PonyFans.com

Would propose that any school with an endowment greater than $1B has to use at least 25% of it on financial aid or risk losing non-profit status: https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2016/01/11/bill-focuses-wealthy-colleges-endowment-income?utm_source=Inside+Higher+Ed&utm_campaign=63ed73e22c-DNU20160111&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1fcbc04421-63ed73e22c-197573701

Will never fly. Are you not going to take a donor's money because he/she wants to specify it go to something other than schollies? Gov't is just trying to crack the door to tax endowments.

Whacko bills like this get proposed all the time, this story is likely the last you'll hear of it.

STUPID MEDICAL RESEARCH IM SICK OF THEM MESSING WITH MY SCHOLARSHIP MONEY

While there is certainly a nutty factor to the law, part of it stems from the fact that some schools have such large endowments that it is basically obscene.

Although Yale has been very good to my family, I don't give to Yale because the current endowment (about $25.6B) works out to over $2,000,000 per student.

Does Yale even need gifts anymore?

whitwiki wrote:Does Yale even need gifts anymore?

Unless you give a really big one (like fund the new B-School), I doubt that they care. They didn't get that enormous endowment by getting people like me to contribute $1k per year ($2K with the company match).

On a positive note, they decided to use the massive endowment to ensure that undergrads (and their families) aren't crippled with student loans. For middle and lower income students, all Yale financial aid packages have been "no loan" packages.

the pathetic thing about this is

1. it was put forth by a Republican (they can have their idiots too)

2. I distinctly remember the last time this nonsense came up I believe it was mostly dumbocraps proposing it and it was just before the major financial meltdown when many universities lost 25%_ of their endowment

3. how in the hell are you going to tell a state university it is not tax exempt

4. many of the morons that propose these stupid laws should (and do) have PLENTY of money of their own that is invested and thus they should understand how LONG TERM FINANCIALLY VIABLE endowments work

I mean yea sure a school has a $2 billion dollar endowment if they want that to last well they will be drawing from between 4% and 5% of that annually so $80 million to $100 million is available to spend and that is a drop (maybe a splash) in the bucket in most large university budgets

5. perhaps they should go after the pay of any university administrator that lectures about "fairness" or "privilege" and put a 65% surtax on them......oh wait that does not apply to professors they have lots of degrees and stuff and put off ever having to go to the real world for a job while they spend 12+ years in college often getting free tuition of paid research positions on the dime of other students, government grants, or endowment dollars.....why should THEY PAT MORE!!!

6. if they wanted to go after something how about all the fake charities for pet causes and "activist groups" why not tax them and why not take away the tax destructibility of donations to them

7. there is a good chance most schools probably spend WELL over 25% as it is now especially the ones with larger endowments

do the math on SMU $1.46B....if that pays out 5% that is $73,000,000

if you divide that $73 million by $10,000 that is 7,300 scholarships of $10,000

and SMU has a great deal of students that pay a great deal less than a full ride for SMU and a full ride is of course a great deal more than $10,000

and the $73,000,000 was 100% of the spendable proceeds from a well managed endowment

8. which gets us to the last point.....if I am reading the summary right on the link this guy is such a total moron he wants a university to spend 25% of the PROCEEDS.....NOT 25% of the SPENDABLE proceeds, but 25% of the PROCEEDS annually

so if SMU has a 15% return or if they have large donation(s) one year that moron wants SMU (or anyone else) to spend 25% of that......because of course the stock market always goes up and it never goes down and if you want to have a consistent % of your endowment to spend annually that you can count on and also keep up with inflation the smart thing to do is spend a lot more of the proceeds in a year when you have a good return and then put your head in your [deleted] when you have a year with a MINUS 6% return on investment and look for money in there because you will have the same luck finding it

this is just another example of why government is broke and a total enlightenment of the USA educational system

But if the market is not good then you are reducing the principal with each mandatory reduction and within a few years your endowment is no longer.

When I attended the University, I dated a female who was very well endowed. I didn't need anybody to pass a bill for me to stay focused on her endowments. What is this world coming to? Never mind.

smustatesman wrote:When I attended the University, I dated a female who was very well endowed. I didn't need anybody to pass a bill for me to stay focused on her endowments. What is this world coming to? Never mind.

It was very progressive of you to date a "female" who was "well endowed."

Digetydog wrote:

smustatesman wrote:When I attended the University, I dated a female who was very well endowed. I didn't need anybody to pass a bill for me to stay focused on her endowments. What is this world coming to? Never mind.

It was very progressive of you to date a "female" who was "well endowed."

Bruce Jenner I mean Catelyn?

Now that I think about it; it might have been Brucy.......and, I think he did say something about Gynecomastia. How's that for Teddy/Woodrow/Hillbilly progressivism.

P.S. (progressive selectivism) What really confuses/bothers me is that each day I feel different, and thusly, I don't know which bathroom I want to use on any given day.

smustatesman wrote:Now that I think about it; it might have been Brucy.......and, I think he did say something about Gynecomastia. How's that for Teddy/Woodrow/Hillbilly progressivism.

P.S. (progressive selectivism) What really confuses/bothers me is that each day I feel different, and thusly, I don't know which bathroom I want to use on any given day.

Keep it simple...use a fire hydrant or tree.

Keep it simple........today I feel like squatting, so a tree or hydrant won't do.