In Quite a State
The argument behind this “Other Voices” piece in the News urging privatization of the U of M seems to be:
- The university doesn’t get that much money from that state anyway.
- Taxpayers would save money, since the university gets a LOT of money from the state.
- The university wouldn’t have to worry about how to plan around the state budget, since it would know it’s not getting anything.
The authors seem to think that going private would better enable the U to compete with private institutions. Is there any basis for this?
If there is any basis for it, they’re certainly not making a very good case of it in this article…
posted by Murph on March 1st, 2004 at 12:37 amThe only goodpoint is that, since U-M is slosly privatizing, to go whole hog might be the less painful way to do it and still maintain institutional quality.
posted by Lucky Jackson on March 1st, 2004 at 8:57 amThe problem, for both the state of Michigan and for higher education in Michigan, is that U-M is in Ann Arbor. Let me put forth two exercises in alternate history:
1. U-M stayed in Detroit. The presence of a top research university helped to kep white flight from being as terrible as it would have otherwise been, and, with the eighties, tech spinoffs helped to disersify the economy of the Detroit area. Detroit hip-hop and techno spet the nation in the nineties, with Seattle grunge running a close second.
2. U-M like other slagship universities, relocated at the state capitol, in Lansing. Combined with the state government, Lansing became Michigan’s definitive “second city” much like Madison, Austin and Columbus.
The problem wiht U-M in Ann arbor is simply that there was no place to grow. Ann Arbor is like Boulder (except that the cost of living is lower in Boulder.)
posted by Lucky Jackson on March 1st, 2004 at 9:16 amalternative history;
UM never comes to ann arbor, but all you people here on AAiO somehow manage to anyhow. You have a blog you all visit all AnnArborIsUnderated, and all complain that somehow your wonderful ann arbor is forgoten by the rest of the world. Ann Arbor would likely look more like Brighton and Ypsi would have died off when Michigan ave got replaced by the highways.
This is a combo response to this thread and the Whole Foods thing. The complaints that there is nothing to do in ann arbor is just ludicrous, you just need to admit to being anti-social losers. Please leave ann arbor if its so bad!!
posted by JaV on March 1st, 2004 at 11:37 amFirst of all, could somebody explain to me how UM is “slowly going private?” I tought the largest UM funding sources were the state of MI, tuition, and the NIH, which is also public money (although public money that is competitively available to all). UM is one of Michigan’s greatest assets and public disinvestment would hurt this state in ways that people are too blind or too stupid to see.
Second, I am sick of people telling us/me to “put up or shut up” about the griping about Ann Arbor that goes on here. AAIO was kind enough to put together this blog for those of us with dissatisfactions. If you *like* it here and feel as though it is your personal calling to defend Ann Arbor’s reputation then I suggest you bugger off: quit coming around here and leave the rest of us who don’t give a damn in peace.
Third, in re our previous drawn out convo about cool national acts never coming to Ann Arbor, THERE’S ONE COMING! Don Caballero is playing Bling Pig on Friday. Anybody interested in pre-show PBRs down in the 8-Ball?
posted by Alex on March 1st, 2004 at 11:47 amUm, JaV (if that is your real name), this is a site for making fun of AA, periodic discussion of local politics, and then making more fun of AA. This is intended to be fun and not taken seriously - I personally don’t like living here, but this site adds a touch of humor to the experience that makes it bearable. If you’re perfectly happy with your life in Ann Arbor I don’t quite understand why you give a shit what others think of it. Frankly your defensiveness suggests that, indeed, many people here do need more of a life than they have.
posted by Nick on March 1st, 2004 at 11:50 amI sympathize with the authors of this article, but complete “privatization” would remove U-M from public scrutiny, and that would be very bad.
Michigan taxpayers have already made the “investment,” through 150 years of building and contributions, to have earned Michigan’s compliance with both FOIA and the Michigan Constitution (imagine the “speech codes”
a non-governmental University would implement; and that doesn’t even touch on issues like race preferences).
I would favor **defunding** the university; a thought that fits directly into the Michigan Constitution’s “autonomy” provisions. If it is to be autonomous from the legislature, then there should be no need for the legislature to appropriate money. But I wouldn’t eliminate its Constitutional status. Defunding the university; but allow them do whatever they want with tuition and in-state v. out-of-state student mix; would be a fair exchange.
In the alternative, I have a better one for the Mackinac Center wonks. Create a statewide system of higher education vouchers and credits that are completely portable within state universities.
