There Has Never Been A Better Time To Be A Smart, Rich Kid--Williams Pres

Parents Forum
141

<p>
[quote]
"Personally, I think we should be thankful that we live in a time when college admissions are actually relatively meritocratic and where the top schools have pledged to provide extensive financial aid packages to poorer students despite the decline of their endowments. Whatever one might say about the travails of the current economic maladies, things are clearly far better than they were in the old days."

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I certainly appreciate the aid. My parents make about 110K and have four children and by my sophmore year in college there will be three of us in college. So the financial aid is something that I really appreciate otherwise I would not have even applied.</p>

142

<p>I agree with sakky re hyperbole. However we tinker with need-blind aid, the system is much more meritocratic than it was in the 60's. </p>

<p>To bluebayou, there are four potential differences that might not apply to all people. None of them have to do with the quality of the courses (especially at the basic level).</p>

<ol>
<li><p>For students who are interested in research or might be if they had access to the real idea creators, there are many more such people at HYPSM than at Vandy, Tulane, Miami or Tennessee. In the fields I know, the difference is one of orders of magnitude. That doesn't mean that the Vandy, Tulane, Miami or Tennessee people are not smart or don't understand their field (they do). But, they are much less likely to be the guys who had seminal ideas that helped create fields and really shape the way people in their field (or beyond) think. They may actually be better classroom teachers. But the access to the idea creaters will be of immense value to some students but no mans all. </p></li>
<li><p>Horizons. Going to HYPSM encourages one to think, "I want to be the best in the world in my field." My sense is that at Tennessee or Tulane, the focus is more likely to be on being the best in the state or maybe best in the South or maybe not best as an aspiration. Many people are influenced by their reference group. Some kids at Tennessee or Vandy will have the "best in the world" attitude and you may or may not want your kid to be swimming in that pool, but I think that is a significant difference.</p></li>
<li><p>Contacts. Because of the greater selectivity and the access to opportunities afforded to HYPS, the kids' classmates at HYPS will end up in relatively elevated positions around the world compared to Vandy or Tennessee or Miami or Emory. Depending upon what the kid chooses to do, this may be extremely valuable or not valuable at all.</p></li>
<li><p>Intellectual stimulation from classmates. If the student is one who really learns and gets excited by stimulating intellectual discussions, if he/she attends a school that has brighter, more creative kids, he/she will learn more and be excited more about his/her education. There is a question as to how much the intense competition favors the bright creative kids versus the bright hoop-jumpers and a second question as to how well SATs, GPAs and the extra secret sauce that HYPSM adcoms actually screens for brightness and creativity, but assume for the purpose of your question that the average student body at HYPSM is higher on the bright/creative scale than Vandy/Tulane etc. If so, a subset of kids who learn from their classmates is likely to be better off at HYPSM.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>There are loads of advantages to non-HYPSM schools (cost, merit aid, Division I sports, honors colleges, etc.), but these are the ways in which a middle or upper middle class kid might be better off at HYPSM than the schools you mention.</p>

143

<p>While I fundamentally agree that there are more advantages at HYPS to a certain degree, I think that amount is diminishing in a few ways. Computers are obviously of more importance to the next hundred years than the past hundred. When you see people like Jim Clark (founder of Netscape and WebMD corp) and David Filo (co-founder of Yahoo) coming out of Tulane and the guy who is now running Apple as COO and acting CEO, Timothy Cook, coming out of Auburn University it becomes clear that no one is going to hold any monopoly on the future of computing. This is especially true in undergrad education. One of the smartest guys that I've meet in computing had problems getting through high school because he wasn't interested in it, but he could strip down and build a computer better than anyone that I had ever seen. I think this is ultimately good for America. There are always going to be the advantages that shawbridge mentioned above to HYPS. I just think that over the next 50 years, we are going to see Forbes Richest People include a lot more people that come from State and regionally-focused schools than ever before along with some that have no education past high school. Information is essentially free and available to everyone now. The brightest among us might just do the math and figure out they can work on their ideas without that HYPS degree. I'll admit though that for the most of us a HYPS diploma would look nice on the wall.</p>

144

<p>To offer a different perspective, it couldn't be a WORSE time "to be a smart, rich kid". </p>

<p>Your parents have probably lost a ton of money on Wall Street, either fairly or as victims of criminal activity.</p>

<p>If your mom or dad own their own business, they are most likely getting slammed by the economy, and suffering over having to let people go that they really want to keep.</p>

<p>With the promise of a tax assault on business and those making over $250,000 (now $209,000?) coming soon down the pike, your parents are afraid to spend any money if they work for someone else and afraid to invest in their own business if they work for themselves. </p>

