And that might block the first EO because he did put in the exception for religious minorities suffering persecution in those countries, which by interpretation then turns it into a ban on Muslims from the six nations. But the second one eliminated any reference to religion, It's a flat ban on the immigrants from those six nations, no first amendment issues involved.
Doesn't matter, This still needs to be fought, as the law clearly gives the President this authority but lower courts have decided to take his irrelevant campaign speeches as somehow redefining the very specific and limited text of his Executive Orders, and then implemented Nationwide bans on implementation. Normally when one of the Circuit courts acts that ruling stands for that Circuit, not for the nation as a whole. This was seen in the gay marriage battle where it wasn't until one of the cases reached the Supreme Court that it achieved nationwide impact.
Thus the over-reach by the lower courts must be addressed, or we actually have a constitutional issue.
The appeals courts exceeded jurisprudence in citing his campaign speeches as some how changing the clear language of the Executive orders. What he said as a candidate during a campaign cannot be taken as indicating his intent once elected when the wording of executive orders issued is clear in it's limitations and specifics. The first ban did have a problem in the exception it provided for persecuted religious minorities from those nations made it a defacto ban on the religion from those countries.
But the second ban removed that exception, making it a blanket ban on citizens from those countries regardless of faith.
Car gets a flat? It recognizes the tire deflating long before a human driver would and starts breaking, and reports the problem to the other cars which also start slowing and maneuvering to let it over to the shoulder safely. Object in road, assuming the object just barely appeared (out of the back of a pickup). The car hits the object it didn't have time to avoid, but immediately reports the object and the imminent impact. The other cars begin slowing and transitioning to other lanes. If the car has a little more time, it's sensors detect the previously unreported object, determines what needs to be done to avoid it and does so, while reporting the object to the rest of the nearby traffic so those vehicles and following vehicles can also safely avoid the obstacle Pedestrian. Again the Car either detects them in time to avoid the impact and reports the moving location of the ped in real time so following cars can also try to avoid it. If not it reports the impact, as it is still stopping trying to avoid it. The other cars adjust their speed down, and maneuver both to avoid the Pedestrian/body and the car that hit it, which has stopped in place to preserve the accident scene. Wildlife ditto human. -Countless others ditto.
A video from Google I saw a few months ago had a prime example of how well this could work with cars that are talking. The Google-car (G-Car) detected a bicyclist coming from the left while it was stopped at an intersection. The light changed and the bike should have stopped but it did not and rolled through the intersection as the G-car and other traffic started to move. The human driver of the G-car could not see the bike due to a larger car in the left lane, whose driver should have been able to clearly see the approaching bike.
What happened? The Gcar had seen the bike, identified it as a potential risk before the bike even reached the intersection and then flagged it as a definite risk when it failed to stop and thus the G-Car did not start moving. The car to the left started rolling and then suddenly stopped as it's driver slammed on the brakes and the bike swerved and managed to miss it. The G-Car hadn't moved and there was no risk of impact. Now if those cars were talking, none of the traffic would have started rolling at all when the bike was identified as not stopping even though it no longer had right of way due to the light change. And had it been hit, the following cars would have been notified of the crash and resulting lane closures. (The Bike was flying, had it hit the non-google car the rider would likely have landed in the road in front of the G-Car.)
Individual sensors and computers are great, but inter-vehicle communications will actually make it even easier to deal with the situations you proposed as each car isn't having to react anew to the threat, but the incident is reported back up the road allowing for all traffic to adjust, to clear lanes well in advance allowing for smoother flow of traffic around the incident.
Introverts like myself would disagree with your opinion on Human being the best interface. I prefer to punch my order into the Kiosk at my local McD's. The only human interaction I have to suffer through is when the employee brings the tray to my table. And I like it that way. No having to repeat my order three or four times to make sure they heard and understood it in a noisy restaurant with English as a second language store employees. No having to try to dodge or waive off upsells. No having to make small talk. I order my food and go watch my kids play while I read a book. Employee interaction is extremely minimal and that's the way I like it.
Odds are they get the sandwich served to you just as quickly. As soon as they hit Big Mac on the register the "cooks" start assembling one. At most you might be saving yourself 15 seconds, but probably not because you took the time to ask if they had one ready and then chose something else. When you say McChicken, hopefully they've got one ready or already in the fryer or you will be waiting longer.
