Who really wants tuition increase?

I don't think there's ever going to be a win-win situation with students and tuition. It saddens me to know that no matter the case, tuition will always increase...eventually. Students apply for financial aid, grants, and scholarships. For many others, there's the burden of taking a loan.

The entire nation talks about being more educated and making something of yourself. We're all suppose to better our country. It's hard enough being admitted into a university, why is it tuition needs to be increased when it's already pretty high? Don't they feel they want to educate those who strive to get the best education? Or don't they think that students admitted worked extremely hard to make it in the first place?

It's difficult enough with all the obstacles we have to overcome to make it into a school like UT. Raising tuition won't only put many students in deeper debt than they already are but many may not be able to attend any longer for whatever the reason may be.

I understand that there are other factors as teacher's salary and campus expenses to take into consideration, but I still feel that tuition increase isn't that best way to go about it. Students kill to get the most out of education and be better in the real world. K-12 teachers do all it takes to get their students to love and enjoy learning. Then once you're out the door, burden is thrown upon you. It's troublesome to be admitted into higher education schools, causing many adults to not continue their education. So why is it we bother wasting the time it takes for K-12 teachers to engrave how important it is that we learn?

It beats me. Students suffer and struggle as much as it already is. May the outcome be for the best.

A Response to "Public Assistance in Texas"

I read both the original opinion & the response of my colleague's and have come to have a response to both people.

To "A Gee Statement":
I understand where you're coming from. A great 34.2% of our tax money is going to these assistance programs and the people who aren't in need, don't deserve our help. Although there are some "clever recipients" whom have manipulated the system, I don't believe there's a great percentage of those who actually get in. All applicants go through various interviews and all paperwork is verified with detail before being admitted, in order to prevent fraudulent applicants/information.

To, Wendy of "Government Matters":
It's true that a single parent and two children can hardly live off of $1,500. To worsen matters, eligibility requires you make below $1,341 in a household of three. It seems impossible to survive with income limitations so low but remember these programs were meant to only assist.

Raising the bar on eligiblility requirements won't help anyone on either side of the fence. Therefore, I feel one of the best solutions could be to keep our eligible income limitations at the same rate or lower it and enforce more strict eligibility requirements. We shouldn't be giving money away just because there are many of those who need help but instead assist them in finding jobs. There's a program called Texas Workforce and that's where we should take a percentage of our taxes should be going instead of these "assisting programs." Texas Workforce Commission offers various programs to train those who need jobs and not only assist in childcare providers, but also have educational institutions and many more. These programs help those in need to get back on their feet and make make something of themselves. Our tax money should be going somewhere worth the effort and time; especially spent wisely. Now that's something to be happy about (for both sides of the fence).

Talk about Racism...

After reading the article about Tyrone Brown and John Alex Wood, I've got to say that I'm feeling quite aggravated. A black man, Brown, sentenced to life over a $2 stick-up compared to a murderer, Wood, with innumerable times being found guilty doing drugs as cocaine. How could this in any way have sound the least bit even-handed to you? It was obviously a biased judge with issues.

I understand that Brown needed to learn his lesson and be punished. In which he got 10 years of probation. But then he made the mistake of doing marijuana while on probation, causing further punishment. What I didn't agree with was his life sentence because of having drugs in his system. How could this have flown over so many people's heads? Why hadn't it caught anyone's attention to help this man?

As for Mr. Wood, I honestly don't know what to say. The first time he was thrown in court was because he shot a man by the name of Mr. Clark. That should've clearly been a sign that he should be harshly punished. Especially if the same judge felt Mr. Brown deserved life sentence for marijuana. Not only was he sent free for MURDER, he had failed at least 5 drug tests and his was punishment was "postcard probation." He even flew to Italy while he was on probation!

After 17 years of imprisonment, Mr. Brown was freed. I thank god for that. I'm still bothered by the fact that I feel the judge should lose his position. He shouldn't be allowed to serve as a judge any longer for unnecessary punishments. Everyone should pay for their faults to a certain extent, regardless of whom you are in society.