4 ms·

I don't think this is a fair comparison. It's like complaining that I got in trouble for bribing the guard at the Ferrari dealership to look the other way when

I don't think this is a fair comparison. It's like complaining that I got in trouble for bribing the guard at the Ferrari dealership to look the other way when I drove off with a Ferrari, while the truly rich are allowed to just stroll in and pay the owner. The point is not that you mustn't get a college entrance by paying people for it, but that you must pay the right people. If you donate two million to the university, maybe they'll admit your useless child and carry them along. The two million you donated does enough good for the University that the leadership deems it worthwhile to trade. Conversely, if you bribe the coach to lie to the University, then that's you getting something of great value for far less and without paying the appropriate people. Being against the rich paying their way in is one thing, but this scandal isn't the same thing as that.

choward 6y ago
The difference is that the Ferrari isn't going to affect the rest of your life. It's mostly an ego/luxury item. Maybe it will help you make a sale if you're a real estate agent or something like that, but other than that if you didn't get the Ferrari, your life wouldn't really be affected. College on the other hand is way more important. > Being against the rich paying their way in is one thing, but this scandal isn't the same thing as that. So as long as it's legal it's okay.
- refulgentis 6y ago
  To this reader, 'its actually much more important than a Ferrari' weakens your argument for legalizing bribing college officials for admission