<p>It’s only the people who struggle to do the best for their children who are open to scorn or censorship. Those who do it easily or never have the rug pulled out from under them aren’t open to scorn. I guess they are the Great Worthies.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Good point. But I’d say that for most students, the FA picture is more important than COA per se. High COA or low COA, most state flagships don’t meet 100% of need even for in-state students with need. Some examples:</p>
<p>Penn State: meets full need for 5.8% of students with need, average need met 55%
University of Oregon: meets full need for 8.7%, average need met 46.8%
Rutgers: meets full need for 11.4%, average need met 52.1%
University of Alabama: meets full need for 14.2%, average need met 50%
University of Iowa: meets full need for 23.3%, average need met 52%
University of Arizona: meets full need for 8.1%, average need met 55.7%
University of Illinois: meets full need for 8.3%, average need met 62%
UConn: meets full need for 6.8%, average need met 64%
Ohio State: meets full need for 16.4%, average need met 64%
University of Tennessee: meets full need for 21.3%, average need met 61.7%
University of Georgia: meets full need for 19.2%, average need met 66%
University of Texas: meets full need for 19.6%, average need met 66%
University of Minnesota: meets full need for 25%, average need met 70%
University of Wisconsin: meets full need for 27%, average need met 73%
University of Florida: meets full need for 30.2%, average need met 78%</p>
<p>For a student with need, whether a college is high COA or low COA is less important than the gap between need and FA. With a handful of exceptions (UVA, UNC-Chapel Hill, and for in-state students, Michigan, UC Berkeley and UCLA), most state flagships don’t come close to meeting full need, even for their in-state students.</p>
<p>Ironically, the state flagship is often a better bargain for the more affluent kids, those whose EFC exceeds total COA of their flagship, and who therefore can attend the flagship at a substantially lower net cost than a private college (though of course merit aid could change this at some schools, public and private).</p>
<p>I also think much of the discussion in the preceding posts about income being a predictor of success ignores the degree to which financial stresses are a major obstacle to college completion for very large numbers of low- and middle-income people. It’s just routine for less affluent kids to take semesters or years off to work, or to take a reduced course load to save on tuition and to make time for a part-time or sometimes a full-time job, or to try to squeeze as many work hours as possible into a busy student schedule. All of that interferes with the student’s educational progress, pushes back graduation, and makes graduation less likely. Affluent kids don’t have those same kinds of financial pressures. My guess is that’s the biggest single factor accounting for the difference in college completion rates by income level.</p>
<p>"I got married in 1986. We put away savings for the future from the very beginning, and yes, put away money for college from the moment our kids were born in 1992. We also never “lived up to our income” - we essentially lived (and still live) off one income and bank the other. Those were choices. No, we had no idea what college costs would be like, but it didn’t matter. We never would have chosen to have lived the lifestyle afforded by both incomes in order to keep up with the Joneses. "</p>
<p>I have never been fortunate enough to meet the Joneses. ( I hear they are nice.)</p>
<p>I agree with everyone.</p>
<p>And I’m not naming names here.</p>
<p>That said- It doesn’t bother me when someone posts that they wish they were up a notch financially so that their kids would have more choices. We all feel that. But it does bother me when someone wishes they were DOWN a notch financially, so as to qualify for more aid, or at least to be subsidizing less of someone else’s tuition (and that has been both said and implied.)</p>
<p>I have little sympathy for this point of view. You want fewer assets? Give them away. (and the Federal government will even make this worth your while via the charitable deduction). Want less income? Get a job which pays less or offers fewer opportunities for overtime or bonuses or advancement. Want less borrowing capacity? Then don’t have any assets (house, etc.) which can qualify you for loans, and make sure you have the world’s worst credit rating by paying all your bills late.</p>
<p>Not so hard to be among those you envy, now, is it?</p>
<p>Yes, college costs are ridiculous, and even the most frugal and long range planners have difficulty figuring out how to swing it. But the implication that a single parent (and yes, I think it’s shameful that SOME divorced people figure out how to game the system) is going to have an easier time than a married couple-whether both are employed, or whether one has chosen to be home full time-- well, this is crazy.</p>
