Perspective on the Madness

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not in terms of jobs but in terms of money Musk (UPenn), Bezos (Princeton), Larry Ellison (dropout UIUC), zuck & gates (dropout Harvard), Page (UMich), Brin (UMaryland), Dell (dropout UTA), Ballmer (Harvard), Bloomberg (JHU) have all the bananas.

Steve Jobs (dropout Reed College)
Mark Cuban (University of Pittsburgh college, Indiana University MBA)

Jobs' kids attended Stanford and Harvard. Cuban has a kid at Vanderbilt and a crew recruit daughter going to UCLA.

What does it matter where the kids go? They are nepo babies now. Ofc they'll inherit privilege. It's the schools the parent went to (Mark Cuban) who made the wealth that matters.

Because those same parents when wealthy want their kids to attend top schools...even though it doesn't matter at all where their kids attend college.

Also, as someone else rightly pointed out...it's like a 10-to-1 ratio of elite school grads to non-elite if you are looking at the wealthiest people.

Now do "economic background" for those wealthiest people.

The economic background skews UMC but not wealthy. Zuckerberg’s dad is a dentist…Bezos mom had him in HS and stepdad was a network engineer.

There is no doubt that being UMC or above is a huge leg up, but other than the Walton children that inherited Wal Mart stock (and BTW didn’t really attend elite schools for the most part), the families played little to no role in the ultimate success.

Bezos was given 245k to start Amazon by his stepdad. Zuckerberg's dad gave him 100k. Might seem like nothing to you but this much capital with zero pressure to reimburse it is a huge head start.

Both co-invested in larger funding rounds which is quite different than giving the only $$$s.

Bezos worked at DE Shaw (hedge fund) and had far more personal wealth than his parents at the time.

Once more…it is an advantage to be UMC, but the families played little in the scheme of things for ultimate success.

But the schools they attended did? Bezos didn’t start Amazon until nearly a decade after he graduated. Zuckerberg barely spent time at Harvard though it’s where he found the idea he stole, so that counts for something, I guess.

It's hard to not give credit to Harvard for assembling the group of people that became the FB founders. Literally, this is why elite school alums have such outlier massive outcomes.

I doubt FB would ever have happened if Zuckerberg had attended SUNY Binghamton (he is from Westchester...hence referencing a SUNY).

It would have happened in some form because it was someone else’s idea (at Harvard).

Smart people have smart ideas and come up with big things. They also attend top colleges. I’m not sure why you credit the school versus the people, or give more weight to the school than other factors around them. This is the lack of perspective mentioned.

This is silly...I guess you get all your facts from the movies.

BTW, if smart people attend top colleges and that is where the big ideas are created...how is that not a reason why people are "caught up in the madness" to attend these schools?

Nobody is claiming that the institution of Harvard magically imbued a bunch of random kids with these talents...but they do assemble a class of kids that they hope/expect will do great things.

DP - This explains why it is madness. The 'elite' schools are great, of course, and are a great option for both wealthy and low-income families, who should benefit from them. The UMC needs to weigh all the options and avoid getting caught up in prestige or 'the possibility of their child becoming a billionaire' part of it. Most end up with huge debt and, if they are lucky, do only marginally better than their public school counterparts.

I completely agree...however, it makes perfect sense for an UMC kid to decide they want to work at a hedge fund, gets caught up in the "madness" to attend Wharton...attends Wharton...and then goes to work for Point72 or any number of other hedge funds founded by Wharton grads who disproportionally hire Wharton/Penn (STEM usually) grads.

Sometimes in fact there is a method to the madness...even though I know DCUM thinks it's all distasteful.

It'd make sense if your 17 year old is passionate about working at a hedge fund. Most kids get caught up in the perceived expectations from the parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not in terms of jobs but in terms of money Musk (UPenn), Bezos (Princeton), Larry Ellison (dropout UIUC), zuck & gates (dropout Harvard), Page (UMich), Brin (UMaryland), Dell (dropout UTA), Ballmer (Harvard), Bloomberg (JHU) have all the bananas.

Steve Jobs (dropout Reed College)
Mark Cuban (University of Pittsburgh college, Indiana University MBA)

Jobs' kids attended Stanford and Harvard. Cuban has a kid at Vanderbilt and a crew recruit daughter going to UCLA.

What does it matter where the kids go? They are nepo babies now. Ofc they'll inherit privilege. It's the schools the parent went to (Mark Cuban) who made the wealth that matters.

Because those same parents when wealthy want their kids to attend top schools...even though it doesn't matter at all where their kids attend college.

Also, as someone else rightly pointed out...it's like a 10-to-1 ratio of elite school grads to non-elite if you are looking at the wealthiest people.

Now do "economic background" for those wealthiest people.

The economic background skews UMC but not wealthy. Zuckerberg’s dad is a dentist…Bezos mom had him in HS and stepdad was a network engineer.

There is no doubt that being UMC or above is a huge leg up, but other than the Walton children that inherited Wal Mart stock (and BTW didn’t really attend elite schools for the most part), the families played little to no role in the ultimate success.

