Yeah, it was the people who supported vaccines who made it a political issue. Not the maniacs screaming about how it was a plot by the Jews to put microchips in people's bodies.
Do you think the anti-vaxxer movement just started with Covid?
Funny events in anti-woke world
- Thread starter Agema
- Start date
Do you think the anti-vaxxer movement just started with Covid?
Even the most local/regional colleges cost too much money in the US. Even my school, which is really affordable for a school of its size (OSU), costs around 10-15 thousand a year to attend and that's if you live there, live in the same state for years on end/are a local resident. Even many local state universities in California that are funded by the state/federal/local taxpayers don't like accepting people who live there/California which is a contrast to my university, which, despite being a top 60-80 university worldwide, and a top 40 university in the US does tried to keep costs down, and will accept you if you go to a community college, and transfer; no matter what.
UC in-state enrollment highest ever as Berkeley, UCLA seat more Black and Latino students
A record number of Californians enrolled at UC in the fall while out-of-state and international students declined. Berkeley and UCLA bucked national trends at elite universities with increased Black and Latino enrollment.
www.latimes.com
A bold plan for UC: Cut share of out-of-state students by half amid huge California demand
As the University of California confronts record demand for admission, lawmakers are considering a plan to cut in half the share of nonresident students to make more room for locals.
www.latimes.com
Now that's not to say internationals are all rich kids looking to party/study on their country's/parents/families' money since their country's schools may not fit their academic or other needs, but it shows something important. Why not increase the number of seats that go into a good university? Because universities, both public and private, prefer to be exclusive brands. It would benefit me a lot if the Trump administration axed SFA or student financial aid since I would have fewer people to compete against in the job market, and my degree would be worth more.
It's a sickness in universities that they follow the same model as many companies. The fewer people that work/study here the better. They aren't even growing relative to the population of the country.
Hoodlum 🇺🇸 (@nothoodlum.bsky.social)
He didn't wear a suit, but he received a pardon and was treated better than Zelenskyy was.
bsky.app
Sure, and a university could run less. But who would want to study there?
University is both an education and a life experience. Universities can have the academics and campus/facilities they pay for, and for a university that wants to compete for high quality students, $15,000 is probably a good deal for a good US university.
Bear in mind here in the UK the standard annual course fee is ÂŁ9,250 (~$13,000) even at low-rank institutions, and for various reasons many courses are probably running at a loss. The USA is then more expensive than the UK generally - academic salaries are probably around 30% higher on average, for instance, again, with greater disparity likely at higher-quality institutions: because those leading research experts are expensive.
It might depend on how universities do their calculations. Some will be cost-neutral whether in-state or out-of-state. However, if not there is a rationale that the out-of-state get soaked for profit which provides benefit helping subsidise the educations of home students. They can also benefit the home students because the wider the talent pool, the more good students it is possible to bring in, and the pay-offs for students in peer-learning, quality, networking, etc.
Of course, if out-of-state bring in more money it may also mean that the university starts favouring them, although where universities are being subsidised for in-state students I would expect the subsidising government to include a condition for how many in-state students the university must accept.
Universities, traditionally, were private institutions and many (USA) still are. It's no surprise that they might be a bit like companies.
The public university stems from a societal need to increase higher education decades ago. However, you surely have noticed the prevailing societal trend over the last 40 or so years towards the market, enterprise, capitalism, etc. as the dominant paradigm for organisations. This has affected many non-corporate organisations such as government, charities, and indeed universities.
It's not just that people increasingly think about organisations in terms of businesses. A huge amount of research and development into organisations is for corporations, and that then is applied across to other non-corporate organisations, so the principles of business creep ever more over non-business organisations; corporate consultants who take on tasks for non-corporate organisations whose ability to do those tasks themselves withers away, etc. It's also that governments expect things from universities, they spend money on universities, and so they pressure universities to get results: and they do so by using the levers that they understand, which are in large part about business. Efficiency, returns, make them compete, make them do more profit-focused work, etc.