<p>We’ve all made our choices and of course, it’s frustrating to see the chickens come home to roost. The promotion you didn’t take because you needed to meet the school bus. The transfer you didn’t apply for because your kid didn’t want to change schools in the 5th grade. The Master’s degree you didn’t complete because you were exhausted at the end of every work day.</p>
<p>I get it. And I’m fine with everyone envying the income level just above us where life is easy and the martinis are ice cold on a hot day. But envy folks making less than you because once in a blue moon one of their kids will get into Harvard and the parents won’t have to pay money they don’t have so the kid can attend? Or envy folks making a subsistence wage because every 5 years or so one of their kids from your community will win the Questbridge lottery and end up at a school that your kid can neither get into nor afford?</p>
<p>This is bizarre. And a nasty form of class warfare IMHO.</p>
<p>My mother always drove me crazy comparing the worst to the best in her arguments. That’s what one often sees. Yes, the kid with the zero EFC and living at near poverty level got a full ride to Harvard, and it’s sore for the kid who was accepted there, but can’t come up with the money because a deadbeat parent for whom no NCP waiver is approved refuses to pay. Or if parents altogether refuse to fill out any forms. Yes, it happens.</p>
<p>In my case, and in most of the case of those I know in this income bracket, yes, we are hard put to pay private college costs because we spent the money that we could have saved on other things and made long term commitments on other things that are difficult to break. I admit it fully. Also, yes, one can get a lower paying job, get rid of assets far easier than getting more. So having too much money to get aid is a problem easily solved if one want to trade places that way. Dont’ know any takers for that.</p>
<p>
As I pointed out, life is not easy for everyone who has an income of a certain level. Some people work like dogs to get there exactly so their kids can do better than they did and not have to work like dogs. I’m sure a lot of people wouldn’t particularly want to be a NYC Police Officer married to a NYC firefighter because those are HARD jobs where the living isn’t easy and the martinis are Bud Light, but that couple at top pay will cross the threshhold set out here. And we are generally talking about income, rather than inherited wealth. It’s easier to make certain choices when the parents have their college, graduate or professional school paid for by THEIR parents which is a huge leg up that most people don’t have, but one doesn’t get that help because they are so smart/deserving/special, they get it because they are fortunate. That should never be forgotten.</p>
<p>I believe there are some serious straw man arguments on this thread, extrapolating things that people didn’t say.</p>
<p>Why these kind of threads seem to evolve into this is beyond me.</p>
<p>+++ to blossom, cpt, and zooser’s posts.</p>
<p>Zooser, I would never deny the advantages that luck confers. Whether it is being born to parents who value education, or having a grandparent willing to live modestly (and not in need of nursing care) in retirement so as to help grandchildren pay for college, or even just being in the right place at the right time professionally.</p>
<p>But the financial aid system isn’t set up to create an individually crafted package to cover each and every circumstance that’s out there. (“Oh, Johnny lives in Great Neck because his grandparents moved into the garage and allowed the parents to buy the house from them when they retired. That explains things. Little Susie is in subsidized housing because her mom who was a nurses aide met the income threshold 15 years ago, moved in, and nobody ever discovered that mom is now VP Nursing services at a major teaching hospital and is only paying 15% of her income in rent. Joanne’s dad is a single parent who owns a restaurant, declared 50K in income last year, but has 200K in income “off the books” which he’s sheltering from the IRS. No need based aid for Joanne- Dad can hide from the IRS but he can’t hide from FAFSA.”</p>
<p>I get the system is imperfect. But does it help anything to gripe about families who have it worse than you? And since I live in the Northeast- Zooser- I am well aware (and extremely sympathetic to) parents where one is a cop, the other a firefighter, and on paper their income looks huge. But to realize that both parents work dangerous, physically demanding jobs which they will NOT be able to maintain into their 60’s, or are only earning these salaries because they’ve given up any semblance of a home life to take on extra shifts, overtime, and private security- yes, we owe our public servants our respect and gratitude.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t see that POV in this thread. I have seen, in just a small handful of posts, “I think I should get the same help that poorer people get/poorer people should not get this help because it raises my own costs, even though I am not willing to give up my income/lifestyle”. </p>
