<p>Parents who are younger will have more time to replenish their retirement and savings accounts once their kidlets graduate from college. If you are retiring soon, your available income will not give you that opportunity. Of course, if you are going to get a huge retirement income, it wouldn't matter. But if that's the case, you probably aren't going to qualify for need based aid anyway. For most, retirement income is a fraction of their working income.</p>
<p>wow
I DO not think elite lacs should be free. I think that they should not cost 1/3 of ANY family of five's income though after financial aid.</p>
<p>If you are from a family of 2 that makes 20,000, i would say you should go for free, honestly, and that admissions officers should notice that you probably didn't take the princeton review thousand dollar course or have all the opportunities as someone with 50k, 150, 350k, etc. and if you can get in, you should be able to go.</p>
<p>i think that i should have to pay about 20-25k which after taxes, would be about a fifth of my family of five's income. my parents would pay 20, and i would take out loans for the rest.</p>
<p>I am not saying i won't work or take out loans. i am not saying that life is fair, but that it shoudl be. maybe i shouldn't expect life to be fair (i already know this, contrary to what many here may think) but i think we should work towards a fairer world. that's it. so i was just shocked and appalled when i wrote this thread, i expounded my interpretation of what life should be, and what many elite colleges profess to be the case, namely, if you get in, finances should not stop you from attending.</p>
<p>by the way, there is not a cent saved for me for college. making a lot of money is a fairly recent event for my family, and expenses with family and other things have not amounted to any kind of college savings. not my fault, but I know it's my problem.</p>
<p>the main thing is people need to stop making assumptions about me and my situation. i'm not an ungrateful brat. i just want to be able to take advantage of the opportunities my hard work in hs has afforded me. i wouldn't hope for less for anyone else. i actually got a likely letter from wellesley recently.
i've even reiterated several times that i am willing to work and take out loans of 40+.<br>
once again, life is not fair. no duh. but that doesn't make the way things are right. i'm not asking for anyone to wave a magic wand with a solution. i just wanted to make sure that my estimate was not totally out of the ordinary, and see what others' experience and opinions were. that's it.</p>
<p>* just want to be able to take advantage of the opportunities my hard work in hs has afforded me.*</p>
<p>and you should be able to do that-
its up to you, if you can accomplish what you want, by working hard at a school that will offer you merit awards and minimize your debt- or if you think that attending a school where you may have loans of more than double the amount that undergrad students are usually advised to limit themselves to, will be worth it.</p>
<p>thumper, maybe I will have more time to replenish retirement savings but one could make the argument that older parents had more time to save for college before the kid was born. Older parents had time to establish financial security before having a child. No matter what formula is used it will not be fair to everyone. Heck, I just finished paying off my student loans 6 years ago and now I will get to jump right back in.</p>
<p>that brings up an interesting perspective daviban
My H & I didn't have any college loans at all- but we still cautioned our D not to accrue more than $15,000 at graduation.( I think she managed less)</p>
<p>Many parents on CC, have mentioned that when * they* were in college, it was much easier to pay for & some even paid for it themselves, while working part time or paid it off within 10 years.
Would you caution your kids, to find merit aid/affordable schools? or do you feel having loans that as you say- you just paid off 6 years ago impacted your life choices at all?</p>
<p>( this isn't off topic- because I think it may be helpful to the OP to hear how students manage large loans)</p>
<p>
[quote]
I am not saying i won't work or take out loans. i am not saying that life is fair, but that it shoudl be. maybe i shouldn't expect life to be fair (i already know this, contrary to what many here may think) but i think we should work towards a fairer world. that's it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I totally agree. As I said earlier in the thread, "life isn't fair" is usually a tactic for belittling and dismissing peoples' legitimate grievances.</p>
<p>As I said earlier in the thread, "life isn't fair" is usually a tactic for belittling and dismissing peoples' legitimate grievances.</p>
<p>And repeating " it isn't * fair* that * life* isn't fair" over and over again, deafens the speaker toward hearing alternatives that are comparable and feasible.</p>
<p>And of course, in this thread as in life, no one has bothered to define "fair." There is no solution to this problem that is "fair" to everyone. Some may be fair to some individuals while penalizing others. Some may be fair to large institutions with big endowments but unfair to small ones (or vice versa). What I think is "fair" for me may not be (and usually isn't) "fair" for someone else. Would it be "fair" to penalize me for saving and living below my means so I could send my kid to whatever school she wanted without financial aid (but not without some hardship), but require me, in effect, to subsidize the OP because his parents, for whatever reason, didn't save? (That's just a rhetorical question in this context.) Is it "fair" to take the goat of a farmer who has 2 and give it to a farmer who has none? Bet you one would say it is and one would say it isn't. The argument boils down, in its simplest terms, to capitalism v. communism.</p>
<p>What is "fair" always depends on whose ox is being gored.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And repeating " it isn't fair that life isn't fair" over and over again, deafens the speaker toward hearing alternatives that are comparable and feasible.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm not sure what your point is, but I note that you still haven't answered my question from before.</p>
