By Professor Doom
There’s no doubt
about higher education being a major source of illicit funds. The primary
reason for this is the student loan scam, but part of why the scam works is
we’re trained from a very young age that “go to school” is the trick to being a
successful person. Thus, we as a people are willing to spend any amount of
money (especially money we don’t even have) to get that magical education.
We’ve basically
bred ourselves into being suckers for schooling. Thus, if you’re a big shot and
you want to make a lot of money, you start a school, or at least go into
education administration. Thus it’s no surprise that all three of the top presidential
candidates are linked to schools, and I’ll leave it to the gentle reader to
determine which is worse: that our political leadership is focused so much on
money, or that our schools have such a powerful tendency to be fraudulent and
attract the worst sort of people.
It’s an
interesting hierarchy of fraud, when you look at the top presidential
candidates.
Let’s start with
Donald Trump.
Trump (with Trump
University) has been
associated with a bogus school, but this school is small
potatoes; not being a political insider, he had no way of accessing the
torrential downpour of money from the student loan scam. While the school was
called “Trump University,” it was no university. It was merely a real estate
scam school, of the sort I’ve seen many times, hawking “no money down real
estate” on TV at 2am, or the like. To his credit, Trump did hire a few legitimate
academic faculty to create courses for his school, along with less qualified folk.
In sworn statements released this week as part of a federal class action
lawsuit, former employees complained of unethical sales techniques, unqualified
instructors and widely unsatisfied students.
Having taught at
accredited schools with wildly unqualified teachers and administration behaving
extraordinarily unethically along with most students being cheated, I’m hard
pressed to see what the difference between Trump University and your typical
community college is. Yes, Trump University lies about being a university, but
community colleges lie about being college…that’s hair splitting if you’re
going to call that a difference.
Schnackenberg
told the story of a couple he talked to the month before he quit who had no
money to pay the $35,000 tuition. Schnackenberg said they were talked into
using the husband's disability income and a home equity loan to pay for it.
Trump University,
being a real estate scammy school, at least focused its attention on adults
(unlike the kids fresh out of high school who are the primary prey of higher
education). Sure, Trump U used a different branch of Federal loan scheme, but
we’re still not talking anything like the money that student loans bring to our
campuses.
What’s
interesting about the Trump University scandal is there is no discussion of how
much money was taken this way. Trump U went non-functional in 2011, and was
barely in business for 5 years; while I’m sure there are dissatisfied customers,
the total amount of money raked in this way was perhaps a few million in
revenue, maybe. That’s revenue; the
net profit, if any, was not enough to keep this “university” in business.
Sure, the business
was as much a scam as all the other “get rich quick in real estate” scams out
there. As a business that could never be accredited, was never close to being a
university, and probably never turned even a tiny profit, Trump University was
nothing.
Let’s move on to a
non-profit college that actually was a college.
The method of
plundering here is pretty much standard procedure, one I’ve seen many times. She
spearheaded a big real estate purchase leading to the eventual destruction of
the college.
In recent
years, Burlington College has struggled under the crushing weight of the debt
incurred by the purchase of the Archdiocese property on North Avenue.
The Poo Bah (in
this case, Mrs. Sanders) comes in with big plans for growth, and says the
growth must be accomplished by first purchasing expensive real estate at a huge
premium, or by buying/building overpriced buildings. The trustees, dollar signs
in their eyes, sign off on the plan without thinking things through. The Poo
Bah arranges to buy real estate with the college money at a huge inflated
price, in exchange for “considerations” to the Poo Bah. It’s great work if you
can get it, though it does tend to lead to the destruction of the helpless
school.
The Poo Bah then
leaves, with a golden parachute, plus whatever “bonus” proceeds from the buying
spree, plus more bonuses for “growing” the school. The school then goes
bankrupt. Seriously, I’ve seen
this before. Accreditation, being run by the same administrators who are
looting the schools, is completely impotent to stop school after school being
plundered this way.
Jane Sanders apparently overinflated the college's
donations in order to get a loan for that property. Isn't that bank
fraud?
Also, Jane's daughter got a position at Burlington College as Director of Woodworking (really). Although her woodworking shop wasn't accredited, she also was approved as a class for Burlington College students. College $, position & students sent to the president's daughter - isn't that nepotism?
Finally, the Sanders campaign STILL won't release their income taxes or complete the (required) financial disclosure statement.
Also, Jane's daughter got a position at Burlington College as Director of Woodworking (really). Although her woodworking shop wasn't accredited, she also was approved as a class for Burlington College students. College $, position & students sent to the president's daughter - isn't that nepotism?
Finally, the Sanders campaign STILL won't release their income taxes or complete the (required) financial disclosure statement.
--I’m not picking on Mrs. Sanders here, this is
run-of-the-mill Poo Bah behavior. Director of Woodworking? Ok, usually the
fiefdoms that bloat our campuses are Diversity-related, but it’s the same
principle.
And again, we’re
not talking Presidential-levels of money here. Mrs. Sanders was “only” given
$200,000 to go away and never come back, and it’s hard to imagine she got more
than a couple million bucks more than that for the real estate “deal.”
Time to move up
to the big kahuna, for-profit education. Or was I talking about Clinton?
We all know the
for-profits are the worst scammers, however, and, of course, the Clintons
are associated with skeezy for-profit school, Laureate.
Curiously, I couldn’t find a “mainstream news” article on their dealings,
however. I’ve
covered Laureate’s “slash and burn” method of getting past limp accreditation
before.
Let’s talk about
the kind of money involved once you hit the big leagues in student loan
plunder.
…Bill
Clinton $16.46 million over five years while Hillary Clinton’s State Dept.
pumped at least $55 million to a group run by Laureate’s founder and chairman,
Douglas Becker, a man with strong ties to the Clinton Global Initiative. Laureate has donated between $1
million and $5 million (donations are reported in ranges, not exact amounts) to
the Clinton Foundation.
Wow, look at the
money pouring in here. Bill was paid over $3,000,000 a year for his role as
“Chancellor” at this school. Not to denigrate Bill, but I still think educators
should have primary roles in education. Why aren’t more people asking questions
about this level of tax dollar looting?
“During
Bill Clinton’s tenure as Laureate’s chancellor, the school spent over $200
million a year on aggressive telemarketing, flashy Internet banner ads, and
billboards designed to lure often unprepared students from impoverished
countries to enroll in its for-profit classes. The goal: get as many students,
regardless of skill level, signed up and paying tuition.
Wait. Trump gets
grief for aggressive marketing by a few dozen salesmen at Trump U, which
failed, while the Clintons get a pass for being associated with a school that
needs to spend $200 million a year on marketing to get students? There really
seems to be some hypocrisy here as the Laureate log is far larger than the
Trump U splinter.
It’s not like the Clintons
didn’t use themselves to market the school less than Trump did his school:
Still, for
five years, Bill Clinton allowed his face and name to be plastered all over
Laureate’s marketing materials. As Clinton Cash reported,
pictures of Bill Clinton even lined the walkways at campuses…
I’m not trying to be pro-Trump
here, but it’s clear when it comes to the hierarchy of education fraud, the
Clintons are on top by a wide margin. It’s weird how the mainstream news
doesn’t know any of this, however.
No comments:
Post a Comment