How the Ivy League Broke America

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The critique is fine; the proposed solution is insipid. Brooks is pretty good when it comes to summarizing things that other people have been thinking and writing about for years. He isn’t much of an original thinker.

Yes. He’s proposing to rearrange the deck chairs. The fundamental problem is that the Ivies are too small for the social role they are trying to fill, and they refuse to grow. It doesn’t really matter how they fill their classes: their role as gatekeepers, and the ever-growing number of people locked out, will continue to fuel an ever-expanding populist backlash.

The populist backlash isn’t really about limited access to Ivies. The Ivy hatred is just one manifestation of the grievances of LC/LMC people (mostly but not exclusively White) display because they feel left behind. Their bigger beef is with globalization. You could get rid of tho Ivies tomorrow and some average Joe in Ohio would still be getting hooked on opiates and supporting Trump because the Chinese and Indians are working harder and outperforming them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Read the article. The title is click bait.

After reading it, you will see it actually makes the case for having to attend an elite school.

Oh, and by the way, many of us who have kids at an Ivy were not Tiger moms. We didn’t pay for private counselors or tutors. We weren't gunning for Ivies at a young age. My kid didn’t even consider them until December of Senior year. The grades and scores were unprepped. He had a job and played a sport.

We actually got out of the rat race and he wasn’t even in GT in elementary which was reserved for the kids whose parents thought they were geniuses and lobbied the principal or donated $$$$.

Ironically, none of the ultimate Tiger moms in our hood had kids accepted to an Ivy. They can see through the BS.

+ a million. True of my ivy kids, their friends there(most of whom are on at least some financial aid), and other students from the high school who landed there. Attending Ivy/+ schools offers a boost going forward, this and many articles &experts acknowledge it, thus making elite schools permanently in demand. The tiger mom over-prepped and tutored kids who come from extraordinary wealth all ended up shut out of all top 20s, and are at SMU, W&L, Colby, Bucknell...and a few at UVA in state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The critique is fine; the proposed solution is insipid. Brooks is pretty good when it comes to summarizing things that other people have been thinking and writing about for years. He isn’t much of an original thinker.

Yes. He’s proposing to rearrange the deck chairs. The fundamental problem is that the Ivies are too small for the social role they are trying to fill, and they refuse to grow. It doesn’t really matter how they fill their classes: their role as gatekeepers, and the ever-growing number of people locked out, will continue to fuel an ever-expanding populist backlash.

The populist backlash isn’t really about limited access to Ivies. The Ivy hatred is just one manifestation of the grievances of LC/LMC people (mostly but not exclusively White) display because they feel left behind. Their bigger beef is with globalization. You could get rid of tho Ivies tomorrow and some average Joe in Ohio would still be getting hooked on opiates and supporting Trump because the Chinese and Indians are working harder and outperforming them.

It's sad/funny, but good old JD Vance actually described the problems in Hillbilly Elegy...but now he is completely distancing himself from himself because it doesn't fit a successful political career.

You could debate any Trump supporter simply responding with quotes from JD's book.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The critique is fine; the proposed solution is insipid. Brooks is pretty good when it comes to summarizing things that other people have been thinking and writing about for years. He isn’t much of an original thinker.

Yes. He’s proposing to rearrange the deck chairs. The fundamental problem is that the Ivies are too small for the social role they are trying to fill, and they refuse to grow. It doesn’t really matter how they fill their classes: their role as gatekeepers, and the ever-growing number of people locked out, will continue to fuel an ever-expanding populist backlash.

Cue the “but the experience wouldn’t be the same…” poster in 3…, 2…, 1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The critique is fine; the proposed solution is insipid. Brooks is pretty good when it comes to summarizing things that other people have been thinking and writing about for years. He isn’t much of an original thinker.

Yes. He’s proposing to rearrange the deck chairs. The fundamental problem is that the Ivies are too small for the social role they are trying to fill, and they refuse to grow. It doesn’t really matter how they fill their classes: their role as gatekeepers, and the ever-growing number of people locked out, will continue to fuel an ever-expanding populist backlash.

The populist backlash isn’t really about limited access to Ivies. The Ivy hatred is just one manifestation of the grievances of LC/LMC people (mostly but not exclusively White) display because they feel left behind. Their bigger beef is with globalization. You could get rid of tho Ivies tomorrow and some average Joe in Ohio would still be getting hooked on opiates and supporting Trump because the Chinese and Indians are working harder and outperforming them.

It's sad/funny, but good old JD Vance actually described the problems in Hillbilly Elegy...but now he is completely distancing himself from himself because it doesn't fit a successful political career.

You could debate any Trump supporter simply responding with quotes from JD's book.

And as someone else pointed out in the Politics forum, the roots of the problem were sewn in the 90s with NAFTA and many other popular policies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kind of a bit of aside that is mentioned in the article, is that how the rise of Generative AI will make traditional academic skills even less important.

Linked to a study at Harvard where someone used ChatGPT 4 (paid version) to write a bunch of papers on different topics and then told the Harvard professors grading, that some of the papers were written by ChatGPT and others by qualified humans.

In reality, they were all written by ChatGPT. Papers received mostly As. Basically, the person would have received a 3.6 for the semester just having Chat GPT crank out the papers.

given that a 3.6 is the bottom 25% of Harvard, not too impressive. Harvard median GPA is 3.83.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The critique is fine; the proposed solution is insipid. Brooks is pretty good when it comes to summarizing things that other people have been thinking and writing about for years. He isn’t much of an original thinker.

