<p>marite,</p>
<p>okay.. even if the family makes 1,000 more than the allowable for a full ride, they're still probably financing their life away... that's a LOT of loans..</p>
<p>My observations about NYU match NewHope's conclusion. Being loose in the city without a campus can require lots of money.</p>
<p>danashu--
the context of my remarks, originally responding to post #14:
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showpost.php?p=2543463&postcount=18%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showpost.php?p=2543463&postcount=18</a></p>
<p>BTW--I agree with you about LACs. I love 'em.</p>
<p>Edad said:
[quote]
Being loose in the city without a campus can require lots of money.
[/quote]
You're not kidding. With the amount of money I spent while at BU visiting Paul's Mall, The Jazz Workshop, Backroom at the Idler, The Boston Club and the many other assorted music venues, I probably could have afforded that trip to Cancun. Except I had to work, to support my music clubbing habit.</p>
<p>barrons.... Please accept my apology
if I led you to believe that rich people
don't eat burgers. Some fast food
restaurants cater to the upper class.
McDonald's is not one of them.</p>
<p>Some very rich rappers still roll to McD's. So do lots of other people with $$$. They do not need to cater to be popular. Lots of rich people don't sit around eating fancy foods all day. Sometimes you just want a shake and fries at McD's or lots of other places.</p>
<p>fendergirl:</p>
<p>I don't see the logic. It's not a full ride or nothing. If a family makes $1k over the full ride, you can bet your bottom dollar that it will receive some (lot of) financial aid. I don't see it "financing its life away." Time and again, posters have mentioned that it can be less expensive to attend a top school than a state school.</p>
<p>You know, I still go to MacDonald's--but only for the french fries. I'm with Julia Child on that one. And sometimes I drive my husband's fancy convertible there, too.</p>
<p>There's a couple different issues being discussed here. Bottom line is that I think the parents probably care more about these issues than the kids do. We do not live in a classless society. Kids at a very young age grasp that. Do the have-nots have problems with the haves? Some do. Some don't. Are the have-nots jealous of the haves? Some are. Some aren't. Is new money jealous of the social ease of old money? Most likely. All colleges and universities are not created equal. Attending any of them, with the exception of community colleges is a priviledge not a right. Kids will find friends and fit in or they will be unhappy and leave. Old money, new money, no money, black, white, yellow or pink every place will have its own feel. What is ridiculous is to try to level the playing field in some way. Life just isn't that simple. The kids know. If they haven't learned or they don't learn in college that the world is a very big place filled with alot of different people then heaven help them when they step into the adult real world. If they want to step out of their comfort zone. Let them. It's their college experience not the parents'. My son called colleges filled with kids similar to him JLM schools (Just Like Me). If your son or daughter wants that, I guarantee you it's out there. If they want diversity and exposure to diversity, it's out there, too. There's alot of trust-fund kids hiding out in the country. I think by the time your kids leave for college you've just about done all you can to instill your beliefs on/in them. All this is an entirely different train of thought than the conversation about whether kids have some implied right to attend any private school as long as they meet whatever criteria is in place regardless of their ability to pay. By virtue of the fact that the school is private the school holds the cards. I have entirely different feelings about public schools.</p>
<p>Blossom wins the prize for getting to the essence
(sorry, no monetary award)</p>
<p>I apologize if this was discussed earlier but what's do you all consider wealthy?</p>
<p>What do I consider weathly? Being the recipient of a multi-generational trust fund. I was always jealous of those kids. I always wished I had one of 'dem. But alas, the generations of my family have had to work their butts off as will my offspring!</p>
<p>what a relief! I thought wealthy meant being able to afford two pizza toppings</p>
<p>My definition of wealthy in the context of college is not having to check the "applying for financial aid" box on the application--no student loans to pay after graduation, more choices, etc.</p>
<p>Wealthy outside of the college context: work is a choice, not a necessity.</p>
<p>Really rich? That would be never ever looking at a price tag, even for first class flights---on my own jet.</p>
<p>I once knew a very wealthy women who, when a very famous and wealthy businessman called while we were talking in her apartment which took up the entire top floor of a Chicago high rise, said when finished, "He is not too bad for a working class person." I asked just what qualified one as working class, she said anyone who thought about making money. To her there were only two classes, hers and the working class. From that point on, I always got a kick out of all those folks making all that money being considered working class by their "betters."</p>
<p>Dmd:</p>
<p>We did not check the finaid box. But we are borrowing for the kids' college education. What does that make us?</p>
<p>responsible?</p>
<p>dmd: Wealthy is people who can afford to do the things I wouldn't even dream of doing.</p>
<p>We didn't check the financial aid box for kid #1 and we won't check it for kid #2 either. This is thanks to the money my husband and I inherited from our parents, all of whom are gone now. But our ability to pay for our kids' college is a one-time aberration in an otherwise modest lifestyle.</p>
<p>We'll yawl trying but you still haven't gotten there as to a definition. Not asking for financial aid is not a good definition particularly if you are sending a child to a low cost state university and he/she is living at home. Is it $100,000 or $250,000? Or more? Does it depend on what part of the country you live in? How many children you have? Is someone whose parents make $250,000 wealthy vs. someone whose parents make over 1 mil? Clearly the latter families have more flexibility than the former?</p>
<p>It's all about tax bracket and if you own your home or not. That constitutes wealthy according to the colleges.</p>
<p>It doesn't really matter to them if you have already put one, two, or three through college. The differences in what you pay according to 'need' are small taking these into account. Do the calculator and you will see.</p>
<p>I don't think you can compare wealth, except in relative terms. We live in a very expensive part of the country, and happen to own a home (modest by most standards) that is worth an obscene amount of money.</p>
<p>The same home in 95% of the rest of the country would cost under one quarter of what it is worth here. </p>
<p>Of course, we also pay a salary in property taxes per year.</p>
<p>I wouldn't begin to consider us wealthy, but we do have a handsome asset.</p>