Frugaling

Save more, live well, give generously

Public-Private Partnerships Pillage Graduate Students’ Fixed-Income Stipends

By 2 Comments

Share This:

dailyiowan

Graduate students are a vulnerable population

This has been the craziest two weeks of graduate school and it all started with a blog post I wrote on Sunday, November 29. It was entitled, “How Leases Trap College Students.” Therein, I talked about my graduate student housing on the University of Iowa campus. When I first arrived, it was $435. But then, a private company, Balfour Beatty, came in and demolished the subsidized housing. They built a lavish, $31 million complex.

Since then, the prices have skyrocketed about 130% since the university – a public institution – sold off the rights to build and manage a property to a private company, Balfour Beatty. Next year’s 1-bedroom leases are now going for $999. You can get better prices in New York City. The company has published all sorts of reasons and information for the prices and increases, but they never talk about the big difference: profit motive. Now, graduate students cannot afford graduate student housing.

How do graduate students contribute on campus?

Graduate students often teach, research, and assist universities. For example, I teach two undergraduate courses, conduct research, provide technical assistance, and work on special projects with faculty in my college. These efforts – for 20 hours per week – allow me to receive a tuition scholarship and stipend. After taxes, that stipend equals about $18,720.

Despite the need for graduate students and an economic engine for doctoral graduates, housing them doesn’t tend to be a moneymaker. With only $18,720 per year, they’re limited as to where they can live without taking federal aid (student loans). Most schools have used affordable graduate housing as a benefit for incoming students. Like any incentive package at work, low-cost housing attracts the talented, financially sensible, and respects the dignity of those who contribute to the milieu.

How much money can you make from grad students?

While the University of Iowa certainly has a drive for income, profiting off of graduate students isn’t the purpose. When they managed their own properties, they made enough to maintain the property. With this private company on campus, the paradigm has shifted. The profit motive was back with a vengeance.

This move towards privatization on college campuses is little highlighted or understood. Frankly, I don’t know anyone who’s talking about it – or knows about it. But the reality is that more and more public institutions are deciding to parcel out their public resources – taxpayer funded – to an elite group of market barons.

Today, I wanted to take an opportunity to break down this problem and explain how students are financially affected by privatization using Balfour Beatty. Over the next decades, if universities continue to embrace privatization, students will be holding record levels of debt. For graduate students, it all starts with their rent/housing.

Lease public resources, make it someone else’s problem profit

Unfortunately for universities, graduate student housing isn’t a moneymaker. They are hard to maintain, keep risk on the table, and place debt liability in the hands of administrators. On campuses nationwide, universities are beginning to “lease” their land to private companies, as they cannot sell public resources. These leases can be signed for decades and lead to magnificent profits for companies involved.

When a private company comes in to build new residences, building, etc. on public universities, the two organizations are signing what’s called a public-private partnership. I’m getting sort of wonky today, so bear with me. A public-private partnership is when a “private party provides a public service or project and assumes substantial financial, technical and operational risk in the project.”

Effectively, public universities who embrace this model are offsetting their risk onto a private partner. They can suddenly fire handfuls of expensive employees who provide public services. These employees ordinarily require pensions and other retirement benefits, quality healthcare, and reasonable paychecks. The replacement is simple: smaller staffs, fewer benefits, and pay cuts. It’s all for one goal: maximize profits for a select few and pillage the fixed-income graduate students.

Administrators love public-private partnerships!

Many administrators say that graduate student housing isn’t a core mission, but undergraduate housing is a core mission because universities make boatloads of profits off undergrads. Here’s a University of Iowa administrator excitedly explaining how university-managed residence halls make sense (but not graduate student housing?):

“Stange said the Petersen Residence Hall, a $53 million, 10-story building under construction and scheduled to open in time for the fall 2015 semester, will house about 500 first- and second-year undergraduates.” (source)

Despite 90% occupancy rates and a population in need (many of which were people of color, international students, young families, and people with disabilities) in old, university-controlled graduate student housing, administrators decide to spin the story:

