Yale Drama goes tuition-free with $150m gift from David Geffen

Most people not actually being as amazing at their jobs as you might imagine given their titles, background, or organizations they're associated with (though a few are! But this seems only weakly correlated to expectations based on context), and most (but not quite all) famous people (especially in academics and business, and to some extent in art) becoming famous not because of what they personally did, but because they're great at taking credit for things, is another. Oh, and nepotism. Lots and lots of that. This is all related to the above, about much of adult life being a show, where people's roles are largely based on stage-dressing and expectations. "There but for the grace of god..." is the rule, not the exception. So much circumstance, chance, and external validation of same reinforcing early luck or fortunate circumstances into patterns of apparent excellence that's not actually more than bare competence plus positive expectations and support.

Hell, anyone who's switched employers with a significant title-bump in the process, and abruptly had shockingly more respect and deference in meetings has seen this stage-like reality-behind-the-reality in action. Same person as last week, totally different treatment, and all it took was a scenery & costume change. All eyes on you, people deferentially raising points plainly seeking validation, and your words carry actual weight. Days earlier, you were on the other side. No change on your part, you're just playing a new character.

Overall, the world of adults is just way less different from the world of kids than I'd thought it was, when I was a kid. The main differences are that you're a bit freer to choose the company you keep, and that if life gets very very bad for you it will be entirely "your fault" (if you're a kid that can still happen, but it's at-most only partially your fault, as folks judge it).

The only controversy I can see is whether the returns provided by hedge funds outweigh the management/performance fees they charge.

It's been deliberately sabotaged to be this way. We can easily make different choices.

There are a lot of progressive spending proposals and they all can't be paid by just taxing the wealthy.

Using that money to pay for benefits that mostly go to privileged people is not the best use of dollars. College graduates make more money on average, by a lot, 30 thousand dollars.

Our current system address those who have loans but don't actually get high income. They barely have to pay their loans--and often don't pay anything. A person making 35k, with an average of 3.5% a year income growth won't pay a single cent under the PAYE program if they have a family of four.

The fact of the matter is that if you define “wealthy” as the top 1% (as Biden implicitly does by refusing to raise taxes on folks making up to $400,000), then there just isn’t enough money there to pay for a robust welfare state without raising middle class and upper middle class taxes. Doubling the tax rate on the top 1% (which isn’t in the cards) would raise $650 billion annually. That won’t even come close to closing the current budget deficit, and won’t pay for even a third of Medicare for all. It would pay for the Biden infrastructure plan, plus maybe free college, but none of the other things in the progressive wish list.

Even if we take as drastic a step as doubling the tax rate on the top 1%, it would still be highly inequitable to distribute that money for free college before hitting priorities like universal healthcare, improved unemployment insurance, etc.