Harvard lost a ton of money during the market turmoil, to the point of getting margin calls it could not meet http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/20/harvard-endowment-failed-business_harvard.html But very few people would cite one example and ignore the rest of the data available, or just as worse, cite an example and not compare to it's peers during the same time, both which would show similar catastrophes befitting them. It is like giving an example of a bad kid because he was called into the principals office once in eight years, or in this case, once in dozens of years? As far as inflation, you are not the FED, so looking at core inflation as your measure of rising prices or not is by definition incorrect. Everyone jokes that the FED numbers show no inflation if you: a) don't drive b) don't eat c) don't go to school d) don't pay rent e) don't drink f) don't go to the hospital g) the list is endless I don't know how these institutions decide to raise tuitions or not. I remember debating with a friend of mine that Ivy League schools cost way too much, and this was ten years ago. He pointed out that I was missing one point, that the only people that pay full tuition at these universities are the rich, and it is they who in effect subsidize the people that can't afford to go there [This was a Freakonomics moment]. I conceded that this may be true, but it was definitly counter intuitive.
I never claimed to be the FED. I was not aware that in order to discuss inflation I had to be the FED. I was not refering to core inflation either. I was refering to CPI which showed inflation of -1.7% while Big Education increased tuition by 6.5%.
CPI is a monthly measure. So if we have CPIs in a steady uptrend, http://www.inflationdata.com/Inflation/Consumer_Price_Index/CurrentCPI.asp and one reading that shows it is going lower from really high levels, prices are not high? Look at the data from 2000 [scroll down to see it]. Harvard looked at the cost of living last year, and the cost of living this year, and then made it's decision, if that is even how they decide to raise tuition or not. Professors etc may be given a raise once in a while, or maybe they need to raise money pronto not to go bankrupt. I don't know.
I am not so much targeting Harvard as Big Education as a whole. The fact is, they are price gougers. The way I see it, they know that if you want to be competitive to get a decent job you better have at least a bachelor's degree and have it in a decent major. Art History ain't going to cut it. As a result, they know they have the public by the balls and they will charge what they want. This did not start this year. It was worst in years past. Here is a great article from 2004. It talks about how tuition increases SLOWED to 10.5% http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46165-2004Oct19.html "College tuition rose at a slightly slower rate this year, climbing 10.5 percent at public four-year colleges and 6 percent at private ones, according to a new study. " Not only that, the public colleges were increasing faster than private ones.
I think Big Soccer is Price Gouging. (Rush Limbaugh parody when he made complete and utter fools of his listeners over Tobacco use. Circa 1994)