|
Comments:
Eric - 2004-05-15 23:42:59 That is a very low national % to have bachelor's degrees! I'm also very surprised by MI's even lower rate given the number of prestigious schools in this state. It appears that students are getting their degrees then getting the F out. Too bad.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-05-17 14:12:23 You're right Tuesday--I hadn't thought of it from that angle but the state does indeed graduate thousands of students a year...* * * * * * * * * * * * Brandon - 2004-05-17 15:29:44 As a recent UM Bachelor's-earner, I've gotta say that all of the out-of-state students I knew are now out of Michigan, as are the majority of in-staters. Romantic ties and inertia ain't gonna cut it.* * * * * * * * * * * * Brandon - 2004-05-17 15:30:15 As a recent UM Bachelor's-earner, I've gotta say that all of the out-of-state students I knew are now out of Michigan, as are the majority of in-staters. Romantic ties and inertia ain't gonna cut it.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-05-17 15:39:56 That is disconcerting information, Brandon...if the majority of instaters are also leaving the state, Michigan is out of luck. I don't know how many people are moving here, though.* * * * * * * * * * * * Murph - 2004-05-17 20:02:54 That's Jenny's explicit motivation for the whole "cool cities" thing, though, isn't it? Michigan is educating a good share of the country's economic drivers, but we're not keeping them. My favored strategy would be to charge all college students the out-of-state tuition rate, but offer all of them (regardless of prior residence) grants to bring them down to in-state levels, assuming they stick around for x years after graduation. You leave the state, you pay back the grants (which means that job you're leaving for better be *good*). Maybe pro-rate it. This would be exactly the opposite rationale for an "in-state tuition" rate than is currently used. Rather than, "your parents have paid for it in taxes, so we'll go ahead and give it back to you", it's "this is a loan that you'll pay back either directly or through the taxes you'll pay over your next 15 years as a Michigan resident." * * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-05-17 21:06:23 I think that is a creative idea, Murph. But 15 years, in the prime of one's life, is a long time!--and might turn people off due to the heavy commitment. Can I voice a heretical statement here? Perhaps it's not all bad that the MI population is dwindling. I mean, yes, we lose money for public services. But--it may mean less sprawl, more chance of preserving habitats, and more chance of me eventually buying a place in the country someday to raise chickens without being surrounded by McMansions.* * * * * * * * * * * * Murph - 2004-05-18 00:30:14 That's Jenny's explicit motivation for the whole "cool cities" thing, though, isn't it? Michigan is educating a good share of the country's economic drivers, but we're not keeping them. My favored strategy would be to charge all college students the out-of-state tuition rate, but offer all of them (regardless of prior residence) grants to bring them down to in-state levels, assuming they stick around for x years after graduation. You leave the state, you pay back the grants (which means that job you're leaving for better be *good*). Maybe pro-rate it. This would be exactly the opposite rationale for an "in-state tuition" rate than is currently used. Rather than, "your parents have paid for it in taxes, so we'll go ahead and give it back to you", it's "this is a loan that you'll pay back either directly or through the taxes you'll pay over your next 15 years as a Michigan resident." * * * * * * * * * * * * Murph - 2004-05-18 10:23:42 Doh, double-post. Silly browser. I don't think that's a heretical statement, necessarily, but I think that a population reduction which occurs through college educated folks skipping town is perhaps not the best way to go. I'd rather encourage a broader cross-section to migrate.* * * * * * * * * * * * Larry Kestenbaum - 2004-05-18 12:41:29 25% is a new high for the proportion of college graduates in the U.S. Not so long ago, it was hovering around 17%. People who live in an ivory-tower area like Washtenaw County are always incredulous to hear these numbers. But out in the real middle of America (socioceonomically if not geographically), most people never get to college.* * * * * * * * * * * * Larry Kestenbaum - 2004-05-18 12:45:31 And check out THIS ranking at the county level. There are more than three thousand counties in the United States. Washtenaw County ranks TENTH in the whole country with its 47.0% college graduates.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-05-18 12:53:35Wow to that second statistic! thanks Larry.* * * * * * * * * * * * Brandon - 2004-05-18 17:27:54 Our population growth isn't the main driver of sprawl in this state-- we are rather low-growth compared to many. It's that the people already here, plus the few new ones, are taking up more land per capita. They're leaving the old cities for big lots in suburbia. I think I heard a statistic that we are using land at a rate 8 times the population growth in MI (anyone back me up?). It's not as much the number of people, but where/how they are living that needs to be addressed.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-05-18 18:05:08 Good point--and a chilling statistic--8 times the population growth?! Man, we need more people moving into preexisting homes (pats self on back) or cohousing-minded folks.* * * * * * * * * * * * Eric - 2004-05-18 20:41:50 Brandon's correct, but his information comes from a 1997 report delivered to the EPA, so that rate could be decreasing by now. The report mentioned that places in Northern MI (like Traverse City) were expanding into farm land the fastest.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-05-18 20:57:09 Really? I thought relatively trendy Traverse City was expanding with residents, not farmland.* * * * * * * * * * * * Eric - 2004-05-18 22:31:33 Farm land versus farmland? Regardless, I was hoping to get across that Traverse City and Northern MI are consuming farm land the quickest and turning said farmlands into suburbia.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-05-18 22:57:38 I thought that trend was confined to SE MI.* * * * * * * * * * * * Brandon - 2004-05-19 17:08:57 The irony of NW Michigan-- everyone is moving up there for the natural beauty and making it ugly in the process. The GR-Holland-Muskegon area is sprawling like mad, also-- the triangle between the freeways connecting them, one of the state's richest farming areas, will be nothing but sprawl in no time unless something is done... especially if MDOT puts that US-31 bypass freeway through the middle of Ottawa County as planned.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-05-20 08:30:12 I hadn't realized that was a sprawl hotspot too. I can hardly believe my eyes when I visit my folks in Lambertville, once a small town in a largely rural township now packed with developments. Wouldn't it be nice if MI passed a law that people may only move into preexisting homes? Yeah, I know.* * * * * * * * * * * * add your comment: |