Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WASPs founded these schools and still attend these schools. There is a reason. That is the irony of the name. They are happy many of you are too ignorant to see the tree in the forest. The establishment never changes. You will not find them at any of the popular colleges people are obsessed with, outside an Ivy. They don’t need to. They will quietly keep their low profile collecting an elite education, laying the groundwork to control Wall Street, have top positions in consulting/PE firms, run Boston and New York City law firms, are the top doctors at America’s best hospitals, and yes influence Washington from afar.

Not really..especially Swarthmore and Pomona are not classically seen as WASPy colleges- frankly, there’s a ton of New England mediocre LACs who deserve that reputation (cough Colby cough)

Pomona and Swat have always been seen as WASPy. Pomona was specifically created to be a West Coast emulation of Williams, Amherst, Middlebury, Hamilton, and Wesleyan so it would be pretty hard to be more WASPy than that.

What is WASPy about Pomona? It’s never been a main choice for New England boarding schools, is in Southern California, and has very little impact in finance with the dominant industry of choice being tech. It was created to be a liberal arts college- which is an educational style pretty popular in New England but lacking in most of the rest of the country’s it didn’t want to be Williams- Williams just was around before. It was also a time when California was creating a ton of colleges due to oil. While academically Williams and Amherst are peers of Pomona, I don’t think it sees itself as anything like those two. They represent an elite white history of New England that just doesn’t really compare.

If you believe that WASP culture doesn’t exist in SoCal you are seriously naive. Pomonas founders specifically said that they wanted to recreate a NE LAC, as did Whitman founders. Pomona aspired to be part of the club and they are part of the club. The outcomes aren’t much different either as significant numbers from the top NE schools go into tech as well.

Pomona has like 1/10 the alumni as Williams. It’s a west coast thing. Look at Stanford- amazing, one of the best, but it’s alum created tech and medicine, not really policy or law- which is how Yale and Harvard rose. There’s a reason so many people in our government come from the same 2-3 schools (HYP) and not Stanford…

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Top 2 LACs (#1-#2):
It will always be Williams and Amherst. Period.

Next 2 LACs (#3-#4):
Swarthmore or Wellesley

Next 3 LACs (#5-#7)
Bowdoin or Pomona

Next 3 LACs (#8-#13)
Then it's an argument for the next group with 6 different contenders. Depending on what you care about you could put in Carleton, Middlebury, Vassar, Wesleyan, Mudd (STEM only), or Claremont (social sciences).

Just merge #3-#7? It’s arbitrary and Wellesley is over ranked. I’d even boot out Amherst’s and just put them all together. Williams is the only LAC where it’s not rare to see an alum go off into consulting, IB, or Quant. The others can get a kid in for consulting and IB but quant…Williams is head and shoulders better than every other LAC by any metric you take; Amherst doesn’t have that level of ubiquitous quality.

+1, Amherst is good at “soft” subjects. People here get in arms about it, because they have a nice science center, but they’re not known to be remarkable in Mathematics, Biology, Chemistry, Neuroscience, or Physics. They’re better at soft science and humanities, which is commendable in the modern day but not gonna score it better than its lac peers.

Except Amherst is the top LAC feeder to med and law schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Top 2 LACs (#1-#2):
It will always be Williams and Amherst. Period.

Next 2 LACs (#3-#4):
Swarthmore or Wellesley

Next 3 LACs (#5-#7)
Bowdoin or Pomona

Next 3 LACs (#8-#13)
Then it's an argument for the next group with 6 different contenders. Depending on what you care about you could put in Carleton, Middlebury, Vassar, Wesleyan, Mudd (STEM only), or Claremont (social sciences).

Just merge #3-#7? It’s arbitrary and Wellesley is over ranked. I’d even boot out Amherst’s and just put them all together. Williams is the only LAC where it’s not rare to see an alum go off into consulting, IB, or Quant. The others can get a kid in for consulting and IB but quant…Williams is head and shoulders better than every other LAC by any metric you take; Amherst doesn’t have that level of ubiquitous quality.

+1, Amherst is good at “soft” subjects. People here get in arms about it, because they have a nice science center, but they’re not known to be remarkable in Mathematics, Biology, Chemistry, Neuroscience, or Physics. They’re better at soft science and humanities, which is commendable in the modern day but not gonna score it better than its lac peers.

Except Amherst is the top LAC feeder to med and law schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Top 2 LACs (#1-#2):
It will always be Williams and Amherst. Period.

Next 2 LACs (#3-#4):
Swarthmore or Wellesley

Next 3 LACs (#5-#7)
Bowdoin or Pomona

Next 3 LACs (#8-#13)
Then it's an argument for the next group with 6 different contenders. Depending on what you care about you could put in Carleton, Middlebury, Vassar, Wesleyan, Mudd (STEM only), or Claremont (social sciences).

Just merge #3-#7? It’s arbitrary and Wellesley is over ranked. I’d even boot out Amherst’s and just put them all together. Williams is the only LAC where it’s not rare to see an alum go off into consulting, IB, or Quant. The others can get a kid in for consulting and IB but quant…Williams is head and shoulders better than every other LAC by any metric you take; Amherst doesn’t have that level of ubiquitous quality.

