http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/january_february_2014/ten_miles_square/patronage_for_plutocrats048351.php#
Greg Noll, a senior at Columbia University, balances his engineering major with a federally subsidized “work-study” job at the university’s fitness center, where he fills spray bottles, wipes sweat off the machines, and picks up towels for twenty hours a week.
The $9-an-hour wage he’s paid is underwritten by the federal work-study program, which was launched in 1964 to support low-income students who would not otherwise be able to afford college.While Noll and his counterparts at Columbia and other pricey, top-tier private colleges and universities no doubt benefit from the program—Noll says he uses the money to buy books and food and to go out with his friends on the weekends—they are not necessarily the intended recipients of aid from the $1.2 billion federal program. Noll’s family, for instance, makes $140,000 a year, which he says, rightly, puts them squarely in the upper-middle class.In fact, researchers at the Community College Research Center at Teachers College, Columbia University, have found that only 43 percent of students who receive work study meet the federal definition of financial need as determined by whether they also receive Pell Grants. Work study “disproportionately benefits the students who need it the least,” says Rory O’Sullivan, research and policy director at the youth advocacy organization Young Invincibles.A major source of the problem stems from the fact that the work-study program uses a fifty-year-old formula to determine how federal funds are allocated.Unlike other federal financial aid programs that distribute money according to how many students at a university actually need aid, money for the work-study program is based instead on how much a university received the previous year, and how much it charges for tuition.
life in America is not geared in favor of those not rich, they parade these programs for the poor but as we see here they are not really for those intended, and they never were. with the loss of majority status comes the threat of no longer being the chosen one's no offense to Jewish community, they know what they did and expect the new majority to do the same to them, he who knows not expects not.
are you sensing a pattern of treatment here?
That perpetuates a system under which the universities that get the lion’s share of federal dollars are not the ones with the most low-income students but, rather, those that have been participating in work study the longest and charge the highest tuition. Consequently, nearly half of work-study recipients attend private, nonprofit universities and colleges.With the exception of tiny Berea College in Kentucky, these schools do a relatively poor job of serving low-income students. Out of 284 national universities on the Washington Monthly’s annual college rankings(September/October 2013), Columbia scores number 175; USC, number 243; Northwestern, number 246; and New York University, number 278 on measures of “social mobility”—that is, their record of recruiting and graduating low-income students and the net price of tuition they charge those students.Moreover, these schools are not lacking in dollars they could put toward student aid. Columbia University, number six on the top ten work-study list, received nearly $6.8 million in federal funds for work study, a figure that represents less than 1 percent of the annual return on its $8.2 billion endowment.
wow Kentucky, who knew? Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell land. you can see how hard a job it is to unseat those who have rigged from the beginning a strategy that on paper before the numbers satisfies that separate but equal James Crow thing but once you crunch the numbers you see the numbers aren't the only thing crunched.
