<p>Without knowing the personal circumstances, I'm assuming that what the original poster was concerned about was people attempting to "game the system". I know that I had that original thought when I read last year about the financial policies of some of the Ivies. If DH earns around $100,000 and my income is flexible as an adjunct professor depending on how many classes I pick up -- I could see striving to keep my income under 20 rather than at 30 so that I would be under the 120,000 threshold for financial aid. And I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one to wonder about this. Some types of jobs (contract work like editting, teaching as an adjunct, substitute teaching, tutoring, teachers having a second business mowing lawns over the summer or providing daycare) would lend themselves to this kind of tinkering with the system. And presumably if you had your own business, you could make your income look less by buying some expensive piece of equipment (a new oven for your bakery?) prior to filling out the forms. </p>
<p>I wouldn't categorize as the same KIND of unethical behavior as actively shielding assets so they're not considered at all in calculating the family's expected contribution -- but given that there's an entire industry devoted to advising families on how to get the best financial aid and what particular financial steps to take to improve how one "looks" on paper, it would be odd if someone hadn't come up with the kind of strategies outlined in the previous paragraph. </p>
<p>I was reminded of a book of essays I read awhile by an MIT economics professor (wish I could remember the name). In this book, he concentrates on people's economic behavior (do you buy more shoes if they're buy one, get one free? Do you eat more free food than food you have to pay for?). He talks about how stores price items -- and supposedly there's a correlation between an item's price and the likelihood that people will steal or attempt to steal the item. People are more likely to attempt to steal an item if they perceive that it is significantly overpriced relative to the value of the item. I wonder if the same dynamic isn't at play in college financial aid?</p>
<p>foto2gem, did you even read my post? Please do, so that you can understand the REAL situation with my parents, not the one that ParentOfIvyHope fabricated in his sad, desperate, jealous little mind.</p>
<p>
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
While I may not be able to respect the choice, I can say that there is no way that I want the FA calculations to take any of this into account. I don't want either the federal government or the colleges delving that far into my personal life to gather enough information, nor do I want them making value judgments about my or anyone else's choices. It's bad enough that they have to make these kinds of judgments about the students they decide to accept or not accept!</p>
<p>While people may believe that they know everything that goes into another person's decision making process, and therefore can "judge" that this person's job is worthy and that person's job (or decision to stay at home) is not, generally they really don't. You don't know what goes on behind closed doors, and even in this Internet age, people have the right to some degree of privacy.</p>
<p>Unless your choices are patently immoral or are illegal, your choices are your own, and the reasons for them are your own business. Financial aid is given on the basis of demonstrated financial need. Why someone has that financial need is no one else's business.</p>
<p>True, but the point of financial aid is ideally to give those a chance at an education who otherwise could not afford it. Thus, imo, being well educated and CHOOSING to not climb up (staying at home, working in a fun but low-paying job, etc) is not even remotely close to coming from unfortunate circumstances and not BEING ABLE TO pull yourself up. I think children of the latter deserve a bigger slice of the financial aid pie than the former.</p>
<p>but who are we to say what some one should or should not be doing with their education and what kind of job they should have. That is one of the great things about living in this country is that you have choice.</p>
<p>I know my sister who is ivy educated eith multiple graduate degrees left her 6-figure job to become a teacher making about a quarter of the salary she made in corporate life. But, she is a damn good teacher, enjoys what she does and has made a difference in the lives of not only her children but the children that she teaches.</p>
<p>so is she now considered a slacker and should her children be penalized in the FA process because she decide to do work where wealth is not always equated in terms of $$ and cent?</p>
<p>What about people who had jobs, got laid off and have taken the opportunity to start a new career where they now make a fraction of their former salaries. Are they slackers who are not pulling themselves up? sounds like a lot of bitter rantings to me.</p>
<p>ParentofIvyHope is the funniest poster on this forum. I love parody.</p>
<p>I suspect I'm one of those who might fall under suspicion of "gaming the system." The year before my D went to college I retired after 35 years and took my pension. After 35 years in the same profession things just weren't as "fun" anymore. So here I am collecting 75% of my previous take home pay and working as a consultant out of my home at something entirely different and something that is rewarding and, dammit, fun again. No, I don't earn quite what I did before "retirement," so I guess I might be guilty of intentionally lowering my income in order to "scam" my D's college of a few thousand extra dollars. I guess if they catch me I'll just have to go beg my former employer to take me back.</p>
<p>Yea, Chedva! How absurd and ugly it would be for colleges to be making determinations about which student is deserving of aid based on his/her parents choices. My father was an intermittantently employed alcoholic. When he had a job it was usually as a bouncer or a bartender, but they never seemed to last long. He graduated from USC back in the day. He could have made different choices. Probably should have. Hence, a kid in my position should not receive any aid. Yeah... that makes sense. Let's have a system where colleges make judgements on everyone's life. Good idea. :/</p>
<p>Besides if bitter rage is the apt response to this, it would properly be directed to the colleges themselves, not the families. Any school, such as Ivy schools, that grants its own endowment money to aid students is giving that money away as a private institution. How dare they reward those slackers, drunks, stay-at-home moms! Get all over them about their policies. They're the ones making the decisions about what to do with their money. It's their fault.</p>
<p>An ivy education is about much more than the potential to make money. it is about becoming an educated citizen in whatever field one chooses to pursue. No one is obligated to forgoe a career they love for a career more lucrative because they have the so-called "potential"</p>
<p>coming from unfortunate circumstances and not BEING ABLE TO pull yourself up. >></p>
<p>Then we get into judgments about those unfortunate circumstances and how people get into them. Did a parent drop out of college 25 years ago? If they had finished, their earning potential could be higher, so should their children be penalized? Did they never even attempt college? Same scenario. If the grandparents had gone to college, would that have increased the change of those parents going, thus their earning potential would have been higher, etc, etc</p>
<p>Did someone get involved in drugs or alcohol years ago and lose their earning potential? You'd have to punish those kids then since their parents failed to "maintain" their circumstances.</p>
<p>"so they won't have to" != "in order not to" </p>
<p>Who are you to judge what is a "laid back lifestyle"? TO ME, 60,000 / year is a lot of money. ParentOfIvyHope, I was taught to respect my elders, but given the nature of your username and the presumptuous nature about income capacity, that respect is suffering, here. </p>
<p>Also, with tax brackets on higher incomes, there might not be an incentive to earn more money, especially where the income tax rate for higher brackets reaches 98% in some areas. For all you know, those parents don't earn more simply because they don't have to: they work on spending LESS.</p>
<p>Admissions and financial aid folks have enough hard data to make the hard decisions that they have to make. I very much doubt they are going to make presumptions on what families COULD be doing. When you look at the number of apps that need to be processed during the admissions season and the number of personnel involved to carry out the task, you can see that it is no small task.</p>
<p>I’m not sure where the thread went wrong but the basic idea of it was to highlight the fact that the FA at top schools is not fair. To me it really seem wrong that well educated parents living in a classy sub-urban area actually compete for Financial Aid with under educated hard working inner city parents.
