<p>“It may not be a midwest thing, but for some of those parents, having their kids at some elite colleges is like telling people that they summer at Hamptons/Tuscany, weekend home at Palm Beach…I would also suspect that a lot of those parents, from where they are sitting (senior hiring manager or owner), understand value of education because they know where they recruit.”</p>
<p>I think there are both types – those for whom the elite name is a marker of having made it akin to the house in the Hamptons, and those for whom it’s not – enjoying the money they have is pleasure enough and they’re happy to send the kid wherever he wants to go. I also think different social circles (of equal wealth) care differently about the prestige of elite schools. I don’t know that it’s Midwest or not, just different circles. </p>
<p>Also keep in mind that in some circles, donating big-time to the local school is more noticed/admired in the community than to a far away school. Plenty of well to do St Louisans have donated heavily to WUSTL, for example.</p>
<p>“Just a side note, I think the reason D2 is friends with this young woman is that D2 does ask much of her friend and D2 is not overly impressed with her friend’s family wealth, other than the fact that she is a nice/fun person. The only offer D2 may take up on is a possibility of internship at her friend’s father company.”</p>
<p>I think the worst thing you can do (not you, oldfort – the generic “you”) is send off vibes that you’re intimidated by someone’s wealth. Being nonchalant is the way to go. Because someone will always have more. That’s how it goes.</p>
<p>Why do you equate wealth with snobbery? The only rich people I know who are snobs are those who don’t want you to know they grew up poor or middle class.</p>
<p>I’m trying to figure out what wealthy "elite’ means.</p>
<p>Some kids go to CC style great schools, and some go to state schools and some go to Wellesley or Sarah Lawrence. Some go out west to be able to ski.</p>
<p>The one thing the “elite” wealthy have in common, imho, is a knowledge of charitable work and giving the money away. It’s a very important part of things, moreso, IME, than where you went to school. Where did you donate?</p>
<p>So, if you have some strange desire to “hobnob” with the “elite” wealthy, get involved in the local “important” charities, in some capacity or other.</p>
<p>Marian, now that I think about it, yes. In the cases I am thinking about there was a presumption from very early on that the child would go to the alma mater. The biggest difference from those from other social strata with similar aspirations for their children: admission was very likely given the development office angle. In any event, just my small sample set.</p>
<p>But how is that different from people that spent their entire lives grooming their children to attend their big DI school that they know their kid can get into (assuming he doesn’t completely screw up in high school)? If anything the wealthy seem to have a much greater focus on fit for their kids than do those in the middle class.</p>
<p>Some of the schools that have a good number of wealthy students also have amazing financial aid for those who don’t have much money, or even those who have a pretty good income. So it is hard to characterize a student population in any particular way concerning wealth. Also, understand that these days top colleges are aiming for a meritocracy, as opposed to the “old boy network” that was an aristocracy. If you want to make connections, work hard, do well, be a nice person, and aim for connections through merit.</p>
<p>Some of the subsets of wealthy I’m familiar with believe very much in environmental and social causes. So, you might find them sending kids to, say, Colorado College. They don’t have to have the kid punch a ticket at a super elite school. The kid can go do something non profit and he will never starve. Wealth doesn’t = live lavishly.</p>
<p>Also, WUSTL has an incredibly high number of very wealthy students (but not every student, of course). A professor there once joked that you knew if a parking lot was for faculty and staff and not students because it had Hondas and Toyotas, while the students’ lot had more Mercedes and BMW. We visited both, and he was right.</p>
<p>Well, everyone at GWU seemed to be well-connected and affluent. I got a lot of the “Well, my father knows…” or “My mother had a charity with her!”</p>
<p>You’ve misread the main thrust of my point. I write the above precisely because the OP seems to be obsessed with associating with “The 1%” by virtue of their SES status. From the last sentence of the quote I used from Sally and OP’s motives, the OP will be viewed by many of the wealthy elite as a social climber to be disdained and for some preferably avoided at all costs. </p>
<p>People in general want to be befriended as people with their own unique personalities/traits. Not solely on the basis of something like one’s SES. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Stop being such a party pooper! :D</p>
<p>Also, it has some bearing on this topic due to comments about “following the wealth”…which is exactly what the Vikings did. </p>
<p>In some ways…they had a similar mentality as the OP…except they weren’t interested in “hobnobbing” with the rich.</p>
<p>Basically, except for maybe community colleges and “directional” publics (“Eastern North Dakota State”), any college that does not (a) attract a fair number of students from wealthy families, and (b) generate a fair number of very successful alumni, is a college that failed a generation ago. Every state flagship, and every private university, competes successfully for a share of the wealthy.</p>