5 ms·

If one influential person does something bad, it's called "fraud", if a small number of influential people do something bad together, it's called "unfair". If m

If one influential person does something bad, it's called "fraud", if a small number of influential people do something bad together, it's called "unfair". If most influential people do something bad together, it's called "reality".

rexpop 8y ago
...to say nothing of the countless millions of un-influential persons violently robbed of life and liberty for just being imagined to have participated in such things.
doctorpangloss 8y ago
Yeah, I don’t know. Most of the kids in the elite education system are alright, they didn’t build this world and generally believe in an equitable one. College campuses are pretty much the most liberal places in the United States. For every 1 rich kid buying their way in, there are 10 normal kids. It’s a big red herring to worry too much about a handful of admissions to eg USC. It’s hardly an elite institution anyway. The big problem is the competition between the normal kids. Most people can’t relate to inequities in the funnel for normals in ways other than race and class. The fastest growing sectors of education—private, effectively segregated schools and test preparation—reflect this reality but I wouldn’t call it unfair or a fraud. Being a white parent and putting your kid into a school with no Asian kids, or being a middle income parent and putting your kid into a test prep program with no dirt poor kids—the reason these are bad is that they obscure actual outcomes based analysis of education in favor of useless retail indicators like test scores, income after graduation, racial composition and income levels that parents actually use to determine where to send their kids. It takes an incredible amount of sophistication, on the part of parents and students, to make wise decisions in education. So much pressure to look at easily comparable but relatively meaningless things. I sympathize with the parents with no high school education who bought their daughter’s way into USC. They didn’t know any better and most of the supposed entrepreneurs/good ideas in Ed-tech reinforce the bad trends, not work against them. Most of the programmers, product managers and businesspeople working at those companies are bought into that reductive retail system. There is basically no one with “bad grades” working on Blockly at Google. It’ll really open your mind up and make you less cynical when you realize how ill equipped well meaning institutions are to actually address inequities in education.
- chess93 8y ago
  What's the difference between someone getting in because their parents bought a building and someone getting in because their parents spent 50k/year on a highschool?
  - magnetic 8y ago
    The kid from the $50K/year high school got an education for that price (albeit expensive) and got in through his/her own work & dedication (you could say that the expensive high school "paid off"). That kid is supposed to be competent, since he got in through merit. The other kid, on the other hand...
  - analog31 8y ago
    Two different competitive pools of different sizes. The pool of kids with buildings might be small enough that they can be accepted at a 100% rate, whereas the pool of $50k/y high school kids can only be accepted at a lower rate, maybe 20% ballpark. Realistically, the kids with buildings also went to $50k/y high schools. If I understand the article, the bribery service was for upping the odds from 20% to 100% without the house getting their cut.
  - Nasrudith 8y ago
    The difference is are they getting in because of money and connections vs qualifications money helped acquire. Natural aptitude and/or sheer obsessive determination can allow anyone to compete with the second - and crucially the money must be spent well to help - if it is just more posh in surroundings but doesn't actually prepare them better than say an average Brooklyn High School then money isn't actually propping them up. Meanwhile in the first only those with money and connections can "compete".
  - CydeWeys 8y ago
    In one case, $200k is being given to a high school in exchange for an education that may be of significantly higher quality than the public schools in that area (it varies widely). In the other case, $10M is being given to the university in order to fund a building. The better question is, what are the similarities? Different amounts of money are being given to different parties for different purposes. Everything is different. The only thing that's the same is that they're all sort of vaguely related to education.
OrgNet 8y ago
if a non-influential person does the same thing, it's called a felony
- scarcely 8y ago
  Just because one is a felon doesn't mean "it's all over". Case in point, Jeremy Meeks
  - cannonedhamster 8y ago
    In many states you lose your right to vote, you lose your right to firearms, you lose your right to privacy since you're now a known felon, you have almost no chance of getting a white collar job or a high paying job unless you were already connected before the felony and very wealthy. Poor people who get felonies often get tougher sentences because they can't afford the lawyers of the wealthy. Pretty sure for most people a felony severely limits any chances of a life that isn't just scraping by or in the best case middle class. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130647626 https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130647...
teslaberry 8y ago
whether that's original of yours or not, it's salient and relevant and on point. good job and thanks for a pithy memorable quote.

