<p>Zooser: The problem with my giving an example is that it is just one example, and of course does not fit all situations. But just as it is challenging for you guys who make over $150,000 to pay for college, it is likewise a challenge for us who make much less, even if our kids got some aid. We still have to pay a significant amount for college and for the loans, etc. and it is relative to our income level and still a big big chunk of it as it is for you guys making a lot more.</p>
<p>ParentofIvyHope…a family making $200,000 should be able to afford college, that’s why. That is an upper class income. Only having to put $20,000/year toward college is very little as someone at that income level should be able to pay more than that out of current income and also have some savings and be able to pay loans out of future income. If I have to pay that much toward college making way way way less than that, I surely think someone making $200K should be able to as well.</p>
<p>Some of the parents in that income bracket paid to send their kids to private high schools (we never could have afforded that). The savings from that alone should be a nice chunk toward college tuition. Add in the money you spent for summer programs and lessons and what not…there is an automatic savings there when your kid is out of high school. Many of you in that income bracket take vacations…some even have a second home. Truly, if people like us have to find a way to pay for college making far less, surely someone making $200,000 can find a way to do that. Nobody said it would not hurt or be easy. It is NOT easy for us who make much less, even if we get some aid. The amount we pay is commensurate with our income and it is all relative. We may pay less for tuition than you do but we make a lot less!</p>
<p>
Depends on the circumstances. But as I said, more income is generally better in the college sense and offers more options. </p>
<p>For me, I think it’s important to note the distinction between middle “class” and middle “income.” Kids (like mine) who have income but no history of higher education and the things that go along with it are sometimes lost in the shuffle because there is an assumption that if you’re first-gen and poor you could use a hand, but the kids who are first-gen and not poor can be left to fend for themselves. I don’t mean monetarily, either, but there are so many things that my husband and I didn’t know that could have helped D1 when things got tough for her. Money doesn’t necessarily buy “class,” you know?</p>
<p>ParentofIvyHope - If you pay $20K out of $200K, you still have $180K left to spend. If you make $50K and pay 10% you have $45K left to spend. How does that make it any fairer? Not to mention no one is willing to divulge their income except when asking for FA.</p>
<p>soozievt: The issue is what we want to pay for or not. We paid $35K for DD high school and paying $52K for her college but the point here is that FA policies of the colleges should not rule out abruptly people for making more. </p>
<p>Still what is wrong in extending 10% rule for all families?</p>
<p>zooser, yes, I do understand that. And I think it is great that your kids are first generation college students and that you are able to fund their educations, and that is not so typical!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agee with soozievt on this one - even if a family making $200,000 per year doesn’t feel like they can afford college, they SHOULD be able to - and then they are expected to.</p>
<p>On the other hand, the 10-15% rule doesn’t work because there is a cost of living expectation. When colleges set the “full ride” rule at $60,000 per year, they are saying that $60,000 per year is the base of what it should cost to run a family. That is, they are setting a limit not unlike the poverty line. They are saying that $60,000 per year is functional (63rd percentile, actually). So, $60,000 is the standard of living baseline. Families making not much more than $60,000 are only expected to pay, out of pocket, above that $60,000. That’s the basic assumption of the 10-15% rule. When a family is making more than twice (let alone more than three times) that generous baseline of $60,000, the financial aid initiative diminishes because that family is living far above the rest of Americans and should be able to pay without degrading the standard of living below the average.</p>
<p>Although I myself am torn on the issue of cost of living, I understand why it isn’t considered. Living in an area with a high cost of living is a choice. As others have posted, the sacrifice involved with living some place cheaper make it feel like living in that expensive place is “not a choice,” but in reality, that is the case. Since it is a choice, colleges consider it. I believe it was oldfort who posted something to this effect:</p>
<p>A family making $150,000 in NYC could move to Tulsa and make $75,000 per year. Since the cost of living is significantly cheaper, income would be effectively the same - AND that family would qualify for financial aid. It’s win-win, except a) it’s not always possible and b) requires sacrifice that many are unwilling to make. I’m not saying anyone should up and move; I am saying it’s a viable possibility and that’s why cost of living is barely taken into account.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A family with a higher income has much, much more disposable income. A family making $70,000 a year loses 10% and it drops them many percentiles. A family making $200,000 per year is charged 10% and a dent isn’t even made in their spending power. It’s like how the less money you have, the more monetary fines hurt. My family got a fine of $350 for expired tags (long story short, we didn’t know they were expired) and we were in financial straits for six months until we got straightened out. Someone making $200,000 a year is charged the same amount, but barely notices the $350 is missing.</p>
<p>Soozie, we are so grateful, I can’t even tell you. My husband and I were absolutely giddy about it last night. But we’re still scared that something might go wrong with this D. She plans to go to graduate school in her field and I sneak a peek at the requirements for that major and it’s so beyond me that I just want to cry. God willing she’ll have a good advisor.</p>
<p>Iglooo: For an AGI of $200K here is approximate break down</p>
<p>Federal Tax: $45K
State Tax: $20K
Payroll Tax: $20K</p>
<p>Leaving you with $105K</p>
<p>Pay $53K for college and you are left with $52K</p>
<p>And you call these families rich with $52K a year income.</p>
<p>Also I stated that for families making less than $60K EFC should be 0% and colleges can choose to have 5% for families making between $60K and $120K and 10% above $120K.</p>
