OT - Columbia raises $6.1 billion

[RegisteredUconn]

Of course there was no gun to my head. But if I wanted X, I had to agree to Y. There is always a choice. Always.

When you use the word "force" it doesn't sound like a choice.

 

[J187Money]

When you use the word "force" it doesn't sound like a choice.

Right. In my particular situation there were extenuating circumstances. So it felt forced. But yes, not the best choice of words to describe it when speaking in generalities.

 

[FDNY99]

That's not all they own either. In the early 1990s, GE donated its premier property in mid-town Manhattan, the 50-story General Electric building, to Columbia. In announcing the donation, their CFO quipped he didn't know if it was the largest gift Columbia had ever received but he was pretty sure it was the tallest.

They also bought 3333 Broadway...which at one time was the largest single public housing unit in the world (it still may be)..in one building there is 5 towers all interconnected in the lobby..shortest tower is 25 flrs..largest is 35 flrs. This building was built to house 10,000 residents.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

Right. In my particular situation there were extenuating circumstances. So it felt forced. But yes, not the best choice of words to describe it when speaking in generalities.

When the choices are "bad" and "worse" it can seem like you're getting forced into the bad choice .

 

[J187Money]

When the choices are "bad" and "worse" it can seem like you're getting forced into the bad choice .

Actually a good story. But not for a public message board.

 

[BlueDogs]

I already posted this in this very thread. Taxpayer support has dropped by 50%. In even the high subsidy states, like California, it's dropped from $16k+ to $9k+ in REAL MONEY over the last 20 years. Compare this to, say, kindergarten subsidy in the very same states. There is 2x as much subsidy for kindergarten as there is for college education. 20 years ago, it was the reverse of that.

That's not correct, because the same experience in rate of increase in tuition has applied to private schools as well. The only area similar on behavior is healthcare cost increases. In both cases, the markets are distorted by large low cost government money. The unusual inflationary behavior is simply that there is no market driven cost controls. The schools are flooded by money, and each budget is consumed to the last dollar to justify the following year's budget. and need for more support. It's just like government spending. Use it or lose it. So they spend and spend. Student are paying through the nose because borrowing is so easy. That's why we have a trillion dollar junk student loan problem ready to implode. The truth is government employees have raped the taxpayer and students with outrageous benefits that nobody can get outside the public sector. This is compounded by high salaries and lifetime pensions based on their highest pay.

 

[upstater]

That's not correct, because the same experience in rate of increase in tuition has applied to private schools as well. The only area similar on behavior is healthcare cost increases. In both cases, the markets are distorted by large low cost government money. The unusual inflationary behavior is simply that there is no market driven cost controls. The schools are flooded by money, and each budget is consumed to the last dollar to justify the following year's budget. and need for more support. It's just like government spending. Use it or lose it. So they spend and spend. Student are paying through the nose because borrowing is so easy. That's why we have a trillion dollar junk student loan problem ready to implode. The truth is government employees have raped the taxpayer and students with outrageous benefits that nobody can get outside the public sector. This is compounded by high salaries and lifetime pensions based on their highest pay.

Every single point you made here is incorrect.

1. Private school tuition rose because of need blind policies that redistribute money from richer kids to poorer kids. This is easy to see because tuition is above the cost per student, which tells you that kids at private schools (most, not all) are paying more than what they are getting. Not true at public schools where tuition is often only 1/3rd of the cost per student.

2. The link I provided above has many analysts showing the cost drivers. Read the section on student loans.

3. You talk about cost controls but you've confused tuition with costs. They are not the same. Expenditures per student are much higher than tuition. The rise in tuition does not correlate with a similar rise in costs. By the way, 25 years ago, direct student loans (i.e. gov't subsidized) were $3000 a year, and now they are $5500. That's not a huge rise and certainly doesn't account for the rise in tuition. Borrowing outside gov't supported programs is done with private banks, and so it's not taxpayer subsidized.

4. I've worked at several schools and not a single one has offered a pension. There is no pension. That went out about 25 years ago. Salaries are actually pretty low in academia, and that's even taking into account the fact that full-time faculty have dropped from 70% to 30% in 20 years. The salary for full-timers is relatively low given career training and trajectories. You make more money if you took up plumbing out of HS with a career salary average of $45k.

I question almost everything you wrote in that post. You should read the thorough analysis I provided in the link. Although the study is dated, the greatest rise in tuition year-over-year occurred in the late 80s and all through the 1990s. Even tuition has moderated in the last decade, not to mention the costs.

 

[BlueDogs]

Every single point you made here is incorrect.

1. Private school tuition rose because of need blind policies that redistribute money from richer kids to poorer kids. This is easy to see because tuition is above the cost per student, which tells you that kids at private schools (most, not all) are paying more than what they are getting. Not true at public schools where tuition is often only 1/3rd of the cost per student.

2. The link I provided above has many analysts showing the cost drivers. Read the section on student loans.

3. You talk about cost controls but you've confused tuition with costs. They are not the same. Expenditures per student are much higher than tuition. The rise in tuition does not correlate with a similar rise in costs. By the way, 25 years ago, direct student loans (i.e. gov't subsidized) were $3000 a year, and now they are $5500. That's not a huge rise and certainly doesn't account for the rise in tuition. Borrowing outside gov't supported programs is done with private banks, and so it's not taxpayer subsidized.

4. I've worked at several schools and not a single one has offered a pension. There is no pension. That went out about 25 years ago. Salaries are actually pretty low in academia, and that's even taking into account the fact that full-time faculty have dropped from 70% to 30% in 20 years. The salary for full-timers is relatively low given career training and trajectories. You make more money if you took up plumbing out of HS with a career salary average of $45k.

I question almost everything you wrote in that post. You should read the thorough analysis I provided in the link. Although the study is dated, the greatest rise in tuition year-over-year occurred in the late 80s and all through the 1990s. Even tuition has moderated in the last decade, not to mention the costs.

 

[BlueDogs]

Here's a completely different set of facts:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/steveodland/2012/03/24/college-costs-are-soaring/

Those wed to the educational industrial complex do mental gymnastics to argue against what is plainly obvious.

As for pensions, the state pension system applies. You're simply wrong. http://articles.courant.com/2011-04...nsion-system-pension-payments-uconn-professor
There are nearly 400 uconn pensions over 100k a year. And, that's for the life of the employee and their spouse. Over 10 years that's 1MM per employee, or about 400 million. The numbers with pensions below 100k are just as problematic. These numbers don't include cost of lifetime healthcare. In the private college systems, they use guaranteed retirement annuities that are on top of tax free retirement accounts with matching dollars.

This is all hide and seek, and there is massive pillaging going on.

 

[upstater]

Here's a completely different set of facts:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/steveodland/2012/03/24/college-costs-are-soaring/

Those wed to the educational industrial complex do mental gymnastics to argue against what is plainly obvious.

As for pensions, the state pension system applies. You're simply wrong. http://articles.courant.com/2011-04...nsion-system-pension-payments-uconn-professor
There are nearly 400 uconn pensions over 100k a year. And, that's for the life of the employee and their spouse. Over 10 years that's 1MM per employee, or about 400 million. The numbers with pensions below 100k are just as problematic. These numbers don't include cost of lifetime healthcare. In the private college systems, they use guaranteed retirement annuities that are on top of tax free retirement accounts with matching dollars.

This is all hide and seek, and there is massive pillaging going on.

You do know Forbes is the Bleacher Report for the news, right? It's where amateurs post their drivel.
But, even in the link you posted, he is looking at tuition increases which, AGAIN, is not expenditures! This is the whole point. To say administrator expenses are up 35% over 20 years is not to say they are a cost driver for tuition, since the total cost of all administrator salaries are still under 1%. It's interesting that even the article acknowledges that full-time faculty is now way down in numbers, but then the author conflates administrator/faculty pay as the same thing, which it's not. There are a lot more administrators, a lot fewer faculty. By combining them both, he shows increased labor costs. It's a deception.

The rest of the stuff is just mind-boggling canards. Sabbaticals every 3 years? Huh? Where? Not at any institution I know of. Where does he come up with that? I suspect he doesn't know the difference between a sabbatical and an unpaid leave (i.e. for a fellowship or project). Sabbaticals are fully paid, and they're only available at R1 research institutions, and they happen about once a decade for more faculty. Those who take more time off from teaching do so with the help of outside grants and fellowships while the university stops paying them salary (though sometimes a school may decide to top off the professor's salary if the fellowship is somewhat lower than the salary).

As for the pensions, you listed retired people. From the Health Center. Those pensions stopped being options for new employees 2 decades ago.

Here's the UConn retirement plan for employees: http://www.osc.ct.gov/empret/tier3spd/letter.htm

It's a 403(b), a non-profit form of the 401(k).

 

[BlueDogs]

You do know Forbes is the Bleacher Report for the news, right? It's where amateurs post their drivel.
But, even in the link you posted, he is looking at tuition increases which, AGAIN, is not expenditures! This is the whole point. To say administrator expenses are up 35% over 20 years is not to say they are a cost driver for tuition, since the total cost of all administrator salaries are still under 1%. It's interesting that even the article acknowledges that full-time faculty is now way down in numbers, but then the author conflates administrator/faculty pay as the same thing, which it's not. There are a lot more administrators, a lot fewer faculty. By combining them both, he shows increased labor costs. It's a deception.

The rest of the stuff is just mind-boggling canards. Sabbaticals every 3 years? Huh? Where? Not at any institution I know of. Where does he come up with that? I suspect he doesn't know the difference between a sabbatical and an unpaid leave (i.e. for a fellowship or project). Sabbaticals are fully paid, and they're only available at R1 research institutions, and they happen about once a decade for more faculty. Those who take more time off from teaching do so with the help of outside grants and fellowships while the university stops paying them salary (though sometimes a school may decide to top off the professor's salary if the fellowship is somewhat lower than the salary).

As for the pensions, you listed retired people. From the Health Center. Those pensions stopped being options for new employees 2 decades ago.

Here's the UConn retirement plan for employees: http://www.osc.ct.gov/empret/tier3spd/letter.htm

It's a 403(b), a non-profit form of the 401(k).

The only deception is the notion that somehow tuition increases are a function of anything other than our of control personnel related costs. http://ivn.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/tuition-tipping-point.jpg

How about we compared university real salary wages against general wages of Parents? The think real wages have fallen by 5% . I guarantee wages for university professors have outstripped inflation. Sorry, Just not buying what your selling. The educational industrial complex do mental gymnastics to convince us that the something other than the obvious truth is at work.

 

[upstater]

The only deception is the notion that somehow tuition increases are a function of anything other than our of control personnel related costs. http://ivn.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/tuition-tipping-point.jpg

How about we compared university real salary wages against general wages of Parents? The think real wages have fallen by 5% . I guarantee wages for university professors have outstripped inflation. Sorry, Just not buying what your selling. The educational industrial complex do mental gymnastics to convince us that the something other than the obvious truth is at work.

You are wrong in each and every post.

Faculty wages nationally average $62k for tenure and tenure track. That's mid-career. But since the numbers of full-timers have fallen drastically from 75% to under 30%, the money is way down. Comparing faculty to parents is absurd as well. Consider, a plumber becomes an apprentice after high school and goes on to average $45k until retirement (according to payscale). A faculty member with an average of 10-12 years post-grad and fellowship gets the first job at average age of 34 and gets tenure after 40. They have 30 years to earn at an average of $62k, not to mention the loans from 16 years of school. When you add it all up, middle class parents are much better off. And even this is taking into consideration engineering and science faculty with high salaries (compared to others who average less than $62k) who are bringing in research grants that pay their salary (i.e. it doesn't come from tuition or taxpayers).

I gave you a full blown bipartisan study of costs. You gave me a graph on tuition.

How can we even have a conversation when you don't understand the difference between tuition (which is a fraction of costs per student) and expenditures. There is a world of difference between the two.

 

[2UCONN04]

USC has raised 3 Billion in 2 years. According the the Annual Presidental Address I attended last Weds....