“Hawkeye Court is at the end of its useful life,” Stange said. “They were well-maintained as best as they could. They just were not meeting needs of our current population.” (source)

Worsening the problem is the added classism and gentrification risk to these privately constructed and managed apartments. Poor people need not apply:

These buildings are intended to create “an exclusive community designed to meet the lifestyle needs of today’s student.” (source)

Calling attention to the pillaging of graduate students

For a 1-bedroom at the “exclusive” Aspire at West Campus at the University of Iowa — remember, intended for graduate students — you’ll spend $1,000 per month. Over the course of a 5-year Ph.D. (some take longer), you’d be spending around $60,000 on rent along — if prices stayed consistent. Again, that’s a generously low total.

With my graduate student stipend of $18,720 per year, I’d be spending 64% of my income on rent alone. That’s why I’ve decided to move out for the coming year. But the gentrification and heartbreak to those looking for affordable housing has been finished. The University of Iowa signed a bad deal with no deal to renegotiate. Heck, administrators didn’t even know how much the private company would charge for rent!

Now, graduate students are stuck with bill or forced to get out. That’s just not right. The university messed up.

Spreading alarm and stirring up media attention

Four days ago, when a group of us affected students began emailing and contacting administrators to tell them they have a major problem on their hands, they told us to go away. They told us it wasn’t the university’s problem; in fact, we needed to bring our concerns to the private company, Balfour Beatty. Here’s what one administrator said:

“I can sit down with [the students], but the strongest voice will come from the people who will or won’t rent from [Balfour Beatty] based on rates.”

What that administrator seems to be implying is that he would sit down with us, but we might as well talk to the company. Picture that: a bunch of students marching into a multinational company trying to negotiate. That’s ridiculous.

Well, we weren’t particularly happy with that answer. So, we kept writing statements to politicians, lawyers, administrators, the president’s office, media outlets. In three days, we had three front page stories in three separate newspapers.

IMG_1323

IMG_1330

Suddenly, the University of Iowa administration had a PR disaster on their hands. And magically, that tone of changed among admin/staff at the highest echelons of the university. Now, the president wanted to meet with us because he cared about this issue. My how they reversed their tone rapidly!

But taking it from PR nightmare to significant change is a different story. While the administration debates their next actions, this story has massive implications.

When prices skyrocket, that means students with disabilities must bear the costs. When young families with children feel the cost, they must move further from campus. When international students trust the university’s marketing of this on-campus housing, they find an awful price and unmanageable lease.

Balfour Beatty has a reputation for profit over people

The company’s buildings have gone viral — trumpeting their privately constructed and managed properties across the country. Just look at where they’ve gone beyond Iowa:

  • University of Houston-Victoria
  • University of Nevada-Reno
  • Georgia State
  • Temple University
  • George Mason University
  • Texas A&M
  • UNC-Charlotte
  • University of Sussex
  • Tarleton State University
  • San Diego State University
  • Florida Atlantic University
  • Winston-Salem State University
  • Appalachian State University
  • University of South Florida-Tampa
  • Cornish College of the Arts
  • University of California Riverside
  • George Mason University
  • University of Texas-Dallas

Every place they go, an area is gentrified, low-income students are forced out and a community is transformed. When the profit motive takes over non-profit campuses, the results can be harrowing. In fact, students at the University of Nevada, Reno tried to rebel against Balfour Beatty once before, but the company wasn’t willing to renegotiate. The solutions are murky once a contract is signed, too. Only one thing can be done: universities must resist the drive to privatize public resources and everyone should know that market barons like Balfour Beatty don’t represent students’ interests — they represent their own.

Now, hundreds are awaiting the University of Iowa to respond. Thousands are affected. And tens of thousands are seeing the consequences of short-term economic gains that have long-term effects on students.

University of Iowa, we are waiting for your answer. We will be civil, but never silent.

Outsourcing Corporate Responsibility And Taxation

By 7 Comments

Share This:

Henry Ford Corporate Responsibility
Mr and Mrs Henry Ford ride in the first Ford automobile

America and business: peanut butter and jelly

America has an illustrious, grand entrepreneurial spirit. Many generations of families started from humble beginnings to succeed. The United States was an incubator for business acumen. After the industrial revolution, we became the world leader. Amidst a growing infrastructure, companies and their entrepreneurs found success in the States.