Your biggest wait item is going to be anything that goes in the fryer if not already ready (the Chicken in a McChicken), or is in constant high demand (Fries).
First, who do you think investors are? Not all are the filthy rich who would never step inside a fast food joint.
Second. These Kiosks are very popular at my local McDonalds. The counter gets a good deal of business. But rather than standing in line for the one register, I am able to go to one of the four kiosks, let my kids pick their meals, make my order then we go out to the Play-area and the kids play until the order is brought to us. Best of all, the orders are as we requested, no more mistakes due to language difficulties of the employees.
Third. We go to sit down restaurants for the better food and some service, we go to fast food joints for food, served fast with minimal fuss.
Funny about that average life expectancy claim. I have yet to see anyone going around knocking down houses just because they are getting old. Oh every now and then a fire burns one down, or someone decides to massively remodel to the point that it is basically torn down, but for the most part Houses go well past that imaginary lifespan.
You leave out the place where the officer told him repeatedly not to touch the weapon but he kept reaching for it. But just keep dancing the racism card.
If you carry, there is one rule to keep in mind if you encounter the police. Do exactly what they say. If they say don't touch it, get your damn hands away from it. Best to keep your hands up on the steering wheel in plain sight. If you need to grab anything explain verbally what you are going to do before doing it. If your hand has to go anywhere near the gun, tell the officer, let him acknowledge it, and then move slowly narrating your every movement. It shouldn't have to be this way, but as certain movements (BLM) have resulted in officers across the nation being targeted and assassinated just for wearing a uniform our police are reasonably jumpy these days. So it behooves the law abiding armed citizen to do everything correct.
Sadly this individual did not. His actions caused reasonable alarm, and he paid for not obeying the officer's instructions to not touch his firearm. Racism had nothing to do with it.
Security by obscurity is not hardening. The only reason they don't see nearly as many attacks is because the install base is so much smaller. It's not an advantageous use of time to go after OSX or Linux, as opposed to Windows based on the installed user base alone.
Modify one point: the fridge is just new enough to possibly not have Freon. Manufacture was banned in 2010, but existing stores were allowed to be used up, so it might still be using it.
Because computer hardware changes. That 15 year old Fridge uses a lot more electricity than a newer model will. It uses banned refrigerants and is a hazard to the environment if they are not properly bled off at disposal. That nine year old smart phone is not a smart phone by today's standard. It's an obsolete piece of crap, yes it can still make phone calls but is about to lose a major portion of the networks it can access as the 2g systems are shutting down. That TV has lousy resolution and gobbles far more energy than today's TV's, but yes it still works because other than the change from analogue to digital the basic functions have not changed. Lamps are an electric circuit with a resistor that glows. The technology behind a lamp is well over a century, bulbs have changed but the way a lamp works has not. A lawnmower is similarly a technology that is over a century old. It's a basic four stroke Internal combustion engine.
Citing items based on far simpler technology that does not change every month, with computers is idiotic and you know it. The only example you gave even close to matching is the Smartphone. Nine years old would put it about the age of the Samsung Galaxy. Maybe a Galaxy 2. I have a Galaxy 2 I use as a game device for my kids on rare occasions, but it's storage is so limited that I can only put few games on it as the many apps I used to run on it have expanded and bloated. It was primarily a 3G device that roamed on 2g. Those 2G networks are about to go away like Analogue networks did. So you'll still have coverage in most metro areas but step into the sticks and you will have no signal.
Times change, technology advances. And some times a manufacturer has to cut off older technology.
Enforced diversity? Han is White, Lando is Black. It's only enforced because that's the story as established way back in 1981. The roles were established back before Hollywood was enforcing diversity. I hate enforced diversity in media as well. But stop trying to blame something that isn't an issue here. The characters are as established long ago.
But unlike IE where OEM's where forced to keep other browsers off the initial desktop while IE was prominently placed on every Windows desktop. Most computers come with the preinstalled browsers pointing to google's competitors. Similarly most ISP's try to get you to point your browser to other search engines as do many apps on install. In fact except for when you install Chrome you have to specifically choose to change your default to Google.
Google does not have a monopoly, there are several very capable alternatives.
Explain how a Jr, Senator of the minority party caused a shut-down.
