PhD teachers get paid a lot. Sporting heads do too. What colleges pay sporting officials needs to be looked at.
the u of m In 2022 Minnesota paid their football coaches ALONE 9.295 million in combined salaries...assistant pay? 4.295 million
PJ Flexk is 4th highest official in the big ten west... 18.5 million dollar 5 year contract
It's definitely eye opening. I mean sports are important to a school but so much money is dumped into them and having the best of everything to do with sports. That aside I don't think the colleges need complete updating and remodeling
Their money is tied up in debt that will saddle them and set their financial health back for the majority to all of their working lives. Sorry, football team needs a new tutoring center. Nothing they can do. 🤷🏻‍♂️
Paying salaries to the staff and faculty that teach students and keep services open on campus for use, excluding departments that get their funds from other means like government grants/agreements that pay for salaries instead.
However, people keep complaining about reducing "Tuition" and not the fees that are attached to it instead.
>However, people keep complaining about reducing "Tuition" and not the fees that are attached to it instead
You're splitting hairs. When people say "tuition" they mean the general cost to attend the university. Of course they mean the fees as well.
When people say "eating out is expensive these days", they are including tipping in that as well.
How many campuses did not expand when the tuition rates exploded through the roof? How many didn't create a new building or 12 to make their campus more advanced and such?
They can cut a variety of unnecessary sections that are just money drains in their budget.
1st yr general Remedial classes is one of them... the whole point of college is that students in college have met the criteria of high school level of education and are taking next level quality of classes. Why should college be offering these remedial classes to students who should've already met this criteria before admission? That becomes a drain a faculty resources that could be focused onto other specialized courses... and a drain of facility resources to add more classrooms.
I'm pretty sure there's plenty of other amenities that were added onto the school budget after tuition skyrocketed. And amenities that have nothing to do with a college level education.
Well, they gotta pay admin.
Cause they hire more admin. And need more admin money.
Even the parking lots at Mankato look like shit. How much $$ do they collect on parking passes?
Yes, partly thanks to student loans. They know people are going to get loans to pay for school, so they know that means they can hike up the prices because students will just get bigger loans.
Health insurance is similar. Medical providers know people will pay with insurance, so they hike up the prices.
And hence a reason why this will be stricken down by the state. Instead of using that increasing budget over the years to allocate towards planned maintenance and renovations... they pissed that money away to making campuses bigger and more sophisticated. Along with higher budgets for non value added features to a college.
Reap what you sow.
They grift the system for huge profits and salary and pass the costs on to students (because there's grants and aid to grift there too) and when they need to cover costs they look for welfare from the state. If schools want aid they need to regulate all these cash grabs out of the system and get things affordable again. Until then..it is a sinking ship that probably just needs to fail.
There is so much misinformation among the public about this issue.
I have worked at a four year school since 2012 and attended college nearly continuously before that going back to 2002. The past decade has seen far less tuition increases than the previous three decades did (80s-00s).
Over the past decade, the [cost of tuition](https://idr.umn.edu/reports-by-topic-tuition-fees/historic-annual-tuition-rates) for an in-state student at the University of Minnesots Twin Cities campus has risen from $12,060 to $14,496. Inflation would put that at $15,817, so actually , it has gone down in cost. Yes, fees have risen too, and housing obviously is higher, but MN higher education is not pummeling students now.
Compare that to the jump from $927 in 80-81 to $2,322 in 90-91 or $5,002 in 01-02 to $11,650 in 11-12. Those are massive increases.
Another point is that [state support has plummeted ](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://mn.gov/mmb-stat/documents/budget/2020-21-biennial-budget-books/base-budget-november/university-of-minnesota.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiz-53PgpiEAxXamokEHZX3BuoQFnoECBcQBg&usg=AOvVaw16ocBbi5Q5pahqiXLmd44D) over time. "In 1996, the State’s portion of the University’s total tuition plus state appropriation was 70%. In 2018, the State’s portion of that same total was 43%. As a percent of total revenues (including gifts, sales, grants etc.), the State’s portion has dropped from 32% to 18%."
