Just What Is the Priority Anymore?Essay title: Just What Is the Priority Anymore?“Just what is the priority anymore?”By Christopher BinkleyHow do we set our priorities in life? Would we spend thousands on curb appeal when our foundation is crumbling away? Would we sell off our retirement fund at an ultimate loss when we are still in our thirties? I am a student at Lincoln University, and I discovered some issues that should not be happening. I do understand some of the reasoning behind it, however I for one do not agree with them. The placing of a monument on campus in lieu of improvements in structure, and the proposed selling of MOHELA, are the issues that I am addressing; is the interests of the current and future students’ being considered in these decisions as well? So I ask you, “Just what is the priority anymore?”
The issue with Lincoln University that concerns me, and some fellow students at the same time, is the fact that the College Board wants to put up a monument instead of investing in existing buildings. I know that Lincoln was founded by the soldiers and officers of the 62nd and 65th colored infantry divisions in 1866 at the close of the Civil War. Having an objection to a monument in honor of the founding fathers of the university is not a case of racism or hatred, but one of concern for the direction of Lincoln University. The fact that it was at one time an all-colored student body does not bother me. The issue that I want to discuss is the fact that there are many other improvements that should be made prior to the building of a monument. The funds the board wants to put into the monument are ill-placed and would be better served elsewhere. Why do we need a monument, because other universities have them? That’s not a very good reason. The amount of money that it is going to take to build it is outrageous! Once you figure in the cost of hiring contractors, excavation and the commission of the monument itself; there could have been various needed improvements made to the buildings, programs and instructors’ salaries.
I have no wish to stop the placing of the monument on the Lincoln campus, but to make it a known fact that I do not agree with the way the money is being spent. The College Board should re-evaluate what they are spending money on. There are several projects that should come before this, along with a more diverse spectrum of instructor’s being hired. There are parking issues, building maintenance, underpaid instructors and events that should be implemented to help bring in a more diverse student body. What does a monument have to offer the school body, other than looks and “we have one, too!”? I myself would much rather see that type of money go to a more productive area of our college. Only after areas that need the improvement are done should a monument be considered and placed on campus.
Another issue that should concern parents, students and future students is the proposed selling off of part of Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority’s assets. The branch of Wachovia has a proposed plan to sell its main financial aid, MOHELA, to larger corporations. This has set off debates within the political offices of what to use this money for. There are several proposed ways that the Missouri government wants to use this money. Most of them do not have the interests of the students that are on the MOHELA plan in mind. The largest majority of this money would go to capital improvements at colleges, but not the colleges that need it the most. The universities that will receive the most benefit from the sale will be the larger, more financially stable, universities of Missouri. The proposed plan calls for $347 million on capital improvements on colleges and universities, $12 million
[…]
On June 3, the Federal Court ruled in an 11-to-5 decision striking down an amendment to the student loan and education bill that would have created the federal government’s central entity, the Higher Education Loan Authority, and directed that that entity be the same entity responsible for making loans to public entities.
It is time that we pass a debt reduction deal that will give Missouri taxpayers in full control of the federal government’s federal loan agency.
What would happen? Â At the federal level, the federal government would be responsible for financing any portion of Missouri’s student loan payments.
The University of Missouri System would have the choice of either issuing debt free as a student loan or carrying on loans as if it was a private-sector business.
The federal government would be responsible for servicing the loans at the college and university, but not for servicing it in the classroom.
The U, the University of Missouri System would choose a college and university that is “competitive with” and “encompassing” Missouri or the state, with no federal involvement.
For example, the University of Missouri would choose Missouri with its “out-of-state and out-of-state competitors,” with no federal involvement, or Mississippi State or Florida State with no federal involvement.
These are serious problems that will have to be addressed quickly.
What would be the best solution? Â The next president of the United States should propose the two main avenues that President Obama and the Federal Reserve have been working toward since their founding:
1. An “investor-backed” debt limit for the U.S. government. Â It would reduce debt or make the U.S. government completely insolvent.
2. The same Federal Reserve that controls our national debt. Â The debt limit would be imposed by our politicians on all federal debt, whether or not it was borrowed by the U.S. government.
If the Federal Reserve were forced to run a default in an orderly fashion, we would see that as one of the worst things we could do all day long for our citizens while at the same time having no choice but to turn to government debt for the last time as the next time our economy is hurt.
I think we have a very bad idea that these are what would happen.
There aren’t any viable alternatives to this in the works.
The President of the United States should call a vote. Please send us an email with your proposal, your plan for implementing one of the alternatives, and any other helpful information you might be able to provide as a donor.
[…]
In its July 15 Resolution, the Council on Governmental Affairs addressed the matter as to which financial instruments are “the preferred financial instruments” today:
There are no financial instruments in the United States that are ‘the preferred financial instruments’ today. They are the instruments of interest to the interests of both parties. The United States can and will pay no more interest than its citizens should enjoy in the same income and savings rate as its citizens.
If there actually is an acceptable substitute for the traditional, government-backed, federal public-private investment, and the United States fails, it should be considered by most of the world as an option that would encourage people all over the globe to enter and retain private investments to diversify their income and invest in businesses.
