<p>Maybe colleges should just go back to merit based aid only! Would admissions officers have to see thru that as well? I say attend the college that you and/or your family can afford. Finances, above all else, come first--try not to buy into a name and try not to game the system into acquiring more financial aid (some of that aid may have to be repaid at a pretty penny!).</p>
<p>There are plenty of Ivy grads who choose to work as teachers, ministers, or in low paying places like nonprofits, rural areas, etc. Just because one is Ivy-educated doesn't mean that one will make a lot of money.</p>
<p>The Ivies also deliberately admit students who'll go into a variety of fields, not just those fields in which one can make a lot of money. </p>
<p>I do not understand many people's obsession with Ivies since a talented student who's main interest is making money can make more money by majoring in business at, for instance, a flagship state school than would an Ivy grad who plans to be a school guidance counselor.</p>
<p>Believe it or not, many students enter Ivies for the education not because their goal is to make big bucks at graduation.</p>
<p>I can't believe this thread got highlighted as a "Best of CC" on the Forum homepage. This is a travesty - it's 1 against 20.</p>
<p>Guys, we all agree with each other. And we all agree that ParentOfIvyHope is off his or her rocker. Can we move on?</p>
<p>All disagree with POIH..not me!! I think that all parents should have to be working for a child to get FA unless there is a reason such as young children at home, disability or retirement. Otherwise, it is no different than staying at home and not working to collect gov't aid...there is absolutely no reason that parents should be able to get away with that...Ivy league education has nothing to do with it..how about personal character? Now everyone can disagree with me..</p>
<p>foto2gem, could you please elaborate on why you don't want a child to receive FA if their parents don't work? It seems like you want to punish the child, in the form of no govt. or university aid, for a choice the parents have made.</p>
<p>How about parents accepting responsibility for the choice of a child? Again, I go back to my earlier post--finances come first. If you can't afford that Ivy name-then accept some responsibility for paying and look at other options. Don't accept the aid and dump the huge repayment on the child in the end. (That is assuming that some of financial aid is in the form of loans--is that financial aid???) Our generation as parents have done a poor job of anticipating the cost of college education; of course, I guess none of us really knew what the cost would be, but, how many truly save to pay the full bill? When I went to college, it was what my family could afford--not shoot for the moon and worry about paying later!</p>
<p>I know of people with kids in Ivy's. The parents get huge financial aid for their kids. The grandparents are loaded and paid for these kids to go to private prep schools. Essentially the parents look a lot more "needy" on paper than they really are. Family money is not reported on FAFSA and not to the IRS. The Ivy Schools think these kids "need" help. They dont. They are given cars, spending money, clothes, and all sorts of toys (computers, Ipods). Is that fair?</p>
<p>How do you define "ability to work"? Physically and/or mentally capable? My parents are both perfectly intelligent, healthy people who could be doing a variety of things, but they chose to teach. Should I get less aid for college because they decided not to go into higher-paying jobs?</p>
<p>I stayed home to raise my children, and in our high cost state I feel the financial crunch of that decision every single day. My kids have not had some of the opportunities afforded to their peers from higher income families. They haven't had fancy vacations, and summer classes, and the latest gadgets. But they have benefitted from other advantages, such as having a parent who had time to read to them, play with them, help them with their homework, and through vigilance deliver them from danger, temptation and trouble. They had a mother who was available to take them to the library when they needed to go, to cart them around to sports practices, to bake cupcakes for class parties, and take care of them when they were sick. And what's more, POIH, many other kids of working parents have also benefitted from my presence. I'm the one who gets called in an emergency to pick up their child from school and take care of them until they get home from their high-powered job in the city; I'm the one who drives their athlete to the high school at 10:00 AM or 2:30 PM for a sports practice on vacation or in-service days; I'm the one finds out the nonsense that's going on in the schools and lobbies the administration for change; I'm the one that's the class parent, team parent, field trip chaperone, etc. I'm the reason my youngest, special ed. kid is costing the school system less money because of all the special help she receives at home from me. And because my family never got used to living with luxury, we're people who donate a significant portion our income to charity. Of course I know that many working parents can, and do, do a lot of that stuff too, but my point is that we need all kinds of people to make our communities run well.</p>
<p>Having said that, however, I do see fotogem's point: we shouldn't reward laziness either. The problem is that it will be next to impossible to police who isn't working for valid reasons, and who isn't working because they're slothful. I have no issue with helping parents who are working low-income jobs for all the reasons cited above, and of course there are those with medical issues. But on the surface w/o knowing the details of the case, I do agree it's a little disturbing if between the two of them, neither Ivy League educated parent can find a job and/or is willing to work.</p>
