6 ms·

I have a hard time believing this. Every course I took in college had at least 15 people and usually 30-50 people. Large classes like Calculus 1-2, Linear Alg

I have a hard time believing this. Every course I took in college had at least 15 people and usually 30-50 people. Large classes like Calculus 1-2, Linear Algebra, and Differential Equations had at least 300 people. There is no way you cannot pay the salary + legitimate overhead for 1 profess, and 1-10 TAs with these class sizes. My guess is a lot of the money does not go to instruction but goes to administration, sports palaces (stadiums), luxury dorms, etc. Colleges used to be MUCH cheaper in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s. The education was just as good but cost far less. The big problem with colleges today is they are "non-profit" in name only. Instead, of giving profits to shareholders, they are giving them to employees and insiders. This hurts students and the United States. However, colleges do not care because they, their employees, and friends benefit.

wakawaka28 3y ago
Sports more or less pays for itself in most cases and even brings in profits. That's why even public colleges have active sports programs. You are right about other luxury amenities. But even basic facilities cost pretty serious money, even if they are only built every 50-100 years or so. If I had to estimate, I'd say no school currently pays more than 25% of tuition on actual teaching. Administrators and luxury facilities account for most of the other spending. The real cause of these escalating costs is easy credit for tuition. There would simply be no big market for the current overpriced programs if people couldn't get loans regardless of outcomes. I would like creditors to have to prove how the students will pay for the median salary of a person with the same degree before loaning the money. You should not be able to borrow hundreds of thousands of dollars for stupid stuff that will never pay off.
- ecshafer 3y ago
  sports only pays for itself in a minority of highly successful schools, and even then typically only Football or Basketball. So sure Penn State and Auburn football pull a profit, but the vast majority do not. Last I checked on these, the number of schools was <20 that were profitable.
  - wakawaka28 3y ago
    You're wrong about that. See this for example: https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances Not only is sports usually profitable on the surface but it draws donations and new students. Administrators aren't as stupid as you think.
- onlypassingthru 3y ago
  There is exactly 1 college sport that typically pays for itself and every other sport at the university, with the slight possibility of a second sport contributing to the coffers ONLY if the college is a D1 school and competes regularly in March Madness. For those unfamiliar with American college athletics, American Football is the money maker via shared revenue from broadcasting rights and Men's Basketball can be a net cash flow positive also via broadcasting if they're an elite team. Every other sport is a net cost for the school because nobody watches all the other sports shown on ESPN Ocho.
  - wakawaka28 3y ago
    Football is the most profitable and most colleges do make money on it. https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances Not only is sports usually profitable on the surface but it draws donations and new students. Administrators aren't as stupid as you think. Sports need not cost a huge amount of money. Stadiums used for one sport can easily be used for other purposes instead of letting it lay fallow in the time between football games. It always amazes me that people simultaneously say that colleges are sharks when it comes to maximizing tuition and minimizing expenses, while also saying that sports are objectively a waste of money. They aren't stupid. If sports wasn't a desirable thing to invest in, they wouldn't do it. We could make the same complaint about luxury amenities too. The fact is that colleges have to compete with each other, and they charge enough to pay for everything. Could tuition be lower if not for all of these luxuries? Maybe so. Should core education get more money? Perhaps. It certainly used to bother me that sports got more money than academics. But I really get that it's a legitimate business decision to allocate some money to sports. I don't even like sports much but I would not cut it out if I were them.
- Vegenoid 3y ago
  > If I had to estimate, I'd say no school currently pays more than 25% of tuition on actual teaching. Is this based on anything at all? Any direct experience you have, any sources? I don’t mean to be rude, and I don’t expect everyone to have expertise on something just to talk about it - but when people start using numbers as evidence for their claims, I think a higher standard is warranted.
  - true_religion 3y ago
    Most undergraduate degrees don’t really require much in the way of infrastructure. I went to school as an English major. I struggle to see why the cost of tuition has gone from 6k per semester when I attended to 35k now 20 years later. Did salaries grow 6x?
    - wakawaka28 3y ago
      No but the dollar is worth about a third of what it was 20 years ago, at best. You might not even realize the infrastructure that the school uses. Those big buildings are expensive and use tens of thousands of dollars in electricity every month. If your school has shuttles to take people back and forth to the dorms or parking, that is also a constant expense. The library has to pay tens of thousands of dollars for access to academic databases. Computer labs, printing, internet, security, and so on. It all adds up quick.
      - echoangle 3y ago
        https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/ https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/ tells me the dollar is worth 60% of what it was worth in 2004, that’s a lot more than a third. Where did you get that figure from?
        wakawaka28 2y ago
        The real rate of inflation is higher than what they say it is. Some products have gotten cheaper due to outsourcing but almost everything that matters (education, health care, housing) has exploded in price over the last 20 years. So has the money supply. If you want more honest numbers, try https://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/inflation-charts https://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/inflation-charts Realistically, prices are up 40% since the pandemic alone. That's a lot less than 20 years. Not to be an ass, but if you weren't an adult in 2004, your opinion on this is going to be unduely skewed by propaganda I'm afraid. Not every old person has such a clear view of things either but having lived back then sure makes a big difference in perspective. Idk how anyone with basic number sense who has shopped for anything like a normal person can think inflation is less than 10% per year.
brianwawok 3y ago
How much has state aid changed in 40 years? That’s also big
lupire 3y ago
You not liking how the money is spent doesn't mean the money's not spent on the product being sold to you. Tuition grants you access to the campus resources. I don't like the CEO of global corp making a billion dollars, but it's still part of the price of the globowidgets that I buy. At expensive schools, those large classes are usually much smaller.

wakawaka28 3y ago

Sports more or less pays for itself in most cases and even brings in profits. That's why even public colleges have active sports programs. You are right about other luxury amenities. But even basic facilities cost pretty serious money, even if they are only built every 50-100 years or so. If I had to estimate, I'd say no school currently pays more than 25% of tuition on actual teaching. Administrators and luxury facilities account for most of the other spending. The real cause of these escalating costs is easy credit for tuition. There would simply be no big market for the current overpriced programs if people couldn't get loans regardless of outcomes. I would like creditors to have to prove how the students will pay for the median salary of a person with the same degree before loaning the money. You should not be able to borrow hundreds of thousands of dollars for stupid stuff that will never pay off.

ecshafer 3y ago
sports only pays for itself in a minority of highly successful schools, and even then typically only Football or Basketball. So sure Penn State and Auburn football pull a profit, but the vast majority do not. Last I checked on these, the number of schools was <20 that were profitable.
- wakawaka28 3y ago
  You're wrong about that. See this for example: https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances Not only is sports usually profitable on the surface but it draws donations and new students. Administrators aren't as stupid as you think.
onlypassingthru 3y ago
There is exactly 1 college sport that typically pays for itself and every other sport at the university, with the slight possibility of a second sport contributing to the coffers ONLY if the college is a D1 school and competes regularly in March Madness. For those unfamiliar with American college athletics, American Football is the money maker via shared revenue from broadcasting rights and Men's Basketball can be a net cash flow positive also via broadcasting if they're an elite team. Every other sport is a net cost for the school because nobody watches all the other sports shown on ESPN Ocho.
- wakawaka28 3y ago
  Football is the most profitable and most colleges do make money on it. https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances Not only is sports usually profitable on the surface but it draws donations and new students. Administrators aren't as stupid as you think. Sports need not cost a huge amount of money. Stadiums used for one sport can easily be used for other purposes instead of letting it lay fallow in the time between football games. It always amazes me that people simultaneously say that colleges are sharks when it comes to maximizing tuition and minimizing expenses, while also saying that sports are objectively a waste of money. They aren't stupid. If sports wasn't a desirable thing to invest in, they wouldn't do it. We could make the same complaint about luxury amenities too. The fact is that colleges have to compete with each other, and they charge enough to pay for everything. Could tuition be lower if not for all of these luxuries? Maybe so. Should core education get more money? Perhaps. It certainly used to bother me that sports got more money than academics. But I really get that it's a legitimate business decision to allocate some money to sports. I don't even like sports much but I would not cut it out if I were them.
Vegenoid 3y ago
> If I had to estimate, I'd say no school currently pays more than 25% of tuition on actual teaching. Is this based on anything at all? Any direct experience you have, any sources? I don’t mean to be rude, and I don’t expect everyone to have expertise on something just to talk about it - but when people start using numbers as evidence for their claims, I think a higher standard is warranted.
- true_religion 3y ago
  Most undergraduate degrees don’t really require much in the way of infrastructure. I went to school as an English major. I struggle to see why the cost of tuition has gone from 6k per semester when I attended to 35k now 20 years later. Did salaries grow 6x?
  - wakawaka28 3y ago
    No but the dollar is worth about a third of what it was 20 years ago, at best. You might not even realize the infrastructure that the school uses. Those big buildings are expensive and use tens of thousands of dollars in electricity every month. If your school has shuttles to take people back and forth to the dorms or parking, that is also a constant expense. The library has to pay tens of thousands of dollars for access to academic databases. Computer labs, printing, internet, security, and so on. It all adds up quick.
    - echoangle 3y ago
      https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/ https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/ tells me the dollar is worth 60% of what it was worth in 2004, that’s a lot more than a third. Where did you get that figure from?
      - wakawaka28 2y ago
        The real rate of inflation is higher than what they say it is. Some products have gotten cheaper due to outsourcing but almost everything that matters (education, health care, housing) has exploded in price over the last 20 years. So has the money supply. If you want more honest numbers, try https://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/inflation-charts https://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/inflation-charts Realistically, prices are up 40% since the pandemic alone. That's a lot less than 20 years. Not to be an ass, but if you weren't an adult in 2004, your opinion on this is going to be unduely skewed by propaganda I'm afraid. Not every old person has such a clear view of things either but having lived back then sure makes a big difference in perspective. Idk how anyone with basic number sense who has shopped for anything like a normal person can think inflation is less than 10% per year.

brianwawok 3y ago

How much has state aid changed in 40 years? That’s also big

lupire 3y ago

You not liking how the money is spent doesn't mean the money's not spent on the product being sold to you. Tuition grants you access to the campus resources. I don't like the CEO of global corp making a billion dollars, but it's still part of the price of the globowidgets that I buy. At expensive schools, those large classes are usually much smaller.