Harvard vows to keep the cash
Comments
-
41 billion endowment and they are going to use tax payer money to give to students who go to their school. Harvard is the classic liberal bastion. The rich elites steal from the little people and continue to live their lives of luxury.
From that endowment they should be paying for half their enrollments tuition and those students should all be from middle and lower class families. Instead they enroll Biff and Buffy rich elites and legacies and throw a bone to far too few less privileged who then have several hundred thousand in student loans to pay back upon graduation. Classic liberal elite behavior. -
"Their whole endowment system should be looked at."
Them's fightin' words. Plus, most of that money was gifted to them. They're not giving it up w/o a fight. -
This is not quite accurate. Harvard is a no loan school. They don't make loans, and few students who need the help take them out from other sources. Over half who attend receive aid based on need; 1 in 5 doesn't pay a dime to attend.Bendintheriver said:41 billion endowment and they are going to use tax payer money to give to students who go to their school. Harvard is the classic liberal bastion. The rich elites steal from the little people and continue to live their lives of luxury.
From that endowment they should be paying for half their enrollments tuition and those students should all be from middle and lower class families. Instead they enroll Biff and Buffy rich elites and legacies and throw a bone to far too few less privileged who then have several hundred thousand in student loans to pay back upon graduation. Classic liberal elite behavior.
Harvard, along with several other elite institutions, moved to a need-blind admissions policy years ago, with the aim of admitting the smartest of the smart, however you measure that. Sure, there are kids who get in through various channels, including the rich and famous from both ends of the political spectrum. But by and large, that is the exception to the rule, and Harvard admissions is mostly a meritocracy. They absolutely use their endowment to subsidize cost of attendance for more than half of their students, many receiving full support if they demonstrate need.
I defend them and their like because they are a shining example of how the private sector can work to deal with issues of social inequality. Their wealth guarantees access to those who otherwise would not be able to attend. That beats relying on the state in my book. That's my argument for their tax-exempt status. I'm not sure what the argument is for the church. -
Harvard is a pretty solid meritocracy.creepycoug said:
This is not quite accurate. Harvard is a no loan school. They don't make loans, and few students who need the help take them out from other sources. Over half who attend receive aid based on need; 1 in 5 doesn't pay a dime to attend.Bendintheriver said:41 billion endowment and they are going to use tax payer money to give to students who go to their school. Harvard is the classic liberal bastion. The rich elites steal from the little people and continue to live their lives of luxury.
From that endowment they should be paying for half their enrollments tuition and those students should all be from middle and lower class families. Instead they enroll Biff and Buffy rich elites and legacies and throw a bone to far too few less privileged who then have several hundred thousand in student loans to pay back upon graduation. Classic liberal elite behavior.
Harvard, along with several other elite institutions, moved to a need-blind admissions policy years ago, with the aim of admitting the smartest of the smart, however you measure that. Sure, there are kids who get in through various channels, including the rich and famous from both ends of the political spectrum. But by and large, that is the exception to the rule, and Harvard admissions is mostly a meritocracy. They absolutely use their endowment to subsidize cost of attendance for more than half of their students, many receiving full support if they demonstrate need.
I defend them and their like because they are a shining example of how the private sector can work to deal with issues of social inequality. Their wealth guarantees access to those who otherwise would not be able to attend. That beats relying on the state in my book. That's my argument for their tax-exempt status. I'm not sure what the argument is for the church.
As long as you're not Asian.
-
You want to turn the snotty Liberals against paying off student loan debt simply add the stipulation that any program that does must be funded from the confiscation of University endowments to help fund it.creepycoug said:"Their whole endowment system should be looked at."
Them's fightin' words. Plus, most of that money was gifted to them. They're not giving it up w/o a fight.
Should shut it up pretty quickly... -
Didn't say it was perfect. They engage in social engineering by trying to have a broadly diverse student body, as measured by a lot of things.dnc said:
Harvard is a pretty solid meritocracy.creepycoug said:
This is not quite accurate. Harvard is a no loan school. They don't make loans, and few students who need the help take them out from other sources. Over half who attend receive aid based on need; 1 in 5 doesn't pay a dime to attend.Bendintheriver said:41 billion endowment and they are going to use tax payer money to give to students who go to their school. Harvard is the classic liberal bastion. The rich elites steal from the little people and continue to live their lives of luxury.
