
Why I’m Giving $1.8B for College Financial Aid - wallflower
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/18/opinion/bloomberg-college-donation-financial-aid.html
======
jseliger
This is a fine thing to do with $1.8B and that amount could be used in worse
ways. Still:

 _Together, the federal and state governments should make a new commitment to
improving access to college and reducing the often prohibitive burdens debt
places on so many students and families.

There may be no better investment that we can make in the future of the
American dream — and the promise of equal opportunity for all._

At the moment, zero incentivizes colleges to reduce costs. If they can get a
student in the door, the federal government will ensure that student loans are
available and that the college gets paid no matter what happens to the
student. Regulators, in the meantime, work hard to ensure that colleges and
especially universities face little competition.

So we get an array of problems: we are all, in a way, paying for the party:
[https://jakeseliger.com/2014/04/27/paying-for-the-party-
eliz...](https://jakeseliger.com/2014/04/27/paying-for-the-party-elizabeth-
armstrong-and-laura-hamilton). Already prestigious schools like Hopkins
compete primarily to raise their own prestige, rather than improve access. Why
do most such schools admit fewer students per capita than they did in 1950?
Why are they so interested in discriminatory children-of-alumni admissions?

While I don't want to look a gift horse in the mouth, I've been involved in
post-secondary education for too long, and read too many books on it (Tyler
Cowen's _The Great Stagnation_ is recommended, as is his book _The Complacent
Class_ ), to think that "more money, same system" is the answer. We need
comprehensive, systemic reform, starting with the accreditation bodies, before
we pour more money in.

~~~
kristianp
It is just insane that 1.8B should be spent on just Johns Hopkins. This
doesn't sound like anywhere near the most efficient way to help the most
students who are missing out on places because the institution looks at their
ability to pay. Does Bloomberg have an alterior motive to limit his donations
to just his Alma Mater? Does he just want a wing of the library named after
him or something? I'm frustrated reading this article, it compares poorly to
the Gates foundation model of trying to help the maximum number of people per
dollar.

~~~
yelloweyes
1.8B is not that much, really. at 50k tuition, that's only 36k people.

~~~
kristianp
There's only 5407 undergraduates at JHU[1] (for all years). If 10% of those
qualify for aid that's 541 in total. Nowhere near 36k people. If we assume a
degree takes 4 years, then 137 per year of intake, then those 36k people would
be spread over 263 years.

[1] [https://apply.jhu.edu/discover-jhu/get-the-
facts/](https://apply.jhu.edu/discover-jhu/get-the-facts/)

------
akulbe
I realize I'm likely going to be a dissenting opinion here… but I'm not sure
this is a good investment.

Unless you're going to enter a field that requires the pedigree that starts
with college (i.e. medicine, law, engineering), it's arguable that college
isn't even worth the tuition you pay for it. Like another commenter says, they
have no incentive to do anything that will reduce costs.

The quality of the education seems to be on the decline too.

It feels like colleges are turning into breeding grounds for social justice
warriors more than they're turning out folks who are prepared to enter the
workforce.

It feels like the onus should be on the colleges to make costs more
reasonable, rather than getting another handout from a rich benefactor (which
will not last long).

~~~
schimmy_changa
That may be true (but is arguable) if you see college as nothing but a
vocational school, training you to be the best worker which society could ask
for.

A truly liberal (in the John Stuart Mill / Enlightenment sense of the word)
education gives you the tools you need to engage with the world. How can you
ever change society if you are only able to see the world in what makes money,
and are never given the time and resources to think beyond what is today
towards what could be?

It is true that some people can learn some of these things on their own, but
having 4 years to think surrounded by an environment where everyone else is
focused on that same goal can really make a difference.

If a pragmatic man like Bloomberg believes in the value of a liberal education
(again the old sense of the word), you can bet it's not total hooey.

(although see my other comment for what I believe is behind at least the
timing of this announcement)

~~~
wernercd
> A truly liberal (in the John Stuart Mill / Enlightenment sense of the word)
> education gives you the tools you need to engage with the world.

But the current education system doesn't give you either.

You don't get tools to be useful - IE STEM related, engineering, math, etc.

You also don't get the tools to "engage" with the world. Blocking traffic,
needing safe places and being triggered by anything you disagree with isn't
"engaging" the world.

~~~
nickthemagicman
Your view of college seems to be very media influenced. Just like 99.9% of
Arabic people aren't terrorists, 99.9% of college students aren't 'safe space
triggered social justice warriors'. Maybe you should grab a statistics class
at a nearby college. ;).

The media has really painted college students in a bad light. There's such a
wide variety of students and personalities. It's a great place to share ideas
and form networks.

~~~
addicted
As the spouse of someone who suffers from depression and suicidal thinking the
outrage against “trigger warnings” really pisses me off.

Trigger warnings are just that. Warnings.

We watched A Star is Born, and having my spouse go back on almost a years
worth of progress and treatment when a single “trigger warning” could have
avoided that is beyond enraging.

And what’s most hypocritical is the people who are complaining about trigger
warnings are people who are complaining that a little paragraph of text
describing certain known triggers may be contained in the text or movie
before. So people who suffer from a variety of potentially harmful diseases
such as depression and PTSD are pussies because they need a trigger warning to
help them avoid media that may be harmful to them, but you’re a strong
reasonable and logical person to protest the inclusion of a minor warning that
you are under no obligation to read and can easily skip.

~~~
manigandham
The underlying fact is that everything is subjective and trying to enumerate
every possible situation that someone may react to is impossible. Why is it
not the responsibility of the individual to learn more about the movie by
checking the ratings and synopsis?

Can you explain what exactly a trigger warning would even contain that somehow
helps here? It seems that if a single movie can unwind a "years worth of
progress" then the situation is rather critical and movies are the least of
your concerns. How do you label everyday life with such warnings?

~~~
nickthemagicman
I have zero issues with trigger warnings. If it helps someone so be it. No
skin off my back.

Just alot of this country views them with disdain which is unfortunate. It's
been branded as weak to have a mental disorder. Meanwhile beliveing in Q-Anon
is perfectly ok to them.

------
ohazi
Rising tuition costs + more generous financial aid packages are a shell game
for donor money.

Money usually comes in from various donors with strings attached, so that it
must get spent on the donors' pet projects.

College administrators then go "oh no! tuition is so high, look at all these
qualified students who won't get to attend," to convince these donors that
financial aid is a worthwhile pet project.

Administrators then raise the tuition to compensate for the new financial aid
pool they just cooked up. Money earmarked for financial aid then gets "spent"
by going right back to the college with the earmark removed. That money can
now be spent on the administrators' pet projects, including higher salaries
for themselves.

~~~
dr_
But do you really think Michael Bloomberg doesn’t get this? There’s money
spent on research projects and there’s money spent on retaining high quality
faculty who could probably do well in a corporate environment if they chose
to.

------
Barrin92
First off, this is a great thing for Michael Bloomberg to do so props to him,
but I think there needs to be a much broader discussion about moving away from
college as a sort of 'eye of the needle' mechanism for upwards mobility in the
United States.

I'm German so my perspective may be biased, but over here you can pick up an
apprenticeship, a dual university/work program and still earn comparable wages
to college graduates, and if you enter a family business, potentially even
more as they are starving for the next generation to take over.

In the US there seems to be a huge gap between prestigious universities
degrees and the fear of ending up working for Starbucks your entire life.
Expanding access to universities is fine, but a university education is not
for everyone, and should not be a prerequisite for a good shot at life.

~~~
marsrover
You can enter a trade school in the US and earn more than many college
graduates. I think it’s more of a mindset problem than anything. College
degrees give a person a baseline social status whereas trade schools are
looked down on as low class.

~~~
dlp211
Citation needed. This is one of those things that large swaths of the internet
believe is true, but is filled with anecdotal evidence and not actual
research.

------
schalab
People are suffering from taking too many pay day loans.

I think I will donate 2 billion dollars to my local pay day lender.

There, problem solved.

Now people dont need to be worried about paying it back.