+1, Amherst is good at “soft” subjects. People here get in arms about it, because they have a nice science center, but they’re not known to be remarkable in Mathematics, Biology, Chemistry, Neuroscience, or Physics. They’re better at soft science and humanities, which is commendable in the modern day but not gonna score it better than its lac peers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WASPs founded these schools and still attend these schools. There is a reason. That is the irony of the name. They are happy many of you are too ignorant to see the tree in the forest. The establishment never changes. You will not find them at any of the popular colleges people are obsessed with, outside an Ivy. They don’t need to. They will quietly keep their low profile collecting an elite education, laying the groundwork to control Wall Street, have top positions in consulting/PE firms, run Boston and New York City law firms, are the top doctors at America’s best hospitals, and yes influence Washington from afar.

Not really..especially Swarthmore and Pomona are not classically seen as WASPy colleges- frankly, there’s a ton of New England mediocre LACs who deserve that reputation (cough Colby cough)

Pomona and Swat have always been seen as WASPy. Pomona was specifically created to be a West Coast emulation of Williams, Amherst, Middlebury, Hamilton, and Wesleyan so it would be pretty hard to be more WASPy than that.

What is WASPy about Pomona? It’s never been a main choice for New England boarding schools, is in Southern California, and has very little impact in finance with the dominant industry of choice being tech. It was created to be a liberal arts college- which is an educational style pretty popular in New England but lacking in most of the rest of the country’s it didn’t want to be Williams- Williams just was around before. It was also a time when California was creating a ton of colleges due to oil. While academically Williams and Amherst are peers of Pomona, I don’t think it sees itself as anything like those two. They represent an elite white history of New England that just doesn’t really compare.

If you believe that WASP culture doesn’t exist in SoCal you are seriously naive. Pomonas founders specifically said that they wanted to recreate a NE LAC, as did Whitman founders. Pomona aspired to be part of the club and they are part of the club. The outcomes aren’t much different either as significant numbers from the top NE schools go into tech as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WASPs founded these schools and still attend these schools. There is a reason. That is the irony of the name. They are happy many of you are too ignorant to see the tree in the forest. The establishment never changes. You will not find them at any of the popular colleges people are obsessed with, outside an Ivy. They don’t need to. They will quietly keep their low profile collecting an elite education, laying the groundwork to control Wall Street, have top positions in consulting/PE firms, run Boston and New York City law firms, are the top doctors at America’s best hospitals, and yes influence Washington from afar.

Not really..especially Swarthmore and Pomona are not classically seen as WASPy colleges- frankly, there’s a ton of New England mediocre LACs who deserve that reputation (cough Colby cough)

Pomona and Swat have always been seen as WASPy. Pomona was specifically created to be a West Coast emulation of Williams, Amherst, Middlebury, Hamilton, and Wesleyan so it would be pretty hard to be more WASPy than that.

What is WASPy about Pomona? It’s never been a main choice for New England boarding schools, is in Southern California, and has very little impact in finance with the dominant industry of choice being tech. It was created to be a liberal arts college- which is an educational style pretty popular in New England but lacking in most of the rest of the country’s it didn’t want to be Williams- Williams just was around before. It was also a time when California was creating a ton of colleges due to oil. While academically Williams and Amherst are peers of Pomona, I don’t think it sees itself as anything like those two. They represent an elite white history of New England that just doesn’t really compare.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WASPs founded these schools and still attend these schools. There is a reason. That is the irony of the name. They are happy many of you are too ignorant to see the tree in the forest. The establishment never changes. You will not find them at any of the popular colleges people are obsessed with, outside an Ivy. They don’t need to. They will quietly keep their low profile collecting an elite education, laying the groundwork to control Wall Street, have top positions in consulting/PE firms, run Boston and New York City law firms, are the top doctors at America’s best hospitals, and yes influence Washington from afar.

Not really..especially Swarthmore and Pomona are not classically seen as WASPy colleges- frankly, there’s a ton of New England mediocre LACs who deserve that reputation (cough Colby cough)

Pomona and Swat have always been seen as WASPy. Pomona was specifically created to be a West Coast emulation of Williams, Amherst, Middlebury, Hamilton, and Wesleyan so it would be pretty hard to be more WASPy than that.

What is WASPy about Pomona? It’s never been a main choice for New England boarding schools, is in Southern California, and has very little impact in finance with the dominant industry of choice being tech. It was created to be a liberal arts college- which is an educational style pretty popular in New England but lacking in most of the rest of the country’s it didn’t want to be Williams- Williams just was around before. It was also a time when California was creating a ton of colleges due to oil. While academically Williams and Amherst are peers of Pomona, I don’t think it sees itself as anything like those two. They represent an elite white history of New England that just doesn’t really compare.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WASPs founded these schools and still attend these schools. There is a reason. That is the irony of the name. They are happy many of you are too ignorant to see the tree in the forest. The establishment never changes. You will not find them at any of the popular colleges people are obsessed with, outside an Ivy. They don’t need to. They will quietly keep their low profile collecting an elite education, laying the groundwork to control Wall Street, have top positions in consulting/PE firms, run Boston and New York City law firms, are the top doctors at America’s best hospitals, and yes influence Washington from afar.

