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

Undergraduates with family income below $200k will be tuition-free at MIT

news.mit.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–487 of 487 posts

Re: Undergraduates with family income below $200k will be tuition-free at MIT

#481

Post by throwaway2037 »

nuancebydefault wrote: post #452
throwaway2037 wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We can have kids without fear of not being able to pay kindergarten. FYI: Public kindergarten is 100% paid for by gov't across the US. I don't think any public schools in the US have tuition. (That said, there is no magical money. It is paid for by local taxes.) Where did you hear about this myth? Also: In Belgium, can you really go to the dentist 20 times? Is there any good reason to allow this in a public healthc…

20 times is a bit exaggerated. I estimate mostly [3]. That's the whole discussion here. If you wear braces, you have to visit very frequently. Half the kids in secondary school get them at some point. If you have cavities, it's usually several visits. Granted, it does not come for free but it will set you back hundreds rather than thousands a year.

Are braces paid for by national insurance? If yes, I am surprised, as it is mostly cosmetic. That would be like national insurance paying for tooth whitening.

Re: Undergraduates with family income below $200k will be tuition-free at MIT

#482

Post by EasyMark »

balderdash wrote: post #259

While I think this is well meaning, I’d be much more impressed by institutions actually cutting costs, The ratio of administrators to students is insane as is the faculty ratio at most universities, not to mention the outlays for extravagant projects like sports centers and student centers.

Yeah my school was a -lot- less nice 20 years ago when I graduated. I was amazed visiting my nephew in his dorm. It was like something out of an extremely nice hotel and concurrent works space for students to lounge and study, and the sports stadium was insanely improved. He said almost all the dorms were that nice or better. I can’t help but feel all that likely came out of his an other students back pockets, as the state has only been cutting funding for public universities. And yes I realize this has more than one cause, but virtually unlimited student allows allow a large portion of the out of control tuition costs.

Re: Undergraduates with family income below $200k will be tuition-free at MIT

#483

Post by KetoManx64 »

ajdude wrote: post #479
d2049 wrote: post #33

When I was touring colleges as a high school senior I met someone who had gotten into MIT but whose family could only afford to send one kid to an elite college, him or his sister. He decided to go to a state school which was a lot less expensive but whose academics weren't close to the same level. This stuff matters to people.

I'm the first person in my family to have gone to college, and we never really had any money. Still, I've always been interested in science growing up. I was programming video games and building little robots before I was 10 and envisioned myself being a robotics engineer when I got older. I got into Johns Hopkins for a double major of physics and astronomy, I couldn't actually afford it, didn't win enough scholarshi…

Damn that is absolutely brutal. I dropped out of college after about 1 year and just learned by watching YouTube videos and installing Linux on a spare computer and running a homelab. Had to hop through a couple of lower paying IT jobs to accumulate some experience for the resume, but am now making low 6 figures in DevOPS, fully remote.

I recomend job hopping if you haven't in a while, that's the only way to really get those 20-40% raises from what you're making at the moment.

Re: Undergraduates with family income below $200k will be tuition-free at MIT

#484

Post by Slava_Propanei »

araes wrote: post #12

Started looking and found out there's some much worse, and far more obvious cases that need to implement these reforms. [1] UPenn is THE most obvious. Sitting on a $20,000,000,000 endowment fund that went up +170% over 10 years while Philadelphia rots with drug use, poverty, and gun violence. BTW, amazing site to be horrified by gun violence (and vaguely fascinated). Look upon the awfulness of Philadelphia. [2] Sitti…

[dead]

Re: Undergraduates with family income below $200k will be tuition-free at MIT

#485

Post by Slava_Propanei »

bradchris wrote: post #45
rs999gti wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> UPenn is THE most obvious. Sitting on a $20,000,000,000 endowment fund that went up +170% over 10 years while Philadelphia rots with drug use, poverty, and gun violence. Why is it UPENN's responsibility to solve these issues? This is Philadelphia's problem, the university is just a business operating in the city.

I think that speaks to the low bar we have come to expect from our endowed institutions today more than anything else. American Universities, historically, are supposed to improve not just their students’ lives but also society as a whole, especially as serving as boosters for the city they’re in and their immediate neighbors. That’s why they’re nonprofits. That’s also likely their strongest lifeline to remain releva…

[dead]

Re: Undergraduates with family income below $200k will be tuition-free at MIT

#486

Post by qnleigh »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #316
leetcrew wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

needlessly adversarial. financial aid is a best effort kind of thing, and plenty of people with unusual situations fall through the cracks.

I don’t see it like that. People bragging about getting into MIT but not being able to go for some reason is an old meme, it always turns out that they didn’t really get in.

Right no one has ever gotten into MIT but couldn't afford it. This has literally never happened.

Re: Undergraduates with family income below $200k will be tuition-free at MIT

#487

Post by rs999gti »

dleary wrote: post #51
blackhawkC17 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They were given land and money specifically to serve the public good. Their duty is to deliver education. It's not solving political problems meant for elected officials (and the population at large).

If their duty is to deliver education, why are they sitting on a $20B hoard? Presumably they could spend a little bit of that to deliver some more education, couldn’t they?

> If their duty is to deliver education, why are they sitting on a $20B hoard?

Rich alumni, patents, etc. Also, it is a warchest for innovation and expansion. Same thing as other businesses, you have a surplus of cash for reinvestment.

Post reply on HN