Answer he didn't, neither did Utah's Mike Lee. In fact the actual blame for the shut-down if it can be assigned to any one person would be to Sen Harry Reid (D), the Senate Majority leader at the time. He refused to let any house budget bill he didn't like even be debated. Yes the House's first budget, demanding total recall of the ACA was too extreme. But that's negotiating, you start out asking for everything knowing that you'll compromise. The House then did compromise, passing multiple replacement budgets gradually diminishing their demands, Reid refused to let any of them be debated let alone voted on. He forced the shutdown and maintained it until the house leadership caved in.
Cruz and Lee had NOTHING to do with any of that process. They had zero say in any of the Budget bills passed by the House, and zero say in what Reid let onto the floor of the Senate for debate.
Guess who the real cancer on efficiency is. it's not the Republicans.
Not a change, get rid of the Electoral college and a few big cities run the nation. Most of said cities being deeply in debt, with uncontrolled crime (despite ever more draconian gun laws).
The fact is the Electoral college worked exactly as it was supposed to. But if we did not have the Electoral college Trump would have campaigned differently and likely would have still pulled out a win. He knew CA and NY were automatic losses, so he didn't spend much time campaigning in those states (but he didn't totally ignore them). Meanwhile Clinton ignored several smaller states that had previously voted Democrat, and she lost in those states. Not visiting Wisconsin and other states hurt her and cost her those states. Trump campaigned to match the rules of the game and won the only popular vote that mattered; he won the popular vote in 30 different states earning those Electoral college votes, to Hillary winning 20 states (and DC). Thus he won more electoral college votes. The overall vote does not matter because even though we all vote on the same day we are not voting in a single election but in 51 elections (50 states plus DC).
The EC is not a static body as you seem to think with your comment that the EC should have stepped in. The Electors of each State are appointed by and from the Party that wins the election in that state. Thus the EC will represent the President. Except for the occasional faithless elector, of which there were more Democrat electors who chose to be faithless than Republican Electors. Funny the losing candidate was so bad that she had more electors refusing to vote for her than the Boorish and widely disliked President did.
I suggest you study our system a little better, you'll find out that it worked exactly as designed, ensuring a broad nationwide support for the President, not just a few High population centers. And there is no need at all to eliminate or modify it at all.
It doesn't take a truck to ram into a crowd at speed. The surprising thing is how seldom this is used. Mass murder is also easier with explosives which can be manufactured at home, pressure cookers are one method, with a little planning a Ryder rental truck was used to kill 168 people 22 years ago. Far more effective than any firearm attack.
Please cite the US Mass shooting with more than 130 dead. You can't, the 49 at the club in Orlando a year ago is the US record.
The GP said mass shooting not terrorist attacks. Thanks to 9/11 nobody comes close to the US, but this is mass shooting events, terrorist or otherwise.
Otherwise you are right, prior to today there have been two mass shootings in the US in the last 50 years that were not in gun-free zones. This is the third.
That would equal IP infringement on VW (The various iterations of the Bug) and Ford (90's Ford Escort and Taurus sedans where everything was an oval) and other designs of the past .
Oh, but Apple would somehow try to claim prior art and sue.
No, he was joking, based on the assumption that the Russians had previously hacked the DNC and several others associated with the Democratic party leadership and thus most likely Hillary's server as well (years before back when she was Sec state and running the unsecure server), and thus they would likely have hoovered up the 30,000 missing emails she had deleted after her term as Sec State ended. Thus he made a Joke (a non-serious statement designed to elicit laughter) about asking the Russians if they had the missing emails. It was a joke, in the context it was clearly a joke, and only an idiot bound an determined to make it something else would consider that off the cuff statement anything but a joke.
but keep trying to claim it was a serious statement.
Nothing suddenly about it. Oh eventually most students pay the taxpayers back but very few students (or their families) are paying their own way, Grants, scholarships and Tax Deferred Student Loans are paying for the education. The loans are the biggest source of payment and they allow schools to charge ever increasing tuitions, knowing that the students will just take out more and bigger loans without care about how they are going to pay for them. (Then they spend the next twenty years griping about paying off the loans they took out to cover their education and their party trips to FLA for spring Break).
Personal responsibility or any care about the content of the "Education" received is long since lost. As long as they get their magic diploma and don't get offended at all they are happy to rack up the loans to pay off later.
Slashdot Mirror
And that might block the first EO because he did put in the exception for religious minorities suffering persecution in those countries, which by interpretation then turns it into a ban on Muslims from the six nations. But the second one eliminated any reference to religion, It's a flat ban on the immigrants from those six nations, no first amendment issues involved.
