<p>kitkatail, I'm a bit confused - why are you offended by this? I read mensa160's comments as describing parents who chose to spend all their money on themselves - lavish houses with huge mortgages, luxury cars and the like without saving a dime for their kids education and expecting the government to give them a free ride. I don't think it was his/her intention to say that those people who are actually needy are ruining the system. I've read many comments on this board that say something like my dad makes 150,000 a year but only wants to pay 5,000 for my education. I agree with mensa - that's irresponsible and puts the burden on those parents who choose to sacrifice the "high life" and keeping up with the Jone's to meet their obligations.</p>
<p>lavish houses with huge mortgages, luxury cars and the like without saving a dime for their kids education and expecting the government to give them a free ride.</p>
<p>First of all, the government isn't giving any one a free ride because subsidized student loans cap out at $5500/yr and that is for junior and senior year. The maximum pell grant is $4,050 (and the person who is recieving the maximum is probably considering it a blessing to know that they can feed their family every day because they will be truly among the neediest).</p>
<p>The person who makes $150,000 a year and only wants to pay $5,000 isn't really placing the burden on anyone but their own child for whose choices for colleges has now been severely limited unless they are in the range to get merit money, or are a stellar recruited athlete who can go to a Div I school on an athletic scholarship.</p>
<p>Those with lavish homes, hopefully will have built up some equity which will be considered as income on the CSS profile. While the FAFSA does not take equity on that lavish home into consideration, it also does not take into consideration how much you owe one it.</p>
<p>jamimom and strick - I think I did, in fact, mix up Case and CMU in my above post. And I think it's not the first time, either. :o</p>
<p>Sybbie, My apologies for my rant - sometimes I get a bit irked when I think about how hard we worked to set aside $ for education while others with similar incomes seem to live a more extravagant lifestyle and seemingly get away with paying less. But...it was our decision to do so and to imply others were irresponsible was unfair. We all have choices and values and I don't want to be the one to say who did the "right" thing. And, some of us had opportunities based on our education and our parents decisions that others, through no fault of their own, did not.
I certainly believe that everyone should have the opportunity for higher education regardless of their financial situation. I understand that even with full need based scholarships, it is a struggle for many folks even to afford the necessities like books, computers and such. If I had to do it over again I would choose the same path since it allowed us to make choices for our children that we would otherwise not been able to do. Only time will tell whether they were the right ones.</p>
<p>no problem,</p>
<p>I totally understand where you are coming from. </p>
<p>I think that the scenario which you meant is even with schools that have large endowments, the person who goes into this with the attitude that they are only willing to pay "X" amount of dollars is essentially saying that someone else's parents should foot the bill for their child's education (as endowments are pretty much funded by alumni). </p>
<p>In the end noone can want more for our kids than our kids can want for themselves (we probably run a close second). </p>
<p>There is really no greater disservice to our kids than we as parents telling them to work hard and they will get into the school of their choice only to place a cap on their worth (I'm only spending this amount of money) while at the same time having spent the equivalent of a year's tutition on a luxury car, and not holding up our end of the deal.</p>
<p>Because the family assets are hit at 5.6% while income is assesed at much, much higher levels in the college financial aid process, unless there is a significant amount of money put away, the parent is not going to be soaked for saving. The saver also gets so much more flexibility. It is pretty risky assuming that your kid is going to get into a school that gives 100% of demonstrated need, that the school and FAFSA are going to look at your finances and give you signifcant aid. I see very few people rewarded for taking this path. Most get pretty burned and disappointed. However, there are always those who do beat the system by cheating and lying and hiding assets and incomes. And, yes, we do all subsidize this group, not only in financial aid but in insurance, taxes, you name it. College aid is no different. </p>
<p>There are famiies who can afford to send their kids to college if they sacrifice other things in their lives, and who choose not to do so. That is their choice, and if they wish to put a $ limit on what they will pay for education, that is really their choice in parenting. Just as the child has to live with other decisions these parents made, including where they went to highschool, middle school, elem school, preschool. These decisions are up to the parent. Once a person is 24, or is applying to grad schools, the parents become a non issue for the most part, and that is how long such a person whose parents are not going to contribute for college has to wait in order to get a full range of choices about where to go to school as they can then qualify for aid or stipends on their own records. But most professional programs have a lot of loans, some only loans as financial aid. My niece will be graduating from med school with $160k in loans and this is not atypical.</p>
<p>i dont understand
