<p>Because their kids liked the school and because they can afford to. It’s rather like asking - why do rich people vacation in Europe? Because they like it.</p>
<p>If you want to get into the wedding section of the New York Times, coming from some of these colleges might help. Tongue In cheek but probably a grain of truth.
[Katie</a> Baker on the New York Times wedding section - Grantland](<a href=“http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/6769919/matrimonial-moneyball]Katie”>» Matrimonial Moneyball)</p>
<p>I think many of the private schools in FL attract wealthy kids, e.g. Lynn U and Rollins. I was helping my friend made a Hannukah dinner for a dozen kids from one of these schools, and one student overheard me mention how my son had not yet been offered in job in financial analysis sector. He offered to call his grandfather, who owned an extremely exclusive boutique firm. (I didn’t take him up on his offer). Having so many full pay students allow both of these schools to offer generous FA.</p>
<p>My friend’s grandson at NW, who went to a private school in NY, has an array of friends. He is currently with a college friend’s family in the Hamptons. His folks chuckle at how many places he gone with friends.</p>
<p>I know my son (aka the worm) had no clue who had money. His first roommate was full FA, and his parents spoke no English. His last rm/mt came from the 1%. when I took this young man and his brother out to dinner, they led me to an inexpensive Indian restaurant, ordered water, no appetizer. I encouraged them to order more. Not until my son went home with him for a weekend did he learn they lived on an estate, and he was housed in a guest house, with staff. These young men were clearly not spoiled, both academic and hard-working.</p>
<p>Just curious, bookworm,why did you not take the kid up on his offer to call his grandfather re: your son if your son still needed a job? Did you pass that info on to your son ?</p>
<p>Why do they send their kids to more expensive schools for engineering? Because they can. </p>
<p>But really the elite school with wealthy students is NOT as important as ABET accreditation, in my opinion…and in my DH’s opinion. DH is an engineer and does hiring. He hires NO ENGINEERS who are not from ABET accredited schools. And he doesn’t give two hoots how wealthy the applicants parents are, or what college…as long as the applicant did well in the engineering program, and it was an ABET accredited program.</p>
<p>An engineering degree from an “elite” university could be more beneficial to a kid who knew they wanted to get into something like consulting. Some of the consulting firms,particularly the most prestigious ones, have target schools for recruiting. Some of those firms are looking for the soft skills , social skills,etc. that they think may be easier to find at some schools more than others.</p>
<p>I think somone else said this, but it is not the students who are wealthy (yet) it is the parents who have the money and connections. Their children have a leg up when it comes to jobs. The friends of their children. Not so much, unless you manage to marry one. Maybe that’s the OP’s intent. I know several cases where the husband of the wealthy daughter is now working for Daddy. Nice work if you can get it.</p>
<p>“Just curious to see where most of the 1% end up going to school.”</p>
<p>I know one attended St. Mary’s College of California. The Entourage made quite an impression at Graduation.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>USC certainly did have that reputation, although it is trying to counter it. It currently has 23% of its undergraduates on Pell grants, relatively high for a high profile university, though not as high as its cross-town rival UCLA with 39%.</p>
<p>[Economic</a> Diversity Among the Top 25 Ranked Schools | Rankings | Top National Universities | US News](<a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/economic-diversity-among-top-ranked-schools]Economic”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/economic-diversity-among-top-ranked-schools)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If your being literal, the 1% don’t have anything too exceptional. They can pay for college without a loan, have a nice house, and drive very nice cars. In general, your neighborhood doctor would be in the 1%. But they don’t have personal jets, summer in the Hamptoms with people named “Bunny”, or have connections to the powerful and famous.</p>
