<p>Voila. And there we have it. No need based grants for even the poorest of the poor , but can't see how that is hurtful or to use my phrase of choice "hateful" to the underclass in America.</p>
<p>I think your idea is hateful. You think it's fine. We disagree.</p>
<p>Have what? That you prefer grants and I prefer loans? I can accept that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And so can I, bay. I was just not going to let the argument go unchallenged.</p>
<p>If my belief that every student should have a financial stake in their own education makes me "hateful" in your eyes, well I can't do anything about that. My kid is full-pay, but I made her take the unsubsidized loan anyway, because it is a great lesson in financial responsibility.</p>
<p>I might not disagree with a financial stake, but when your argument is ALL loans for all kids which is what you said here
[quote]
It seems more fair to me (ridiculous to expect fairness, I know) that all FA should be loans and not grants.
[/quote]
well that's a stake through the heart of disadvantaged kids. Somebody has to speak for them. It may as well be me.</p>
<p>My complete argument was that college is way too expensive (hence my compassion for OP), that tuition should be lowered for everyone, and that FA (on the lower tuition) should be loans rather than grants. As many on this thread said to OP, if its too expensive, don't go to that one, pick somewhere cheaper, get a loan, go to community college, take a year off to work. Many posters have a myriad of solutions for students who don't have the money to pay for college, but whose parents don't qualify for FA. Those ideas should apply equally to the disadvantaged, at least to cover part of the tuition. I don't see why they shouldn't.</p>
<p>And yes, my quote said "it seems more fair to me" that FA should be loans, because I do think its more fair, but if you read my other posts, I also accepted the fact that FA is unfair.</p>
<p>Bay, I'm raging at the FA machine , too. Daily on here. It's stupid crazy and tuition is insane. On those points we agree.</p>
<p>I wasn't a big FA winner, either. As a matter of fact, I kinda sucked at it. I won nothing. I was 0-5 on challenges (requests for an adjustment).</p>
<p>Okay. Just letting you know I'm signing off now, so you can get the last word in. ;) Good night.</p>
<p>"Live it. Then tell me how it works out for you."</p>
<p>My sentiments exactly.</p>
<p>Curmudgeon (post #226),</p>
<p>They (Family A) do have more then $700,000 in their 401(k), 403(b) and IRAs combined. They probably just picked the right stocks in the 90s. Given the 6% applied to parents assets, I have to agree with you that they have over $1 million in stock alone. Their house is about 2,800 (not 1,200) square ft. </p>
<p>Those numbers are pieces that I heard from the parents (of Families A & B) at various social functions over the years. Some people might talk a bit too much after they had too many drinks of yellow tail (or whatever they prefer).</p>
<p>
[quote]
If my belief that every student should have a financial stake in their own education makes me "hateful" in your eyes, well I can't do anything about that. My kid is full-pay, but I made her take the unsubsidized loan anyway, because it is a great lesson in financial responsibility.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Bay,</p>
<p>I think the point that you are missing and that Calmom is trying to point to is that the low income student, whose FA package is built from bottoms up (self-help money being given first) will probably graduate with 3 to 4 times the debt that your child will graduate with (I also have no problem with students having some skin in the game when it comes to financing their education).</p>
<p>For the poorest of the poor, these students will start out with the following:</p>
<p>Subsideized stafford loan :3500
Perkins loan 4000</p>
<p>Since the overwhelming majority of low income students will not attend colleges with low income initiatives or no loan policies, the chances are greater that they will attend a school that will gap their FA package (remember out of the 3400 colleges in the country you would be hard pressed to find 2% of them that meet 100% demonstrated neeed and have no loans for low income students).</p>
<p>The likelihood is very high that a loan income student does not have a parent who will be financially able to take out a PLUS loan to fill the gap. so how is this gap filled? You got it, an unsubsidized loan (up to $4000).
