<p>We fall into that category of people who are full pay – but we’ve only had our current salaries for about two years. (I only went back to work full time a few years ago and since then had a raise or two). So there’s no assets accumulating in this family, since when the kids were little we made about 69,000/yr in a very high cost area of the country. If we had had our big salaries for 17 years, AND the stock market had done well (which it didn’t), then we probably would have enough money to be full pay at a private university – but honestly I probably would have been better off never going back to work, in order to hold our income under that magic number where we would get generous financial aid. The calculators are broken, and they tend to penalize women who work rather than staying home; spouses who take time out to raise families and then return to work, etc. etc. etc. Recently read that College Board guide to filling out the FAFSA and practically choked on the stories about how to keep your ASSETS high and your INCOME low, so that you too can live in a 2 million dollar apartment in NYC and send your kids to private school and still get financial aid. (I picture myself working two jobs while some rich lady gets her nails done – so that I can subsidize her kids’ college tuition. Ain’t America grand?)</p>
<p>^I thought the CSS Profile took care of situations where people had above-average assets but wanted finaid?</p>
<p>And as ellemenope pointed out, amenities have risen on campus. Much of the money states grant to colleges is used for building fancy rec centers and more modern dorms. And any college that doesn’t build these things gets left behind and looked down on by visiting prospies.</p>
<p>The “least” expensive schools our kids are looking at will realistically be the most expensive because they just don’t have the aid packages to award. Those schools COA is in the $20,000 range. The private schools they are considering are in the $45-50K range, BUT at those schools, the merit awards they qualify for will put their total COA into the $15,000 range or less. Every college costs the same in my book, until you get your aid package…</p>
<p>MisterK thanks for that background context. While I read this site on occasion I rarely post because because many of the posters lack even a basic understanding of economics or how the college FA system really works.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And professors should agree to work for nothing, just for the pure pleasure of interacting on a daily basis with all those bright, inquisitive young minds.</p>
<p>Right.</p>
<p>Mister K – NY has higher admit standards for in-state. Per my kids GC. I note that California out of state % went up dramatically this year.</p>
<p>I found the article difficult to read and follow. SLC has long been a school charging top dollar. I think the composition of its student body has changed a lot and I do believe that a large number of kids going there have gotten sizeable “discounts” on the price. I live minutes from the school, and my kids have gone to workshops there, I know it reasonably well, and the kids I know who go there all got some sort of award, and may be commuting to boot. A lot of schools are offering this sort of discount which I find rather insulting to be called a scholarship or merit award, when it is really an enrollment enticement. I know several knucklehead who got them, as much as 50% off tuition on schools like Seton Hall that are hurting for kids that can pay. The way it is working too often, is that those who can really afford the school are getting the discounts at the expense of those who can’t. It’s more useful for a school to offer 5 $10K awards to kids who don’t need the money and the famiies can easily afford the remaining $40K in cost than to offer one very needy kid that full $50K, knowing he may have trouble coming up with any extra expenses or price increases that occur.</p>
<p>I don’t know about college being more affordable than ever. My dad was in the civil service and I can look up what his pay would be today at his GS rating, and the increase is nothing like what it is for my alma mater. Also awards like NMS and other designated name awards are still sitting there at 1970s dollar amount while the tuition and other costs have sky rocketed. Kids were able to borrow the whole cost of college those days; and the Stafford limits remain about the same but now they barely cover 10% of the cost.</p>
<p>I find it hard to read about the squabbling over the doubling of subsidized loan interest rates when the amounts affected are so small in the scope of things. Yes, I know that every bit makes a difference when one is tight for the money. I’d like to just knock all of the federal student aid money out of the private schools and shore up our neediest kids and community/state school programs and options. IT’s not like those top schools are taking scads of PELL eligible kids anyways, and those that do take some wouldn’t be so hurt coughing up the extra that would cost.</p>
<p>Kayf, with so few OOS kids going to the SUNYs that is truly a dribble on the chin. I do wish more OOS kids would come to NY. It would give the system more of a prestige boost, which it can use.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nothing is “free” - your primary school education wasn’t free, either - it was bought and paid for by the taxpayers where you live. Or do you think all of your teachers worked for free, and the school buildings were built by magical elves?</p>
<p>And for those who don’t choose to go to college - should we just give them a check for, say, $100k? Because that’s basically what you’re expecting - “Hey, I was born, and now that I finished high school, I deserve another check for $100k from society.”</p>
<p>“Assets have risen faster than college costs for those in this economic class.”</p>
<p>I’m not sure about that. housing price came way down. stock market not having real gain in 12 years. real wage down. cost of health care, education, etc. went way up.</p>
<p>Quote - cptofthehouse:
“Also awards like NMS and other designated name awards are still sitting there at 1970s dollar amount while the tuition and other costs have sky rocketed. Kids were able to borrow the whole cost of college those days; and the Stafford limits remain about the same but now they barely cover 10% of the cost.”</p>
<p>A very good point, CPT. When I went away to school in 1985, as my dad describes it, the job market had picked up and salaries were increasing but tuition hadn’t kept pace. OOS at Berkeley according to my mom was $2500 a year. On the flip side, I was Penn admit/deny because the upper tier privates did not have the same generous FA policies that they do today. I finished my degree at the University of Washington and NMF made it tuition free. Today the situation would be completely flipped. Penn might be most affordable, Cal is a no way, and NMF barely scratches the surface at U of W.</p>
<p>There was a time when high school was not an entitlement in this country. In fact, in NY most kids in orphanages, like my dad, did not get a high school degree because state aid ended at age 16, so at that age, out you go into the world to make your own way. Now high school is an entitlement and is "free’ in that you pay a given amount whether you have kids in the school system or kids at all. Should the next step be free? It is for those who make under a certain threshhold due to the PELL and in some states, other low income grants. </p>
<p>So if a family has a zero EFC, its college students get $5500 that first year to go to college. More if they live in a state with such a program. That is usually enough money to cover most state colleges and certainly public community colleges. For the tuition, that is. If the family needs more, the kid can borrow up to $5500 if the costs support it, with some of it possibly subsidized. Maybe even more than that if the parents can’t qualify for a Federal direct loan (PLUS) and the costs support it.</p>
<p>Those kids whose parents make too much to qualify for PELL still can borrow those Stafford amounts. So local public college, if one is accessible, is pretty much covered either by loan or grant. The problem, as I see it, is that too many of those colleges are inadequate. They don’t run well, don’t have the classes a lot of students need, may not be easily accessible, do not provide the difficulty level in courses for those who need them for a base, and do not have good options to transition kids upwards to a 4 year school. But we do have an infra structure in place for most high school graduated to have college available, and by sprucing it up, we could move to offering at least the first two years of college or nearly so, or at least doable for everyone.</p>
<p>I think "free’ was used meaning at no additional cost to the person using the option.</p>
<p>Saintfan, back then, though NMF awards were just one year as they are now, a lot of school, top schools, in fact would pick up where the awards left off, so a NMF award winner truly had an array of choices. Now the list is very short as to which schools will supplement the award. That it is a one time award makes it akin to a local scholarship and may even just reduce other aid you get for that first year. </p>
<p>States that offered awards like Bright Futures are scaling back on them like crazy too. I think BF used to pay the tuition at any Florida public college. Now there is a chart and not everyone with the award gets full tuition. </p>
<p>I remember getting a slew of “small” scholarships locally that ranged for $100-1000. You could layer them right on top of your finacial aid award. I made money that first year at college. My one son who aggressively went after outside scholarships found that most of them were still in those small amounts so that the time one put into them could be like working for minimum wage if you got some. Then on top of that, for those who have need based aid, they can reduce that, though most schools will take it off of the self help first.</p>
<p>Even more telling is that a graduate usually could find a job that was equivalent to the cost of a year at a private college. Now no one would pay a kid that $60K figure that some privates are costing, except for the dear parents paying it towards said kids’ college costs.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But isn’t it the case that many NY students have an “anywhere but state school” preference? If it is the case that SUNY is not even desirable for NY students, how would be able to attract to others, other than price (which is relatively low for an out of state public)?</p>
<p>In part, NY students have that attitude because of the lack of name recognition in NY state schools. Until my kids got to college age, I couldn’t tell you what the names of the primary state universities were and had no idea what was what, unlike MD, PA, MI, CA and any number of states. We don’t have a flagship school and we don’t have the name recognition. I have a kid who is going to an OOS public, in part, for that reason. Binghamton is becoming more popular, but it is too small be a true flagship I think UBuffalo has all the pieces in place and needs to work on PR and getting more kids to go there. Too many commuters and not enough OOSers are some issues. Making it more of a flagship atmosphere would help too.</p>
<p>Most of the great flagships are the landgrant universities.</p>
<p>Cornell, in NY, is the original landgrant university, which is why they do have GTA’s with some of the community colleges for some of their schools, but it’s not the “way” Cornell is seen, since it is a member of the Ivy league athletic conference, and since some of its programs are considered to be “private.”</p>
<p>It’s a strange hybrid, but to be honest, I can’t figure out why schools like Berkeley and UMich haven’t gone to this hybrid model, for financial reasons, if nothing else.</p>
<p>The California system is the most interesting one, to me, the way it is all tied together during the app process. But, the way they’ve done it has managed to raise all the UC’s, in prestige level, and name recognition level. </p>
<p>I wonder what will happen now, though, given the number of OOS they are being forced to accept.</p>
<p>It’s an interesting point in education, and I wonder what the “tipping” point will be, or if there will be one.</p>
<p>Household asset growth in the U.S. grew by 11X between 1979 and 2009. Household assets were greater in 2009 than they were in 2005 (though lower than in 2008). It has continued to grow. The top 20% of the population owns 85% of household assets. Household assets of the top 5% grew at a far, far greater rate than those in the rest of the population, and at a far greater rate than the list COA price at the prestige privates. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, prestige private colleges like my alma mater provide a massive subsidy to millionaires. The college claims to spend $89k per student per year (and I have seen the breakdown, and it looks reasonable to me). But they only charge $55k. So in addition to keeping prices low for the top 5%, they provide a $136k subsidy over four years for every millionaire’s kid. No wonder it has prestige - millionaires know a good deal when they see it - and the college is giving each of their kids a $34k scholarship every year. </p>
<p>It’s never been cheaper (for their traditional market).</p>
<p>I don’t think the upper 5% will buy into a $89K college tab for Williams. For HPY, maybe. I know too many in that upper 5% who are struggling to keep their lifestyles afloat, and at levels that would be considered nice but not great in other areas, in the NY and Bay areas. They are showing their limits, where they can stretch these days. I don’t see miillionaires looking at things that way either.</p>
<p>What % of kids are on financial aid at Williams, anyways? It seems to give decent aid as I know some relatively high income families get some money from there. </p>
<p>I’m still waiting for more of a tiered pricing for colleges. Yes, some schools are offering am awful lot of discounts in tuition and I am seeing more of a gap between the top price category of private schools and the next levels down, but it’s still crazy. Sarah Lawrence should not be charging what it does, IMO, but I can only assume that their cost analysts see no reason to drop the sticker price to a lower level, say $55K as the total amount brought in by school tuitions is not going to increase by doing so.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How is this not already being done through financial aid and scholarships? Of course, doing it this way makes it somewhat less transparent (and reduces the price competition between colleges), although the net price calculators now do help students and parents make initial estimates before finalizing the application list.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Perhaps that is the case for the top 0.1%, but not for the bulk of the households who are considering sending their kids to college (including the state universities that enroll most of the four year college students).</p>