ollie wrote on Nov 21, 2007 6:09 PM:
" These Bureaucrats and University tax whores have gotten away with spending our money for so long they have gotten sloppy. What part of "tear down a perfectly fine housing building and build another on same sight then cry that we need more housing" don't they think we understand. They must really take us for Morons.....but then again.....Hmmm, maybe we really are morons for letting this crap go on for so long. "
WDJS wrote on Nov 20, 2007 4:58 AM:
" Once again, my same thoughts on tearing down buildings...travel to Eurpope! How do they live/work/function in their 200+ year old buildings and we tear down structures after 50 years? How many of us survived the dorms in the '70's, made the best of it, and graduated? Supply and demand at UW-L says it all! Empty classrooms? How many classrooms are in use at 8am? Bet you'll find enough available in which to study. "
North Sider wrote on Nov 19, 2007 12:53 PM:
" MR. Gow- "the previous administration". As if all the hierarchy down there left with the man that held your former position? Come on? We have many people even quoted in this article that were here and planning during the last Administration. We had, and have a local represenative of the Regents, "On Too Many Boards". 1000 more students, growth, danger to Vets funding, off campus private housing, "west Side of campus", tear down campus housing, shift burden. "It led UW-L to submit a $49 million proposal"? Look, you people are all over the map, that's really the perception problem you have. Like a habitual compulsive shopper with a pocket full of cash. Big stadium?, all donated funds?, parking will be moved to a few sand/dirt lots? Ramp?, what ramp? "
damnstraight wrote on Nov 18, 2007 12:47 PM:
" You've got it exactly backwards there The Real World. Yes the total appropriations for the previous budget biennium was $7,005,199,100 but both the revenues and expenses are known. The state now provides less than 20% of the entire UW budget, with tuition and student fees increasing to make up a large part of the difference. The students and staff as well as all the businesses and their employees that are here and thriving because of the UW system pay taxes too! "
6760French wrote on Nov 17, 2007 10:46 PM:
" On the insult on studying the constitution. I was one of the top 5 students winning a scholarship, for the ELK's Constitution Contest. I KNOW the constitution. Second, my tution bill says exactly how much the taxpayers paid for my education. It says right at the bottom... and let me tell you it does not represent 81% of my Gross tuition. I know my professors care about my education. They are WONDERFUL individuals, and the last note... I pay taxes, thank you. Just because I am a student does not mean I don't work. "
please wrote on Nov 17, 2007 9:53 PM:
" Isn't it quite apparent that UW-L is not about education or teaching students? It is and always has been a business. Do they care if you have an advisor? No, but they'll take your tuition money. They oversell their parking lots year after year. And now, they admit student that they have no intention of housing? It's obvious where the priorities are, always have been and always will be; sports. As an alumnus, I remember it well. I see things haven't changed. "
The Real World wrote on Nov 17, 2007 8:58 PM:
" Excellent question damnstraight, The truth is about 81%. If you contact the legislative audit bureau, that is the figure they came up with last year. They will admit that no one really knows, because of such things that we have to take into account. The last budget had $7,005,199,100 for the UW system. That is just over 7 billion. Then we have an unknown amount of other cost, indirect administration, real estate taxes not taxed and it goes on and on. The person that pays all of the upfront instate tuition, probably pays 35%, leaving the taxpayers to cover 65%! Thanks for caring! "
damnstraight wrote on Nov 17, 2007 8:37 PM:
" So which is it The Real World? How much of the cost of a college education is borne by the taxpayers? 50%? 65% or the incredibly accurate number of about 81%? You obviously are guessing as your ranting. If you keep it up long enough it will probably exceed 100%! "
The Real World wrote on Nov 17, 2007 7:28 PM:
" One more thing 6760French, You are not paying for a retired persons social security, they paid it themselves and our government wasted it and now they are extorting it from you to try to keep our seniors from starving. Learn young, you can not trust Government. They lie and steal and give your hard earned money to causes that buys them votes. Study the Constitution and try to elect people who will uphold the Constitution. If we don't start following the Constitution we are
doomed. And if you think we are following the Constitution than you are doomed. "
The Real World wrote on Nov 17, 2007 7:09 PM:
" To 6760French; First you can't believe any thing that you hear from the office of resident life director. These are government people, most of them don't have a clue about anything, other than how to keep their job and collect their pay. As for your education, even if you were paying every expense that you are billed as a student, you are still leaving at least 50% to the taxpayer. In reality it is probably 65%. Your tuition is far less than half of the real cost of your education. Again about 81% of the college expense at La Crosse is paid directly or indirectly paid by the taxpayer. You might get it if you become a taxpayer someday! "
6760French wrote on Nov 17, 2007 6:02 PM:
" Also, as a student I KNOW that when I develop healthy relationships with professors I am much more likely to succeed. I am always visiting professors. On the UW-Madison comparison... they may have TAs and GAs, but UW-L doesn't... perhaps we should have a better faculty to staff ratio then madison then...
