Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 294 posts

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#51

Post by olliej »

darpa_escapee wrote: post #33
olliej wrote: post #29

I feel like the solution here is to not bribe your children's way into school. If your children aren't academically talented and you don't have the money to publicly buy a building for the school you should accept that and just let them live off your money and power as is traditional.

> If your children aren't academically talented and you don't have the money to publicly buy a building for the school you should accept that and just let them live off your money and power as is traditional. The tradition is nepotism and bribes. It's a relatively recent thing for the state to go after the moderately wealthy for doing what they've done for millennia.

That was a joke targeting the tradition of the rich and powerful using said riches and power to get in, but at least it was obvious and in the public eye - it doesn't take a huge amount of deductive reasoning to see the connection between the new "Mark McMarksFace" Building and little jimmy mcmarksface gets into school). Similarly seeing friends and family of the school board getting in shouldn't be shocking.

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#52

Post by vkou »

protomyth wrote: post #9
iscrewyou wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a great way to polarize more people in this political environment if some of these parents are let off the hook.

People have been giving buildings and endowments for hundreds of years. It is not illegal to give buildings and money for the endowments. What these folks did was run a scam on the university.

What these folks did was to bribe the employees of the university, as opposed to the university itself.

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#53

Post by vkou »

protomyth wrote: post #16
iscrewyou wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completely agree with you. I’m just commenting on the fact that these people should not be let off the hook just because they donate a building.

There is no hook or wrong doing in giving a building. It benefits a lot of people. These folks actually did something illegal. Grouping people who actually gave to the university with people who paid a scam artist is wrong.

> There is no hook or wrong doing in giving a building.

It's not giving if you're expecting a quid-pro-quo. The word you're looking for is 'bribe'.

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#54

Post by olliej »

munk-a wrote: post #38
olliej wrote: post #29

I feel like the solution here is to not bribe your children's way into school. If your children aren't academically talented and you don't have the money to publicly buy a building for the school you should accept that and just let them live off your money and power as is traditional.

I don't think building purchasing should even be allowed, remove all of the slippery slope and put students on equal footing.

You still get the wondrous private institution problem of hereditary entry (which is a great example of something that isn't explicitly racist still resulting in a fundamentally and uncorrectable racist result)

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#55

Post by jonhohle »

munk-a wrote: post #38
olliej wrote: post #29

I feel like the solution here is to not bribe your children's way into school. If your children aren't academically talented and you don't have the money to publicly buy a building for the school you should accept that and just let them live off your money and power as is traditional.

I don't think building purchasing should even be allowed, remove all of the slippery slope and put students on equal footing.

Paying for a building, at least, has some public benefit. Direct bribes to individuals only benefits the student and conspirator.

(not saying I agree, just that there is more utility)

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#56

Post by cletus »

Honestly, I really don't understand the motivations for some of these parents. Take Lori Loughlin. $500,000? For USC? For two daughters, one of whom clearly isn't that interested, isn't particularly academic and isn't particularly athletic? Like... why?

I can understand if someone bribes their kid into, say, Harvard or Yale Law School. There's a career where going to a good school matters. But this? It just makes no sense to me.

Felicity Huffman may end up being sentenced to 10 months in jail (and, let's face it, might serve only 5) but, still, that's a big deal for someone who probably never expected to go to jail. It's also on the lighter end because of her guilty plea and cooperation with the prosecution. What are these parents who have plead not guilty going to get when they're found guilty?

Add to this the children have to live with the stigma of these actions. I don't have a huge amount of sympathy here because at least some of them were complicit. Posing for photos faking crew, that sort of thing. But still... why would you want to risk your children having to live with that... to go to USC?

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#57

Post by darawk »

The actual problem here is not the bribery. The problem is that those bribes are being captured by random 3rd parties, rather than by the school itself. The correct way to implement college admissions is this: Charge a sliding scale fee based on application quality, and then use the excess revenue generated to subsidize poor kids tuition. Your kid has a 2.5 GPA and wants to go to Harvard? Great, that'll be a million dollars a year. You'll be funding the tuition of 20-30 kids of lesser means and everybody wins.

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#58

Post by madengr »

munk-a wrote: post #44
ForrestN wrote: post #40

I'm surprised that this scandal doesn't seem to be causing anyone to think one step further and realize that the entire premise of "elite" colleges with competitive admissions is a device for the perpetuation of inequality. We're devoting most of our advanced educational resources to helping people who would already be successful reap even more rewards. I understand the idea of meritocracy in fields with life or deat…

Back a while high school was the sort of "standard education" things have changed and now college is considered the default level people should have in the workforce, back when college was rare I think private colleges made sense, they were more of a final specialty training step at the end of your education - now that has shifted over to PhDs - let PhD programs remain privatized for whatever reasons, but we should e…

I don’t want the USA to turn into India or China, where your academic fate is decided by some cruddy standardized test given in 5th grade.

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#59

Post by NotSammyHagar »

jonhohle wrote: post #55
munk-a wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think building purchasing should even be allowed, remove all of the slippery slope and put students on equal footing.

Paying for a building, at least, has some public benefit. Direct bribes to individuals only benefits the student and conspirator. (not saying I agree, just that there is more utility)

You are bribing the institution when you buy a building. It could be useful or wasted, just like giving money to a person.

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#60

Post by yeahitslikethat »

HaloZero wrote: post #47
yeahitslikethat wrote: post #22

What is criminal about this? I never heard of someone going to jail for cheating on an SAT test. And why aren't the admissions boards going to jail for accepting the bribes?

Because the proctor was the one who was bribed, not the organization itself.

"Charges ranged from cheating on college entrance exams to paying bribe money to university officials, "
Post reply on HN