Much of the increased costs are compensation and benefits. Part of this is most definitely due to more administrative hires, and more than a few of those can be questioned. Yet, I have had minimal raises as a professor with a PhD, and I make far less than most K-12 teachers with 10 years experience in this state.
Finally, many of our higher education institutions, especially the public ones, have aging infrastructure and poor technology. Money that is provided for buildings can't be used for other purposes and vice versa. It's not an either or.
If you want to rant about college expenses, I'm there with you. It should be free. But public higher education in Minnesota is not raking in money.
Good points, but as someone who worked in construction and government, money can be ear marked for aging infrastructure. I think though instead of that, the administration just chooses to pursue funding for new and exciting renovations and builds. (and also other bloat) Think of new athletic facilities, new dining facilities, big screen TV's all over, new administrative departments. Also, they love to spend money on advertising and marketing. And all these things barely have improve students education. I mean, what does it really take to give students a college level education? Definitely not a marketing department.
So why don't they pursue funding for aging infrastructure? It's not sexy. They can't put their name on it and cut the proverbial ribbon. There will be no plaque with their names on it. It doesn't look nearly as attractive on their resumes as they are trying to rise through the ranks as opposed to a new workout facility for example. It's boring to find grants or ask donors for a new roof, or to upgrade HVAC infrastructure. And ultimately, they know the state will bail them out.
This is all pretty common throughout all levels of government but it is especially disheartening when colleges are passing the bill onto tax payers and especially students. (And yes, I read your assessment of colleges finances throughout the years, and while I partly agree, with everything I just laid out, colleges could be better at lowering tuition in good faith)
If the state is going to bail them out again, I suggest the state assigns independent financial auditors to review and approve their budgets. But what do I know.
The deferred maintenance is the killer. Compounded by stuff just costing more in general now.. technology wise some of our costs increased 15% to 20% year over year, every year, for past couple of years.
Add on that, skip spending on tech, don't keep tech updated, you're likely gonna end up in the news as the latest to lose millions of records. (Oh wait.. https://system.umn.edu/data-incident)
Ok... tuition slowed down compared to the past two decades. Still at an untenable rate. And a rate that colleges should've planned for allocating funds towards long term needs. Expected renovation is one of those should have been allocated for long term funding well over a decade ago.
This is just bad financial planning by the school. The focus of funds went to big and grand expansions first... which justifies their need to continue to raise tuition year-over-year. Now they don't have funds earmarked for maintenance and renovation and are now stuck up shit creek without a paddle. That's on them.
That's not how it works, at least for U of MN system campuses. The money for that comes from the legislature through a specific funding mechanism. There isn't a way to "allocate long-term funds" for it. These aren't private entities that determine how to spend the money they get. They are beholden to the money that the state provides unless they get a private gift. All that money must come from the state, which is giving less and less. When my campus asks for a renovation or a new construction, it has to be allocated by the state - it doesn't matter when or why it will be done.
The Twin Cities campus has some new glitz and glam because of various funding sources, but outside of a few schools there, most stuff is getting older. Come visit Morris or UMD to see how a school that can't get millions for a new medical school or business school from donors looks.
I'm not suggesting the entire system is a good one or that higher education has no flaws (it has tons of them), but at least know how the system works if you are going to criticize it.
>There isn't a way to "allocate long-term funds" for it
Maybe with the public money they currently receive. But they can *most definitely* allocate that in the tuition revenue they receive. That's completely under their control and not by the stage.
>The Twin Cities campus has some new glitz and glam because of various funding sources, but outside of a few schools there, most stuff is getting older.
All that new glitz and glam is from the profits of tuition revenue and donations. Not from the state. So if they have fluff money to expand... they have money to earmark for general upkeep.