<p>A far larger number of posts have lamented the fact that the FA formulas do not take COL in certain geographic areas into account. I get that argument, to a point. I personally lived in NYC for 25 years, 10 as an adult, and never made more than $24K a year there. I did it by not living in the most $$ neighborhood, by having roommates - even with my first child. It CAN be done, plenty of people do it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Absolutely. As I said earlier, it bugs me that kids don’t have equal opportunities here as so much depends on parents, and grandparents, even.</p>
<p>Re: NYC cops and firefighters, of which I know many…they are well compensated, sort of, because their work is so hard and so dangerous. They DO have retirement largely taken care of by their union contracts, so don’t need to set that extra aside as many do.</p>
<p>My best friend’s husband is permanently disabled because of his time at the WTC after 9/11 - he has “the lung thing” and cannot do his job. After a lot of fighting with the bureaucracy, they were able to get him qualified for the 9/11 fund so that their 3 kids can go to SUNYs for free. </p>
<p>Nice that they have the benefit, but his life will be shorter, and never the same.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I haven’t seen this either. Rather, I have seen people who must pay $50K+ wish they could pay the same lower cost that others pay for the same product. That frustration makes sense to me, because it is unfair <em>on its face</em> (while granted, there are logical reasons for it). It can be frustrating to see colleges charge some people (but not others) $50K per year while having billion dollar endowments in the bank. If they can afford to lower the cost for half, why don’t they lower the cost for all? (I also know each college is different. Its complicated - another frustration).</p>
<p>"Well, now wait a minute, here. UC’s fully fund tuition for families making under 80K …
There’s no question that public college affordability varies significantly from state to state. But I don’t think that anyone would deny the overall trend.</p>
<p>Right, but it’s much worse for the “comfortable” than the needy. People forget this for some reason."</p>
<p>Don’t accuse me of setting up straw man arguments- this is a direct quote from earlier in this thread, and as I’ve pointed out, I think it’s irritating to insist that poor people have it made. In what world is it worse for the “comfortable” than the needy? And then to post about a kid whose family made 20K per year (in California, no less) and got full freight to a UC… ok, i accept your challenge. Go live on 20K per year in California and then come back and tell us how fantastic an experience it was.</p>
<p>Huh? It’s 80K not 20K. Is 80K poor? And, I think those quotes are incomplete, misleading, and mixed up.</p>
<p>No-one said poor people have it made. That’s ridiculous.</p>
<p>I remember the much worse part and that was about financial aid not life in general. Sheesh!</p>
<p>Posts 29, 30, 31, and 32. A sequence, hardly “mixed up”.</p>
<p>My reading comprehension is just fine, thank you very much. What seems like envy for a kid who got a full ride based on his parent’s 20K income, and the assertion that people forget that it’s harder for the comfortable than the needy.</p>
<p>In Bakersfield 80K is quite good. In the Bay Area not so much. That’s the problem. And, I can certainly understand Mr. 100K’s annoyance when he stumbles into this information.</p>
<p>$80,000 even in the San Francisco / San Jose / Oakland area is not “poor”, though. In 2011, the median household income in San Jose was $76,593, according to [San</a> Jose’s Household Income at $76,593 in 2011, American Community Survey Shows - American Community Survey (ACS) - Newsroom - U.S. Census Bureau](<a href=“http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/american_community_survey_acs/cb12-r10.html]San”>San Jose's Household Income at $76,593 in 2011, American Community Survey Shows - American Community Survey (ACS) - Newsroom - U.S. Census Bureau) . [America’s</a> Richest Cities: San Jose Tops List With Highest Median Household Income (PHOTOS)](<a href=“HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost”>America's Richest Cities: San Jose Tops List With Highest Median Household Income (PHOTOS) | HuffPost San Francisco) says that makes San Jose the major city with the highest median household income.</p>
<p>
My husband is a first responder on the 9/11 registry. </p>
<p>My point was that not everyone who has income of a certain level is a country club prince or princess. Among the choices one makes is to NOT take certain jobs because they are too unpleasant, too difficult or whatever.</p>
<p>Okay, well I went back and read the whole thing and it did not seem like envy of the poor to me. People certainly read things differently. It’s actually fascinating.</p>
<p>UCB - Exactly. How that comment became poor-bashing is beyond me.</p>