Doesn't matter, This still needs to be fought, as the law clearly gives the President this authority but lower courts have decided to take his irrelevant campaign speeches as somehow redefining the very specific and limited text of his Executive Orders, and then implemented Nationwide bans on implementation. Normally when one of the Circuit courts acts that ruling stands for that Circuit, not for the nation as a whole. This was seen in the gay marriage battle where it wasn't until one of the cases reached the Supreme Court that it achieved nationwide impact.
Thus the over-reach by the lower courts must be addressed, or we actually have a constitutional issue.
The appeals courts exceeded jurisprudence in citing his campaign speeches as some how changing the clear language of the Executive orders. What he said as a candidate during a campaign cannot be taken as indicating his intent once elected when the wording of executive orders issued is clear in it's limitations and specifics. The first ban did have a problem in the exception it provided for persecuted religious minorities from those nations made it a defacto ban on the religion from those countries.
But the second ban removed that exception, making it a blanket ban on citizens from those countries regardless of faith.
Bad driving existed before and is caused by things other than cell phones.
Car gets a flat? It recognizes the tire deflating long before a human driver would and starts breaking, and reports the problem to the other cars which also start slowing and maneuvering to let it over to the shoulder safely.
Object in road, assuming the object just barely appeared (out of the back of a pickup). The car hits the object it didn't have time to avoid, but immediately reports the object and the imminent impact. The other cars begin slowing and transitioning to other lanes. If the car has a little more time, it's sensors detect the previously unreported object, determines what needs to be done to avoid it and does so, while reporting the object to the rest of the nearby traffic so those vehicles and following vehicles can also safely avoid the obstacle
Pedestrian. Again the Car either detects them in time to avoid the impact and reports the moving location of the ped in real time so following cars can also try to avoid it. If not it reports the impact, as it is still stopping trying to avoid it. The other cars adjust their speed down, and maneuver both to avoid the Pedestrian/body and the car that hit it, which has stopped in place to preserve the accident scene.
Wildlife ditto human.
-Countless others ditto.
A video from Google I saw a few months ago had a prime example of how well this could work with cars that are talking. The Google-car (G-Car) detected a bicyclist coming from the left while it was stopped at an intersection. The light changed and the bike should have stopped but it did not and rolled through the intersection as the G-car and other traffic started to move. The human driver of the G-car could not see the bike due to a larger car in the left lane, whose driver should have been able to clearly see the approaching bike.
What happened? The Gcar had seen the bike, identified it as a potential risk before the bike even reached the intersection and then flagged it as a definite risk when it failed to stop and thus the G-Car did not start moving. The car to the left started rolling and then suddenly stopped as it's driver slammed on the brakes and the bike swerved and managed to miss it. The G-Car hadn't moved and there was no risk of impact. Now if those cars were talking, none of the traffic would have started rolling at all when the bike was identified as not stopping even though it no longer had right of way due to the light change. And had it been hit, the following cars would have been notified of the crash and resulting lane closures. (The Bike was flying, had it hit the non-google car the rider would likely have landed in the road in front of the G-Car.)
Individual sensors and computers are great, but inter-vehicle communications will actually make it even easier to deal with the situations you proposed as each car isn't having to react anew to the threat, but the incident is reported back up the road allowing for all traffic to adjust, to clear lanes well in advance allowing for smoother flow of traffic around the incident.
The magazines use clips, not the firearms themselves. Your pictures do not prove the prior poster wrong.
Introverts like myself would disagree with your opinion on Human being the best interface. I prefer to punch my order into the Kiosk at my local McD's. The only human interaction I have to suffer through is when the employee brings the tray to my table. And I like it that way. No having to repeat my order three or four times to make sure they heard and understood it in a noisy restaurant with English as a second language store employees. No having to try to dodge or waive off upsells. No having to make small talk. I order my food and go watch my kids play while I read a book. Employee interaction is extremely minimal and that's the way I like it.
Odds are they get the sandwich served to you just as quickly. As soon as they hit Big Mac on the register the "cooks" start assembling one. At most you might be saving yourself 15 seconds, but probably not because you took the time to ask if they had one ready and then chose something else. When you say McChicken, hopefully they've got one ready or already in the fryer or you will be waiting longer.