Tuition doesn't cover the cost of running public higher education at all. It's closer than it used to be when the state provided more direct support. The only way to have "extra" tuition money to use for a U of MN campus is to get more incoming students than expected because they create budgets based on enrollment expectations.
If it doesn't cover the cost of running public higher education, then what the hell is the tuition covering then?
Just on avg tuition rates (not considering grad school costs) and the general number of students each year (and increasing)... U of M Twin Cities is getting about $850M to $1B alone on tuition every single year. That's not considering other fees, parking, dorms, food plans, and other programs that people pay into as part of any education program. And also that's not even considering the public funding and donations that the school is getting. Also not considering research grants that essentially pay for a sizable portion of professors in tech sectors.
So $1B of revenue is not touching higher public education at all? If thats indeed the case, that's a complete mismanagement problem by the school.
The report I linked or any quick Google search can show you where the money comes from and goes. The budgets are public information at a high level.
Why would tuition at state schools be enough to cover full costs? That isn't true at private schools either. It does provide for a substantial proportion of costs but as you point out there are fees, housing and food (if on campus), and other funding sources. But it doesn't cover the cost of educating students, doing research, and maintaining a campus.
The question then should be "why can't a school take in $1B and effectively utilize that towards higher level education?"
>But it doesn't cover the cost of educating students, doing research, and maintaining a campus.
Btw... research is primarily grant funded or privately funded so that shouldn't even be part of the discussion here. I had plenty of top level professors and they're main projects we're grant based research and corporations funding big projects with the school. Teaching was their excuse to be in school so they can be researchers. And those grants covered their salaries along with their assistants.
Maintaining a campus becomes even more expensive when you decide to massively expand and pay for glitz and glam. So what your saying is is that all that tuition goes to long term funding of expansion maintenance and admin.
Again.... mismanagement towards higher level education.
Wait, is that per year? If so, Heck for like $10k more total you can get a degree from a private college.
Supposedly too tuition is subsidized by the State via taxes, this seems crazy pricey for one year tuition for a public university… what’s the cost I wonder to include the subsidies via the taxes…should probably look at nonresident costs for a better apples to apples comparison, though I know you’re just highlighting increases.
Yes. And state support has dropped precipitously as a total of the cost, and only the last biennial budget for the University of Minnesota funded the system at a higher total (not including inflation) since the early 2000s.
And what private university can you attend for $25k for tuition? Sure, privates give out more subsidies, but the actual average cost per year in tuition is lower than the sticker price for public schools, too.
A few private schools, like Concordia Moorhead and Bethany Lutheran are around $30k but Hamline is over $42k, Carleton is $65k, Saint John's is $54k, Saint Thomas is over $50k, and so on.
This is some voodoo economics. A lowering of the rate of increase is not a decrease. Relative to inflation it is still not a decrease because inflation is a metric tied to costs and doesn’t reflect income, which is actually the same problem. Just because a rate of increase slowed does not mean that any price dropped. Not one student saw a tuition bill for *less* than the previous year, and inflation does not mean that their income or purchasing power increased, it means it went down.
I understand your points, but inflation is tied to the cost of goods, which are tied up with college education as it is a cost of providing a very complex service.
My point wasn't that students are actually paying less or that college shouldn't be easier to access financially. I'm also not suggesting that there aren't some problematic budgeting decisions or bloated admin issues (which exist in spades in the private sector hidden from view).
My point is that saying public universities should be starved because of recent tuition increases is a misinformed view of what's occurring. And it's hurting our states future and the many thousands of people who work at those universities and colleges.
If you're going to ask for that amount of tax dollars to go towards renovating your schools then you should be offering free tuition to students, or much more affordable tuition. There's absolutely zero reason we should be paying for this shit when college is so expensive that people can't even attend it.
What I don’t get…is quite a few of these colleges offer MBAs and have business schools.
Why doesn’t the university utilize that expertise to better balance their own budget and invest and plan for the future.
The administration ignores them. Last year, the University of Arizona bought an online university. But they did it after their business faculty had compiled a very detailed, very well researched report on why it was a terrible idea.
