The people who are the most screwed are those who took out loans, but then never got their degree??? So if you partied, played and flunked out you should still get a diploma because you borrowed money and have to pay it backGreat rant!
The biggest problems are that college tuitions & cost of attendance have increased at more than double the nominal inflation rate.
Inflation long-term rate is in the 2.5-3% range, vs college is north of 7%.
That’s absurd. And unjustifiable.
A big fix would be to lower &/or cap the interest rates on student debt.
(Alas, all rates are higher now, but this would’ve been massively beneficial for the prior 15 years)
The other huge problem is, college grads can’t just automatically get good jobs anymore, so now they’re stuck with tens of thousands in student debt, often at high rates, and no way to pay it off.
The people who are the most screwed are those who took out loans, but then never got their degree.
It’s the worst of all worlds - they are saddled with debt, and don’t have the ‘piece of paper’ that allows access to potentially higher earning jobs.
And then you’ve got the parents, who often also take on big debts to help their kids attend colllege, and now they’ve sacrificed their financial well being and/or a comfortable retirement.
Or rather get nickel and dimes than be part of a war machine I guess.The military is a great way to expunge student lawn debt. Doing the military first and college second is also a great option. You’re 3 to 4 years more mature and you have the GI bill to significantly reduce the financial burden.
Unfortunately most would rather get nickel and dimed for 20 to 30 years than 3 to 4 years of intense pain. The interest they pay over those 20 to 30 years is mind blowing.
That's not what he's saying at all.The people who are the most screwed are those who took out loans, but then never got their degree??? So if you partied, played and flunked out you should still get a diploma because you borrowed money and have to pay it back
I know exactly what you're saying! I just saw "customer service" and thought I'd write about my thoughts on that notion. Not really directed at your thought on the judicial process at all. I just needed to vent.My comment was more pointed at these judicial processes and how they basically exist as a CYA for the university irrespective of the impact they have on students who largely, in one way shape or form, are paying to be there. But I guess that aligns well with how you’re describing how things have evolved. Sounds like the whole racket now is just about bringing in tuition revenue to fund useless administrative positions.
The military is a great way to expunge student lawn debt. Doing the military first and college second is also a great option. You’re 3 to 4 years more mature and you have the GI bill to significantly reduce the financial burden.
Unfortunately most would rather get nickel and dimed for 20 to 30 years than 3 to 4 years of intense pain. The interest they pay over those 20 to 30 years is mind blowing.
The first one that files first gets all the benefits. In some cases, like this one, he’s the perpetrator. One of many flaws in The Students Rights and Responsibility system!Maybe no action re the other kid because NO ONE filed a violation of the code of conduct against him. Further showing how stupid this process is. The so-called Judicial Board are just a bunch of bureaucrats. [Now I'm getting angry about how dumb SU is and how L.A. is getting screwed.]
To each their own. There are a thousand ways to skin a cat. As long as I don’t have to pay for someone else’s loans I could care less which path someone takes.Or rather get nickel and dimes than be part of a war machine I guess.
To each their own. There are a thousand ways to skin a cat. As long as I don’t have to pay for someone else’s loans I could care less which path someone takes.
This is the perfect opportunity for the university to review/change their process. They can indicate that LeQuint, and others, will be re-reviewed once the new process is complete.The resolution is going to occur through the judicial process. SU is not going to change their position prior to any court hearing.
Someone asked about discovery. I wondered the same thing. It seemed it would only be based on information at the hearing. However could a request be made for punishments received in similar cases to determine if the punishment offends one’s sense of fairness?
I would also suggest that you will get more of an education in the military than any university.The military is a great way to expunge student lawn debt. Doing the military first and college second is also a great option. You’re 3 to 4 years more mature and you have the GI bill to significantly reduce the financial burden.
Unfortunately most would rather get nickel and dimed for 20 to 30 years than 3 to 4 years of intense pain. The interest they pay over those 20 to 30 years is mind blowing.
I would also suggest that you will get more of an education in the military than any university.
Which is along the lines of my suggestion that they hire a law firm to expeditiously look at best practices at other schools. Penalties on students currently receiving discipline would have that penalty put in abeyance until a report is provided.This is the perfect opportunity for the university to review/change their process. They can indicate that LeQuint, and others, will be re-reviewed once the new process is complete.
I would also suggest that you will get more of an education in the military than any university.
I'm not a lawyer but i'd argue that the egregious suspension and damage done to his imagine has limited his ability to gain NIL dealsHe’s not. What is his claim? What’s the basis? What are his damages?
Sounds like the claimant in LeQuint's case initially raised a criminal complaint and didn't pursue his pound of flesh through SU until it was clear there would be no substantive criminal penalty. Then the original hearing in LeQuint's case was scheduled in February, but he was unable to attend due to the death of his father. By the time the hearing and full appeals process played out, the spring semester was essentially over.It may have been mentioned but I’m surprised there hasn’t been more comparison with the Delone Carter punishment. Yes Delone was suspended for 2 semesters like LA but how they treated the suspension was quite different and I’d think that would be basis to help LA.
LA’s actions occurred in December…DC’s happened in February (I believe) and still ended up more favorable for him with the punishment timing. They allowed DC to start his suspension (spring semester) retroactively even though it was prob close to half over and then serve 2nd semester suspension during summer session. This allowed him to be eligible for fall as long as he got his academic requirements in order. On the surface it looks like LA wasn’t allowed these same opportunities which shows inconsistencies within the school judicial system.
*Disclaimer- this is assuming LA wasn’t given the option of starting suspension in spring
The University may wish by the time this gets to court that they had resolved the situation.Sounds like the claimant in LeQuint's case initially raised a criminal complaint and didn't pursue his pound of flesh through SU until it was clear there would be no substantive criminal penalty. Then the original hearing in LeQuint's case was scheduled in February, but he was unable to attend due to the death of his father. By the time the hearing and full appeals process played out, the spring semester was essentially over.
Su didn’t damage his image though. He made the matter public by bringing the lawsuit and hes made it know that he struck the other individual.I'm not a lawyer but i'd argue that the egregious suspension and damage done to his imagine has limited his ability to gain NIL deals
NopeI'm not a lawyer but i'd argue that the egregious suspension and damage done to his imagine has limited his ability to gain NIL deals
According to Axe (and I’m surprised that it has not been discussed more), LA was offered suspension for this past Spring and this Summer and he declined.It may have been mentioned but I’m surprised there hasn’t been more comparison with the Delone Carter punishment. Yes Delone was suspended for 2 semesters like LA but how they treated the suspension was quite different and I’d think that would be basis to help LA.
LA’s actions occurred in December…DC’s happened in February (I believe) and still ended up more favorable for him with the punishment timing. They allowed DC to start his suspension (spring semester) retroactively even though it was prob close to half over and then serve 2nd semester suspension during summer session. This allowed him to be eligible for fall as long as he got his academic requirements in order. On the surface it looks like LA wasn’t allowed these same opportunities which shows inconsistencies within the school judicial system.
*Disclaimer- this is assuming LA wasn’t given the option of starting suspension in spring