<br>
<p>All I am saying is that it aches to tell your kid that you can't afford to send her wherever her hard work has earned her a place to be. And, that kind of parental ache transcends any income level or economic class.</p>
<br>
<p>Amen. And Calmom, I just hope you earn 150K some day so you can see what it's like! Make that 250K, just to be mean(smileyface)</p>
<p>I also don't think it is parental obligation to fully fund a bachelors degree
Students can earn $3,000 or so summers-that can go right to tuition.
It is also not unreasonable for them to take maximum stafford loans ( average $3,000 a year) even if they are unsubsidized.
While they might not qualify for work study- a small part time job, particulary on campus should be enough to cover books and personal expenses, and gives students a great way to meet others on campus and attain an additional incentive to manage their time.
Put that together with a clear financial committment from parents and possibly even some merit aid from the school or from outside and you might feel that the school of her dreams is workable.
If not, there are many many great schools that are more affordable to families- try US News best deals list.</p>
<p>rorosen, I don't need more money nor want it. I've always earned around median income; my kids always went to public school. Every year the public schools send home a piece of paper to determine whether they qualify for subsidized meals or (when they were younger) subsidized day care -- I always tossed those papers away, never once feeling sorry for myself because I didn't qualify for the "financial aid" that poorer families could get. </p>
<p>My son won't qualify for financial aid if he goes to to a CSU next year. My daughter's EFC is under $6000, my son's EFC is around $16,000 -- the difference is that he has been working and saving money, but is still young enough to be considered a "dependent" for financial aid purposes -- so he's expected to contribute a huge chunk. So here's the irony: a kid who earned about $22K last year and who has about $10K in savings is expected to pay full freight while putting himself through college.... while families who make $150K and above are bemoaning their inability to qualify for financial aid. And so I'm thinking to myself -- if they don't have the money, why can't their kids go to the CSU too? I know the answer -- of course they prefer a private education -- but the point is that I also know that the problem isn't that they <em>can't</em> pay for college without the money, its that they can't pay for the more-expensive private college that they want. </p>
<p>I agree that private college costs have gotten way out of hand, but market forces would bring those costs down if people simply refused to pay by opting for public education instead. I have a daughter who desperately wants to get out of state and attend a high-ranked private college, but I've promised her only the cost of an in-state public. I personally think that the public universities ought to meet 100% need for their students -- no one should be denied a public education in their home state because of inability to pay -- but I honestly wouldn't care if no one ever got a dime beyond the COA for their home state public. I wouldn't object if the FAFSA EFC calculation was capped at the COA for public schools. (That is, anyone whose EFC was over about $20-$22K wouldn't qualify for federally subsidized loans or work study, though the private colleges of course would be free to discount their tuition in any way they saw fit). I mean, why should public tax dollars go to subsidize a loan for a California kid to attend Swarthmore when that kid's parents can easily pay for the kid to be educated at UCLA?</p>
<p>It's not that I begrudge the families who send their kids to private colleges, its just that I think government money should go for necessary expenses. I also would rather see those federal dollars flowing back in state-funded institutions rather than going to support the continuing inflated rates that the private institutions charge. It makes sense to me that the various tax benefits for college (deductions for student loan interest, Hope credits, etc.) phase out after a certain income level -- why not the same for federal student aid? If anyone with an EFC above $22K (the COA for UC Berkeley) simply was ineligible for federal loans or work study, then there would be more money available for Pell grants and other aid geared to the types of families where aid dollars mean the difference between college and no college, as opposed to the difference between public and private.</p>
<p>And this all relates back to my comment about the $150K wage earner because I really think any family that earns $150K ought to be able to pay whatever it costs to send their kids to school at an in-state public, if I can do it on $50K.</p>
<p>"I wouldn't limit your daughters choices until you take a hard look at your finances, at her ability to take on small loans and add in summer earnings, and at your ability to tap some of that equity." </p>
<p>Emeraldkity4, this is exactly what we need to do. We have managed to avoid having any debt other than the mortgage. We went to credit card hell early in our marriage and learned our lesson. Our adamant position against taking on any kind of debt has served us well as we have seen others fall into a hole they can't seem to ever get out of. That's why it is so hard to contemplate saddling either ourselves or our kids with debt. </p>