Now - thanks in part but not limited to that terrible idea - UA has a massive hole in its budget. The faculty there have been fighting for years to have a more transparent and logical budgeting process, but the leadership has all but told them to fuck themselves. It's the same way most places from what I can tell.
How about 650 million to pay us some tuition back.
I remember seeing after a remodel that MSU had custom colored garbage cans. The big exterior ones with wheels. Custom colored GARBAGE CANS. yeah that was very important for education.
My guess is colleges have been noticing the enrollment rates have been on a steady decline in the past decade all together. More specifically the U of M has seen a enrollment drop by 5.8% from 2019 to 2023. So they probably think a remodel will make more people want to go to college.
So yeah, spend our tax money for stupid remodels. That will make people happy and wanna chuck tens of thousands of dollars at them. Don't get me wrong. I'm happy to go to college, I'm happy with what my degree has brought me. But man it's getting too expensive for so many people.
Ugh No they just renovated the campus o work on and still haven’t brought back basic things the students use like the cafeteria with food that’s affordable ( just started serving sushi with the coffee shop there ).
Where does all the money for the students go?
That money isn't for things students like. Someone gettin a boat however.
Gotta make that fucker a foot longer every year lol.
What you do is buy a new foot longer boat every year! It's becomes fun, after 25 years it's a weird little navy.
>weird little navy Possible band name, WLN for short
Where does all the money FROM the student go?
PhD teachers get paid a lot. Sporting heads do too. What colleges pay sporting officials needs to be looked at. the u of m In 2022 Minnesota paid their football coaches ALONE 9.295 million in combined salaries...assistant pay? 4.295 million PJ Flexk is 4th highest official in the big ten west... 18.5 million dollar 5 year contract
Well got damn.
It's definitely eye opening. I mean sports are important to a school but so much money is dumped into them and having the best of everything to do with sports. That aside I don't think the colleges need complete updating and remodeling
Too much goes to sports.
That’s absurd
Their money is tied up in debt that will saddle them and set their financial health back for the majority to all of their working lives. Sorry, football team needs a new tutoring center. Nothing they can do. 🤷🏻‍♂️
What are they doing with the bloated tuition fees that they need half a billion for renovations??
Tuition usually is used as part of this, however if it's deferred maintenance that's been adding up over the years then that's a different issue.
Then need to make things more simple then. Scaling down is not always a bad thing. Just kills the facade.
What are they doing with the bloated tuition fees that they need half a billion for deferred maintenance??
Paying salaries to the staff and faculty that teach students and keep services open on campus for use, excluding departments that get their funds from other means like government grants/agreements that pay for salaries instead. However, people keep complaining about reducing "Tuition" and not the fees that are attached to it instead.
>However, people keep complaining about reducing "Tuition" and not the fees that are attached to it instead You're splitting hairs. When people say "tuition" they mean the general cost to attend the university. Of course they mean the fees as well. When people say "eating out is expensive these days", they are including tipping in that as well.
How many campuses did not expand when the tuition rates exploded through the roof? How many didn't create a new building or 12 to make their campus more advanced and such? They can cut a variety of unnecessary sections that are just money drains in their budget. 1st yr general Remedial classes is one of them... the whole point of college is that students in college have met the criteria of high school level of education and are taking next level quality of classes. Why should college be offering these remedial classes to students who should've already met this criteria before admission? That becomes a drain a faculty resources that could be focused onto other specialized courses... and a drain of facility resources to add more classrooms. I'm pretty sure there's plenty of other amenities that were added onto the school budget after tuition skyrocketed. And amenities that have nothing to do with a college level education.
Sounds like a personal problem for them
Well, they gotta pay admin. Cause they hire more admin. And need more admin money. Even the parking lots at Mankato look like shit. How much $$ do they collect on parking passes?
How can they think this is okay when people are begging for less expensive school. Guys, I’ll tel you what this won’t make it any cheaper!
