Did Henry Rutgers get the deal of lifetime?
- Thread starter RUSK97
- Start date
I believe it is worse than that. It was the interest on $5000 bond or something like that. Of course, it was named for him in hopes that the childless bachelor would donate his fortune upon his death. Did not happen. I'm sure the bell cost a lot.
But still, Revolutionary War Hero and friend of Washington.. good enough of a name for me.
Your number is based on using the CPI method. That works great for a commodity, but can be misleading when trying to value the importance of an investment from the past.
In terms of GDP it comes in at $122 Million in todays dollars.
This is from measuringworth.com :
Choosing the Best Indicator to Measure Relative Worth
If you are asking what a monetary value in the past is "worth" today, there is no one correct answer. A price or an income in the past would have been valued in different ways in that time by different people and under different contexts. That must be taken into account when asking the same question today.
We suggest ten different measures of worth in our essay "Measures of Worth". We define these different measures to help you decide the context of your query. Here are some examples of different types of expenditures and suggestions concerning which measure to use. All examples are based on using 2009 values for "today."
A Commodity. If your are asking about the "present worth" of buying a loaf of bread or filling the gas tank 40 years ago, are you thinking in terms of the amount of money you are spending today on such things? If so, use the price index of the average household called the CPI (RPI for the UK.) On the other hand, if you are wondering how "affordable" this would be to the average person, use the GDP per capita, or a wage or average earnings index. For the US, we have an index ofunskilled wage or the compensation of a production worker, and for the UK we have an index ofaverage earnings.
In 1968, the average price of a gallon of gasoline in the US was 34 cents. Compared to other things that the average consumer bought that year, this would be comparable to $2.10 using the CPI index for 2009. As to how "affordable" it is to the average person, 34 cents in 1968 would correspond to spending $3.48 out of an average income by using the GDP per capita index.
A wage or income. If you are asking about the current equivalence of what someone earned in the past, and you are thinking in terms of the household items that person might buy, then use the CPI. If you are thinking about how this income would compare in terms of affording to run that average household today, then use the Consumer Bundle. A third possibility is that you want to know how that person ranked in status compared to what others earned so it would be best to use GDP per capita. Finally, your question may be how economically "powerful" that person would be, and then you should use share of GDP.
In 1931, an accountant in the US would be earning about $2,250, an amount that would represent a comparative purchasing power of $31,700 in current dollars. However, this salary is almost 45% more than what the average household spent in those days. This would correspond to $168,000 today, a "status" of nearly twice the national average.
Sometimes you want to know how very rich people compare. Recently it was reported that Warren Buffet is the richest person in the world and is worth $62 billion today. When John D. Rockefeller died in 1937 he was worth $1.4 billion. Who is richer in their time? Either man could buy anything they want (that is or was available at the time they live). But the question of how economically powerful they are can be best measured by how big their wealth is compared to the economy they live in. This is measured by share of GDP and for Rockefeller, that number is $215 billion, or nearly four time greater that Mr. Buffet.
A "project". If the amount you are asking about is the construction of a church, the cost of a war, or a new highway, again the context is important. If the question is how much it cost compared to the present cost of materials or labor, you would use the GDP deflator and/or the wage or earning index. However, you may be more interested in how important this project was to the community or the country. In the past there were less amounts of materials and labor available for all projects. So to measure the importance of this project (compares to other projects) use the share of GDP indicator.
In 1931, the Empire State building, a giant of a structure in its day, was built at a cost of $41 million. This may seem inexpensive in today's terms when we compare its cost using the GDP deflator and determine a contemporary cost of $491 million. As a share of the economy, however, an amount of $7.6 billion in 2009 dollars would be the number to use, showing how important this building was in its day.
To determine the present worth of a US dollar amount from any year from 1774 to the present, go to Relative Values - US $. You will have up to six choices.
To determine the present worth of a UK pound from any year from 1830 to the present, go toRelative Values -UK £. You will have five choices. For the years from 1264 to 1830, you can still get a measure of relative value, however, there will be only one choice: the Retail Price Index. This is at Purchasing Power - UK £.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So according to this, since the $5000 bond was a gift to the college. To measure it's importance to the community the GDP indicator method makes the most sense.
