This is based on the Nexus research in post 39.
Easier to read.
@klingon97 the issue with just increasing govt funding is that the $ has to come from somewhere…and it wont come from defense. Already been cut.
@HRSMom Defense has already been cut? Haha. Defense spending is insanely high and for what? The last war the US actually won was WW2. Every other war was lost (or a stalemate in the case of Korea). And redistributing money from private universities is theft. Donors gave most of that money and any legislation to “redistribute” it would be struck down as unconstitutional.
And if you really want to raise money, tax those making more than $150K at 50% like every other western country does (and like the US did until Reagan).
Oh my…you clearly need to take a con law course, as you are very mistaken. Just as congress can “take” 50% in taxes as you suggest by passing a law, it can also eliminate the deduction and redistribute the taxes paid to other schools. It is not even close to a constitutional issue.
Talking about wars won, well that gets very close to politics which is not allowed here. Your comments though show a lack of true understanding of how the world and this country work, our motives, and of history itself.
Agreed. Social Security is literal, direct redistribution from individual taxpayer A to individual taxpayer B, and it’s constitutional. Taxing Harvard’s capital gains and using the funds to support public universities wouldn’t present a constitutional issue at all. It’s a political nonstarter, but constitutional. Virtually ALL government spending of tax revenue is redistributive; when it isn’t, the government can just use a fee-for-service model like a toll road.
“The power to tax involves the power to destroy.” Chief Justice John Marshall, 1819
perhaps true, but then you should have qualified your original statement, counselor. 
But of course, once you do that, your original statement fails.
have you looked at Northwestern’s mission? (I couldn’t find their 990, although they probably have numerous Tax ID’s…) Regardless, Northwestern’s exemption would be as a “school”, and funds sent to that nonprofit unrestricted could be regretted to other nonprofit in the ‘school’ realm, which includes handing over cash. Or, since cash is fungible, Northwestern or Chicago could subsidize a class room at Chicago State. There are plenty of legal ways to fork over cash.
If I were a donor giving money to U Chicago, I most emphatically would not allow (and would challenge- in court if need be) U Chicago handing over money to Chicago State. Donors to elite universities are not morons. They are more than capable of sending a check to Chicago State if that is their intention, and they take umbrage at someone else telling them where to spend their charitable dollars.
It doesn’t matter what the 990 says about their “mission”- if someone endows a chair in neuroscience at Northwesterns med school, Northwestern can’t decide, “Well we already have benchstrength in neuro, but UIUC is trying to build up their vet program so let’s just send them the dough.”
Educational mission notwithstanding, that’s not what the dollars were given for.
“Regardless, Northwestern’s exemption would be as a “school”, and funds sent to that nonprofit unrestricted could be regretted to other nonprofit in the ‘school’ realm, which includes handing over cash. Or, since cash is fungible, Northwestern or Chicago could subsidize a class room at Chicago State.”
No way. Northwestern’s mission is to be Northwestern. It can’t just hand over unrestricted funds for Northwestern to some unrelated institution, just because they both do education. Clear violation of the donor’s intent.
A significant percentage of the federal government answers to a small group of elite-school grads. For some reason, I don’t think Harvard’s tax exemptions are going anywhere.
I suspected so. Public universities are not necessarily run inefficiently. It’s more likely that public universities are just poorer. When money is tight, we notice waste more.
I think it would make more meaningful discussion if we focus on the tax exempt of private universities not direct transfer of wealth from private U to public U despite the title of the thread.
Regarding the question of whether universities get subsides by virtue of their tax-exempt status, the technical term is a tax expenditure: "revenue losses attributable to provisions of the Federal tax laws which allow a special exclusion, exemption, or deduction from gross income or which provide a special credit, a preferential rate of tax, or a deferral of tax liability” (Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974). Mortgage interest deductibility would be another example of a tax expenditure. That is why the elimination of such a provision is technically an expenditure reduction not a tax increase.
Facts not in evidence, counselor.
Sure, much of fundraising is targeted for projects (e.g., capital) and programs, but not all. Some $$ just comes into the coffers as ‘highest and best use’, which is anything that the poobahs deem to be highest and best.
Back to regularly scheduled programming.
Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, and Larry Ellison should stop wealth-hoarding and share their money with me.
Not with you. You cannot educate masses in gender and women’s studies and art history.
there was also a proposal in Connecticut to tax Yale’s endowment… didn’t go anywhere.
http://ctmirror.org/2016/03/29/session-notes-florida-governor-invites-yale-to-relocate/
some government’s need to learn that at some point you run out of other people’s money to spend.
“Some $$ just comes into the coffers as ‘highest and best use’, which is anything that the poobahs deem to be highest and best.”
Highest and best at NORTHWESTERN. Unrestricted gifts to Northwestern are gifts to Northwestern. Giving them to Chicago State is not kosher. Donor’s intent giving money to Northwestern is by definition to give it to Northwestern.
No one would ever give unrestricted funds to any university if it could just hand them over to some totally unrelated school. The United Way is inapposite; like a foundation, it exists to build coalitions and distribute funds to other organizations. Universities do not exist to fund other universities.
Do you ever come up with your own thoughts? Or do you just regurgitate others sayings?
I think Yale has some money and Yale has a lot more money because of its non profit status.
Institutions that aren’t taxed are poor poster boys for institutions that have their money taken.
Yale is a taker. I don’t see Yale giving too much to government entities. 
Yes, just peanuts.
http://news.yale.edu/2016/03/31/yale-opposes-legislation-revoke-its-tax-exempt-status
"Jacob cited a number of examples of Yale’s positive impact on New Haven and the region, including:
$8.8 billion in annual economic impact as estimated by The Connecticut Conference of Independent Colleges
$2.2 billion in yearly wages and benefits for its employees
Homebuyer Program assistance to more than 1,100 employees
760 college scholarships funded through the New Haven Promise program
$8.2 million in annual voluntary payments to New Haven
$4.5 million in property taxes to New Haven for Yale’s commercial properties
60 research spin-off companies that have attracted $1 billion in venture capital
“Everything that Yale does to improve the quality of life in New Haven — funding the New Haven Promise Scholarships, using the Homebuyer Program to encourage faculty and staff to live in New Haven, working in local schools, making voluntary payments to the city totaling $96 million to date — is ultimately made possible by Yale’s careful stewardship of its endowment,” Jacob said. He noted that New Haven has gained jobs over the past decade, while Connecticut’s other major cities have lost jobs during that period."
Yale has done a lot for New Haven.