<p>Parentofivyhope said "Two top Ivies graduate not making $60000 because of their laid back lifestyle is not same as two hardworking college drop outs to make end meet." They made their choice and you made yours</p>
<p>Okay, so this is me ParentOfIvyHope is talking about. And let me explain the situation. Because honestly, this is ridiculous. </p>
<p>Yes, both my parents did go to Princeton. Yes, they do collectively make less than $60,000 dollars a year.</p>
<p>My mother has been running a theater company for the past 15 years: Ten</a> Thousand Things Theater - Minneapolis Theater - Affordable Theater in Minneapols - St. Paul Theatre Tickets. They bring professional theater to people in prisons and homeless shelters. Here's a link to an article about her from a prestigious newspaper: MinnPost</a> - David Hawley: Ten Thousand Things knows a thing or two about captive audiences. </p>
<p>My mom has won several national fellowships for her work and has been recognized nationally and even internationally (by the Globe Theater in London.) But because her company is a non-profit, she makes around $40,000 a year.</p>
<p>As for my dad, personal circumstances that are far too private to discuss on a message board mean he makes around $20,000 a year as a freelance writer. Yes, he went to Princeton. He currently works from about 9 AM to 8 PM every day editing. </p>
<p>I am honestly slightly speechless right now! ParentOfIvyHope, you know NOTHING about my parents, my life, or my circumstances. I am immensely proud of what they have done and the decisions they have made. You, your assumptions, and your apparent jealousy disgust me. My wager is that my mother has done more with her life in the past few months than you ever, ever will do. </p>
<p>Honestly. This is absolutely ridiculous.</p>
<p>Oh yeah, let me say this again:</p>
<p>MY PARENTS BOTH HAVE JOBS!!! THEY BOTH WORK FULL TIME!!!</p>
<p>I'm really sorry southeast-I can't imagine how anybody can be so clueless about how things work in the US.</p>
<p>CC is not typical--and there is a subculture here that thinks that somehow they or their kids are entitled to an "Ivy" education. Please keep in mind MOST people in the world are sane, and see the Ivy League for what it is--not the be all and end all and badge of having "Arrived"</p>
<p>Geesh... I haven't followed this whole thread but, southeasttitan, you have every reason to be proud of your parents.</p>
<p>Ditto, rentof2. </p>
<p>Southeasttitan, your mom is exactly the type of person I meant when I said we need all kinds of people to make a community run smoothly. Where would we be without the compassionate and selfless folks like your mother who think of others before they think of their wallets.</p>
<p>I don't blame you for being upset southeasttitan. Not everything is about money, some people don't get that. I live in a working class neighborhood and have some extremely well-educated neighbors who have chosen a different path in life. I once new an Ivy-educated man who worked as a mailman as it gave his family solid benefits and job security while allowing him to still pursue a life of the mind on his own time. I've known quite a few Ph.D stay at home moms. They don't stop being bright, engaging people because they're not out making big money or a name for themselves.</p>
<p>Of course nobody has a right to judge the lifestyle choices of others. I can see ParentofIvyHope's point though. Not everybody with an elite education is working in a job with socially redeeming value. Should financial aid go to the kid of the uneducated single mom who is cleaning offices at night or to the kid of ivy grads who choose to pursue a pleasurable lifestyle with low pay? They are not the same to me. I'm not slamming people who choose to stay home with their young children either. But people who temporarily quit their jobs to qualify as low income, or those who refuse to grow up and get a job at all, are scamming the system and robbing truly needy kids of a chance. (Or, maybe the system is broken and never worked fairly to begin with.)</p>
<p>I really hate the title of this thread. It is not fraud when someone is not making a lot of money when he has the credentials to do so. It also perpetuates the myth that just because you have the degrees or name school, you are going to be making a lot of money. That is not necessarily the case.</p>
<p>But choosing not to climb up is not the same as not being able to lift yourself up.</p>
<p>crs1909...I do not want to punish the child. If both parents are capable of working and choose not to and do not have good reasons that keep them from seeking employment, then I do not think that they should be getting as much aid as they are getting..if I chose not to work, my children would suffer the consequences of that decision...we would, simply, not have enough money to afford them some of the opportunities they have been able to have...if both parents are working I am not saying that they have to have specific jobs which give them a specific amount of $$. You are missing my point. But, to choose not to work so that you get more aid, is a mentality that I cannot respect. The FA calculation should take this into account. Believe it or not, you get more than $$ from having a job and contributing to your child's education! It is a privilege to work to pay for your child's education...at the end of my life, I will get great comfort from the fact that I helped my children get their college education, and, in doing so, I gained experience, knowledge and self-respect along the way!!</p>