Henry Ford was one of those genius businessman. He was responsible for designing the first moving assembly line, which greatly increased manufacturing and production time. Additionally, Ford instituted a $5-per-day income for his workers. The reasoning: He wanted his employees to be able to purchase the vehicles, decrease employee turnover, and increase the company’s bottom line, in turn.

Everybody won. He sold more cars, his employees saved and purchased more, and there was a pride in creation. This was an American company — fulfilling the American dream.

During World War II, production was reinstituted for a desperate military. An enemy stood to destroy entire races, religions, and peoples. The Allies came together to extinguish this enemy, but the pains were felt at home. Families rationed necessary foods for soldiers. People bought government bonds and women went to work. The U.S. needed its people, and they stepped up to defeat the Axis of evil. We were patriots.

Businesses were essential to a powerful rise in the middle class during the 50s and 60s. Taxation among executives and companies was high. This period is famous for 90 percent marginal tax rates in the highest income brackets. Despite the most social mobility and income equality ever, the system began to crumble.

Special interest groups, political power, and declines in average America

It all starts with special interest groups. Free market principles exalted an invisible hand that led to massive outsourcing. Much of the manufacturing industry disappeared as a consequence. We’ve lost nearly all customer service and basic technological leadership to Asian countries. It’s a rarity to find anything “Made in America.” Instead of stopping and correcting this course, America and its people have held steady — buying, consuming, and destroying as much as they can. Patriotism and pride in country be damned.

These economic principles, which largely took America by storm in the 80s, were lauded by the Reagan administration. Swift cuts to taxes were made for everyone, but they mostly benefited the richest of our population. Almost immediately, an increase in income inequality, social stratification, imprisonment, and use of tax havens increased.

Each time we’ve lost another layer of pride and power in America, corporate executives have argued that they are creating jobs, cutting inefficiencies, and raising shareholder value. We can’t fall for these tired logical fallacies. Jobs have been created elsewhere and people are paid less than ever. Wages are stagnating for most, as executives get rich. We’re stuck in the twilight zone of corporate disrespect, political power, lobbying groups, and massive outsourcing of everything. It’s dystopian in the powerlessness of average people. The last thing to go: corporate headquarters and revenue.

How to avoid taxation and book record profits

In the past, tax havens were simply “offshore,” Caribbean or Mediterranean islands. Rich doctors, businessmen, and criminals used these countries to store untraced funds. The money would be protected from extradition, taxation, and/or criminal prosecution. But as businesses grew with the new, global economy, tax practices changed in step.

Yet again, the start was in the 80s. Apple — yes, the iPhone and iPad maker — pioneered a strategy to avoid federal taxes “legally.” This gets complicated quickly. Essentially, Apple setup subsidiary corporations in other countries and booked intellectual property sales from those international locations. Income then sidestepped the higher-tax policies in America for lower-tax zones. This magical strategy is called, the “double Irish arrangement.”

Named for its home location, Apple set up a location in Ireland, where corporate taxes are 0%. Then, these new funds avoided billions of dollars in taxation and could still be reported as revenue and profit. This opened the floodgates for copycat companies to do the same (e.g., Facebook, General Electric, and Google).

By harnessing the power of this tax-dodging trick, some companies whittled down their tax liability to nothing. We’re talking about multibillion dollar profits — untaxed. More importantly, all of those loopholes lead to severe federal tax revenue shortages, despite record-breaking profits. Our people, infrastructure, and future are in the balance.

The regular American, a patriot

Warren Buffett is famous for saying that if you’re born as an American, you’ve already lucked out. This is still the land of opportunity. And frankly, I couldn’t agree more. The U.S. is still an incredible place. I have a lot of pride and feel humble for my opportunities. I couldn’t have done it without this place.

Over the last couple years, I’ve built a solid side income as a writer and entered a doctoral program. This is the life I want. I’ve carved out my niche. I feel fortunate for the privilege to be given room to explore and succeed. The financial successes also increased my tax burden.

