Don't know what numbers you are looking at, but China has more than doubled its number of universities in the last 24 years and has an enrollment rate that is likely higher than in the U.S. Sure, the elite in China want to limit access to the "top" institutions, just like the elite in the U.S. want, too. But the overall quality of the average Chinese college has improved dramatically and as a system they educate way more students than in the U.S.

Define "quality"? I'd happily pit a randomly selected college grad from 2026 against a randomly selected college grad from 1986 (from the same major, and assuming we can time-warp back to 1986 so this isn't counting 40-odd years of additional life & work experience) in a knowledge and skills test; I'd put my money on the 2026 grad every time.

Facts are facts, sorry. You not liking them does not make them less true.

More than half of the undergraduate students graduating from my local public university have NO DEBT - none. Zero. A huge portion of the debt, when calculated for "national averages," is for students attending extremely expensive private institutions. Many public colleges remain an incredible financial bargain.

Yes, that's how facts work. See, for example: https://www.forbes.com/advisor...

Yes, like getting into medical school or law school, both of which are majority female?

While the wage premium does vary from major to major, there is not a major that I can think of where you'd make more money in that career field without a degree than you'd make with a degree. Even education, for example: Teachers (with a degree) make much more than paraprofessionals or facility maintenance (without a degree).

And the cost of rent in BH is more than double the national average, so even if you pay teachers double the salary they still won't be able to live in the same neighborhood as their schools or as their students.

That's exactly the problem - most school funding is determined locally, and when a large % of the children don't attend public school it is difficult to get voters to support funding increases for public schools. And if there's one thing I know about the wealthy it is this: they hate paying taxes.

That's true that was the perception in many places, but that perception was still just as wrong then as it is now. You could make the same argument around smoking. My teachers smoked like chimneys in the "teachers lounge", and the smoke often wafted through the hallways. It was "normal," but it wasn't healthy or safe. Guns are the same: owning a gun has always put you at a high risk of dying from a gun in comparison to non-gun owners; and guns in school increased the chance of accidental injuries or suicides or shootings at school.

It's not confusing at all. Trump and the Republican party want to control the Western Hemisphere. They want the U.S. to be in charge of everything that happens in the Western Hemisphere. In their view, the EU can control Western Europe, Russia can have Eastern Europe (and Russia), China gets the rest of Asia, Saudi Arabia & Israel get the Middle East, and [no one cares about Africa]. That Maduro 'did some bad stuff' is just an excuse to throw around power and get countries in the Western Hemisphere to fall in line with what Trump and the Republicans want. When you understand that, it's simple, really. What happened to Maduro is just an example of what *can happen to you too if you don't fall in line with what the U.S. wants.*

I am not sure there is good evidence that the current zero-tolerance rules that most school districts have in place for the presence of firearms on school district property (with certain exceptions in some states for law enforcement or trained SROs) have reduced the incidence of mass shootings or of gun violence or injuries on school property. But, I do know that, given the trauma with guns that many young people have experienced, seeing a gun, especially a rifle, casually in your high school hallway is enough to re-traumatize some students and really has no educational purpose or benefit. Such rules also give districts tools to use to prohibit use of firearms in threats or bullying, at least as it relates to their physical presence on school property.

Shooting clubs or teams can keep their equipment locked up at the shooting club. Hunters can likewise keep their guns at the hunting club or at home.

Yes, it would be great if we didn't live in a world where many young people have experienced gun trauma and people could carry guns around as if they were no big deal. But that's not the reality (and, in fact, guns have always been dangerous to the owner and those around them, even when held by "responsible" owners, so the notion that we could "return" to some mythical point in time when guns were safe is a fantasy because such time never existed).

"Thug culture" is code word for "black." It's a racist idea and not based in the reality that most mass shooters are white, and nearly all mass shooters are men (https://ammo.com/research/mass-shootings-by-shooters-race).

It would be much more accurate to say it is a men problem than a "thug" problem.

I would be more loyal if quality was more consistent by brand. Even some of the top brands, such as Hyatt, the hotel quality really varies greatly from location to location. So if I'm going to pay Hyatt prices, I want to expect good quality every time. Unfortunately, that's not the case with any of the brands so every new location requires reading lots of reviews, looking at maps and street views, etc. I stayed in one Hyatt Place, for example, where the pool had been shutdown for more than a year and the air conditioning unit for the lobby had been dripping water over the entrance for 6+ months. And it seemed like this was a long-term problem that the local owner had no interest in addressing.

It's fine to want loyalty from your customer, but you have to show some loyalty to the customer too by ensuring a good experience across the brand. Otherwise it's back to Expedia and scrolling through reviews and deals...

Sure, some of those titles sound appealing, but I am happy to wait until they show up cheaper either on streaming or a digital rental and I can watch at home, on my own couch, with my own popcorn, when I want, with as many bathroom breaks as I want, with no parking, driving, or annoying additional attendees who kick my seat or talk the whole time.

Yes, laws and law enforcement are a critical part of the system to decrease or even prevent mass shootings. Not the only thing, but an important thing. If cameras are a deterrent, then the privacy trade-off might be worthwhile in a public setting such as a school. I know when I'm driving and Siri points out a speed camera ahead, I do pay closer attention to my speed.

I am not sure there is good evidence of cameras as a deterrent for mass school shootings, though. Such shootings happen so infrequently (relative to the number of schools, that is) and most schools have cameras, so it's probably difficult to draw any clear connection between them.

Sort of, most districts have a mix of revenue streams (many states use income taxes to pay for a portion of the cost of public schools, for instance), and some communities pool money into a central pool and the distribute it back out again (to try to ensure districts in poor communities have enough to keep their schools functioning).

About 20% of the children (likely the richest 20% of families) in BH send their kids to private schools, so you can't really assume the BH schools are full of extremely wealthy children - the neighborhoods the district covers certainly are often wealthy, but lots of other people live there too, and the wealthy tend to send their kids to elite private schools, so it makes the funding proposition difficult (everyone hates property taxes!).

You mean like a musket-loading rifle? Hardly useful in a school shooting.

Some still do, although guns for sport is not as popular as it once was, and I doubt any of those teams "practice" on school grounds.

? What fantasy history are you looking at? The murder rate in the 1980s and 1990s was as high or higher than in the last three years (2021-2025).

Oh, now I understand. Blame on on black people. Got it.

You don't have that compulsion RIGHT NOW, but should you snap and have that compulsion tomorrow, well, you already have the gun.

Mass shootings are actually a very unlikely cause of death, and are even a very unlikely cause of death by gun. You're much more likely to die by suicide with a gun than be a victim in a mass shooting.

Which highlights that fact that having a gun in your home makes you MUCH more likely to die by gun violence.

The murder rate (with a gun) was actually just as high in 1992 as it was in 2024 (https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/03/05/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-us/). What do you mean, 'nobody was blowing anyone away'? In fact, for most of the 2000s, the murder rate by gun was MUCH lower than it was in the 1980s and 1990s. Now, the U.S. still had one of the highest gun murder rates in the world for high-income countries, a statistic the U.S. maintains today.

Suicides (with a gun) continue to skyrocket.

My advice: get rid of your gun before you hurt yourself with it.

Tell that to Australia who just had their first mass shooting with a fatality in three years (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_Australia); they have some of the most strict gun laws in the world.