Kansas budget means $3.3M less in state funding for Wichita State

[Kung Wu]

When you take away the mortgage home interest deduction and earned income tax credits, most of the new money is going to come from the poor. Funny, tax credits that mostly benefit top earners and businesses are not getting cut.

The article you referenced says that the state will "use $60 million gained from eliminating the earned income tax credit to match federal aid for the poor and disabled."

So instead of handing out $60 million to the poor, they will be handing out $113 million to the poor and disabled, because the government will match the $60 million with $53 million.

In other words, by dropping the EITC program, the poor and disabled in Kansas have nearly DOUBLED their benefit from that program.

[_kai_]

To think, I wasted all that money attending continuing education for federal and state income tax preparation. I never knew there were so many tax experts on ShockerNet.

[rjl]

Tuition will never stop going up until the federal government stops blindly guaranteeing access to education loans without accountability from the schools. That is the root of the rising tuition problem and the student loan bubble.

Harvard law school costs almost the exact same as law schools where just 1/3 of graduates receive jobs requiring a JD. Why? Because students are guaranteed the same access to loans from the federal government regardless of which school they attend. SLU's MBA program has an acceptance rate of 84% and an average starting salary roughly half of what Duke's MBA program provides, yet it costs more ($51k/year tuition). Why? Because there is guaranteed borrowing available for the entire price, no matter how high they set it, from the federal government. The school could literally say kiss my ass, we're doubling tuition next year and the government would still provide below-market rate loans for the full amount. This is not a traditional customer/vendor relationship.

The spigot either needs to be tweaked, or schools need to be beaten into line through various measures. Many graduate programs are facing lawsuits over misrepresentation of employment statistics- this is one possible solution if schools are found liable and involves minimal government involvement. Regulations could address problems but can also create a nightmare of bureaucracy.

If you are over 45 and attended graduate school, you almost certainly paid less for your entire advanced degree than similarly situated students pay for one year (often, one semester) now. Wage inflation has not come close to keeping pace with that. Something's gotta give eventually.

Graduate programs have always been money generators for schools. The two law schools in Kansas, KU and WU, generate more money for their respective universities than any other program. Business schools, med schools, etc. They all do the same.

But this is not about graduate degrees. This is about undergraduate degrees.

There has been a pattern of behavior developing here: decrease funding for public universities while simultaneously decrying the rise in student loan debt. For the first time in the HISTORY of Kansas, tuition now covers more of the universities' costs than public funding. Virtually everybody here got to go to WSU on the cheap--most people here, VERY CHEAP--and now most are posting about how "fat" universities are and how much more funding they can stand to lose. The days are long gone where you can honestly work and pay your own way through a full-time college courseload at most universities in the United States, and WSU is getting really damn close to that, if not way over that line already. That means, if you don't have a scholarship or you don't have mommy or daddy's money, you either take 8 years to get through school or you take on student loans. I wonder how many posting ehre had to make that decision?

I assume that is a reasonable way to go if one does not care about any form of brain drain in the state. If people don't care about the increasing divide between the rich and the poor. If people don't care about the fact that a diploma from WSU is increasingly becoming less and less valuable outside the city of Wichita, if not there too.

[rjl]

Is the goal of government to provide the poor with more buying power or more opportunity?

The left's fiscal ideas haven't worked in like, oh, forever. It's past time to do things drastically different.

Let's not argue with lies, Dr.

The left's fiscal ideas are the ones that worked in the 30's to get us out of the depression, the 40's, the 50's, the 60's, and the early 70's.

Ever since Reagan took office, we've been modelling the right's fiscal policy of "trickle down economics."



The "left's" fiscal model hasn't been in place since the early 80's. The closest it's ever been to returning was during Clinton's second term. You remember when the economy was gangbusters and the deficit was shrinking?

[Kung Wu]

To think, I wasted all that money attending continuing education for federal and state income tax preparation. I never knew there were so many tax experts on ShockerNet.

Experience. Our mature board has had years and years and years of paying those lying bastards in Washington D.C. and Topeka. :)

[ABC]

As I said above RJL, state aid has decreased by -.1% during the 10 years from 2003-2012. Tuition increased 137%.

That would seem to counter your assertion about the cause of tuition increase. I agree with a lot of your other statements about affordability. I just don't think the taxpayers are the culprit.

As to brain drain, people move to states that have economic opportunity. Oh, and as high as tuition is in Kansas, it is still lower than many other states in the country, and no higher than other states in the region.

[shockmonster]

As I said above RJL, state aid has decreased by -.1% during the 10 years from 2003-2012. Tuition increased 137%.

That would seem to counter your assertion about the cause of tuition increase. I agree with a lot of your other statements about affordability. I just don't think the taxpayers are the culprit.

As to brain drain, people move to states that have economic opportunity. Oh, and as high as tuition is in Kansas, it is still lower than many other states in the country, and no higher than other states in the region.

You are right about the cost of everything going up and tuition has gone up more than most things. For example, health care has gone up 131% in the past 10 years. I just don't agree with you that people, companies, and jobs are going to flood to Kansas because of low income taxes coupled with a decrease in tax deductions. In my opinion, our state is going to hurt big time in the future because of this big experiment. There are a lot of other ways to tax and a slower path to tax reform would have been more prudent.

[The Coach]

Respectfully, I don't think you know what redistribution means.

You would be wildly incorrect, but the respect is noted. Let me say respectfully that I have never found those who support the state's economic suicide - of which higher education shortfalls are a big part - to be particularly able to recognize the inconvenient truths of the shift of tax burdens to the poor, which is what's happening here.

This isn't about shrinking spending or government; it's about shrinking the tax burdens of the wealthy. Redistributing wealth. Upward.

[shockmonster]

You would be wildly incorrect. It is the genesis of the "Brownback Experiment."

This is the experiment:

Small business owners making more because of income taxes going down/deductions aimed at middle class going up - A good thing for them to stimulate the economy to possibly create jobs.

Middle Class workers - income tax going down but tax deductions aimed at middle class going down too.- No gain and possibly a loss.

Lower Class lose income tax but tax deductions don't affect them. A net loss but don't pay income tax and probably aren't affected by tax deductions.

Wealthy upper class corporations paying less taxes/decrease in tax deductions. Net gain but won't make a difference in jobs.

[Kung Wu]

Kansas has a 5.5% unemployment rate. Kansas and many (most?) other midwestern states don't have a "jobs" problem.

http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm

[SB Shock]

http://www.kansascity.com/2012/01/17/3376262/brownback-tax-plan-hits-poor-hardest.html

This is part of what I was referring to. Would elaborate but on phone.

me think you "love lamp"

[ABC]

Kansas has a 5.5% unemployment rate. Kansas and many (most?) other midwestern states don't have a "jobs" problem.

http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm

Unemployment rates are not the same as jobs. Kansas essentially hasn't gained private sector jobs for a decade.

[ABC]

This is the experiment:

Small business owners making more because of income taxes going down/deductions aimed at middle class going up - A good thing for them to stimulate the economy to possibly create jobs.

Middle Class workers - income tax going down but tax deductions aimed at middle class going down too.- No gain and possibly a loss.

Lower Class lose income tax but tax deductions don't affect them. A net loss but don't pay income tax and probably aren't affected by tax deductions.

Wealthy upper class corporations paying less taxes/decrease in tax deductions. Net gain but won't make a difference in jobs.

The overall income tax burden is going down for everyone. The overall tax burden in Kansas is definitely going down.

The current sales tax rate goes to 6.15 from 6.3%.

A growing economy provides more and better jobs for all income levels.

[wu_shizzle]

Kansas has a 5.5% unemployment rate. Kansas and many (most?) other midwestern states don't have a "jobs" problem.

http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm

While we are doing well comparatively, too many of those who would have been counted on the roles of the unemployed are now collecting disability instead.

http://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/?wpisrc=nl_wonk

[ABC]

So the Regents did approve and 8% tuition hike for WSU.

I wish there was an analysis about what the Universities are spending on, how much administration has been added, how much professors or TAs are teaching etc.

About the only thing we've heard from the Regents' members is caterwauling about budget cuts, but nothing substantive.

Also, I do have a small problem with the Alumni Assoc weighing in on this, unless they are providing all sides, which I doubt they are doing. What do others think?