It's cause for celebration of some sort that Baruch comes in 2nd in the country in Money Magazine's rankings of the best colleges for your money. Baruch only comes in behind Princeton, and ahead of Michigan, Berkeley, Stanford, et al. That is pretty cool, and it's worth taking a second to bask in the coolness. I know I was always worried about how I'd make a living, and I went to Rutgers in part because I couldn't justify how I'd pay off private school loans (in retrospect I think this was a very smart decision, though one I made less out of wisdom than out of laziness and luck).
Now for the flipside: there is something nauseating about ranking schools by their ROI. That Atlantic piece on the Ivies said a lot of things I found disagreeable (and a lot I found agreeable) but the one that stuck with me most was how sad it was that colleges are being ranked often solely by their ROI. College is a time to broaden ones horizons, to figure out what else is out there and set the path for what sort of person one will become. Merely ranking based on how much you pay and then how much you get paid is thus similar to ranking how good music is by how much is cost to make in comparison to total record sales. Perhaps the worst thing to come to colleges is the business culture mindset (well, maybe after states no longer heavily subsidizing state schools) and I caution about getting too excited about one's ranking in Money Magazine--what the hell does money magazine know about education?!
Nonetheless, let's not pretend that money doesn't matter at all. What's perhaps coolest is that we charge the least of anyone on that list.