Not really..especially Swarthmore and Pomona are not classically seen as WASPy colleges- frankly, there’s a ton of New England mediocre LACs who deserve that reputation (cough Colby cough)

Pomona and Swat have always been seen as WASPy. Pomona was specifically created to be a West Coast emulation of Williams, Amherst, Middlebury, Hamilton, and Wesleyan so it would be pretty hard to be more WASPy than that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Top 2 LACs (#1-#2):
It will always be Williams and Amherst. Period.

Next 2 LACs (#3-#4):
Swarthmore or Wellesley

Next 3 LACs (#5-#7)
Bowdoin or Pomona

Next 3 LACs (#8-#13)
Then it's an argument for the next group with 6 different contenders. Depending on what you care about you could put in Carleton, Middlebury, Vassar, Wesleyan, Mudd (STEM only), or Claremont (social sciences).

Just merge #3-#7? It’s arbitrary and Wellesley is over ranked. I’d even boot out Amherst’s and just put them all together. Williams is the only LAC where it’s not rare to see an alum go off into consulting, IB, or Quant. The others can get a kid in for consulting and IB but quant…Williams is head and shoulders better than every other LAC by any metric you take; Amherst doesn’t have that level of ubiquitous quality.

You couldn’t be more wrong, they are all indistinguishable but keep mindlessly boosting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Top 2 LACs (#1-#2):
It will always be Williams and Amherst. Period.

Next 2 LACs (#3-#4):
Swarthmore or Wellesley

Next 3 LACs (#5-#7)
Bowdoin or Pomona

Next 3 LACs (#8-#13)
Then it's an argument for the next group with 6 different contenders. Depending on what you care about you could put in Carleton, Middlebury, Vassar, Wesleyan, Mudd (STEM only), or Claremont (social sciences).

Just merge #3-#7? It’s arbitrary and Wellesley is over ranked. I’d even boot out Amherst’s and just put them all together. Williams is the only LAC where it’s not rare to see an alum go off into consulting, IB, or Quant. The others can get a kid in for consulting and IB but quant…Williams is head and shoulders better than every other LAC by any metric you take; Amherst doesn’t have that level of ubiquitous quality.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WASPs founded these schools and still attend these schools. There is a reason. That is the irony of the name. They are happy many of you are too ignorant to see the tree in the forest. The establishment never changes. You will not find them at any of the popular colleges people are obsessed with, outside an Ivy. They don’t need to. They will quietly keep their low profile collecting an elite education, laying the groundwork to control Wall Street, have top positions in consulting/PE firms, run Boston and New York City law firms, are the top doctors at America’s best hospitals, and yes influence Washington from afar.

Not really..especially Swarthmore and Pomona are not classically seen as WASPy colleges- frankly, there’s a ton of New England mediocre LACs who deserve that reputation (cough Colby cough)

Anonymous wrote:Top 2 LACs (#1-#2):
It will always be Williams and Amherst. Period.

Next 2 LACs (#3-#4):
Swarthmore or Wellesley

Next 3 LACs (#5-#7)
Bowdoin or Pomona

Next 3 LACs (#8-#13)
Then it's an argument for the next group with 6 different contenders. Depending on what you care about you could put in Carleton, Middlebury, Vassar, Wesleyan, Mudd (STEM only), or Claremont (social sciences).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Top 2 LACs (#1-#2):
It will always be Williams and Amherst. Period.

Next 2 LACs (#3-#4):
Swarthmore or Wellesley

Next 3 LACs (#5-#7)
Bowdoin or Pomona

Next 3 LACs (#8-#13)
Then it's an argument for the next group with 6 different contenders. Depending on what you care about you could put in Carleton, Middlebury, Vassar, Wesleyan, Mudd (STEM only), or Claremont (social sciences).

Just merge #3-#7? It’s arbitrary and Wellesley is over ranked. I’d even boot out Amherst’s and just put them all together. Williams is the only LAC where it’s not rare to see an alum go off into consulting, IB, or Quant. The others can get a kid in for consulting and IB but quant…Williams is head and shoulders better than every other LAC by any metric you take; Amherst doesn’t have that level of ubiquitous quality.

Anonymous wrote:Plenty of cows in their remote locations have heard of these schools. Williams and Amherst and the others are not worth it now.

Anonymous wrote:Top 2 LACs (#1-#2):
It will always be Williams and Amherst. Period.

Next 2 LACs (#3-#4):
Swarthmore or Wellesley

Next 3 LACs (#5-#7)
Bowdoin or Pomona

Next 3 LACs (#8-#13)
Then it's an argument for the next group with 6 different contenders. Depending on what you care about you could put in Carleton, Middlebury, Vassar, Wesleyan, Mudd (STEM only), or Claremont (social sciences).