|
|
|
|
|
Jens 'n' Frens
Idle thoughts of a relatively libertarian Republican in Cambridge, MA, and whomever he invites. Mostly political.
"A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures." -- Daniel Webster
|
|
|
|
|
Thursday, June 09, 2011 :::
Also via Instapundit, John Carney asks why conservatives are supporting for-profit colleges. Professor Reynolds suggests that conservatives see the attack on for-profit colleges as "primarily an effort to defend a traditional Democratic constituency," which is probably part of it. I mostly object to singling out for-profit colleges as for-profit colleges. I don't object to tightening the requirements for a school to get federal student loans, or requiring the schools to essentially co-sign some portion of the loans their students take. This would price some poor people out of college, but a lot of them probably don't belong in college, anyway. Because for-profit schools tend to have poorer credit risks as students, they would probably be hit disproportionately by those rule changes, which is also fine. What I object to is restricting loans for for-profit schools while non-profits and state schools get a free pass.
Similarly, I don't know how this ended up, but there was talk of raising taxes on energy companies a couple months ago, and I saw two main proposals. One would have eliminated some controversial general deductions that energy companies make heavy use of. The other would have left those deductions in place but singled out the five largest domestic oil producers and eliminated some deductions just for them. The former idea struck me as attractive while the latter struck me as inane.
Incidentally, can you single out five of something? Is there a word that is to five as "single" is to one?Labels: education, energy
::: posted by Steven at 12:30 PM
|
|
|
|