<p>Calmom - The purpose of my post was not to get anyone riled up or cause a debate about "how much is enough". Everything is relative. Again, I know how incredibly lucky we are when I see people paying rent as much as our house payment. In our circle of friends there is a huge dicrepancy in income. But, funny thing, we all share the same concerns about getting the bills paid, wanting to give your kids every chance you never had but making sure you're raising generous, kind adults who know the value of a dollar, and trying to ensure that we save enough to avoid ever becoming a burden to our kids in our old age. And, all of us from the doctor to the teacher to the sales rep worry about losing our jobs and the fact that we are all making less and less money every year.</p>
<p>Let's be honest, to shell out an extra 7,500. dollars a month for 2 kids going to college and all the associated expenses, you would have to be bringing home a lot more than 150K (12.5K/mth) or what is left after taxes. </p>
<p>I don't want financial aid because there are others much more needy than us. And, going to private college isn't do or die for us. I just found it interesting that people make assumptions about the lifestyle or financial security of a family in So. Calif. with an income of 150K.</p>
<p>Calcaitsmom,
I am not trying to attack you in anyway -- I understand where you are coming from.</p>
<p>But you do have to keep in mind that the whole financial aid system is built around the assumption that people will take on debt. Yes, it can be a big hole -- but the system looks first to self-help aid (loans and work study). Kids who are poorer qualify for bigger loans, such as a Perkins on top of a Stafford. True middle class people like me rely on PLUS loans or home equity loans to meet our EFC. </p>
<p>By "true" I mean that I really have close to median income; although a family with a $150K income may lead a very modest lifestyle I consider them to be "upper class" simply because of where they fall along a bell curve. That's not meant as an attack - but when you are able to make choices that also preserve a lifestyle choice to avoid debt, you really aren't in the same class as those of us whose choice is to take on debt or forego things like owning cars or going to college. In other words, you are making a choice that people who are less fortunate than you simply don't have. </p>
<p>So you see 2 kids in college as meaning $7500/month in payments -- I see it in terms of a significantly less substantial monthly payment on a loan. A $75,000 loan balance, paid over 10 years, at 8.5% interest is $930/month. When my son went to college and I took my first PLUS loan, I was already aware that when my son graduated, I wouldn't be supporting him any more -- so with that expense removed, I should be able to keep up the loan payments. Ten years of debt isn't that much - it will be paid off within 6 years after the kid graduates. A California mortgage is a great investment, but if the choice came down to borrowing for a house and borrowing for my kids' education, I'd take on debt for the kids. Of course the equation isn't quite that simple - I would probaby end up paying more on rent, even for a modest apartment, than I do on my current mortgage. </p>
<p>I think that your posts have been very balanced & considerate and I don't sense a hint of whining, but this little discourse was triggered by a kid wondering whether there was any financial aid eligibility if his parents make $500K a year. So I do get a sense of financially well-off people wanting to have their cake and eat it too: they want their kids to be able to go to expensive private colleges, but they don't want to pay out of pocket and they don't want to borrow. And it just isn't going to work that way. </p>
<p>The bottom line is that your kids have more privileges and more options than mine do, because you have more money. I don't begrudge that at all -- I kind of got used to the fact that people with more money have more things a long time ago. It's just that it irks me when the people with more money start griping or whining about how tough things are for them. I'm not saying that you fall into that category -- I'm just saying that however tough it is for the family with the 6 figure income, its nothing compared to the families in the $40-$80K range -- the ones who make too much to qualify for things like "simplified needs test" but really don't have the borrowing power, much less the spending power, of those who are earning $100K more each year.</p>
<p>I think part of it isn't really the family who makes "$150 TO $200K" fault
even though college is more important than ever, because of dumbing down of education, and lack of livable wage jobs that you can find with a high school diploma, many families who are the ones that advertisers and marketers are aiming at, just don't realize that the median income in US is only about $50,000.
The department stores certainly don't carry things the average family could afford- seen the price of jeans lately? even jeans at Target are $20 to $30 a pair .( I just went to the mall yesterday- something I do about 3x a year- came home empty handed & I had a LIST!)
We limited our family to two kids- 8 years apart and are still living in our"starter" house. Yes we could have moved to a less expensive area than Seattle, but there are other perks to living here that make it so far worth the trade off.
So while I realize that some families whose EFC is the price of a year in a private school,may feel that they can't afford that, so they * settle* for an instate school. OUr EFC however is the price of a year of instate public school , and being that our D is attending a school that covers anything above our EFC, we will accept that need based aid gladly.
