Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a graduate of one of the most elite colleges, Harvard's complaints are hypocritical. They are very happy to comply with progressive mandates from the Federal government (the Fed has long used the threat of the purse to get universities to comply with Federal mandates, such as Title IX or affirmative action or sex/gender politics). But when the Federal government uses the threat of the purse in a different way, suddenly it's a violation of free speech? While the other mandates weren't? Wow!

Cry me a river. Harvard isn't that special. Like all progressive institutions, it is deeply hypocritical. It, along with other elite colleges, has lost a great deal of credibility and respect in the last 10-15 years. A Harvard diploma does not carry the weight it did in 2005. Harvard can do what it wants but if it loses Federal funding, few Americans outside the NYT readership will care, and that is what Harvard doesn't understand.

This is one of the dumber things I've read.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s put this in perspective. If a Harvard grad were to manage its endowment and earn 4.25% then that would cover the $2.2B.

So, send the money to help support public education and let Harvard do its own thing.

There are enough R1 public institutions to pick up the slack.

There are people on this thread who have zero understanding of higher ed financing.
Trump is eviscerating NIH, the CDC, and the NSF. Where do you think R1s are supposed to be getting their funding? Why don't you actually try to educate yourself before making nonsense comments. It's not just Harvard and private universities that are being skewered, it's all universities, both public and private, that have a significant research arm.

All funding is not being cut. Reasonable amounts are being offered for overhead costs and if I am not mistaken Columbia’s funding has been released.

Sanity is being brought to the process. So, perhaps take a moment to step back and think before you criticize those that are far more informed than you appear to be.

I doubt you are more informed than me.
-R1 tenure professor

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard has hundreds of billions in endowments. They can support their own programs without 9 biillion in government funds.

Ok. And they will keep and retain all rights to their medical innovations, cancer treatments, etc., going forward. No more cheap labor for the government and no more technology available to them. Harvard can retain all rights. Public can no longer re rice the benefits or vaccines developed by this private institution.

Harvard is not the only does that in the world. Government can have better deal elsewhere anytime.

Tell us where and how, with specifics.

For a starter, there are more than 300 R1 and R2 research universities.

BWT vaccines will be developed by AIs now. Government should invest in Google, Microsoft, etc. instead.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard has hundreds of billions in endowments. They can support their own programs without 9 biillion in government funds.

Ok. And they will keep and retain all rights to their medical innovations, cancer treatments, etc., going forward. No more cheap labor for the government and no more technology available to them. Harvard can retain all rights. Public can no longer re rice the benefits or vaccines developed by this private institution.

Harvard is not the only does that in the world. Government can have better deal elsewhere anytime.

Tell us where and how, with specifics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s put this in perspective. If a Harvard grad were to manage its endowment and earn 4.25% then that would cover the $2.2B.

So, send the money to help support public education and let Harvard do its own thing.

There are enough R1 public institutions to pick up the slack.

There are people on this thread who have zero understanding of higher ed financing.
Trump is eviscerating NIH, the CDC, and the NSF. Where do you think R1s are supposed to be getting their funding? Why don't you actually try to educate yourself before making nonsense comments. It's not just Harvard and private universities that are being skewered, it's all universities, both public and private, that have a significant research arm.

All funding is not being cut. Reasonable amounts are being offered for overhead costs and if I am not mistaken Columbia’s funding has been released.

Sanity is being brought to the process. So, perhaps take a moment to step back and think before you criticize those that are far more informed than you appear to be.

I doubt you are more informed than me.
-R1 tenure professor

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LMFAO these people were claiming hard that Harvard was a private school and it doesn't take any Federal funding so it can do whatever it choose to just last year when the discrimination case was going on.

Now they are cry babies that Fed taking away some money. WTF

MAGA losers are so fcking clueless.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard has hundreds of billions in endowments. They can support their own programs without 9 biillion in government funds.

Ok. And they will keep and retain all rights to their medical innovations, cancer treatments, etc., going forward. No more cheap labor for the government and no more technology available to them. Harvard can retain all rights. Public can no longer re rice the benefits or vaccines developed by this private institution.

Harvard is not the only does that in the world. Government can have better deal elsewhere anytime.

