Well it depends whether you are talking about upscaling standard of living or financially. It is possible to buy a lovely home in a great area, but get something very small or a multi-family house and get the better lifestyle without impacting finances. Some people may upscale in terms of shortening a commute but downscale on finances. It’s not always cut and dried.</p>
<p>We chose to buy our first home when D was in high school because we had never had a home and wanted one. We knew the potential consequences, but we also made sure that we could cover the amount we thought it would cost for her college (we were very close on our guestimate and did have the money).</p>
<p>Right, but this thread is about the affordability of college for <em>parents.</em> People have blamed the $250K set of parents for feeling squeezed because they <em>chose</em> to have kids they can’t afford, or spent their money on other things so now they can’t afford college. Most poor parents can’t pay for their kids’ educations because they <em>chose</em> to have kids they couldn’t afford, and made life <em>choices</em> that did not include enabling them to pay for a college education for their kids.</p>
<p>There was a study saying that people’s happiness about money has a great deal to do with the people they spend time with. If you spend time around people who have much more disposable income and fancier houses and cars than you do, you will feel inadequate. However, if you spend your time with people who are in a similar financial situation, you are more likely to feel OK about your economic situation. That is one of many reasons to not over-stretch yourself and to buy more house than you can comfortably afford - you may be buying into a culture you can’t keep up with. </p>
<p>If your kids’ friends are all going on expensive vacations and summer camps, and you can barely scrap to together enough cash for 2 days at Aunt Myrtle’s house, that can create some uncomfortableness.</p>
<p>There is another thread remarking on the same phenomenon, from a parent who made the concious choice to send their kids to public instead of private school although they could afford it, yet didnt manage to sock those savings away.
Some peoples money just burns holes in their pocket.
Which is why I dont carry money, unless I am actively on a shopping trip.</p>
<p>I will agree that college expenses have increased a great deal from even when our oldest went off to college. However most schools dont meet need and most schools dont even offer much merit, so those families who make upwards of six figures are still much better off than those who do not in terms of taking on additional expense.</p>
I only carry cash so that I can see when it’s gone. I never replenish my personal amount of money, so if I splurge I end up going hungry or otherwise cutting back somewhere. </p>
<p>I totally agree that more money is better. I truly believe that in terms of college, what money gives is options, which people with really no money don’t have any of at all. Money is definitely better. No money is awful. But a numeric snapshot in time doesn’t necessarily tell the tale on either end.</p>
<p>I liked blossom’s post too, but I disagree that parents want all those things from colleges nowadays, and that is what is driving up the price. As a full-pay parent, I honestly would prefer a lower price and have my kids rough it at college. I think the college experience should be a transition to supporting one’s self on a starter salary, not a step-up from living at home. If parents are demanding those things, I think it is because they are being asked to pay $50K+ for a BA degree, so they feel they should be getting more than a shared spartan dorm room and class lectures 16 hours per week. Its a chicken and egg, spiraling problem, not caused by the consumer alone.</p>
<p>Arent most colleges less than $50,000?
My youngest has been living off campus since sophomore year, having a roommate or 5, is a time honored way of making your money stretch.</p>
<p>“Glido, that’s not the point. The point is if a family is going to have more kids than they can afford, they shouldn’t expect to be able to easily pay for all the things they would if they just had one or two.” - Sally</p>
<p>Sally - I agree with you, but in the context of variable tuitions - that is not always the case:</p>
<p>Let’s say a man makes the choice to father a child (student1) and chooses to abandone the mother and student1 before the child is even born. Those are two choices that he made. Mother chooses to do the best she can earning well below federal poverty rate.</p>
<p>The student1 grows up poor.</p>
<p>Student1 makes the choice to work hard in school and is admitted to 2nd-tier private college. (tuition is $60,000. Student1 gets $55,000 grant and $5000 for on-campus job.) Is Student1 “easily paying” for private college? </p>
<p>Man2 chooses to marry. He and his spouse choose to have 2 children. Together, they have a third child WITHOUT choosing to (It happens). Man2 and Spouse each choose to work, earning $60,000 per year each (before taxes). They choose to own a house and pay a mortgage and they are compelled by law to contribute to a retirement fund. They choose to pay for day care, so neither parent has to remain home with the children when they are young. They choose to send their children to public school. They choose to save a little each year (because that is all they have left over) to place in a college fund. </p>
<p>The first of their children (Student2) chooses to work hard in school and is admitted to the same 2nd-tier private college as Student1.</p>
<p>Student2 gets a $25,000 grant and a $2500 campus job. College fund is drained to cover $25,000. Student2 must choose to go more than $50,000 in debt to finish college at the same school. Is that “easily paying.” </p>
<p>Is the cost differential caused by choices that Student1 or Student2 made?</p>
<p>Is the cost differential caused by choices Man1 and Man2 made?</p>
<p>Its up to private schools to decide how much of their own money they want to use to underwrite the cost of educating students.
Some schools choose to select students with need who are particulary capable.
Other schools choose to attract students without need but with strong athletic &/or academic accomplishments to strengthen their student body.</p>
<p>If a family chooses to leave privates out of the picture, there are always instate public schools which are pretty much the same price for everyone.</p>
<p>Well, I’d say Student1 has overcome much more to get to the same place–admission-worthiness for CollegeX–than Student2. It’s not the choices THEY are making as kids that is the issue, it’s what CollegeX is looking for. And CollegeX, as a private institution, can decide that the resourcefulness of Student1 is appealing enough to offer him financial assistance (even if Student2 is perfectly qualified and also desired in the student body).</p>
<p>Student2’s parents (Man2 and Spouse) have made many choices that they think are in the best interest of their children–choices Student1’s mother (the one left holding the bag with the infant Student1) has not been able to make. Man2 and Spouse have prioritized many things–home ownership, private college, three kids–over other things. Why the expensive private college then? Why not StateU or CC? Also, there is no way Student2 himself could end up $50K in debt if he borrows the “regular” maximum amount of federal student loans. Anyone who would let him incur more debt through private loans is part of the problem.</p>
<p>Yes, there is an affordable way for everyone to earn a BA degree, if they really want one. The point being, no one parent’s <em>complaining</em> about affordability is worthier than another parent’s complaining. Most all have made choices that led to their financial circumstances, and they all have choices concerning how to help their children get a degree (or not).</p>
<p>I spend time with people who share my values, and our disposable incomes never enter the equation. The person who has the fancier house and car may be up to the hilt in debt and not happy.</p>
<p>{QUOTE}/If a family chooses to leave privates out of the picture, there are always instate public schools which are pretty much the same price for everyone./{QUOTE}.</p>
<p>Which the majority of people pick. It is certainly easier for the $250,000 household to make those payments than the $80,000 household. The 80,000 household is getting the same package as the $250,000 household.</p>
<p>(How long have I been here and I still can’t quote. What a fail on my part lol!)</p>
<p>Low income California residents commuting to local CSUs while living with parents tend to see a net price of around $4,000 per year, which is in the range of a reasonable expectation of student work earnings (not too different from “no loan” packages at Harvard and Stanford that have a student work expectation of $4,600 to $5,000).</p>
<p>Note that this net price is about the same as the estimated room and board cost of the student living with parents (which is accounted for in the net price).</p>
<p>I still would, if given a choice, be student2 than student1. There are so many cards stacked against student2 in life, that to focus on “well, his college is cheaper” completely misses the greater context. Again, it’s like complaining about the cushy parking spots disabled people get and complaining you have to walk for. </p>
<p>In my neck of the woods, it is VERY common for people to go to the local comm college for 2 years, live at home in the meantime, then transfer to our (very good) state U for the last 2 years. Does that not happen in your areas?</p>
<p>But perhaps there are some other places where either or both of the state universities and community colleges is looked upon as being of inferior quality (whether or not they actually are).</p>