Operation Varsity Blues

[Ethel mermania]

Her success may have happened. Could still happen. We will never know for sure now. There have been a few comments she was aware and even participated in the process. I will wait for the evidence before talking about hard punishment.

As to the others? The case (I believe) was made when somebody tried to deduct the bribes on the taxes as donations.

The case is interesting. My way it's rather interesting to hear people defending the bribery as acceptable actions. The comments of you can't punish the children. Such talk only perpetuates the belief it's ok to do. Even Jade made comments about her dad faking his way in college and defrauding his parents to start a business....

Her success is a lot harder now that the brands are boycotting her, for something she didn't do, and didn't even want to do. In the culture that her father grew up in, you were told by your parents to go to college and study accounting, programming, law, or medicine. Her father wanted to be a fashion designer, so he told his parents that he was going to college, but, in reality, he was using their tuition payments to run his very own clothing brand. That's not a crime.

And I'm not defending bribery. I'm defending those who were likely innocent, from being punished as if they intentionally committed the crime. The very fact that some people used bribes as a tax write off leads to the crime of tax evasion, something that they should be heavily penalized for. I'm all for fining those who evaded taxes the maximum amount, but let's not pretend that their kids should be pariahs for the rest of their lives.

You dont get to benefit from a crime.

So if I properly short a stock and make a lot of money, I'd have to pay all of it back, if the competition was involved in collusion, even though I knew nothing about it?

I've never heard of her and in fact think social media "influencing" should be tightly regulated if not banned, but that's not the topic. To be honest, something "kids" should learn whether their parents are worth $10 or $1 billion is to make their own decisions in life and accept every good and bad result that happens because of that decision, including speaking up about attending college or not attending college.

Regarding the "college experience" argument, a student can also have the "college experience" from "Directional State College".

As for losing a business, that's the reality of business. As for other jobs, there's a joke in my area: "I hear whatever ACS calls itself now is hiring."

It doesn't matter whether you've heard of her, or not. We get influenced plenty by the likes of CNN proverbially sucking the war lobby's cock, so I highly doubt that social media influencers are much worse, but that's beside the point. When you have both parents, who are successful, telling you to go to college for at least half a decade, that tends to leave an impact in your brain, unless you think that 13 and 14 year olds should make their own decisions... that'll end well. I agree that thinking that you can only have college experience from Ivy Leagues is dumb, but that doesn't really address my argument.

Your analogy doesnt fit as the kids were the direct beneficiary of the crime.

Your example is a fairly gray area of the law, but the folks who made money from the Bernie Madoff scam and where unaware of it had to give the money back, many of those were charities and they and their served populations were devestated.

L

[Ifreann]

If they're passing their classes then how can you say that they wouldn't be in those classes without that crime taking place?

It doesnt matter.

Of course it does. Isn't higher education meant to be meritocratic? If they're keeping up with their classes then clearly they merit their place in the class, regardless of what bribes their parents paid to get them though the admissions process.

As an aside top schools get a lot more kids applying to them who are qualified to do the work than slots available. So lots of kids who can do the work dont get in to that school.

You should probably get bigger schools then, to better accommodate all these students.

[Ethel mermania]

It doesnt matter.

Of course it does. Isn't higher education meant to be meritocratic? If they're keeping up with their classes then clearly they merit their place in the class, regardless of what bribes their parents paid to get them though the admissions process.

As an aside top schools get a lot more kids applying to them who are qualified to do the work than slots available. So lots of kids who can do the work dont get in to that school.

You should probably get bigger schools then, to better accommodate all these students.

No it doesnt matter, you dont get to benefit from a crime. You cant mug someone give the money to the red cross and the red cross keeps the money, they have to give it back. S ome other deserving kid did not get that spot, it was stolen from them. Even if the kid didn't know, The kid has got to go.

[Shofercia]

As an aside top schools get a lot more kids applying to them who are qualified to do the work than slots available. So lots of kids who can do the work dont get in to that school.

You should probably get bigger schools then, to better accommodate all these students.

Actually, all we'd need to do is double the amount of classes that Professors should teach, and shrink their research requirement by a third. At this point the universities are favoring research over students, whereas the duo should be equally treated.

[Novus America]

It doesnt matter.

Of course it does. Isn't higher education meant to be meritocratic? If they're keeping up with their classes then clearly they merit their place in the class, regardless of what bribes their parents paid to get them though the admissions process.

As an aside top schools get a lot more kids applying to them who are qualified to do the work than slots available. So lots of kids who can do the work dont get in to that school.

You should probably get bigger schools then, to better accommodate all these students.

We already have big enough schools.
Huge ones.
Texas A&M has 70,000 students.
The US has no shortage of colleges. We have literally thousands!

People want to go to elite schools BECAUSE they are exclusive!
If everyone could go the Harvard then it would no longer be especially desirable.
Its desirablity comes from its exclusivity.

People drive Ferraris to show they are rich.
If everyone could get a Ferrari having one would no longer allow you to show off.

If you want to show off how much richer and more connected you are, you need things that are largely limited to only rich and connected people.

[Oranjea]

Of course it does. Isn't higher education meant to be meritocratic? If they're keeping up with their classes then clearly they merit their place in the class, regardless of what bribes their parents paid to get them though the admissions process.


You should probably get bigger schools then, to better accommodate all these students.

We already have big enough schools.
Huge ones.
Texas A&M has 70,000 students.
The US has no shortage of colleges. We have literally thousands!

People want to go to elite schools BECAUSE they are exclusive!
If everyone could go the Harvard then it would no longer be especially desirable.
Its desirablity comes from its exclusivity.

People drive Ferraris to show they are rich.
If everyone could get a Ferrari having one would no longer allow you to show off.

If you want to show off how much richer and more connected you are, you need things that are largely limited to only rich and connected people.

Elite colleges are supposed to be elite because their students got in on elite merits (funny, I know), not because they're another status item of the rich.

[Ifreann]

Of course it does. Isn't higher education meant to be meritocratic? If they're keeping up with their classes then clearly they merit their place in the class, regardless of what bribes their parents paid to get them though the admissions process.


You should probably get bigger schools then, to better accommodate all these students.

No it doesnt matter, you dont get to benefit from a crime. You cant mug someone give the money to the red cross and the red cross keeps the money, they have to give it back.

No money was stolen from anyone. Quite the opposite.

S ome other deserving kid did not get that spot, it was stolen from them. Even if the kid didn't know, The kid has got to go.

Expelling these students will not give their place go to someone else. You can't kick one student out and admit another in their place in March and expect the former's learning and experiences since September to transfer to the latter.

---

Of course it does. Isn't higher education meant to be meritocratic? If they're keeping up with their classes then clearly they merit their place in the class, regardless of what bribes their parents paid to get them though the admissions process.


You should probably get bigger schools then, to better accommodate all these students.

We already have big enough schools.
Huge ones.
Texas A&M has 70,000 students.
The US has no shortage of colleges. We have literally thousands!

And I am told you have more applicants than places, so clearly you need more.

People want to go to elite schools BECAUSE they are exclusive!
If everyone could go the Harvard then it would no longer be especially desirable.
Its desirablity comes from its exclusivity.

People drive Ferraris to show they are rich.
If everyone could get a Ferrari having one would no longer allow you to show off.

If you want to show off how much richer and more connected you are, you need things that are largely limited to only rich and connected people.

If that is what higher education is for then you have much bigger problems than some bribes.

[Novus America]

We already have big enough schools.
Huge ones.
Texas A&M has 70,000 students.
The US has no shortage of colleges. We have literally thousands!

People want to go to elite schools BECAUSE they are exclusive!
If everyone could go the Harvard then it would no longer be especially desirable.
Its desirablity comes from its exclusivity.

People drive Ferraris to show they are rich.
If everyone could get a Ferrari having one would no longer allow you to show off.

If you want to show off how much richer and more connected you are, you need things that are largely limited to only rich and connected people.

Elite colleges are supposed to be elite because their students got in on elite merits (funny, I know), not because they're another status item of the rich.

Hehe. Funny guy.
Sure in theory maybe that was supposed to happen.
Trade with China was going to make them a liberal democracy too.

However even if it was exclusive only to the smartest and most qualified students,it still would have to be limited, small and exclusive.

If anyone could get in, it by definition cannot be elite.

[Oranjea]

And I am told you have more applicants than places, so clearly you need more.

Should everyone be able to attend college, regardless of grades?

There are already universities with 100% acceptance rates.

[Oranjea]

Elite colleges are supposed to be elite because their students got in on elite merits (funny, I know), not because they're another status item of the rich.

Hehe. Funny guy.
Sure in theory maybe that was supposed to happen.
Trade with China was going to make them a liberal democracy too.

However even if it was exclusive only to the smartest and most qualified students,it still would have to be limited, small and exclusive.

If anyone could get in, it by definition cannot be elite.

I may have been mistaken about the point you were replying to, I'm not sure if Ifreann is saying elite colleges should not exist or whether they should only be based on merit.

[Novus America]

No it doesnt matter, you dont get to benefit from a crime. You cant mug someone give the money to the red cross and the red cross keeps the money, they have to give it back.

No money was stolen from anyone. Quite the opposite.

S ome other deserving kid did not get that spot, it was stolen from them. Even if the kid didn't know, The kid has got to go.

Expelling these students will not give their place go to someone else. You can't kick one student out and admit another in their place in March and expect the former's learning and experiences since September to transfer to the latter.

---

We already have big enough schools.
Huge ones.
Texas A&M has 70,000 students.
The US has no shortage of colleges. We have literally thousands!

And I am told you have more applicants than places, so clearly you need more.

People want to go to elite schools BECAUSE they are exclusive!
If everyone could go the Harvard then it would no longer be especially desirable.
Its desirablity comes from its exclusivity.

People drive Ferraris to show they are rich.
If everyone could get a Ferrari having one would no longer allow you to show off.

If you want to show off how much richer and more connected you are, you need things that are largely limited to only rich and connected people.

If that is what higher education is for then you have much bigger problems than some bribes.

Citation that we have more applications then available spaces total?
Even if true, it has nothing to do with this scandal.
This scandal was not bribery because they could not get their kid into any decent school.
It is because they wanted an elite status school.
And again an elite status symbol CANNOT posibly be widely available.

Yes, we have much deeper problems with our totally fucked up college culture than just this one bribe scandal, namely that college is no longer about education.
It is now often about drunken debauchery, wasting money, and status.

[Novus America]

Hehe. Funny guy.
Sure in theory maybe that was supposed to happen.
Trade with China was going to make them a liberal democracy too.

However even if it was exclusive only to the smartest and most qualified students,it still would have to be limited, small and exclusive.

If anyone could get in, it by definition cannot be elite.

I may have been mistaken about the point you were replying to, I'm not sure if Ifreann is saying elite colleges should not exist or whether they should only be based on merit.

He was saying our schools need to be bigger.
So he was clearly missing the point.

[Andsed]

So as for the students I have a very simple solution. If they are passing their classes and did not know about the bribes they can stay. If they are not passing their classes or knew about the bribes we kick them out.

[Vetalia]

Of course it does. Isn't higher education meant to be meritocratic? If they're keeping up with their classes then clearly they merit their place in the class, regardless of what bribes their parents paid to get them though the admissions process.

I agree to a certain degree; in the circumstances where their children were not involved in any way, it would be massively unfair to expel them just because their parents paid a bribe to get them in. However, in the other cases where they outright cheated knowingly on their SAT/ACT tests they should be punished because that reflects fundamental dishonesty by the students. If anyone else lied about their academic credentials when applying, they would rightfully be expelled or otherwise punished. Same as if someone lies on a job application...the ends don't justify the means.

Another thing to consider - if corruption was so pervasive at these schools as to allow these parents to bribe their way into getting their children admitted, what's to say that same corruption isn't affecting their class grades in the same way?

