life?

     Nowadays, thanks to technology, we can enjoy the convenience of using them, especially in our daily life. The state-of-the-art tech can even take us further to make the world better place.

     First, transportation is a significant progress making people commuting to work so easily, like HSR in Taiwan. In the past, people had to take approximately days or months traveling form one place to another, not to mention the big continent like U.S. and Russia. We should take advantage of using public transportation more because it will save us lots of time. Making our life from walking on foot to taking vehicles, fleet, and planes is a huge improvement.

     Second, telecommunication used to be hard. People had to use pigeons or eagles to send their messages. What’s worse, some aboriginals used rope to tie on the trees in order to leave the messages for warning, notifying, or hunting. After Bill’s invention, people enjoyed using telephone to reduce the distance and save the time. Furthermore, taking a glimpse at today’s teens, almost everyone gets a smart phone on their hands. Steve Jobs prompted the combination of three major functions, which making phone, internet, and the best-sales ipod. They’re an extremely recreational and creative product presenting in front of people in 20^th century.

     Third, in terms of computers, I would say not only hardware but also software enhancing much better than the one in the past. We can tell from the size of it. Computers were huge and almost accounted for the half or two-third of the room at that time. However, we can put about sixty computers in the same room now. Without a doubt, Software is also better. We had practical software like Facebook, Google, Twitter, Yahoo, and Amazon. As a result, once you post something on the internet, presumably millions of people could see that if you’re a celebrity or being famous enough.

     Finally, in my opinions, technology helps us to make our life convenient, to communicate with our relatives easier, save the time we could have wasted, and also make our accommodation better to live in.