Student Loans

Latest Salon Interview with Liz Warren Even More Nauseating Than Usual

So exclusive. Much interview.

|

Warren
Twp / Wikimedia Commons

Salon political columnist Thomas Frank spoke with his dream candidate, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, in a hard-hitting interview that posed tough questions like, "Is there anything someone can do about all the things we're describing, short of being president?" Wow, he went there.

To his credit, Frank did go after President Obama for being a "disappointment" on the issues Frank cares about: financial regulation, prosecuting Wall Street bankers, etc. Warren agreed that Obama let Wall Street off the hook too easily, though she did praise the president for getting her consumer protection agency approved.

The rest of the interview consists of Frank telling Warren how brilliant she is and Warren spouting off her usual faux-populist screed. (Reminder: Warren is in favor of the Export-Import Bank.) The conversation eventually turned to higher education affordability:

Is it time to do something about college tuition?

Absolutely. Yes it is. But let's get the right frame on this. Because I think this is really important, and it's the right question to ask. But start with this: three out of four kids in college are in public universities. A generation ago, state support for public universities was strong enough that three out of four dollars to educate those kids came from taxpayers and the family had to make up the difference for the fourth dollar. Today, that has basically reversed itself. That is, that the states are putting up, just generally across the country, about one out of four dollars and the families have got to come up with the other three out of four dollars. This matters because it is the state universities that are the backbone of access to higher education for middle class families, and I think that's the place you have to start the conversation. I'm not going to let anybody off the hook, but I think it's the critical part of the conversation. And I say this — it's like I talk about in the book — this is personal for me. I graduated from a commuter college that cost $50 a semester in Texas.

Warren is technically correct: Public funding for higher education has generally declined across the country. But large state universities are still raking in cash. Warren's own solution to the college affordability program—massive loan subsidization—is one of the main reasons the price is still climbing. Universities can keep jacking up the price as long as the government keeps finding ways to help students pay in the short term while concealing the true cost from them until they are already on the hook for it.

Doesn't Warren want to go after rich CEOs (i.e., college presidents) at corrupt crony corporations (i.e., public universities) who extort consumers (i.e., students)? Only in the private sector, it seems. When it comes to higher education affordability, Warren is very much a part of the problem.

Full Salon interview here.

Advertisement

NEXT: Virginia Postrel: Why Neal Stephenson, Peter Thiel Are Wrong About the Future

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. But, isn’t the best solution to any problem to have the taxpayers bear more of the cost and the people actually using the service to bear less of it? That always works!

    1. Why do you hate education?
      I really wish he had asked her about her struggles as a Native American.

      1. Please! No uncomfortable questions to screw up the message!

      2. It would be funnier if she actually had the gall to preface one of her statements with “My people have a saying…”

        1. Now that could be a funny SNL skit. Not that they would ever criticize a prog in such a manner.

    2. There is no problem too large, that can’t be solved with other people’s money before the next election.

  2. The only thing Warren could competitively run for is most charisma-challenged female pol in America. She would not come off well at all if someone puts her in the spotlight and asks the tough and critical questions she doesn’t get from the Massholes and people in the media outlets that adore her.

    1. I truly hope she gets the Democratic nomination for that reason. Her stupidity will be placed on a pedestal that everyone can through old vegetables at.

      1. Careful what you wish for. The only thing stupider than that squaw is the American voter.

        1. Tis true, 2008 did happen.

          1. 2008 was kind of excusable. 2012, not so much – by then there was no excuse for not knowing better.

            1. Are you saying that Romney was clearly better than Obama? Uh…yeah…

              1. *Nobody for President 2016*

        2. Or the Republican party.

      2. You’d take that chance?

        You got balls.

    2. She reminds me of my dental hygenist. Every six months, I lay back and try to sleeep while she chatters on and waits for answers I can’t give with the pick and water pump and water suck and whatever else she’s using. She looks exactly the same, little round-faced grey-haired woman of about the same age, natters on in the most anguished tones about flossing and gums and whatnot, even though I haven’thad a cavity in ten years.

  3. You’re forgetting the first rule of Salon.

  4. Thomas Frank and Squaw buy into the myth that the guys at Lehman, Merrill, and Bear bankrupted themselves on purpose and must be prosecuted. For what crime? They don’t know.