Yes. He’s proposing to rearrange the deck chairs. The fundamental problem is that the Ivies are too small for the social role they are trying to fill, and they refuse to grow. It doesn’t really matter how they fill their classes: their role as gatekeepers, and the ever-growing number of people locked out, will continue to fuel an ever-expanding populist backlash.

The populist backlash isn’t really about limited access to Ivies. The Ivy hatred is just one manifestation of the grievances of LC/LMC people (mostly but not exclusively White) display because they feel left behind. Their bigger beef is with globalization. You could get rid of tho Ivies tomorrow and some average Joe in Ohio would still be getting hooked on opiates and supporting Trump because the Chinese and Indians are working harder and outperforming them.

+1,000

Spot on!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The critique is fine; the proposed solution is insipid. Brooks is pretty good when it comes to summarizing things that other people have been thinking and writing about for years. He isn’t much of an original thinker.

Yes. He’s proposing to rearrange the deck chairs. The fundamental problem is that the Ivies are too small for the social role they are trying to fill, and they refuse to grow. It doesn’t really matter how they fill their classes: their role as gatekeepers, and the ever-growing number of people locked out, will continue to fuel an ever-expanding populist backlash.

Cue the “but the experience wouldn’t be the same…” poster in 3…, 2…, 1

If the Ivies aren't big enough for their role, you'd think the next tier of schools would simply step in to fill it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the article. The title is click bait.

After reading it, you will see it actually makes the case for having to attend an elite school.

Oh, and by the way, many of us who have kids at an Ivy were not Tiger moms. We didn’t pay for private counselors or tutors. We weren't gunning for Ivies at a young age. My kid didn’t even consider them until December of Senior year. The grades and scores were unprepped. He had a job and played a sport.

We actually got out of the rat race and he wasn’t even in GT in elementary which was reserved for the kids whose parents thought they were geniuses and lobbied the principal or donated $$$$.

Ironically, none of the ultimate Tiger moms in our hood had kids accepted to an Ivy. They can see through the BS.

+ a million. True of my ivy kids, their friends there(most of whom are on at least some financial aid), and other students from the high school who landed there. Attending Ivy/+ schools offers a boost going forward, this and many articles &experts acknowledge it, thus making elite schools permanently in demand. The tiger mom over-prepped and tutored kids who come from extraordinary wealth all ended up shut out of all top 20s, and are at SMU, W&L, Colby, Bucknell...and a few at UVA in state.

So these two people are saying their kids are there because of merit? And the families are not in the top 10 percent income wise?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The critique is fine; the proposed solution is insipid. Brooks is pretty good when it comes to summarizing things that other people have been thinking and writing about for years. He isn’t much of an original thinker.

Yes. He’s proposing to rearrange the deck chairs. The fundamental problem is that the Ivies are too small for the social role they are trying to fill, and they refuse to grow. It doesn’t really matter how they fill their classes: their role as gatekeepers, and the ever-growing number of people locked out, will continue to fuel an ever-expanding populist backlash.

The populist backlash isn’t really about limited access to Ivies. The Ivy hatred is just one manifestation of the grievances of LC/LMC people (mostly but not exclusively White) display because they feel left behind. Their bigger beef is with globalization. You could get rid of tho Ivies tomorrow and some average Joe in Ohio would still be getting hooked on opiates and supporting Trump because the Chinese and Indians are working harder and outperforming them.

Ha. My husband’s 50 year old brother has never heard of my kid’s Ivy. Said “what’s that?” So true

[Anonymous]

Wharton was cheaper than Villanova for us.

These articles always fail to mention these schools are the very best deal for UMC families.

[Anonymous]

Boy- those down-to-earth, average to low intelligence really stuck it to us. They stuck it to America and their own safety because they believed the snake oil salesman.

Now we have an anti-vaxxer for public health who will take us back to the 1800s. Remember Polio, Measles, Small Pox, a flu epidemic before vaccines?

We have a pedophile with less than 2 years of law experience for Attorney General.

We have a conspiracy theorist, friends with Putin and other dictators for our National Security.

We have a President using his private security to vet these people since they’d never pass an FBI background check. And using his office to exact revenge for selfish purposes.

I don’t think intelligence is what broke America. These people were full on Trump regardless. And, let’s see where that gets us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wharton was cheaper than Villanova for us.

These articles always fail to mention these schools are the very best deal for UMC families.

Well, no. Not UMC. Ivy is $90k for us

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wharton was cheaper than Villanova for us.

These articles always fail to mention these schools are the very best deal for UMC families.

Well, no. Not UMC. Ivy is $90k for us

But it’s completely free for HHI of $150k and less. So, yeah, the article is ridiculous. Just click bait.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The critique is fine; the proposed solution is insipid. Brooks is pretty good when it comes to summarizing things that other people have been thinking and writing about for years. He isn’t much of an original thinker.

Yes. He’s proposing to rearrange the deck chairs. The fundamental problem is that the Ivies are too small for the social role they are trying to fill, and they refuse to grow. It doesn’t really matter how they fill their classes: their role as gatekeepers, and the ever-growing number of people locked out, will continue to fuel an ever-expanding populist backlash.

The populist backlash isn’t really about limited access to Ivies. The Ivy hatred is just one manifestation of the grievances of LC/LMC people (mostly but not exclusively White) display because they feel left behind. Their bigger beef is with globalization. You could get rid of tho Ivies tomorrow and some average Joe in Ohio would still be getting hooked on opiates and supporting Trump because the Chinese and Indians are working harder and outperforming them.

It's sad/funny, but good old JD Vance actually described the problems in Hillbilly Elegy...but now he is completely distancing himself from himself because it doesn't fit a successful political career.

You could debate any Trump supporter simply responding with quotes from JD's book.

JD is so slimy and phony.