Trump vs Universities

[Politruk]

I mentioned it as reference to newspeak. Good is bad, bad is good and so on

Oh, that's been going on at least since Frank Luntz got started -- introduced by gradual stages, so hopefully Americans have built up some immunities.

 

[Politruk]

Educational institutions are sacred spaces in progressive religion.

More good comes of a hundred students attending a class than ever comes of a hundred worshippers going to church. There has never been a time in the history of Christendom when that has not been true.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Of course you are. Losing all those high tax paying employee's is going to lower your taxes...

Right. They would have paid $2.6 billion in taxes. lol.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Educational institutions are sacred spaces in progressive religion. The progs here are reacting like bible thumpers at a church arson.

I understand how higher education represents an existential threat to your long-held vision of a return to a simpler agrarian lifestyle (that disappeared from the United States over a century ago).

You're simply a man who arrived too late for his time.

 

[Politruk]

I understand how higher education represents an existential threat to your long-held vision of a return to a simpler agrarian lifestyle (that disappeared from the United States over a century ago).

You're simply a man who arrived too late for his time.

Maybe that's why Chernosoth is always hinting at the impending collapse of petroleum-based industrial civilization. Wishful thinking. See World Made by Hand by James Howard Kunstler.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Right. They would have paid $2.6 billion in taxes. lol.

You've proven over and over you have no concept of math, nor the economy. I never said they would make up for the 2.6 billion, I said you'd lose them. When they go, so does the economic spin off's. Harvard as a facility generates far more economic worth than a 2.6 billion grant.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

You've proven over and over you have no concept of math, nor the economy. I never said they would make up for the 2.6 billion, I said you'd lose them. When they go, so does the economic spin off's. Harvard as a facility generates far more economic worth than a 2.6 billion grant.

Feel free to quantify the economic return to taxpayers that would result from the $2.6 billion grant to Harvard. Show your work.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Show your work.

Why? I've done it before and you didn't get it then.
You're just like Ostrich, he still thinks 2/10th is the right answer....
https://community.harvard.edu/economic-impact

https://www.harvardmagazine.com/202... Year in Review,$2.4 billion: about 9 percent.

 

[Lazaran]

Yes, I understand it perfectly.
You both prove my point exactly, unfortunately. ‘Unfortunately’ because exactly what you write makes you what you accuse others of being.
I am what some US citizens call a left-wing fanatic, only these people use a different choice of words.
In the civilised world, people like me are called ‘liberal social democrats’.
For those who don't know what ‘liberal’ is, liberal means free from fear of oppression by the state or by others.
In other words, exactly what the supporters of 47 demand and the exact opposite of what 47 is building: A totalitarian state that terrorises its citizens by means of its institutions.
Your president makes it possible for strong market players to exploit the people and at the same time forbids these people to defend themselves against this. He systematically dismantles all structures that serve the people and strengthens and perverts those that benefit him. He will truly go down in the history books as the man who did the greatest damage to the USA.

And now we come to you two. You don't know me. You know nothing about me. You've read a single post of mine and you didn't even understand it. You are making common cause in tone and argumentation with the people who are cheering on 47 who are destroying your state. What does that make you?
I could write that here now, but that would be extremely rude.

Reread your post I responded to, and then consider my response.

You criticized how "we" talk to each other in the U.S., and I simply asked you to explain how "we" SHOULD talk to each other when one side (the "right") is an unholy union / alliance of reinvigorated Confederacy AND Third Reich “Lost Cause” racists & fascists

I get that you are a socialist that believes everything should be ignored except class and worker’s power, but decent, intelligent individuals should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time if they want to lead / govern. Because it’s one thing to WANT to lead / govern, but it’s another to DESERVE to lead / govern. (And my question still stands / remains unanswered).



Also:

We. Told. Them. So.

 

[Meekly_Anna]

Reread your post I responded to, and then consider my response.

You criticized how "we" talk to each other in the U.S., and I simply asked you to explain how "we" SHOULD talk to each other when one side (the "right") is an unholy union / alliance of reinvigorated Confederacy AND Third Reich “Lost Cause” racists & fascists

I get that you are a socialist that believes everything should be ignored except class and worker’s power, but decent, intelligent individuals should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time if they want to lead / govern. Because it’s one thing to WANT to lead / govern, but it’s another to DESERVE to lead / govern. (And my question still stands / remains unanswered).



Also:

We. Told. Them. So.

