<br>
<br>
<p>There are subsidies and transfers of wealth in many other areas - food stamps, heating aid, free cell phones, K-12 schools, public transportation, highways, trash pickup, municipal swimming pools, etc. Is higher education a public good? I think that most would say yes (if that’s untrue, please let me know).</p>
<p>It would be interesting to see what would happen if a school like WIlliams raised its tuition to what it claims it costs to educate each student. What would happen in terms of applications? If they also guaranteed to meet full need (albeit their own definition), I wonder what the breakpoints would be in terms of income/assets. </p>
<p>Unfortunately, you would also lose a number of applicants whose famiies, though able to afford it according to the school criteria as well as by nearly any criteria, simply because there are certain points where something is just not worth the price anymore. I think we are seeing some of that these days. At my son’s schools, there has been a definite shift to more kids applying to state school and going to them. Several parents in my personal circle are writing off private schools. Even more people are limiting private options to schools they consider “worth the price”. One dad was telling me that as much they loved College of Holy Cross, the $20 merit money Fordham offered made the value for the dollar higher for the latter, and this is a family that looks like it can afford either school. We had to put a cap on price too, something we did not have 12 years ago with our first one.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The state governments realize that a better educated population of the state means a larger economy and more tax revenue. So they subsidize state universities and community colleges, and discount even the subsidized price with financial aid for lower income students, based on their view that “a mind is a terrible thing to waste” (better to send the smart person from the poor family to college to improve his/her chance of becoming a productive, taxpaying citizen, instead of a net cost to society in welfare, police, court, or prison costs). And many wealthier people realize that a better educated population with better economic opportunities means more opportunities for the wealthy as well (whether jobs, businesses, or investments).</p>
<p>Private universities, noting that price discrimination in college tuition is socially and politically acceptable, enthusiastically embrace it in order to maximize tuition revenue by trying to charge each student as much as the student and family can pay. Charging the same price for all would either price out some desirable (to the private university) students, or “leave money on the table” by not collecting as much money from some who can afford to pay more.</p>
<p>Obviously, you may not necessarily agree with the state governments’ and private universities’ reasonings.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not so much a public good (since there can be a limited amount of it, and people can certainly be excluded from it), but a good or service which produces positive economic externalities, at least in theory.</p>
<p>^^ that’s debatable</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree wholeheartedly. As someone who saved for college since their child was born, I think that the whole saving-for-college process was liberating, and in many ways my family was blessed to have been able to do so. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This, too. Graduation comes in three months - followed by a vacation and a new kitchen!!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t think any one is “entitled” to any aid. </p>
<p>However, I struggle to find an answer for “why should anyone get any aid at all?”. Because you don’t have to attend an expensive school to be successful.</p>
<p>Full disclosure: we are net benefiter of generours need based FA.</p>
<p>As I have my first going to college this year; and there isn’t any aid, I tell anyone with small children . . . . save! Live in the very best public school system you can. Teach your kids good work and study habits. Invest in SAT/ACT prep books. Get them involved in extra-curricular activites. Save. Hope for merit scholarships. Always apply to your’s state’s schools. Depending on financial aid is too much of a risk.</p>
<p>What makes college different is that we need MANY college-educated folks to run a modern economy and society. Of course, it’s not for everyone and it’s not really an entitlement. So we need to be investing in college educations, but not necessarily Ivy League educations. The analogy in transportation is that we need to make sure people can get to and from work, but we don’t care whether they have luxury cars.</p>
<p>Personally - I think parents need to set good, sound expectations and have a reasonable “value proposition.” By that, I mean; undergrad degrees have very little cache’ now, and will have even less going forward. Take the most expeditious, affordable, undergrad experience you can - pound that into your kids heads, early. An undergrad from Harvey Mudd means nothing more than an undergrad from U of M, Morris - anywhere between the Rockies and the Appalachians!</p>
<p>I do believe that a college education should be available to everyone. In NY, it pretty much is with the state tuitions priced as they are. state schools located where a lot of NY is covered. Where is there is the lack here and even more so in other states, is that sometimes there is absolutely no state university within commutable distance from some areas. In those cases, increases in the levels of aid should be built into the formula. I DO NOT feel that federal and state aid should have to cover room and board. Sleep away college is a luxury. You either get a scholarship for it, borrow for it or pay for it on your own. Can’t afford it? Too bad. Private schools? The same. Why suddenly the need to go private after graduating high school? You don’t hear the laments about not being able to afford boarding schools and other private options as though it is an entitlement.</p>
<p>If the top 50 schools opened their doors to anyone willing to pay full costs,they would have NO problems filling their freshmen class…As a matter of fact,they’d likley have to turn people away…i laugh when i read about the stereotypical family who makes loads of money and blows it on pricey cars,vacations, homes 3X larger then needed,lol…i think this may exist,but clearly not as much as it is discussed on CC</p>
<p>*It’s hard for us to feel sorry for anyone who is getting FA as we will qualify for no aid at all. Why should ANYONE be entitled to any aid at all? If someone can’t afford a Mercedes nobody steps in and offers aid to help them afford the Mercedes. How did college come to be different?
