Prison vs. Harvard in an unlikely debate | Hacker News Reader

Prison vs. Harvard in an unlikely debate

wsj.com

56 pointsrohunati13 comments

This isn't far off from how the Putnam competition started: In 1933, five years before it launched as an annual competition between universities, the first Putnam mathematics competition was held between Harvard and the United States Military Academy. Allegedly nobody thought the Army had much of a chance, but unlike the students from Harvard they took the competition seriously, and as in this latest competition the underdogs won.

I was expecting to read about a debate on the relative merits of going to prison, or to Harvard.

I was thinking it was the article about the merits of a Harvard education versus being a prison guard. http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014240527487041322045762854...

Classic example of ignoring the std deviation and using mean instead of median as if it holds any significance given a very unusual distribution curve. Its truly a textbook example.

Selectivity in lower socioeconomic class jobs is hardly limited to great paying jobs; there are similar stories about McDonalds being more selective in hiring than the Harvard acceptance rate.

There's also a cause/effect malfunction in that kids going to Harvard is an effect of getting rich, but getting rich is an effect of being a prison guard in CA, two entirely different concepts.

Oh man, this is so bad - I admit that I read the headline the same way, and then started thinking "Hmm, maybe there's an argument there." Both communities really help you develop important life skills, and you get the opportunity to network with people who are better than you at certain things, or have great "business" contacts, and may be able to help you find a job later when you get out.

You'll likely learn a great deal at either place, and we could indeed debate the merits of lessons learned at each place. But the body of knowledge learned at each is so different - there's so little overlap. Minus the social stigma, being processed through both institutions likely results in a very rounded worldly education. Knowing that some individuals have indeed done this, what is their perspective?

"Republican politicians () argued that many law-abiding families struggled to afford college and shouldn’t have pay for convicted criminals to get degrees"- while this opinion has merit, it shows again Republicans have no compassion, it's a paradox that many called themselves Christian when in the Bible Jesus explicitly commanded to help the imprisoned.

Reminds me of the last minute of http://www.cc.com/video-clips/m38gcf/the-colbert-report-jesu...

It's also incredibly short-sighted. Norway treats their prisoners with respect and invests in rehabilitating rather than punishing them, and guess what? Their recidivism rate is 20%, compared to 67% in the US.

Pretty sure higher education in Norway is also cheap/free for non-prisoners.

Surely you see the difference between helping the poor vs. taking other people's money and using part of it to help the poor.

Surely you see the difference between just taking other people's money vs requiring everyone above a certain means to pay into the social contract that brings order to chaos and keeps us from Darwinian anarchy?

You're already paying for the jails. If you want to pay less for the jails, provide free college in jail. If you don't want taxes on the other hand, you have no prisoners to worry about educating anyway, as you have no jails. Or for that matter, schools, hospitals, army, police, paved roads, or stable currency.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com