Your biggest wait item is going to be anything that goes in the fryer if not already ready (the Chicken in a McChicken), or is in constant high demand (Fries).
First, who do you think investors are? Not all are the filthy rich who would never step inside a fast food joint.
Second. These Kiosks are very popular at my local McDonalds. The counter gets a good deal of business. But rather than standing in line for the one register, I am able to go to one of the four kiosks, let my kids pick their meals, make my order then we go out to the Play-area and the kids play until the order is brought to us. Best of all, the orders are as we requested, no more mistakes due to language difficulties of the employees.
Third. We go to sit down restaurants for the better food and some service, we go to fast food joints for food, served fast with minimal fuss.
Funny about that average life expectancy claim. I have yet to see anyone going around knocking down houses just because they are getting old. Oh every now and then a fire burns one down, or someone decides to massively remodel to the point that it is basically torn down, but for the most part Houses go well past that imaginary lifespan.
That citation says nothing to refute the point that neither DHS nor any domestic LEA has sent a single person to Gitmo.
You leave out the place where the officer told him repeatedly not to touch the weapon but he kept reaching for it. But just keep dancing the racism card.
If you carry, there is one rule to keep in mind if you encounter the police. Do exactly what they say. If they say don't touch it, get your damn hands away from it. Best to keep your hands up on the steering wheel in plain sight. If you need to grab anything explain verbally what you are going to do before doing it. If your hand has to go anywhere near the gun, tell the officer, let him acknowledge it, and then move slowly narrating your every movement. It shouldn't have to be this way, but as certain movements (BLM) have resulted in officers across the nation being targeted and assassinated just for wearing a uniform our police are reasonably jumpy these days. So it behooves the law abiding armed citizen to do everything correct.
Sadly this individual did not. His actions caused reasonable alarm, and he paid for not obeying the officer's instructions to not touch his firearm. Racism had nothing to do with it.
Security by obscurity is not hardening. The only reason they don't see nearly as many attacks is because the install base is so much smaller. It's not an advantageous use of time to go after OSX or Linux, as opposed to Windows based on the installed user base alone.
Modify one point: the fridge is just new enough to possibly not have Freon. Manufacture was banned in 2010, but existing stores were allowed to be used up, so it might still be using it.
Because computer hardware changes. That 15 year old Fridge uses a lot more electricity than a newer model will. It uses banned refrigerants and is a hazard to the environment if they are not properly bled off at disposal. That nine year old smart phone is not a smart phone by today's standard. It's an obsolete piece of crap, yes it can still make phone calls but is about to lose a major portion of the networks it can access as the 2g systems are shutting down. That TV has lousy resolution and gobbles far more energy than today's TV's, but yes it still works because other than the change from analogue to digital the basic functions have not changed. Lamps are an electric circuit with a resistor that glows. The technology behind a lamp is well over a century, bulbs have changed but the way a lamp works has not. A lawnmower is similarly a technology that is over a century old. It's a basic four stroke Internal combustion engine.
Citing items based on far simpler technology that does not change every month, with computers is idiotic and you know it. The only example you gave even close to matching is the Smartphone. Nine years old would put it about the age of the Samsung Galaxy. Maybe a Galaxy 2. I have a Galaxy 2 I use as a game device for my kids on rare occasions, but it's storage is so limited that I can only put few games on it as the many apps I used to run on it have expanded and bloated. It was primarily a 3G device that roamed on 2g. Those 2G networks are about to go away like Analogue networks did. So you'll still have coverage in most metro areas but step into the sticks and you will have no signal.
Times change, technology advances. And some times a manufacturer has to cut off older technology.
Enforced diversity? Han is White, Lando is Black. It's only enforced because that's the story as established way back in 1981. The roles were established back before Hollywood was enforcing diversity. I hate enforced diversity in media as well. But stop trying to blame something that isn't an issue here. The characters are as established long ago.
Are you saying that "EU" will now equal "money grubbing whores"? Because other "money grubbing whores" may not be part of the "EU".
But unlike IE where OEM's where forced to keep other browsers off the initial desktop while IE was prominently placed on every Windows desktop. Most computers come with the preinstalled browsers pointing to google's competitors. Similarly most ISP's try to get you to point your browser to other search engines as do many apps on install. In fact except for when you install Chrome you have to specifically choose to change your default to Google.
Google does not have a monopoly, there are several very capable alternatives.
Explain how a Jr, Senator of the minority party caused a shut-down.