<p>Yes we all get that the FAFSA process is frustrating and EFCs are a shock
everyone has had that experience-
so we arent so- or at least I am not so patient to listen to yet another person try and come to terms that they are actually going to have to pay for college.</p>
<p>THe student boards, may be a better place to get a shoulder to cry on- IMO the finaid boards are a place to find what is a reasonable amount for debt</p>
<p>I think taking out $40K in loans and possibly more just for undergrad is unreasonably limiting, wouldn't you agree?</p>
<p>The debate over "fairness" could go on forever.</p>
<p>The financial aid formulas are what they are. In my view, rather than railing about the apparent "unfairness" of the system, it's in the benefit of most (who might be eligible for need-based aid) to educate themselves about how the system and formulas work, and start planning well ahead of the financial aid years in order to get their finances in the best possible position, aid-wise. There are many decisions parents make in the months and years prior to college that end up hurting them when it comes time to fill out the FAFSA/Profile, and then they cry "unfair". Better to make the system work to your best advantage by planning ahead.</p>
<p>Emeralkity4, I believe college students should have some loans. Some "skin in the game" helps them appreciate the education as well as the sacrifice it takes. With that being said I do not want my d to graduate with $50,000 in loans. I do believe that $10,000 to $15,000 is reasonable. My parents cut me off financially after my sophomore year so I picked up the entire cost for Jr. and Sr. year. Guess what? I never missed a class after I started paying for it. I actually sat down and calculated what each class period was costing, in effect is was the cost per lecture. I was flabbergasted and never missed another lecture. It took me more time then most to pay off my loans as I had a child two weeks after turning 25. The financial burden of the child was all mine as her dad walked out when I got pregnant. Hopefully, my daughter will have a very, very different situation. The answer to your question is, I believe a reasonable amount of loans, or student contribution, is a good thing regardless of whether or not the parents can afford to pay the full tab.</p>
<p>Agreed about the loans. Our kids have taken the Stafford Loans for college. We told them that they had to assume this financial obligation. All told, they will graduate with $17000 worth of loans each. That is fine, and should yield affordable payments even if they do not have high paying jobs. But it does make them responsible for a part of their educations. It's also why we do not give our kids spending money....they earn that themselves. They are much more responsible with money when it's theirs.</p>
<p>I had this really great post re fairness /loans and my wireless connection croaked and I restarted and lost the post</p>
<p>But I agree re loans-
My D has small loans as well as she contributed 1/4 of our EFC from her summer earnings each year.
under $20,000 is reasonable- & what some people borrow for a car that they will keep for 10 years- an education should last you longer than that ;)</p>
<p>unreasonably limiting- i'm not sure exactly what you mean by this
i think it would suck, but 500dollars a month for ten years afterward would probably be worth it, especially because depending on the lender (whether govt or private) you can negotiate the repayment schedule to some extent.
if i made 30k, which would be in my area what i could make working retail 40h a week, and had 40k in loans, it would be about 15% of income for an estimated monthly repayment of about 500dollars (got this info from the college board calculator). honestly, it is probably worth that much to me, i'd rather have the best education for me, which would put me in a better position to thrive in school, opening doors for fellowships, grants, etc which could help me with grad school, should i decide to pursue it. and the really good grad schools for public policy, my area of interest (namely harvard and princeton) are free, so i'd rather shell out 40k for the best possible situation which i know i would make the best of and hopefully qualify for major graduate moneys.
i don't want to debate private elite lac vs good public uni again, but all in all, i think 40k would be worth it. i could live without a new car, lots of clothes, etc, but i LIVE FOR LEARNING. so for me, though not everybody, it would be worth it, i think.
i really appreciate all you suggestions for merit aid schools, but i'm a senior and deadlines have passed. after the finaid packages come in, if i decide to take a gap year or something like that i'll definitely apply to some of th ecolleges you've suggested.</p>
<p>for the chicken situation- not really comparable to college, because that's a basic human need. it would be better to think of a giong to a college as a trophy or certificate that helps you attract employers, networking, etc. you're one of the few people who are qualified for it, but why should ability to pay (or expecting an unreasonable amount of income to go into) it stop the qualified people from getting it.
maybe that's a very ungraceful analogy, but i tried.
as for the chickens,
if someone was starving and another had 2 chickens in the pot, i'd have the "wealthy" one give the starving person enough to eat.
if someone had herds and herds of cattle as an inheritance, and someone else had no cattle to start with, i'd give the cow-less one 2 to begin mating and a 3rd to keep away hunger out of the other person's vast legions.
i don't think supporting the needy should cause irreparable damage to the wealthy, or that all people should be economically equal. i just think everyone should be given the chance to succeed as an individual within the context of an ethos of giving bac to society.</p>
<p>
[quote]
if someone was starving and another had 2 chickens in the pot, i'd have the "wealthy" one give the starving person enough to eat.
