> Donating a building is a payment to the university. > The university then gets to decide to admit your child in return. > It may not be meritocratic, but it

> Donating a building is a payment to the university. > The university then gets to decide to admit your child in return. > It may not be meritocratic, but it's not corrupt (except perhaps insofar as by pretending the exchange is a donation, the university and donor manage to cheat the taxman). > The donor is simply paying the university to provide a service that they have every right to offer for money. > It also benefits other students, which is why the universities take the deals in the first place. > In this case, we're talking about bribery of specific employees to act against the interests of their employer. That's simply corruption. > They might be equally non-meritocratic, but they're definitely not equally dishonest or equally socially harmful.[1] 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19369775 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19369775