- Increasing healthcare costs is the main reason
- Increasing IT costs
- Reduced government subsidies

Also, the advertised tuition price is not the real tuition price. There are discounts. If the real price goes down due to low demand, the advertised price does not go down because that makes the college look desperate, and it makes it easier to raise prices later. Currently, low birth rates and high employment are making demand very low. So discounts are growing.

Sorry, this is not true. The advertised tuition price is not the real tuition price because there are discounts. Many universities are raising their discount faster than they are raising the tuition because there is a shortage of students. Purdue is surely shrinking their discount, leading to a cost increase.

This is false. Many universities have been laying off their administrators, or finding that they are unable to hire new ones because they cannot pay enough. In reality, health care costs are rising, but student numbers are falling because of low birth rates. University administrators are paid far less than their counterparts in the private sector.

A few rich universities do spend too much on administration.

They have so much money the personal security budget is insignificant to them. Of course they are putting more money into it. From their point of view, it is a tiny cost and a major risk reduction.

"its prototype really will be barely audible when it crosses the sound barrier."

Sonic booms are caused by going faster than the speed of sound. They are not caused by reaching the speed of sound. This is why the boom is a potential problem - it is heard along the entire supersonic flight path, not just at the beginning.

Low income students believe what you said is true. That is why they get lower scores. In reality, knowledge of test taking strategies can help you score higher on standardized test questions. Often, you can get the points without knowing the answer if you understand how the test is (incompetently) constructed.

No, they are not IQ tests.

A correlation of 0.5 is terrible.

No it's not an IQ test. That's false.

Not true. The tests are biased towards Asian and White kids, because those kids have access to information about how to get high scores.

U Chicago has staff whose job it is to know the quality of each high school. They can adjust. This is a super rich university, they can afford to pay for careful examination of these details. Many of the applicants are not even from the US.

Most universities cannot afford those staff, but may have fewer high schools to keep track of.

The University of Chicago is not really an educational institution. It's primary goal is to improve its own reputation. It does a lot of basic research. Undergraduate education is a side-operation. This is all about increasing the number of applicants, which increases the University's rejection rate, which raises its ranking.

The empirical evidence is that diverse groups do learn and work better.

"your standardized scores coming out of secondary education (high school, et al) mean everything, and can be relied upon to do so."

Citation needed for the reliability. Can they reliably distinguish the top 8% from the top 9%? That is what U Chicago admissions needs to do.

You're way off, U Chicago has offered BAs in science for many decades. I have one. And they are famous for being among the most rigorous degrees.

Lots of things wrong with this post:

1. They are not eliminating the standardized tests. They are just optional.

2. If they are optional now, that means the scores were not actually being used in the past. Nothing is changing.

3. Standardized tests are poor at measuring. They are particularly poor if you are trying to distinguish the difference between top 9% and top 8%, which is what they do at U Chicago.

My email client does timeline and groups okay. What are the pragmatic uses of photo albums? Selling real estate?