No, you didn't.
You assume what I might have meant and impute an opinion, attitude and point of view to me, and then you go into a retort until you're foaming at the mouth with nonsense.
You don't know the difference between a socialist and a social democrat like most US citizens and your argument exhausts itself with some "third reich" nonsense.
Normally I wouldn't care, it just makes me a little sad that you're right about one thing: the US is lurching further and further to the right politically, like a drunken SA man at the Reichsparteitag.
It's a shame really, you used to be a nice country with nice people.
You want to know how to talk to people who insult you and accuse you of things you have never said or done?
Well, maybe in which you try to explain that you're not a socialist?
They probably won't understand.

 

[Lazaran]

No, you didn't.
You assume what I might have meant and impute an opinion, attitude and point of view to me, and then you go into a retort until you're foaming at the mouth with nonsense.
You don't know the difference between a socialist and a social democrat like most US citizens and your argument exhausts itself with some "third reich" nonsense.
Normally I wouldn't care, it just makes me a little sad that you're right about one thing: the US is lurching further and further to the right politically, like a drunken SA man at the Reichsparteitag.
It's a shame really, you used to be a nice country with nice people.
You want to know how to talk to people who insult you and accuse you of things you have never said or done?
Well, maybe in which you try to explain that you're not a socialist?
They probably won't understand.

We, who are not from the USA, see with fascinated horror how much hatred you show towards your fellow countrymen.
You don't talk to each other, you talk about each other and use words whose meaning you don't understand and turn them into swear words.
Democracy really is when you get what you deserve.

That ^ is what you posted.

How should that be interpreted???

You do understand that there are actual fascist running America currently??? No???



You do understand that “The Lost Cause” racists have attained some measure of victory since Trump was elected the first time??? No???



How would you have us address pure evil???



Should we love the fascists and racists (and misogynists and bigots) who are currently debasing America and our constitution???



We. Told. Them. So.

That ^ was my response.

And my response stands.





Also:

We. Told. Then. So.

 

[Meekly_Anna]

That ^ is what you posted.

How should that be interpreted???





That ^ was my response.

And my response stands.





Also:

We. Told. Then. So.

We actually agree on that. It's just your interpretation of what I might have meant that bothers me.

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Why? I've done it before and you didn't get it then.
You're just like Ostrich, he still thinks 2/10th is the right answer....
https://community.harvard.edu/economic-impact

https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2024/10/financial-report-fiscal-2024#:~:text=The Fiscal Year in Review,$2.4 billion: about 9 percent.

How nice. Harvard is swimming in endowments and getting great returns on its stock and bond investments. And now taxpayer donations have been reduced. Canadians are welcome to help make up the shortfall.

 

[PaxNurgle]

Yes, I understand it perfectly.
You both prove my point exactly, unfortunately. ‘Unfortunately’ because exactly what you write makes you what you accuse others of being.
I am what some US citizens call a left-wing fanatic, only these people use a different choice of words.
In the civilised world, people like me are called ‘liberal social democrats’.
For those who don't know what ‘liberal’ is, liberal means free from fear of oppression by the state or by others.
In other words, exactly what the supporters of 47 demand and the exact opposite of what 47 is building: A totalitarian state that terrorises its citizens by means of its institutions.
Your president makes it possible for strong market players to exploit the people and at the same time forbids these people to defend themselves against this. He systematically dismantles all structures that serve the people and strengthens and perverts those that benefit him. He will truly go down in the history books as the man who did the greatest damage to the USA.

And now we come to you two. You don't know me. You know nothing about me. You've read a single post of mine and you didn't even understand it. You are making common cause in tone and argumentation with the people who are cheering on 47 who are destroying your state. What does that make you?
I could write that here now, but that would be extremely rude.

I apologize if I misjudged you. This is actually a pretty decent post. It's just that, well, Your name is relatively unfamiliar to the board, and we (unfortunatly) do have trolls who constantly create new screen names to troll this forum under multiple aliases- most of which incidently come here to promote Trump's dystopian, racist, and tyrannical agenda as opposed to criticizing it. So a lot of people get cynical and defensive of new posters. I'll try not to be.

 

[coati]

Bravo to Harvard for standing up to the bully, even though they risk losing $2B.

Let the lawsuits proceed. The U.S. President is not allowed to control the curriculum and First Amendment decisions at an academic institution based on political whim.

Stand up to the GOP control freaks.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

How nice. Harvard is swimming in endowments and getting great returns on its stock and bond investments. And now taxpayer donations have been reduced. Canadians are welcome to help make up the shortfall.