<p>If your parents own their own business, with the EFCA Act looming, they are sick over worry that their company, even if they have taken good care of their employees, will unionize in the dark of night when 51% of their employees are coerced by big union bosses from another city (all so the union can line its coffers with your parent's company's money, because the union needs a bailout). </p>

<p>Your parent's company will probably not survive having to pay the ten to twenty dollars per worker - PER HOUR - to the union, plus hourly pay increases to the workers as well. The company will also not survive having all their now unionized employees available over the weekend and at night to work for competitor companies (bringing all the proprietary information that your parent's company spent years to build along with them).</p>

<p>Since your business owner parent probably has no experience in union negotiations, the likelihood that he or she will be able to negotiate a fair contract in the 120 days allotted is slim. Either he or she will negotiate a poor one, or a bureaucrat from Washington will TAKE OVER the decision-making process, imposing a contract on the business AND workers. This contract will be in force for two years. This bureaucrat knows nothing about your mom or dad's business, or the market in which they compete.</p>

<p>The misery index in your home is now at an all-time high if you are a rich kid whose parent owns his own company, because of the resentment that comes with having something unfairly stolen (in this case, property and civil rights). 49% of company workers had no say in the unionization process, while the 51% who signed the card lost their right to a private vote. And of course, your parent as the business owner had no say at all. His company is now out of his control.</p>

<p>With all the increased union dues, employee wages (when the company is already hurting), legal and emotional costs, you parent's company will likely fail. </p>

<p>If your parents each work for someone else and their combined income makes them "rich", they are both probably worried about holding on to their jobs and replenishing their horribly depleted net worth. They may now, for the first time in their lives, owe so much more than they have that getting out from behind seems impossible before they retire.</p>

<p>If you are a "rich kid", you are caught in the middle of a War on Prosperity, and the biggest wealth redistribution (and power grab) in our company's history. You will look on paper like you have too much money to get aid, but your parents may not be able to afford to send you to college at all, and certainly not to a private one. You will need that college degree more than ever, because you family's money and freedom to prosper is in the crosshairs of a rapidly growing centralized government monster.</p>

145

<p>Many of those parents will want to spend the last dollar they have to make sure their kids will have more competitive edge, especially in this environment. I would.</p>

<p>There will always be top 5% students from any school that would do well, but it's more likely higher percentage of kids at top tier schools would do better later on. It's no different than good private high schools send over 30%-50% kids to top tier colleges.</p>

146

<p>This is in response to the general topic of that little box, checked or unchecked, about financial aid.
We checked no for financial aid, and our daughter got substantial scholarships,up to $20,00/year at several of the schools she applied to. Admittedly, some of them were safeties, but one of them is in the final cut of college choices thus far. She applied to all of them in time for ED if they had it.
Now I'm wondering if she might not have received the scholarships if we HAD checked the box asking for financial need.<br>
Such a backwards world!!!!
She may also have been favored bec she applied so early (October and early Nov). Who nows? This is yet another example of how hard it is to psych out the admissions process.</p>

147

<p>Although the House will pass some version of the pro-union legislation you are talking about, spideygirl, it is not clear the saner heads and lobbyists in the Senate will not sit on this legislation as is would clearly be detrimental to businesses (particularly in a recession).</p>

148

<p>spideygirl seems to have been listening to too much Rush-- The union scenario put forth in the post is not even in the realm of reality.</p>

149

<p>
[quote]
spideygirl seems to have been listening to too much Rush-- The union scenario put forth in the post is not even in the realm of reality.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, DeirdreTours, spideygirl makes lots of sense. Too bad that you can't see it. To say that her points are not in the realm of reality is rude and ignorant. And then you have to throw in an ad hominem argument against Rush Limbaugh. This is what leftists do when they can't handle the argument. They change the topic to something else, like personalities.</p>

<p>This is typical of the frustration that educated moderates and conservatives go through. Having to deal with people who don't know the facts but have already made up their minds and won't listen. And who won't at least have the decency to admit that they can't handle the argument, and just leave.</p>

<p>I challenge you to point out where spideygirl is wrong.</p>

150

<p>Just out of curiousity, I wonder how many parents start saving for college when the child is born? It appears to me that, somewhat like the bailouts, many do not make any attempt to save with the plan that they will get more aid. In fact, I know many families who spent their savings on trips and improvements to their residences, even purchased second homes about 2 years before they applied for financial aid. Seems people who saved and went without extras for years are penalized and those big spenders are rewarded. I have even heard of financial advisers preaching this mantra. What do most parents do?</p>

151

<p>I agree with Spideygirl. I am a liberal,. but I disagree with the new tax policy. BTW, just what is rich? Doesn't it depend what part of the country you live in?</p>

152

<p>Me thinks this thread has gone far off topic. It is time to post tangential comments in the relevant forum. :) </p>

<p>The OP's original point has been commented on adnauseum.</p>