    But they must have broken some law!

    Stupidly running your firm into the shitcan is now illegal.

    1. Don’t lock eyes with ’em, don’t do it. Puts ’em on edge. They might go into berzerker mode; come at you like a whirling dervish, all fists and elbows. You might be screaming “No, no, no” and all they hear is “Who wants cake?” Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.

      1. No, on this one it is largely correct. Of course, don’t hold your breath waiting for it to consider the implications.

        1. Broken clock and what not.

          1. Blind ADHD squirrel in a nut factory?

  5. Public funding for higher education has generally declined across the country.

    Actually, I think you will find that spending on public universities has continually risen in both real and nominal terms.

    The “1 in 4” vs. “3 in 4” statistics are a result of the fact that public universities have increased their total spending faster than inflation, and have used increased tuition prices to make up for what they couldn’t get from the taxpayer. They took the taxpayer’s money, and then charged what the market could bear anyway.

    1. They took the taxpayer’s money, and then charged what the market could bear anyway.

      A “market’ driven by heavily subsidized federally backed financing.

    2. I seriously doubt that the number that’s reported as declining includes gubmint backed student loans.

  6. You want to make college tuition more affordable?

    End Tenure.

    Let schools decide who to keep on the payroll based on present, not past, performance.

    1. Tenure wouldn’t be an issue of liberty were it not for tax payer support. Then it becomes force-over-reason all the way down.

      1. Its like unions. I have no problem with rhem as a concept, but pubsec unions and laws favoring privsec unions are the problem.

        1. Its like unions. I have no problem with rhem as a concept, but pubsec unions and laws favoring privsec unions are the problem.

          As the Spaniards say; ?exactomundo!

          Hell unions would even be a legitimate market actors without laws that arbitrarily grant the unions a monopoly within a shop. Who knows, maybe GM wouldn’t have shit the bed if the UAW had to compete with other unions for membership. Giving all the bargaining chips to monopoly unions doesn’t help workers, employers or the market as a whole. It really only seems to benefit the union leaders, political leaders and the bureaucracy that springs up around them.

          1. Hell unions would even be a legitimate market actors without laws that arbitrarily grant the unions a monopoly within a shop. Who knows, maybe GM wouldn’t have shit the bed if the UAW had to compete with other unions for membership. Giving all the bargaining chips to monopoly unions doesn’t help workers, employers or the market as a whole. It really only seems to benefit the union leaders, political leaders and the bureaucracy that springs up around them.

            This is precisely the problem I have with private unions. They have a monopoly position in a market and they abuse it ruthlessly.

    2. Eh. There was a period in living memory when colleges had tenure and somewhat reasonable* tuition rates. (e.g., when I went there.)

      Get rid of the administrators.

      (*”Reasonable” is defined as “living at home and working a job will allow you to pay your tuition as you go. Yes, even a minimum wage job.”)

      1. This came into my email a couple of weeks ago:

        “Good afternoon,

        We are excited to welcome 3 candidates to campus for the Director, Title IX Compliance position. We hope you will join us for the following open forums so you may meet each candidate.

        [names deleted]

        Attached is each candidate’s resume.

        We look forward to seeing you there,
        …”

        Yes, we are hiring a full-time administrator for Title IX compliance. In addition to the ones already working for athletics.

    3. Are administrators tenured?

      Why not just force schools to deal with the same regs as insurers — ban federal support for schools that don’t spend at least 80% of their funds on non-administrative education and research. If they bitch, ask why they should be treated better than insurance companies.

    4. Endowed universities are not “tuition driven.” Tuition and professor salaries actually have nothing to do with each other.

  7. She’s a parody of a politician. Which is really saying something in this age of parody politics.

    The fact that people are pushing her as a serious anything and that she’s actually a senator is truly mindboggling. She’s not the only one you can say that about, but the media fawning over her is absolutely nuts.

    1. The failure of the Obama presidency has really fried the progs’ poor, demented brains. It’s easy to forget just how much they invested in him emotionally.

      Warren is their rebound. Subconsciously they mostly know she’ll never come close to accomplishing anything but with her they can point to whenever a less radical Democrat fails.

    2. The Democratic primary is going to be awesome. Between Warren and Biden delusionally thinking they have a shot, and given how much progressives hate Hillary it’s going to be fun.

      1. You want fun? Wait until the Republican candidate emerges from his interview with Huckabee and Rick Warren (no ideological affiliation with Elizabeth).

        We’re all having fun with fringers these days.

        1. Well yes that will also be funny.

    3. I think Warren might be an emptier suit than Obama, and that is really fucking saying something.

      1. The default is to think of someone like Warren as evil. Frankly, that is giving her too much credit. She is too small and petty of a person to be worthy of the charge. Empty suit is a good word for her.

        1. She can’t be both?

      2. Humorless, po-faced, jackbooted school marm for president!

  8. I graduated from a commuter college that cost $50 a semester in Texas.

    I didn’t know Warren was a coog.

    1. $50/semester because of her affirmative action status. No so for the pale-faced.

  9. Warren is technically correct: Public funding for higher education has generally declined across the country.

    Wait- declined in real terms, or as a percentage of egregiously inflated tuition levels?

  10. OT: but speaking of Native Americans anybody catch Dan Snyder at the Redskin Cardinals game sitting next to the Chief of the Navajo nation who was wearing a redskin hat on Sunday? As a fan of the redskins I find the name debate stupid, but Dan Snyder is such a complete tone deaf retard I almost can’t stand cheering on a team that he owns.

    1. The NFL long ago became pro wrestling. Peyton Manning is Hulk Hogan, Richard Sherman is Ric Flair, and Dan Synder is Vince McMahon. Just sit back and enjoy him heeling it up.

      1. How about the browns boat racing the steelers yesterday? While I thought the shannahans acted like complete dipshits in Washington, Kyle was a very competent offensive coordinator here.

        1. It was a contender for the best day of my life. It could only have been better if it was the fat rapist hillbilly who broke his leg instead of Alex Mack.

          1. “It could only have been better if it was the fat rapist hillbilly who broke his leg”

            Going to have to be more specific.

            1. Rapelisburger.

              1. Damn I’m stupid.

  11. Speaking of the Wild West unregulated laissez faire banking industry, some guy was on the news earlier talking about how they are still “filling in the blanks” of Dodd Frank. But don’t worry, it will be a fucking masterpiece when it’s finished. A chicken in every lobbyist’s pot!

  12. Salon political columnist Thomas Frank

    I stopped reading right there. If I want to destroy brain cells I should at least get high doing so.

    1. Now you know why Reason writers have an official gin.

      It’s all you can do, to drink the criminally stupid away.

  13. Salon political columnist Thomas Frank spoke with his dream candidate

    unfortunate imagery brought to us through html formatting

  14. Salon is too ridiculous to parody anymore.

    Their clickbait headlines are so asinine, I don’t see how anyone who writes there can even take themselves seriously.

    Here’s a real deal headline from them today: “Anal sex jokes got me through my dad’s funeral”

    1. I think it’s time for another round of “Salon headline or 4chan comment”

  15. Is she still accepting $350,000 per year to teach a course at Harvard?

    Maybe she could donate that salary to a scholarship fund?

    Or would that eliminate the magic power of Other People’s Money to solve any problem she can identify?

    1. I’d like her to comment on the State of Washington replacing Columbus Day with Indigenous Peoples Day.

      Does she she this as a big step forward for her people? Would she like to do the same in Massachusetts? What will she be doing to celebrate Indigenous Peoples Day?

  16. Forget it Jake, it’s Salontown.

  17. Who likes reading about the Freikorps? And no frivolous answers to make me go away.

  18. I graduated from a commuter college that cost $50 a semester in Texas.

    I told them I was 3/64’s part Coahuilteco and gave me a discount.

  19. lizzie Warren and Salon in the same story? Good gawd, I can’t even look…

  20. Is there an honest legal case to be made for “prosecuting Wall Street bankers” for their actions in the years leading up to the financial crisis, and if so, what is it? Or is prosecuting bankers just a progressive wet dream/big FYTW? IANAL, and I truly am curious as to what the arguments are in favor of prosecution.

  21. “prosecuting Wall Street bankers, etc. Warren agreed that Obama let Wall Street off the hook too easily,”

    Great. Fire up the electric chairs. And don’t forget to save some seats for the government federal regulators and congressman responsible too. I’m sure she meant to mention them, and just forgot.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.