Displaying 1 - 10 of 34 Forum Posts 1 2 3 4 Next
  • Dec 08, 2016 01:26 PM
    Last: 1mo

    Junior and Community colleges have many similarities, but there are also important things that differentiate them. Determining which option is best for you doesn't have to be that difficult if you know what you're looking for.

    Junior Colleges are similar to four year universities insofar as they tend to give students the "full college experience." These colleges usually have dorms, food, sports, student activity centers, and many other things that you would expect to have at a four year school. These colleges also accept students from other communities, states, and even countries.

    A typical junior college student is a recent high school graduate and many colleges have rules that limit the age someone can be if they want to live in the dormitories. That doesn't mean older students aren't allowed to enroll in these colleges though. Older students are often welcome to enroll in junior colleges, but they usually aren't allowed to live on campus.

    One of the main differences between this and a community college is that most private junior colleges have an application process and you are not guaranteed admission.

    Community Colleges are just that - colleges in a specific community. They typically offer associates degrees, but they also offer a wide variety of classes and sometimes trades depending on the location. Anyone can sign up for classes at a community college as long as you meet the educational requirements for the class.

    People of all ages attend community colleges for any number of reasons. Some students are just out of high school and others are middle-aged people who are going back to school to further their career prospects.

    So if you are looking for a full college experience but aren't yet ready for a four year university then looking into a junior college may be a good idea, but if you're a full time employee or single parent who is looking to take one class at a time then a community college might be your best route. It all depends on what type of educational experience you are seeking.

  • Feb 19, 2016 02:46 PM
    Last: 1yr
    justin412 Wrote: Am I crazy for thinking that Donald Trump might actually pull this off or are we still too early in the process to start thinking about that?
    Not at all. Trump, whether I like him or not, has his finger on the pulse of the Republican base. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if he is the nominee.
  • Feb 10, 2016 05:17 PM
    Last: 1yr

    If Teddy Roosevelt couldn't mount a successful third party candidacy then I highly doubt Mayor Bloomberg can.

    There have been plenty of third party candidacies throughout our history, but not a single one has ever come close to winning an election. Roosevelt was able to earn the highest totals of a third party candidate by earning 27.5% of the vote and 88 electoral college electors. The next closest is John C. Breckinridge, a Southern Democrat who won 18.1% of the vote and 72 electoral college electors.

    What will likely happen if Bloomberg runs is a repeat of 2000, when Ralph Nader (likely) played spoiler to Vice President Al Gore. He received 2.7% of the vote and 0 electoral college electors, but there's a high probability that Al Gore would have won had Nader not run.

  • Feb 24, 2015 06:58 PM
    Last: 1yr
    LivingWanOlderGal Wrote: So on average, that is, if you are in average health, you should be better off waiting if you are financially able to do so.

    That's what my parents are doing, but they are financially able to do so. I just feel bad for those who aren't. Seniors who have serious health issues and can't continue to work, but aren't financially stable, are the people I worry most about.

  • Feb 09, 2016 01:16 PM
    Last: 1yr
    Interesting points, but people were saying the same thing about Barack Obama back in 2008 and we all know how that turned out. I think it's hard to predict what's going to happen until it actually happens. If Bernie wins in New Hampshire after a virtual tie in Iowa then I think this race is wide open.
  • Feb 09, 2016 03:08 PM
    Last: 1yr
    JaredS Wrote: What do you think? Is Rubio the best choice or am I over looking something?

    I agree that Rubio is the person the Democrats are more afraid of, but I have a feeling he is in over his head. He didn't seem to get any "bump" after Iowa and he shot himself in the foot with repeating the same line a handful of times in the most recent debate.

    Your points about Governor Kasich were interesting and I share many of them. I'm really surprised he hasn't been able to break away from the pack considering his obvious appeal. The Presidency is almost always won in Ohio. He's the sitting governor of Ohio. He's popular in his state. I am shocked that Republicans aren't lining up behind him.

  • Jan 31, 2016 06:49 PM
    Last: 1yr
    Max Wrote: I agree with some of your argument, but it's hard to overlook the fact that Iowa picked four of the last five Presidents we've had. I know that's a short history, but it's still something to think about.
    That's a really interesting point and one I hadn't considered. They may have a poor track record overall, but you can't deny they have picked correctly lately.
  • Jan 31, 2016 06:49 PM
    Last: 1yr

    Politicians and media alike flock to Iowa every four years to cover the first in the nation caucuses, but we might want to start asking ourselves if that is the wisest decision considering the winner of the Iowa caucuses usually doesn't win the nomination of their respective party. In fact, it almost seems like the kiss of death for a candidate of either political party.

    Only two Democrats (who went unopposed) that won the Iowa caucus since 1972 have gone on to win the Presidency. Their names are Bill Clinton and President Obama. And only two Republicans (who went unopposed) that won the Iowa caucus since 1972 have gone on to win the Presidency. Their names are Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.

    So while there will a lot of hoopla over who wins the 2016 Iowa caucuses, I encourage everyone to remind themselves that a lot more American citizens will get to have their say before the eventual nominee of either party will earn enough delegates to secure the parties nomination.

  • Jan 24, 2016 04:30 PM
    Last: 10mo

    The common Social Security filing practice known as 'file and suspend' is ending this year, but not for everyone.

    File and suspend is the strategy where one spouse files for their Social Security benefit and then immediately suspends receiving the benefit. It is done to establish a base for the worker’s dependent or dependents to begin receiving benefits attributed to the original filers work record. This practice has helped seniors maximize benefits, but it has also created a financial strain on the two Social Security trust funds.In order to help alleviate the stress this practice has caused on the trust funds, the a provision of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 eliminated this practice, but there is a caveat.

    If you are at least 66 or will turn 66 by April 30, 2016, then you can still obtain your benefits under the previous file-and-suspend system. So if you fall into this category then make sure you contact the Social Security Administration before April 30 to make sure you are able to maximize your benefits before this it's too late.

  • Nov 13, 2015 04:57 PM
    Last: 1yr

    CBS is following the lead of its debate predecessors and will be live streaming the second Democratic Presidential debate Saturday evening. The debate will be held at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa and aired on television, but it makes sense that CBS made this decision now that so many so called "chord cutters" are altering the way organizations can reach a wide audience.

    All you need to do is go to www.cbsnews.com/live at 9 pm EST and you will be able to watch it from your computer or other mobile device. The live stream will also include real-time "Twitter trends, instant reactions, curated Tweets and other key information."