So the likelihood is great that the the low income student is borrowing $11,500 freshman year alone.</p>
<p>So where you will have "made" your child take out $19,000 (assuming they max out the stafford loan amounts over 4 years). Let us not also forget that since your family is fortunate enough to pay full freight, when push comes to shove depending on your child's post bac plans, you may feel benevolent enough to pay off your child's debt if you feel it is not in their best interest to carry the debt (or at least say don't worry, we'll help you out). The low income student does not have anyone to jump in and say "he, I've got this" and over the course of 4 years will have $51,000 in debt. This debt does not have to be incurred by attending private school, the cost could be a good ol home State U. Let's tell the truth here, most middle class parents (whatever you think middle class is) would never, ever let their kids take on 51k in debt .</p>
<p>As a single parent, I get the worst possible situation. Ex hubby's numbers get factored in: he is categorically not going to be helping. I see my friends (married couples) who have so much more than me and who make so much more than me - but they get FA money for their kids. They live the life of Riley, have the cars, the trips, the homes, the toys.....and I DO feel I am punished for saving. I never expected a free ride for my kids.....but I am so with the OP on this subject.</p>
<p>Kit,</p>
<p>I feel and know your story (I am a single parent too). At pretty much every school when it comes to FA, the first payers are the parents whose child (ren) are going to be the beneficiary of the education. However, if your child applied to a profile school, where the school is giving out their own institutional aid, they are going to consider the income/assets of both parents (in the case of remarriage, stepparents) . The sad thing is that your ex refuses to pay and financial aid is given on the basis of what the school thinks your family, including your ex. can afford to pay not what some one wants or does not want to pay. </p>
<p>The school is not the one who is screwing you/your kids, it is your ex through his unwillingness to live up to his social/moral obligation to help pay to educate his child. So while you may feel the process is not fair to you (I know that there are times I felt it wasn't fair to me), everyone is treated pretty much in the same way. Imagine if things were done differently and only one parent was responsible for paying for college; people would be walking out on their kids in droves in order to get the more FA.</p>
<p>I haven't found much fairness in systems. I can always find situations where someone is getting the raw end of the deal. </p>
<p>An aspect of financial aid that can really hurt, is that some of the most highly desirable colleges give the best financial aid packages. So if your child can get into one of them, he and you may not have to take out any loans as the mantra lately has been to eliminate loans and to ease the burden on the middle class. Ironic that those kids who graduate from those schools that are considered an excellent ticket to some of the better paying jobs, and therefore have a better chance of paying their loans, are the very ones who are least likely to have to take out a loan.</p>
<p>"I see my friends (married couples) who have so much more than me and who make so much more than me - but they get FA money for their kids. They live the life of Riley, have the cars, the trips, the homes, the toys.."</p>
<p>You know, this is such drek. (Excuse my Yiddish.)<br>
(1) Lots of people (for example, adolescent boys) brag about their sexual conquests, too. Do you believe all those claims, as well?
(2) What does "They get FA" mean?<br>
(a) They may very well get loans, which are ALSO f.a.
(b) They may be liars, and/or power-tripping you.
(c) They may get a legal amount of small or non-small f.a., depending on other expenses that you may or may not know about, that they may or may not have revealed to you.
(3) They may be crooks.
In that case, as the line goes, "This sounds like a matter for the authorities."</p>
<p>If there is just so much bleepin' blatant f.a. fraud going around, you folks who claim to have verifiable inside knowledge of this stuff are failing in your civic duty, & I have no respect for you in that case. You ought to be at the very least anonymously reporting such supposedly confirmable violations with actual names, street addresses, job titles, license plate numbers of such mini-mafia figures.</p>
<p>Otherwise, stop with the teasing posts. You either have hard info, or you don't. Anythiing else has no credibility.</p>
<p>Zoosermom:</p>
<p>You wrote "there are some compelling reasons against her going to a SUNY." </p>
<p>Could you explain what those reasons are please?</p>
<p>"You wrote "there are some compelling reasons against her going to a SUNY"</p>
<p>For this particular child, geography is a problem for the two schools that have her program. No aspersions on the SUNYs, but the locations of those two schools (BInghamton and Buffalo) could be problematic. But you never know (actually, I never know), things could turn work out much differently in the next year than I expect. I also can't assume that she will get in. I THINK she will, but who knows?</p>
<p>Thanks for responding. I hope you find a good fit at a reasonable price.</p>
<p>I wish that the same y'all that Curmudgeon was evoking last night could come spend some time with the students I work with, here in the real world. First of all, the idea that the parents have been paying for the students' clothes, phones, books, food etc is just not reality for low income families. Almost all my students worked, often 20-30 hours a week, to pay their own expenses during hs. Many of them attempt to keep this up during college. Why? Well, for one, they've been gapped. Two, they are trying to avoid big loans. Most of them, as Calmom says, start with the STafford and quckly end up with more, Perkins, Plus, etc. Often, their parents are turned down for Parent Plus. MOst do not own houses, so home equity is out.</p>
<p>Here's a kicker--when the student hours get too much (such as a student of mine who went to full time when her dad lost his job to help pay the mortgage) then FA is reduced, since the assumption is that money all goes toward school. Ha. And nevermind what kind of damage these hours do to their GPAs.</p>
<p>The struggle to complete school for low income students in the 99.9% (or so) of colleges which do still require loans, and do gap, is remarkable. Very few of our kids (certainly not mine) experience anything like it. That a few students at Harvard do not get loans (and i believe that's at all income levels, not just low income) seems utterly beside the point.</p>
<p>The myths (as Epiphany has posted out) about the widespread FA cheats at high incomes, are misleading, but the attacks on the poor, which started right in the very first post, are, as Curmudgeon has said, extremely troubling.</p>