Right now, the “deal” U-M has made is that it provides undergraduate tuition at a rate of about $12,000 less per student to in-state students; in exchange for that $160 million direct legislative appropriate. It gets the money however regardless of what schools individual students choose. I say take the 12K per student and give it directly to the students and let them choose the best value. Can anyone say competition?
12K times 14,000 students equals the same
money, but now universities would compete in a market that would have pricing reflecting the various “overhead” rates, quality of education, etc. Many students would still go to U-M because of its quality, but at the margin for the first couple of years, some would choose MSU, WSU, etc.
U-Michigan would eventually adapt by reducing overhead (or they could go find more out-of-state students as well). Everyone would save! My guess is that the same bang for the buck could be obtained with half the budget; and the money could balance the budget and be used to equalize up K-12 education; where it is needed.
Part of the proposal entails allowing as many out-of-state students that hit U-Mich’s standards to come to Michigan; something we’ve capped. More talent in Michigan and immigration of the “tech” and other sectors is what we want, isn’t it?
I’ve outlined this proposal before.
posted by Chetly Zarko on March 1st, 2004 at 11:59 amBut there is no place for the techies to go once they ahve graduated, other than Austin. (Does anyo0ne remember when Seattle was cool? Whatever happened to that?) That’s why U-M should have been in Lansing or Detroit.
posted by Lucky Jackson on March 1st, 2004 at 12:33 pmI totally agree with you, JaV (Just A Voice?). Because this is the only world with life, and the only world with God, this must be the best of all possible worlds. Because it’s the best of all possible worlds, Ann Arbor has to be the best of all possible Ann Arbors. We should be happy just to live somewhere that’s the best, period. Because if we’re not, well, then, we’re implying that Ann Arbor could be better. And if Ann Arbor could be better, this wouldn’t be the best of all possible worlds. If this isn’t the best of all possible worlds, there’s a world somewhere that’s better. Once you can find that other world, you’ll have proven that Ann Arbor can be improved!
posted by js on March 1st, 2004 at 3:28 pmNext chapter: The Jesuits of Paraguay.
Hey, I had to beg the Pig to agree to that Don Caballero show. (Of course I got my band to open for the trouble).
Just us little old Ypsipanties tryin’ to help out Tree Town’s scene.
posted by Leighton on March 1st, 2004 at 6:12 pmLeighton why didn’t you just have these guys play in ypsi at your place ?
posted by Dan on March 1st, 2004 at 7:44 pmI agree with Chetly: privatization would remove the U-M from public scrutiny. In the course of my job I call dozens of U-M departments every month, and I note that the Life Sciences bunch is a tad close-mouthed about events going on over there…they seem to make much more of a point that certain talks or seminars (that in other departments would be ordinary brown-bag talks &c.) are open to faculty and grad students ONLY. My impression, fair or not, is that there’s a certain amount of belief over there that we unwashed hordes would misinterpret the biotech goings-on as a bunch of untested and possibly very dangerous genetic tinkering that we common folk are better off not knowing too much about.
posted by Laura on March 1st, 2004 at 11:23 pmThanks Leighton, I appreciate your efforts. Therefore I will make sure to be there for the opening bands
posted by Alex on March 2nd, 2004 at 7:07 amBiotech is still mad that the villagers burned Frankenstein’s monster.
posted by js on March 2nd, 2004 at 8:41 amjs
Bands as big as Don Cab sometimes can’t fit their crowd into the ELbow Room. (That opening band BTW, starts at 9:30 now - ah, Glori5 always gets shafted).
I’ll often send bigger shows over to the Pig (Vin Bondies). And the Pig sends shows over to the Elbow (Jucifer). You’d think we’d be at each other’s throats fighting over bands, but it’s one of the few AA/ Ypsi symbiotic cultural relationships!
There’s something to do in both towns as a result.
posted by Leighton on March 2nd, 2004 at 4:56 pmWell, whoever is promoting Don Caballero put up fliers on University light-poles all over the Diag this afternoon. Guess who gets to take them all down tomorrow morning in a thunderstorm?
posted by Brandon on March 4th, 2004 at 6:52 pmSomeone actually promoted that show?
There was a line around the corner before 9…word of mouth ?
posted by Leighton on March 8th, 2004 at 4:46 pmconsigliery ?
posted by Do you like anything from it: gay picture gay video gay movie gay site gay fucking gay cum gay anal gay gallery gay hardcore gay cock gay xxx? I don't... on April 9th, 2004 at 9:39 am