The End of College Life - Wash U Prof's article in the Atlantic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What you don’t get is that this will just kill off most schools.

It won't kill off most schools, but it will force them to cut the flab and make choices on how to spend limited money. It will kill some schools, that is a much needed Darwinian fitness test.

They are cutting research, not “flab”.

MAGAs are dumb AF.

Look beneath the surface & see what this “research” is focused on, moron.

I have a relative whose research is focused on treatment of diabetes whose lab is affected. The research affected is focused on issues that affect millions of ordinary Americans. Another relative is in a cancer drug trial at one of the affected institutions. This just really stinks — why we want to attack what is America’s best industry is beyond me. I love America. I want it to thrive.

[Anonymous]

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/01/opinion/paul-weiss-columbia-dei.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare&sgrp=c&pvid=2B8B82FC-13A6-4415-9C13-ACED357EEEE3

NY Times today. And no, I don’t have a gift link

and this very insightful comment made by a reader who is a professor —

‘I am a university professor, I voted Harris, and I wish Trump would order my place to lower tuition across the board 25% or lose access to the federal loan system. The response would be to cut services, jobs, offices, etc that had nothing to do with research or student success/learning - in other words, precisely what my institution needs to do to survive. Such an order is unimaginable under a Democrat President. I am quite familiar with Columbia: cutting tuition 25% could be done immediately, and easily, and the entire issue goes away. Public opinion is against Columbia not because it peddles pro-Hamas nonsense, it’s because it became the symbol of popular, wide spread disdain for universities that harvest the wealth of families who committed the grave sin of raising children smart enough to go to college. Universities have lost their way, completely bloated with non-essential jobs that boost tuition. Both the Right and Left are aware of it, but no one does anything about it. No sector needs a “DOGE solution” more than higher education.’

[Anonymous]

^ I could not agree more

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^ I could not agree more

Well, that professor is right up until the last sentence. He or she has fundamentally misunderstood the goal of DOGE and Trump. It’s not to help the middle class voter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I could not agree more

Well, that professor is right up until the last sentence. He or she has fundamentally misunderstood the goal of DOGE and Trump. It’s not to help the middle class voter.

You’re missing the point. Obviously the writer doesn’t like Trump or his tactics. But she/he is saying there’s too much blout in colleges right now which should be obvious to all of us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What you don’t get is that this will just kill off most schools.

It won't kill off most schools, but it will force them to cut the flab and make choices on how to spend limited money. It will kill some schools, that is a much needed Darwinian fitness test.

They are cutting research, not “flab”.

MAGAs are dumb AF.

Look beneath the surface & see what this “research” is focused on, moron.

I have a relative whose research is focused on treatment of diabetes whose lab is affected. The research affected is focused on issues that affect millions of ordinary Americans. Another relative is in a cancer drug trial at one of the affected institutions. This just really stinks — why we want to attack what is America’s best industry is beyond me. I love America. I want it to thrive.

All of a sudden EVERYBODY is a cancer researcher. And nobody knows someone getting millions to investigate the patriarchy’s impact on 17th century Hungarian undergarments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What you don’t get is that this will just kill off most schools.

It won't kill off most schools, but it will force them to cut the flab and make choices on how to spend limited money. It will kill some schools, that is a much needed Darwinian fitness test.

They are cutting research, not “flab”.

MAGAs are dumb AF.

Look beneath the surface & see what this “research” is focused on, moron.

I have a relative whose research is focused on treatment of diabetes whose lab is affected. The research affected is focused on issues that affect millions of ordinary Americans. Another relative is in a cancer drug trial at one of the affected institutions. This just really stinks — why we want to attack what is America’s best industry is beyond me. I love America. I want it to thrive.

All of a sudden EVERYBODY is a cancer researcher. And nobody knows someone getting millions to investigate the patriarchy’s impact on 17th century Hungarian undergarments.

That’s because the fed govt doesn’t fund research into Hungarian undergarments so it’s not relevant. Most of the fed money to places like Harvard and JHU is going to medical research. Some is going to things like Pell Grants so kids from low income families can attend top colleges. (I got a Pell grant.). Very little of the humanities work is federally funded. I googled whether Harvard gets any money from the national endowment for the arts and all I could find was an article that is 15 years old about a 75K grant to the Harvard museum for an exhibition about immigrants. The professors teaching Hungarian 17th century history are all privately endowed chairs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I could not agree more

Well, that professor is right up until the last sentence. He or she has fundamentally misunderstood the goal of DOGE and Trump. It’s not to help the middle class voter.

You’re missing the point. Obviously the writer doesn’t like Trump or his tactics. But she/he is saying there’s too much blout in colleges right now which should be obvious to all of us.

Yes. But the Trump solution is not at all tailored to address that problem. And it’s really weird for the federal government to be involved in minimizing bloat at a private entity. Private industry has a million boondoggles, but the federal government doesn’t cut contracts because corporate CEOs are overpaid and go to conferences in Hawaii.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All Americans - liberal, conservative, and apolitical - should be very concerned about the future of college given how Trump & Vance are attacking it. It is arson with no architecture. They don't have a vision for fixing it, they just want it to die.

I am paying careful attention and am very happy with the changes. These are much needed.

The people who are unhappy are those who are content to receive funds without needing to demonstrate any results.

Now the fun part - the supposed liberals who are "open" to new ideas and alternative viewpoints, think none of the above is an "acceptable" viewpoint. Because the above must have been written by a MAGA advocate and therefore not a valid view.