Bezos was given 245k to start Amazon by his stepdad. Zuckerberg's dad gave him 100k. Might seem like nothing to you but this much capital with zero pressure to reimburse it is a huge head start.

Both co-invested in larger funding rounds which is quite different than giving the only $$$s.

Bezos worked at DE Shaw (hedge fund) and had far more personal wealth than his parents at the time.

Once more…it is an advantage to be UMC, but the families played little in the scheme of things for ultimate success.

But the schools they attended did? Bezos didn’t start Amazon until nearly a decade after he graduated. Zuckerberg barely spent time at Harvard though it’s where he found the idea he stole, so that counts for something, I guess.

It's hard to not give credit to Harvard for assembling the group of people that became the FB founders. Literally, this is why elite school alums have such outlier massive outcomes.

I doubt FB would ever have happened if Zuckerberg had attended SUNY Binghamton (he is from Westchester...hence referencing a SUNY).

It would have happened in some form because it was someone else’s idea (at Harvard).

Smart people have smart ideas and come up with big things. They also attend top colleges. I’m not sure why you credit the school versus the people, or give more weight to the school than other factors around them. This is the lack of perspective mentioned.

This is silly...I guess you get all your facts from the movies.

BTW, if smart people attend top colleges and that is where the big ideas are created...how is that not a reason why people are "caught up in the madness" to attend these schools?

Nobody is claiming that the institution of Harvard magically imbued a bunch of random kids with these talents...but they do assemble a class of kids that they hope/expect will do great things.

DP - This explains why it is madness. The 'elite' schools are great, of course, and are a great option for both wealthy and low-income families, who should benefit from them. The UMC needs to weigh all the options and avoid getting caught up in prestige or 'the possibility of their child becoming a billionaire' part of it. Most end up with huge debt and, if they are lucky, do only marginally better than their public school counterparts.

I completely agree...however, it makes perfect sense for an UMC kid to decide they want to work at a hedge fund, gets caught up in the "madness" to attend Wharton...attends Wharton...and then goes to work for Point72 or any number of other hedge funds founded by Wharton grads who disproportionally hire Wharton/Penn (STEM usually) grads.

Sometimes in fact there is a method to the madness...even though I know DCUM thinks it's all distasteful.

That sounds very Long Island

Very tri state or miami

Gunner

Distasteful

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not in terms of jobs but in terms of money Musk (UPenn), Bezos (Princeton), Larry Ellison (dropout UIUC), zuck & gates (dropout Harvard), Page (UMich), Brin (UMaryland), Dell (dropout UTA), Ballmer (Harvard), Bloomberg (JHU) have all the bananas.

Steve Jobs (dropout Reed College)
Mark Cuban (University of Pittsburgh college, Indiana University MBA)

Jobs' kids attended Stanford and Harvard. Cuban has a kid at Vanderbilt and a crew recruit daughter going to UCLA.

What does it matter where the kids go? They are nepo babies now. Ofc they'll inherit privilege. It's the schools the parent went to (Mark Cuban) who made the wealth that matters.

Because those same parents when wealthy want their kids to attend top schools...even though it doesn't matter at all where their kids attend college.

Also, as someone else rightly pointed out...it's like a 10-to-1 ratio of elite school grads to non-elite if you are looking at the wealthiest people.

Now do "economic background" for those wealthiest people.

The economic background skews UMC but not wealthy. Zuckerberg’s dad is a dentist…Bezos mom had him in HS and stepdad was a network engineer.

There is no doubt that being UMC or above is a huge leg up, but other than the Walton children that inherited Wal Mart stock (and BTW didn’t really attend elite schools for the most part), the families played little to no role in the ultimate success.

Bezos was given 245k to start Amazon by his stepdad. Zuckerberg's dad gave him 100k. Might seem like nothing to you but this much capital with zero pressure to reimburse it is a huge head start.

Both co-invested in larger funding rounds which is quite different than giving the only $$$s.

Bezos worked at DE Shaw (hedge fund) and had far more personal wealth than his parents at the time.

Once more…it is an advantage to be UMC, but the families played little in the scheme of things for ultimate success.

But the schools they attended did? Bezos didn’t start Amazon until nearly a decade after he graduated. Zuckerberg barely spent time at Harvard though it’s where he found the idea he stole, so that counts for something, I guess.

It's hard to not give credit to Harvard for assembling the group of people that became the FB founders. Literally, this is why elite school alums have such outlier massive outcomes.

I doubt FB would ever have happened if Zuckerberg had attended SUNY Binghamton (he is from Westchester...hence referencing a SUNY).

It would have happened in some form because it was someone else’s idea (at Harvard).

Smart people have smart ideas and come up with big things. They also attend top colleges. I’m not sure why you credit the school versus the people, or give more weight to the school than other factors around them. This is the lack of perspective mentioned.

This is silly...I guess you get all your facts from the movies.

BTW, if smart people attend top colleges and that is where the big ideas are created...how is that not a reason why people are "caught up in the madness" to attend these schools?

Nobody is claiming that the institution of Harvard magically imbued a bunch of random kids with these talents...but they do assemble a class of kids that they hope/expect will do great things.

