SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
El Reg reports
For-profit college chain ITT Technical Institute is facing further sanctions as the US government and the state of California have ordered the school to stop accepting new students.
Citing ongoing financial problems with the school, the US Department of Education (DOE) has barred the school from taking any new students who rely on federal aid money, out of concerns that the school will go under before those funds can be repaid.
"To protect prospective students and taxpayers, we're no longer allowing ITT to enroll new students with federal aid", the DOE said.
"In addition, in case the school's actions cause it to close, we're increasing the amount of cash reserves it must send us and we're ending its installment payment plan for the amount previously required."
This, after the DOE said it has spent the past two years working with ITT to get its financial matters in order and address concerns from creditors that the school may not be able to stay afloat and pay back its debts.
[...] Students who are already enrolled at ITT with financial aid will be allowed to continue courses and will have the option to transfer to another school that accepts ITT course credits.
The DOE added that those who have already graduated from ITT will continue to have their certifications recognized as valid credentials.
[...] The state of California, meanwhile, is taking things a step further by ordering the school [PDF] to stop accepting any new enrollments at its 15 California locations as of September 1.
The decree, issued by the Department of Consumer Affairs, Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education, cites the financial issues and says "there is a substantial failure by the Institution to meet institutional minimum operating standards related to financial resources and accreditation standards".
We have previously discussed other for-profits in hot water.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 01 2016, @04:22AM
Capitalism is a system that rewords people who can provide a product or service
Nope. That's called "business".
There doesn't have to be a Capitalist anywhere in the loop for what you described.
A Capitalist is someone who makes money from money.
He EXTRACTS money from the system.
He does not have to PRODUCE anything.
Workers produce goods and services.
A Socialist workers' cooperative which has no money and has nothing but LABOR and which produces goods and/or services fits your silly description.
Paris Hilton sitting on her ass, waiting for a check to arrive is an example of Capitalism.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 01 2016, @05:01AM
Paris Hilton sitting on her ass, waiting for a check to arrive is an example of Capitalism.
Paris Hilton does not appear to be sitting on her ass. [youtube.com]
OK, point taken. [youtube.com]
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Thursday September 01 2016, @11:36AM
Capitalism also has as one of its features a need for the proletariat to believe that by hard work and self-sacrifice they or at least their descendants can become capitalists rather than workers. This is why the news will occasionally highlight stories along the lines of "laundromat worker retires as a millionaire" or "working-class person you might be able to identify with wins the lottery".
This story is, for the most part, bunk.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Thursday September 01 2016, @03:47PM
A Capitalist is someone who makes money from money.
No, that's not capitalism.
Maybe words have multiple definitions.
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Thursday September 01 2016, @05:24PM
It's not so much that words have multiple definitions, though they do, as that technical terms (economics is a form of technical) lose precision when they move into common usage. You are right, the better term for someone who makes money from money is financier, but such a person is ALSO a capitalist, as capitalist is a more inclusive term than financier.
A capitalist is one who makes "money" from capital. The capital can be durable goods, a factory, land, or money. A laborer is someone who makes "money" from his personal effort, his labor. And a manager is someone who makes "money" by organizing things. These definitions are exclusive, but the categories are never pure. E.g., a manager devotes personal effort to managing, and often depends on the capital of and MBA.
Also note that I put money in quotes in every mention in the previous paragraph. I mean it in the most abstract sense, which includes, but is not limited to, currency. It also includes accrual of capital in the wide sense that includes political power.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Thursday September 01 2016, @07:00PM
You are right, the better term for someone who makes money from money is financier, but such a person is ALSO a capitalist, as capitalist is a more inclusive term than financier.
Right, but that doesn't have bearing on the definition of the term "capitalism." Capitalism doesn't just mean the activity that happens with capitalists/financiers. It is used by many people to mean an economic system that provides certain freedoms (or absolute freedom). There's nothing in the definition of capitalism (at least the one most people use, including the one many economists use) that means capitalism only pertains to activity undertaken by financiers, which is what the gp post was asserting.
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 01 2016, @08:30PM
You appear to be conflating the term businessman|entrepreneur with "Capitalist".
As an example, the 6 worker-owners[1] who founded Mondragon in 1956 were entrepreneurs.
Their model, however, does not rely on borrowing from / debt to / dependence on a Capitalist.
Their profit comes from their labor and their operation runs strictly from that profit (and the worker-owners decide democratically how that profit will be disbursed).
This is very unlike top-down Capitalist operations which have a money-man layer of individuals who PRODUCE *nothing* but who skim off the cream.
Your premise is flawed because your vision is too narrow.
You are still using the term incorrectly.
[1] Mondragon now has over 100,000 worker-owners.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Thursday September 01 2016, @08:49PM
You appear to be conflating the term businessman|entrepreneur with "Capitalist".
I think the problem is you are conflating the term "capitalism" with the concept of capitalists. Yes they are etymologically related, but no that is not how people use the word.
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 01 2016, @05:34PM
I'll bet that you think "Middle Class" is also a useful term.
It isn't. It's something Lamestream Media made up.
Ask a group to each mark his own graph delineating the "Middle Class" and each will put the marks in different places.
"Middle Class" is just a divide-and-conquer mechanism meant to manipulate The Working Class.
There are only TWO classes.
The Bourgeoisie AKA The Idle Rich AKA The Capitalist Class has enough wealth that they don't need to do any labor.
The Proletariat AKA The Working Class must exchange labor for sustenance.
If you **have** to work to make a living, you are NOT a Capitalist.
The whole point of Capitalism is for the Idle Rich to remain idle and to get someone else to do all the work.
The term "The Country Club Set" is typical of the paradigm.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Thursday September 01 2016, @07:01PM
I'll bet that you think "Middle Class" is also a useful term.
Not really, no.
There are only TWO classes. The Bourgeoisie AKA The Idle Rich AKA The Capitalist Class has enough wealth that they don't need to do any labor. The Proletariat AKA The Working Class must exchange labor for sustenance.
Those terms aren't useful to me, either.
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings