<p>sev – my point is that if there are 20,000 students at a state school, there are probably 20,000 different percentages of how much of a student’s cost of education is being paid by that student. </p>
<p>take the engineers. at some schools, engineers pay more but at some they don’t. does that extra charge equate to the incremental cost of their education vs an english major? maybe, maybe not. some of those engineers are on athletic scholarships. some are on merit scholarships. some get school, state and/or federal need-based financial aid. some are full payors. some are faculty kids with a tuition waiver. some are in staters. some are out-of-staters. some are foreign students.</p>
<p>seats in a college classroom are like seats on an airplane. there’s many many different prices and cross-subsidies.</p>
<p>Heck – the reason that many state Us were established in the first place was due to the subsidy that came from the federal government (i.e. Morrill Act). Great idea, by the way.</p>
<p>How much of a subsidy do in-staters really get if the state only funds 7-10% of a certain public university’s budget, and students provide for 60%+ of the school’s budget?</p>
<p>msndis notes, “s a middle-class parent who has scrimped and saved so I can put my kids through college I can honestly say that I resent a portion of my daughter’s tuition going to someone whose parent(s) chose to go on vacations, bought the latest technology, and lived beyond their means. Parents need to make paying for college a priority in their budget. A PUBLIC university should be financed through taxes and the tuition should be set the same for everyone attending (at least for in-state students who helped pay the taxes that fund the university). EVERYONE should be paying for a PUBLIC university, not just the middle-income and higher-income students through their tuition.”</p>
<p>Response: (sigh) You are assuming that all people receiving aid have parents who are spendthrifts. This may be true in a few cases, but I would bet that majority of kids are from poorer families. Frankly, I see nothing wrong with public universities using some tuition money for lower income kids in their state. After all, public universities do have a mandate to benefit the public.</p>
<p>However, I wouldn’t give the same answer for private universities that aren’t subsidized from the state. I know it happens all the time,but I don’t like it.</p>
<p>What I find particularly galling is for schools to give better aid or easier admission based on racial background regardless of the economic conditions of the applicant. That is just too stupid for words.</p>
<p>If a student has absolutely no “skin in the game” it is absurd. Case in point, I talked with a student admissions rep at a college fair and asked her if she new who gets their UC “Regents Scholarship”. She said she wasn’t sure what that is, but she is from a low income family so gets a full ride! Then she proceeded to tell me that she did know who the UC “Regents” were and that they were the ones who keep raising the tuition! The gaal (actually, the ignorance) coming from someone paying absolutely nothing for her education. Again, if nothing else, these “low income” (chuckle, chuckle) students should be paying something, anything to show that they actually appreciate the unbelievable charity they are receiving.</p>
<p>The whole needs-based approach is broken. Schools jack-up their tuition and then increase the grants for those at the bottom - well guess who’s paying the freight? Those in the middle who thought that had saved enough for college.</p>
<p>The whole needs-based regime should be eliminated.</p>
<p>ExhaustedDad,
I would argue that many wealthy kids have no"skin in the game". When mom and dad foot the whole bill, they see the education and “college experience” as an entitlement.
I experienced a whole lot of that back in my day at a private school. Kids would trash the dorms and daddy would send a check. I knew many who were enjoying their four years until getting a job with daddy’s company.</p>
<p>* Again, if nothing else, these “low income” (chuckle, chuckle) students should be paying something, anything to show that they actually appreciate the unbelievable charity they are receiving.*</p>
<p>This doesn’t even make any sense. In order to appreciate the charity that they are getting, we should take the charity away?</p>
<p>In their mind, it is. But is there anything wrong with that? Some kids will really appreciate what their parents have provided - especially if they attend a university with a lot of other low-income students that talk about how hard it is to fund college.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>A good recession decreases the amount of that stuff.</p>
<p>Most full-pay college students know their parents don’t have to pay. They also know that if their parents choose to stop paying, they will have to drop out because they are not eligible for FA.</p>
<p>OR…have a small business, structured in an accepted manner, make sure all assets are held in the business…do not let your kids accumulate ANYTHING in their name…pay for your healthcare from the business…be sure to show very little income…and apply to FAFSA only schools (pretty much most large State publics) where the business does not count towards your assets…DO NOT save in such a manner that it counts toward your available ability to payu…</p>
<p>and then your upper middle class kids can qualify for PELL grants…yup…I do know of exactly such situations.</p>
<p>The problem with any ‘game’ is rules can be manipulated…by all levels of the
socioeconomic spectrum.</p>
<p>^Yeah, to suggest that only the poor take advantage of the system is kind of ludicrous. They don’t even have binders of lawyers to help them figure it all out. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>I did put $100,000 in assets, so that may have changed the financial need calculation. Note that BGO says that the student must “Demonstrate income below $80,000 with financial need, as determined for federal need-based aid program”, so perhaps assets with low income may produce that result.</p>