Here are the conversions to 2015 dollars using various methods:
Current data is only available till 2014. In 2014, the relative worth of $5,000.00 from 1820 is:
$104,000.00 using the Consumer Price Index
$119,000.00 using the GDP deflator
$1,380,000.00 using the unskilled wage
$3,340,000.00 using the Production Worker Compensation
$3,680,000.00 using the nominal GDP per capita
$122,000,000.00 using the relative share of GDP
In terms of GDP it comes in at $122 Million in todays dollars.
This is from measuringworth.com :
Choosing the Best Indicator to Measure Relative Worth
If you are asking what a monetary value in the past is "worth" today, there is no one correct answer. A price or an income in the past would have been valued in different ways in that time by different people and under different contexts. That must be taken into account when asking the same question today.
We suggest ten different measures of worth in our essay "Measures of Worth". We define these different measures to help you decide the context of your query. Here are some examples of different types of expenditures and suggestions concerning which measure to use. All examples are based on using 2009 values for "today."
A Commodity. If your are asking about the "present worth" of buying a loaf of bread or filling the gas tank 40 years ago, are you thinking in terms of the amount of money you are spending today on such things? If so, use the price index of the average household called the CPI (RPI for the UK.) On the other hand, if you are wondering how "affordable" this would be to the average person, use the GDP per capita, or a wage or average earnings index. For the US, we have an index ofunskilled wage or the compensation of a production worker, and for the UK we have an index ofaverage earnings.
In 1968, the average price of a gallon of gasoline in the US was 34 cents. Compared to other things that the average consumer bought that year, this would be comparable to $2.10 using the CPI index for 2009. As to how "affordable" it is to the average person, 34 cents in 1968 would correspond to spending $3.48 out of an average income by using the GDP per capita index.
A wage or income. If you are asking about the current equivalence of what someone earned in the past, and you are thinking in terms of the household items that person might buy, then use the CPI. If you are thinking about how this income would compare in terms of affording to run that average household today, then use the Consumer Bundle. A third possibility is that you want to know how that person ranked in status compared to what others earned so it would be best to use GDP per capita. Finally, your question may be how economically "powerful" that person would be, and then you should use share of GDP.
In 1931, an accountant in the US would be earning about $2,250, an amount that would represent a comparative purchasing power of $31,700 in current dollars. However, this salary is almost 45% more than what the average household spent in those days. This would correspond to $168,000 today, a "status" of nearly twice the national average.
Sometimes you want to know how very rich people compare. Recently it was reported that Warren Buffet is the richest person in the world and is worth $62 billion today. When John D. Rockefeller died in 1937 he was worth $1.4 billion. Who is richer in their time? Either man could buy anything they want (that is or was available at the time they live). But the question of how economically powerful they are can be best measured by how big their wealth is compared to the economy they live in. This is measured by share of GDP and for Rockefeller, that number is $215 billion, or nearly four time greater that Mr. Buffet.
A "project". If the amount you are asking about is the construction of a church, the cost of a war, or a new highway, again the context is important. If the question is how much it cost compared to the present cost of materials or labor, you would use the GDP deflator and/or the wage or earning index. However, you may be more interested in how important this project was to the community or the country. In the past there were less amounts of materials and labor available for all projects. So to measure the importance of this project (compares to other projects) use the share of GDP indicator.
In 1931, the Empire State building, a giant of a structure in its day, was built at a cost of $41 million. This may seem inexpensive in today's terms when we compare its cost using the GDP deflator and determine a contemporary cost of $491 million. As a share of the economy, however, an amount of $7.6 billion in 2009 dollars would be the number to use, showing how important this building was in its day.
To determine the present worth of a US dollar amount from any year from 1774 to the present, go to Relative Values - US $. You will have up to six choices.
To determine the present worth of a UK pound from any year from 1830 to the present, go toRelative Values -UK £. You will have five choices. For the years from 1264 to 1830, you can still get a measure of relative value, however, there will be only one choice: the Retail Price Index. This is at Purchasing Power - UK £.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So according to this, since the $5000 bond was a gift to the college. To measure it's importance to the community the GDP indicator method makes the most sense.
