<p>No, you're a dork because you're talking ---- on an internet forum.</p>
<p>Actually, I'm writing.</p>
<p>j10cpc5000 is right though. British universities are no longer what they used to be. Due to the lack of funding and poor studenty bodies, a UK education can now no longer compete with that of the US. For example, Cambridge, hailed as the "great British university," had to stop running Architecture this year because they simply couldn't afford to. Can you imagine any good, private US university doing that? The endowments at UK universities are rubbish, and outside Oxford and Cambridge, universities receive almost nothing. Class sizes are enormous and student to faculty ratios are worse than second tier schools here in the US. </p>
<p>To cite a personal example OneTwoThree, I could have gone to Oxford this year (it was the only UK university I applied to) but after getting all my US decisions in, I'd go to NYU over Oxford (obviously, I'm not actually going to NYU). That's how I equate it.</p>
<p>Thank you. I wasn't expecting such a British lover lingering around here. The fact is, England is only like an American state. So America is 50 times greater than England.</p>
<p>Alright, if it makes you feel better to trumpet the virtues of your lovable nation to someone you don't know, congrats on a job well done. But to all the americans who wonder why people around the world hate them 'without reason', this dork right here is just one of those reasons.</p>
<p>But, if for nothing but the chance to get back to the initial purpose of this thread, can we keep this to a minimum so people with relevant opinions can post? </p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<p>I am not American and, like I said previously, I go to a British school and have many British friends. My opinion is completely unbiased. The fact is, and everybody but the British accept this, UK universities are mediocre, especially when compared to the US.</p>
<p>To directly answer the question proposed on this thread, Chicago is in another league when compared to Cambridge and LSE, in any field of academia - even more so in Economics. Between Cambridge and LSE, it is slightly more difficult to choose. Cambridge's "straight" economics course is excellent and is porbably better than L101 at LSE. However, the number and variety of economics courses available at LSE may make it a more preferable option to some people.</p>
<p>If you are accepted into Trinity at Cambridge, go there. If it's any other college in Cambridge, go to UChicago. Trinity is in a whole different league. They have an endowment of ~1 billion pounds ($1.92 billion). This is for ONE College. They have about 800-900 students. In other words, this school has about twice the endowment per capita as Princeton (the richest U.S. school, per capita). All the other colleges at Cambridge and Oxford are ****.</p>
<p>Faithfully Submitted,
Cesare de Borgia</p>
<p>That is a phenomenal endowment - but I suppose they's been arround a bit longer.</p>
<p>"That is a phenomenal endowment - but I suppose they's been arround a bit longer."</p>
<p>Yes, very true. HYP has had no influence on America compared to how Oxbridge has truly formed the U.K.</p>
<p>Since the thirteenth century, isn't it? You get a hint of that sort of deep academic time reading about John Adams at Harvard, but of course that's recent history. I think Chicago does very well despite its youth.</p>