<p>Truely wealthy is when there is no need to consider costs of almost anything. We have a business friend who is very very wealthy (10 figures). One of the nicest people you could ever meet. When I see him we always discuss his passion - The Yankees. This friend and his closest friends attended a very high profile Hollywood type event a few months ago ( flew out on his G4, etc). As they do some common charity work, Bono sat at their table and performed at this event. Our friends all said they could not believe how humble & down to earth Bono was. Bono’s wife is just lovely.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>True; if you want to mean the super-wealthy, you are probably referring to the top 0.1%, not the top 1%.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t look at Pell grant figures to determine where the wealthy go to school. There are tons of people who are not Pell-eligible but are by no means wealthy.</p>
<p>A better indicator is the percentage of full-pays, especially if the school has a high sticker COA. By this metric, among top 30-ish private research universities, Tufts (60.8% full-pay), WUSTL (60.7%), Wake Forest (59.8%), Georgetown (58.9%), USC (57.7%), Boston College (57.6%), Rice (56.9%), Brown (55.9%), Duke (54.9%), Johns Hopkins (54.3%), Northwestern (53.4%), Chicago (53.3%), Vanderbilt (53.0%), Penn (52.6%), and Carnegie Mellon (52.6%) would appear to have more affluent student bodies than MIT (33.4% full-pay), Harvard (39.9%), Princeton (40.6%), Yale (44.0%), NYU (45.8%), Caltech (46.2%), Columbia (47.6%), Stanford (48.8%), Notre Dame (49.8%), Dartmouth (50.0%), Emory (50.8%), and Cornell (50.9%). Some of this difference may reflect differing FA policies, however. It’s well known, for example, that HYP give need-based FA higher up the income scale than other top private colleges and universities.</p>
<p>Among top 30-ish LACs, Colgate (64.5% full-pay), Kenyon (61.4%), Washington & Lee (59.9%), Colorado College (59.6%), Barnard (58.9%), Colby (58.8%), Scripps (58.5%), Middlebury (58.4%), Claremont McKenna (58.2%), Bucknell (55.9%), Davidson (55.5%), Hamilton (55.4%), Bates (54.6%), U Richmond (54.6%), and Bowdoin (54.1%) tend to skew more affluent than Grinnell (29.4% full-pay), Mount Holyoke (29.5%), Macalester (29.7%), Vassar (33.3%), Smith (36.9%), Amherst (38.3%), Wellesley (40.8%), Bryn Mawr (41.0%), Holy Cross (43.1%), Carleton (44.0%), Oberlin (45.1%), Pomona (46.5%), Swarthmore (47.5%), Williams (47.5%), Haverford (48.5%), Harvey Mudd (48.9%), and Wesleyan (50.8%).</p>
<p>But these figures tell us nothing about where the super-rich attend college. Full-pay at a top private college or university probably puts you in the top 2-3% of households by income. Where the top 1%, or top tenth of of the top 1%, are concentrated is anyone’s guess.</p>
<p>Right. In other words, define your terms of wealthy. Otherwise, you’re just including a lot of affluent upper middle class people who still have have financial constraints, still work for a living and do well, but don’t have “power” beyond their economic buying power. </p>
<p>And there is not an insignificant number of wealthy people who got there in ways not requiring elite educations. The guy who owns a chain of car dealerships, a chain of restaurants, a series of high end beauty salons, etc. if they are savvy, they can be well outearning the local doctors and lawyers with fancier degrees. You just might not know it.</p>
<p>I am thinking the super wealthy. Like the super powerful families.</p>
<p>Forget defining wealthy. First try to figure out why you PERCEIVE this as an important college selection criteria. It is NOT an important college selection criteria. Not at all.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You seem to know what you are looking for. It should be pretty easy for you to look up information about these families online. I doubt anyone here would be interested in doing the research for you.</p>
<p>This is such a bizarre thread. It makes me think that the OP is some reality show producer looking for an angle… or a spouse.</p>
<p>Yeech…</p>
<p>Super wealthy and super powerful are not the same thing.
Powerful implies governmental or business clout. Wealth is just wealth. One could be quite wealthy and not necessarily in a position of power (except over one’s company). Or, one could be powerful but not as wealthy. Many big city mayors, senators, etc may have lots of power but are out earned by constituents.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Note that the one school that Katie Baker mentions twice for points (Berkeley) is also among the highest in terms of [url=<a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/economic-diversity-among-top-ranked-schools]percentage”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/economic-diversity-among-top-ranked-schools]percentage</a> of Pell grant recipients<a href=“38%”>/url</a>.</p>