If you did go to a top school then it should be your responsibility to make decisions in your life to take care of your and your children future. I think there is a difference between being literate and being educated. It is now quite evident that going to top schools can only make you literate but it is how you get raised makes you educated.</p>
<p>POIH. That makes no sense. Why would someone who is Ivy educated deliberately choose not to work a good job just to get good FA and be lazy. I mean, yeah you're earning under 60k per year and your kid can go to Harvard for free and you can stay at home doing nothing...but you're still earning under 60k per year! Most people don't chop of their nose to spite their face. Usually there's another a reason why the person isn't working a high power job. Furthermore, if you're living in a classy suburban area you generally have something called assets which increase your EFC. Oh and galosien, I hope you were joking about the I-bankers being good parents.</p>
<p>^^^: The point is that Ivy educated person is not making less than $60,000. It is just on the paper that they are making $60,000 but in actuality there living style is equivalent to someone making $200,000.</p>
<p>Think about an ivy educated person who is living in a fully paid sub-urban ancestor house and making a $60,000 being a head of charitable organization. Now there is a difference between this Ivy educated person heading a charity organization for self satisfaction and the under educated person who works at that charity for making a genuine living. Whose Children should get the Financial Aid? Decide for yourself.</p>
<p>I've not read this entire thread....no such time. However, Ivies and most top tiers require more just than FAFSA. Profile AND their own financial applications. What is a couple doing...moving to the wrong side of the tracks? Putting their assests in someone else's name, so financial worth doesn't show? Are they living in poverty just to make certain their child receives the perks from an Ivy? If they are making THAT sort of sacrifice, then what is the peopblem. </p>
<p>Music teacher at daughter's school is married to a Yalie, who chooses to teach at a small college AND help out in our community...second poorest in VA. They have raised a fine family, with outstanding values. Their income isn't what you would expect with his creditentials, however, this world is a much better place with them. If his youngest wanted an Ivy league education AND they wanted to offer her full scholarship, seems appropriate reward!</p>
<p>POIH. It can't be. Correct me if I'm wrong but you pay property tax even if your house is fully paid off. If someone's making 60k, and living in a wealthy suburban area their property tax can easily be over 10k. When you factor in federal income tax, state income tax, living necessities, the person is living rather poorly.</p>
<p>POIH, there are a lot of people out there who fall between the cracks of need definition and make out better than others in similar situation. I know many, many families who live on the benevolence and gifts of well to do family and therefore, enjoy a standard of living their own incomes could never provide. When their kids apply to college, they may well end up getting financial aid even though they are living high. It's just the way it works. There are many unfair and inconsistent provisions in FAFSA and PROFILE and if you are fortunate enough to fall into those cracks, you can make out. It is advised to know the rules well, so that you CAN take advantages of those loopholes, just as it is advised for tax loopholes. If you can do this, more power to you. It is legal. Fair, no. Legal, yes. It is the system.</p>
<p>since when does the work ethic of your parents earn you the right to more or less money? Its about how much money you have, and your assets that determines how much aid you will receive. Sorry it isn't subjective enough for you.</p>
<p>Let us take three example families and decide for yourself who is needy</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Two Ivy graduate parent living in a fully paid ancestral home (Originally bought for $100,000 40 years ago) in an upscale sub-urban area with top public high schools:
Income: $60,000
Taxes: $10,000
Property Taxes: (Assessed at $400,000): $5,000
House Maintenance: $5,000
Health Insurance: Paid by charitable organisation
Commute/Transportation: Paid by charitable organisation
Net Income: $40,000</p></li>
<li><p>Two Non Ivy graduate parents living in the same upscale sub-urban area in a similar home (Paid for $1,000,000) with 20% down:
Income: $160,000
Taxes: $50,000
Property Taxes: (Assessed at $1,000,000): $13,000
Loan Payments ($800,000 @6%): $47,000
Health Insurance: Paid by organisation
Commute/Transportation: $6,000
After School Care for children: $10,000
House Maintenance: $5,000
Net Income: $35,000</p></li>
<li><p>Two high school diploma parents living in the inner city with under performing schools on rent:
Income: $60,000
Payroll Taxes: $10,000
Rent: $10,000
Commute/Transportation: $5,000
Health Insurance/Medical: $5,000
After School Care for children: $5,000
Net Income: $25,000</p></li>
</ol>