FBI accuses wealthy parents in college-entrance bribery scheme

Post by umvi » Tue, Mar 12, 2019, 4:23 PM UTC

NowThenGoodBad wrote: post #7

This might be more overt than the usual form, but how does this differ from donating a new building, department, or scholarship fund and subsequently getting your kid in? My mother did well in the Masters program at Stanford and I would have likely gotten in if she donated a couple million dollars but she didn’t and I didn’t (despite getting an invitation a year after accepting enrollment at another university). It’s…

Post by TheTruth321 » Tue, Mar 12, 2019, 4:26 PM UTC

XCabbage wrote: post #44

NowThenGoodBad wrote: post #7

This might be more overt than the usual form, but how does this differ from donating a new building, department, or scholarship fund and subsequently getting your kid in? My mother did well in the Masters program at Stanford and I would have likely gotten in if she donated a couple million dollars but she didn’t and I didn’t (despite getting an invitation a year after accepting enrollment at another university). It’s…

Donating a building is a payment to the university . The university then gets to decide to admit your child in return. It may not be meritocratic, but it's not corrupt (except perhaps insofar as by pretending the exchange is a donation, the university and donor manage to cheat the taxman). The donor is simply paying the university to provide a service that they have every right to offer for money. It also benefits ot…

Post by wildmusings » Tue, Mar 12, 2019, 4:27 PM UTC

NowThenGoodBad wrote: post #7

This might be more overt than the usual form, but how does this differ from donating a new building, department, or scholarship fund and subsequently getting your kid in? My mother did well in the Masters program at Stanford and I would have likely gotten in if she donated a couple million dollars but she didn’t and I didn’t (despite getting an invitation a year after accepting enrollment at another university). It’s…

Post by strikelaserclaw » Tue, Mar 12, 2019, 4:30 PM UTC

hopler wrote: post #38

bilbo0s wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. A guy donates an engineering complex, and every engineering student on that campus gets to take advantage of said complex and its resources. Guy donates a new business school building and every student on that campus can take advantage of said building and its resources. In exchange, the university lets in two girls, their daughters or whatever, who might want to major in Art History and French, and coincidenta…

Oddly sexist example but OK.

Post by everdrive » Tue, Mar 12, 2019, 4:36 PM UTC

fmajid wrote: post #58

XCabbage wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Donating a building is a payment to the university . The university then gets to decide to admit your child in return. It may not be meritocratic, but it's not corrupt (except perhaps insofar as by pretending the exchange is a donation, the university and donor manage to cheat the taxman). The donor is simply paying the university to provide a service that they have every right to offer for money. It also benefits ot…

Just because it’s legal doesn’t mean it’s not corrupt.