Anyway, I am not actually a believer in comparisons like the ones you're making. It is a bad idea to look at disgustingly light sentences for bad crimes, and then saying crimes not as bad should garner relative punishments. All attention should be on the fact that bad crimes were not adequately punished, not that lesser crimes should be inadequately punished because of that. You should just be advocating for drunk drivers causing harm to get way heavier sentences, not for these rich pieces of shit to get lighter sentences.
Yes, I actually doubt anyone would serve more than a year or two over this (aside from the head guy that was involved in most of the cases). There just seems to be a lot of outrage and people supporting huge sentences over this, and I disagree. I think a hefty fine and a year or two is more than fitting. Just my opinion based on the fact this is a non-violent and no one could possibly be harmed in this action.
What do you mean no one could be harmed???? What about all the deserving young people who got fucked? For every person who got enrolled via this kind of fraud, there is another person who should have had that spot because they worked for it.
Also, Madoff was non-violent too. I guess he only deserved a couple years?
I can't believe you are so cavalier when it comes to white collar crime. No wonder these assholes all think they can get away with it, if your attitude reflects many others.
No one was physically harmed. Sure, some kids didn't get into college, and yes that sucks. Two years is a long time for someone to serve in prison. I think that is fair, that is was Martha Stewart got and I would compare this to what she did (based on the grand scheme of things and how serious the crime was), not really Bernie, his was a much larger scale. Maybe the head guy (I can't recall his name) who was directly involved with all of these bribes and scandals is the Bernie and deserves more, but not each individual parent. What gives you the right to make your opinion so superior that makes me so cavalier? In the end someone who kills someone through an intentional act, being drinking and driving or street racing, I believe deserves a much harsher sentence than someone who bribed their way into a school. And if 5-10 years is pretty standard for those acts, I would think 2 would be fitting for this crime. Ask Martha Stewart if 2 years in prison was no big deal and isn't going to be a a factor next time she gets some insider information. And if you're so worried about people getting into college fairly and those who got pushed out, why not sentence students to prison who cheat on the high school biology exam, that basically has the same end result, right? Or the college kid who cheats on a test or paper, give him jail time too. None of those things makes sense to give hefty jail sentencing too, but do have the same impact as someone who bribes/cheats their way into college so why does it make sense to give someone 10 years for cheating on the SAT? All have the same impact that someone is in a school who doesn't deserve to be there when someone else can be in their place (I know, I agree no one will likely serve actually that much, but based on the opinions that they should).
Um, because cheating on an exam isn't against the law?
Technically neither is cheating on the SAT. The means that they cheat can be considered illegal, and the same logic applied to nearly any test.
Okay, so I gather you must not understand the case at all then. Because nobody is being criminally charged for "cheating on the SAT".
I understand that. Your argument was that the victims are those who didn't get into college as a result and thus a heavy prison penalty would fit the crime. I simply asked if that justifies it, then why not apply strict laws to all unorthodox methods that allow students into college. I mean, if that is what it takes to warrant a 10-year prison sentence, then why single out these parents because they are rich and instead enforce such laws on other actions that have the same result? And it seems like we agree that wouldn't make sense, so why does it here? Your response it to assume I know nothing and call me cavalier. I've seen nothing that would make me believe any of these parents deserve to spend more than a year or two in prison. That would also seem equivalent to other crimes that I would consider on a similar scale. You want to compare these parents Bernie Madoff, I think Martha Stewart is more fitting. One got 2 years and the other got sentenced to 150. Anyway looks like we will just disagree on this. Taking 2 years away from someone's life to me seems like a punishment that fits the crime. 2 years is a long time.
The funny thing is that there are so many legal ways that the rich can get a leg up that resorting to this is just kinda sad. Bribing out in the open by donating a building is something we just kinda shrug and accept...not to mention paid tutors, test prep, etc.
Maybe it's OK for the child of a billionaire to go to the University of Arkansas, Cal State Fullerton, or Colorado State. Is there something about "rich person culture" that brings shame to the family of the kid that does not go to an elite university?
