3 ms·

Because it is really a discount to the parents, not the student. It is understood that few 17 year olds have saved enough money to pay MIT's tuition of $85k/yea

Because it is really a discount to the parents, not the student. It is understood that few 17 year olds have saved enough money to pay MIT's tuition of $85k/year for 4 years and parents are usually footing the bill. Yes, students who's parents have money but choose not to spend it get a rough deal. You can make a pretty strong case that it is their parents screwing them over, not the school. The school doesn't owe a discount to prospective students.

bigstrat2003 2y ago
> Yes, students who's parents have money but choose not to spend it get a rough deal. You can make a pretty strong case that it is their parents screwing them over, not the school. No you can't. The school is the one choosing to set their prices based on the parents, who might or might not have anything to do with the student's school budget. That is the school's faulty assumption, and they, not the parents, are the ones screwing over those students.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  My point is that the school has zero obligation to a prospective student. If the parents have the means to pay, but dont want to, that seems to be a bigger question of responsibility and obligation.
ndriscoll 2y ago
You can't make that case at all. The price these name-brand schools ask is pretty much "how much do you(r parents) have?", and your kids could instead go to state school (if they can get into MIT, they probably qualify for a full ride scholarship or at least close) and have that tuition go to an ~80% down payment on their first house.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  I agree with that. I dont see how that is MIT's problem.
  - ndriscoll 2y ago
    It's not their problem, but they're setting the absurd price, so it's not the parents screwing over the kids somehow. The price being so outrageously high does also call into question whether their charitable endowments could reasonably be characterized as part of a tax avoidance scam.
    - s1artibartfast 2y ago
      >The price being so outrageously high does also call into question whether their charitable endowments could reasonably be characterized as part of a tax avoidance scam. I dont see how that follows at all. They spend more on students than they receive in tuition funds. Who would they be scamming? What if they offered a million dollar education? I still dont see how that would impact their non-profit status.
      - ndriscoll 2y ago
        If they offered a million dollar education, I'd say the IRS should heavily scrutinize their budget, and if they did manage to stay within the letter of the law, it's likely that the law should be fixed because holistically, it's unlikely that they're truly spending over 20x what comparable universities do on educating students.
        s1artibartfast 2y ago
        What laws are you worried about specifically? You could run a non-profit giving million dollar spa days.
        ndriscoll 2y ago
        You can't run a 501(c)(3) giving million dollar spa days though. If you're actually running e.g. a 501(c)(7) social club, then your investment income is taxable, and there are limits on unrelated business activities. If you're an educational nonprofit and your purported spending on education is wildly out of line with what it costs elsewhere, that should raise eyebrows as to whether that money is being spent on education.

bigstrat2003 2y ago

> Yes, students who's parents have money but choose not to spend it get a rough deal. You can make a pretty strong case that it is their parents screwing them over, not the school. No you can't. The school is the one choosing to set their prices based on the parents, who might or might not have anything to do with the student's school budget. That is the school's faulty assumption, and they, not the parents, are the ones screwing over those students.

s1artibartfast 2y ago
My point is that the school has zero obligation to a prospective student. If the parents have the means to pay, but dont want to, that seems to be a bigger question of responsibility and obligation.

ndriscoll 2y ago

You can't make that case at all. The price these name-brand schools ask is pretty much "how much do you(r parents) have?", and your kids could instead go to state school (if they can get into MIT, they probably qualify for a full ride scholarship or at least close) and have that tuition go to an ~80% down payment on their first house.

s1artibartfast 2y ago
I agree with that. I dont see how that is MIT's problem.
- ndriscoll 2y ago
  It's not their problem, but they're setting the absurd price, so it's not the parents screwing over the kids somehow. The price being so outrageously high does also call into question whether their charitable endowments could reasonably be characterized as part of a tax avoidance scam.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    >The price being so outrageously high does also call into question whether their charitable endowments could reasonably be characterized as part of a tax avoidance scam. I dont see how that follows at all. They spend more on students than they receive in tuition funds. Who would they be scamming? What if they offered a million dollar education? I still dont see how that would impact their non-profit status.
    - ndriscoll 2y ago
      If they offered a million dollar education, I'd say the IRS should heavily scrutinize their budget, and if they did manage to stay within the letter of the law, it's likely that the law should be fixed because holistically, it's unlikely that they're truly spending over 20x what comparable universities do on educating students.
      - s1artibartfast 2y ago
        What laws are you worried about specifically? You could run a non-profit giving million dollar spa days.
        ndriscoll 2y ago
        You can't run a 501(c)(3) giving million dollar spa days though. If you're actually running e.g. a 501(c)(7) social club, then your investment income is taxable, and there are limits on unrelated business activities. If you're an educational nonprofit and your purported spending on education is wildly out of line with what it costs elsewhere, that should raise eyebrows as to whether that money is being spent on education.