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

Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 124 posts

Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo

#21

Post by msellout »

sukuriant wrote: post #2

And now. Whatever you do. No. Whatever. You. Do. Do. NOT. Turn back on this promise. Make it happen. No ifs, ands, or buts. Period. And colleges. If somehow, something terrible happens, and the money stops coming in. Let those kids finish for free anyway. Anything less is the newest worst thing that could happen to these kids and then adults. [edit: I am curious about the downvotes. From what I gathered, the people t…

The down-votes may be in response to the style of your prose and that your comment is directed to people that (most likely) do not read this forum. If you want to engage with the other forum readers, perhaps you should have said something along the lines of: "I worry that this funding promise will be broken if the donors lose some of their wealth. If that occurs, the children's lives may be worse than if the promise were never made in the first place."

I happen to disagree with that sentiment. I understand that giving and then taking away can be worse than no action, but I doubt that the donors' wealth is so volatile that the funds would run out before a large cohort graduates college.

Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo

#22

Post by elmuchoprez »

mahmud wrote: post #5

What would be the unintended negative consequences of this? It reminds me of the story of a West African king who went on a pilgrimage to Mecca. On his way to Arabia, the king gifted so much gold to all intervening communities that the price of gold crashed, taking with it the economies of North Africa and Arabia.

The same as any tuition program or grant: When you separate the cost from the consumer, prices skyrocket. With 100% of their tuition being paid by anonymous donors, why should these kids care how much it costs? And if the kids don't care and have a blank check, why shouldn't the schools raise the price tag?

I'm just using this an example of unintended consequences in this type of stuff. I'm well aware this handful of kids aren't enough to skew tuition prices, that most public institutions (which this program seems to target) have caps on tuition increases, etc... Regardless, disconnecting the consumer from the price of the product have caused tuition prices to rise artificially fast.

Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo

#23

Post by mgkimsal »

gmrple wrote: post #8
mahmud wrote: post #5

What would be the unintended negative consequences of this? It reminds me of the story of a West African king who went on a pilgrimage to Mecca. On his way to Arabia, the king gifted so much gold to all intervening communities that the price of gold crashed, taking with it the economies of North Africa and Arabia.

Only downside I could possibly see is someone taking their education more lightly because they don't have to pay for it.

Many people aren't "paying for it" today already - can we judge if they're taking it more or less lightly than they otherwise would have?

Given that we have 20 year olds taking on tens of thousands of dollars in debt, when I don't really think most of them have any perspective at all to judge the seriousness of that, I'm not sure we can say that everyone going to college today is 'paying for it'. We might say that many of them are paying for it (in many senses of the phrase) for years/decades to come.

Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo

#24

Post by chii »

quesera wrote: post #15
alttag wrote: post #7

Wow. That's neat. I once had a conversation with a state legislator where he argued it wasn't the responsibility of government to provide grant and loan opportunities for higher education, and that by doing so, the federal government was disincentivizing saving and investing. Instead, he argued universities should be more market driven (which I will concede might introduce more price competition in the face of rapidl…

I respect your position, and agree with parts of it. But I am bothered by the vast amounts of grant and loan money that get absorbed directly by colleges, raising the cost for everyone and creating a positive feedback loop that requires endlessly more taxes and debt to sustain. I feel we've been sold a bill of goods ("opportunity through higher ed -- don't let your kids fall behind in the new global economy, etc etc"…

I think its a balancing act - but i guess grants is worse than loans.

Granting "free" money will indeed cause problems, but a loan that is required to be repaid seems like the right way to go in the long term, provided that after the higher education is completed the individual in question is able to actually provide value.

Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo

#25

Post by jjguy »

kqr2 wrote: post #14

Actually, it's donors (plural). They are collectively called the Kalamazoo Promise. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalamazoo_Promise

The words "donors" in that wikipedia page have remained unchanged since the original page shell in May 2006. Considering also the NYT article explicitly discusses donor vs. donors, I view the wikipedia characterization more as editorial convenience than evidence.