my parents make more than 110K, but my EFC= $11000. I checked all the numbers out and it looks all right. does any1 else know what cud be a problem?</p>
<p>Yes, people with incomes over $100,000 get aid. There are cases on my campus where people with incomes over $100,000 have a family contribution of $0. In other words, full aid packages.</p>
<p>There are many variables--number of people in the family, for example, the value of your home, how close your parents are to retirement, etc. It's really hard to say until you go through the process of applying.</p>
<p>my case is that, we're renting a house, and my stepfather owns a little house (worth about 100,000) in kentucky that he hasn't paid off yet. my parents make around 100-120,000 a year, and i'm the only kid in the family. so.. if anyone is in similiar situation but had a small amoutn of EFC, plz.. let me know :) thanks for all the info</p>
<p>I think it's outrageous to look at assets. These are what hardworking parents scrimped and saved to get. Then you get these spendthrift types who spend every penny on vactions and new cars, and they get a free ride to college. They should look at income over the previous years, and determine what they should have saved. If they spent it on SUVs, too bad. Why should hardworking people have to subsidize these spendthrifts.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>I think it's outrageous to look at assets.>></p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Unfortunately, assets are viewed as assets. Some people make choices to own vacation homes for example. I personally feel (ok...ready to get clobbered) that families who choose to own second homes should NOT be given preference for finaid because of their debt for that second home. The reality is that it is NOT their primary residence and it is a choice to own it rather than to pay for their child's college education. These types of assets SHOULD be looked at. Also, if you own a home with significant equity, you are very fortunate. That means that your family COULD choose to use that equity as a means to help finance your college education. There are families who do not even have this option. They are the ones who should receive need based finaid.</p>
<p>They should look at second homes, absolutely, because it's a luxury that few people need. If you need it, that's different.</p>
<p>if Bill gates' daughter only makes 30 K a year, her children shouldn't get the same amount of aid as someone else with the same income, cause granddaddy should take care of it</p>
<p>Hmm, is this unusual? My parents make over 100,000 (family of 4), and I got a half tuition scholarship for Yale.</p>
<p>i heard that ivey league schools tend to have better financial aid package, they expect a family to contribute between 10-20% of their income to the school, then they'll give you the rest. sucks for out-of-state tuition though,,,</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>heard that ivey league schools tend to have better financial aid package, they expect a family to contribute between 10-20% of their income to the school, then they'll give you the rest. sucks for out-of-state tuition though>></p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>What difference does it make if you are OUT OF STATE at an Ivy League school? These are private schools...no "in state" or "out of state" tuition...EVERYONE pays the same tuition regardless of where they are from. AND the Ivies use the same FAFSA formulas to determine aid as everyone else. The difference is that they use the Profile to supplement the FAFSA. Our FAFSA EFC was over $40,000. Believe me, this is well over 20% of our income. The Ivies look at total assets, not just income, when determining finaid...that includes savings, certificates of deposit, home equity, salaries, dividends and interest.</p>
<p>When people speak of "aid", do they mean loans or grants? I presume you have to be pretty poor to get a grant (i.e., Pell), and who wants loans?</p>
<p>Aid can mean scholarships, loans, grants and workstudy,. As I previously stated a school can meet 100% of your demonstrated need by giving you all loans (and it does happen) even to the pell grant reciepent</p>
<p>I agree...I don't consider the opportunity to take out a loan as "aid", because I can take out a loan anytime! The same goes for work-study. If it's money that is earned, it is no gift! We are currently comparing finaid by the bottom line and we are not considering loans or employment (only grants and scholarships). Do you think this is reasonable???</p>
<p>this is true
subsidized loans do give you a bit of a break, and work study doesn't count for FAFSA although it does count on taxes, but unless you are mainly considering schools where your profile is above the average,I expect that a good portion of offer will include workstudy and loans
My daughter has both workstudy and loans although she also has a large grant.
I expect students to work during school year and earn enough to at least pay for books and their expenses. Workstudy has the advantage that it is not added to income, and that the jobs are much more flexible than jobs off campus.
Her loans are subsidized and until Bush decided to gut the education budget, they had the potential for being forgiven if she spent time teaching.
Its really up to you if you want to limit your schools by those that can offer only grants. We made a family decision, that we wanted her to attend the best school at a reasonable cost including assuming a small amount of debt. She could have attended cheaper schools, but we felt the education in this case was worth it.
I don't have a problem with a small amount of debt, I think including loans and workstudy in aid package allows school to offer more grants to a wider number of students, helping the lower and middle income students to a first class education</p>