I wish tuitions were just priced fairly.....

[geeps20]

<p>

I agree that an income of $200K a year is not sufficient to support 4 years of $50K+ educational expense. No question about that.

</p>

<p>Plenty of questions about that…save early and often and it should be a breeze…if it’s important to you.</p>

[debrockman]

<p>geeps, I guarantee you, we are excellent savers. We have saved 7 figures for retirement and we have saved 300,000 for 3 kids to attend college on a 250,000 income. Pretty impressive our financial advisor says.</p>

[livesinnewjersey]

<p>Debrock- I’m with you–
Crumudg-- you & Old Fort are my favorite cc’ers. Tea Bag U-- I’m sending # 2 there!!! (As long as Kirkland U doesn’t open in the meantime). Please leave Sarah (& GBush) alone-- they’re did their best, not quite as smooth as B.O. (hey-- BO - stinky too!).</p>

<p>Ironic and all being President’s weekend. (okay just some light hearted gibberish)</p>

[geeps20]

<p>debrockman what’s your point? sounds like you are agreeing with me.</p>

<p>$200k plus salary and it’s not that hard to save for your kids college education</p>

[raiderade]

<p>300K isn’t enough to send 3 kids to 200K schools. It’s enough for half…</p>

[Shrinkrap]

<p>"save early and often and it should be a breeze…if it’s important to you. "</p>

<p>geeps20; Starting when? Has anybody done the math to figure out how long you’d have to be earning 200K to make saving enough for 2.5 kids “easy” when they turn 17? I remember being shocked by the figure I was told when my first was about 5 years old, but we weren’t making 200k back then. I’d be okay using some of the math above, but would add in paying off your own “average” student loans, for lets say 15 years after graduation.</p>

[GA2012MOM]

<p>…</p>

[curmudgeon]

<p>Just so everyone will know where I am coming from on this thread, I am Joe Middle Class. My kid was accepted to elite schools but the debt would have been …substantial. (This was , of course, one year before the middle-class initiatives at the top schools. Oh, joy!) She chose a merit-scholarship at a very good LAC instead, and made a deal with me to pay what would have been our FAFSA EFC for medical school instead of UG. </p>

<p>What I always keep in mind when I think about the opportunities my D had to/chose to forego because of our 'tweener status is …with our money and federal loans she was always going to be able to go to a good college (albeit not necessarily the LAC, small research U environment she wanted). We were and are grateful for that. Poor/lower-middle kids can’t say that. They do not have that as a fall-back option. I would not trade my position in life for their position, and IMO no thinking person would. </p>

<p>Need-based aid almost put the top schools in reach for her (and with today’s rules they might have been). Merit aid put her in a great school that she loves dearly and that has served her very, very well. </p>

<p>Do you homework. Be up-front with your kids about what you can pay. And good luck, everybody.</p>

<p>BTW, if you want to see some crazy stuff…I’m in the midst of med school FA right now. Truly odd stuff.</p>

[applicannot]

<p>I’m pretty much at a loss for most of this thread, but I have to question this:</p>

<p>

The proof is everywhere. The Ivies are dragging in record numbers of international students, fewer high income US students, and lots of low to middle income high achievers with lots of aid. The kids left out are many of our smartest kids. So the Ivy League is no longer what it was…the home of our smartest kids

</p>

<p>So the Ivies are no longer the home of the smartest kids. The international students, middle and upper income students who DO attend, and low to middle income students are not “the smartest kids.” Are they not as smart because they aren’t in your income bracket? I’m definitely missing something here.</p>

[berryberry61]

<p>rocket6louise</p>

<p>

The debate on the other thread was about merit and need based mixing. I believe this thread is about need based aid in general. Besides, if you keep spouting hateful rhetoric, I will keep fighting you on it.

</p>

<p>Nothingt hateful about my rhetoric - simply stating my beliefs and opinions. Just because you have a different opinion about need based aid than I do doesn’t make what i say hateful rhetoric.</p>

[berryberry61]

<p>northeastmom</p>

<p>

Wooster does offer merit aid to about 1/3 of applicants, but other private schools do that too. This is why I do not understand what is different about Wooster’s merit aid. Wooster’s sticker price is 44,000 which is on the expensive side for a midwestern private school, but is a lower sticker price than many private schools in the northeast, where many schools are at or over 50k. Is that 6,000+ difference in sticker price what you are finding attractive? There are lots of other schools in the midwest that have a sticker price equal to, or less than Wooster.</p>

<p>Oh, and many view merit awards as tuition discounting.