Anonymous wrote:As a graduate of one of the most elite colleges, Harvard's complaints are hypocritical. They are very happy to comply with progressive mandates from the Federal government (the Fed has long used the threat of the purse to get universities to comply with Federal mandates, such as Title IX or affirmative action or sex/gender politics). But when the Federal government uses the threat of the purse in a different way, suddenly it's a violation of free speech? While the other mandates weren't? Wow!

Cry me a river. Harvard isn't that special. Like all progressive institutions, it is deeply hypocritical. It, along with other elite colleges, has lost a great deal of credibility and respect in the last 10-15 years. A Harvard diploma does not carry the weight it did in 2005. Harvard can do what it wants but if it loses Federal funding, few Americans outside the NYT readership will care, and that is what Harvard doesn't understand.

Anonymous wrote:LMFAO these people were claiming hard that Harvard was a private school and it doesn't take any Federal funding so it can do whatever it choose to just last year when the discrimination case was going on.

Now they are cry babies that Fed taking away some money. WTF

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s put this in perspective. If a Harvard grad were to manage its endowment and earn 4.25% then that would cover the $2.2B.

So, send the money to help support public education and let Harvard do its own thing.

There are enough R1 public institutions to pick up the slack.

There are people on this thread who have zero understanding of higher ed financing.
Trump is eviscerating NIH, the CDC, and the NSF. Where do you think R1s are supposed to be getting their funding? Why don't you actually try to educate yourself before making nonsense comments. It's not just Harvard and private universities that are being skewered, it's all universities, both public and private, that have a significant research arm.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So dumb. “No government — regardless of which party is in power — should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue”’

The government isn’t saying that. No one is forcing Harvard to do anything. They have a billion dollar endowment and can do as they please.

What they can’t do is foster an educational atmosphere of harassment and expect the taxpayers to finance it.

The govt-university partnership for research was put in place post WW2 and is the basis of the innovation ecosystem of the United States. It has been extremely productive for America. If the govt wants to break that partnership by imposing limitations on the college, they are free to do so.

If the country doesn’t want premier research universities, we won’t have premier research universities. No university can afford to fund this on their own for the good of the United States.

What we won’t have is premier research universities where free expression is stifled. Those two things don’t work together. If you want creativity and big ideas out of people, you can’t tell them what to think like the govt is trying to do right now.

Free expression at Harvard is at 0%
They shouldn't get any taxpayer money with their multi-billion dollar endowment.

Stop the false narrative that the government is just "giving" money to universities.

The government wants services/research from private and public universities that the government cannot do itself. The government puts out a request for proposals to the general population to get those services. Various university professors with expertise and resources to do the work submit proposals. The government reviews them all and picks the one they deem best to give them the services they need.

This helps the university because it attracts student who are interested in that area of research, and it helps fund the process of furthering that area of research deemed important by Congress. And it helps our country because the government is getting the results it asked for, in addition to attracting and developing the best and brightest in academia and research, which is a huge asset to the country. Destroying this process is very bad for the United States.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s put this in perspective. If a Harvard grad were to manage its endowment and earn 4.25% then that would cover the $2.2B.

So, send the money to help support public education and let Harvard do its own thing.

There are enough R1 public institutions to pick up the slack.

There are people on this thread who have zero understanding of higher ed financing.
Trump is eviscerating NIH, the CDC, and the NSF. Where do you think R1s are supposed to be getting their funding? Why don't you actually try to educate yourself before making nonsense comments. It's not just Harvard and private universities that are being skewered, it's all universities, both public and private, that have a significant research arm.

All funding is not being cut. Reasonable amounts are being offered for overhead costs and if I am not mistaken Columbia’s funding has been released.

Sanity is being brought to the process. So, perhaps take a moment to step back and think before you criticize those that are far more informed than you appear to be.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s put this in perspective. If a Harvard grad were to manage its endowment and earn 4.25% then that would cover the $2.2B.

So, send the money to help support public education and let Harvard do its own thing.

There are enough R1 public institutions to pick up the slack.

There are people on this thread who have zero understanding of higher ed financing.
Trump is eviscerating NIH, the CDC, and the NSF. Where do you think R1s are supposed to be getting their funding? Why don't you actually try to educate yourself before making nonsense comments. It's not just Harvard and private universities that are being skewered, it's all universities, both public and private, that have a significant research arm.