<p>I can't believe there are still people as shallow as Kenneth in the present day world. That's why many things dont change. If u must know, think a while (that should do you some good) and tell me of people you know that dont want better things, better lives. Tell me of a person that loves to be poor. All fingers are not equal and not everyone gets the opportunities to progress in life.</p>
<p>That was a little harsh Ferney (and not P.C.), but what do you all think about UltimateFrisbee and others who make slightly over the threshhold amount? They sure can't pay 60% of their income but they are not quite poor enough to benefit from these free tuition programs. What to do about those people?</p>
<p>Granted, not all are in a two income position, but if both of UltimateFrisbee's parents were working, I would seriously consider dropping the second income in order to qualify for free tuition. If you are close to the threshhold number, it may be worth it.</p>
<p>The thing you need to realize, however, is that you do not go from paying nothing to suddenly paying full freight. Those who are slightly over the threshold, as we have been for most of my son's years there, pay just a little more than those who are under it. There is no big jump that I have noticed, even as our income has risen slightly.</p>
<p>Another reason schools like Stanford want to give poor kids enough money to attend is, ironically, to help people like Kenneth. When a rich kid actually attends class with, or even rooms with, a "poor kid," stereotypes may begin to break down, and both sides are enriched by experiencing other viewpoints and seeing how others live. Diversity is not just to aid the "underprivileged."</p>
<p>this is so stupid. kenneth 2005 you want to seclude the "poor" just for their social state when infact they are quite possibly more brilliant than you. i have yet to hear of a college that is more interested in the wealth of its incomming students than their brilliance. Susantm has a really good point...the reason that stanford is so sought after, sometimes even more so than HYP, is because of its carefree attitude. students there are concerened for one another and "snotty" students quickly learn to abandon their dreadful attitude because it does nothing for them. </p>
<p>your parents were great to make 220k a year. you have made nothing close to that. the same goes for a poor student. while the parents might be destitute, the kid is still indivdual of his parents. </p>
<p>you must afterall already know of this concept of equal opportunity since you IMMIGRATED to this country. </p>
<p>often most students comming into schools are in the same income brackets individually since they havent earned any significant amounts of money through their summer or part-time jobs. it is the parents that are different so kenneth2005 i hope you learn some of the diligence and determination that your parents had to over come such obstacles. what they did doesnt make YOU any better. it makes THEM better people.</p>
<p>OK first of all, I work at Sears (blue collar, basically). Second of all, I don't have a car. Third of all, you're all crazy.</p>
<p>This is America OK; everyone has the opportunity to succeed.</p>
<p>Besides, I've probably suffered through more adversity than any of you were ever exposed to or even know about, but did I/my family go on foodstamps???</p>
<p>Kenneth, you're very, very sad:(</p>
<p>Kenneth, calling us all crazy is probalby not an effective debate technique; why are you talking to people you think are crazy. Promoting educational opportunities is one of the ways this country stimulates our democracy and our economic engine. You are right, we should not make presumptions about each others' plight in this life. </p>
<p>Did you realize that when a struggling company gets government assistance they call it economic development, but when a struggling individual gets help it is called welfare. You mentioned foodstamps like they were bad things. Foodstamps help feed our lower income families but they also provide financial security to our agricultural industry including the jobs that are created at grocery and large chain stores. Most people would agree with you that work should be rewarded, but we don't think that poverty should be a multi-generational life sentence, so we look for ways to help people out of poverty. Education is the four lane highway from poverty to success, I applaud Stanford and every other program that encourages and allows the children of our poor to participate.</p>
<p>i think it's difficult to really understand what the lower income folks go through unless you actually experience it yourself. </p>
<p>i've been in both situations (it went from high middle class to 45k or less a year because of moving to another country). and i can tell you, yes, people have the opportunity to succeed but it's not an equal chance. these people are not wasting their money buying non-essential stuff, they're scrimping every single money they have just trying to buy the essentials. you say they have the opportunity to succeed, but what does it take to succeed? it takes money!</p>
<p>i know the feeling of living from pay check to pay check, not knowing if you'll have enough money to pay rent for the next month. believe me, people in this bracket need this financial aid more than people earning 50k+.</p>
<p>
[Quote]
Elite colleges continue to adopt new aid policies Stanford University announced on Wednesday that families with incomes of less than $45,000 would no longer need to contribute anything toward tuition. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology announced last week that it would match Pell Grants. But the new data drive home that many of the most prestigious and most wealthy colleges in the country public and private arent necessarily the leaders when it comes to educating low-income students. And institutions with limited financial resources are managing to attract such students.