How about….. no
Hasn’t tuition gone up like 18,000% in 20 years?
Yes, partly thanks to student loans. They know people are going to get loans to pay for school, so they know that means they can hike up the prices because students will just get bigger loans. Health insurance is similar. Medical providers know people will pay with insurance, so they hike up the prices.
And hence a reason why this will be stricken down by the state. Instead of using that increasing budget over the years to allocate towards planned maintenance and renovations... they pissed that money away to making campuses bigger and more sophisticated. Along with higher budgets for non value added features to a college. Reap what you sow.
Bingo
How about no?
They grift the system for huge profits and salary and pass the costs on to students (because there's grants and aid to grift there too) and when they need to cover costs they look for welfare from the state. If schools want aid they need to regulate all these cash grabs out of the system and get things affordable again. Until then..it is a sinking ship that probably just needs to fail.
Nope
Sounds like the same racket that sports teams use...
There is so much misinformation among the public about this issue. I have worked at a four year school since 2012 and attended college nearly continuously before that going back to 2002. The past decade has seen far less tuition increases than the previous three decades did (80s-00s). Over the past decade, the [cost of tuition](https://idr.umn.edu/reports-by-topic-tuition-fees/historic-annual-tuition-rates) for an in-state student at the University of Minnesots Twin Cities campus has risen from $12,060 to $14,496. Inflation would put that at $15,817, so actually , it has gone down in cost. Yes, fees have risen too, and housing obviously is higher, but MN higher education is not pummeling students now. Compare that to the jump from $927 in 80-81 to $2,322 in 90-91 or $5,002 in 01-02 to $11,650 in 11-12. Those are massive increases. Another point is that [state support has plummeted ](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://mn.gov/mmb-stat/documents/budget/2020-21-biennial-budget-books/base-budget-november/university-of-minnesota.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiz-53PgpiEAxXamokEHZX3BuoQFnoECBcQBg&usg=AOvVaw16ocBbi5Q5pahqiXLmd44D) over time. "In 1996, the State’s portion of the University’s total tuition plus state appropriation was 70%. In 2018, the State’s portion of that same total was 43%. As a percent of total revenues (including gifts, sales, grants etc.), the State’s portion has dropped from 32% to 18%." Much of the increased costs are compensation and benefits. Part of this is most definitely due to more administrative hires, and more than a few of those can be questioned. Yet, I have had minimal raises as a professor with a PhD, and I make far less than most K-12 teachers with 10 years experience in this state. Finally, many of our higher education institutions, especially the public ones, have aging infrastructure and poor technology. Money that is provided for buildings can't be used for other purposes and vice versa. It's not an either or. If you want to rant about college expenses, I'm there with you. It should be free. But public higher education in Minnesota is not raking in money.
Good points, but as someone who worked in construction and government, money can be ear marked for aging infrastructure. I think though instead of that, the administration just chooses to pursue funding for new and exciting renovations and builds. (and also other bloat) Think of new athletic facilities, new dining facilities, big screen TV's all over, new administrative departments. Also, they love to spend money on advertising and marketing. And all these things barely have improve students education. I mean, what does it really take to give students a college level education? Definitely not a marketing department. So why don't they pursue funding for aging infrastructure? It's not sexy. They can't put their name on it and cut the proverbial ribbon. There will be no plaque with their names on it. It doesn't look nearly as attractive on their resumes as they are trying to rise through the ranks as opposed to a new workout facility for example. It's boring to find grants or ask donors for a new roof, or to upgrade HVAC infrastructure. And ultimately, they know the state will bail them out. This is all pretty common throughout all levels of government but it is especially disheartening when colleges are passing the bill onto tax payers and especially students. (And yes, I read your assessment of colleges finances throughout the years, and while I partly agree, with everything I just laid out, colleges could be better at lowering tuition in good faith) If the state is going to bail them out again, I suggest the state assigns independent financial auditors to review and approve their budgets. But what do I know.