Here are the conversions to 2015 dollars using various methods:
Current data is only available till 2014. In 2014, the relative worth of $5,000.00 from 1820 is:
$104,000.00 using the Consumer Price Index
$119,000.00 using the GDP deflator
$1,380,000.00 using the unskilled wage
$3,340,000.00 using the Production Worker Compensation
$3,680,000.00 using the nominal GDP per capita
$122,000,000.00 using the relative share of GDP
To add to the above, Henry Rutgers gift was primarily used to purchase the land and fund the building of the college (Old Queens). Do you think a prominent building such as that could be built for $100K today?
A comparable building by today's standards would surely cost many millions to build today.
A comparable building by today's standards would surely cost many millions to build today.
You do realize that Henry Rutgers did not get a college named after him because he donated a bell. He donated the bell as a token of appreciation because the BOT decided to name the college after him.
The decision to name the college after Rutgers was because he was considered worthy of the honor, not because he bought naming rights. Henry Rutgers was president of the Reformed Church corporation, a war hero, and he led the fundraising effort to open the college permanently. It was due to his fame, role in the church, and role in helping secure funds for the college (probably helped by the fact that he was friends with college president Milledoler).
Think of it this way, Rutgers named the stadium after High Point Solutions because they paid money. But if they instead decided to name the stadium Greg Schiano Stadium, it would have been because he was considered an appropriate person to name the stadium after, not because he paid money.
The decision to name the college after Rutgers was because he was considered worthy of the honor, not because he bought naming rights. Henry Rutgers was president of the Reformed Church corporation, a war hero, and he led the fundraising effort to open the college permanently. It was due to his fame, role in the church, and role in helping secure funds for the college (probably helped by the fact that he was friends with college president Milledoler).
Think of it this way, Rutgers named the stadium after High Point Solutions because they paid money. But if they instead decided to name the stadium Greg Schiano Stadium, it would have been because he was considered an appropriate person to name the stadium after, not because he paid money.
The cornerstone for Old Queens building was laid in 1809, and classes started in the building in 1811. Henry Rutgers didn't give his donation until 1825.
Henry Rutgers $$$ helped reactivate a school that had closed its doors in 1816 for lack of funding. Without his generosity, who knows if the school ever comes back into existence. Is that a good enough reason for ya?
Besides, if you're looking for a guy who got the biggest bang for his buck, you can't go wrong complaining about Amerigo Vespucci. He got two continents, the world's leading country , half a pro football conference and a beauty pageant all named after him. Why? Well...... when it comes to this part of the globe.... he made the map.
Besides, if you're looking for a guy who got the biggest bang for his buck, you can't go wrong complaining about Amerigo Vespucci. He got two continents, the world's leading country , half a pro football conference and a beauty pageant all named after him. Why? Well...... when it comes to this part of the globe.... he made the map.
Last edited:
But my understanding is that was prior to the college being renamed after Rutgers .... and it was not just Henry Rutgers' personal funds, but also the funds he helped raise. Certainly without Henry Rutgers' leadership to get the college reopened, there would be no Queens College or Rutgers College today.
The donation of the bell and the bond interest was after the college was renamed for him, and that was a token thank you gift.
The idea that Henry Rutgers bought a college name on the cheap is looking at things through a 21st century lens when it seems everything is up for sale. But if you look at it through an 19th century lens, or even 20th century lens, naming the college after someone without a donation is not unreasonable. LaGuardia didn't personally fund LaGuardia Airport, Brendan Byrne didn't personally fund the arena that was named after him, and William Paterson didn't build the city named after him.
Upstream, you might have heard correctly about funding to re-open and Rutgers part in it. Unfortunately, the whole story about Henry Rutgers "stiffing" the school upon his death in 1830 doesn't explain the whole story.