<p>ParentofIvyHope…the idea of FA is to help people afford college who could not otherwise do so. You ask what is wrong with a family making over $180,000 having to only pay 10% of income toward college…it is because they can afford to pay for college without aid, that’s why. Aid is meant to help those who could not afford college without the help! </p>
<p>You just said you paid $35,000/year for high school! So, you obviously could afford that much per year for tuition. So, you now pay that for college and if you could not afford more than $35,000/year (sounds like you can but just giving a “what if”), then take out $15,000 in parent loans per year which you pay back after graduation which you should be able to do on that income as it is even less than the payments per year you are paying toward tuition while the kid is in school.</p>
<p>
Not necessarily. Us for example. My H is functionally illiterate but was lucky enough to land a job with a residency requirement. We can’t go anywhere. Lots of jobs have that requirement. Who should clean the streets of NY or put out the fires or protect the citizens? Those are jobs that the well-educated don’t particularly want, but he holders can’t move. Many municipalities have residency requirements. Do you think that only the very well-educated or wealthy should live in those places? And, if so, who will do the messier/more dangerous jobs?</p>
<p>Also, applicannot, if you aren’t educated you’ll be on the bottom of the scale wherever you go. You have to again look at income. Most cops/firemen/san-men in NYC work two jobs to make ends meet, which makes the income appear very high, but it’s really not. The point being: It’s the educated who get to make the choices so get yours!</p>
<p>ParentOfIvyHope, your post in 189 doesn’t make sense. Nobody expects anyone (unless very wealthy) to be able to pay for college entirely out of current income.</p>
<p>ParentofIvyHope, you are assuming that all of the college costs have to come out of current income - that just isn’t the case. Not to mention the fact that people making less money take a similar hit to their income with taxes. It may not be as high a percentage, but it often still comes out to a similar amount. It may seem “Awesome” that some family only has to pay $20,000 instead of $52,000, but you have to remember it’s a portion of their income.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The point is that he might be able to work anywhere. Like I said, the choices are difficult and I’m not expecting anyone to make them, but that’s not to say those choices don’t exist. Sure, there will occasionally be the case of absolute impossibility, but it could happen, and therefore cost of living isn’t taken into account.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Absolutely not. I’m just saying that high cost of living is a choice, and so if that family is making $200,000 a year, they aren’t going to be able to claim high cost of living as an issue. You can feel free to live wherever you want; lord knows I’d strongly prefer to live in NYC.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree. And more often than not, it’s the educated who are making $150,000+.</p>
<p>soozievt && applicannot:</p>
<p>The college should be paid from the current pay. It is not something the parent should have to take loan for.</p>
<p>We blame our President to be communist with his health policies but it seems the elite colleges does the same and no one has a right to complain.</p>
<p>And the problem is that a family making $180K have to pay $20K while another making just $200K or more have to pay $52K.</p>
<p>We can all have opinions, but more objective agencies (I’ll see if I can dig up a link or citation) places Upper Class at over $300,000.00 in earned income alone.</p>
<p>I would agree with that, because an upper class lifestyle is markedly different from a middle class lifestyle, and $200,000.00 in our community (a NY suburb) doesn’t markedly change the lifestyle from an ordinary middle class lifestyle.</p>
<p>Should those people be able to afford college? With a little planning, yes. Should they have FA? Probably not, although I have no problem with an income distribution down and the billionaires helping out more with their donations and tuition.</p>
<p>I do think there are many options but I also think there are many families that struggle much more than they should have to to afford an instate tuition.</p>
<p>And there is a double edged sword with instates, too.</p>
<p>The states with excellent and competitive flagships seem to charge more than the states with run-of-the-mill schools, so the quality of the instate often tracks in an inverse proportion the ability of the state residents to afford it.</p>
<p>
Do you think it’s a choice for lower-income people to not get a second job as my husband does or work 60 hours a week as I do?</p>
<p>Like I said, most city workers like our family work two jobs so they can pay for the costs of college. That doesn’t make them “rich” to be demonized. It just makes them really hard working. Which, in my opinion, is something to be valued and respected.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, then you will never be satisfied. That is your choice. The colleges think that college should be paid for out of past, present, and future income. This is why many of them package loans and consider savings in the EFC. (I agree, though, that the majority of the loans should be the responsibility of the student.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not for everyone, but for some people. I could try to get a second job this summer (I actually had one, but chose to quit). My mom has a lot of disabilities and probably couldn’t get a second job, but that’s not to say it isn’t possible. I’m not saying that we should all take these options, but we can’t complain that those choices don’t exist. That’s why I’m using exaggerated examples. I absolutely do not expect my mom to get a second job. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t an choice.</p>
<p>What I’m saying to you applicannot is that family finances are pretty complicated and you shouldn’t really pass judgment or make sweeping statements about others than your own. I wouldn’t want you to get a second job. I want you to focus on your education. I wouldn’t want your mother to get a second job, either, because it messes up finances in strange ways. Just have a little respect for others’ choices, and please remember that “income” doesn’t necessarily equal “wealth” and “income” doesn’t necessarily buy the advantages that many think it does.</p>