<p>^ Right, but Berkeley is aggressively addressing the issues as mentioned:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And where is the source that says UC Davis, UCSD, etc. are currently more financially sustainable than others? I didn’t see that in the Bain report.</p>
<p>^ Okay…but where is the Bain list of “financial unsustainable” colleges? Even the link in the Daily Cal points to the same article you posted. But there is no list.</p>
<p>^oh geez. If UCSF were part of UC Berkeley, there wouldn’t be such things as JOINT programs and JOINT appointments and those links wouldn’t have existed. </p>
<p>They each have their own financial statements by the way. Nothing is consolidated.</p>
<p>^ LOL! No, you just said, “nothing is consolidated”. I’m telling you where I know they are consolidated. You could say they’re consolidated in US GDP numbers. </p>
<p>UCSF and Berkeley have geographical, historical and on-going ties. Not so much with UC-Riverside.</p>
<p>Well, I said they each have their own FS and in their FS, none consolidates the other. A consolidation of the two only at the UC level shows they are two separate entites under the UC system. It’s like your sister isn’t your daughter. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>“Ties” doesn’t automatically translate to “part of”. Like your friends aren’t sleeping partners. Collaboration, joint programs, and joint research are common among schools in close proximity. Maybe the joint effort is a bit more extensive between UCSF and Berkeley because they are not competing with each other; but that doesn’t mean one can claim another.</p>
<p>UCB, as much as I respect Cal, UCSF is not its “de facto” medical program, or affiliated to Cal in any substantial way. Both are members of the UC system, and that is the extent of their relationship to each other. UCSF is no more affiliated to Cal than it is to any other member(s) of the UCs. Just because Cal does not have a medical school does not mean it can claim UCSF as its own. UCSF has its own Chancellor (who reports directly to the UC president, not to Cal’s Chancellor), its own budget and its own funding.</p>
<p>UCB, would Duke/UNC and Harvard/MIT be the same institutions then? Undergrads at these two pair of schools can cross-register and take whatever classes they wish at their neighboring institutions and basically reap almost all of the benefits of attending the other school besides the degree itself and on-campus recruiting for jobs.</p>
<p>It looks like Alexandre and I finally agree about something. ;)</p>
<p>^ I would argue that history and geography tie Berkeley and UCSF…UCSF and Cal do not compete with overlapping academic programs. There are far more joint degrees offered than any other schools. </p>
<p>^ Difference being UCSF and Berkeley were one university and still offer joint degrees and have faculty with joint appointments. Any joint degrees offered between Chicago and Northwestern? Don’t Chicago and Northwestern offer similar degrees and have competing academic programs?</p>
<p>^ My first decrees would be UCSF consolidate under Berkeley in an effort to reduce management costs… and UCLA would be forced to go back to powder blue and rewrite its fight song. Haha!</p>