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

Why can't Ivies cope with losing a few hundred million?

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 311 posts

Re: Why can't Ivies cope with losing a few hundred million?

#61

Post by dragonwriter »

amazingamazing wrote: post #58
s1artibartfast wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the government paying for a service. Should a private cement company get public money for delivering cement?

> This is the government paying for a service. a service public schools can do.

Sure, and if there were a law proposed in Congress to restrict federal research funding to public institutions and bar all private institutions, we could debate the merits of that.

That is not, however, what is happening. Institutions, without regard to whether they are public or private, are having research funding used as a lever to secure adherence to the political ideology of the ruling party, unilaterally by the executive branch.

The attempt to make this a debate about public vs private institutions is a distraction from and cover for that.

Re: Why can't Ivies cope with losing a few hundred million?

#62

Post by Papirola »

Larrikin wrote: post #29
Papirola wrote: post #7

[flagged]

Not withholding cancer research because two countries on the other side of the planet can't get along and make it everyone else's problem shouldn't be difficult either.

I agree 100% - I would point out that it's not the Jewish students who set "encampments".

Re: Why can't Ivies cope with losing a few hundred million?

#63

Post by Papirola »

marricks wrote: post #18
Papirola wrote: post #7

[flagged]

I believe what’s under discussion is a students right to protest the US governments involvement in the genocide of the Palestinian people.

I believe you can protest whatever, even things that are not real (like the so called genocide, where the population actually grows). There should of course be limits to your protest: violence against people you disagree with should never be an option.

PS: if you can stop the war by returning all the hostages, it's not a genocide.

Re: Why can't Ivies cope with losing a few hundred million?

#64

Post by Papirola »

micromacrofoot wrote: post #33
Papirola wrote: post #7

[flagged]

Turns out both Jewish and Muslim students are getting harassed, which isn't surprising at all to anyone paying attention... this was also true before the current israel/palestine conflict https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/29/us/harvard-reports-antisemiti...

you should read this: https://www.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/FINAL-Har...

Re: Why can't Ivies cope with losing a few hundred million?

#65

Post by ahahahahah »

steveBK123 wrote: post #9

I am not a fan of the orange man. But I think its an interesting question if the feds should be funding rich Ivies with small numbers of students vs more efficient state universities which educated 100s of thousands each at a fraction of the cost per student. All of the Ivy League combined educate 65k undergrads. SUNY by comparison educates 5x that many at a tuition of 1/5th to 1/10th depending on in/out of state and…

> All of the Ivy League combined educate 65k undergrads. SUNY by comparison educates 5x that many

What a weird comparison. Yes, picking a group of universities that comprises 64 campuses is going to have more students than a group with a small fraction of that.

Re: Why can't Ivies cope with losing a few hundred million?

#66

Post by amazingamazing »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #59
amazingamazing wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is the government paying for a service. a service public schools can do.

not as well. Grants are a competitive process. When building a highway, the government should put out notice and buy the best offering. Im not sure why you would want government buying sub-par research just because it comes from a public school

it would solve themselves. all of the good PIs at the good private schools would go to the good public schools. there's no actual inherent reason why private schools are bad like you're implying.

Re: Why can't Ivies cope with losing a few hundred million?

#67

Post by s1artibartfast »

amazingamazing wrote: post #66
s1artibartfast wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not as well. Grants are a competitive process. When building a highway, the government should put out notice and buy the best offering. Im not sure why you would want government buying sub-par research just because it comes from a public school

it would solve themselves. all of the good PIs at the good private schools would go to the good public schools. there's no actual inherent reason why private schools are bad like you're implying.

I'm skeptical of the idea that money and fix any problem, and that there are no inherent differences.

Setting that aside, why do you think it is even desirable to limit funding to public institutions in the first place?

Seems like you're starting from this position and moving backwards.

If Public schools are superior, why haven't they already out competed private institutions? They have a pretty huge advantage from additional tax revenue.

Re: Why can't Ivies cope with losing a few hundred million?

#68

Post by otterley »

snickerbockers wrote: post #44
Kapura wrote: post #11

This framing conveniently ignores the question of whether the president should have the authority to single-handedly withhold funding for universities, broadly considered to be one of the foundational pillars of America's strength in the 20th century. While I think it's interesting and answers the specific question it raises, it's wild that the economist has just accepted that the president has dictatorial powers.

America is a democracy, not a bureaucracy. The executive branch is governed by a single representative elected by the people. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the people didn't make a great choice this time but our constitutional republic is also one of the foundational pillars of american strength and trump being an idiot doesn't change that. The judicial branch has authority to stop him but they're only su…

This is true only to the extent that Congress delegates its power to the executive. Per Article I of the Constitution, Congress has the plenary power of the purse.

So if it decides to spend $X on something specific, it has to be spent on whatever that something is. The President doesn't have discretion in that case.

Re: Why can't Ivies cope with losing a few hundred million?

#69

Post by foobiekr »

steveBK123 wrote: post #41
School-Cotton wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The feds aren’t funding ivies for the purpose of education, they’re funding researchers who happen to work at the ivies to do research.

Multiple people pointing this out, and absolutely right. Some question though of how all the research grants do kind of cross-subsidize the education in a way as it pays for research professors, their graduate staff, etc? Otherwise why do we collocate research and teaching?

"Otherwise why do we collocate research and teaching?"

Because you need a second generation of researchers.

Re: Why can't Ivies cope with losing a few hundred million?

#70

Post by strathmeyer »

marricks wrote: post #18
Papirola wrote: post #7

[flagged]

I believe what’s under discussion is a students right to protest the US governments involvement in the genocide of the Palestinian people.

"Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past."
Post reply on HN