<p>How is the state of California offering him a free ride? He’s going to Harvard. And it isn’t his fault he was born into poverty or that he received assistance from the state as a child.</p>
<h1>60 and #61 >>> agreed!!</h1>
<p>I’d point out that by going to Harvard, he is also waiving his Cal Grant money - so even less of a burden on the state.</p>
<p>The mom only drove him to school for 9th grade --he transferred back to a local high school in 10th grade.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“From the XYZ Geographic Area, here’s Billy who attends High School A (list of qualifications). And here’s Susie, who attends High School B (list of qualifications). Oh, High School B tells the kids they can only apply to 10 schools.” How is that last sentence of any relevance whatsoever to the adcoms? They have to take each kid’s application at face value - that the kid is interested. Otherwise they wouldn’t apply.</p>
<p>I understand why the private school would want to convince parents that it is advantageous in some way to limit the number of apps and let the colleges know about it – but I can’t see what difference it would possibly make to the colleges. Any given student can only attend one college, so as far as the accepting college is concerned – it doesn’t matter if the applicant is accepted to two colleges or twenty-- a kid with other options might turn them down. </p>
<p>Colleges solve that problem with ED or SCEA, as well as their own internal methods to track student interest.</p>
<p>California taxpayers aren’t offering him at this point- but they sure did UP to this point, according to the article.</p>
<p>“Nobody at my offspring’s alma mater, a NYC public magnet, could pull this off. Why? Once he got into Harvard in December, the school college counselors would have demanded that he pull some of the other applications. They felt it hurt kids from the high school if the stars hoarded acceptances. So, once he got into Harvard, he would have been told that he should notify some of the schools that had accepted him that he would not attend.”</p>
<p>I will also point out that Harvard has the same net cost for everyone whose family earns less than $60k per year, so the whole “waiting for financial aid” argument is a bit disingenuous.</p>
<p>As an alumni interviewer, I thank jonri’s kid’s school. It is really annoying to try to give back to my alma mater, but have my time be wasted by students who already have H acceptances, those who are blatantly unqualified (like not top 10% of their public high school class), or those who are applying to ten schools and probably aren’t going to go.</p>
<p>mimimomx3-</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>What on Earth are you talking about? Do you mean that he should reimburse CA for the cost of his free public school K-12 education? Why should he do that? Are you planning to reimburse your state for the cost of your K-12 education?</p>
<p>Or are you referring to the fact that his single mother received government assistance while he was growing up? Never in my life have I heard anyone suggest that children whose families received government assistance should reimburse the government for that aid. This is bonkers. These kids have it tough enough, and you would saddle them with a debt for past support when they reach adulthood. Do you think we should bill former foster children for the care that they received?</p>
<p>^^</p>
<p>That would be a good argument for bringing an end to that utter waste of time (and mostly the applicants’) that are the interviews. </p>
<p>Please read the posts above yours to refresh or gain some understanding about the differences that exist for extremely low SES students, even when the packages seem standard on the surface.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you step out of the College Confidential forum bubble of people who are “middle class but won’t receive financial aid”, you will see that, with Harvard’s maximum financial aid offer, the net price of $4,600 per year is a lot of money for a student from a very low income family. Other schools could have produced net prices from $0 to $8,500 per year, and GMS results did not come until April (he got the GMS, which made all of the schools’ net prices $0, but he would not have known that when receiving the Harvard early admission).</p>
<p>While the difference between $0, $4,600, and $8,500 per year may seem like a trivial cost difference for the “middle class but won’t receive financial aid” people, it is certainly not trivial for someone from a low (or even median) income family.</p>
<p>
Even the -0- is illusory. That Northern California kid is going to need a warm winter coat and snow boots in Boston. The COA calculation doesn’t include the costs for travel home for spring break-- the Harvard dorms will stay open, but there is no food service then. Despite the “full ride”, I’d expect to see a kid like that to take a summer job to raise money to cover incidentals.</p>
<p>That $0 cost also doesn’t include the mandatory health insurance coverage. At least it doesn’t at Yale, which is among the more generous universities when it comes to need based aid. Here’s an example of this challenge: [From</a> Oakland to the Ivies | Indiegogo](<a href=“http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/from-oakland-to-the-ivies]From”>Oakland | Indiegogo)</p>
<p>"his single mother received government assistance while he was growing up? Never in my life have I heard anyone suggest that children whose families received government assistance should reimburse the government for that aid. "</p>
<p>His single mother made a choice to come to the USA and be destitute. The taxpayers of California footed the bill for that choice. I would think it honorable to pay it back- or pay it forward- as a thank you. I’m a conservative, and I believe in paying my own way. Sorry if that idea is “bonkers”.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I doubt that she chose to be destitute, though I do think that your construction of these events explains a lot about how many who call themselves conservative feel about the poor. As a teacher I have known a lot of very poor families, but none that CHOSE to be destitute. After all, who would CHOOSE to be destitute? Most of these families are working very hard. I doubt that this mother chose to be ill. I also doubt that she chose to have her spouse walk out and leave her with two children to raise on her own.</p>
<p>p.s. Do you think foster children have an obligation to reimburse the state for their care?</p>
<p>He will undoubtedly pay it forward in taxes from the earnings he’ll see due to his education, work ethic and ability.</p>
<p>Having said that, the notion that children who are in need of assistance, through no fault of their own, should carry the burden of paying back that assistance is appalling to me, as is the idea that a woman who is abandoned by her husband, and faces a major illness, would be described as “choosing” that path.</p>
<p>I’m not trying to win any arguments, it’s my political and economic belief. Welfare/assistance should be short term and temporary, and for citizens.</p>
<p>I am frankly speechless with the thinking that a child should be held accountable for the circumstances of his family. He is a child. Empathy is required in certain cases, especially where children are involved.</p>
<p>In addition, this child seems to give back, pay it forward, whatever expression you wish to use. He did not spend his high school years being selfish. I am quite sure he will spend his college years and beyond doing the same.</p>
<p>From the article, I did note that he has a sister “away” at college, and that there was no mention of him holding a job (other than selling enough candy to buy two items). I thought it was interesting that his family was able to achieve that situation (away college and teen not needing to work) when they are on government assistance. I’m not saying it is good or bad, just noteworthy because it is not what I would have expected from their situation. It is good that the children were able to achieve goals on par with the wealthiest among them.</p>
<p>“there was no mention of him holding a job (other than selling enough candy to buy two items).”</p>
<p>I noticed that, too. </p>
<p>I applaud this student for working hard in school and getting good grades. I do think that he and his mom “worked the system” for the benefit of being admitted to the best colleges with the best financial aid package. </p>
<p>There are thousands of kids with one and two jobs, with hard working parents, many who are veterans, who don’t receive these kind of offers.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>The story doesn’t mention whether mom is a citizen. She very well could be. It does, however, give us enough information to know that the Lloyd Chen IS a citizen. His mother moved to the US three years before he was born. So…I would think that by your standards, this hard working young man was entitled to state support. Eighteen years may not meet your standard for “short term,” but I assume that you do not expect children to support themselves.</p>