Rutgers was a benefactor to many charities. A family treatise about the family kept at Special Collections at the Rutgers Library said he gave one third of his yearly earnings to charity including a defunct college along the Raritan one year. On New Year's Day in NYC, he would give out books to children who knocked on his front door to bring greetings. He helped organize the protection of New York City during the War of 1812 (that's when he obtained the title Colonel. He was a captain in the Revolutionary War). He wasn't cheap and didn't lead on anybody. He was a very generous man who spread his wealth out far and wide.
By the way, brainyquote.com has an quote entry left behind by Henry Rutgers himself.... "Don’t let your studies interfere with your education.”
Rutgers was a benefactor to many charities. A family treatise about the family kept at Special Collections at the Rutgers Library said he gave one third of his yearly earnings to charity including a defunct college along the Raritan one year. On New Year's Day in NYC, he would give out books to children who knocked on his front door to bring greetings. He helped organize the protection of New York City during the War of 1812 (that's when he obtained the title Colonel. He was a captain in the Revolutionary War). He wasn't cheap and didn't lead on anybody. He was a very generous man who spread his wealth out far and wide.
By the way, brainyquote.com has an quote entry left behind by Henry Rutgers himself.... "Don’t let your studies interfere with your education.”
Ahh, my favorite subject. The fact that what had become the largest state research university of New Jersey sold its name into perpetuity for a bag of magic beans. Raise your hand if you've donated more to this school than "Colonel" Rutgers. Raise your hand if you haven't, but have ever set foot on the land that Rutgers sits on. You've done more for this school than Henry Rutgers ever had.
And I like how people justify naming the school after him because he is a "war hero". His entire war effort consisted of allowing American troops to use his mansion as a barracks. Noble, yes, but hardly something that merits the label "hero".
The Rutgers name is worthless nationwide. Beyond worthless, it's a nationally recognized punchline and a metaphor for failure and incompetence. It's time for the University of New Jersey to take back its name.
And I like how people justify naming the school after him because he is a "war hero". His entire war effort consisted of allowing American troops to use his mansion as a barracks. Noble, yes, but hardly something that merits the label "hero".
The Rutgers name is worthless nationwide. Beyond worthless, it's a nationally recognized punchline and a metaphor for failure and incompetence. It's time for the University of New Jersey to take back its name.
It was a good deal but not the best by a long shot, IMHO. That honor would go to the British in 1664 when they got the Dutch to exchange their New Netherlands colony (a.k.a., New York and New Jersey) for what today is Suriname, the former Dutch Guiana on the north coast of South America. That worked out well for them and for those new folks called "Americans" afterward. Though part of me thinks it might be nice to have the Dutch back if we have to start building dikes to keep the sea out. They're quite good at that.
Source -- Thanks for the additional info. I'm not arguing that Henry Rutgers "stiffed" the college. All the evidence supports the fact that Henry Rutgers was instrumental in allowing the college to reopen, donating his own funds and raising significant funds from others. The idea that he bought naming rights for the college by donating a bell and interest on a bond, and then turned around and stiffed the college, is just another Jersey "self-hatred" myth, which is unfortunately repeated in part by the University.
No, it doesn't, and to be clear, "stiffing" is my word choice, but this is from the Rutgers 250 timeline:
February 17, 1830
Henry Rutgers Dies
Colonel Rutgers dies, leaving a third of his estate to charity. Not one penny is earmarked for Rutgers College.
I believe this is a case of someone having written a history with the story that he stiffed the college in his will, and it's been repeated so many times that it has become accepted as fact. "When you have the choice of printing the legend or the truth, print the legend."
No one can know what the trustees of Queens College were thinking when they chose to rename the school. To say that they were doing so in hopes of getting into HR's will is assuming an awful lot.
What he did give the school was quite valuable. As others have stated above his donation re-opened the doors. And as I've shown above $5000 was of very high value in terms of GDP.
No one can know what the trustees of Queens College were thinking when they chose to rename the school. To say that they were doing so in hopes of getting into HR's will is assuming an awful lot.
What he did give the school was quite valuable. As others have stated above his donation re-opened the doors. And as I've shown above $5000 was of very high value in terms of GDP.
LOL. Yyes - the name New Jersey is so well respected. Rutgers can at least be rehabilitated. New Jersey will always be a national punchline. Even the people who live there dont like living there.
