According to the state salary database, there are about 3 dozen UW employees who make more than $500,000 a year in 2022 (the most recent year published). A few are administrative staff, many are coaches for sports (which is very dumb), and a few are professors.
Their total salaries sum to $32 million, which is a lot. But when you divide that across the total number of students, it comes out to about $580 per student per year. So even if you stopped paying these people, tuition would only go down about 5%.
That's assuming that these staff members don't bring any value, which is not a good assumption. Many of these highly paid people would be highly compensated in this private sector--for example the manager of UW's investments makes $1 million per year--so rightly or wrongly, the university must pay very high to retain them.
As I said before, the university has received $400 million less from the state (adjusted for inflation) today than it did in the 1980s. The expense of highly paid staff is a drop in the bucket compared to the drop in state funding.
The last outbreak was not contained. Prior to 2022, there was no sustained transmission outside of central Africa. The 2022 outbreak saw significant transmission all over the world. There were 30,000 confirmed cases and 42 deaths in the US alone.
Just because something isn't extremely contagious right now doesn't mean it can't become a pandemic. A virus can will mutate, it can go unnoticed, etc. As it stands, mpox can be transmitted by respiratory droplets.
Smallpox was a related virus. It too was transmissible through close contact with other people. It killed 300 million people in the 20th century. While vaccination is likely going to prevent mpox from becoming anywhere close to that deadly, I'd rather not play with fire. Don't ignore a nasty virus.
In 1986, my mom paid $386 ($1,106 in 2024) in tuition for a quarter at the University of Washington. In 2015, I paid around $3,700 ($4902 in 2024) for a quarter at UW.
In 1986, UW got $440 million dollars from the state. That's $1.2 billion in 2024. In 2015, UW got $644 million from the state. That's $0.8 billion today.
It's hard to find enrollment data for some reason, but there were less than 30,000 students at UW in the late 80s. In 2015, that figure was closer to 55,000.
Using inflation adjusted figures, the state was contributing $41,000 per student in 1986 compared to $14,500 in 2015. Adding in yearly tuition, the total cost was $44,700 in 1986. In 2015, that's $29,300 per student.
Importantly, this analysis leaves out private contributions to the university's budget which makes up a large portion of its funds. However, those funds are usually restricted in how they can be spent.
Most of the buildings on UW's campus were built in the 50s or 60s. There were some that were from the 20s and 30s or older. Forget cosmetics, most of those need renovations just to remain usable. There were thousands of good, usable computers in the libraries that were always in use. Keeping that fleet running is an expense that just wasn't around 30+ years ago. Labs equipment has gotten better and more expensive. I used a $100,000 high speed camera when I was in school. My mom sure didn't have access to that.
Based on my quick, back of the envelope math, education has not gotten 3 to 4 times more expensive, but the state has been contributing less and less money to fund it.
Second, the only reason for the massive amounts of student debt is due to universities massively inflating the cost of an education to milk the government of their federal student loans.
I can't speak for everywhere, but that's not true for my alma mater. Tuition has been rising because of a lack of state funding. 20 years ago, state funds made up 2/3 of the University budget. Now it's 1/3. The difference has to come from somewhere.
Go to an in-state school. Prices are lower. Go to a community college to take your desired program's prerequisites and transfer to a state university. Or just finish up a degree at a community college.
Good to know, thank you! I'll have to look closer when I visit a forum next.
Reddit does shitty stuff, but at least I'm able to find stuff on there. Why Discord took off as a medium to replace forums is beyond me. It's not easily searchable, and search engines can't index it. If people aren't fastidious about replying to messages they're responding to, it's just a nonsense stream of consciousness from dozens of people.
That being said, I hate the formatting of most forums. Reddit and Lemmy's comment nesting is excellent. It's very easy to follow conversations.
It's not hard to imagine. Spacial Disorientation is where your brain can't tell the difference between acceleration and climbing very sharply. It happens when there's no visual references. It sounds like the flight was dealing with overcast weather, so there might not have been a true horizon.
It's happened before. Atlas Air Flight 3591. United Airlines Flight 1722. Flight 1722
I take a 30 to 40 minute walk (2 miles) every day at work. Sometimes it's to clear my head. Sometimes it's to think about work. Sometimes it's to think about not work. No one cares, and if they did, I'd argue it's time well spent for the company. I can't get anything done if my brain is overflowing with crap.
Man, a work LAN party would be pretty cool.
No, their airlines are not an ancillary product. They are their main product. According to Boeing's earnings reports, the commercial aircraft segment of the company made up 56% of total revenue in 2018, 42% in 2019, 27% in 2020, 30% in 2021, 38% in 2022, and 43% in 2023. The rest of their revenue is split between the Defense, Space and Security segment, and the Global Services segment.
Prior to 2017, the vast majority of the earnings for the whole company came from the Commercial Airplanes segment. Since then, that segment has been operating at a loss. Since 2022, both Defense and Commercial Airplanes have been operating at a loss.
If you're curious you can look up Boeing's 10-k form. Page 56 has the revenue breakdowns.
Humans generate 4,000 terawatt hours of electricity in a year. The sun dumps nearly that much on earth in 1 minute. That's a 6 order of magnitude difference. So I'm going to assume that human heat generation is probably negligible.
I know that if I skip a meal, I can get really hungry later. That or I start snacking on crap. So skipping a meal could potentially lead to weight gain because you end up eating more than if you didn't skip the meal.
Here's a school bus going up for auction. 117,000 miles. Sitting for 2 years. Current bid $643 with 3 days left.
While this policy is bullshit, I'd firmly disagree that kei cars are safer than half of vehicles in the US.
- They're all right hand drive, which makes it harder to see other traffic and pedestrians. Their headlights are also aimed to illuminate the left shoulder in Japan. In the US, those headlights will blind oncoming drivers.
- In order to be imported into the US, these kei cars are all 25 years old at least. Crash safety has improved a lot in that time. The slab fronts of these cars provide no crumple zone for occupants. Like many modern pickup trucks, a pedestrian will be crushed, rather than scooped onto the hood and windshield of a shorter car like a sedan.
- Because of their age, many of these vehicles might not have ABS or airbags. Additionally, their age also will make them more likely to have a technical problem, which will be harder to solve since they're JDM only vehicles.
Why would they love this? More claims means they have to pay out more. Even if they're assholes and don't pay out, they still have to process and fight claims which costs money.
Apparently, in the 70s Exxon had a solar division, but they shut it down in the 80s.
Not only would it be better for the environment for them to continue with solar research, it would have been better for them too. They could've had a monopoly on solar power by now. "Bad news everyone! Oil is bad for the environment, but the good news is that we can sell you a solution!"
Of course, it wasn't immediately profitable (because research costs money), so they shut it down. Absolutely mind numbingly stupid.
I invent something. Since there are no patents, my idea is put in the open. A big company sees my idea and uses its much bigger budget to advertise and out sell me, putting me out of business. How's that not abusive?
Patents prevent theft. Patents on medicine based on publicly funded research is stupid. I could be persuaded that it's theft in that particular instance. But in general, no patents are not theft.
Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented.