Links
Archives
Monday, September 12, 2005
BADA BOOM Some heavy-going irony, in an American Enterprise Institute online publication, from a colleague of UD’s. He’s in GWU’s Economics department. No economist - with the exception of John Kenneth Galbraith, who has always been considered eccentric - cares about good writing, but sometimes it can make a difference. Did I say irony? Make that sarcasm. The writer begins by noting that pretty much everyone on the faculty of an American university is a liberal; he then asks a couple of questions and exclaims a couple of exclamations: If redistributing wealth is a good idea for workers, companies, individuals, and families, then intellectual consistency suggests it should be equally valid for institutions like colleges and universities. Right? Why does the writer put the phrase “well off” in quotation marks? Is Krugman wrong that rich people are well off? Is the writer suggesting that the well off do not exist? The writer goes on to point out that The disparities in college endowments are enormous. As of mid 2004, Harvard, Yale, and Princeton had average endowments of $14.9 billion, while three private institutions of similar size, George Washington University, Georgetown, and American University, averaged $543 million. That is a ratio of 27:1—about the same difference in income between a successful investment banker and a Wal-Mart clerk. Er, I know that last question’s rhetorical -- as are all the questions so far asked in this piece -- but why does Grinnell charge tuition? Why does Harvard? It’s time for an egalitarian revolution. Liberal professors at Harvard, Princeton, Amherst, and Williams should follow the principles they proclaim and strongly support action to end campus disparities by redistributing educational wealth. Voila. Touche. Game set and match. The writer seems sure he’s been very clever, but in fact he’s now got me thinking that there must be a better attitude toward these remarkable disparities than complacency ... |