user: Article: Many private institutions of higher education around the country are in danger. Not all will be saved, and perhaps not all deserve to be saved. There are low-quality schools just as there are low-quality businesses. We have no duty to save them simply because they exist. But many promising institutions that deserve to continue are threatened. They are doing a fine job educationally, but they are caught in a financial squeeze, with no way to reduce rising cost or increase income significantly. Raising tuition doesn't bring in more income, for each time tuition goes up, the enrollment goes down, or the amount that must be given away in student aid goes up. Schools are bad businesses, whether public or private, not usually because of mismanagement but because of the nature of the enterprise. They lose money on every customer, and they can go bankrupt either from too few students or too many students. Even a very good college is a very bad business. It is such colleges, promising but threatened, that I worry about. Low enrollment is not their chief problem. Even with full enrollment, they may  _ . Efforts to save them, and preferably to keep them private, are a national necessity. There is no basis for arguing that private schools are inherently   better than public schools. There are many examples to the contrary. Anyone can name state universities and colleges that rank as the finest in the nation and the world. It is now inevitable that public institutions will be dominant, and therefore diversity is a national necessity. Diversity in the way we support schools tends to give us a healthy diversity in the forms of education. In an imperfect society such as ours, uniformity of education throughout the nation could be dangerous, In an imperfect society, diversity is a positive good. Supporters of public higher education know the importance of sustaining private higher education. Question: Which of the following statements is NOT true? Yes or no, is the answer "Private schools have more money than public schools."?
No

Article: February 28th, 2009 2:54 am GMT I have to say that am shocked at just how bad the new music is. This cannot be the same band that produced great albums such as HTDAAB and ATYCLB! This is awful! They either do not care anymore, or have completely lost it. I never thought U2 would become irrelevant, but they have officially become one of those bands that you will now say, "Remember when they were great?" ----- Posted by Ronald Harris February 28th, 2009 8:29 pm GMT Total drivel, Mr Harris. The new album is great, far better than the safe, cynical HTDAAB and ATYCLB. U2 have become inventive again, like they were in the 1990s. thank goodness! ----- Posted by Dan March 3rd, 2009 12:09 pm GMT Agree, Dan. The new album is the best since Actung Baby. Magnificent is an anthem in the waiting, Breathe is unbelievable, and Stand Up Comedy is absolutely outstanding----- to name just three! Loving the new sound, pure class as usual. ----- Posted by Martin March 4th, 2009 7:43 pm GMT Totally agree with you guys. This album is unbelievable. Breathe is definitely a great song, same with Moment of Surrender. I bet their upcoming tour will be amazing. If you haven't bought the CD yet, you should. I bought mine on Amozon.com for $3.99. I couldn't believe it. ----- Posted by Josh Briggs Question: whose comment is contrary to the others? Yes or no, is the answer "Ronald Harris'"?
No

Article: How good are you at saying "no"? For many, it's surprisingly difficult. This is especially true of editors, who by nature tend to be eager and engaged participants in everything they do. Consider these scenes: It's late in the day. That front-page package you've been working on is nearly complete; the last editing and it's finished. Then enters the chief editor, who makes a suggestion requiring a more-than-modest rearrangement of the design and the addition of an information box. You want to scream: "No! It's done!" What do you do? The first rule of saying no to the boss is "don't say no". He probably has something in mind when he makes the suggestion, and it's up to you to find out what. The second rule is "don't raise the risks by challenging his authority". That issue is already decided. The third rule is "be ready to put forward choices and consequences". The boss's suggestion might be appropriate, but there are always consequences. He might not know about the pages backing up that need attention, or about the designer who had to go home sick. Tell him he can have what he wants, but explain the consequences. Understand what he's trying to accomplish and propose a Plan B that will make it happen without destroying what you've done so far. Here's another case. Your least-favorite reporter suggests a silly story idea. This one should be easy, but it's not. If you say no, even politely, you risk holding back further ideas, not just from that reporter, but from others who heard that you turned down the idea. This case is common in newsrooms that lack a systematic way to filter story suggestions. Two steps are necessary. First, you need a system for how stories are proposed and reviewed. Reporters can bear rejection of their ideas if they believe they are given a fair hearing. Your natural reaction and strong rejection, even of a worthless idea, might not qualify as systematic or fair. Second, the people you work with need to make a "What if",agreement covering ''What if my idea is turned down?" How are people... Question: Instead of directly refusing your boss's suggestion, you should  _  . Yes or no, is the answer "seek what he is thinking about"?


assistant: No