if someone had herds and herds of cattle as an inheritance, and someone else had no cattle to start with, i'd give the cow-less one 2 to begin mating and a 3rd to keep away hunger out of the other person's vast legions.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Aye, and there's the rub! "You'd" give. Who decides? Who takes from the one with two and gives to the one with none? What gives you the right, if you do believe in private property? And if the one with two obtained them through hard work and diligence, and the one with none was a lazy bum - doesn't that fly in the face of your "I worked for it so I should get it" philosophy? If the one with 2 wants to give to the one with none, that's great, but to require it - that's an other situation entirely. There are homeless people. I have a 3 bedroom house. Would "you" (whoever that "you" is) require that I house the homeless? Why not?</p>
<p>The devil's in the details, and there will always be someone shouting, "Unfair!"</p>
<p>"if someone was starving and another had 2 chickens in the pot, i'd have the "wealthy" one give the starving person enough to eat.
if someone had herds and herds of cattle as an inheritance, and someone else had no cattle to start with, i'd give the cow-less one 2 to begin mating and a 3rd to keep away hunger out of the other person's vast legions."</p>
<p>This socialist view is common on many campuses-- so you'll probably feel at home.</p>
<p>But carrying Chevda's homeless analogy further--</p>
<p>YOU have a three bedroom home. May I decide to put a homeless person in one of your bedrooms?</p>
<p>If you can make 30K working retail- you must live in a much more expensive area than I do & down the street they are selling 2 bed condos that they just threw up for $500K</p>
<p>Retail- if you are blessed enough to find a 40 hr a week job, since most aren't full time because then they would have to give you benefits- pays pretty much minimum wage= even if you made $8 an hour, you would make just over half of $30K in our area, and that would be * before taxes*</p>
<p>* how much* are condos going for in your area anyway?</p>
<p>I am coming from a perspective of a parent of a child who * did * go to one of the top liberal arts colleges where tuition and expenses are well over $40K</p>
<p>She graduated last year- she* is* making her loan payments- since they are under $10K after she deducted her CityYear award, and she hasn't yet tried to find a job in another part of the country from her college, where she doesn't really know anyone- but even with low loan payments- you still have to have some income coming in.
As far as I can tell, that is what she has, * some*</p>
<p>Of course * you* will be different- so go for it & come back and let us know what happens - seriously</p>
<p>Although I think passion has some misconceptions, mocking the fact that she cares about poor folks is meanspirited, at best. I don't expect a high school senior to understand the FAFSA, let alone have a perfect answer to world problems.
Passion - remember that pre-tax $. . First item is rent, then utilities, phone, medical insurance, car payment if you have one, car insurance, food, clothes, computer line and TV/cable. With a loan payment that big you could survive, but you couldn't save much money. You couldn't save enough to buy one of those condos.
some ok tips and links here
<a href="http://www.quintcareers.com/next_after_college.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.quintcareers.com/next_after_college.html</a></p>
<p>think about what you'll be able to do, and if you will need to live at home with parents for 5-10 years to be able to do it.</p>
<p>Condos in our area go for, usually, 300k to over 1 million. The condo fees around here are 350 a month for the lower ones, and upwards. Taxes around 6k for the lower priced ones if she lives fairly close to our area, which her original post seemed to me to indicate. Most of NJ the same or higher.
In northern NJ I see many, many "boomerangs" - boomer's offspring coming back home to save money for grad school, house downpayment etc. I can't see how anyone starting out will ever own a home in this area without help or a huge salary.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I LIVE FOR LEARNING. so for me, though not everybody, it would be worth it
[/quote]
Yes, but you will learn at any college you choose. If you truly are passionate about learning, then it doesn't matter so much what college you attend, because you will motivated to go beyond the classroom, such as doing extra reading on things that come up in class that pique your interest. All you really need is a reasonably good college with a pretty good library -- and you are going to have a fruitful college experience. So you've got parents who can pay $20K but not $30K, and you may have to opt for a college that is not the favorite on your list. But you will do OK. </p>
<p>One thing I've noticed about colleges with a lot of resources and amazing courses: you can't take them all. So no matter where you go, in the end your education will only be a small sample of the offerings of that particular university. I say that because you would probably find that even a lower-ranked public university offers much more than you could possibly take full advantage of in 4 years as an undergraduate. </p>
<p>Here's the difference -- my son attended an elite LAC for 2 years, dropped out, went to work, and now attends a lower-tier state U. He took a course in political theory. He said that the difference between course content is that at his state U. a class will have a textbook that summarizes various ideas of important writers and theorists -- whereas at his other colleges he would have had a reading list that went back to the original writers. In other words, at the state U. he was reading about Adam Smith, whereas at the elite college he would have been reading the works written by Adam Smith. </p>
<p>My reaction was to ask, what is stopping him from reading those works on his own? All those books are readily available for free on the internet, and I'm sure his college library stocks them -- he has the option to do whatever he wants to do for the sake of learning. Yes, it would be nicer if he could take the more in-depth course that the prestige college would offer... but when you factor in money, you get a different story: for one thing, my son could buy every single book that would be on the course syllabus at his first college, to read to supplement the text book at the second college, at a tiny fraction of the cost of the differential in tuition.</p>