Thank you however for helping pay my student fees, I am sure someday I will pay enough taxes to repay you. Right now I really don't want to pay for your social security, but I am paying it because I hope it is there when I get there. . . "
6760French wrote on Nov 17, 2007 5:59 PM:
" As a student who lives on campus at UW-L, I think I know what the campus needs. Because the studies are currently filled for student housing, I have a hard time finding a good group study location. My friends at UW-Madison like to go in unused classrooms and review there using the large white board space available. To bad, you have to fight for classroom availablity here. Oh yeah, and about CH100 and the mold problem... "
6760French wrote on Nov 17, 2007 5:57 PM:
" The Real World
wrote on Nov 17, 2007 5:31 PM:
" Hey,6760French,The taxpayers are paying on average about 81 percent of the student fees. That means it will cost us dearly. I wish that everyone would become educated on a subject before they voice their opinion. "
I said "The wisconsin taxpayers are not going to pay a dime for the new residence halls." This is true the wisconsin taxpayers will not pay for a dime of the prospecitve $49million dollar bill for the resident hall. It will not cost you dearly for that portion. (per an email sent to students by the office of resident life director)
"
The Real World wrote on Nov 17, 2007 5:31 PM:
" Hey,6760French,The taxpayers are paying on average about 81 percent of the student fees. That means it will cost us dearly. I wish that everyone would become educated on a subject before they voice their opinion. "
what_that_too wrote on Nov 17, 2007 4:36 PM:
" Don't you think we shouldn't trust any entity that can't plan better than this? :::Forget the academic building, and fix the housing situation FIRST!!!::: Fewer students are going to "brick and mortar" campuses anyway, so why do they even need new classrooms? ::: Maybe they could combine the new stadium with the classrooms to make a full-time facility (the old stadium used to serve as a barn for the county fair during the summer up until the 1960s "
Big Spender wrote on Nov 17, 2007 2:30 PM:
" To 6760French, re: "The wisconsin taxpayers are not going to pay a dime for the new residence halls. All costs are going to be absorbed by the student body." That's not sweetening the deal--students have been financially steamrolled enough. It's time to take some of that pressure off; tuition has gone up like a missile these last few years. Also, teacher-student ratio is not a big factor at the college level; most profs don't spend much time with individual students whatever the class size. At Madison and Minnesota, grad student and post-doc TAs handle most of the student interaction load--I know that through direct experience. "
6760French wrote on Nov 17, 2007 1:32 PM:
" I wish that everyone would become educated on a subject before they voice their opinion. If people did that however, this would be a perfect world.
Let me let you know something. The wisconsin taxpayers are not going to pay a dime for the new residence halls. All costs are going to be absorbed by the student body. This does however raise the cost of housing on campus. With that being said, many students are continuting to support the university. We are in dire need of new academic facilities on campus. Our student to teacher ratio is 24:1, and as a top ranked university in the Midwest we should be more around 13-18 (UW-Madison has a ratio of 13:1)
"
The Real World wrote on Nov 17, 2007 12:02 PM:
" To destroy the existing building and replace them with money extorted from the public is disgraceful and anyone condoning such a thing should be ashamed. We have got to get control of the Regents, they have never been in the real world. "
Random Observer wrote on Nov 17, 2007 10:51 AM:
" CJ, from when I was at UW-L, if you were a freshman living with your parents, you weren't required to live on campus. That's standard procedure at many of the UW campuses. "
JS wrote on Nov 17, 2007 9:11 AM:
" $50 million for housing? They plan to knock down two dorms. Then add 1,000 students and claim there is a "housing shortage". But there would not be one if they had just left the dorms standing. Hello UWL, when my house gets old I don't start from scratch and build a new one, it's called maintenance and remodeling. Then once the housing shortage hits and students start to move out into the neighborhood they expect neighbors to back their plan. With this they hope to get support of legislators from LaCrosse so it will pass during the next state budget. There were many proposals in the previous state budget for housing on various campuses and NONE of them passed. What do they think will be different when UW-L puts a proposal on the table? It will be probably be the "emergency housing shortage" they have created. "
CJ wrote on Nov 17, 2007 9:08 AM:
" So if I'm from the local area and a freshman I'm required to live on campus??? What wizard passed that rule? Overcrowding maybe these kids could give basic training a try and a stint in the sand overseas. Enjoy going to school and be grateful that you can attend one no matter how dire the sleeping conditions are. Give me a break. "
zz wrote on Nov 17, 2007 7:47 AM:
" Any thing for a buck. What next?????
You people sound like LARRY< DARREL< AND DARREL.
Big spender has your number right on..
Heat Lights Books Yes.
Millions for 5 foot ball games .. NO NO NO
Gat your act together for every ones sake.
It's only a nother $100. for ever $50,000.home and its getting damm old. "
Big Spender wrote on Nov 17, 2007 6:26 AM:
" Correction to the comment: "Chancellor Joe Gow said the previous administration planned the new academic building without “fully exploring what that meant for campus” housing." You mean stadium, not academic building, dontcha Joe? Once again, you can count on The Great Big Spender ta ride ta the rescue! House them studints in that thar stadee-um uv yers! Then shet all them akky-demics down! We don't need no fancy schmancy edumacatin' at the UW of Futbawl no-how cuz we gots sports! "