<p>hunt The point is that these are not rich people. Both spouses are educated and work full time. This isn’t about whining but about a destructive policy that will ultimately hurt everyone. Please go look at the situation in Holland or Sweden. In those countries the new uneducated immigrants are having over 50% of the children and in 30 years those cultures as they existed for a thousand years will be gone forever. This is not an exaggeration in any way if you look at the demographic data. In America the situation is somewhat different but the results are leading to the same place. Now this is usually argued based on ideology but I’m not interested in political fights. Instead I’m looking at the birthrate data and it’s very worrisome. In some sociology class one can argue about whether it’s nature or nurture but in reality the facts are very clear but not politically correct. In this country the top 20-30% pay for almost everything and it makes no sense to purposely punish the educated and effectively kill the golden(tax paying) goose.</p>
<p>xiggy I know the data and you have just made my point. The most selective schools are mainly filled with the children of the highly educated. There are many exceptions but statistically this is true. Again most of these people are affluent but not rich. 500k in potential educational costs/per child is a huge expense and quitely frankly is the single item that parents worry about most. Hunt keeps saying these people are rich which is not correct. Hunt- rich means that you have enough money not to worry about any normal expenses and do not need to work. In the real world rich is not a being an attorney that can be downsized from being a partner or an COO who can be fired. They are affluent but not rich and there is a very very big difference.</p>
<p>Say…I completely agree with your each and every word! My husband and I both hold advanced degrees, work hard, and make a comfortable living. We are not wealthy, but saved and sacrificed so that our kids are/were able to attend private college preps and have their bachelor’s degrees paid for by savings. We don’t drive luxury cars nor do we take exotic vacations. We’ve made very different choices than some classmates’ parents and yet, when our D with virtually perfect stats applied last spring, we checked the FA box and were told by all that she didn’t qualify for ANYTHING. On the other hand, several of her friends (with lesser stats I might add) whose parents live beyond their means were given anywhere from 15-25K a year. Our D did receive merit $ at some good schools but none from those on her “favorite” list. I can’t help but think what on earth is happening? Our family is now sacrificing even more so that our D will get that education from a top school while friends who are living in homes with substantial mortgages, wearing designer labels, and driving BMWs are getting the SAME education but paying less? Frustrating doesn’t even begin to describe the feeling. And for those who might argue, “Yeah, but she got almost a full ride at [X School]; she could have chosen it. She didn’t have to choose the full pay route,” I would argue is it fair that this top stat kind of kid be relegated to a cheaper school while others with lesser means (and perhaps lesser stats) attend her dream schools? For those who think she is an anomaly and these kids are few and far between, you’re wrong. Again, Say, you are precisely right – the economics of higher education has turned into a Robin Hood plan plain and simple.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You are starting to come around. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>Alternatively, the parents of the children at your school voluntarily choose to spend their personal resources on a private college. They could just as easily accept the merit money from Public Uni, the negative ‘tax’. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How many world-class Unis does Holland and Sweden have? If they offer such a great deal, why don’t your neighbors send their kids overseas?</p>
<p>btw: according to the TES survey, other than OXbrige, only one European Uni was ranked in the top 20.</p>
<p>The only ‘honest’ answer is to auction off admissions slots.</p>
<p>Jc40, the other families may have large mortgages and fancy cars, but their net worth is probably less than yours…and the cars are probably leased.</p>
<p>bluebayou a few posts ago you said I was wrong and my facts were incorrect. I don’t know jc40 but her post just highlights how FA really works and it’s pure socialism. But the real problem is that it gives parents and society the wrong incentives. Yes dstark the cars may be leased but the responsible parents paying full tuition are in effect subsidizing these other families. You see I’m all for help truly poor familes send their children to college but that’s not the reality. In practice the people making 200-500k are actually having their wealth transfered to people making 100-200k since almost all the students at selective schools come from this demographic. Please explain to me why two working couples making 300k combined should subsidize only one working parent making 150k. For them it’s a lifestyle choice that has many benefits. Moreover many of the people making 150k are members of public unions and in fact are wealthier than the people making 250-300k if their defined benefit pensions were to be included. I don’t want to get into politics but the FA crowd are cut from the wealth redistribution crowd. This system is being gamed just like all the 1/8th students claiming to be URM or the 3.7uw/2100 SAT parents claiming their child has a form of ADHD and needs unlimited time on the SAT/ACT.</p>
<p>bluebayou the issue with Holland and Sweden is a different but related issue. In those countries the policies are such that many couples now choose to have few children and the native population is well below replacement numbers(2.1), Greece and Italy are the worst but it’s everywhere in Europe. The immigrants on the other hand only see benefits for having lots of children and after 20 -30 years they have become the majority in the schools. In the next 25 years the European culture we all love so much will largely cease to exist in some countries. This has been caused by policies that have discouraged child bearing by the european couples and there are too many to list. But in America a form of the same problem is occurring. The most accomplished couples(the best and brightest for lack of a better term) are being punished for their success and one of the biggest obstacles to larger families is the extreme burden of college costs. You cavalierly suggest they should just go to state schools but most of the parents think just like jc40 and instead will have fewer children. This may satisfy you but it bad policy for the country.</p>