From that endowment they should be paying for half their enrollments tuition and those students should all be from middle and lower class families. Instead they enroll Biff and Buffy rich elites and legacies and throw a bone to far too few less privileged who then have several hundred thousand in student loans to pay back upon graduation. Classic liberal elite behavior.
Harvard, along with several other elite institutions, moved to a need-blind admissions policy years ago, with the aim of admitting the smartest of the smart, however you measure that. Sure, there are kids who get in through various channels, including the rich and famous from both ends of the political spectrum. But by and large, that is the exception to the rule, and Harvard admissions is mostly a meritocracy. They absolutely use their endowment to subsidize cost of attendance for more than half of their students, many receiving full support if they demonstrate need.
I defend them and their like because they are a shining example of how the private sector can work to deal with issues of social inequality. Their wealth guarantees access to those who otherwise would not be able to attend. That beats relying on the state in my book. That's my argument for their tax-exempt status. I'm not sure what the argument is for the church.
As long as you're not Asian.
It's not always just race/ethnicity. Socio-economic status is used. And geography. A LS classmate of mine, who did undergrad at Yale, used to joke that the primary reason he got into EVERY Ivy League school (which is very hard to do, btw) was because he was from Elma. We used to joke about how it must've gone the day Yale got his app. Admissions Dean to Secretary: Marge, can you go find the last time a kid from Elma Washington attended? Secretary: Yes, sir. My search on the Wang shows Gilbert Bartholomew McGilliguddy III, from Elma Washington, graduated with the class of 1918.
There's all kinds of shit that happens in admissions. Some good; some not. The Asians are screaming loud about now and funding all the law suits, because elite academis is very important to them.
As someone who has spent time in this space, my vote is that it's good and healthy to not have a class of students made up of 90% Asian American student body. The educational experience would suffer. I admit I'm biased right now because I'm mad @RoadDawg55 because China virus. But still.
Harvard is as close to a meritocracy as you're going to get outside of sports. The kids there, and schools like, are across the board very, very, very capable. They just are!!!! -
Didn't say it was perfect. They engage in social engineering by trying to have a broadly diverse student body, as measured by a lot of things.
It's not always just race/ethnicity. Socio-economic status is used. And geography. A LS classmate of mine, who did undergrad at Yale, used to joke that the primary reason he got into EVERY Ivy League school (which is very hard to do, btw) was because he was from Elma. We used to joke about how it must've gone the day Yale got his app. Admissions Dean to Secretary: Marge, can you go find the last time a kid from Elma Washington attended? Secretary: Yes, sir. My search on the Wang shows Gilbert Bartholomew McGilliguddy III, from Elma Washington, graduated with the class of 1918.
There's all kinds of shit that happens in admissions. Some good; some not. The Asians are screaming loud about now and funding all the law suits, because elite academis is very important to them.
As someone who has spent time in this space, my vote is that it's good and healthy to not have a class of students made up of 90% Asian American student body. The educational experience would suffer. I admit I'm biased right now because I'm mad @RoadDawg55 because China virus. But still.
Harvard is as close to a meritocracy as you're going to get outside of sports. The kids there, and schools like, are across the board very, very, very capable. They just are!!!! -
I've never been even remotely supportive of the debt forgiveness idea. Frankly, I think it's absurd and flies in the face of a founding principal of our society. Do that and people will stop making the loans altogether.HoustonHusky said:
You want to turn the snotty Liberals against paying off student loan debt simply add the stipulation that any program that does must be funded from the confiscation of University endowments to help fund it.creepycoug said:"Their whole endowment system should be looked at."
Them's fightin' words. Plus, most of that money was gifted to them. They're not giving it up w/o a fight.
