"There is a huge amount of waste and fraud."

You are right. There is. But it's a private college -- and likely suffer far less from this than a public university. And that's not the ONLY reason. What happened between then and now? Oh yeah! Government funded student loans and government admission requirements! Think that didn't drive up the price?

"It really is a mystery."

Not so much. When the market was more "free", tuition at Harvard was cheaper (per your example). Toss in government involvement (ease of student loans, regulate admissions standards for example) and get a FLOOD of applicants they can't POSSIBLY take who can ALL FIND the money SOMEWHERE -- the price will go up. It's not so mysterious. Not saying that SOME government regulation isn't in order -- but what was implemented has made the cost of a college education terribly expensive.

"If the government REALLY "got in the middle", this wouldn't be a problem in the first place since public colleges and universities would be dirt cheap or even free, as they are in most other OECD countries."

Because buildings are free. Because teachers work for free. Because libraries are free...

It's really nice these "OCED countries" can afford such things -- since most of them have their military security supplemented by US tax dollars either directly, or indirectly.

Or maybe the "alarmists" will attack the facilities -- PRETENDING to be the "anti-GW" people!

TIN FOIL HAT FOR YOU!

"Perhaps the GOP-dominated Congress will soon suggest"...

Congress has been DNC dominated from what? 2008 until 2010? STRONGLY dominated? And the GOP had slight majorities before then... This report is from 2007 with just a recent update...

Your dig at the GOP just doesn't sound reasonable...

This is the perfect tin-foil-hat scenario!

The "Global Warming Alarmists" will say it's a plot to prevent the study of of anthropogenic climate change by the "Deniers" and prove just how bad it is.

And the "Deniers" will say it's a plot to keep the "Alarmists" evil lie from coming to light.

Pass the popcorn!

"but that in no way makes them 'work better'. =) "

I don't know... just off the top of my head, I'd say it keeps the cards from shaking (or maybe a combination of heat/cooling related expansion/contraction of the metal on the contacts) and possibly losing a connection to the motherboard over time -- or during an earthquake for example. Or maybe just a big truck going down the street one too many times.

I'd feel a lot more "warm" and "fuzzy" knowing cards are not only attached to the motherboard, but stabilized by the chassis.

I'd think that qualifies as 'works better'...

"We want to force them to comply with the will of the majority. And frankly, most of the laws of society exists to force people who lack empathy and benevolence to comply under penalty of imprisonment."

Are you talking about the US? Because that is nearly the opposite of what our founders intended.

You may want to look up "liberty" and what it meant to our founders...

"Life develops easily with the right requirements, we know this from quite a lot of evidence. We even recreated genesis by accident, twice, and once on purpose just recently."

Really? Can you provide a link? I've not heard this. I've heard that we've created environments SIMILAR to early earth -- and basic proteins developed... the BUILDING BLOCKS of life. But I haven't heard anything about creating life.

Unless you are talking about XNA research...

"I actually agree with this one. Just getting a normal mail thats not printed is so rare these days, that it usually means its always read."

Unless it's handwritten. Maybe if it's printed clearly this is true. I think reading and writing cursive is a dying art. My kids can barely read the letters my mother sends them because it's in cursive.

I have kids -- and I *DO* vaccinate them.

I, however, have suffered massive reactions to vaccines in the past and now refuse them. The worst was a HepC which knocked me on my arse for a month. Never finished the full course of that vaccine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYKQJ4-N7LI

Want another?

Well, technically, it would be theft. And, well, technically, larceny *IS* a type of theft.

Hmmm, lets check wikipedia under elements of larceny:

"The offender must have taken the property with the intent to steal it"

Sounds like theft. Sounds like stealing. Sounds like you are wrong.

Claiming a lost item is "discarded" is some pretty funny "thinkspeak", don't you think?

I'd suggest you look up what can be considered theft and then re-evaluate your statement.

I cannot speak of the 49 other states in the US, but I'm familiar with the statutes of CA -- and I can tell you that it *IS* stealing. Shall I waste my time looking up the exact statutes or will you just accept you are wrong?

Thought I'd also add this:

If someone's living on $17000 somehow -- the $25000 can live without $21 a month. If someone's living on $12000, the $17000 can live without the extra $14 per day. Etc. When someone says "fair share", I cringe people so many pay zero. Paying zero is not fair. My complete tax burden every year is around 40%-50% (between state, local, property, and fed) of my yearly income. I become REALLY testy when it approaches and passes 50%.

I know exactly how much every dollar I have means to me -- and I've crawled up from literally nothing to what I have now (which isn't anything special).

No. You create a system that forces them to be dependent -- then you take THAT away and they'll come for your heads. When someone votes for someone who supports Federal Program "X" -- yet pays no Federal taxes, he has no incentive to question if "X" is REALLY needed and how it will get funded.

What you have here is a system where people, as you say, are on public assistance more and more. And the money to pay for it is getting less and less. Seriously, if you confiscate ALL wealth in the US, do you REALLY think that would solve the problem? You;ll buy yourself an extra few years -- and devastate the economy doing it. Remember -- the net worth of the 400 wealthiest people in the US adds up to ~$1 trillion. That would BARELY pay for one year of overspending (if we did about 200 million in cuts). Good luck next year grabbing the next 400's wealth...it'll be a small FRACTION of that.