DP - This explains why it is madness. The 'elite' schools are great, of course, and are a great option for both wealthy and low-income families, who should benefit from them. The UMC needs to weigh all the options and avoid getting caught up in prestige or 'the possibility of their child becoming a billionaire' part of it. Most end up with huge debt and, if they are lucky, do only marginally better than their public school counterparts.

I completely agree...however, it makes perfect sense for an UMC kid to decide they want to work at a hedge fund, gets caught up in the "madness" to attend Wharton...attends Wharton...and then goes to work for Point72 or any number of other hedge funds founded by Wharton grads who disproportionally hire Wharton/Penn (STEM usually) grads.

Sometimes in fact there is a method to the madness...even though I know DCUM thinks it's all distasteful.

It'd make sense if your 17 year old is passionate about working at a hedge fund. Most kids get caught up in the perceived expectations from the parents.

You don't appreciate that social media has made many of these jobs much more "accessible" to kids. Of course, they just know you can make a gazillion dollars and don't understand how the sausage is made...but they know way more about these jobs than 17 year olds ever knew back in the day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not in terms of jobs but in terms of money Musk (UPenn), Bezos (Princeton), Larry Ellison (dropout UIUC), zuck & gates (dropout Harvard), Page (UMich), Brin (UMaryland), Dell (dropout UTA), Ballmer (Harvard), Bloomberg (JHU) have all the bananas.

Steve Jobs (dropout Reed College)
Mark Cuban (University of Pittsburgh college, Indiana University MBA)

Jobs' kids attended Stanford and Harvard. Cuban has a kid at Vanderbilt and a crew recruit daughter going to UCLA.

What does it matter where the kids go? They are nepo babies now. Ofc they'll inherit privilege. It's the schools the parent went to (Mark Cuban) who made the wealth that matters.

Because those same parents when wealthy want their kids to attend top schools...even though it doesn't matter at all where their kids attend college.

Also, as someone else rightly pointed out...it's like a 10-to-1 ratio of elite school grads to non-elite if you are looking at the wealthiest people.

Now do "economic background" for those wealthiest people.

The economic background skews UMC but not wealthy. Zuckerberg’s dad is a dentist…Bezos mom had him in HS and stepdad was a network engineer.

There is no doubt that being UMC or above is a huge leg up, but other than the Walton children that inherited Wal Mart stock (and BTW didn’t really attend elite schools for the most part), the families played little to no role in the ultimate success.

Bezos was given 245k to start Amazon by his stepdad. Zuckerberg's dad gave him 100k. Might seem like nothing to you but this much capital with zero pressure to reimburse it is a huge head start.

Both co-invested in larger funding rounds which is quite different than giving the only $$$s.

Bezos worked at DE Shaw (hedge fund) and had far more personal wealth than his parents at the time.

Once more…it is an advantage to be UMC, but the families played little in the scheme of things for ultimate success.

But the schools they attended did? Bezos didn’t start Amazon until nearly a decade after he graduated. Zuckerberg barely spent time at Harvard though it’s where he found the idea he stole, so that counts for something, I guess.

It's hard to not give credit to Harvard for assembling the group of people that became the FB founders. Literally, this is why elite school alums have such outlier massive outcomes.

I doubt FB would ever have happened if Zuckerberg had attended SUNY Binghamton (he is from Westchester...hence referencing a SUNY).

It would have happened in some form because it was someone else’s idea (at Harvard).

Smart people have smart ideas and come up with big things. They also attend top colleges. I’m not sure why you credit the school versus the people, or give more weight to the school than other factors around them. This is the lack of perspective mentioned.

This is silly...I guess you get all your facts from the movies.

BTW, if smart people attend top colleges and that is where the big ideas are created...how is that not a reason why people are "caught up in the madness" to attend these schools?

Nobody is claiming that the institution of Harvard magically imbued a bunch of random kids with these talents...but they do assemble a class of kids that they hope/expect will do great things.

It’s not silly at all, I’m just explaining simplistically why there is a correlation between the most successful people and the top schools they went to. That isn’t causal. It’s the same reason you see top undergraduate schools well represented in top grad programs.

It’s why Buffett transferred from Wharton to Nebraska and still became the richest person alive (at one point) and one of the most successful investors of all time. It wasn’t because he spent two years at Penn. That’s perspective. But you would want to cite this as a reason to obsess about your kid going to Penn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People don’t need to argue with anecdotes, there are studies on this. There was the big one in Nature last year that looked at the backgrounds of 26k+ high achievers. Yes, top schools are overrepresented but also, yes, the majority of high achievement people in non-academic fields (academia is a different story) didn’t attend a top-top school. And a lot of the people identified as having attended a top school went there for grad school instead of undergrad.

OP is not wrong that people need to chill a bit. There is life and opportunity outside of four years of college.

