You’d better sit down for this one. According to a story in The Boston Globe, Massachusetts lawmakers are thinking about taxing private endowments worth more than $1 billion a year. That includes Harvard’s endowment.

Sound like good old-fashioned soak-the-rich tax policy from here. After all, what did Harvard really do to earn all that essentially inherited wealth?

But how does Harvard respond?

University leaders criticized the plan as a gimmick that would backfire by hurting institutions that are pivotal to the state.

“You’d be taxing success here,” said Kevin Casey, Harvard’s associate vice president for government, community, and public affairs. “Over time, this would put us at a real competitive disadvantage. . . .”

Do tell.

Maybe the administration should pass the word along to the faculty:

The Harvard Crimson reported that 86 percent of Harvard professors’ contributions went to Democrats.

P.S. -- Time for a rousing rendition of Tom Lehrer’s “Fight Fiercely, Harvard!”

“"Universities rack up obscene endowments because their tax exempt status makes it enticing for them to do so.  Is the business of running a university to rack up a huge endowment or to educate students?"” Ans: rack up endowments.

UR $49K in 2008-09. I guess these are windfall profits but no one wants them taxed. From the Dem prospective it is better to indoctrinate students in socialism and diversity, meanwhile amounts spent on energy research, drilling and refining. In both cases, take away the incentives and gain intellectually shallow advocates.

Wait a minute.

I don’t know how many times I’ve heard conservatives whine like punky little titty babies about the high cost of education and how EVIL those education people are, but then when someone comes along and has a scheme to actually make universities accountable, oh noooooo, that would be taxation, and taxation you know, is EVIL.

Education taxation must be EVIL EVIL or as those education folks would say EVIL to the power of the second degree.

Then there is the little matter that an overwhelming percentage of Harvard and Princeton alma mater contribute to Democrats. Why could that be ? Princeton the alma mater of both Condi Rice and Gen. Petraeus to name a couple.

Is the conservative conclusion therefore that intelligent people find the Democrats more appealing ? No, you guys are amazing in your evident illogic.

You conclude that intelligent people must really be stupid. (oh, that explains it) It’s a vast leftwing conspiracy, don’t you know.

When Hillary Clinton calls for gas tax relief paid for by windfall profits that is EVIL EVIL.  It does not make sense (true) and it takes money away from honest hardworking oilmen who know best what to do with all those billions. (um)

But when McCain calls for gas tax relief, that’s cutting taxes, and that’s GOOD GOOD.  Never mind how or why. Just cut the taxes and we’ll all be happy. Did even one single conservative complain about his proposal ? That would be no.

Conservative logic comes from Alice in Wonderland.  Curiouser and curiouser.

Universities rack up obscene endowments because their tax exempt status makes it enticing for them to do so.  Is the business of running a university to rack up a huge endowment or to educate students ?

Simple question. Leave off the conservative logic in answering it.

You should never post on Friday. The natives are restless, the sap is rising, the tide is turning, the butter is churning.

Butter ? Wha ?  Poor bacon biscuit done lost it.

At least get your story straight. Either you conservatives hate education or you love it. You can’t switch-hit on me just for the sake of convenience and random hits on libertarian touchpoints.

Is the business of running a university to rack up a huge endowment or to educate students ?

Post Your Comments: