Hacker News Reader

It's not a fallacy, he's saying that its not the point. The question is why is this the crime?

Matt Levine talks about insider trading a lot. He brings up the point that "it's not about fairness, its about theft". He approaches this much in the way. The crime that took place was against the schools. People misappropriated their property; the ability to trade access for money.

There might be a net increase in available resources for each student, but there's no evidence to support that there would be net increase in available spots.

e.g. Donating $25MM for a gym clearly gives students a nicer gym. It does not necessarily enlarge the size of the undergraduate matriculating class, year over year.

Cynically, it could be even worse. A nicer gym gives students a bigger tuition bill.

How is "just donate a building like a real rich person" a fallacy?

The article doesn't say it's bad to donate and get in.

>In this case, people bribed individuals to enrich themselves, not the school. That is a decrease in the available spots for students at the school.

The article agrees with this, saying it's theft from the school, whereas donating a building isn't theft from the school.