*</p>
<p>I have no problem with privates giving aid as they do…it’s their money, they can do what they want with it.</p>
<p>However, I do have a problem with the Calif publics who give a ridiculous amount of tax-payer provided aid so that kids can have the “sleep away” experience. It’s one thing to provide aid for tuition alone, it’s another to provide lots of aid (at taxpayer expense) to fund dorms and meal plans. At that point, it’s welfare. And, it’s not right since many of the taxpayers can’t afford the “sleep away” experience for their OWN kids, but they’re funding it for others!???!!!??? Crazy and unfair.</p>
<p>Most Californians live within commuting distance to a local CC, CSU, or UC. Providing (taxpayer) aid for commuting is reasonable, providing aid for dorms/meal plans is not.</p>
<p>I think those families exist. However, the ones I know, aren’t lamenting the fact that they can’t afford Williams or Haverford- they’re not interested in those schools even if their kids could into them. They want their kids to get a degree in something “useful” – OT or PT or Speech Pathology for their daughters, and accounting or CS for their sons. They can afford the local branch of the State U (not the flagship) and the kids live at home and commute or get an apartment close by with 5 friends and each pays $350/month for a dive and do their laundry at home.</p>
<p>The financial aid formulas are not designed for you and your family situation. (lather, rinse, repeat every March and April.) It’s not personal, people. In the same way that the tax code was not designed for your particular situation. The formulas are designed so that over a broad population (thousands of families) big and obvious inequities can be reduced or minimized, and which will allow the maximum number of kids to benefit from a limited pool of funds.</p>
<p>It is too easy to cherry pick and find a family with the same income as yours whose aid package is higher than your kids. But I could find you someone with the same income and no package- or less of a package. That doesn’t mean the system is unfair. It means that to devise a system which completely eliminates these difference would require a system so costly to implement (and so intrusive on your family) that no college would use it.</p>
<p>A college friend of mine leads the financial aid committee for a well regarded private K-12 school. If you apply for financial aid, the committee shows up at your house and conducts the review of your tax returns at your kitchen table. Don’t bother applying if you’ve got the BMW parked out front, or have a Smallbones kitchen displaying grandma’s antique Minton china.</p>
<p>Is this system fair? Sure. It means that if you’ve had a bad year or been laid off from your job but are living what appears to be a luxurious lifestyle, you’ve got a lot of explaining to do when the committee shows up at your house. Do you want your college tuition dollars paying for 500 financial aid vigilantes vs. paying for professors and laboratories? I’d rather pay for the professors, and know that every year, a couple of cheaters have found a way to circumvent the system and get money they shouldn’t have.</p>
<p>And to add to CPT’s excellent post- Family A inherits 100K from a great uncle which they promptly sock away in a custodial account for their two kids. Family B inherits 100K but uses it to pay off their mortgage. Family C takes the money and goes on a couple of cruises, buys their 16 year old a jeep, and upgrades the Honda to a Lexus with all the bells and whistles.</p>
<p>While I would hate to see Family A be “punished” (which they will be- the kids assets are presumed to be available for college tuition) and Family C rewarded… the fact is, I also don’t know how a college could figure out a workable system for monitoring windfall earnings in a way that wouldn’t be obnoxious and intrusive. And at the end of the day, Family A will be rewarded for their mature decision-making because their kids will have far more options (with 100K in the bank) than Family C (no 100K).</p>
<p>Is this fair? Probably not. Is the alternative- having the “consumption police” show up at your house before deciding if you’re “worthy” of financial aid a better system? I doubt it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It doesn’t work with Mercedes because there aren’t hordes of Mercedes owners who are so utterly delighted with how having a Mercedes has changed their entire life that they want as many people as possible to have that same kind of life-changing experience, to the extent that they donate to Mercedes in order to allow Mercedes to offer subsidies to potential Mercedes drivers, who Mercedes chooses through a complicated application process. </p>
<p>If people want to donate money to private colleges, and the private colleges want to use it for need-based aid, that’s entirely up to them. </p>