[/Quote]
</p>
<p>Kenneth,
I know you work at Sears and don't have a car. Most teens work a blue collar job and don't have a car. I totally understand your point about people pulling themselves up by their bootstraps, as opposed to the many families who live on welfare for generations. But you are still a kid and you are not supported by your Sears job, but by your fairly wealthy parents (who I'm sure have a car for you to use). Unless you are on your own, that's just how it is.</p>
<p>Gee, Kenneth, what an attitude. I'm sure you did not learn this from your parents, which I applaud for their hard work. Some of us do not have that luxury. I am both disabled due to severe health problems and handicapped due to limited mobility. I and my daughter are NOT on welfare or food stamps. We exist on what I get from SSI Disability, which is less than $6800.00 per year. I'm also glad that both you and your parents have their health. BTW, have you ever bothered to actually THANK your parents for all that they have given you? Or do you think that you deserve anything that you want? My car is a 1988 LeBaron, and I live in an ancient 1972 12x60 Great Lakes mobile home. It is parked on my own property, which I was able to purchase before I became so badly disabled. My daughter washed school buses this past summer to finance her school clothes and supplies, as well as her extra-cirricular activities. Have you worked for anything, or has it just been given to you, not because you deserve it, but because your parents, God Bless them, love you?</p>
<p>There are parents on this board that think like this?</p>
<p>I'd be interested in hear about the adversity you've had to go through. Do tell.</p>
<p>First off, I think it's great that low income families don't have to pay tuition.</p>
<p>However, I'm a bit concerned where the money is coming from.</p>
<p>If the money is a result of increased alumni donations, or increased funds in other areas that can be drawn upon then that's absolutely great.</p>
<p>However, I'm sure the school only has so much grant money that they can give, I wonder if the amount of grants for students in the $60,000-$80,000 range will be decreased and loans become more prevant. </p>
<p>As a member of a family of five with a single income of around $80,000 a year, I go to a university where total cost of attendance is about $42,000, more than half my family's income. My brother and sister will soon be in college at the same time. From the point of view of someone in this income range, if I received my financial aid letter and my package was suddenly all loans. . .it would be extremely hard for me to attend all four years. Yes, I would probably stay at my school, but I would be in some serious debt when I got out of school.</p>
<p>Yes it is a very good idea. However, I'm worried that it's just for public image. In order to say that they're not charging tuition to the lowest income students, I hope that they're not shifting funds from other needed sources. It really is a balancing act. </p>
<p>I hope this post doesn't sound like I'm against the program, if they're helping students get an education, I'm all for it. I just hope they are helping MORE people attend, not just shifting funds from other people.</p>
<p>This may sound unrelated. But try it on for size. This is not intended as a criticism of Kenneth, nor of those who don't like what Kenneth is saying. Instead, it is a quick story of hypocrisy. When i was younger, I worked for a while up in Humboldt County, CA (near Eureka). I remember breakroom conversations from co-workers, and party conversations with from some friends (who attended college at HSU). Many people were emotionally angry at the logging companies who were cutting down the Redwood Trees. I was new to the area, and had lived in a major city south of Humboldt County. What they said made sense to me. Why cut down all the redwoods. Then, on more than one occasion, I had an opportunity to hang out in the homes of some of these people. It did not me long to see their hypocrisy when these people had huge redwood fences around their yards, huge redwood decks, and luxurious redwood hot-tubs. My point, it is sometimes easy to criticize others (see the speck in their eye), not see our own hypocrisy (the log in our own eye - no pun intended).</p>
<p>In this thread, both sides need to come down off their high horses, and attempt to view the reality of the other side.</p>
<p>Peace.</p>
<p>I agree with StPlayrXtreme - it's great that more disadvantaged kids will become financially able to attend Stanford, but at what cost? (no pun intended) If they suddenly found a bunch of money it's fine with me. It's great that more lower-income students will attend. However, siphoning that money away from other students' fin aid seems wrong.</p>
<p>If grants are decreased for the middle class, and more loans result, middle class applicants will go elsewhere, instead of lower class. The students at Stanford are almost surely getting merit money at less prestigious institutions, and some of them will definitely follow it.</p>
<p>When a student goes off to college, they are gaining more and more independence. I believe that they should be considered more their own person, not the direct beneficiary of their parents wealth or lack of. I know very few grads who receive financial support from their parents - what makes a former student whose parents made 40k less able to pay loans than a student whose parents made 100k? They both have the same education - and in Stanfords case - they should both be able to do great things with it. </p>
<p>No matter what happens, students will be limited by financial opportunity. If college is to be the great equalizer, they need to make sure that the money is distributed in a manner that does not eliminate any group.</p>
<p>lovetocamp, I don't think that analogy fits in this case. First, most environmentalists aren't 100% against logging. They realize that we as a society need lumber in our lives, but what they want is more responsible harvesting by the lumber companies. Also, in Humboldt, there are trees that are have been there since before America was a country, and I think they have a valid argument that those trees are in fact historical landmarks that should be left alone for future generations. Second, I just don't see the hypocracy in arguing with kenneth's position. Please explain.</p>
<p>OK OK I'll admit I overreacted, so I apologize. </p>
<p>Second of all, this still doesn't change my mentality much. My mom has cancer and my dad works in China. Contrary to what all of you might think, WE DON'T HAVE A MAID (save, me). Basically, I had to do everything for my family etc.</p>
<p>Thirdly, WE ONLY HAVE ONE CAR! (which is used by my mom)</p>
<p>and lastly, i just want to say "sorry" to all you parents if you've been offended. I know you (as a group) have infinitely more "wisdom" than i do (i do have a respectable amount, though) and just because this is indirect contact doesnt mean i can be disrespectful.</p>
<p>in any case, today i learned to show more respect and to place myself in others' positions. today i learned a lot.</p>
<p>are you being sarcastic? i cant tell...</p>
<p>Just to let you know, some of us are students too who are equally offended.
But thank you.</p>