Originally Posted by Smalls (Post 786704)

No, that is just what every single ULL graduate says because they don't want ULL to close or be impacted in any way. It doesn't matter how many people McNeese puts in the local facilities or the over $300 million economic impact that McNeese has in SWLA. Bet it has more of an impact than most of the other 4 year universities, save for ULL, LSU, and Tulane. No way SELA, NWST, ULM, or NSU have that impact.

And no way a 2 yesr technical school would have that impact. Do things need to be cut and streamlined? Yes. But there is no reason for McNeese to go to a 2 year status. You want to make cuts? How about to the ridiculous number of schools in North Louisiana with the population there is in that region. You have LSUA, Louisiana College, NWST, ULM, LA TECH, Grambling, and LSUS all in that region. Why the hell do you need so many colleges in a region with the population that it has?

More people live in the I-10 cooridor than any other part of the state. Could ULL handle the load that it would have to take on if McNeese did not offer 4 year programs? Doubt it. I read somewhere that the main region that McNeese supports has something in the realm of 300-400k people. That's plenty big enough to support a 4 year university. And McNeese has the alumni to support the university.

Cut programs if necessary, or combine programs. But there are enough reasons to maintain McNeese as a 4 year.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by DaPointIsDaBomb (Post 786722)

Everybody wants cuts but doesn't want cuts in their region. Mcneese should go. ULM, LSUA, LSUS, NW, Southeastern or Nicholls and all the historically black colleges. It's racist if you think about it. Segregation is over

That $300 million economic impact is just s number that was derived from someone at mcneese and probably exaggerated

Originally Posted by Blue Wave 2200 (Post 786701)

Just curious, what is your reasoning behind this statement? Personal opinion or based on facts?

Originally Posted by Blue Wave 2200 (Post 786701)

Just curious, what is your reasoning behind this statement? Personal opinion or based on facts?

Originally Posted by mcjaredsandwich (Post 786749)

Here's the libertarian stance..

Government shouldn't pay for education of students, scholarships or not. Scholarships should be given privately and should not be handed out by the government. Charity should rule here.

Government shouldn't pay for food stamps. Charitable donations and the kindness of others replaces the mandatory tax collections used for this purpose.

Originally Posted by Top Dawg (Post 786652)

Wonder how much edwards paid dardenne to stay in the race to split the vote enough for a runoff?

Originally Posted by Mako19 (Post 786751)

A little bit of both. I knew it would ruffle some feathers (mainly yours) and was in the mood to stir the pot.

Originally Posted by Pat Babaz (Post 786611)

They could easily fix TOPS by making the first year TOPS students have to get a student loan for the first year... You make the grades, we pay off your loan. That way you wouldn't have tons of 18yr olds going to college just to party on the state's dime and then drop out.