<p>Other nonprofits do the same thing as private colleges. I bought student-rate tickets for theater, symphony, and opera when I was a student. I now pay full price for those, and I donate to the foundations that are plowing that money back into arts accessibility for low income/student populations.</p>
<p>I’m just a student and don’t really have a right to comment on money (because it’s not out of my pocket that I’ll be paying) but I don’t necessarily agree with the sentiment expressed by some parents here.</p>
<p>There seems to be a complex that a family spending their money on fancy stuff (cars, gadgets, what have you) deserve less financial aid than those who save religiously. As a directive, I could not agree more. At first I was also jumping up-and-down that a financially irresponsible family could outplay, in the EFC game, a family of similar means with more conservative tastes.</p>
<p>That being said, I don’t think it is the responsibility of the admissions office to determine what constitutes a responsible expense. If the office gets into this game it will be playing in a grey area. Is a vacation to Europe really more “appropriate” than a book on mathematical history? If so, who is the admissions officer to judge that.</p>
<p>That being said, let’s say that a university does indeed place a premium on intellectual expedition beyond the school level (and I would hope they do). In this scenario, the use of ones resources for scholarly benefit would already be checked in the admissions process itself, as opposed to the financial aid process. After a student has demonstrated sufficient interest, as defined by the University, in academic pursuits, why should the financial aid office determine how such resources are allocated?</p>
<p>At the end of the day, the prime purpose the financial aid office is to make college affordable to its students. To a select-few, RICH universities (overtalked about on these boards) this mission is extended to ensuring that no student is rejected due to a lack of money and that no student will turn the university down for financial reasons. If this indeed is the case, then a family that saves its money will of course be more able to pay than a family that doesn’t. </p>
<p>Given the situation at hand, I think it’s fair that the financial aid office help the family that needs it more (even if they have bought that ridiculously overpriced LV bag) as that better meets the mission of their institution. It is not the role of the FA officer to judge how a family spends its money.</p>
<p>All this being said, much of this sentiment is predicated on the assumption that a school is need-blind. In fact, very few schools are both need-blind and meet full demonstrated need. Each of these schools are incredibly difficult to get into. The idea that I can splurge on foreign excess but benefit in the long-run would be true only insofar as I can get into such a university.</p>
<p>For the driving majority of students, Harvard and the like are not an option. For these kids, it is still in the best interest of a middle-high income family (those most sensitive to FA policies, I might guess) to save to the extent that it can without sacrificing the comfort of a professional income.</p>
<p>
Uhhhhh… Maybe because the American government and private donors have decided that education is a basic right and a determinant of productivity whereas plush leather seats are not?</p>
<p>Paying for college always brings conflicting feelings. Last time I checked, no one wants to pay full fare. We all want a bargain. Everyone would like a discount regardless of how much they earn or how much they have saved. Being full pay at a private university is a little like paying rack rate in a hotel or full published fare on an airplane and knowing that everyone around you got a better rate. While I don’t begrudge financial aid, I find it unfair that some universities meet 100% full need, but refuse merit aid to those who don’t qualify for aid.</p>
<p>
Yeah. Perfect. Except education isn’t an airplane seat. I find it unfair that my parents put me through brilliant private schools and bought me all kinds of books but some of the kids I’m competing with might have had trouble paying for a car.</p>
<p>I’ve said it once, I’ll say it again. I’m so goddamn lucky that my parents pay full-fare. Not because they do, but because of what it means. It means I’ve been given everything I need to succeed, everything many other kids have not. If I don’t get merit aid it’s because I’m not good enough. Don’t expect Harvard to give your son/daughter a merit aid because if your kid says no then they’ve got fifty others ready to take the spot.</p>
<p>The reward for saving is not getting yet more money, but getting breathing room for more scenarios,like your student getting no aid. More flexibility. You really take a chance if you don’t save some money. </p>
<p>Sort of like health care, If you have it, you pay the deductibles and gaps, If you don’t, you take your chances that you qualify for relief. If you don’t, you will go into debt and jeopardize your credit rating.</p>