I think got is a little of an underplay - the British had taken over New Amsterdam and the Dutch had taken Suriname - so they decided to call ti a day rather than continue fighting.
My father always said that the Duke family offered to make a substantial contribution to the school if they agreed to change their name... I guess the Rutgers board of trustees said no so they ended up in North Carolina…
What also goes unheralded is a $2,000 donation for the cupola that Henry Rutgers bell sits in. It was donated by General Stephen Van Rensselaer, III. Van Rensselaer cast the Congressional vote that gave the 1824 tie for the Presidency to John Quincy Adams over Andrew Jackson. He also started Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute the same year.
The fact is that by the time RU was even getting going, the Dutch church in AMerica was dying and it was divided between NJ and the Hudson Valley. Alot of Dutch familes had already or would become Anglicans or Prebyterians.
That name SUCKS. Kind of like The College of New Jersey. It sucks too. For people who don't know what Rutgers is, they really need to start reading some books. Because yes, your f*cking stupid and should have been thrown off a cliff at birth. This should have been the answer to the state of Tennessee when this question was posed.
Just for kicks:
- railroad barron Cornelius Vanderbilt donated $1 million in the 1870s to endow Central Univ which became Vandy
- tobacco Duke family donated over $40 million between 1892 and 1924 to endow Trinity College
- Standard Oil magnate, JD Rockefeller founded the University of Chicago in 1890 with an $80 million gift; he also founded what became Rockefeller University in 1901 with gifts totaling over $500 million
- industrialist Leland Stanford donated $40 million in 1891 to found a university in his son's name
These gifts all came several lifetimes after the gift the colonel gave to Queen's College, but it's no wonder the University that bears his name remains destitute in 2015.
- railroad barron Cornelius Vanderbilt donated $1 million in the 1870s to endow Central Univ which became Vandy
- tobacco Duke family donated over $40 million between 1892 and 1924 to endow Trinity College
- Standard Oil magnate, JD Rockefeller founded the University of Chicago in 1890 with an $80 million gift; he also founded what became Rockefeller University in 1901 with gifts totaling over $500 million
- industrialist Leland Stanford donated $40 million in 1891 to found a university in his son's name
These gifts all came several lifetimes after the gift the colonel gave to Queen's College, but it's no wonder the University that bears his name remains destitute in 2015.
The Colonel's gift was larger than the Commodore's using 4 of the six methods below.
$104,000.00 using the Consumer Price Index
$119,000.00 using the GDP deflator
$1,380,000.00 using the unskilled wage
$3,340,000.00 using the Production Worker Compensation
$3,680,000.00 using the nominal GDP per capita
$122,000,000.00 using the relative share of GDP
That myth is about Princeton, not Rutgers. It is also false.
https://www.princeton.edu/pr/pwb/99/0510/myths.htm
http://library.duke.edu/rubenstein/uarchives/history/articles/princeton
I have always found it interesting that, while Rutgers (Queens College) was closed, Cornelius Vanderbilt began building his fortune here in New Brunswick with a hotel and a steamship line. And he left before the college reopened. Assuming Vanderbilt as a Dutch name, I cannot help but think we missed out on having quite a wealthy benefactor. I wonder if someone somewhere screwed the pooch with the Vanderbilt.
It happens. Someone, somewhere probably knows. I wonder if it's been recorded anywhere? Maybe old presidents' correspondence from the era?
Incidentally, I just got out of a meeting about some old archived letter from a leafy old prep school - fascinating stuff - so I'm all fired up about this subject now.
Good thread...
Yeah, you can see how tough the state universities in West Virginia, Alabama, and Oklahoma have attracting out of state students & athletes, states which have stereotypes that are just as brutal as the NJ stereotype.
And let's not forget how Trenton State College's academic rating & selectivity plummeted, once they embraced state pride.
There is no way to rehabilitate the Rutgers brand. It has a negative value. It is a metaphor for loser.
Stupid, stupid, did I say stupid idea.
I'd much rather see NJ change it's name to Rutgers, the State.
I'd much rather see NJ change it's name to Rutgers, the State.
Similar threads
