<p>No Sucker Left Behind, Marc Sheer, looked at this in the bookstore the other day. Some of the things you are discussing on this thread are in this book.</p>
<p>Well you are incorrect. Specialized nurses taking call having been making over 100k for years. Anesthesia nurses are making 150-200k. Do you realize that the average fireman in San Diego makes over 100k?</p>
<p>here is some facts to chew on…10+ years of experience in NYC at a Major medical center,average salary of a BSN grad is 74K,with a few(5%) earning just over 100k…I will agree that Nurse anesthesists earn signifincatly more</p>
<p>“The cost of tuition is currently rising far far above inflation because the cost is not directly related to the value of the degree.”</p>
<p>No, it’s because teaching is almost purely labor intensive, and labor costs are increasing way above inflation (due to costs like health care). Inflation was already low (before the financial collapse) because our cost of *goods<a href=“mostly%20produced%20overseas”>/i</a> has been falling. Colleges cannot outsource their product like Walmart can.</p>
<p>There isn’t any cause/effect relationship (at least in the short term) of the value of the degree and the cost of getting it.</p>
<p>I’m a healthcare executive. My point as you just corroborated is that many nurses make over 100k. So two nurses making over 200k would get no financial aid. But if the wife at college time decided to stay home they would get a lot of aid and in essence be paid to stay home. This is what happens when bureaucrats start trying to create social justice.</p>
<p>No vossron that not’s the reason. At ivy league schools very little is directly spent on educating undergrads. The fact is they spend huge amounts of money on things completely unrelated to education. Do you realize that many schools have more administrators that teachers. It’s really just like the public union costs.</p>
<p>Well the situation you use as an example has flaws…If the spouse stays home to get FA,they lose 100k of income(and a significant change of lifestyle without the 100k), and would likley NOT get 100% FA,so getting paid to stay home is not 100% accurate…</p>
<p>The tuition is raising for one reason, which everybody has learned in Econ 101 - Supply and Demand. The same reason that drives Health care cost up as our waist lines increase which results in epidemic of very preventable diseases. Tuition will rise much faster with economy in shambles. There are no jobs, people stay longer in schools, going to Grad. school as alternative. Younger inexperienced are last in line for employment, older people are staying at job longer because of uncertainty about economy and more so Health Care. I have no plans to retire, I heard it from many who are older than me.</p>
<p>I am almost afraid to say this but here goes…</p>
<p>Earlier in the thread today some of the full pay folks were complaining they were being asked to foot the FA bill for others making their choice school out of reach. Many disagreed with this perspective…however, the $120K family is paying significantly more taxes (some of which funds FA) than the $60K family that qualifies for that aid. So, it does hurt a bit when the FA kids can attend their dream schools and the “rich” kids cannot. Even if we paid the same tax rate (which we don’t), the $120K family is contributing twice as much to the federal aid coffers. </p>
<p>I agree about families being penalized for two working spouses. Motherofthree noted earlier that high income earners made mistakes in their past if they cannot pay the full price that their EFC indicates they should be able to. I have always been in a 2 income household, and I believe that 1 income households have made choices that allow them to qualify for FA when I do not. I am offended that some think I have not worked as dilligently as they have. We were working, and not in fact jetting off to our summer home in Paris.</p>
<p>qdogpa. If you earn 100k you might keep 50k if you were lucky. With two children in college they would come out even or slightly ahead without bothering to work. It’s happening all over the country.</p>
<p>How does one quantify the value of a degree? I would argue against a simplistic rubric that assigned a value based on average earners. I think a college degree had benefits way beyond the flatly vocational.</p>
<p>And as for the nurse who went to work, the salary has bought other things all along beyond college tuition and will continue to do so, and even yield more social security when both partners are retired.</p>
<p>However, if a mom wants to stay home I think it’s a good thing that FA at some institutions makes it possible to make that choice.</p>
<p>If you were in the 25% Income Tax Bracket & decided to earn MORE on an annual basis, look where that dollar would go: </p>
<p>FICA: .0765
FEDERAL INCOME TAXES: .25 (Married, Filing Jointly)
PRIVATE COLLEGE: .46 (Private College-IM Formula, One in College)
STATE INCOME TAX: UNKNOWN </p>
<p>How much is left from that dollar? $1.00 minus .79 = .21 cents left from the dollar.
So is there any incentive for a stay-at-home-Mom to go out & earn MORE?</p>
<p>I have resigned myself to the fact that the system does not work for our family. I appreciate mythmom’s empathetic post.</p>
<p>We cannot afford our EFC for many reasons, none of which involve fancy vacations, expensive cars or lavish home remodels. We live in a high cost of living area.</p>
<p>S is attending a state school, and that is working out well for him. We have two more and unless they qualify for significant merit aid, they may have to do the same.</p>
<p>We cannot take out large parent loans to meet our EFC - we would face financial ruin if we were to lose our jobs. An S will not be one of those with the $100K plus albatross around his neck when he graduates.</p>
<p>It was frustrating to me because I very much ran into what some of the earlier posters mentioned - deceptive college marketing practices and guidance counselors that were clueless about helping us find realistic choices that did not involve heavy debt.</p>
<p>Slumom, you are correct. Many opt to stay home but I find it irritating that they then complain that those that have opted to work long hours for their .21 cents should be penalized.</p>
<p>“So is there any incentive for a stay-at-home-Mom to go out & earn MORE?”</p>
<p>So if she earned $100,000 (the number repeated here), she would have $21,000 more in spending money? Some might consider that significant, especially those who like their jobs!</p>
<p>How is that fair? I didn’t think anyone over the age of six really expects things to be fair, and besides, fair is in the eye of the beholder. The person in the two income family will have more money before and after college, even if college is a wash. Since various options are available to most, it is fair.</p>
<p>I could have stayed home to get more FA, but it would have been a disaster when my H’s business folded. </p>
<p>I am not heavily invested in receiving FA. Paying full fare myself and being able do so would have been even more satisfying.</p>
<p>My spouse and I both work and earn a combined income just under $100,000. We are paying $30,000 out of pocket for our D to attend school. I really find it hard to believe that folks can’t pay $50,000 with twice the salary. It is really not hard to live on less than 100K - small house, used cars, discount clothes, eat at home. Our child’s education is our priority (and ours - we have financed 2 Masters degrees and 1 PhD on this income or less) and we currently pay a tuition bill that is twice our mortgage. But, like I said - that is our priority. We’ve got another kid headed to college in a couple years and, hopefully, we will get some FA for him, but plan on paying about the same out of pocket for him as well. I don’t begrudge those who receive more FA than us - I know that we have a lot more (materially) than 90% of the population.</p>