[bradleyjg]

I mean I agree in principle, there does seem to an attitude in Gen Z that need implies entitlement, but Stanford has a taxpayer subsidized war-chest of $29 billion. It seems to be growing ever larger even in these supposedly difficult times for universities. If it doesn’t want to act charitably maybe it shouldn’t get the tax benefits of a charity.

[gruez]

>but Stanford has a taxpayer subsidized war-chest of $29 billion

Aren't endowments supposed to last forever? ie. the university can only spend $29B * 5% (or whatever the after inflation return is)

[bradleyjg]

Supposed to according to whom? Perpetual organizations that face no market pressure, have governance structures where one board picks the next (and in practice where senior employees have a lot of influence on trustee selection), and which are given massive tax benefits with virtually no strings attached by governments seem like a really bad idea to me. That’s sounds like a petri dish for breeding pathological behavior.

[mod]

Maybe it should get to decide how it acts charitably.

[bradleyjg]

How long do we wait for them to start acting charitably before we conclude that they are in fact a partnership run for the benefit of senior employees exploiting the tax code?