I am sure they wont use this guaranteed income to jack up the rates more.

~~~
Flavius
I get what you're saying, but surely keeping the money for himself or invest
them in luxury real estate wouldn't have done any better.

------
gesman
" ... The Credit Suisse report has an entire chapter devoted to “the unlucky
Millennials” who have been hit by rising debt and poorer job prospects.

And it’s true. Recent reports from the Treasury Department show that the US
government owns nearly $1.5 trillion in student loans.

That’s pretty sad when you think about it: the US government’s #1 financial
asset is debt owed by tens of millions of its young people for university
education that didn’t even necessarily qualify them for a real career..."

\-- Simon Black

~~~
gammateam
The US has always been addicted to serfdom.

~~~
Apocryphon
This country was built by indentured servants before it was built by slaves.

------
mcny
I think the real answer is:

1\. Higher income tax across the board

2\. Decreased wages for college and University staff. Fewer executive and
bureaucratic positions. Just at one CUNY college there are about one hundred
positions at or above the level of a department chair. It has fewer than 17k
students enrolled.

3\. Eliminate all competitive sports across all schools and colleges. This is
just noise that nobody needs.

4\. Reduce mandate of colleges and universities. No, a college is not supposed
to decide whether an assault took place. Also, it makes no sense for a college
to have to pay for campus police. Who came up with this nonsense idea?

5\. Focus on reducing costs. Reduce if not eliminate most regulations state
legislatures have forced on colleges and universities. Consider getting rid of
freaking people soft to manage student records. Does it make sense that
students have Employee ID numbers (EMPLID)? Who makes these decisions?

~~~
Fomite
A bigger factor than pretty much all of this, for state universities, has been
that state support for universities has dropped through the floor.

Washington State, for example, got state support cut by 50% during the 2008
recession. It's never come back.

This also has an impact on one of HN's other favorite higher ed topics, the
state of quality research. With state support cut, the two available levers
are tuition and more federal research money. With the latter, the pool of
money is - at best - stagnant, and there's increasing pressure to get grants,
which means more people cutting corners.

------
esotericn
Is it not the case that at a fundamental level certification is a funneling
mechanism to filter people and set expectations at an early stage in life?

It's quite arbitrary and probably not "fair" by any reasonable definition, but
it seems to achieve that goal fairly well.

I feel this is essentially why the UK idea of 'chuck 50% of the population in
to University' failed.

It created an expectation, in huge numbers of people, that they were going to
have the good life.

But our society is structured at a fundamental level around the class system.
Our jobs, our homes, our cities, everything.

There will still be millions of unskilled jobs with no respect afforded
towards the workers. There will still be millions and millions of crappy
prefab houses out there, far away from where the decent jobs are. There will
still be sink estates. There will still be dead end towns.

You could evacuate the streets of London and walk around and see, quite
easily, that the entire city is built around our class system - even with the
intentional mixing we've done geographically.

I think it would take centuries to achieve a sensible level of equality even
if such a thing were possible or desirable.

It's something I think about often; social mobility is just shuffling the
cards around; ultimately someone has to lose, not everyone gets the drawing
room in Knightsbridge and lunches out on the town as they please.

------
spikels
Actual Reason: Bloomberg is planning to announce his presidential candidacy
soon.

~~~
mmanfrin
The cynical part of me is in complete agreement. I hate that I assume ulterior
motive to charity, but Bloomberg _wants_ to be in politics, and this is a big
move at the very beginning of the primary races.

~~~
gammateam
It makes his perpetual low tax burden unquestionable when he releases his
returns :)

Its a non-zero sum game, why worry about such binary events of completely
charitable or not.

~~~
maxxxxx
" It makes his perpetual low tax burden unquestionable when he releases his
returns :)"

Trump has set the precedent that this is not necessary anymore.

~~~
gammateam
I’m happy about that and I hope others follow suit.

Now for the political science: If you want to win brownie points with both the
wage slaves and the “orange man bad” crowd that would be elated to see
everything the opposite of Trump, you can jubilantly release your tax returns
if they look good or relatable.

------
intralizee
I can't imagine if you have that kind of money, you wouldn't have had a team
of people calculating and rationalizing every scenario for the action taken.

The thing that bothers me is how universities keep raising the cost for
students to have an education. Nothing seems to prevent it and everything
seems like a joint effort in having the new generation be worse off by having
no real spending power for years compared to the previous.

~~~
born_a_beetle
A lot of the top tier schools like Harvard provide a very fair financial aid
package structure, so no, it isn't a joint effort. It is a myth that most
students can't avoid high tuition costs. SUNY schools are very cheap for in
state. There is always the route of spending 2 years in community college and
then transferring to your state school. That is a very successful model in New
Jersey.

The problem is many kids want a luxurious college lifestyle where they do a
little work, play a lot of beer pong, and live in nice dorms. Our student loan
structure allows for some bad actors to take advantage of this.

~~~
intralizee
How very fair are these financial aid packages they offer? I went to a low
tier university compared to the "elite" named ones and still think it was
expensive compared to previously what my parents paid when going to school.
The first years at a community college for two years before stepping into
university wasn't really a well known thing like today when I started. I don't
think people are living luxurious lifestyles at college unless they have rich
parents. It wasn't even possible to take out loans that would cover everything
if one would choose from my knowledge. Everywhere now a days for anything
higher than min-wage requires a degree for an interview. I'm not even sure how
med students manage to keep their mental health sane.

~~~
born_a_beetle
>Our program requires no contribution from Harvard families with annual
incomes below $65,000. About 20% of our families have no parent contribution.
Families with incomes between $65,000 and $150,000 will contribute from 0-10%
of their income, and those with incomes above $150,000 will be asked to pay
proportionately more than 10%, based on their individual circumstances.
Families at all income levels who have significant assets are asked to pay
more than those in less fortunate circumstances. Home equity and retirement
assets are not considered in our assessment of financial need.

[https://college.harvard.edu/financial-aid/how-aid-
works](https://college.harvard.edu/financial-aid/how-aid-works)

~~~
intralizee
I don't see that as making this a very fair system. Many of my colleagues had
parents refuse to pay a dime. I know they were hurt by it and some actually
had to wait until they were of age to be an independent.

~~~
born_a_beetle
Private schools cost money. Somebody has to pay and it isn't the state. If
your parents don't want to pay for a private education, then take it up with
them. It's fair from Harvard's perspective and the perspective of the general
population.

~~~
intralizee
I wasn't aware of the voting that took place to find out what the perspective
of the general population thinks. The university I went to was public and the
age for being an independent was for federal student aid. Seems like it
doesn't matter if something isn't fair.

------
chiefalchemist
It's not for me to tell the wealthy & powerful how to redistribute their
fruits. But... I would think it's more effective not to give so much to a
single entity. Instead, provided grants that aren't tied to a particular
school. Let students apply (or be nominated) and then decide. Yes, that adds
some overhead. But the effect will now be ubiquitous and not limited to a
single bottleneck.

~~~
ggm
Actually, it _is_. -This is what democracy, and giving tax powers to the state
is about. We get to tell them, by virtue of what we vote for and how that
translates down into tax code.

I welcome the donation, but I am suspicious of what ensues. Given the mix of
public and private tertiary education and the mix of debt and grant funding,
It's pretty complicated. If this levels-up Johns Hopkins against the ivy
league, remember its still private education. It won't neccessarily redress
all the imbalances inherent in university study. It might help, it might
hinder. Its not clear

(on an individual level, I am sure it will help enormously. I'm trying to draw
a distinction between individual benefit, and societal benefit as a whole)

------
jeffdavis
Is this a zero-sum game, where we are just changing _who_ has the opportunity?
Or does it actually increase the total amount of opportunity available?

------
InTheArena
There is more to the problem then just available capital. In fact during the
Bush administration, the government vastly increased the amount of capital
available under pell grants and financial aid. These loans had horrible
conditions, which people didn't read, and worse were increased the supply of
cash, while not changing the amount of supply of education. Basic economics
worked out - college tuition rose to meet the additional availability of
capital.

------
strikelaserclaw
I wonder how giving to john's hopkins fixes the issue that lower income people
don't generally have a good pipeline to know their options and realize it when
it comes to higher education. I don't think it is just a money thing when it
comes to lower income households sending their children to prestigious
universities. Surely alot of top schools give out generous packages to these
people. How do you fix a system to work for lower income households in which
many children of the upper middle class and above (who are most likely to get
into these top schools) are groomed from a younger age by parents with
financial means to do so and good schooling (some of which is specifically
designed to get its students into the top schools).

------
master_yoda_1
Until you won't fix hiring discrimination based on school name, you can't fix
the problem. Just see around in silicon valley you can find the example.