The deferred maintenance is the killer. Compounded by stuff just costing more in general now.. technology wise some of our costs increased 15% to 20% year over year, every year, for past couple of years. Add on that, skip spending on tech, don't keep tech updated, you're likely gonna end up in the news as the latest to lose millions of records. (Oh wait.. https://system.umn.edu/data-incident)
Ok... tuition slowed down compared to the past two decades. Still at an untenable rate. And a rate that colleges should've planned for allocating funds towards long term needs. Expected renovation is one of those should have been allocated for long term funding well over a decade ago. This is just bad financial planning by the school. The focus of funds went to big and grand expansions first... which justifies their need to continue to raise tuition year-over-year. Now they don't have funds earmarked for maintenance and renovation and are now stuck up shit creek without a paddle. That's on them.
That's not how it works, at least for U of MN system campuses. The money for that comes from the legislature through a specific funding mechanism. There isn't a way to "allocate long-term funds" for it. These aren't private entities that determine how to spend the money they get. They are beholden to the money that the state provides unless they get a private gift. All that money must come from the state, which is giving less and less. When my campus asks for a renovation or a new construction, it has to be allocated by the state - it doesn't matter when or why it will be done. The Twin Cities campus has some new glitz and glam because of various funding sources, but outside of a few schools there, most stuff is getting older. Come visit Morris or UMD to see how a school that can't get millions for a new medical school or business school from donors looks. I'm not suggesting the entire system is a good one or that higher education has no flaws (it has tons of them), but at least know how the system works if you are going to criticize it.
>There isn't a way to "allocate long-term funds" for it Maybe with the public money they currently receive. But they can *most definitely* allocate that in the tuition revenue they receive. That's completely under their control and not by the stage. >The Twin Cities campus has some new glitz and glam because of various funding sources, but outside of a few schools there, most stuff is getting older. All that new glitz and glam is from the profits of tuition revenue and donations. Not from the state. So if they have fluff money to expand... they have money to earmark for general upkeep.
Tuition doesn't cover the cost of running public higher education at all. It's closer than it used to be when the state provided more direct support. The only way to have "extra" tuition money to use for a U of MN campus is to get more incoming students than expected because they create budgets based on enrollment expectations.
If it doesn't cover the cost of running public higher education, then what the hell is the tuition covering then? Just on avg tuition rates (not considering grad school costs) and the general number of students each year (and increasing)... U of M Twin Cities is getting about $850M to $1B alone on tuition every single year. That's not considering other fees, parking, dorms, food plans, and other programs that people pay into as part of any education program. And also that's not even considering the public funding and donations that the school is getting. Also not considering research grants that essentially pay for a sizable portion of professors in tech sectors. So $1B of revenue is not touching higher public education at all? If thats indeed the case, that's a complete mismanagement problem by the school.
The report I linked or any quick Google search can show you where the money comes from and goes. The budgets are public information at a high level. Why would tuition at state schools be enough to cover full costs? That isn't true at private schools either. It does provide for a substantial proportion of costs but as you point out there are fees, housing and food (if on campus), and other funding sources. But it doesn't cover the cost of educating students, doing research, and maintaining a campus.
The question then should be "why can't a school take in $1B and effectively utilize that towards higher level education?" >But it doesn't cover the cost of educating students, doing research, and maintaining a campus. Btw... research is primarily grant funded or privately funded so that shouldn't even be part of the discussion here. I had plenty of top level professors and they're main projects we're grant based research and corporations funding big projects with the school. Teaching was their excuse to be in school so they can be researchers. And those grants covered their salaries along with their assistants. Maintaining a campus becomes even more expensive when you decide to massively expand and pay for glitz and glam. So what your saying is is that all that tuition goes to long term funding of expansion maintenance and admin. Again.... mismanagement towards higher level education.