Here is the Abstract from the study you cite. Hard to square this with your conclusion:

The highest-achieving figures in politics, business, academia, and the media dominate public discourse and wield great influence in society. Education—perhaps especially at “elite” colleges and universities—may lie at the heart of the divide between the general public and these top achievers. In this paper, we build a new data set for the American “elite” and systematically examine the link between selective schools and outstanding achievements. In Study 1, across 30 different achievement groups totaling 26,198 people, we document patterns of attendance at a set of 34 “Elite” 34 schools, the 8 Ivy League schools, and Harvard University in particular. In Study 2, we surveyed 1810 laypeople to estimate how well they are aware of the key empirical facts from Study 1. We found that exceptional achievement is surprisingly strongly associated with “elite” education, especially obtaining a degree from Harvard, and the general public tends to underestimate the size of this effect. Attending one of just 34 institutions of higher education out of the roughly 4000 in the U.S. appears to be a critical and surprising factor separating extraordinary achievers from others in their fields.

Ideally you need to compare those at the T34 schools with only kids who had the resumes to attend a T34 school, but chose not to for various reasons for undergrad (distance, finances, etc). Until you do that, it's not a fair comparison.

Do that, and I suspect you won't see much differences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're in the midwest- at my DS's private HS there are kids with 1530-1600 SAT scores, grades, etc. (I know this because it's a small school, kids talk, parents talk, etc). If the parents don't have money, the kids go in-state, honors or out of state on schools that offer a lot of merit and financial aid.
A lot of talent doesn't go to the Ivy League or T20- it's too expensive for most families, especially if there are multiple bright siblings.

Ivy League/T20 are need blind.

Your average MC/LMC/poor kid from small town Nebraska doesn't even have Elite schools on their radar. They will most likely attend U of Nebraska or a nearby private school that recruits them and gives them good merit. So even really smart kids from those areas simply don't even think of attending T25 schools.
Their parents and Guidance counselors don't even know that they might get excellent financial aid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're in the midwest- at my DS's private HS there are kids with 1530-1600 SAT scores, grades, etc. (I know this because it's a small school, kids talk, parents talk, etc). If the parents don't have money, the kids go in-state, honors or out of state on schools that offer a lot of merit and financial aid.
A lot of talent doesn't go to the Ivy League or T20- it's too expensive for most families, especially if there are multiple bright siblings.

Ivy League/T20 are need blind.

Need blind is just about admissions. It doesn’t make money appear out of the ether to pay the bill.

And it’s not just about whether you technically can pay. It’s also about whether you should. For example, DC has a brilliant friend currently deciding between an Ivy ($30k of need-based aid per year) and our flagship (merit-based full ride). Kid is leaning toward the flagship. Because in this economy, who commits to paying ~$280k over four years when you can attend a similarly well-known school for free?

Smart choice!!! Take the free ride, and perhaps their parents can help them upon graduation with grad school or at least a new car/setting up their first apartment. It would be ridiculous not to do that, unless you are wealthy/already have it all saved

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not in terms of jobs but in terms of money Musk (UPenn), Bezos (Princeton), Larry Ellison (dropout UIUC), zuck & gates (dropout Harvard), Page (UMich), Brin (UMaryland), Dell (dropout UTA), Ballmer (Harvard), Bloomberg (JHU) have all the bananas.

Steve Jobs (dropout Reed College)
Mark Cuban (University of Pittsburgh college, Indiana University MBA)

Jobs' kids attended Stanford and Harvard. Cuban has a kid at Vanderbilt and a crew recruit daughter going to UCLA.

What does it matter where the kids go? They are nepo babies now. Ofc they'll inherit privilege. It's the schools the parent went to (Mark Cuban) who made the wealth that matters.

Because those same parents when wealthy want their kids to attend top schools...even though it doesn't matter at all where their kids attend college.

Also, as someone else rightly pointed out...it's like a 10-to-1 ratio of elite school grads to non-elite if you are looking at the wealthiest people.

Now do "economic background" for those wealthiest people.

The economic background skews UMC but not wealthy. Zuckerberg’s dad is a dentist…Bezos mom had him in HS and stepdad was a network engineer.

There is no doubt that being UMC or above is a huge leg up, but other than the Walton children that inherited Wal Mart stock (and BTW didn’t really attend elite schools for the most part), the families played little to no role in the ultimate success.

Bezos was given 245k to start Amazon by his stepdad. Zuckerberg's dad gave him 100k. Might seem like nothing to you but this much capital with zero pressure to reimburse it is a huge head start.

+1000

Also, growing up in a household where parents had professional degrees (dentists, engineer) goes a long way towards success.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not in terms of jobs but in terms of money Musk (UPenn), Bezos (Princeton), Larry Ellison (dropout UIUC), zuck & gates (dropout Harvard), Page (UMich), Brin (UMaryland), Dell (dropout UTA), Ballmer (Harvard), Bloomberg (JHU) have all the bananas.

Steve Jobs (dropout Reed College)
Mark Cuban (University of Pittsburgh college, Indiana University MBA)

Jobs' kids attended Stanford and Harvard. Cuban has a kid at Vanderbilt and a crew recruit daughter going to UCLA.

What does it matter where the kids go? They are nepo babies now. Ofc they'll inherit privilege. It's the schools the parent went to (Mark Cuban) who made the wealth that matters.

Because those same parents when wealthy want their kids to attend top schools...even though it doesn't matter at all where their kids attend college.

