<p>Yes, I think this is absolutely important to point out. Dorms and “sleep-away” living costs should be the responsibility of the student and their family, with only very limited exceptions (low-income student in a rural location far away from any state public university, for example).</p>
<p>California is still blessed with a vast system of public universities in just about every corner of the state - tuition and fees should be subsidized more heavily, but that might mean attending Humboldt State instead of UCLA.</p>
<p>^^^^^
Payroll tax is way different from income tax. It should be viewed as a contribution to your retirement fund (although it does not work exactly this way). In general, you pay more, you get more. It is a completely different category of tax.</p>
<p>EIC has nothing to do with payroll tax. Only federal income tax. And I said in my previous post that people who do not pay any INCOME taxes, receive EIC. So, please don’t mix two different concepts.</p>
<p>Sorry, but no. A tax is a tax is a tax. It’s a tax-supported social insurance program, but I don’t get out the money I put in and I don’t have a choice to participate or not. The payroll taxes coming out of my $17-per-hour government paycheck are funding Social Security and Medicare benefits for retiring Baby Boomers. I don’t have a problem with that - that’s how it works.</p>
<p>You said people who don’t pay any taxes get EITC and that’s just false.</p>
<p>I just want to say that this can screw up some low income kids. </p>
<p>I got a 20k private scholarship (5k/year) on the condition that I go to a public 4-year uni. I am not able to use it at a cc. Under that plan, I would have had to forfeit that entire scholarship. </p>
<p>Re#138 Actually a student from a family that made 85k probably would qualify for aid.
They would not be eligible for a Pell grant, but they would for a stafford loan
They also may have enjoyed the resources of a situation that helped them prepare for & find merit aid from the school &/or outside scholarships, as well as perhaps some savings to pay for college.</p>
<p>Using my book group as an example of average middle class parents with kids in college, this is our experience.
My oldest attended private college that met 100%need no merit aid offered.
Youngest attending public instate school, cost is just under EFC. Stafford loans.
Parent K- They have money for college but don’t qualify for aid even for private. Child is attending community college with plans to transfer to private after two years.
Parent E- they invested enough in the state tuition plan, that instate tuition is completely paid for, a very wise move on their part. They are only paying for dorm costs.
Parent P- child is attending a relatively unknown private school with need & merit aid.
Parent S- child is attending a vocational program and is planning on a apprenticeship.</p>
<p>All obviously doable ways for middle class kids ,to continue their education.</p>
<p>( Diana3 I know there are loan forgiveness programs for educators, has she looked into that?)</p>
<p>You know what I will support? No deductions (schedule A, qualified tuition, child care, etc), but a simple tax rate for EVERYONE. Maybe even two tiers. 5% for low income. 10-15% for everyone else. </p>
<p>P.S. My assertion about doom and gloom of national health care is based on the fact, that those systems are under a lot of financial pressure and you have to wait 14 months get a knee surgery. Other than that, they work great!</p>
<p>So what collective wisdom is the forum going to offer the OP?</p>
<p>One unorthodox suggestion: your family is very very close to the B&G cutoff. Find out if you are eligible for B&G next year if your family income drops under the $80k limit. Can you afford UC with that? If so, your parents may want to consider a slight income adjustment in order to be B&G eligible. </p>
<p>Otherwise, you’ve got at least two other obvious choices. Choice one: go to your local CC, save up money, then transfer to a UC. CC rather than CSU because that’s often an easier transfer path. Choice two: take a gap year, and reapply next year for schools that will offer significant merit/need-based aid, fitting with your family’s budget.</p>
<p>You’ll need to consider several things. What is the reputation of the CCs near you as far as sending students on to four-year schools? What percentage of students are able to move on within two years? Three? You’ll need to talk to the counseling office at the CC to find out if your hard work is all that’s needed.</p>
<p>What are you considering majoring in? If you are interested in STEM fields, transferring from a CC might mean you have to retake some coursework at the UC, meaning 3 years after transfer. </p>
<p>Do you want the four year experience, even if not at a UC? That argues in favor of a gap year. Would you be able to set up a structured experience for yourself, with goals, if you take off the year? You won’t be able to take any college coursework during that gap year, so that you can apply as a freshman applicant, not a transfer. </p>
<p>After doing some research on schools with big merit aid, do they intrigue you enough that you’d want to attend them? Check your budget. Can you and your family afford the cost of two years of a UC (and throw some tuition increases in there, 'cause they’ll be coming as well)?</p>
<p>The current top tax bracket is 35 percent above $379,000. So basically, you’re complaining about college costs, but you want to cut tax rates by more than half for the richest people in America?</p>
<p>I think Diana is trying to say that we should level the playing field. If student A’s parents make $80,000 and student B’s parents make $50,000 and they get the same degree there are even differences in the loans the 2 are obligated to take out.
Student A is accumulating interest from the day they sign for the government loan and student B’s interest doesn’t start accumulating until after they graduate.<br>
So they both graduate and become nurses with the same pay at the same hospital. Student A has far more to pay off because of the accrued interest than Student B. There is no fairness in this system and is just a way for the political classes to garner votes.</p>
<p>You can spin my words any way you want. And so can I (spin yours). When you suggest that we should tax richest people even more to fund your programs of choice and these people have no choice but pay, what you are proposing is thievery. </p>
<p>And by the way, you are either naive or disingenuous when you are happily proposing increasing your taxes to pay for education. At $17 per hour, your taxes will not be raised. There will be no political will to do that. It is only those who already have high tax rates who will be affected by the tax rate increase. In your opinion what would be a fair tax rate to levy on the current 35-percenters?</p>
<p>It looks like OP did well in school and on her SAT’s:</p>
<p>“I have a 4.2 weighted GPA, 4.4 weighted UC/CSU GPA, and a 2140 SAT I.”</p>
<p>If we are looking to restructure the financial aid system, why not consider awarding more money to reward those who perform well academically. I think that in our desire to have more people attend college, we should still be focusing on rewarding those students who have excelled in High School. I do not agree with the suggestion that those who excelled in High School should go to community college or a lesser state school.</p>
<p>But student A’s family has 20K more in after tax income to help pay for college and loans? Are you saying that all students should be expected to pay the same amount despite family finances? Certainly family A might have more financial obligations, but isn’t that a choice?</p>
<p>ETA: In addition, family A will have more money to help their child “set up” for adult life and is more likely to, for example, help with buying a car, housing, and even clothing.</p>
<p>I agree with shadow. Those whose GPA, SATs and other merits are so high as to be awarded Regent’s Scholarships (I think they are the top 1% of those admitted to UCs) should not have to turn down the Regent’s because of finances. </p>
<p>The state pays for marginal students to attend CCs but doesn’t invest in the best and the brightest. Makes no sense.</p>
<p>Gtalum…I can’t help it if you can’t or don’t want to see the unfairness in the process.
They both had to take out the loans after EFC and one gets a better deal and you think the parent of student A is making so much that they are somehow OBLIGATED to help out their adult child?? No wonder we have kids that never grow up…in your perfect world parents are continually taking care of their adult children.</p>
<p>riverbirch, college costs are considered by the government and colleges to be a shared responsibility of the family. There is no obligation to do so, but parents who have the ability to help their adult children pay for college are expected to contribute.</p>
<p>This is fair, because while I believe in significant subsidies for college education, some degree of cost-sharing is important to support responsible behavior by students.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not entirely true. Even someone with EFC of zero gets $2,000 in unsubsidized loans each year - the subsidized loans max out at $3,500/$4,500/$5,500.</p>