We have turned universities into businesses. Reversing this requires a societal rethink that there is (currently) plainly no appetite for. Arguably, we are well on way to the opposite: cutting them all loose into being private institutions again.
And we, in Germany still have free University education.
Even for foreign students. Even if they come from the US via student visa. But Americans somehow still prefer to pay huge sums to stay in their own country.
Also not really true here and i am glad for it.
And many critics might point out that in numerous ranking charts, Germany has ~1 university in the global top 50, whereas the UK has over 5. (The USA, obviously, dominates.) It might not be the best way to encourage the highest levels of attainment.
Of course we should query what the point of these rankings really are, and whether a top global universities truly represents the overall health of a country's education system. Nevertheless, I suspect the stellar reputation of some of their unis is a big deal to the USA, because it's a way of attracting overseas talent to the USA, many of whom might be enticed to stay on and contribute to the US economy after they graduate, and inducting students into US values.
Hrmm, but the high standing of the UK's institutions predates the current sky-high fees. The UK had 8 in the top 50 in 2010, when fees were a third of what they are now. Several of them were world-renowned institutions before tuition fees were even introduced.
The problem is 2 nurses killed 2 kids by improperly giving vaccinations, the country suspended the vaccination programs, rates fell to 30% from 70%. That all happened BEFORE RFK Jr even got there, but it's his fault because you simply don't like RFK Jr instead of the actual facts of the matter...We've seen how RFK's lies about vaccines have harmed another country.
RFK Jr. misled the US Senate on measles deaths, Samoa's health chief says
Samoa’s top health official has denounced as “a complete lie” remarks that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. made during his bid to become U.S. health secretary.apnews.com
No, the extreme left started the anti-vax movement.
He was in Samoa for ten months prior to the outbreak, his trip there was organized by a Samoan antivax influencer, he met with antivaxxers from New Zealand while there, he denied doctors were there to treat measles and blamed deaths on measles vaccine.
And the extreme right has followed it proudly.
This is like when Republicans like bringing up that Democrats were originally pro-slavery as if that means anything now.
@8:36
The extreme left came up with the anti-vax stuff on their own. Government messaging caused the right to become anti-vax. Why is the covid vaccine part of normal childhood vaccines? There's no reason for that. I was forced to get a vaccine I didn't need, so did at least 100 million others in the US. The president made an unconstitutional order to force everyone to get the vaccine, where was the "fascism" accusations then? Kids were literally not allowed to eat in restaurants because of this bullshit. Now, you can't just assume the government messaging is true and you have to look up everything yourself now, this is because democrats.
Ignore that shit, he's utterly clueless and talking out of his arse, and evidently too lazy to even look it up.
The first anti-vax movement was technically religious: it was deemed by some that preventing people dying of disease by vaccination was denying God's judgement. The same sort of people opposed analgesics and anaesthetics for similar reasons, that if people didn't feel pain, they might turn away from God. However, that was also a transient thing that died out.
The modern anti-vax movement descends from origins in the 1800s. Then as now, the fundamental basis of the anti-vax movement was not political in nature: it was based around cranks interested in alternative medicine, mystical mumbo-jumbo and other bullshit: in other words, what is now mostly the New Age and Wellness sectors.
Edit: I'll just leave you this quotation relating to the paragraph above, because it's an awesome demonstration of how the religious could respond to modern medicine:
Yes, things have changed. RFK deleted all evidence of the effectiveness and side effects of vaccines from websites
A kid died of measles. They did not get a choice because the parents picked for them. This is called negligence and child endangerment. If you refused to feed your kid or let them drink water, and they died, you could end up in jail. These parents could not pull their finger out of their arses long enough to keep their kid alive. They absolutely killed their kid and should be charged
And, as you have stated, this is under the old order. The new one promotes anti-vax science and deletes actual facts. And people will die
Now imagine that letting your kids starve could cause other people around them to starve to death too, and the head of the country's medical apparatus was saying "feeding your kid is optional; it just depends on how you feel about it".