Read it again: Disinvestment in public education.
Adding $200k to the salary of a chancellor at a campus with 20k students comes out to $10 per student.
Removing $20 million from the school's budget over 5 years comes out to $2 000 per student. That budget reduction can be by cutting funds or by not increasing funds to cover inflation and increased expenses. For example, Arizona, by allowing the top x% of students into public universities, had a problem--very high drop-out rate for first-gen students that was a bit of a political nightmare. So they added infrastructure to help: summer orientation, mentorship programs, required first year in the dorms (meaning "new dorms" had to be built), counseling, tutoring ... None of which brought in income but all of which required expenses.
We obsess over the $10 because it fits our ideology, what we desperately want to argue. We ignore the $2 000 increase because to prevent it would take the wind out of our argument's sails, because that $20 million can go to fund food for the starving "food insecure", can go to help those without medical care, can help to pay for rent for single mothers.
= new reply since forum marked as read