Dear Chandler Thompson,   The common theme I see in this and, other communications related to cost increases, is a continual mention of how we should accept it because administrators are having a hard time making ends meet and because we’re already getting a good deal. What I see is that within 5 years, it is likely that tuition and fees will be nearly double their current level–almost triple that of only 3-4 years ago. This is unacceptable.   It is the job of administrators to figure out how to provide the required services with the money they have–that’s the point of the budgeting process and part of the reason we pay them their six-figure salaries. They should not see it as an acceptable alternative to simply continue to raise student tuition and fees semester after semester to cover the gaps in their own failure to make ends meet. This is more commonly known as a cop out.   The fact that we are getting a good deal is the main reason I came to N.C. State. I am footing almost the entire cost of attendance for my education through part-time jobs and internships, and I could not afford to do the same if the tuition continues to rise in the manner that it has so far–especially with the raises described in your email–regardless of the fact that administrators making six figures annually still see it as a bargain.   I understand that these are tough times. However, actions like this reinforce the perception that our administration is flailing about without a solution. Every year, administrators bring in more and more students without expanding classroom or faculty capacity as a way to increase revenue–already reducing the quality of the educational experience. To force tuition and fee increases on top of that is further insult to injury.   Please do everything in your power and influence to oppose this action and all similar efforts by the board of trustees and the N.C. State administration. I understand that recent budget cuts by the state have made things difficult. However, raising tuition and fees is not a solution–it simply allows the school to continue operating in an inefficient and ineffective manner while punishing students for their own shortcomings.   Daniel Eckert junior, computer engineering