halfmanhalfbronco

Easier to be "clutch" when you are on a team where your top 8 players were all better then the other teams second best player. Hutch, over the course of a season, was better in every offensive category, defensive category, and could guard all 5 positions on defense. There was 0 doubt who the better player was.

Less government maintained roads and moar for profit toll roads would due wonders for this country, first of all. I have, several times. I made that distinction very clear.. Keep up. MOAR government being the problem is a statement of fact, directly implying that there that there was an amount of government influence that was acceptable. Definition 3B. I would expect you to be able to take the greater context of my argument at the least, even if you can not remember my exact wording this many exchanges into this thread. Know I have been arguing that the amount of influence was once as close to optimal as it could get it I have stated several times any current flaws in post-secondary education as relating to cost was due to an attempt to fix something that was not broken, with MOAR government.

Again, sounds like the year Caleb beat Hutch. Only difference was anybody with eyes could tell Hutchison was several notches better than Caleb. The same is not true in this case.

That is kind of the point. Hutch was better across the board than Caleb and it was not particularly close either. Hutch was better in every offensive category and light years better on defense, yet a short, stubby armed kid who could not carry his water bottle won the coaches award over him due 100% to being on a better team.

+++++ing pleb. One, that is COCKTAIL sauce. NOBODY +++++ING EATS FINGER STEAKS WITH KETCHUP. SECONDLY YOU BLIND DUMB BITCH the fry sauce is in the back, next to the fortune cookie. Cocktail sauce is the only other sauce one should dip a perfect finger steak in. Ketchuip? Seriously, go +++++ yourself.

Wait till she has my fry sauce all over her.

One basket of these and men will take up arms to join and fight for Lady Idaho.

I am THIS close to +++++ing your wife.

Dumbest post in weeks.

When I did not over-simplify things, only happy bothered responding.

For now. Wait until the democratic party shaped by Bernie eventually gets in power. The cost side was a predictable outcome of flooding government backed debt into higher education. States predictably backing off funding was also a result of this. While it may not be the sole reason, it is without a doubt the larges driving factor. Thanks democrats (and a handful of republicans). All I am saying, let's not blow anything up (elect Bernie) because if we just let it be, I believe It will correct to level here in the next 10-15 years, then we can make a better assessment of just how bad we +++++ed up and what if any corrective actions by big daddy government can be re-assessed.

Seems to be two schools of thought here at the end of the day. Those who believe in personal accountability, learning from the mistakes of of previous generations and market forces and this who believe in the government, funded by the tax payers, needs to correct a "problem"

THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT INCREASED REGULATION OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OVER STATE ACTORS IS A GOOD THING, IN FACT IT IS THE SOLE REASON THE PRICE OF EDUCATION HAS INFLATED TO THIS POINT!! Holly hell, the reasons as to why college education is at the current price point have been beaten to death and moar gubbmit is the answer. And yet you want moar gubmit to fix it before even letting market forces that are trending in a direction that would give anybody with a few electrons floating in their brain hope?

If you do not understand my argument than perhaps it is my fault and to some extent yours for getting lost in the weeds. Which argument are we now talking about? My initial argument in this thread was that college tuition costs, while overly burdensome at present should not have a government backed correction but rather that we are finally getting to a point wherein market forces could again come into play and we should allow that to happen, or at least see where it goes before we upset the proverbial apple cart. Our university system is still the wonder of the world. Generally speaking when any problem presents itself one should attempt corrections in the order of least invasive to more invasive so as to minimize the chance at destabilizing the integrity of the system, supposing one believes said system's integrity has a value insomuch as to not risk the aforementioned destabilization. Previously we seemed to be in agreement there, correct?