To learn more about how you can help, please look here.
If you have any feedback
[…]
On June 3, the Federal Court ruled in an 11-to-5 decision striking down an amendment to the student loan and education bill that would have created the federal government’s central entity, the Higher Education Loan Authority, and directed that that entity be the same entity responsible for making loans to public entities.
It is time that we pass a debt reduction deal that will give Missouri taxpayers in full control of the federal government’s federal loan agency.
What would happen? Â At the federal level, the federal government would be responsible for financing any portion of Missouri’s student loan payments.
The University of Missouri System would have the choice of either issuing debt free as a student loan or carrying on loans as if it was a private-sector business.
The federal government would be responsible for servicing the loans at the college and university, but not for servicing it in the classroom.
The U, the University of Missouri System would choose a college and university that is “competitive with” and “encompassing” Missouri or the state, with no federal involvement.
For example, the University of Missouri would choose Missouri with its “out-of-state and out-of-state competitors,” with no federal involvement, or Mississippi State or Florida State with no federal involvement.
These are serious problems that will have to be addressed quickly.
What would be the best solution? Â The next president of the United States should propose the two main avenues that President Obama and the Federal Reserve have been working toward since their founding:
1. An “investor-backed” debt limit for the U.S. government. Â It would reduce debt or make the U.S. government completely insolvent.
2. The same Federal Reserve that controls our national debt. Â The debt limit would be imposed by our politicians on all federal debt, whether or not it was borrowed by the U.S. government.
If the Federal Reserve were forced to run a default in an orderly fashion, we would see that as one of the worst things we could do all day long for our citizens while at the same time having no choice but to turn to government debt for the last time as the next time our economy is hurt.
I think we have a very bad idea that these are what would happen.
There aren’t any viable alternatives to this in the works.
The President of the United States should call a vote. Please send us an email with your proposal, your plan for implementing one of the alternatives, and any other helpful information you might be able to provide as a donor.
[…]
In its July 15 Resolution, the Council on Governmental Affairs addressed the matter as to which financial instruments are “the preferred financial instruments” today:
There are no financial instruments in the United States that are ‘the preferred financial instruments’ today. They are the instruments of interest to the interests of both parties. The United States can and will pay no more interest than its citizens should enjoy in the same income and savings rate as its citizens.
If there actually is an acceptable substitute for the traditional, government-backed, federal public-private investment, and the United States fails, it should be considered by most of the world as an option that would encourage people all over the globe to enter and retain private investments to diversify their income and invest in businesses.
To learn more about how you can help, please look here.
If you have any feedback
[…]
On June 3, the Federal Court ruled in an 11-to-5 decision striking down an amendment to the student loan and education bill that would have created the federal government’s central entity, the Higher Education Loan Authority, and directed that that entity be the same entity responsible for making loans to public entities.
It is time that we pass a debt reduction deal that will give Missouri taxpayers in full control of the federal government’s federal loan agency.
What would happen? Â At the federal level, the federal government would be responsible for financing any portion of Missouri’s student loan payments.
The University of Missouri System would have the choice of either issuing debt free as a student loan or carrying on loans as if it was a private-sector business.
The federal government would be responsible for servicing the loans at the college and university, but not for servicing it in the classroom.
The U, the University of Missouri System would choose a college and university that is “competitive with” and “encompassing” Missouri or the state, with no federal involvement.
For example, the University of Missouri would choose Missouri with its “out-of-state and out-of-state competitors,” with no federal involvement, or Mississippi State or Florida State with no federal involvement.
These are serious problems that will have to be addressed quickly.
What would be the best solution? Â The next president of the United States should propose the two main avenues that President Obama and the Federal Reserve have been working toward since their founding:
1. An “investor-backed” debt limit for the U.S. government. Â It would reduce debt or make the U.S. government completely insolvent.
2. The same Federal Reserve that controls our national debt. Â The debt limit would be imposed by our politicians on all federal debt, whether or not it was borrowed by the U.S. government.
If the Federal Reserve were forced to run a default in an orderly fashion, we would see that as one of the worst things we could do all day long for our citizens while at the same time having no choice but to turn to government debt for the last time as the next time our economy is hurt.
I think we have a very bad idea that these are what would happen.
There aren’t any viable alternatives to this in the works.
The President of the United States should call a vote. Please send us an email with your proposal, your plan for implementing one of the alternatives, and any other helpful information you might be able to provide as a donor.
[…]
In its July 15 Resolution, the Council on Governmental Affairs addressed the matter as to which financial instruments are “the preferred financial instruments” today:
There are no financial instruments in the United States that are ‘the preferred financial instruments’ today. They are the instruments of interest to the interests of both parties. The United States can and will pay no more interest than its citizens should enjoy in the same income and savings rate as its citizens.
If there actually is an acceptable substitute for the traditional, government-backed, federal public-private investment, and the United States fails, it should be considered by most of the world as an option that would encourage people all over the globe to enter and retain private investments to diversify their income and invest in businesses.
To learn more about how you can help, please look here.
If you have any feedback