rexpop 8y ago

...to say nothing of the countless millions of un-influential persons violently robbed of life and liberty for just being imagined to have participated in such things.

doctorpangloss 8y ago

Yeah, I don’t know. Most of the kids in the elite education system are alright, they didn’t build this world and generally believe in an equitable one. College campuses are pretty much the most liberal places in the United States. For every 1 rich kid buying their way in, there are 10 normal kids. It’s a big red herring to worry too much about a handful of admissions to eg USC. It’s hardly an elite institution anyway. The big problem is the competition between the normal kids. Most people can’t relate to inequities in the funnel for normals in ways other than race and class. The fastest growing sectors of education—private, effectively segregated schools and test preparation—reflect this reality but I wouldn’t call it unfair or a fraud. Being a white parent and putting your kid into a school with no Asian kids, or being a middle income parent and putting your kid into a test prep program with no dirt poor kids—the reason these are bad is that they obscure actual outcomes based analysis of education in favor of useless retail indicators like test scores, income after graduation, racial composition and income levels that parents actually use to determine where to send their kids. It takes an incredible amount of sophistication, on the part of parents and students, to make wise decisions in education. So much pressure to look at easily comparable but relatively meaningless things. I sympathize with the parents with no high school education who bought their daughter’s way into USC. They didn’t know any better and most of the supposed entrepreneurs/good ideas in Ed-tech reinforce the bad trends, not work against them. Most of the programmers, product managers and businesspeople working at those companies are bought into that reductive retail system. There is basically no one with “bad grades” working on Blockly at Google. It’ll really open your mind up and make you less cynical when you realize how ill equipped well meaning institutions are to actually address inequities in education.

chess93 8y ago
What's the difference between someone getting in because their parents bought a building and someone getting in because their parents spent 50k/year on a highschool?
- magnetic 8y ago
  The kid from the $50K/year high school got an education for that price (albeit expensive) and got in through his/her own work & dedication (you could say that the expensive high school "paid off"). That kid is supposed to be competent, since he got in through merit. The other kid, on the other hand...
- analog31 8y ago
  Two different competitive pools of different sizes. The pool of kids with buildings might be small enough that they can be accepted at a 100% rate, whereas the pool of $50k/y high school kids can only be accepted at a lower rate, maybe 20% ballpark. Realistically, the kids with buildings also went to $50k/y high schools. If I understand the article, the bribery service was for upping the odds from 20% to 100% without the house getting their cut.
- Nasrudith 8y ago
  The difference is are they getting in because of money and connections vs qualifications money helped acquire. Natural aptitude and/or sheer obsessive determination can allow anyone to compete with the second - and crucially the money must be spent well to help - if it is just more posh in surroundings but doesn't actually prepare them better than say an average Brooklyn High School then money isn't actually propping them up. Meanwhile in the first only those with money and connections can "compete".
- CydeWeys 8y ago
  In one case, $200k is being given to a high school in exchange for an education that may be of significantly higher quality than the public schools in that area (it varies widely). In the other case, $10M is being given to the university in order to fund a building. The better question is, what are the similarities? Different amounts of money are being given to different parties for different purposes. Everything is different. The only thing that's the same is that they're all sort of vaguely related to education.

OrgNet 8y ago

if a non-influential person does the same thing, it's called a felony

scarcely 8y ago
Just because one is a felon doesn't mean "it's all over". Case in point, Jeremy Meeks
- cannonedhamster 8y ago
  In many states you lose your right to vote, you lose your right to firearms, you lose your right to privacy since you're now a known felon, you have almost no chance of getting a white collar job or a high paying job unless you were already connected before the felony and very wealthy. Poor people who get felonies often get tougher sentences because they can't afford the lawyers of the wealthy. Pretty sure for most people a felony severely limits any chances of a life that isn't just scraping by or in the best case middle class. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130647626 https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130647...

teslaberry 8y ago

whether that's original of yours or not, it's salient and relevant and on point. good job and thanks for a pithy memorable quote.