[Oranjea]

Another thing to consider - if corruption was so pervasive at these schools as to allow these parents to bribe their way into getting their children admitted, what's to say that same corruption isn't affecting their class grades in the same way?

Grade inflation at elite universities is actually a serious problem, though I'm not sure it would qualify as corruption. (Universities may have an incentive to inflate grades for the future success of their students which reflects nicely on the university, and for the donation money that follows.)

[Vetalia]

Citation that we have more applications then available spaces total?
Even if true, it has nothing to do with this scandal.
This scandal was not bribery because they could not get their kid into any decent school.
It is because they wanted an elite status school.
And again an elite status symbol CANNOT posibly be widely available.

Yes, we have much deeper problems with our totally fucked up college culture than just this one bribe scandal, namely that college is no longer about education.
It is now often about drunken debauchery, wasting money, and status.

What's funny is that their mindset was foolish to begin with. The elite don't go to Yale because it's Yale, they go there because that's where the elite go and that is a very closed social circle that 99% of students at those universities aren't a part of. Just getting admitted into those schools isn't going to get you any further in social status than if you went to a public university...it's a big club, and you're not in it, and you're not going to get in it unless you have some serious family wealth or political power at your disposal going back at least a few generations. The follies of the nouveau riche...

[Oranjea]

Just getting admitted into those schools isn't going to get you any further in social status than if you went to a public university

Do you really believe this? Going to an elite university absolutely increases your status not just in intangible social prestige but in your ability to get hired (and for what pay), how much people will respect your credentials, etc.

[Gig em Aggies]

Of course it does. Isn't higher education meant to be meritocratic? If they're keeping up with their classes then clearly they merit their place in the class, regardless of what bribes their parents paid to get them though the admissions process.


You should probably get bigger schools then, to better accommodate all these students.

We already have big enough schools.
Huge ones.
Texas A&M has 70,000 students.
The US has no shortage of colleges. We have literally thousands!

People want to go to elite schools BECAUSE they are exclusive!
If everyone could go the Harvard then it would no longer be especially desirable.
Its desirablity comes from its exclusivity.

People drive Ferraris to show they are rich.
If everyone could get a Ferrari having one would no longer allow you to show off.

If you want to show off how much richer and more connected you are, you need things that are largely limited to only rich and connected people.

You called I answered NS Resident Aggie at your service

[Vetalia]

Grade inflation at elite universities is actually a serious problem, though I'm not sure it would qualify as corruption. (Universities may have an incentive to inflate grades for the future success of their students which reflects nicely on the university, and for the donation money that follows.)

I think it's corruption, if you're inflating grades to get money in the future that sounds like it to me. The consequences of grade inflation can be really severe if it's bad enough...and honestly, sometimes I wonder giving the caliber of people we've recently hired at my firm. It really seems like critical thinking skills and basic knowledge of accounting concepts has taken a nosedive from the more elite and private schools in recent years. The Big Four typically vacuum up most of the public school candidates but the ones we have are really pretty solid.

[Vetalia]

Do you really believe this? Going to an elite university absolutely increases your status not just in intangible social prestige but in your ability to get hired (and for what pay), how much people will respect your credentials, etc.

Honestly, nobody cares where you went to college in our field after the first year or so, except for future business development in which case it's better to go to a larger school to have a larger network of potential contacts. Really, in most professions having solid credentials from a reputable state school are more than sufficient.

That being said, I think my emphasis was more on the idea that they could buy their way into the elite by going to Yale...they're not going to be able to do that, the elite aren't elite because they went to Yale.

[Oranjea]

Do you really believe this? Going to an elite university absolutely increases your status not just in intangible social prestige but in your ability to get hired (and for what pay), how much people will respect your credentials, etc.

Honestly, nobody cares where you went to college in our field after the first year or so, except for future business development in which case it's better to go to a larger school to have a larger network of potential contacts. Really, in most professions having solid credentials from a reputable state school are more than sufficient.