Also, as someone else rightly pointed out...it's like a 10-to-1 ratio of elite school grads to non-elite if you are looking at the wealthiest people.

Now do "economic background" for those wealthiest people.

The economic background skews UMC but not wealthy. Zuckerberg’s dad is a dentist…Bezos mom had him in HS and stepdad was a network engineer.

There is no doubt that being UMC or above is a huge leg up, but other than the Walton children that inherited Wal Mart stock (and BTW didn’t really attend elite schools for the most part), the families played little to no role in the ultimate success.

Bezos was given 245k to start Amazon by his stepdad. Zuckerberg's dad gave him 100k. Might seem like nothing to you but this much capital with zero pressure to reimburse it is a huge head start.

Both co-invested in larger funding rounds which is quite different than giving the only $$$s.

Bezos worked at DE Shaw (hedge fund) and had far more personal wealth than his parents at the time.

Once more…it is an advantage to be UMC, but the families played little in the scheme of things for ultimate success.

But the schools they attended did? Bezos didn’t start Amazon until nearly a decade after he graduated. Zuckerberg barely spent time at Harvard though it’s where he found the idea he stole, so that counts for something, I guess.

It's hard to not give credit to Harvard for assembling the group of people that became the FB founders. Literally, this is why elite school alums have such outlier massive outcomes.

I doubt FB would ever have happened if Zuckerberg had attended SUNY Binghamton (he is from Westchester...hence referencing a SUNY).

It would have happened in some form because it was someone else’s idea (at Harvard).

Smart people have smart ideas and come up with big things. They also attend top colleges. I’m not sure why you credit the school versus the people, or give more weight to the school than other factors around them. This is the lack of perspective mentioned.

This is silly...I guess you get all your facts from the movies.

BTW, if smart people attend top colleges and that is where the big ideas are created...how is that not a reason why people are "caught up in the madness" to attend these schools?

Nobody is claiming that the institution of Harvard magically imbued a bunch of random kids with these talents...but they do assemble a class of kids that they hope/expect will do great things.

It’s not silly at all, I’m just explaining simplistically why there is a correlation between the most successful people and the top schools they went to. That isn’t causal. It’s the same reason you see top undergraduate schools well represented in top grad programs.

It’s why Buffett transferred from Wharton to Nebraska and still became the richest person alive (at one point) and one of the most successful investors of all time. It wasn’t because he spent two years at Penn. That’s perspective. But you would want to cite this as a reason to obsess about your kid going to Penn.

Warren Buffett went to Columbia Business School where Benjamin Graham taught, and then went to work at Graham's firm where Graham mentored him

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many of us parents who attended selective colleges have been hired/mentored/supervised by colleagues who went to less selective undergrad and professional schools? That small group of selective schools doesn’t have a monopoly on talent and workplace readiness. Just some food for thought. Signed, WASP and T-14 law grad with hand raised high.

The graduates of ivy+ are indeed overrepresented in many high- paying "white collar" fields, especially at the top of such fields. Sure there have been people from less selective schools who have been my mentor or supervisor before I was in charge, but they were the minority. Of course there are highly successful amazing people who went to less selective undergraduate programs, but it is less likely.
Some people pick ivy/T20 to increase chances to get into said fields, others pick those schools or steer their kids toward them for the peer group: learning among a majority of highly intelligent students in every class and every club, all with lofty goals aiming to do great things in many different careers is quite special place to be. Startups come out of these schools more often. The highest percentage of grads of these schools go on to get MD or phD or JD, as well as the highest percents who end up in top finance roles. The peers encourage each other by the mere fact of all chasing high goals.
When you have seen first hand one kid at a T50 public and the other at a T15 private the difference is astonishing.

I suspect much of those differences are "public and larger school" versus "private and smaller school". Try comparing T15 private with a T40 private, and I don't think you'd see nearly as many "differences". It's not the ranking but the size of the school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not in terms of jobs but in terms of money Musk (UPenn), Bezos (Princeton), Larry Ellison (dropout UIUC), zuck & gates (dropout Harvard), Page (UMich), Brin (UMaryland), Dell (dropout UTA), Ballmer (Harvard), Bloomberg (JHU) have all the bananas.

Steve Jobs (dropout Reed College)
Mark Cuban (University of Pittsburgh college, Indiana University MBA)

Jobs' kids attended Stanford and Harvard. Cuban has a kid at Vanderbilt and a crew recruit daughter going to UCLA.

What does it matter where the kids go? They are nepo babies now. Ofc they'll inherit privilege. It's the schools the parent went to (Mark Cuban) who made the wealth that matters.

Because those same parents when wealthy want their kids to attend top schools...even though it doesn't matter at all where their kids attend college.

Also, as someone else rightly pointed out...it's like a 10-to-1 ratio of elite school grads to non-elite if you are looking at the wealthiest people.

It's more that they can afford to attend elite schools. Also, the ones you are listing have smart kids. Those kids are not Nepo kids just getting in on name alone.

