<p>
Please note that Princeton is a 501(c)(3) institution, covered as an EDUCATIONAL institution. The word of law clearly distinguishes between a tax-exempt educational institution and a charitable organization. That’s because the law recognizes education as a public good. Therefore, Princeton does not need to be a “charitable” organization to be tax-exempt. Your point is moot. </p>
<p>
Education is a recognized public good. You forget that education is tied to research. The research that Princeton undergraduates, graduate students, and faculty produce certainly work towards the public good. Teach for America was an undergraduate thesis that a Princeton alumna made into reality. Alimta, an anti-cancer drug, was developed at Princeton. I hope you agree that these are public goods that have profound impacts on society. If you do not recognize these things as good, you should take it elsewhere, as the law is not ready to accept that view (and shows no inclination to abandon its view that education is a public good). </p>
<p>
You are behind the times. Princeton did one better. Princeton is making an effort to make lectures and coursework available to all online ([Princeton</a> Alumni Weekly: Princeton joins consortium to offer free online classes](<a href=“Issues | Princeton Alumni Weekly”>Princeton joins consortium to offer free online classes | Princeton Alumni Weekly)). I only anticipate this growing. Opening campuses around the country can still only reach so many people. But putting it online can reach millions. And if you want a Princeton-quality education, it is free for you. You only pay to get the diploma. </p>
<p>
The mere fact that Princeton has a lot of money is irrelevant. Education is a common good. If you think Princeton (or donations) should be taxed, you only join the increasing number of people who covet their neighbor’s wealth. “Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal” (Matthew 6:19 KJV). </p>
<p>You are making arguments for the wrong cause. Nobody is making any serious contest that Princeton is not contributing to the public good. Rather, the point here is that it is making profits, even while it is contributing to the public good. Whether a property tax should be levied on the locales that make money for Princeton is the point of debate here.</p>