<p>@data 10:
</p>
<p>Okay, now you’re just repeating the reply I just made to you - while simultaneously snipping that part from the quote. Did Stanford have an honor code when you were there?</p>
<p>Agree that this is getting silly.</p>
<p>For the record, the full quote was:
</p>
<p>I stand by that.</p>
<p>I’d expect it to be obvious that the listed Harvard net price calculator output for a $150k family income that was labeled called “net parental cost” was net cost, not cost for only tuition. I have not used the terms interchangeably, as the distinction is quite important when dealing with specific numbers. In your earlier post, you took this inflation adjusted to 1992 NPC output including room and board for upper middle class of $9k, a value that was clearly labeled without any mention of tuition, and compared this net cost to the tuition in 1989 using only tuition, without room and board (you called it " tuition and fees for Harvard in 1990", it was actually 1989 tuition without fees, it was supposed to be 1992 net cost) . Then when I corrected you, you started talking about using “net cost” and tuition interchangeably and posting historic tuition, without room and board (and without fees, even though you labeled it with fees) and claiming the Harvard factbook was using tuition and net cost interchangeably even though it clearly lists specific values of tuition, room and board, fees, showing the components of “net cost” . Your earlier posts are the only ones I’ve taken notice of in the thread or in any external links/material mentioned in the thread that used the terms interchangeably.</p>
<p>Oh, really? Then, you obviously have a short memory. On February 3 (Oh, CC. where are those post numbers when you need them!), in answer to someone’s question (I think it was, Mom2and), someone who had as much trouble as I in keeping track of your many data dumps, you said:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And as I pointed out somewhere up-thread, tuition increased much faster than inflation. I did not include room and board. Using the 1987 tuition of $11,390, the inflation calculator states that would be $23,397 in 2013. Inflation certainly was not at the same level as tuition increases since 1987. Clearly, tuition of $23K would be much easier to afford than $43K with an accompanying decrease in financial aid. </p>
<p>Also, while HPYS have increased the level at which financial aid is offered, most of the private colleges that CC Parents will be paying for have not. Thus, the average tuition (and the COA) has gone up considerably faster than inflation at most top private colleges. From what I have heard, the financial aid offered at HPYS is not matched at other private schools ranked in the top 30 or so. </p>
<p>
The post is not inaccurate. Sometimes we’ve talked about tuition in this thread, and sometimes we’ve talked about net cost. While tuition and net cost often show the same relationship, with increasing rates above inflation combined with increasing FA beyond inflation, when listing specific numbers, the tuition obviously differs from net cost. In this sense, yes, we could swap the words if describing a general trend, such as if describing the trend of sticker price increasing faster than inflation we could say either “tuition” or “net cost”. Both terms are accurate. However, if we list specific numbers, such as a specific price, we cannot swap the words tuition and net cost. The original post where I listed the referenced numerical $15k cost for Harvard, it calls it
“net cost to parents by income level.” I suppose a more precise statement would be that your posts are the only ones I recall that have used the terms tuition and net cost incorrectly.</p>
<p>@data10:
</p>
<p>And, at that point, you should have defined what that meant, especially since you did not give an url address where someone could look it up for themselves. I’m not disputing your intellect. I will even take back my question about the Stanford Honor Code. You are the smartest person in the room. It’s just a matter of common internet courtesy: When you switch terms in the middle of a thread or add an element to that term that was not present or obvious before, you should define what the term means.</p>
<p>End of rant.</p>