</p>

<p>Per naviance, 85% of the students at Wooster receive merit aid - with the average merit award being $15,935 - so net COA for the typical student is about $28K</p>

<p>And I agree with you - in a lot of cases (as at Wooster for example) merit awards really are a form of tuition discounting.</p>

[berryberry61]

<p>Slithey Tove</p>

<p>

Here on CC we frequently see parents asking about schools that have good merit aid for their kid’s stats, because their EFC is higher than they can afford. These are also therefore parents who “couldn’t, or didn’t save enough for their child’s college education.”</p>

<p>I suppose colleges could award merit aid only to students who can show that their parents have sufficient resources to cover full-pay. That would get rid of all of those troublesome families that are just looking for a handout.

</p>

<p>or of course colleges could eliminate all aid and reduce the COA for everyone across the board</p>

[rocket6louise]

<p>berryberry-technically realism doesn’t pay the bills either…I believe jobs pay bills…you can choose your outlook on life :D</p>

[berryberry61]

<p>yabeyabe2</p>

<p>

I have no problem viewing need aid to Harvard as a reward for earning admission, rather than charity.

</p>

<p>char⋅i⋅ty
  /ˈtʃ</p>

[merryecho]

<p>Amid all of the name calling, I haven’t read anyone’s answer to the question of why a kid whose family has a low efc should be able to leave college with no loans, while chances are a kid with, say a $25,000 efc will leave $100,000 in debt.<br>
And I am not a teabagger, I worked to elect Obama.</p>

[berryberry61]

<p>merryecho</p>

<p>

What I don’t understand is why the poor family kid is ‘entitled’ to go to the top school, paid for entirely by someone else. But if a family making $150,000 is not happy paying $50,000/yr for the same top school, they are told ‘there are plenty of good state schools’.

</p>

<p>Well put. Alas old curmudgeon still has his/her head buried in the sand as evidenced by this foolish comment</p>

<p>

That would be a problem with the current FA system of allocating the resources, not with the concept of FA itself.</p>

<p>There are folks who want zero FA for anybody. That’s who I am lampooning.

</p>

<p>You see, it is indeed an issue with the concept of FA itself - and if colleges eliminated FA, they could lower the COA across the board so what you state wouldn’t be an issue. Alas, people like curmudgeon like their handouts too much to see the logic here</p>

[curmudgeon]

<p>Why would a kid with a 25K EFC leave with $25K a year in debt? Parents won’t pay diddly?</p>

[berryberry61]

<p>applicannot</p>

<p>

Under the current system, the poor student has no other low-debt (less than $20,000) or debt-free options. The middle or upper income students do.

</p>

<p>Not true at all - with what the Federal Gov’t provides (both FA and tax credits) poor students have options to attend community colleges and many state schools for little to no debt</p>

[berryberry61]

<p>debrockman</p>

<p>

It is a fact that the middle affluent are flocking to top State U’s. They can’t afford the Ivies and the Ivies are full of smart/affluent foreign students, minorities, low income/high achieving students and the super rich. A full price 200k tuition is not a good use for most people considering the time value of money. My 800 Math SAT student will be going to a high quality State U. And consequently, the Ivy League gold cup is losing its luster. Because it is out of reach for many of the smartest kids in the country.

</p>

<p>I agree with you. But I think it is more than just the affordability factor. I believe a lot of parents have wisened up and said they are not going to pay full freight at some ivies . high end lacs so those schools can take some of what they pay and use it to support other students. Tuitions have reached the stage where there is a backlash going on. As more and more people do this, we will see a needed change in the sticker price and a reduction in the aid structure</p>

<p>livesinnewjersey</p>

<p>:) - loved your post #126</p>

[northeastmom]

<p>Berry, with respect to Wooster, lets say that you are correct and that 85% are getting merit aid that averages nearly 16,000. Do you think that Wooster is the only LAC in OH that offers this type of discount? I don’t think that they are different from many other LACs. That 28,000 bottom line prior to FA is probably less than the bottom line you would see at some LACs in the northeast, but Wooster is not in the northeast. They have a sticker price similar to other LACs in OH (some are priced the same, and others a little lower than Wooster). Bottom line, if your EFC is 28,000 or greater, this school would work for your family.</p>