<p>@ordinarylives … funny how people take words out of context. It’s cool that you don’t share my perspective though. </p>
<p>Sorry, I see by the post count that you’re pretty new. “I drive old cars and never take vacations” is a really, really common refrain around here (throw in the occasional “no dinners out” verse if you’d like). Just something that confuses me. </p>
<p>Lots of times, strings come with money, and some of the money can be loans that immediately start accruing interest from the day the loans are disbursed. These can really weigh down a person and affect future options. </p>
<p>We have lived below our means, to be able to give our kids nice options and not tried to weigh choices made by others and whether anyone is gaming the system by choices made. Always best not to count the money others have, which may include major debt. </p>
<p>NJSue wrote:
</p>
<p>Intparent wrote:
</p>
<p>While I mostly agree with these statements, I also believe in the FA ‘A’ list and ‘B’ list, even at schools which are need-blind and purport to use the same formulas for everyone. And that the kids who make the ‘A’ list get more aid. Some schools really want some students and put them on the ‘A’ list. That doesn’t mean that student is necessarily better than a ‘B’ list student. There is just some mysterious institutional need. imho</p>
<p>When I look at the formula for aid, I would a whole lot rather have the savings I have in the bank and a bit less financial aid than minimal savings, the same income, and some additional FA from my kid’s college.</p>
<p>Yep.
& Retirement savings are not considered, unless it isnt in a retirement acct.</p>
<p>I guess any of us can have little rants about people who are living on borrowed dimes and will have to pay the piper eventually, but why would we? I think that relative security and stability are a blessing; I’m not quite sure what’s “rant-able” about the lives of people who give those up. As noted in the posts about how FA works, they’re not taking things from the rest of us–being in debt doesn’t get you more aid. So, enjoy your good fortune and good character! :)</p>
<p>I do feel the current structure isn’t fair. I’m single but have two kids to put through college, retirement to save for, most expenses the same as a two adult household, yet my ‘protected amount’ is about 1/4 of that of a two parent family. Why? I actually think singles need more in an emergency fund as if something happens to me, there is no one left to work and bring in money. Does our tuition, rent, utilities, car insurance or registration cost less? Do I not pay the ‘family rate’ for health insurance? I do find the tables to be very, very unfair to singles. The max for qualifying for the COA is also half of a married couple, and I would be waaaay inside the limit for a married couple but just miss it for a single, and yet that married household may be living on one salary, just like we are. Again, that figure is for the amount you actually pay for college, and I actually pay the same as the married family, yet don’t get to take one credit, much less two. Why? The point of a credit is to encourage behavior (home improvement credit, energy savers credit, electric car credit) -does the federal government not want to encourage my children to go to college? </p>
<p>So yes, it does grate that others get grants or financial aid when they are actually earning much more than me. My buying a new car or going on a vacation wouldn’t change things for my kids though- we’d still get nothing -and I’d rather have it saved than have to borrow it, so I still drive my old car and vacation around college tours.</p>
<p>@twoinanddone - I agree. The other thing it doesn’t take into consideration is larger family wealth issues. For example, people might have lower income than I, but some might have large estates due to parents with significant assets (grandparents of students). For those of us without any family wealth, it’s obviously much more significant that we save more and hold on to savings more tightly. </p>
<p>Obviously no system is perfect… and often people will see these critiques and dismiss what they see as complaining. Again… fortunate problems to have, even if frustrating at times. </p>
<p>I am single, but there are a lot of expenses I don’t have since divorcing. I don’t have to pay to maintain a second car, food for an additional person, utilities are lower, I don’t have to save for his retirement, or support his expensive hobbies. The family rate for health insurance… well, that depends on your health insurance situation. We insure separately (me and the 1 kid who is still a dependent, and her insurance is dirt cheap because she is only 19). I don’t see it as all that unfair…</p>
<p>I also can list many families I know personally who were not able to make the colleges they had hoped for work for their kids due to finances. In some cases they couldn’t even let their kids apply because they knew the NPC was not a reasonable price for them. In other cases, they had to say no to their kids when the FA packages did not meet their needs. I just don’t feel like FA is being handed out like candy to the undeserving grasshoppers in my neighborhood while we ants toil away to build college and retirement savings. And in the few cases where it might be going to someone where I would question their financial choices, those grasshoppers are still going to freeze come winter (retirement or when their loans come due).</p>