My company, Frugaling, is based in America. I don’t have an LLC or formal corporation, but it’s my business. At the end of every year, I have to account for this revenue through a Schedule C form and self-employment taxes. Last week, I explained that I had begun to prepare for this accounting challenge, as self-employment taxes are about 30% of revenue. This is because medicare, medicaid, and social security aren’t withheld. But I’m happy to contribute and do my part.

I owe it to the place where I found success. I want others to have the opportunity to excel, as well. America is empty without a cyclical, contributing populace. What goes around comes around. I pay my taxes. Why don’t companies?

Warning! We’ve crossed the tipping point

Today, the largest corporation yet, Medtronic, filed to leave America. We’re talking about a pure formality that will make more tax revenue leave America. The medical device manufacturer just purchased another company — Covidien — that is incorporated in Ireland. Medtronic will switch to that legal address. BusinessWeek reported that this is becoming increasingly popular:

Minneapolis-based Medtronic joins some 44 American companies that have reincorporated abroad or struck plans to do so, including 14 in a recent wave of moves that began in 2012. Earlier this year, Pfizer Inc., the largest U.S. drugmaker, briefly proposed taking a U.K. address, a move that might have cut its tax bills by as much as $1 billion a year…Without a change in law, a congressional panel estimated last month, future deals will cost the U.S. $19.5 billion in tax revenue over the next 10 years.

For shareholders, this is wonderful news. Those tax savings can be directed to share buybacks, increased dividends, greater research pipelines, and better compensation for employees. But meanwhile, Americans will suffer. See, we are stakeholders in a way. We have a stake in what a company does or doesn’t do. Now that companies are fleeing the states in search for individual gain, at the cost of the whole, we must realize that the last pillar of corporate responsibility and patriotism is about to fall. As this disintegrates, and taxation revenue crumbles, so will our country.

The 5-Minute Guide To Thomas Piketty’s Capital In The Twenty-First Century

By 2 Comments

Share This:

Capital in the twenty-first century Thomas Piketty
The cover of Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century

Everyone is talking about Capital in the Twenty-First Century, but few people have read it. In fact, I was watching Real Time with Bill Maher the other day, and the entire panel was debating the virtues of the book — then they admitted no one had read it.

Meanwhile, The Guardian wrote, “This is a huge book, more than 700 pages long, dense with footnotes, graphs and mathematical formulae. At first sight it is unashamedly an academic tome and seems both daunting and incomprehensible [emphasis added].” Well, I just spent an inordinate amount of time reading his masterpiece, and have quickly placed every lesson in the following article. I’ve tried to link to further explanations, should you care to spend the time.

Here’s everything you need to know about Capital in the Twenty-First Century in 5 minutes or less. 

  1. Income equality is increasing.
  2. We are approaching another Gilded Age.
  3. Net worth is not trickling down.
  4. A global wealth tax is proposed.
  5. Marginal tax rates used to be much higher.
  6. Income inequality undermines meritocratic values.
  7. Marx couldn’t properly account for technological progress.
  8. Industrialization and economic shift is inherently advantageous to a select few.
  9. War and taxation created a by-product of economic equality in the 40s/50s.
  10. Theoretical and mathematical interpretations fail to account for individual actors and historical data.
  11. Inequality is not necessarily bad, but the reasons for it could be.
  12. Top managers can control their own paychecks.
  13. Profit is necessary to attract capital; at least, as the economy currently stands.
  14. Per capita income averages hide disparities (median versus mode).
  15. There are errors and gaps in tax revenue due to tax havens.
  16. Foreign direct investment hasn’t led to a convergence in economies.
  17. Economic growth is unsustainable, as compounded growth will kill the planet (think climate change and food shortages for a growing population).
  18. Social mobility is at the heart of moderating income inequality.
  19. Inherited wealth is monopolizing income distribution.
  20. Those with capital and assets can increase wealth faster than beginning entrepreneurs.

Now go out there, act like you read it, and sound smart!

Best Of

Recent Posts

Follow