I'm uncomfortable with the victim-blamey attitude of your comment.

The Ivies actually meet all demonstrated financial need for their students, so the Ivy League grad very likely had a sweeter deal than someone who went to a different private college.

You couldn't be more wrong. Lower federal courts (the kind this provision affects) aren't created by the Constitution - the Constitution merely authorizes Congress to create these courts. If Congress wanted to do away with every federal court (except SCOTUS) tomorrow, it absolutely could. Congress also determines…

Not in 1977 when they were only admitting women for the first time.

oh fuck this. It's well established that people who graduate college in a recession and can't immediately find work NEVER RECOVER in terms of wealth. The crater in their resume and career development is going to follow them for the rest of their professional lives. So sure, we'll all survive, but make no mistake,…

It seems like it depends on how/when you calculate that number, right?

The thing that bothers me is the extent to which this kind of intra-Princeton dating just further entrenches class privilege. The last thing we need is children of the 1% dating each other.

Yes, until we have government mandated paid maternity leave. Is your solution just to let these women go and let them rot in the street?

Everything I learned about tired capitalist tropes I learned from this article. Earned her horse? Gag me.

And the first amendment apologists crawl out of the woodwork. This shit needs to be fucking banned as HATE SPEECH. And anyone who tries to defend it as "oh, sure it's horrible, but JAMES MADISON SAID" needs to pull their head out of their ass and get a clue.

"Offensive speech" is not an exception.

Better than Reagan.

I truly despise anyone who would spend $100 on a tiny tacky velour sweatshirt, let alone one manufactured for "girls who love stuff." Barf. I hate capitalism and I'm really looking forward to the revolution. Enjoy it now, vapid shallow rich bitches.

For real.

I refuse to believe that anyone can't support their family on $300k a year. Even divided 7 ways that's close to 45k/person. I really hate the argument that $200k isn't that much money. Sure it is - just not after you spend it.

Fair enough. But I don't think a third of the 1% has been homeless. I think it has more to do with their pathological need to horde money and steal from the poor than it does with a genuine fear of homelessness.

Or you know, people need to work to feed their kids and uh, in case you didn't notice, jobs aren't exactly easy to get right now. But keep on being a tool for the 1%.

Yup. I'm glad you see it too.

YUP. No welfare for average people, but the US government is forced to basically pay the wages of WalMart's employees. Viva CapitalisM!

Funny how the "sharing economy" doesn't involve WalMart you know...sharing some of its horde of money with society or its employees. /notfunnyatall