Look at Gate's kids. Oldest went to Stanford and onto a top medical school in NYC. You don't get the 2nd part without being actually really smart. Son went to Chicago and is also smart (just out of spotlight). Those kids grew up with privilege but also had expectations to do well in school and forge a path for themselves in life. Sure they have all the privileges and stuff paid for, but they wouldn't get that if they just wanted to sit back and do nothing.

Tons of people can afford to attend elite schools...and they do.

I guess I am not understanding whey it's perfectly fine for a billionaire's kid to attend an elite school...but it's a sign of "madness" for a BigLaw partner's kid (or equivalent millionaire family) to attend.

It's not "madness". But nobody's kid, IMO, should be caught up in the craziness of striving for Elite Schools while missing out on actual learning and developing as a person. You can achieve a lot, strive to be the best but know that if you don't get into T20, you are likely going to a tT50 and that is excellent. Don't stress about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not in terms of jobs but in terms of money Musk (UPenn), Bezos (Princeton), Larry Ellison (dropout UIUC), zuck & gates (dropout Harvard), Page (UMich), Brin (UMaryland), Dell (dropout UTA), Ballmer (Harvard), Bloomberg (JHU) have all the bananas.

Steve Jobs (dropout Reed College)
Mark Cuban (University of Pittsburgh college, Indiana University MBA)

Jobs' kids attended Stanford and Harvard. Cuban has a kid at Vanderbilt and a crew recruit daughter going to UCLA.

What does it matter where the kids go? They are nepo babies now. Ofc they'll inherit privilege. It's the schools the parent went to (Mark Cuban) who made the wealth that matters.

Because those same parents when wealthy want their kids to attend top schools...even though it doesn't matter at all where their kids attend college.

Also, as someone else rightly pointed out...it's like a 10-to-1 ratio of elite school grads to non-elite if you are looking at the wealthiest people.

Now do "economic background" for those wealthiest people.

The economic background skews UMC but not wealthy. Zuckerberg’s dad is a dentist…Bezos mom had him in HS and stepdad was a network engineer.

There is no doubt that being UMC or above is a huge leg up, but other than the Walton children that inherited Wal Mart stock (and BTW didn’t really attend elite schools for the most part), the families played little to no role in the ultimate success.

Bezos was given 245k to start Amazon by his stepdad. Zuckerberg's dad gave him 100k. Might seem like nothing to you but this much capital with zero pressure to reimburse it is a huge head start.

Both co-invested in larger funding rounds which is quite different than giving the only $$$s.

Bezos worked at DE Shaw (hedge fund) and had far more personal wealth than his parents at the time.

Once more…it is an advantage to be UMC, but the families played little in the scheme of things for ultimate success.

But the schools they attended did? Bezos didn’t start Amazon until nearly a decade after he graduated. Zuckerberg barely spent time at Harvard though it’s where he found the idea he stole, so that counts for something, I guess.

It's hard to not give credit to Harvard for assembling the group of people that became the FB founders. Literally, this is why elite school alums have such outlier massive outcomes.

I doubt FB would ever have happened if Zuckerberg had attended SUNY Binghamton (he is from Westchester...hence referencing a SUNY).

It would have happened in some form because it was someone else’s idea (at Harvard).

Smart people have smart ideas and come up with big things. They also attend top colleges. I’m not sure why you credit the school versus the people, or give more weight to the school than other factors around them. This is the lack of perspective mentioned.

This is silly...I guess you get all your facts from the movies.

BTW, if smart people attend top colleges and that is where the big ideas are created...how is that not a reason why people are "caught up in the madness" to attend these schools?

Nobody is claiming that the institution of Harvard magically imbued a bunch of random kids with these talents...but they do assemble a class of kids that they hope/expect will do great things.

DP - This explains why it is madness. The 'elite' schools are great, of course, and are a great option for both wealthy and low-income families, who should benefit from them. The UMC needs to weigh all the options and avoid getting caught up in prestige or 'the possibility of their child becoming a billionaire' part of it. Most end up with huge debt and, if they are lucky, do only marginally better than their public school counterparts.

I completely agree...however, it makes perfect sense for an UMC kid to decide they want to work at a hedge fund, gets caught up in the "madness" to attend Wharton...attends Wharton...and then goes to work for Point72 or any number of other hedge funds founded by Wharton grads who disproportionally hire Wharton/Penn (STEM usually) grads.

Sometimes in fact there is a method to the madness...even though I know DCUM thinks it's all distasteful.

It'd make sense if your 17 year old is passionate about working at a hedge fund. Most kids get caught up in the perceived expectations from the parents.

Yup---unless your parents and all their friends work for hedge funds/on Wall Street, your typical 17 yo does not have striver goals of Working for a Hedge fund. A normal kid would just want to do data analytics or a finance degree and go from there

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not in terms of jobs but in terms of money Musk (UPenn), Bezos (Princeton), Larry Ellison (dropout UIUC), zuck & gates (dropout Harvard), Page (UMich), Brin (UMaryland), Dell (dropout UTA), Ballmer (Harvard), Bloomberg (JHU) have all the bananas.

Steve Jobs (dropout Reed College)
Mark Cuban (University of Pittsburgh college, Indiana University MBA)

Jobs' kids attended Stanford and Harvard. Cuban has a kid at Vanderbilt and a crew recruit daughter going to UCLA.

What does it matter where the kids go? They are nepo babies now. Ofc they'll inherit privilege. It's the schools the parent went to (Mark Cuban) who made the wealth that matters.

Because those same parents when wealthy want their kids to attend top schools...even though it doesn't matter at all where their kids attend college.

Also, as someone else rightly pointed out...it's like a 10-to-1 ratio of elite school grads to non-elite if you are looking at the wealthiest people.

Now do "economic background" for those wealthiest people.

The economic background skews UMC but not wealthy. Zuckerberg’s dad is a dentist…Bezos mom had him in HS and stepdad was a network engineer.

There is no doubt that being UMC or above is a huge leg up, but other than the Walton children that inherited Wal Mart stock (and BTW didn’t really attend elite schools for the most part), the families played little to no role in the ultimate success.

Bezos was given 245k to start Amazon by his stepdad. Zuckerberg's dad gave him 100k. Might seem like nothing to you but this much capital with zero pressure to reimburse it is a huge head start.

Both co-invested in larger funding rounds which is quite different than giving the only $$$s.

Bezos worked at DE Shaw (hedge fund) and had far more personal wealth than his parents at the time.

Once more…it is an advantage to be UMC, but the families played little in the scheme of things for ultimate success.

But the schools they attended did? Bezos didn’t start Amazon until nearly a decade after he graduated. Zuckerberg barely spent time at Harvard though it’s where he found the idea he stole, so that counts for something, I guess.

He didn't steal the idea.
The idea was already in the air; there were many competitors at the time.
Zuck was hired to build Facebook by a pair of dumb rich aholes (Winklevoss), decided he'd rather keep his work for himself and be the rich ahole too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not in terms of jobs but in terms of money Musk (UPenn), Bezos (Princeton), Larry Ellison (dropout UIUC), zuck & gates (dropout Harvard), Page (UMich), Brin (UMaryland), Dell (dropout UTA), Ballmer (Harvard), Bloomberg (JHU) have all the bananas.

Steve Jobs (dropout Reed College)
Mark Cuban (University of Pittsburgh college, Indiana University MBA)

Jobs' kids attended Stanford and Harvard. Cuban has a kid at Vanderbilt and a crew recruit daughter going to UCLA.

What does it matter where the kids go? They are nepo babies now. Ofc they'll inherit privilege. It's the schools the parent went to (Mark Cuban) who made the wealth that matters.

Because those same parents when wealthy want their kids to attend top schools...even though it doesn't matter at all where their kids attend college.

Also, as someone else rightly pointed out...it's like a 10-to-1 ratio of elite school grads to non-elite if you are looking at the wealthiest people.

Now do "economic background" for those wealthiest people.

The economic background skews UMC but not wealthy. Zuckerberg’s dad is a dentist…Bezos mom had him in HS and stepdad was a network engineer.

There is no doubt that being UMC or above is a huge leg up, but other than the Walton children that inherited Wal Mart stock (and BTW didn’t really attend elite schools for the most part), the families played little to no role in the ultimate success.

Bezos was given 245k to start Amazon by his stepdad. Zuckerberg's dad gave him 100k. Might seem like nothing to you but this much capital with zero pressure to reimburse it is a huge head start.

Both co-invested in larger funding rounds which is quite different than giving the only $$$s.

Bezos worked at DE Shaw (hedge fund) and had far more personal wealth than his parents at the time.

Once more…it is an advantage to be UMC, but the families played little in the scheme of things for ultimate success.

But the schools they attended did? Bezos didn’t start Amazon until nearly a decade after he graduated. Zuckerberg barely spent time at Harvard though it’s where he found the idea he stole, so that counts for something, I guess.

It's hard to not give credit to Harvard for assembling the group of people that became the FB founders. Literally, this is why elite school alums have such outlier massive outcomes.

I doubt FB would ever have happened if Zuckerberg had attended SUNY Binghamton (he is from Westchester...hence referencing a SUNY).

It would have happened in some form because it was someone else’s idea (at Harvard).

Smart people have smart ideas and come up with big things. They also attend top colleges. I’m not sure why you credit the school versus the people, or give more weight to the school than other factors around them. This is the lack of perspective mentioned.

This is silly...I guess you get all your facts from the movies.

BTW, if smart people attend top colleges and that is where the big ideas are created...how is that not a reason why people are "caught up in the madness" to attend these schools?

Nobody is claiming that the institution of Harvard magically imbued a bunch of random kids with these talents...but they do assemble a class of kids that they hope/expect will do great things.

DP - This explains why it is madness. The 'elite' schools are great, of course, and are a great option for both wealthy and low-income families, who should benefit from them. The UMC needs to weigh all the options and avoid getting caught up in prestige or 'the possibility of their child becoming a billionaire' part of it. Most end up with huge debt and, if they are lucky, do only marginally better than their public school counterparts.

I completely agree...however, it makes perfect sense for an UMC kid to decide they want to work at a hedge fund, gets caught up in the "madness" to attend Wharton...attends Wharton...and then goes to work for Point72 or any number of other hedge funds founded by Wharton grads who disproportionally hire Wharton/Penn (STEM usually) grads.