<p>If you on your single salary had to spend your salary on your husband’s car and hobbies, then yes, you do better without him assuming he made nothing. For tax purposes, a married couple can make $160k to still get the AOC, and it doesn’t matter if one makes $120k and the other makes $20k, it’s still okay, but if a single makes $120k, she can’t claim it. I’ll bet both families are living off the $120k and the $20k extra is more disposable income. </p>
<p>I pay as much when my kids are at home as when they are away. I still need to have bedrooms for them, pay their insurance, heating/cooling, cell phone bills, and cable TV when they are gone for the summer. I do save a little on food, but not as much as you’d think. It’s all on me, no child support or ability to shift expenses to an ex.</p>
<p>I don’t see my retirement needs as being half in any way. I’ll still need a house, a car, medical insurance, utilities. Two can’t live as cheaply as one, but one can’t live on half of what it takes for two either, and the single protected savings amount for FAFSA is about 1/4, not 1/2. I think it should be closer to 3/4. But it isn’t, so I have to pay. I always seem to be paying.</p>
<p>Twoin–I think you have a point about the asset allowance difference, and I’d be interested to see what the justification is. But that seems to be a different discussion from whether the fiscally irresponsible are better off.</p>
<p>If they go to their dads for the summer, cant you get him to pay child support during the restf the year?</p>
<p>I think it does because my savings is assessed at 5.6% starting at about $13000, not at the $55k+ I could have saved up and protected if were married. Our EFC would be several thousand dollars less if I hadn’t saved that money. I see that as a ‘penalty’ for being fiscally responsible and saving.</p>
<p>I agree that people need emergency funds in case the water heater breaks, I just don’t see how a water heater for a single is cheaper than for a married person.</p>
<p>My kids don’t have a father. They usually are away in the summer at camps or visiting relatives. No child support to be found.</p>
<p>I’m not complaining about that (but supporting the OP that sometimes it just ISN’T fair), just that my expenses are set, day in and day out. If they go away for the summer, I might save $30/mo on utilities (mostly water), another $100 on groceries, but the rest I’m paying anyway - phones, cable, rent, insurance, car, allowance. There are a few things that are cheaper with one less person (food), but not 3/4 cheaper than in a two adult house with the same income, same expenses. Both of mine will go to college in the fall, and I expect anything I save will be eaten up by “Mom, I need a book/tutor/trip/new cleats/shampoo…”</p>
<p>If you kids don’t have a father, then you are far better off than many divorced parents in the FA situation. Top colleges expect Dad to pitch in even if he won’t – my ex didn’t pay a cent for D1’s college education, but the colleges just assume he is going to when they calculate FA. And why in the world wouldn’t your kids cover their own books and spending money for college? Except for maybe the tutor, my kids covered those types of expenses themselves. I just hear a lot of kvetching… sorry, but that is how it sounds to me. Everybody has pros and cons to their life decisions and family arrangements.</p>
<p>Maybe your acquaintances are counting all those “parent loans” as part of their financial packages? They may not understand they really aren’t “aid” and that they will come back to haunt them for years.</p>
<p>I feel you, @twoinanddone. I understand where you’re coming from.</p>
<p>“they are so leveraged they will not retire until 80”</p>
<p>Well that’s pretty clear isn’t it? Maybe the U is throwing a lot of aid at the kid, but the family is still up past their eyeballs in debt. You may be paying more for your kid’s education, but in the long run you (and your kid) are going to have more options because you aren’t so leveraged that you can never retire.</p>
<p>My pet peeve is the multiple kids in college thing. Why is it that parents of twins should pay so much less to educate their kids than parents with the exact same finances of kids born 4 year apart? I’d say it would be more fair to offer no-interest loans to spread out the payments for years that overlap. </p>
<p>As far as thinking it doesn’t affect you when people don’t save for college and end up with a lot of aid, the college has only so much money. If they gave no aid, they could charge significantly lower tuition. I doubt all the money given out was specifically earmarked for aid by donors. </p>
<p>Could OPs neighbors be fabricating their FAFSA and CSS profile? There was a story that I heard about, couple lived in a huge water front home…and collected welfare benefits for years! You never know how they may be gaming the system. I’m not saying that this is their story but people are dishonest. </p>
<p>Also, how can one get so much $$$ if they have equity in their home? Am I missing something?</p>