punia@uvm-cs.UUCP (David T. Punia) (05/03/85)
So why should the student pay? One way or another, the student is going to pay, whether it's for more mainframe power, public micros, or personal micros. In the first two cases, the money buys a resource that the student has no guaranteed access to at any given time, and that he loses access to when he leaves or transfers. Also, in the first two cases, typically, the students who don't necessarily use the resources still wind up paying for it. Why should music majors be paying for the resources needed by the engineering students? Many people out there are talking about pricing potential students out of school. This is, sad to say, a fact of life. Tuition increases have the same effect, but can we freeze those increases? Rather than flaming about genuine attempts to improve the process of educating these people, why not write your congressman about the impending deep cuts in aid to education. The costs of education are not easily controlled without impairing the effectiveness of it. It is a given that more computing power is necessary. The Division of Engineering and Math, including the School of Business Administration, has been the fastest growing area in the university for several years. The periodic increases in compute power have been dwarfed by the demand. These students are going to be using pc's for the rest of their profesional lives, why not start now? They won't have to wait on line, sign up for machine time, and their own, personal workstation will be available 7 days a week, 24 hours a day. The scarce resources that are available on campus will be freed to do more appropriate tasks than text editting, and will be much more available for those who need the power. -- REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR FAVORITE DISCLAIMER David T. Punia, Dept. of Computer Science & Electrical Engineering, The University of Vermont, Burlington, VT 05405 802-656-3330 USENET --> ....!decvax!dartvax!uvm-gen!punia CSNET ---> punia@uvm
scott@gitpyr.UUCP (Scott Holt) (05/11/85)
Why sould music majors pay for part of the education of an engineer
or scientist? Have you ever heard of public goods? Sooner or later, in one
way or another, the education provided to an engineer or scientist will
be benificial to the music major...be it improved roads, faster banking
service, better and cheaper recording equipment.
The eductaion that we get is benificial to not only our selves, but to
every active member of society. Why shouldnt the cost of that education be
distributed equally...personaly I feel a engineering or science major shouldnt
have to pay for a PC, a music major shouldnt have to pay for his instruments,
a chemistry student shouldnt have to pay for the lab equipment...all who
derive benifits from the education of these people should pay...that is,
the taxpayers...only when the tools of education become tools of profit
should the student pay for them ... that is, after graduation.
- your friendly neighborhood quasi-socialist,
Scott Holt.
--
---------
"Its better to die on your feet than to live on your knees!"
Scott Holt
Georgia Tech Po Box 36199
Atlanta, GA 30332
...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,masscomp,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!scott
...!{rlgvax,sb1,uf-cgrl,unmvax,ut-sally}!gatech!gitpyr!scottwcs@ho95b.UUCP (Bill Stewart) (05/15/85)
> Why should music majors pay for part of the education > of an engineer or scientist? When I was in college, my 1/nth of an IBM-370 was partly paid for by music majors' tuition. (But some of them got to use PLATO, piano keyboard, orange screen, and all.) A personal computer would have been an immense benefit to most engineering students; it might not have the horsepower for some CS courses, but the PDP-11 seemed to :~). -- Bill Stewart 1-201-949-0705 AT&T Bell Labs, Room 4K-435, Holmdel NJ {ihnp4,allegra,cbosgd,vax135}!ho95c!wcs
mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) (05/15/85)
>/* scott@gitpyr.UUCP (Scott Holt) / 1:15 pm May 11, 1985 */ > Why sould music majors pay for part of the education of an engineer >or scientist? Have you ever heard of public goods? Sooner or later, in one >way or another, the education provided to an engineer or scientist will >be benificial to the music major...be it improved roads, faster banking >service, better and cheaper recording equipment. > The eductaion that we get is benificial to not only our selves, but to >every active member of society. Why shouldnt the cost of that education be >distributed equally...personaly I feel a engineering or science major shouldnt >have to pay for a PC, a music major shouldnt have to pay for his instruments, >a chemistry student shouldnt have to pay for the lab equipment...all who >derive benifits from the education of these people should pay...that is, >the taxpayers...only when the tools of education become tools of profit >should the student pay for them ... that is, after graduation. > > - your friendly neighborhood quasi-socialist, > Scott Holt. Ok, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on this one -- you didn't think very much before opening your mouth here. If I get $5 worth of benefit from the education of a person, how much do I have to contribute to that education $5, $10, $15, . . . ? Oh, and I know this is just a pragmatic question, but how do you propose to measure such benefits? Oh, I know, we'll get a committee together . . . Mike Sykora