Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

They won't call it a profit. What they will do is spend as much as they can on salaries (especially for the senior employees), increasing the size of the administration (more jobs for insiders), buildings, sports, etc.

Basically, people think non-profit means the organization works for the public or puts the public first. Unfortunately, what it often means is money goes to employees and insiders instead of shareholders. For colleges, it means the students (and the Federal Government which issued the student loads) comes last and the college's employees come first. Not great public policy.



This is why running things that aren't a business "like a business" is profoundly dangerous and destructive and anybody advocating it should be dismissed as ideologically driven.


but on the other hand, these private colleges do not ever claim to be run for the public (tho they are a non-profit, which carries with it the connotation of being run for the public good despite there not being any laws requiring it).

If college is expensive, students should choose not to go, or find a cheaper one. Choosing an expensive college, whether the outcomes are good for said student or not, is the choice of said student and therefore, subject to their rational utilitarian calculations. Choosing badly is always possible, just like any other life decisions.


That's individual consumer based which is still part of the problem.

We need to collectively choose to structure education for the benefit of society because we want people to be educated.

It's not about consumer choices or utility functions. That type of thinking has zero place here.


> We need to collectively choose to structure education for the benefit of society because we want people to be educated.

so it is done already with k-12 education. Not everybody agrees that tertiary education should be paid for by the state, but do agree that the state should help subsidize a bit.

This is the education loan system that is the collective decision.


And that 56 year old decision by Governer Reagan should be revisited.*

A majority of people get a college degree these days. It isn't some effete luxury of the literati in country club colleges. If someone is willing to do the hard work of educating themselves we should support it without burdening them with a lifetime of debt.

You want a doctorate and are willing to put in the years of effort? Good, we need more. It should be free. It's not like information is a scarce resource these days. Spending years of your life to defend a dissertation is a big enough sacrifice.

* see https://theintercept.com/2022/08/25/student-loans-debt-reaga... or https://www.washingtonpost.com/made-by-history/2022/12/29/hi... . The same people who whine about h1-b workers also don't want to fund education to get more domestic ones. We need to stop pretending people with such incoherent policies deserve a seat at the table.


I can see the logic of administrators wanting to spend money on their own remuneration, but why should they care about building new buildings?


Well typically employees at a college typically treat the facilities like their private country club. Instead of getting the family membership at the bouldering gym, just build a bouldering wall and now you can go anytime.


This could just be a case of the profit motive aligning with the good for society as a whole.

New buildings can house new students and academics which is good and also helps bring in more money in future.

New buildings also preserve the status of the university as a top institution - there is some level of competition for students and talented academics and if Harvard fell behind other universities it would be harder to bring in grants. Of course this is a good thing for the university but it's also good for any administrator who wants to preserve their pay.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: