<p>The OP’s family (if her estimate of her parents’ income is accurate) is upper-middle-class. However, elite private colleges on the coasts are not priced for that demographic. There are many good LACS that cost about 45K a year. These schools tend not to be in the Northeast or the West Coast. This student might try to seek bargains at good schools in the Midwest or the South.</p>
<p>If you live in the NYC area, 175-200K is not “rich” at all. Half of that could well go to various taxes.</p>
<p>To me, the absolute floor for being considered a “rich” or “wealthy” person is one who no longer has to work. It would be a person who has enough assets to cover his needs for the rest of his life, assuming a nice long life remaining. But I think the line is quite a bit higher than that. The connotation is that the assets can support a lifestyle that’s more than simply the basics, certainly for the word “wealthy.”</p>
<p>These are nice incomes being discussed here, and they surely support a very comfortable upper-middle class lifestyle But they’re achievable by professional class workers or small business owners who have invested in themselves, put in the effort, and have been lucky enough to avoid the many financial pitfalls, accidents, and health events that can crush anyone. Such folks could be on their way to being rich eventually, but it will take decades. </p>
<p>Now when you have that kind of income based on your assets, instead of from decades of 60 hour weeks - now that’s what I call wealth! But I’m sure that truly wealthy people would sneer at that income …</p>
<p>My observation is that the vast majority of people will never think they are wealthy, no matter how much money they have. There is always someone they know with more, so they never feel like they have enough.</p>
<p>Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, and the like are among the very few who do seem to understand that they are, indeed, rich.</p>
<p>To me, if you can spend $80k/year in cash for four years without worrying or selling anything, you shouldn’t really spend a lot of time fretting with the FAFSA or the CSS profile. Certainly the OP should apply to those more expensive schools but she should also apply to a few slightly cheaper schools that she knows she can afford. That way if the worst thing happens and Bryn, etc. are all completely out of reach, she at least has somewhere to go to in the fall.</p>
<p>
Yes they are. The colleges are priced in a way that assumes that they will be financed via a combination of savings, direct payment, and loans – just like houses and expensive cars are priced. Lower-middle-class and middle-middle-class families accept the reality that they and their kids will have to save and borrow for college. </p>
<p>The borrowing power of an upper-middle-class family puts any college in reach, just so long as the family is willing to finance the endeavor over a longer period than the 4 years that their child will attend. It’s simply a matter of amortizing the cost over a period of years if the problem is that the family is comfortable paying $40K rather than $60K, including asking the student to assume some of the loan burden. </p>
<p>Obviously the very wealthy do not have to borrow at all, and the colleges certainly welcome those students. Sometimes those families end up paying far more than their kids’ tuitions, since they are also potential donors. (They don’t seem to spend any time hanging out at CC, but I’m pretty sure it’s common practice for those parents to be asked to contribute on a regular basis). </p>
<p>But the point is that private colleges charge what the market will bear, and there are plenty of parents who are willing to go into debt to finance the overall cost. The families on the upper end of the income spectrum are fortunate as they probably have options to borrow at lower rates than currently offered via the federal lending system.</p>
<p>
[quote]
elite private colleges on the coasts are not priced for that demographic.
[quote]
</p>
<p>I disagree. Certainly, the family that makes 90k (middle class) who gets financial aid, and therefore pays 10-30k per year at the most generous schools, will struggle more than the family who makes 200k paying 45-50k at the same school. Just because someone gets financial aid, it doesn’t mean college is more affordable for that family. </p>
<p>With financial aid, my D can go to an elite private for the same cost as a public. But certainly, I would prefer to make 200K and pay full freight. In order to pay full freight, the wealthier families can still spend a lot more money than I can. </p>
<p>To the OP. I know it seems that you are not as well off as your friends. But, you and your family are fortunate even if you have to pay full price for your school of choice. You are fortunate primarily because you have the choice and are not in a “rut.”</p>
<p>I don’t care what anyone here says, $170,000-$220,000 is not even in the realm of middle class. And don’t say it’s all relative because she says she can afford $40k a year. Take out a loan like the rest of us. “My family isn’t rich”, “We have the smallest house”, “Middle class rut” – I really hope you don’t get any financial aid.</p>
<p>*To me, if you can spend $80k/year in cash for four years without worrying or selling anything, you shouldn’t really spend a lot of time fretting with the FAFSA or the CSS profile. *</p>
<p>Well sure, that’s just a waste of time. Unless the student is applying to one of those extremely rare schools where that require disclosure of financial information for true merit, there’s no reason to muck around with FAFSA.</p>
<p>*Just because someone gets financial aid, it doesn’t mean college is more affordable for that family. *</p>
<p>Well no, but it does mean that they might actually receive fair value for the price. That won’t happen for the full pay.</p>
<p>
That’s assuming that you don’t believe that Harvard (or any other elite) is worth $40K in tuition, assuming ability to pay. </p>
<p>That’s a different question than affordability, and one which I would question. I saw what my daughter got attending an elite private college, and I don’t doubt that the parents of the full pay students were getting their money’s worth in terms of the quality of education and services to the students. </p>
<p>If you don’t believe that any college is worth that much – that is, if you have decided that the maximum “value” of a college is, say, $20,000 per year – then the solution is to shop for merit money. Any student who is competitive for admission at the top schools is also a contender for merit money at lower-ranked private colleges, which can and do offer deep discounts on their tuition to students who bring strong academic credentials to the table. </p>
<p>And if you don’t agree – if you think that there is something inherently better in Yale than at a college that has earned a featured listing in “Colleges That Change Lives”… then you have to re-evaluate the financial equation. If one college is better than another, then it is reasonable for those who can afford it to pay more for it.</p>
<p>*That’s assuming that you don’t believe that Harvard (or any other elite) is worth $40K in tuition, assuming ability to pay. *</p>
<p>It’s really a very good question. But few people have an elite institution in their backyards, so the question is really the $250k COA for four years. Is it worth it? I don’t think so, but that doesn’t mean I’d rule it out. And why did it rise 10x over the past few decades, when inflation would have been 4x? Is it really 2.5x improved?</p>
<p>But if Harvard is $250k, and it truly is one of the best, then why are so many others priced the same (or greater)? As we all know, the choice is not likely to be among the top level elites.</p>
<p><<bill gates,=“” warren=“” buffett,=“” and=“” the=“” like=“” are=“” among=“” very=“” few=“” who=“” do=“” seem=“” to=“” understand=“” that=“” they=“” are,=“” indeed,=“” rich.=“”>></bill></p>
<p>That’s because Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are, indeed, rich. The two-income couple who may have worked years to pay off their own student and/or graduate school loans, have more than one child, and are now earning $170,000 a year – they are no doubt a hell of a lot more comfortable than the family with a combined income of $40k. They also have a mortage and have to dress well for work and yes are supporting their comfortable lifestyle. But mansions are not bought on that salary, not anywhere that you can live and actually work to draw that salary. I would call that doing well, but a Wall St. investment banker would consider that chump change.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t doubt this either. With one child at a top ten public, and the other at an elite LAC, I see the difference in quality of education, services, and certainly the advantage post college the the elite private gives you. The public is a good school and my child is getting an excellent education. But the private has education and services commensurate with it’s price. </p>
<p>I do not feel that the 40K and above schools are an excellent investment if you can afford it.</p>
<p>Well, current COA at Harvard is more like $220k than $250K… though I assume that the COA is probably higher for wealthy parents because they probably also enable their kids to pay out more for housing, food & incidentals. In other words, the COA is calculated by reference to an average student budget, but the rich kids probably spend much more on day-to-day living expenses and entertainment. So maybe $250K is very reasonable for them.</p>
<p>It’s either worth it or not. If not, the rich have the same opportunity to send their offspring to in-state public universities as anyone else. Further, the rich have more flexibility in choosing their residence – so they can move to states with the best and/or most affordable public institutions. </p>
<p>You may feel that the public institution is worth X and the problem is that the private college is worth 3X but charges 6X. The median income earners are able to get enough financial aid so that they pay X or even 2X to attend the private college, but the higher earners are stuck paying 6X for a 3X quality education. I can see where that would be very frustrating… but then again, the solution is to shop around. </p>
<p>The big problem is that that college buyers have created a seller’s market for the colleges by their focus on prestige and selectivity, when in fact given the large number of colleges and their need for students, it should be a buyers market. But no one is forcing their kids to attend private colleges.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well actually, I was assuming normal COA, without considering any subtle slurs aimed at full pay families (I don’t share your assumption that they don’t spend their money carefully - if anything, I’d argue the other way). This guesstimate was based on my own research. But college costs are increasing (have you heard?), so you need to take that into account when planning, right? </p>
<p>For Harvard, I guesstimated, but let’s go through a sample analysis. I just went to College Navigator at [National</a> Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Home Page, a part of the U.S. Department of Education](<a href=“http://nces.ed.gov%5DNational”>http://nces.ed.gov), looked at Harvard’s COA for 2010-2011, assumed 4% annual increases (modest in recent years), and calculated the four year COA for a student entering Harvard after this HS year. It turned out to be: $248,000.</p>
<p>Not a bad guesstimate was it? It was based on objective numbers, and Harvard isn’t even one of the most expensive privates. There was no need to bring prejudice or class envy into the equation. So offensive.</p>
<p>@calmom -
I “get it” that you don’t like rich people. Sure, I know what you mean - spoiled folks with inherited wealth who never had to earn their own way, folks who casually live out their extravagant lifestyles. Sure, they’re around, but I’ve never met them; they certainly move in different circles from mine.</p>
<p>On the other hand, I’ve met plenty of full pay families who are nothing more than hard-working professionals, folks who have been putting in long hours for decades and gradually building up their lives. In my experience, those kind of people are good stewards of their assets, and they don’t live wasteful lifestyles.</p>
<p>That’s why I simply don’t share your prejudice, and in fact, I find it offensive.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Are there any schools like that? I know there are probably some where they kind of lump need and merit together to try and attract kids with high stats who also couldn’t come without aid, but I don’t know of any who require the FAFSA but don’t consider need at all.</p>
<p>If you’re at the income level where you can spend $250k on anything without loans, it’s going to be really hard to get need aid at most schools. The reason is because… well… you don’t really need financial aid at most schools. </p>
<p>Colleges don’t – and can’t – care about whether you got the money from decades of hard work and careful management. They don’t care if you got it from your dead Uncle Ned or if you got it from running guns and drugs for Colombian cartels. They don’t care if you won the lottery or invented the paperclip. Most schools don’t really have enough aid for people who are truly poor; the odds of getting non-merit-based aid when your family income is in the six-figures is remote and you should be cognizant of that.</p>
<p>Please take the time to apply to schools that you know you can afford without any aid beyond an unsubsidized Stafford loan. Then apply to schools that will give you merit for your stats. That’s the advice that I would give to anyone, really. You’re fortunate that your family can send you to nearly any school in the country without needing aid. You shouldn’t give up on your dreams but you should keep something in your back pocket so in case the worst really does come to pass for you it doesn’t mean that you’ll wind up in the fall with nowhere to go when it doesn’t have to be that way.</p>
<p>MisterK, I never said I don’t like rich people. I’m not very fond of selfish, clueless people, however.</p>
<p>I net roughly $45K per year and paid roughly half of that each year, for four years, for my daughter to attend one of the colleges that the OP has been looking at. Some of the money came from loans my daughter took, and I borrowed an equivalent amount as my daughter and came up with the rest of the money in cash. I paid down my loans at an accelerated rate so I was able to pay them all off within a year after my kid graduated.</p>
<p>The OP believes that her parents earn roughly 4 times what I do. She correctly realizes that her family income puts her in a position that is highly advantaged as compared to me & my daughter. </p>
<p>The part that i don’t get is – if I had to borrow money to put my kid through school at a rate that was roughly half my income… what would be so terrible if the OP’s parents borrowed to make up the difference between the cash on hand and the amount that they have to pay for full cost, and also asked the OP to get a part-time job for all 4 years to earn some of her own spending money? </p>
<p>If she considers herself to be “middle class” … well, that’s what people who are truly middle class do. No “rut” there – just life as normal.</p>
<p>I feel really bad after reading this thread. I misjudged my situation and I’m sorry. It’s just that I live in an area (suburb outside a major city) where the average house costs $700K. Mine cost $100K and my parents worked hard to pay that off. The other thing is that my mom is paying for our colleges alone. My dad came from a tough financial background and will have trouble saving enough to retire. My mom makes about $75K or so. i know it sounds like a lot but it’s not that much when she’s trying to save to retire by age 70 and paying for 2 kids colleges. So, again. I’m sorry if I offended. I’m not as privileged as I may have came across and I didn’t mean to seem stupid or ignorant or anything.</p>
<p>The other thing is that my mom is paying for our colleges alone. My dad came from a tough financial background and will have trouble saving enough to retire. My mom makes about $75K or so. i know it sounds like a lot but it’s not that much when she’s trying to save to retire by age 70 and paying for 2 kids colleges.</p>
<p>Your parents home may have cost $100k when they purchased it, but it’s current worth is a different situation?</p>
<p>Are your parents divorced? </p>
<p>Is your dad employed?</p>
<p>If your parents aren’t divorced, then your parents total income is considered, not just your mom’s. And if your parents arent divorced, why would only your mom be paying for college?</p>
<p>If your mom is the only one with an income, then how could they possibly pay $40k per year for one child, much less two?</p>
<p>I still think you need to look for merit based scholarships from the schools that give them since it sounds like your family is having financial issues.</p>
<p>My parents aren’t divorced. my dad was out of work for a while and his parents died in debt. That’s what I mean by he had financial difficulties. He’s employed now but given the losses he has had won’t be able to give us much of any money for college (if any at all). My mom has a job and is saving frantically to try to give us that much money for college. That’s why we don’t have ipods or electronics. We live comfortably but never in luxury. I don’t know how exactly my mom is thinking she’ll afford $40K per year for each of us but shes a very rational person and I trust her judgement. I am just worried. As far as I can tell there aren’t that many merit scholarships out there these days…</p>