Yup! The world needs American engineers and scientists. MIT is a fantastic school. I'm failing to see how it's irreplaceable compared to University of Michigan, Georgia Tech, University of Washington, UIUC, my alma mater...
> But getting a job here isn't egalitarian or "fair". The people who are hired are hired because the people hiring them believe that they are the best candidate for doing the job. Modulo affirmative action considerations, etc.
Sure! Nothing wrong with that! I'm sure that can still happen if it was affiliated with UMass Boston. Public, less-selective institutions like UNC Chapel Hill do lots of fundamental research too.
> At MIT, every undergraduate student can participate in research. Often with the leading expert in the field.
That's great! I did undergrad research and I'm sure lots of undergrads do!
> Regarding sailing being for the rich, it costs $90 a day to rent a four-person sailboat on the Charles River. Anyone in Boston can do this who knows how to swim and sail. Divided by 4, that's $22.50 per person for a day of sailing. Is this really a sport only for the rich?
Interesting aside, but that's actually a lot more than I expected for a sailboat on the Charles and I was looking into it earlier. I know a few people that sail and it seems like an awesome hobby. Guess I'll have to re-evaluate.
> There are plenty of other great schools. MIT can't take everyone who is qualified to attend MIT. No college can. On the other hand, there are plenty of other high-quality choices for education. You don't have to go to MIT to get a high-quality engineering education.
Yup! I went to a lower tier institution and got an OK quality education. But if you're really going to claim that other schools also provide high quality engineering educations without the social engineering, hate to say it but I don't think you're making a great case for it!
Look, the way I see it is:
1) Either the "MIT woman/man" is so much better than everyone that doesn't get in (like myself) that the cost of re-evaluating the influence of these selective institutions would be enormous to world productivity or
2) These schools are good, but them being selective isn't actually that beneficial to the national interest more than brownie points in a credibility name drop and the specializations that exist there because of the added credibility.
I simply don't see this argument working without admitting to being fundamentally superior.