<p>I plan to study finance related field. Financial Engineering for Columbia and Mathematics with few OR and Finance courses for Chicago.</p>
<p>What would you do if you're in my position. Columbia offers me 12000 and Chicago 30000. Money is definitely a burden, but not a problem.</p>
<p>If you're interested in finance, you'll probably end up doing econ rather than math. Math gets much, much more theoretical at a college level (this is not only true for Chicago, but other universities as well) and you'll find many people on the forums singing Chicago Econ's praises.</p>
<p>Chicago does seem like a better option financially, but make sure you want it. Both schools have great-books focused Core Curricula, and similar offerings. Chicago's known to be academically intense. I'm sure Columbia is too-- I don't know how the two schools compare in that regard.</p>
<p>If Columbia's Financial Engineering program offers you exactly what you want, I would go with that. If you want top-notch econ, an intellectual environment, and less cost-prohibitive city (NYC is EXTREMELY expensive and doing stuff in Manhattan isn't as easy as you might think), go with Chicago.</p>
<p>doing things in Manhattan is extremely easy, even if you have no money... trust me, I live here. If it's a city you want Manhattan is more accessible from Columbia than Chicago is from UChicago. But I agree with everything else amykins said</p>
<p>I would pick Chicago. Columbia's a fine school, but 30,000 is 30,000, and since you're interested in finance anyway it's not like you're doing yourself a disservice by going to the school with what is arguably the best undergraduate education in econ/mathematics of finance. </p>
<p>Unless there's something at Columbia that is worth $18,000 to you, Chicago would seem like the best choice. But of course, depending on your personal circumstances this could vary.</p>