<p>Why should attending Princeton be free? There is no logic to it...</p>
<p>It would attract high achieving students who would otherwise attend less prestigious schools on scholarship.</p>
<p>that's silly--princeton's finaid is strong enough as it is.</p>
<p>Some people feel that a free ride at a lesser school is more worth it than paying 20 k plus for middle class families to go to Princeton, even with the strong finaid.</p>
<p>Some of the lower rich kids often do the same thing.</p>
<p>yeahhh i was just going to say that- the finaid is great of course, but families who are able to pay the money and don't qualify for finaid still might like to save near to $45,000 a year. </p>
<p>my aunt was just telling me about parents she knew who were rich but simply did not want to pay that much money for their child to go to college, especially if the kid may be planning on med school or grad school.</p>
<p>I would have to pay full tuition to go to Princeton, but would get full tuition paid at the state school (with a stipend). That's incentive to not go to a school like Princeton (thought Princeton is hands down my number 1).</p>
<p>Haha, everyone keeps saying that Ivies aren't the epitome, and that people succeed just as well without an elite education, but then people act all surprised when someone actually turns down an elite school.</p>
<p>so, make the need-based financial even better. But dont make Princeton free to every millionaire's kid...</p>
<p>Princeton has so much money, they can run the school on the INTEREST generated yearly..</p>
<p>If people want the education badly enough, they'll pay for it. I'm all for making the education free for those who can't afford it, but people who don't want to is another matter altogether.</p>
<p>Education is an investment like anything else. If you want an excellent education, it always comes at a cost. There's no such thing as a free lunch.</p>
<p>1 of 42, please don't just quote catchphrases. I believe that that's one of the things they specifically warn you against on college essays...</p>
<p>Thing is, an elite institution could theoretically make money solely off of donations from thankful alumni who have graduated and are doing well in society. Also, here you come across questions of whether or not elite institutions are worth the money. Is an elite diploma worth more than 200k at 8% compounded yearly down the line? Of course, if you're lower class or upper class, the cost doesn't really hit the family that much. But for a family making 90k a year expected to shell out 25k (including all of the extra necessities etc) for college, that's a pretty high percentage of income expected, and then the question of whether or not an elite diploma is worth it. Obviously some people decide it isn't, just as many more decide that it is.</p>
<p>'Princeton has so much money, they can run the school on the INTEREST generated yearly.."</p>
<p>Run the school, probably yes. Maintain a position of international leadership in research and teaching, no.</p>
<p>
1 of 42, please don't just quote catchphrases. I believe that that's one of the things they specifically warn you against on college essays...
</p>
<p>Which part of my post was a catchphrase exactly? Would I be correct to assume the "free lunch" part? If so, that's not a catch phrase, it's a well defined economic principle. None of the other things I said are catchphrases, unless you count the truth as a catchphrase, in which case you are slightly misguided.</p>
<p>
Thing is, an elite institution could theoretically make money solely off of donations from thankful alumni who have graduated and are doing well in society. Also, here you come across questions of whether or not elite institutions are worth the money. Is an elite diploma worth more than 200k at 8% compounded yearly down the line? Of course, if you're lower class or upper class, the cost doesn't really hit the family that much. But for a family making 90k a year expected to shell out 25k (including all of the extra necessities etc) for college, that's a pretty high percentage of income expected, and then the question of whether or not an elite diploma is worth it. Obviously some people decide it isn't, just as many more decide that it is.