-A moderate democrat who voted for Kamala

Researchers have to demonstrate results. Often they are contractually obligated to publish their results no matter what. They don’t have to demonstrate success. That is an important concept in science and engineering. You can’t guarantee success, nor should you, when trialing new concepts in basic and applied research.

An epic cope!

So many jackasses on this thread who understand nothing about doing research just yelling nonsense.

Or…some of us have been around for more than 20 years and believe cost- effectiveness has not been practiced in many aspects of research in many universities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A recent paper published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas found that government investments in [R&D] accounted for at least a fifth of U.S. productivity growth since World War II.

So since 1945- that is probably true for most first world countries. What is the decade by decade,(controlling for inflation), difference? That would be telling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/01/opinion/paul-weiss-columbia-dei.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare&sgrp=c&pvid=2B8B82FC-13A6-4415-9C13-ACED357EEEE3

NY Times today. And no, I don’t have a gift link

and this very insightful comment made by a reader who is a professor —

‘I am a university professor, I voted Harris, and I wish Trump would order my place to lower tuition across the board 25% or lose access to the federal loan system. The response would be to cut services, jobs, offices, etc that had nothing to do with research or student success/learning - in other words, precisely what my institution needs to do to survive. Such an order is unimaginable under a Democrat President. I am quite familiar with Columbia: cutting tuition 25% could be done immediately, and easily, and the entire issue goes away. Public opinion is against Columbia not because it peddles pro-Hamas nonsense, it’s because it became the symbol of popular, wide spread disdain for universities that harvest the wealth of families who committed the grave sin of raising children smart enough to go to college. Universities have lost their way, completely bloated with non-essential jobs that boost tuition. Both the Right and Left are aware of it, but no one does anything about it. No sector needs a “DOGE solution” more than higher education.’

This I agree with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/01/opinion/paul-weiss-columbia-dei.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare&sgrp=c&pvid=2B8B82FC-13A6-4415-9C13-ACED357EEEE3

NY Times today. And no, I don’t have a gift link

and this very insightful comment made by a reader who is a professor —

‘I am a university professor, I voted Harris, and I wish Trump would order my place to lower tuition across the board 25% or lose access to the federal loan system. The response would be to cut services, jobs, offices, etc that had nothing to do with research or student success/learning - in other words, precisely what my institution needs to do to survive. Such an order is unimaginable under a Democrat President. I am quite familiar with Columbia: cutting tuition 25% could be done immediately, and easily, and the entire issue goes away. Public opinion is against Columbia not because it peddles pro-Hamas nonsense, it’s because it became the symbol of popular, wide spread disdain for universities that harvest the wealth of families who committed the grave sin of raising children smart enough to go to college. Universities have lost their way, completely bloated with non-essential jobs that boost tuition. Both the Right and Left are aware of it, but no one does anything about it. No sector needs a “DOGE solution” more than higher education.’

This I agree with.

So you think the government should be able dictate the cost of tuition?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I could not agree more

Well, that professor is right up until the last sentence. He or she has fundamentally misunderstood the goal of DOGE and Trump. It’s not to help the middle class voter.

You’re missing the point. Obviously the writer doesn’t like Trump or his tactics. But she/he is saying there’s too much blout in colleges right now which should be obvious to all of us.

Yes. But the Trump solution is not at all tailored to address that problem. And it’s really weird for the federal government to be involved in minimizing bloat at a private entity. Private industry has a million boondoggles, but the federal government doesn’t cut contracts because corporate CEOs are overpaid and go to conferences in Hawaii.

Dp. They are not private entities they are non profits with billion dollar endowments that all taxpayers including the 60% who don’t even have college degrees have to subsidize. We democrats fumbled the ball as we didn’t even bring up the issue of tuition inflation much less suggest solutions to it or acknowledge federal loans role in it so people had no choice but to pick his ham fisted approach. Our party completely lost sight of middle class issues and that why we are here. Face it we have become the party of elites and a system that mostly serves the top percent and their pet causes. Why are auto manufacturer unions celebrating tariffs while democrats are calling for free trade? Who are we really fighting for? We have no plan that addresses 60% of American populations concerns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/01/opinion/paul-weiss-columbia-dei.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare&sgrp=c&pvid=2B8B82FC-13A6-4415-9C13-ACED357EEEE3

NY Times today. And no, I don’t have a gift link

and this very insightful comment made by a reader who is a professor —

‘I am a university professor, I voted Harris, and I wish Trump would order my place to lower tuition across the board 25% or lose access to the federal loan system. The response would be to cut services, jobs, offices, etc that had nothing to do with research or student success/learning - in other words, precisely what my institution needs to do to survive. Such an order is unimaginable under a Democrat President. I am quite familiar with Columbia: cutting tuition 25% could be done immediately, and easily, and the entire issue goes away. Public opinion is against Columbia not because it peddles pro-Hamas nonsense, it’s because it became the symbol of popular, wide spread disdain for universities that harvest the wealth of families who committed the grave sin of raising children smart enough to go to college. Universities have lost their way, completely bloated with non-essential jobs that boost tuition. Both the Right and Left are aware of it, but no one does anything about it. No sector needs a “DOGE solution” more than higher education.’

This I agree with.

So you think the government should be able dictate the cost of tuition?

If they are receiving federal loans absolutely

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cluelessness and stupidity on display in this thread makes it quite clear how we ended up with a low-IQ troll for a president.

Nah! Smugness exactly like you exhibited is what got us Trump. So, thank you for your contribution!

Nah! You’re all just insecure.