Sometimes in fact there is a method to the madness...even though I know DCUM thinks it's all distasteful.

It'd make sense if your 17 year old is passionate about working at a hedge fund. Most kids get caught up in the perceived expectations from the parents.

Yup---unless your parents and all their friends work for hedge funds/on Wall Street, your typical 17 yo does not have striver goals of Working for a Hedge fund. A normal kid would just want to do data analytics or a finance degree and go from there

I guarantee you that a 17 year old is more likely to have heard of a hedge fund and know that you can make huge $$$s (though not understanding how they make the gazillion $$$s) vs. "want to do data analytics".

I also pretty much guarantee you that nearly 100% of all kids at Wharton know about hedge funds the day they walk in the door freshman year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not in terms of jobs but in terms of money Musk (UPenn), Bezos (Princeton), Larry Ellison (dropout UIUC), zuck & gates (dropout Harvard), Page (UMich), Brin (UMaryland), Dell (dropout UTA), Ballmer (Harvard), Bloomberg (JHU) have all the bananas.

Steve Jobs (dropout Reed College)
Mark Cuban (University of Pittsburgh college, Indiana University MBA)

Jobs' kids attended Stanford and Harvard. Cuban has a kid at Vanderbilt and a crew recruit daughter going to UCLA.

What does it matter where the kids go? They are nepo babies now. Ofc they'll inherit privilege. It's the schools the parent went to (Mark Cuban) who made the wealth that matters.

Because those same parents when wealthy want their kids to attend top schools...even though it doesn't matter at all where their kids attend college.

Also, as someone else rightly pointed out...it's like a 10-to-1 ratio of elite school grads to non-elite if you are looking at the wealthiest people.

Now do "economic background" for those wealthiest people.

The economic background skews UMC but not wealthy. Zuckerberg’s dad is a dentist…Bezos mom had him in HS and stepdad was a network engineer.

There is no doubt that being UMC or above is a huge leg up, but other than the Walton children that inherited Wal Mart stock (and BTW didn’t really attend elite schools for the most part), the families played little to no role in the ultimate success.

Bezos was given 245k to start Amazon by his stepdad. Zuckerberg's dad gave him 100k. Might seem like nothing to you but this much capital with zero pressure to reimburse it is a huge head start.

Both co-invested in larger funding rounds which is quite different than giving the only $$$s.

Bezos worked at DE Shaw (hedge fund) and had far more personal wealth than his parents at the time.

Once more…it is an advantage to be UMC, but the families played little in the scheme of things for ultimate success.

But the schools they attended did? Bezos didn’t start Amazon until nearly a decade after he graduated. Zuckerberg barely spent time at Harvard though it’s where he found the idea he stole, so that counts for something, I guess.

It's hard to not give credit to Harvard for assembling the group of people that became the FB founders. Literally, this is why elite school alums have such outlier massive outcomes.

I doubt FB would ever have happened if Zuckerberg had attended SUNY Binghamton (he is from Westchester...hence referencing a SUNY).

It would have happened in some form because it was someone else’s idea (at Harvard).

Smart people have smart ideas and come up with big things. They also attend top colleges. I’m not sure why you credit the school versus the people, or give more weight to the school than other factors around them. This is the lack of perspective mentioned.

This is silly...I guess you get all your facts from the movies.

BTW, if smart people attend top colleges and that is where the big ideas are created...how is that not a reason why people are "caught up in the madness" to attend these schools?

Nobody is claiming that the institution of Harvard magically imbued a bunch of random kids with these talents...but they do assemble a class of kids that they hope/expect will do great things.

DP - This explains why it is madness. The 'elite' schools are great, of course, and are a great option for both wealthy and low-income families, who should benefit from them. The UMC needs to weigh all the options and avoid getting caught up in prestige or 'the possibility of their child becoming a billionaire' part of it. Most end up with huge debt and, if they are lucky, do only marginally better than their public school counterparts.

I completely agree...however, it makes perfect sense for an UMC kid to decide they want to work at a hedge fund, gets caught up in the "madness" to attend Wharton...attends Wharton...and then goes to work for Point72 or any number of other hedge funds founded by Wharton grads who disproportionally hire Wharton/Penn (STEM usually) grads.

Sometimes in fact there is a method to the madness...even though I know DCUM thinks it's all distasteful.

It'd make sense if your 17 year old is passionate about working at a hedge fund. Most kids get caught up in the perceived expectations from the parents.

Yup---unless your parents and all their friends work for hedge funds/on Wall Street, your typical 17 yo does not have striver goals of Working for a Hedge fund. A normal kid would just want to do data analytics or a finance degree and go from there

Or they watch movies like The Big Short (my kid has probably watched 3+ times) or Dumb Money which both heavily involve hedge funds in the plots. The moral of Dumb Money is even though retail investors managed to crater Melvin Capital, Citadel made out like a bandit...and the Melvin Capital guy just founded another hedge fund.

I suppose Moneyball could be considered a data analytics movie...but not exactly fodder for pop culture.