That doesn't mean we can afford the EFC out of pocket,but I expect it is even a greater challenge for a family who makes $50,000 to cover their EFC, than it is for a family that makes twice as much.</p>
<p>"I expect it is even a greater challenge for a family who makes $50,000 to cover their EFC, than it is for a family that makes twice as much."</p>
<p>EK, I agree with above! It also must be so much harder for those that qualify for the Perkins loans on top of the Stafford Loans. Those that can least afford these debts, probably end up with the largest amont of loans to pay back!</p>
<p>What a lot of people also forget is that just because your parents make lots of money, that doesn't mean it will help you at all. My EFC is 99999 because my parents have assets and money, but they are making me pay my own way. That makes it even harder for me than families with incomes <$50,000. Atleast they will have SOME aid to go off of.</p>
<p>this is unfortunately very true osukid
the school will expect your parents to fund at least the EFC-
however- there is a thread or two on the parents board re: schools taht give "free rides" or otherwise large merit aid, that should be worth taking a look at.</p>
<p>My parents make around the 150-200K range but I also have 2 brothers to send to college too. How is that taken into account?</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>My parents make around the 150-200K range but I also have 2 brothers to send to college too. How is that taken into account?>></p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>It's not...unless the brothers are in college at the same time as you are. The financial aid calculations do NOT take into account FUTURE possible expenses. There is good reason for this. Your brothers might not end up going to college.</p>
<p>I is only taken into account when they are in school at the same time as you. For FAFSA the parent part of the EFC is divided equally between the number of students in school at the same time. With an income of $175,000, and no substantial assets, the parent part of the FAFSA EFC would be around 45,000. With 2 students in college at the same time the EFC would be divided equally between them so each would have an EFC of 22,500. But this only happens when they are school at the same time.</p>
<p>Schools that require CSS/profile would make some sort of allowance as well but it may vary from school to school.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Since you have equity in your million dollar house I expect that the schools will expect you to tap some of that.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I hope that colleges begin to realize that home equity loans are becoming much more difficult to get. There seems to be a backlash by banks to pull the rug out from homeowners with existing HELOCs, and to resist giving new ones. I applied to my local bank for a HELOC, mainly because I was curious about the interest rate they'd charge. I had to go through the whole online application to find out. I have a great FICO score, no debts except my mortgage, and nearly 50% equity in my house. My HELOC was denied. The reason given was that my income and equity were both too low.</p>
<p>This past decade has been one of expanding availability of credit, and at the same time the cost of college has risen at a rate much higher than inflation. Without implying causality, one can certainly see a correlation. The middle class has been financing these higher costs through debt. Now that credit is extremely tight, it will be interesting (to say the least!) to observe what will happen to the cost of college. My guess is that that colleges will no longer be able to sustain the 8% annual increases they've enjoyed the past 20 years.</p>
<p>Rising college costs have little to do with how parents and students are paying for college expenses. They have far more to do with the amount of money the government is pouring into the system. The more money the government provides only drives the cost higher. It's a perfect example of government induced inflation.</p>
<p>$150,000 - $75,000 (taxes) = $75,000</p>
<p>$75,000 - $50,000 (mortgage, taxes, insurance) = $25,000</p>
<p>$25,000 - $30,000 (private HS tuition) = ($5000)</p>
<p>($5000) - $25,000 (cost of living, including cars, gas, insurance, med, dental, groceries) = ($30,000)</p>
<p>This leaves no money for ANY luxury whatsoever. The parents are driving 2004 Hondas, the house is average at best, the school tuition is REQUIRED because the public schools are anti-Christian and anti-Western and FAIL to educate. . . </p>
<p>In addition, the $150K income parent is paying for everyone else’s kids to go to public HS and public universities. They are paying for all the free breakfasts and lunches others get. They are paying for healthcare for those without insurance. They are paying the bills for unemployment, welfare, aid to dependent children. . . The working parent keeps this nation afloat, for Heaven’s sake, IN SPITE OF the government’s best efforts to crush him. So stop telling me that the $150K income parent is wealthy or has it so much better than everyone else. He is simply a middle class working stiff trying to get on in the world. Stop taking his money to pay for everyone else and then, MAYBE, he can scrounge $20,000 to pay for college each year (likely through loans).</p>
<p>TheExile, May I ask how old you are?</p>
<p>A 150K income does not pay 50% in Tax and A $150K income should not have 50K for Mortgage. Private HS is also a choice. </p>
<p>In most part of the country $150K income is considered upper middle class.</p>
<p>I would suggest what Dad II suggested in another thread. If you don’t like your standard of living at $150,000 per year salary…then quit your job. See what it’s like NOT being able to make the living and schooling choices you are able to make with a $150K per year salary.</p>
<p>And JUST FOR THE RECORD…our salary is less than $150K per year and we think we’re pretty well off.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, no it is not REQUIRED. The vast majority of people at HYPS are from public schools. Perhaps YOU fail to take advantage of the educational resources available to you. And the idea that schools are anti-Western is at best laughable… our schools are ridiculously Western-centered. The majority of schools require no world history class whatsoever, only a US history class. Even our world history classes are taught from a very Western POV and focus on civilizations that are relevant to the development of America (Rome, Europe, etc). And I know plenty of students who are able to hold on to their Christian beliefs in a secular school. Perhaps your faith is not strong enough to so? (Yes, that was harsh, no I do not apologize, I just can’t stand when people bash our educational system based on ignorance. We are LUCKY enough to even have free, decent public education and I strongly dislike when people gripe about it being anti-this or anti-that. Yes, it has its flaws, but you are not REQUIRED to go to a private hs.)</p>
<p>THere isn’t any income cut off for unsubsidized Stafford loans-as far as I know- Bill and Melinda could have their children apply for Stafford loans through FAFSA.</p>
<p>I always suggest that you fill it out, even if you don’t think you will recieve any grants, because things can change & some merit aid may require FAFSA information.</p>
<p>All I am saying is that it aches to tell your kid that you can’t afford to send her wherever her hard work has earned her a place to be. And, that kind of parental ache transcends any income level or economic class.</p>
<p>THis is true- however there are many schools, some offer merit and if your childs qualifications could earn her a place at a school that only gives need based aid, and your family is found to not have need, those qualifications will likely earn her a place and merit aid at another equally fine ( if not as prestigious) school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Perhaps it’s different in CA, but in most parts of the country, a pool is considered a luxury, not a necessity.</p>