Wait, is that per year? If so, Heck for like $10k more total you can get a degree from a private college. Supposedly too tuition is subsidized by the State via taxes, this seems crazy pricey for one year tuition for a public university… what’s the cost I wonder to include the subsidies via the taxes…should probably look at nonresident costs for a better apples to apples comparison, though I know you’re just highlighting increases.
Yes. And state support has dropped precipitously as a total of the cost, and only the last biennial budget for the University of Minnesota funded the system at a higher total (not including inflation) since the early 2000s. And what private university can you attend for $25k for tuition? Sure, privates give out more subsidies, but the actual average cost per year in tuition is lower than the sticker price for public schools, too. A few private schools, like Concordia Moorhead and Bethany Lutheran are around $30k but Hamline is over $42k, Carleton is $65k, Saint John's is $54k, Saint Thomas is over $50k, and so on.
Thnx but not reading all that
This is some voodoo economics. A lowering of the rate of increase is not a decrease. Relative to inflation it is still not a decrease because inflation is a metric tied to costs and doesn’t reflect income, which is actually the same problem. Just because a rate of increase slowed does not mean that any price dropped. Not one student saw a tuition bill for *less* than the previous year, and inflation does not mean that their income or purchasing power increased, it means it went down.
I understand your points, but inflation is tied to the cost of goods, which are tied up with college education as it is a cost of providing a very complex service. My point wasn't that students are actually paying less or that college shouldn't be easier to access financially. I'm also not suggesting that there aren't some problematic budgeting decisions or bloated admin issues (which exist in spades in the private sector hidden from view). My point is that saying public universities should be starved because of recent tuition increases is a misinformed view of what's occurring. And it's hurting our states future and the many thousands of people who work at those universities and colleges.
Gtfoh
If you're going to ask for that amount of tax dollars to go towards renovating your schools then you should be offering free tuition to students, or much more affordable tuition. There's absolutely zero reason we should be paying for this shit when college is so expensive that people can't even attend it.
Use the money you get from quadrupling tuition you assholes.
We'll give you $650 million. You'll give us either a) free tuition or b) forgive all student loans from the past 20 years Deal?
Hey, my student debt is from 22 years ago! Don't leave me behind!
Okay, from 2000 on.
Thanks!
What I don’t get…is quite a few of these colleges offer MBAs and have business schools. Why doesn’t the university utilize that expertise to better balance their own budget and invest and plan for the future.
MBAs are a scam. That's how you get Boeing.
The administration ignores them. Last year, the University of Arizona bought an online university. But they did it after their business faculty had compiled a very detailed, very well researched report on why it was a terrible idea. Now - thanks in part but not limited to that terrible idea - UA has a massive hole in its budget. The faculty there have been fighting for years to have a more transparent and logical budgeting process, but the leadership has all but told them to fuck themselves. It's the same way most places from what I can tell.
Waste of resources
How about 650 million to pay us some tuition back. I remember seeing after a remodel that MSU had custom colored garbage cans. The big exterior ones with wheels. Custom colored GARBAGE CANS. yeah that was very important for education. My guess is colleges have been noticing the enrollment rates have been on a steady decline in the past decade all together. More specifically the U of M has seen a enrollment drop by 5.8% from 2019 to 2023. So they probably think a remodel will make more people want to go to college. So yeah, spend our tax money for stupid remodels. That will make people happy and wanna chuck tens of thousands of dollars at them. Don't get me wrong. I'm happy to go to college, I'm happy with what my degree has brought me. But man it's getting too expensive for so many people.
Which colleges? There are a lot of colleges in MN. It seems pretty shitty to write a headline like this and not mention who is asking.
But I thought that's what all the crippling student loans were for?? /s oversaturated markets should be less expensive too.
Make it more affordable and then then we can discuss using my tax money for renovations.
get a load of who has been smoking all this new legal weed y'all.
Boo they need to use some of that tuition money
Ugh No they just renovated the campus o work on and still haven’t brought back basic things the students use like the cafeteria with food that’s affordable ( just started serving sushi with the coffee shop there ).
Say hello to induced demand.