Luca posts about the recent cuts in the UC system. (In a later post, he also provided a link to an unbelievable interview with the president of the University of California. It’s unbelievable to me that someone who rose to be the president could come across so badly in an interview.)
Luca wonders how UC Berkeley will continue to provide public, affordable education of quality comparable to any top private research university in the country. I wonder whether these two goals aren’t mutually incompatible. Doesn’t the state of California have many important places where its money should be directed? More generally, why should we expect that students getting a public education should get “the best” education? (Isn’t that analogous to requiring government to provide not just shelter for the homeless, but also to provide mansions?) And if the goals stated earlier are not mutually incompatible, then why have no states other than California seemed able to realize them?
An addendum: I figured as much, but now my feeling are corroborated: apparently, many of the quotes in interviews conducted by Deborah Solomon are taken out of context. I wonder what the reaction of President Yudof will be.