<p>I haven't read these all yet, but the NYT has some articles about the cost of a college education.</p>
<p>re post 240
I SHOULD have said [and I'm adding the correction here] for PRIVATE colleges, the EFC is ALL a parent will have to come with, is that turns out NOT TO BE THE CASE more often than not</p>
<p>Understood, menloparkmom! I went to private and to public schools for undergrad (2 of each :) ); S will go where he can afford to go, and if that means a public school, that's fine with me.</p>
<p>My goal for the next few months is to figure out how college financing for D2 is impacted by two facts. One is that we are both in our early 40s and the other is that hubby doesn't have to save for his retirement while I have a very, very nice 401-k as the result of a company merger many years ago (in addition to saving, of course).</p>
<p>I think OP get an unjustify slam in this thread. </p>
<p>Since I joined CC I've gone through so many threads about the FA policy. I've seen basically 3 types of complainins regarding renewed new FA policy this season leaded by Harvard:</p>
<p>A. Income range lower than $100k (depends on which top level need-based FA college, it could be $60k, $75k, etc.). Family and student who basically got 'full fare' FA package, without loan, but include the 'work-study'. They are complainning have to work to com up the 'work-study' money and/or paying the tax on top of those taxable portions. Its not 'fair' that they have to spend time working to make money instead of study. (my kid, the little socialism at home, agree this one)</p>
<p>B. Income range between $100k to $160k (also depends on which college, could be toped by $150k). They got partial FA package, include loans and work-study and part of FA are tax free. But they have EFC to meet. They are complaining about unable to meet the EFC. And in some cases students in B will graduate with heavy loans while students in A can graduate debt free. It's not fair. </p>
<p>C. Income range > $160k or $200k < $300k (I'm talking about profesional double income family and made the saving through years. Not talking about the inherited 'rich' family or fund managers) Whose EFC is much higher put them into the full pay. They are complain because they don't get any FA. And they have to 'dump almost all the saving to pay the cost'. By the end of day when they pay through their kids's college, they might not better off as B family.</p>
<p>When reading through all these FA threads on CC, C got most slamed on and be told "just be grateful that you can afford it". Grateful to whom? C family diddn't get any money that they diddn't earned through their hard working. The ones should be 'Grateful' are the families As and Bs, at least they got the money that not earned by themselves.</p>
<p>No one is easy come to pay for the college educations. I agree with what Bay and dstark said.</p>
<p>Financial aid at Harvard this year doesn't take into account a primary residence in the assets. There will therefore be a number of people from places like CA with very expensive homes (from huge price appreciation), relatively low incomes who will go for free. This is in contrast to people with higher incomes, less expensive homes (because price appreciation wasn't so large) who have managed to save money by living frugally.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I have a very, very nice 401-k as the result of a company merger many years ago (in addition to saving, of course).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Zoosermom,</p>
<p>You already know the savings is considered an asset which you will be expected to draw from.</p>
<p>The money that is already in your 401k is protected will not be considered by FAFSA or profile schools. However, the contribution that you make during the year that you file, will matter. For example if you contributed $15,000 to your 401k in 2007. When you file the fafsa for D1 for the 2008-2009 school year, your contribution is going to be added back in. </p>
<p>The good thing is right now you have an idea as to what your FAFSA EFC is going to be because D1 is in college . Barring any major fluxuations in income, when D 2 comes along your FAFSA EFC will be divided in 2. The unknown is how profile schools will look at your income assets especially home equity (yes, for 2 years they will look at the fact that you have a 2nd child in college)</p>
<p>Post 246:</p>
<h2>Apparently you have no idea how frugally people with low income live. I've seen wild spenders in all walks of life: low, medium, high incomes. I haven't noticed that those with high incomes by definition live more frugally. Some do, some don't. </h2>
<p>Let's see, on this thread they've been described collectively by various posters as lazy, (versus higher income people who "work hard"), as greedy, as materialistic, as shallow, & as clueless/irresponsible about the future. They have also been described as deceptive, lacking virtue, & maybe even outright dishonest.</p>
<p>Data please? Comparative statistics maybe?</p>
<p>As someone implied earlier, unless I misread it, the bill will come due: whether credit cards, student loans -- or, if true deception -- by denial of future aid funds, auditing/scrutiny by f.a. committees, etc.</p>
<p>Geez.</p>
<p>The reason it is called need-based aid is that is is supposed to go to those who need it.</p>
<p>Every time I write a check to my daughter's college bursar or to Mohela or Sallie Mae I am grateful that I have the means to write those checks. The kid who lives up the block and attends the local community college, while she lives at home with here wheelchair-bound mom, isn't nearly as lucky. </p>
<p>If my d's college expects me to pay double my FAFSA EFC because of my home equity... well, I'm grateful to own the house. (I'll still own it after my d. graduates; and I'll still own it after I finish paying off the PLUS loans).</p>
<p>"You already know the savings is considered an asset which you will be expected to draw from."</p>
<p>I meant saving, the verb (as in putting money into my 401-k), not savings the noun (as in money in the bank). My MIL sucked the latter dry.</p>
<p>"will look at your income assets especially home equity"</p>
<p>Negative equity here.</p>
<p>We feel very, very well-treated by our daughter's college and are beyond grateful. I just don't know what to think about higher tier schools.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I've seen basically 3 types of complainins regarding renewed new FA policy this season leaded by Harvard:
[/quote]
</p>
<p>hardly any college freshmen go to Harvard. Their FA policies do not extend to other colleges. This is very much the exception and not the rule at all.</p>
<p>There are hardly any kids in group A. Kids in group A who don't go to Harvard often have a very difficult time coming up with money to attend a state school and getting ANY college education at all.</p>
<p>Sorry - I lack sympathy for someone who is complaining about his daughter not getting a good financial aid package from ONE school and looking at full rides from 3 other schools.
My kids would not be whining they would be rejoicing - and so would I.</p>
<p>It may surprise you folks but there are plenty of families where parents are working two jobs, whose kids work - in high school, during school and breaks and still NEED financial aid. If they don't get it they are not going anywhere.</p>
<p>Oh my gosh!!! It just dawned on me - lets create a NEW financial aid policy. The more money you make and save then the more financial aid you get. Just as a reward for doing well in life.</p>
<p>Those other kids from lazy, non-working, non-supportive parents who won't work - they can go work at Wal-mart. They could go work in the factory but there aren't any factories left for them to work in.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sure there are. Two words - China. O.K.. That's only one word.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Thanks, calmom. I so agree. I was beginning to think I had entered some parallel Alice dimension.</p>
<p>cur, you have; you just don't know it yet.... :D</p>
<p>(Happens to all who enter CC, I think; it's like falling down a rabbit hole!)</p>
<p>
[quote]
The reason it is called need-based aid is that is is supposed to go to those who need it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>While this is true, it is not so simple. Who needs it? Doesn't anyone who is forced to take out a loan to pay for college need it? When the higher income families are forced to take out loans to finance 3 kids in college, they are expected to be grateful that they can pay (never mind that they will be paying the bank monthly for the next 10 - 20 years). But the lower income group is not expected to take out loans - why is that? And as NJMom said, shouldn't they be the ones who are grateful for the free money?</p>
<p>This has always been a parallel universe with students, all of whom get 800 on every sat, 20 AP's with 5's and having won every honor imaginable except maybe a Nobel.</p>
<p>"The good thing is right now you have an idea as to what your FAFSA EFC is going to be because D1 is in college . Barring any major fluxuations in income, when D 2 comes along your FAFSA EFC will be divided in 2."</p>
<p>At full need schools, one is normally expected to pay 60% of EFC for each child--not one half.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But the lower income group is not expected to take out loans - why is that?
[/quote]
Lower income people have less of an ability to make loan payments. If I have no money left over at the end of the month after paying for basic necessities, then I can't take on debt. On the other hand, if I have $500 left over each month and college financing means that I have to take on a loan that costs me $200 each month, I am (a) able to manage it, and (b) still a heckuva lot better off than the person with -0-. </p>
<p>You know what I wish? I wish that everyone who envies someone with less income or assets than them could trade places with whoever they envy. I personally figure that anyone who can't appreciate their own good fortune doesn't deserve it anyway.</p>
<p>calmom,</p>
<p>If you are referring to me, I have no envy for anyone with less income or assets, I'm merely trying to analyze the situation logically, which is obviously impossible and very frustrating.</p>
<p>I understand that parents with little to no income have little means to repay loans, but it never made sense to me that colleges don't assume that their own college grads won't have the means to repay part of their tuition. That is illogical to me, so I'm merely trying to understand that mentality. I still don't get it.</p>