Answer he didn't, neither did Utah's Mike Lee. In fact the actual blame for the shut-down if it can be assigned to any one person would be to Sen Harry Reid (D), the Senate Majority leader at the time. He refused to let any house budget bill he didn't like even be debated. Yes the House's first budget, demanding total recall of the ACA was too extreme. But that's negotiating, you start out asking for everything knowing that you'll compromise. The House then did compromise, passing multiple replacement budgets gradually diminishing their demands, Reid refused to let any of them be debated let alone voted on. He forced the shutdown and maintained it until the house leadership caved in.
Cruz and Lee had NOTHING to do with any of that process. They had zero say in any of the Budget bills passed by the House, and zero say in what Reid let onto the floor of the Senate for debate.
Guess who the real cancer on efficiency is. it's not the Republicans.
Not a change, get rid of the Electoral college and a few big cities run the nation. Most of said cities being deeply in debt, with uncontrolled crime (despite ever more draconian gun laws).
The fact is the Electoral college worked exactly as it was supposed to. But if we did not have the Electoral college Trump would have campaigned differently and likely would have still pulled out a win. He knew CA and NY were automatic losses, so he didn't spend much time campaigning in those states (but he didn't totally ignore them). Meanwhile Clinton ignored several smaller states that had previously voted Democrat, and she lost in those states. Not visiting Wisconsin and other states hurt her and cost her those states. Trump campaigned to match the rules of the game and won the only popular vote that mattered; he won the popular vote in 30 different states earning those Electoral college votes, to Hillary winning 20 states (and DC). Thus he won more electoral college votes. The overall vote does not matter because even though we all vote on the same day we are not voting in a single election but in 51 elections (50 states plus DC).
The EC is not a static body as you seem to think with your comment that the EC should have stepped in. The Electors of each State are appointed by and from the Party that wins the election in that state. Thus the EC will represent the President. Except for the occasional faithless elector, of which there were more Democrat electors who chose to be faithless than Republican Electors. Funny the losing candidate was so bad that she had more electors refusing to vote for her than the Boorish and widely disliked President did.
I suggest you study our system a little better, you'll find out that it worked exactly as designed, ensuring a broad nationwide support for the President, not just a few High population centers. And there is no need at all to eliminate or modify it at all.
It doesn't take a truck to ram into a crowd at speed. The surprising thing is how seldom this is used. Mass murder is also easier with explosives which can be manufactured at home, pressure cookers are one method, with a little planning a Ryder rental truck was used to kill 168 people 22 years ago. Far more effective than any firearm attack.
Please cite the US Mass shooting with more than 130 dead. You can't, the 49 at the club in Orlando a year ago is the US record.
The GP said mass shooting not terrorist attacks. Thanks to 9/11 nobody comes close to the US, but this is mass shooting events, terrorist or otherwise.
Otherwise you are right, prior to today there have been two mass shootings in the US in the last 50 years that were not in gun-free zones. This is the third.
That would equal IP infringement on VW (The various iterations of the Bug) and Ford (90's Ford Escort and Taurus sedans where everything was an oval) and other designs of the past .
Oh, but Apple would somehow try to claim prior art and sue.
No, he was joking, based on the assumption that the Russians had previously hacked the DNC and several others associated with the Democratic party leadership and thus most likely Hillary's server as well (years before back when she was Sec state and running the unsecure server), and thus they would likely have hoovered up the 30,000 missing emails she had deleted after her term as Sec State ended. Thus he made a Joke (a non-serious statement designed to elicit laughter) about asking the Russians if they had the missing emails. It was a joke, in the context it was clearly a joke, and only an idiot bound an determined to make it something else would consider that off the cuff statement anything but a joke.
but keep trying to claim it was a serious statement.
Nothing suddenly about it. Oh eventually most students pay the taxpayers back but very few students (or their families) are paying their own way, Grants, scholarships and Tax Deferred Student Loans are paying for the education. The loans are the biggest source of payment and they allow schools to charge ever increasing tuitions, knowing that the students will just take out more and bigger loans without care about how they are going to pay for them. (Then they spend the next twenty years griping about paying off the loans they took out to cover their education and their party trips to FLA for spring Break).
Personal responsibility or any care about the content of the "Education" received is long since lost. As long as they get their magic diploma and don't get offended at all they are happy to rack up the loans to pay off later.