fighting the intellectual hegemony of the privileged in the admissions process

Applying to College
181

<p>
[quote]
IMO 100K is way above middle class everywhere. Again the national average is near 50K. I also think the folks in parts of Queens, Staten Island, the South Bronx, Harlem or Washington Heights would more than welcome 100K.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>EtTuBrutus, I'm continually disappointed by your posts considering you're a college professor. Non-sequitors abound. What does the fact that people in some specified areas may be happy for a certain salary mean for what is middle-class? The hobo in Nashville would gladly take a 50k salary. What does that mean exactly? Nothing.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Now if you CHOOSE to live in certain parts Manhattan than that is a CHOICE.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>True, but you do have to live relatively close to the city unless you want a long commute or take the train. Both of which are expensive options, and if your job necessitates metropolis, you don't have much of a choice. There isn't a market for certain professions elsewhere.</p>

<p>
[quote]
If you make 100K and CHOOSE to have 7 kids that is a CHOICE. If you make 100K and CHOOSE for your children to attend a school that you cannot afford that is a CHOICE.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yes it is, and my post was primarily a response to Galoisien's assertion that a family making 100k could easily afford 50k a year for a private college. You followed by citing average national income numbers. First of all, define "middle class." It has almost nothing to do with mean or median income. If median income dropped to 10k, is that middle class? No. What that would indicate is that the bulk of the middle class dropped into below subsistence poverty.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I am not saying that schools with the big endowments should not attempt to provide students with aid. I think they should. But if your family has an income of 100K I have a hard time believing that you are somehow getting shafted. There are many great in state schools around the country that are MORE than affordable on a 100K salary. No one is entitled to anything.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You can. Think about it this way - if 100k in an area where CoL is twice that of elsewhere, your salary is equivalent to 50k in a cheaper area. But where in the FAFSA does it take this into account? It doesn't. So your nominal income is inflated, so you receive very little aid. On the other hand, each dollar stretches half as far for your household. Are you getting the less than rosy picture?</p>

<p>Also, nowhere did I state anyone was entitled to anything. Please point out where I did.</p>

182

<p>haha, narcissa i think it is safe to say your friend is completely wrong. If you make 500K a year, you can be livin it to the max in manhattan.</p>

183

<p>galoisien you seem very angry maybe you should seek some professional help BAY you are IMO 100% right</p>

184

<p>"if the median family income is ~50k, how is that skewed to the left - it must be the new statistics - median means 50% above and 50% below that value - it isn't skewed."</p>

<p>Easily, Doc T. It's skewed to the left. It's not normally distributed around the mean of $50K, because there are people making millions of dollars a year. Bill Gates et al are on the right many standard deviations above the mean, but there are no corresponding people on the left who are the same number of standard deviations below the mean.</p>

185

<p>I am angry -- but I'm not jealous. There's a difference.</p>

186

<p>^^Why are you angry at rich people? It is not rich people's fault that poor people do not have access or awareness of educational opportunities.</p>

187

<p>For the <em>last</em> time, I'm not angry <em>at</em> rich people. I resent the <em>culture</em> of privilege that permeates many intellectual fields, and the attitude of <em>many</em> privileged students in some cases.</p>

188

<p>Spending time focusing on that resentment adds to your life and to the achievement of your goals in what measurable way?</p>

189

<p>Huh, I'm not preoccupied with it. </p>

<p>I merely think it an unfortunate state of affairs that needs to be corrected it.</p>

190

<p>
[quote]
I notice that you have a blog on which you've posted the details of your financial aid package at U.Va. You have $2,854 of unmet need, with $6,000 in low-interest loans in order to attend one of the top 25 universities in the country. It would be hard to afford a place to live and food to eat on $8,854 a year, so you're basically paying your normal living expenses and getting the U.Va. education for free. This is the case because you're receiving an "AccessUVA" grant of $26,651 - funds that former U.Va. graduates - some privileged, some self-made - contributed back to your university to assist an unnamed future student - you. So if you're inclined to resent that to which they contribute, you might look in the mirror; they've contributed to you in the hope that they could help you expand your prospects and your family's prospects for the future.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Game over.</p>

191

<p>Again, I never imposed a blanket statement upon all the privileged, merely against the culture propagated by some of them. Game over what? The fact that many intellectual endeavours both in college and in HS are overly-dominated by the wealthy is a valid observation.</p>

192

<p>How are intellectual endeavours in college 'dominated' by the wealthy?</p>

<p>FA plans are getting better than ever, and almost all if not all kids who go to a school like HYP are usually dedicated enough to make something of themselves.</p>

193

<p>
[quote]
and almost all if not all kids who go to a school like HYP

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Because yes, those people are representative of the general population.</p>

194

<p>Jealousy is unbecoming. You're going to be attending a fabulous university, don't waste your time resenting other people. It'll get you nowhere fast.</p>

195

<p>Well, when I think wealthy, I think HYP first off.</p>

196

<p>I don't really understand why you think intellectual endeavours are hogged by the wealthy.</p>

<p>First you must realize that college study is in no way hogged by the rich. Sure you will always have a very small handful or rich kids at top schools attending because they are rich. But who gives a *<strong><em>? They arent dominating any intellectual endeavors. In fact, nobody does. You may think your intellectuality will get you far in college, that when you do research it is going to be meaningful and valid. Big news flash, undergrad research is complete *</em></strong> in comparison to grad research. Nobody cares at all about your undergrad accomplishments because 99% of the time, nobody will find anything worth any academic's time as an undergrad. You want original <em>groundbreaking</em> research, it is almost always at grad level, not undergrad. And rich kids in no way hog graduate level intellectual fields.</p>

<p>"The fact that many intellectual endeavours both in college and in HS are overly-dominated by the wealthy is a valid observation." and yet another blanketed statement about the wealthy.</p>

<p>There is a difference between a wealthy person going to Harvard and getting an education that he doesnt deserve (because he got in by money, not merit) and a wealthy kid going to Harvard because he actually LOVES studying and researching with some of the best academics and students in the world. Just because someone is wealthy doesnt mean they arent intellectually driven and focused.</p>

197

<p>I wasn't referring to research specifically. I also don't get where you keep on jumping to conclusions on what I think and feel.</p>

198

<p>studying/learning can't be dominated by the rich because everyone in/at a school can learn. Nobody can "overdominate" learning. It's not like professors only have time to assist and teach rich kids.</p>

<p>Research, however. IS dominated by intellectuals. It's definitely fair to say that PhD students are all into their work. Why else would someone dedicate 5-9 years of time after undergrad to research and come close to mastering some academic field.</p>

199

<p>I wasn't referring to purely academic endeavours -- but rather endeavours such as debate and so forth, where it seems that almost every winning team (at least in my state) comes from a school rich enough to hire lawyers to proofread their team's arguments (!) </p>

<p>That's one example -- and I refer to mostly my peers, so pardon my naivete.</p>

200

<p>are you speculating or have you actually heard of debate teams working with lawyers?</p>