That said, my common sense tends to agree with you. Is there evidence elsewhere?

Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo

#26

Post by 001sky »

quesera wrote: post #15
alttag wrote: post #7

Wow. That's neat. I once had a conversation with a state legislator where he argued it wasn't the responsibility of government to provide grant and loan opportunities for higher education, and that by doing so, the federal government was disincentivizing saving and investing. Instead, he argued universities should be more market driven (which I will concede might introduce more price competition in the face of rapidl…

I respect your position, and agree with parts of it. But I am bothered by the vast amounts of grant and loan money that get absorbed directly by colleges, raising the cost for everyone and creating a positive feedback loop that requires endlessly more taxes and debt to sustain. I feel we've been sold a bill of goods ("opportunity through higher ed -- don't let your kids fall behind in the new global economy, etc etc"…

Earning enough to pay for 2 kids is almost getting impossible for the middle classes. Whatever you have saved will get "swept" by college when corrected for financial aid. Financial aid levels, in that context turns into an odd-kinda-wierd thing. A hybrid of forced donation to a charity and a stealth tax.

Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo

#27

Post by jdminhbg »

kevinconroy wrote: post #12
mahmud wrote: post #5

What would be the unintended negative consequences of this? It reminds me of the story of a West African king who went on a pilgrimage to Mecca. On his way to Arabia, the king gifted so much gold to all intervening communities that the price of gold crashed, taking with it the economies of North Africa and Arabia.

Unlike gold which is a scare resource, knowledge is non-rivalous. College tuition acts as an economic exclusion mechanism and thus only allows consumers/students with sufficient means to gain access to it. By removing the exclusion mechanism for these students, it in effect turns college education into a public good. As a country, we've deemed that this is so vastly in the public interest that we provide free K-12 ed…

Knowledge is non-rivalrous, but it's not settled that the value of a college education comes mostly from added knowledge. If instead it comes from signaling, then it's no longer the case.

Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo

#28

Post by mhb »

alttag wrote: post #7

Wow. That's neat. I once had a conversation with a state legislator where he argued it wasn't the responsibility of government to provide grant and loan opportunities for higher education, and that by doing so, the federal government was disincentivizing saving and investing. Instead, he argued universities should be more market driven (which I will concede might introduce more price competition in the face of rapidl…

The ready supply of student loans is the cause of the rapid rise in tuition.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/10/the-cost-of...

Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo

#29

Post by gareim »

jjguy wrote: post #25
kqr2 wrote: post #14

Actually, it's donors (plural). They are collectively called the Kalamazoo Promise. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalamazoo_Promise

The words "donors" in that wikipedia page have remained unchanged since the original page shell in May 2006. Considering also the NYT article explicitly discusses donor vs. donors, I view the wikipedia characterization more as editorial convenience than evidence. That said, my common sense tends to agree with you. Is there evidence elsewhere?

The article uses "donors" several times. I think while it's amazing if one person is willing to sponsor, it's even more amazing if there are many out there who believe in a brighter future for them. That actually makes me happier, knowing that it's donors and not a donor.

"When asked how the conversations that led to the Promise unfolded, Brown demurs. “That, and the identity of the donors, are things I just will never talk about,” she says. "

Re: Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo

#30

Post by sukuriant »

dhughes wrote: post #20
sukuriant wrote: post #2

And now. Whatever you do. No. Whatever. You. Do. Do. NOT. Turn back on this promise. Make it happen. No ifs, ands, or buts. Period. And colleges. If somehow, something terrible happens, and the money stops coming in. Let those kids finish for free anyway. Anything less is the newest worst thing that could happen to these kids and then adults. [edit: I am curious about the downvotes. From what I gathered, the people t…

The article stated > blind to family income levels, to pupils’ grades and even to disciplinary and criminal records...

That doesn't stop bureaucracy from changing that decision or for the people that are donating to be sent to jail/etc before they can finish their promises.
Post reply on HN