~~~
gnulinux
This is bizarre I think. Are we supposed to pretend all CS degrees in the
world (or US?) have the same value as MIT, Stanford, Berkeley et al?

~~~
DannyBee
For undergrad, yes.

Having interviewed 500+ people at this point (and screened many many more
resumes and github accounts), i'd there are rarely, if ever, meaningful
differences in quality of candidate based on where they got their CS degree
from.

I see much greater variation in masters/graduate candidates than in undergrad.

~~~
synaesthesisx
Agreed - I've interviewed candidates with no CS degree that outperformed ones
from Harvard etc. In fact many of the best ones were self-taught...

~~~
gnulinux
I'm finding it very hard to believe a student who did well in MIT or Berkeley
can "on average" be outperformed by someone who is self-taught. I'm not
suggesting all students in top schools are good, or nobody self-taught is
good, but in my experience there is a strong correlation. I'm also surprised
that (1) people had a differing experience in this thread and (2) I'm
downvoted for expressing my experience.

Disclaimer: I taught CS classes in both Berkeley and MIT.

~~~
DannyBee
Fwiw:

Most new grads suck at coding. The self taught are often a little better.

The algorithms and data structures part is a toss up. Maybe they are good at
class and bad in interviews, but ... On average I haven't seen the correlation
you have.

------
virmundi
First off, great for giving the money.

> Together, the federal and state governments should make a new commitment to
> improving access to college and reducing the often prohibitive burdens debt
> places on so many students and families.

Why are we pushing college? We don't need everyone to have a college degree.
We need plumbers, general contractors, electricians. We need the society to
not look down on laborers. We need to get high school students into training
programs for these careers. We need them to actually think about what they're
doing on the job.

I went for a walk the other day. There is a woman on a ladder scrapping away
at loose the paint. The house is about 100 years old. The wood was original.
Even in places where a siding profile changed, the wood is probably 60 years
old. She had no face mask. No 7mm plastic tarp 3 ft from the house. No water
spray bottle. No paint remover that keeps the dust down. No low temp IR system
to make peeling faster.

I told her it was lead paint. I said if she kept that up, she'd die (perhaps a
bit of an exaggeration on one house, but if she does that at all of them, it
will add up). I told her to get a P100 face mask. She said she'd tell her
boss. This is basic EPA lead abatement training. There are free videos from
the EPA and States
([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NKJ6zuVvTY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NKJ6zuVvTY)).
Next day, lead chips on the ground. Her on the ladder as before.

We need to train the next generation of intelligent laborers. We don't need
more people walking out with Comm. degrees because society told them to go to
college.

------
brandnewlow
I’m a biased investor in the company but if you’re looking for another way to
attack the horrible student loan problem in the US check out Goodly. They’re
making it easy for employers to offer loan repayment as a benefit.

[https://www.goodlyapp.com](https://www.goodlyapp.com)

------
hugh4life
I'd like to see a retroactive rebate program for tuition paid for transferable
community college credits that went towards a bachelors degree at a 4 year
university. Make community college free for those who use it successfully to
get a 4 year degree.

------
bedhead
He’s a good man for doing this but it’s addressing the symptom not the
disease. The travesty of college tuition inflation will only be fixed with
government regulation, there is simply no other mechanism to fix it.

------
wallace_f
Such a waste of money.

The model needs change. Everyone across the world should have access to world-
class lectures, books assignments, materials, and eventually, testing centers
were students can demonstrate their education.

------
RickJWagner
I disagree with much of what Michael Bloomberg says, but my hat's off to him
for this.

Thank you, Mr. Bloomberg.

------
gboudrias
Good to see philanthropy from up high.

That said, I haven't seen the term "American dream" used unironically in
years. I've never been shown it as something worth reviving, insofar as it's
deeply intertwined with notions like savage capitalism. For you and ourselves
I'd rather have a great American awakening. But maybe I'm arguing semantics.

------
schimmy_changa
I'll answer it for him:

"So that I can get support (or at least not outright hostility) from the left
wing of the democratic party when I'm running for president in 2020, who
otherwise would be very unhappy with a billionaire as the candidate"

------
joefranklinsrs
Good for Bloomberg; I'm sure it will also play nicely for his presidential
campaign ;)

But it would be interesting if Bloomberg were to win in 2020 - we would have
back-to-back businessman turned chief in command. So far, Trump has been
pretty good for US economy. Bloomberg might be even better.