Yes rich people want their kids in elite schools and when they "help" them achieve this they don't want their kids to know this and that they are less than adequate. It happens with all kinds of parents though, not just rich. https://m.cnn.com/en/article/h_6d80955da3ae7ba73b6676a7831c8459
INDIANAPOLIS, IN—In a stern indictment of the cash-grabbing scandal that
the student athletics organization was somehow kept completely in the
dark about, the NCAA announced Monday the launch of an investigation
into why it wasn’t making millions off of the recent college admissions
controversy. “After the disturbing revelations that massive bribes were
being paid out to people other than us, we’re launching an immediate
inquiry into how we possibly missed out on this,” said NCAA president
Mark Emmert, who claimed it was a “total failure of the system” that
they were not raking in cash from wealthy celebrities when universities
like Stanford, Yale, and USC were. “As an organization that always
strives to squeeze money out of college athletics, I’m disgusted that
this all went on right under our noses without us getting so much as a
taste. There’s no way there isn’t some desperate millionaire out there
willing to pay for his son to be a benchwarmer on a D1 team. To miss out
on such a lucrative pay-to-play scheme goes against everything the NCAA
stands for.” At press time, the NCAA had fined and suspended dozens of
college coaches for not letting them in on the action.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Of course it is. Big time. That's why I was so surprised when I first saw this scandal as breaking news. I thought it was so strange that it was being presented as though anyone was surprised, and also by the fact that the FBI investigation is so limited. If they are actually concerned about this, this should have a much longer reach. However, perhaps this scandal will actually scare some other into stopping it or not seeking to do it.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
It is rigged, and I don't doubt anything that the writer says, but I do doubt her conclusion that it all starts with getting into the right university. That's what these universities think, but the research out there says otherwise. These children of the rich and connected are going to be just fine even if they go to a state school. Their career trajectories and their earning potential is not significantly different whether they get into an Ivy League or into a second tier school.
But you know who does benefit from the top tier schools? Disadvantaged students do. Low income students, minorities without connections, children of immigrants; if they can get into one of these schools, their future is made, so it's doubly (triply) frustrating that the low performing rich offspring get the spots.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
What about those who accepted the "donations" ??? You don't really believe that the rich aren't "advised" that the only way to get "in" is to make a "donation" It's all wrong.
personally i think the person who rights the essays for these kids and genrally takes money to help these rich kids and parents are bigger assholes than the parents and kids. so the writer of this article comes off really poorly to me. it's why i think the coaches and the people at these schools that took the bribes should be punished far more than than parents.
What about those who accepted the "donations" ??? You don't really believe that the rich aren't "advised" that the only way to get "in" is to make a "donation" It's all wrong.
I agree, the acceptance of the bribes seems equally unethical and deserving of equivalent prosecution. They should at least have their funding cut or face other major penalties.
personally i think the person who rights the essays for these kids and genrally takes money to help these rich kids and parents are bigger assholes than the parents and kids. so the writer of this article comes off really poorly to me. it's why i think the coaches and the people at these schools that took the bribes should be punished far more than than parents.
i I don't think the writer comes off well, either...but the story is interesting.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Comments
What gives you the right to make your opinion so superior that makes me so cavalier? In the end someone who kills someone through an intentional act, being drinking and driving or street racing, I believe deserves a much harsher sentence than someone who bribed their way into a school. And if 5-10 years is pretty standard for those acts, I would think 2 would be fitting for this crime. Ask Martha Stewart if 2 years in prison was no big deal and isn't going to be a a factor next time she gets some insider information.
And if you're so worried about people getting into college fairly and those who got pushed out, why not sentence students to prison who cheat on the high school biology exam, that basically has the same end result, right? Or the college kid who cheats on a test or paper, give him jail time too. None of those things makes sense to give hefty jail sentencing too, but do have the same impact as someone who bribes/cheats their way into college so why does it make sense to give someone 10 years for cheating on the SAT? All have the same impact that someone is in a school who doesn't deserve to be there when someone else can be in their place (I know, I agree no one will likely serve actually that much, but based on the opinions that they should).
Your response it to assume I know nothing and call me cavalier. I've seen nothing that would make me believe any of these parents deserve to spend more than a year or two in prison. That would also seem equivalent to other crimes that I would consider on a similar scale. You want to compare these parents Bernie Madoff, I think Martha Stewart is more fitting. One got 2 years and the other got sentenced to 150.
Anyway looks like we will just disagree on this. Taking 2 years away from someone's life to me seems like a punishment that fits the crime. 2 years is a long time.
https://m.cnn.com/en/article/h_6d80955da3ae7ba73b6676a7831c8459
NCAA Launches Investigation Into Why It Wasn’t Making Millions Off Recent College Admissions Scandal
https://www.boredpanda.com/woman-reveals-college-admissions-scam-jaimie-leigh/?fbclid=IwAR2gjRnt32MCzbRbQ1ghyIS-GWnWfcIPOJWXw5QA33fjCdXAolLiWhMva2Q&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=organic
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
It is rigged, and I don't doubt anything that the writer says, but I do doubt her conclusion that it all starts with getting into the right university. That's what these universities think, but the research out there says otherwise. These children of the rich and connected are going to be just fine even if they go to a state school. Their career trajectories and their earning potential is not significantly different whether they get into an Ivy League or into a second tier school.
But you know who does benefit from the top tier schools? Disadvantaged students do. Low income students, minorities without connections, children of immigrants; if they can get into one of these schools, their future is made, so it's doubly (triply) frustrating that the low performing rich offspring get the spots.
You don't really believe that the rich aren't "advised" that the only way to get "in" is to make a "donation"
It's all wrong.
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin