What's the Least Impactful Way to Spend $300,000,000?

Re:What's the Least Impactful Way to Spend $300,000,000? by AnthonyMouse on Friday April 14, 2023 @12:50AM (#35565635)

> It is ultimately funding education for smart people who are well-positioned to use that education productively, and for research and arts that are meant to benefit humanity. It's not just throwing it away.

You have to account for it as the marginal dollar, not the average dollar. If Harvard had less money, and they're competent, they would cut the least effective programs. But because their budget is so large, they've already fully funded everything in their wheelhouse with high utility and the least effective programs would be mostly waste and vanity. (And if they're not competent then you obviously don't want to be giving them more money either.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What's the Least Impactful Way to Spend $300,000,000? by hkt on Friday April 14, 2023 @03:23AM (#35566511)

I'm not generally in favour of elite universities so don't deeply disagree with the sentiment, but is there actually a way to justify more money under the pattern you established in your comment?

I'm guessing your intention was to suggest that in the presence of a large surplus (Harvard's massive endowment etc) it is reasonable to assume this goes unspent because it can't be turned into worthwhile education or research. Is that about the sum of the argument?

Meanwhile, somewhere with high impact research but nearly zero in reserves would presumably be more deserving?

[ Parent | on HN ]