That being said, I think my emphasis was more on the idea that they could buy their way into the elite by going to Yale...they're not going to be able to do that, the elite aren't elite because they went to Yale.

I definitely agree that when it comes to your average state school, where the large majority of students attend, they tend to become interchangeable after your first job or so. (That's what all employers I know have told me, anyway.)

However, I think the Ivy Leagues and the other extremely elite (MIT, etc.) schools are an exception to this rule. I'm not sure what you mean by 'elite' in this context (old money?). At least as the stereotype goes, the old money, legacy, my-dad-donated students tend to study in some of the easier humanities fields and then get employed in some cushy desk job by dad or his friends after graduating. To that extent I think you're right. In the more rigorous fields of STEM, medicine or law, however, getting into an elite school is definitely a way to become an elite yourself, at least in your field.

[Novus America]

We already have big enough schools.
Huge ones.
Texas A&M has 70,000 students.
The US has no shortage of colleges. We have literally thousands!

People want to go to elite schools BECAUSE they are exclusive!
If everyone could go the Harvard then it would no longer be especially desirable.
Its desirablity comes from its exclusivity.

People drive Ferraris to show they are rich.
If everyone could get a Ferrari having one would no longer allow you to show off.

If you want to show off how much richer and more connected you are, you need things that are largely limited to only rich and connected people.

You called I answered NS Resident Aggie at your service

Texas A&M is a good school, especially in the military, agriculture an oil industry fields.
Not just those, but those are the fields the name is most prominent.

But of course people like those in this scandal are no going into those fields.

It is a good school that offers quality education but does not give celebrities something they brag to their friends about.

[Vetalia]

I definitely agree that when it comes to your average state school, where the large majority of students attend, they tend to become interchangeable after your first job or so. (That's what all employers I know have told me, anyway.)

However, I think the Ivy Leagues and the other extremely elite (MIT, etc.) schools are an exception to this rule. I'm not sure what you mean by 'elite' in this context (old money?). At least as the stereotype goes, the old money, legacy, my-dad-donated students tend to study in some of the easier humanities fields and then get employed in some cushy desk job by dad or his friends after graduating. To that extent I think you're right. In the more rigorous fields of STEM, medicine or law, however, getting into an elite school is definitely a way to become an elite yourself, at least in your field.

I absolutely with your assessment in regards to law, medicine and STEM. A degree from one of those universities will still carry a lot of weight, much moreso than any other university. For business...no dice unless you're in a really closed field like private equity, i.e. my degrees from Ohio State are just as valuable in accounting as a degree from Harvard or Yale.

In regards to your second point, I mean exactly that...the people involved in this scandal wanted to become "old money" types with lots of connections by sending their kids to Yale but didn't realize it's not something you buy.

[Greed and Death]

No it doesnt matter, you dont get to benefit from a crime. You cant mug someone give the money to the red cross and the red cross keeps the money, they have to give it back.

No money was stolen from anyone. Quite the opposite.

S ome other deserving kid did not get that spot, it was stolen from them. Even if the kid didn't know, The kid has got to go.

Expelling these students will not give their place go to someone else. You can't kick one student out and admit another in their place in March and expect the former's learning and experiences since September to transfer to the latter.

---

We already have big enough schools.
Huge ones.
Texas A&M has 70,000 students.
The US has no shortage of colleges. We have literally thousands!

And I am told you have more applicants than places, so clearly you need more.

We admit just shy of 70% of high school grads to college.
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372

We have plenty of 4 year colleges. What we lack is the options outside of college, trade schools and the like.

[Vetalia]

We admit just shy of 70% of high school grads to college.
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372

We have plenty of 4 year colleges. What we lack is the options outside of college, trade schools and the like.

We have plenty of trade schools, the problem is the constant drumbeat of "GO TO A 4-YEAR UNIVERSITY OR YOU'LL STARVE DON'T WORRY ABOUT HOW MUCH IT COSTS" and this bizarre idea that you're somehow dumber or inferior if you pursue a trade rather than going to college.