The endowment as of June 30th 2023 was $5.5 billion. A year later it was $5.8 billion. If you add inflation and this spending cut alone, it has not grown.
Sure, it's "only ~2%", but surely I don't need to tell you how the money, meant to _persist in perpetuity_, a _237_ year old institution has accumulated to educate _30,000_ students is a different measure than an annual income? - a drop large enough to, as I pointed out above, no longer make it a viable sum of money in perpetuity?
Here I'm imagining you, sitting on let's say, $500,000 and thinking it's no problem if you spend _an extra_ $10,000 more every year, it's only 2%, and then wondering after a while where all the money to invest went, but where your money went entirely. I think rather than comment on a university's finances, better make sure yours are in order first because I suspect there's a troubling fundamental lack of financial literacy on display here that's going to come back to haunt you at some point.
> perpetually aggregate money to manage as a tax exempt hedge fund
Yes. That's the grand purpose. To do exactly that so they can exist in perpetuity.
Do you also go around pointing at hearts as if it's all some grand revelation that that's the main reason we're all here, making it also very clear that you don't mean it in the loving, metaphorical sense, but simply referring to its function of pumping blood about?
Sure, if you want to reduce a university down to simply existing for money's sake, then go ahead, but then you might as well say that about literally everything. Horrifyingly cynical. Is our grand purpose, in your eyes, the accumulation of money as well, simply because we want to live with a roof over our heads that costs money?
> Sure, if you want to reduce a university down to simply existing for money's sake, then go ahead, but then you might as well say that about literally everything
No it doesn't apply to literally everything. We are talking about the Universities that are completely pausing admittance to their graduate programs while sitting on billions or tens of billions of dollars.
It is deeply twisted and perverted that these schools are prioritizing the size of their endowments over taking on any new graduate students.
OK, maybe with losing this funding, they’ll now have to stop funding these admissions, grow their endowment, and eventually they’ll be able to pay for these admissions using their larger endowment.
So pausing it now is more likely to make it possible in perpetuity. Now, if you don’t care about future students, if you don’t care about this institution existing in perpetuity, please just say so. Say that you couldn’t give a rat’s arse about our descendants and all that we’ve been able to keep alive to hundreds of years. A perfectly reasonable argument, I suppose, if you think a meteorite is about to hit us. Given how firm you are in your conviction, at least tell us where and when it’ll hurt us.
Let’s say a PhD student costs them $100k, and that they have a pile of $10 billion. All just hypothetical order of magnitude numbers. They are one of the biggest universities in a state of 13 million people. Now exactly how do you make that pile last for another 284 years if you have much less money you’re putting into that pile? Either dazzle us with your financial genius right now, or just admit “you don’t”.
Money big pile. Money in pile used to pay for everything and thing A. Now less money going into pile. Pile will disappear if they keep paying for thing A. Losing thing A painful but optional for now. Pile disappear very very bad, will not be able to pay for anything.
Can you maybe see past a decade and see how it might be even more twisted and perverted if they lose the endowment entirely?
University exist for over 200 years. 200 years very long time. University want to exist 200 years from now.
Sure, it's "only ~2%", but surely I don't need to tell you how the money, meant to _persist in perpetuity_, a _237_ year old institution has accumulated to educate _30,000_ students is a different measure than an annual income? - a drop large enough to, as I pointed out above, no longer make it a viable sum of money in perpetuity?
Here I'm imagining you, sitting on let's say, $500,000 and thinking it's no problem if you spend _an extra_ $10,000 more every year, it's only 2%, and then wondering after a while where all the money to invest went, but where your money went entirely. I think rather than comment on a university's finances, better make sure yours are in order first because I suspect there's a troubling fundamental lack of financial literacy on display here that's going to come back to haunt you at some point.