Should shut it up pretty quickly... -
Nicely done Creep. You just ruined a perfectly good angry populist rant.creepycoug said:
This is not quite accurate. Harvard is a no loan school. They don't make loans, and few students who need the help take them out from other sources. Over half who attend receive aid based on need; 1 in 5 doesn't pay a dime to attend.Bendintheriver said:41 billion endowment and they are going to use tax payer money to give to students who go to their school. Harvard is the classic liberal bastion. The rich elites steal from the little people and continue to live their lives of luxury.
From that endowment they should be paying for half their enrollments tuition and those students should all be from middle and lower class families. Instead they enroll Biff and Buffy rich elites and legacies and throw a bone to far too few less privileged who then have several hundred thousand in student loans to pay back upon graduation. Classic liberal elite behavior.
Harvard, along with several other elite institutions, moved to a need-blind admissions policy years ago, with the aim of admitting the smartest of the smart, however you measure that. Sure, there are kids who get in through various channels, including the rich and famous from both ends of the political spectrum. But by and large, that is the exception to the rule, and Harvard admissions is mostly a meritocracy. They absolutely use their endowment to subsidize cost of attendance for more than half of their students, many receiving full support if they demonstrate need.
I defend them and their like because they are a shining example of how the private sector can work to deal with issues of social inequality. Their wealth guarantees access to those who otherwise would not be able to attend. That beats relying on the state in my book. That's my argument for their tax-exempt status. I'm not sure what the argument is for the church. -
Wow. That is not correct. We know numerous cases with middle class minority students who have been valedictorians from some tough areas (Miami, South Atlanta, St Louis) that got next to nothing as far as scholarship. Our friends in Miami, their Cuban daughter with an almost perfect SAT and a 4.4 GPA and and incredible extra curricular resume got 15K assistance. Accepted but no help. Friends in South Atlanta, African American valedictorian, perfect GPA, a perfect score on the SAT, incredible resume got 20K assistance. This kid was from an impoverished area. The best of the best. They were accepted and given next to nothingcreepycoug said:
This is not quite accurate. Harvard is a no loan school. They don't make loans, and few students who need the help take them out from other sources. Over half who attend receive aid based on need; 1 in 5 doesn't pay a dime to attend.Bendintheriver said:41 billion endowment and they are going to use tax payer money to give to students who go to their school. Harvard is the classic liberal bastion. The rich elites steal from the little people and continue to live their lives of luxury.
From that endowment they should be paying for half their enrollments tuition and those students should all be from middle and lower class families. Instead they enroll Biff and Buffy rich elites and legacies and throw a bone to far too few less privileged who then have several hundred thousand in student loans to pay back upon graduation. Classic liberal elite behavior.
Harvard, along with several other elite institutions, moved to a need-blind admissions policy years ago, with the aim of admitting the smartest of the smart, however you measure that. Sure, there are kids who get in through various channels, including the rich and famous from both ends of the political spectrum. But by and large, that is the exception to the rule, and Harvard admissions is mostly a meritocracy. They absolutely use their endowment to subsidize cost of attendance for more than half of their students, many receiving full support if they demonstrate need.
I defend them and their like because they are a shining example of how the private sector can work to deal with issues of social inequality. Their wealth guarantees access to those who otherwise would not be able to attend. That beats relying on the state in my book. That's my argument for their tax-exempt status. I'm not sure what the argument is for the church.
I get it. Harvard with a 41 Billion endowment wants you to believe their bullshit. Biff and Buffy legacy is huge at the school. We know a couple of people who are alumni, connected and who have had kids who are not worthy gain entrance to the school. One couple had both their children accepted and neither was a shining star. I have fired two Harvard grads over the years, both were entitled POS, lazy as hell. Both got in because of mommy and daddy.
Again I get it. Harvard could give every student a free education for 100+ years and not feel it but they don't want to look bad so they make up their bullshit.
Tuition has gone up exponentially since the Fed started giving out student loans. Harvard has taken horrible advantage of the American tax payer. The average professor makes 225K for doing next to nothing. They get about 425 million a year in federal research grants. Yet they still only give the top of the top minority students 15K in scholarship for what amounts to about a 65-70K per year education.
In short, there is nothing generous about Harvard and if you are connected you can get your kid in over a brilliant middle class kid who actually earned it.
