5 ms·

"...because the Charity-status ( 501(c)(3) ) of Colleges in America depends on more-than-half of their students being unable to afford the education (read: “rec

"...because the Charity-status ( 501(c)(3) ) of Colleges in America depends on more-than-half of their students being unable to afford the education (read: “receiving financial aid”)" I wasn't aware of this at all. Do you have a source? Non-profits don't generally need to give away their money.

cjmb 8y ago
For sure, you’re totally right that non-profits don’t generally need to give away their money. I tried to touch on this idea in the “Case for Charity: A Charity Case” section, but my approach is to view it idealistically / as things should or might be. And in a hypothetical world where Colleges charge double-digit fractions of a family’s net worth, while generating as much investment profit as our best companies and hedge funds, but where 0% of students received any “aid”...... .....and the institution was still allowed to remain a non-profit and have returns tax-sheltered.... ....I can’t imagine that such a state of affairs would be allowed to continue. Which organizations are allowed to be considered 501(c)(3) and on what basis and what privileges that affords them is a matter that is hypothetically at the prerogative of Congress. I know trust in Congress/the political process is pretty damn low these days. But my point with the “best play it safe” comment was basically...if I were colleges, I wouldn’t roll the dice.
- firethief 8y ago
  But no one is "colleges", if they're each acting in their own best interest. I don't see how this argument explains their behavior unless colleges are coordinating as a cartel. What's keeping them each in line?
  - mcguire 8y ago
    One of the points in the article is that this tier of colleges have been operating as a cartel since before the 1990s.
    - firethief 8y ago
      Are you implying that there's more to the financial-aid-cap scheme than we know?
extra88 8y ago
You weren’t aware of it because it’s not true.

cjmb 8y ago

For sure, you’re totally right that non-profits don’t generally need to give away their money. I tried to touch on this idea in the “Case for Charity: A Charity Case” section, but my approach is to view it idealistically / as things should or might be. And in a hypothetical world where Colleges charge double-digit fractions of a family’s net worth, while generating as much investment profit as our best companies and hedge funds, but where 0% of students received any “aid”...... .....and the institution was still allowed to remain a non-profit and have returns tax-sheltered.... ....I can’t imagine that such a state of affairs would be allowed to continue. Which organizations are allowed to be considered 501(c)(3) and on what basis and what privileges that affords them is a matter that is hypothetically at the prerogative of Congress. I know trust in Congress/the political process is pretty damn low these days. But my point with the “best play it safe” comment was basically...if I were colleges, I wouldn’t roll the dice.

firethief 8y ago
But no one is "colleges", if they're each acting in their own best interest. I don't see how this argument explains their behavior unless colleges are coordinating as a cartel. What's keeping them each in line?
- mcguire 8y ago
  One of the points in the article is that this tier of colleges have been operating as a cartel since before the 1990s.
  - firethief 8y ago
    Are you implying that there's more to the financial-aid-cap scheme than we know?

extra88 8y ago

You weren’t aware of it because it’s not true.