<p>@SteveMA (and anyone else who was offended by my resentment at having to pay extra tuition so I can help pay someone else’s college tuition). First of all, I have to wonder how many of you are on the receiving end and are not paying a few thousand extra dollars a year to help out someone less fortunate than you are. If you are on the receiving end, imagine being told that in order to attend college you have to pay a $500 yearly “fee” so those less fortunate than you are able to have the cost of their books subsidized. Would it bother you that you had to find that “extra” money somewhere? </p>
<p>I do give to charity but I prefer to be able to pick and choose the charities I give to–I don’t want to be forced to be charitable when it comes to college tuition (other than what I pay in taxes for our public universities). In my opinion, it is equivalent to a special tax for those who don’t qualify for financial aid.</p>
<p>Here is the reason I made that statement in the first place. My friend’s sister’s husband is a dentist. They have a HUGE house, their kids of driving age were given NEW cars, and they go on spectacular vacations. Their oldest daughter qualifies for a Pell Grant. Why? Because they make their taxes look like they barely bring in any money from the dental practice. I’m sure they aren’t the only people doing this. </p>
<p>Also, FAFSA takes your savings into consideration so a family that has scrimped and saved has to list the amount of money they have in the bank and in investments. That counts against us when it comes to financial aid (and we don’t even have much invested or in savings). In order to pay for our kids’ education, we don’t have any new technology (no flat panel TVs or any iPods, iPads or iPhones–in fact our phones are almost three years old and don’t connect to the Internet), our cars are over 10 years old and we haven’t gone on vacation in over five years. We rarely go out to eat and even less frequently waste money on Starbucks. I’m having to limit the colleges my younger daughter is applying to because we can’t afford the application fees and score reporting fees for reach schools. </p>
<p>It is our choice to pay our kids’ college expenses so our kids can hopefully enter the working world after college with no debt. I don’t know if we’ll make it but that is our goal. Next year both our kids will be in college and I really don’t think we’ll be able to pay for both. They both have jobs but don’t make enough to pay their own way through college or even make much of a dent in the tuition. We’re hoping the younger one gets some great merit scholarships. If not, she’ll be forced to wait a year to go to college or possibly start out at a community college (we paid $500 for ONE CC class for her this past summer so community colleges are no longer affordable either). If she sits out a year I’m worried she will not go to college at all. </p>
<p>I’m sorry if I sound bitter but I can barely afford to pay my oldest daughter’s tuition and this economy hasn’t helped. My salary has decreased 3% and my husband’s has decreased about $400 a WEEK. In addition, we both pay more now for our health insurance and my husband’s company is no longer contributing to his retirement so we eventually need to save more to make up for the lack of his retirement. I’m at the financial breaking point and making me pay extra tuition to help someone else out is NOT my idea of PUBLIC education. At a private university (which we cannot afford), I don’t have a problem with it.</p>
<p>So, I apologize for anyone I may have offended but I honestly cannot afford to help pay for others’ college tuition.</p>
<p>It’s also not fair to be the kid taking out loans to pay for some one else to go to college when you have to pay for it yourself. Many parents on CC will help pay for their kids education, but in the general public many will not or can not, no matter what the reason. A kid could be the son of a millionaire and still be given no money for college. Is it fair the kid has parents that won’t pay? </p>
<p>When I was an undergrad my parents had a lot of bills, and no matter where they came from they had little money to give me for school. So I worked two jobs while going to school, taking out loans, while my roommate was on full financial aid. Fair? My roommate partied while I worked and studied. I was not my parents, was over 18, yet was given no aid.</p>
<p>I think FA just serves to drive up the cost of college. The ready availability of student loans does, too. Many private colleges and certainly virtually all public universities NEVER really reduce their expenditures and cost structure. They siphon funds by ramping up tuition, then creating a labyrinthine system in which, indeed, a whole lot of income redistribution goes on – to pay the way of the relatively few on FA but mostly to fund themselves. Same for the loans.</p>
<p>If we pulled all that out from under them, the costs of college attendance would go way, way down. </p>
<p>But won’t happen.</p>
<p>I’m really hopeful the internet-based remote learning model takes hold for higher education. Wish it had come along in time for my kids.</p>
<p>I think the entire model of college education in this country makes absolutely no sense.</p>
<pre><code> I understand where you are coming from. We have a friend, he is first in his class, high stats etc., and he wants to go to Cornell. The problem is his parents are both remarried, and so, financially, ALL FOUR salaries count against his assistance at a ‘need met’ school. Those who have scrimped and saved for college, and lived responsible, middle class lives, get burned in the college process.
</code></pre>
<p>However, please note that some private schools will be a better deal for you than a state school. Do not assume that you will be liable for the ‘sticker price’ of Private School A or B. ALSO, there are a few state universities which are FREE for high performing students. We had a wonderful experience with the application process to Alabama (Honors College), and I believe LSU, Mississippi State and Pittsburgh have similar deals. A few of the students at the top of my D’s class turned down Notre Dame and Cornell, because they got a better deal at Pittsburg. (As in FULL SCHOLARSHIP)
If you have a child who is at the top of their class, super overachiever etc, there ARE great deals out there, you just have to find them. Your state institution may not be the best way to go.</p>