</p>
<p>It could make money off donations alone - in theory. In practice, not so much. Yes, it would still be a good school, but it would not (as mentioned by the last poster) maintain its position of leadership. Now, as to whether the diploma is worth it: maybe, maybe not. Before I get to why that question is irrelevant, I want to point something out: you quote a 200k figure, followed by posting about a family making 90k per annum, and paying a hypothetical 25k per year. That's 100k. Now, it's entirely possible that there are some families that are forced to pay 45k per year and have incomes that aren't astronomical, but I doubt any case is extreme as you're imagining.</p>
<p>However, that question is irrelevant. It is the unfortunate truth that as long as Princeton costs anything, some students will always turn away due to the cost. Marginal benefit vs. marginal cost analysis bears this out. Even if Princeton is free, what about the other schools that are giving students money (on top of full tuition and room and board scholarships) to attend? I know a friend of mine was offered some ~4k per year to attend a certain university that I will leave unnamed. As long as there is any cost whatsoever, you're not going to get everyone. </p>
<p>As I posted above, but you clearly ignored, there's always a trade off. If an amazing student decides not to attend for monetary reasons, that's a shame. But will it be the end of the school? Absolutely not. At the moment, I believe the benefits of tuition (excellent research, teaching etc.) outweigh its costs (small numbers of students turning down offers because of finances).</p>
<p>And financial aid only gets more generous every year.</p>
<p>For the record: I threw a quick ad hominem attack into my post quoting kamikazewave. Since that has been edited out, let me rephrase in the following way:</p>
<p>Please don't insult me by debasing my argument like that. Respond to the actual points made, don't just dismiss it as a catchphrase - it's not, but even if it were it wouldn't make it less relevant or true. More importantly, don't try to disguise attacks on my credibility with flippant remarks about college essays.</p>
<p>I'm not, I responded to your points, and I also pointed out you used a catchphrase, which college admissions warn you against using. Thought that might be interesting since this is a college admissions website.</p>
<p>Just don't use simplistic notions such as "there's no such things as free lunch" in your arguments, since we're not talking about lunches here, and actually public schools do offer free lunch, it's provided by tax dollars, just as a free school such as Olin is provided through donations.</p>
<p>"No free lunch" is not a simplistic notion, and I believe that your characterizing it thus is a sign of you not understanding what I'm saying. So let me try to rephrase for you.</p>
<p>"No free lunch" is an economic phrase designed to reflect the concept of allocation of resources in a world of scarcity. The idea is that there is no such thing as "free" - there is always a cost to someone or something, even if it isn't to you. To use your own examples - the free lunches in public schools aren't free. They're payed for by other taxpayers, which has been decided upon as a government policy because the benefits to the children and to society (in terms of human capital development, among other things) outweigh the costs in terms of money to other taxpayers. Furthermore, it's morally the right thing to do.</p>
<p>Olin's "free tuition" is payed for by the Olin foundation iirc, so it's not really free either - just not paid by students.</p>
<p>Which is really the whole point. If you were to make Princeton's tuition free for students, it would have to be paid for by something else. Would donations step up enough to support it? I don't really think so, since I doubt that anyone who wouldn't be inclined to donate now would be more inclined with free tuition (and I doubt that the students who would be attending who otherwise wouldn't would be especially more inclined either). Is the endowment enough to support it? Maybe, but not without sacrificing some of Princeton's position as a leading research school.</p>
<p>The point is there's always a trade off. I strongly think that this trade off is not one that Princeton should make - for the above stated reasons, and also because part of making someone appreciate/utilize something more fully is by making it cost something. I believe that a student should always be forced to make some kind of investment towards their own education. It's like buying a house. Shelter is as basic a right as education is, but you don't see people advocating free houses for those who don't want to make the sacrifices entailed in putting a down payment on a house and getting a mortgage. And before someone makes the argument about less expensive forms of housing being available, the same is true of less expensive forms of education.</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>So, is that free enough of catch phrases? Again, respond to the points. The ideas I have expressed here are not simple, and whether or not I express them as above or by saying "no free lunch", they are just as valid.</p>
<p>good post, 1of42.</p>
<p>lets just all be friends.</p>
<p>Alot of people don't realize that, according to Princeton's website, 22% of Princeton's budget comes directly from tuition. At this point, Princeton could never conceivably just drop 22% of its spending for what conceivable benefits it would bring.</p>
<p><a href="http://giving.princeton.edu/images/budgetlarge.gif%5B/url%5D">http://giving.princeton.edu/images/budgetlarge.gif</a> shows spending</p>
<p>Alot of people think of the endowment as this big lump sum of money that can just be spent at will. Most of the endowment is not available for the general use of the university; people who leave money to the university often endow a professorship, a building, the athletics teams, musical programs, ect ect ect ect. </p>
<p>In order for Princeton to continue to evolve, the endowment needs to grow, just to sustain the vast resources it has. Anyone here who thinks Princeton could function without 22% of its budget should think twice before posting on this thread again. </p>
<p>As for the perceived improvements it would bring, they would not even come close to measuring up to the costs. Anyone who can get into Princeton can go, and graduate with NO LOANS. Would having no tuition attract "better students" ; the drop in quality which losing 22% of the budget would actually lessen the quality of those who apply. Believe it or not, academically many of the best students come from middle class to rich families who have all the money and time to educate their son/daughter and send them to the best schools.</p>