Then I guess Trump had better claw back these grants as well eh?

https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fa...-closer-look-at-tax-breaks-and-societal-costs

"phasing out subsidies for the fossil fuel industry should be a priority for federal policymakers"

20.6 Billion, kinda makes the fifth largest state employer's grant look pretty tame.

Got any op-eds on reducing grants to education facilities?

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Then I guess Trump had better claw back these grants as well eh?

https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fa...-closer-look-at-tax-breaks-and-societal-costs

"phasing out subsidies for the fossil fuel industry should be a priority for federal policymakers"

20.6 Billion, kinda makes the fifth largest state employer's grant look pretty tame.

Got any op-eds on reducing grants to education facilities?

It’s fine with me if Congress eliminates the clean coal tax credit and the non conventional fuels credit but my comment is about Harvard not getting a $2.6 billion grant. As an American taxpayer I’m delighted the handout has been frozen.

 

[Hel_Books]

Hel_Books said:
The universities have rather shot themselves in the foot, over the years. When they institute illiberal policies on hiring and speech they can hardly complain if someone else tries to dictate OTHER illiberal policies!

In this case, the issue is the grant itself. It was awarded by another administration. Trump should honour the agreement. If he doesn't wish to offer any more, that's fine. Harvard would just make different plans in the future.

What Trump has done, once again,is remove the required trust. He's done it with most other world nations, he's doing it with Universities. It's painfully obvious, Trump's word is useless,and no one can trust the United States to keep any promises, or deals while he or his cohorts are running the show.

Enjoy four years or more of going it alone, while your brain drain speeds up. I'm good, we have a bunch of specialist in Medical and Scientific research all looking to come here. I'm good with that.

Oh I definitely agree. That's the problem with your Congress, they're not saying to the President, "Hey, we appropriated that money, you can't interfere with it!"

But still, it's rather comical that the universities complain about being forced into illiberal policies when they themselves have often betrayed the ideals of classical liberalism. Here's a quote from a 2014 Forbes article:

Last week, these 28 law professors—among them, Alan Dershowitz and Charles Ogletree—penned an open letter to the Harvard administration castigating it for imposing a sexual harassment policy that “will do more harm than good.” The letter could not be more pointed. It blames the new policy for violating “many of the most basic principles we teach,” among which are “due process of law, the substantive law governing discrimination and violence, appropriate decision-making, and the rule of law generally.”

Harvard’s administration, these law professors charge, has adopted “procedures for deciding cases of alleged sexual misconduct which lack the most basic elements of fairness and due process, are overwhelmingly stacked against the accused, and are in no way required by Title IX law or regulation.” Among the violations they find in the new policy are an inadequate “opportunity to discover the facts charged and to confront witnesses”; the “lodging of the functions of investigation, prosecution, fact-finding, and appellate review in one office,” which is “itself a Title IX compliance office rather than an entity” that might be “considered structurally impartial”; and the “failure to ensure adequate representation for the accused.”

 

[Hel_Books]

It’s fine with me if Congress eliminates the clean coal tax credit and the non conventional fuels credit but my comment is about Harvard not getting a $2.6 billion grant. As an American taxpayer I’m delighted the handout has been frozen.

You equate funding for fundamental research with subsidies for coal barons?

 

[Fuzzy1975]

It’s fine with me if Congress eliminates the clean coal tax credit and the non conventional fuels credit but my comment is about Harvard not getting a $2.6 billion grant. As an American taxpayer I’m delighted the handout has been frozen.

I'm just point out that Government invests in business to support the economy. If you think for a second you're going to see that $7.42 cent saving off your taxes....then again that might make or break you getting Starbucks this week, right?

 

[ll74]

People cheering on the defunding need to spend about ten mins researching where advancements in our country's tech originates from, in every sector.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Oh I definitely agree. That's the problem with your Congress,

^^^^^^^^^

Not my congress......Canadian here.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

People cheering on the defunding need to spend about ten mins researching where advancements in our country's tech originates from, in every sector.

Come on it's boomer. Fucking self proclaimed Racist and Misogynist, and we can throw in selfish prick as well.

 

[Hel_Books]

^^^^^^^^^

Not my congress......Canadian here.

I like Canada. Nice people and not so many guns. Much less scary than my visits to the USA.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

I'm just point out that Government invests in business to support the economy. If you think for a second you're going to see that $7.42 cent saving off your taxes....then again that might make or break you getting Starbucks this week, right?

Lol. Harvard earned a 9.6% return on its $50 billion dollar endowment portfolio last year. They’ll figure out how to make up for the $2.6 grant from US taxpayers. I’ll skip Starbucks to demonstrate my sympathy and solidarity with their tragic misfortune.