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

Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

harvard.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 1001 posts

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#521

Post by palmotea »

tmpz22 wrote: post #363
allturtles wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conservatives should start their own universities, if they aren't happy with the existing ones. The federal government has no business enforcing conformity to certain ideological demands in private institutions. It's right there in the very first amendment.

> Conservatives should start their own universities They did. Remember Trump University? It got shut down for fraud.

I don't think Trump University was ever indented to be a real university. Wasn't it basically the Trump-branded version of those late night infomercials promising to teach you how to get rich in real estate? You know, the ones where ultimately they basically just sell you a bunch of tapes for $5000?

If you're looking for an actual conservative university, a better example would be a place like Liberty University. I think the problem is starting an institution is hard, it'll only really hit its stride like 100 years after being founded, and it's hard to keep an ideological project on track for such a long period of time.

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#522

Post by VincentEvans »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #440
robocat wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Republicans Are Floating Plans To Raise the Endowment Tax. Here’s What You Need To Know : https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2025/2/11/increasing-endo... Proposed College Endowment Tax Hike: What to Know : https://thecollegeinvestor.com/52851/proposed-college-endowm... College endowments are typically tax-exempt, but a 2017 law imposed a 1.4% tax on investment income for a small group of wealthy private universities.…

LoL - why it makes any sense to do this for universities and not billionaires is beyond me, but I'm sure half the country can explain it to me like I'm 5.

… or churches

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#523

Post by hnburnsy »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #440
robocat wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Republicans Are Floating Plans To Raise the Endowment Tax. Here’s What You Need To Know : https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2025/2/11/increasing-endo... Proposed College Endowment Tax Hike: What to Know : https://thecollegeinvestor.com/52851/proposed-college-endowm... College endowments are typically tax-exempt, but a 2017 law imposed a 1.4% tax on investment income for a small group of wealthy private universities.…

LoL - why it makes any sense to do this for universities and not billionaires is beyond me, but I'm sure half the country can explain it to me like I'm 5.

Billionaires pay 37% or 20% on their investment gains, can't really explain it to a 5 year old because congress and the IRS make it complex.

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#524

Post by radicaldreamer »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #440
robocat wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Republicans Are Floating Plans To Raise the Endowment Tax. Here’s What You Need To Know : https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2025/2/11/increasing-endo... Proposed College Endowment Tax Hike: What to Know : https://thecollegeinvestor.com/52851/proposed-college-endowm... College endowments are typically tax-exempt, but a 2017 law imposed a 1.4% tax on investment income for a small group of wealthy private universities.…

LoL - why it makes any sense to do this for universities and not billionaires is beyond me, but I'm sure half the country can explain it to me like I'm 5.

Politics of resentment where elite colleges and universities are unjust scams and billionaires are just the pinnacle of self actualization.

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#525

Post by const_cast »

Always42 wrote: post #302
kweingar wrote: post #224

The aggregate demands of the administration are confusing and contradictory. They seem to be simultaneously asking for: - an end to diversity initiatives - a new diversity initiative for diverse points of view - a new policy of not admitting international students with certain points of view - ending speech-control policies - auditing the speech of certain departments and programs - ending discipline of students who…

[flagged]

1. First off, yes they should.

2. We both know and understand that's not what's actually happening. When you have people peacefully protesting for the genocide in Palestine to end and they get disappeared by the state, then the situation is different. Please, at least try to be honest.

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#526

Post by radicaldreamer »

hnburnsy wrote: post #523
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LoL - why it makes any sense to do this for universities and not billionaires is beyond me, but I'm sure half the country can explain it to me like I'm 5.

Billionaires pay 37% or 20% on their investment gains, can't really explain it to a 5 year old because congress and the IRS make it complex.

They don't pay anywhere close to that, there are tons of tricks to avoid paying that % on gains and the more money you have the more leeway for loopholes.

Very relevant in startup ecosystem as well (look up exchange funds, opportunity zones etc.)

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#527

Post by andoando »

pqtyw wrote: post #450
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LoL - why it makes any sense to do this for universities and not billionaires is beyond me, but I'm sure half the country can explain it to me like I'm 5.

Doesn't this tax only apply to "net investment income"/realized gains? Billionaires technically already have to pay it at a higher rate. And well they generally do? I mean when they personally actually sell stock and or receive dividends and interest.

Most of the wealth being in stock is really tricky. You can't really tax stock ownership, but at the same time stock can be leveraged against business deals (Musk for example bought Twitter with largely stock, without having to sell it first and therefore being subject to tax), and you can take out loans with stock as collateral.

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#528

Post by const_cast »

sys32768 wrote: post #377
arp242 wrote: post #169

So first they demand "Merit-Based Hiring Reform" and "Merit-Based Admissions Reform", and then it continues to demand "Viewpoint Diversity in Admissions and Hiring". I can't even engage with these levels of cognitive dissonance. Or bad faith. Or whatever it is.

Harvard admitted it needs to "...broaden the intellectual and viewpoint diversity within our community..." This is a no-brainer considering only 2.3% of their faculty identifies as conservative. https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/5/22/faculty-survey-...

Conservatives will make observations such as "the most educated people are almost never conservative" and they will conclude that it's not their ideology that may be on shaky grounds, but rather the concept of education itself.

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#529

Post by [deleted] »

peterbecich wrote: post #506
pqtyw wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't this tax only apply to "net investment income"/realized gains? Billionaires technically already have to pay it at a higher rate. And well they generally do? I mean when they personally actually sell stock and or receive dividends and interest.

Agreed. For the revenue tax activists want from billionaires, it would necessitate a wealth tax, which I believe is unconstitutional. The non-profit tax exemption fight is about "income taxes" which billionaires already have to pay (but avoid). So it is an apples-to-oranges comparison.

[deleted]

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#530

Post by cocacola1 »

namaria wrote: post #503
areoform wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not. The rubicon has already been crossed. If you asked some of the framers of the US constitution - beyond all other factors, unelected powers etc - what was the one defining trait of the government structure they wished to avoid; they'd have replied with arbitrary imprisonment and the suspension of due process. Please don't take my word for it, hear it from the Prosecutor's Prosecutor. The SCOTUS justice, form…

> The framers held certain rights to be unalienable from human beings - something that no government can take away Unless, of course, the government considers you to be 2/3 of a person

Distinction without a difference, but it’s 3/5.
Post reply on HN