<p>say:</p>
<p>Perhaps many are blinded by the Ivy light; so be it… Of the top 20/21 colleges in the US, 9 of them offer merit money. Only the Ivies, MIT, Stanford, Northwestern & ND do not. Of the next dozen or so colleges, most of them offer merit money. </p>
<p>So, my point is that there are plenty of Unis for accomplished kids to attend, and be one with high-achieving peers (whatever that term means). And they can attend for less than sticker price. But that means looking outside of the Ancient Eight.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Shouldn’t your beef be with those ~10 well-endowed colleges that refuse to share their wealth with the nation’s top 1% income earners? Should the government force HYPSM to lower thier tuition?</p>
<p>Say…life isn’t fair. You said yourself, kids who go to college are more likely to have parents that went to college. Stinks for the kids that have parents that never went to college. Did you ever read “Outliers”? Kids from families that are upper middle class grow up with very large advantages over kids that are from middle or lower class families.</p>
<p>Two families …both make 150,000 a year. One saved 1 million…the other family leases cars, has a large mortgage and saved nothing. The family that saved 1 million has a net worth 1 million more than the family that spent. </p>
<p>So the family that spent gets 15,000 in FA a year and the family that saved pays full pop. I would rather be the family with the 1 million dollar
net worth. Even these days…i can probably make 1.5 percent on the million with little risk and I still come out ahead of the spenders.</p>
<p>I know a few people that lease cars, and live in fancier houses. So what? I wouldn’t trade my financial position for theirs…even with FA. They can have their 15,000 a year.</p>
<p>dstark…Mine is that family that has saved. Neither my husband nor I believe in carrying debt; hence, we struggled to pay our mortgage off, save and pay cash for our cars (which I might add we only buy every 12 years or so), pay our credit card bills off in full at the end of each month, etc. I wasn’t born with a silver spoon in my mouth, and my parents taught me the value of a higher education and the payoff for working 12 hour days. The “million” you say you’d rather have simply isn’t mine to keep. You see, in our situation, the government comes and seizes half of the fruits of our labor and doles it out to others like candy. Now, in addition to that, we are seeing 45+K a year being taken while many others (not all of course) who are NOT saving, NOT working 12+ hours a day, SPENDING $ like water, live the same lifestyle while paying half the cost for their kid’s college education – clearly you can see the inequity? We will continue to scrimp, clip coupons, etc. for the next nine years, but those who foolishly think myself and other’s gravy train will never break down are misleading themselves. The motivation for working hard as an American is diminishing as Say says couples continue “to be punished for their success.”</p>
<p>Jc40, </p>
<p>I think bluebayou said, once your income hits a certain threshold, it doesn’t matter what your assets are. </p>
<p>So maybe, your income is above the threshold and other people, who are getting financial aid, actually make less?</p>
<p>Are families with incomes of 250,000 really getting aid? </p>
<p>I understand that if a family is making 250,000, private school costs are a burden.</p>
<p>When you compare your situation with others, do you really have the facts about others? </p>
<p>How do all these posters know what their neighbors make or the financial situation of the neighbors? </p>
<p>There is a difference between living a lifestyle and affording a lifestyle. Those that live a lifestyle they can’t afford are going to be in trouble.
Or they are getting a large inheritance.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>jc’s kid also applied to 7 of 8 Ivies, which are ALL need-only (not sure what is wrong with columbia…
</p>
<p>jc chose to paying full OOS freight at a public. Isn’t that consumer choice at its finest?</p>
<p>jc’s kid also attended a private prep school. Where is the angst for HS costs? Why only complain about those need-based only colleges?</p>
<p>as a full-rate payer,i could care less who is getting FA or merit aid…Do what it takes to pay for your own children’s education and stop worrying about things you have no control over</p>
<p>Jc40, most people can not afford to send their kids to private prep school.
Most hard working people can not afford to send their kids to private prep school without aid.</p>
<p>From the posts is pretty easy to guess who is getting FA and who isn’t. The issue many of you are missing or choosing to ignore is that the people being helped mainly with FA are not the poor but families with incomes of 100-200k. Again please make your argument for why a one working spouse family making 120k should get big time FA and the two working spouse family making 240k should pay full price. Everyone agrees that truly low income families should be helped. As for the million dollar savings argument if you have three children mostly likely you will be forced to spend every dime before their educations are done. So after ten years and paying for three children the family making 150k will be just as well off as the family making 300k. But the family making 300k will have paid far more taxes and made far more sacrifices as a family. How in the world can that make any sense? Is this really the right policy for America? This system is relatively brand new and did not exist 15 years ago and really began when the schools got rid of the loans and just gave slightly less wealthy upper middle class familes the money while still sticking to the 250k families. The real difference here is that jc 40 and I are talking from real first hand experience paying the bills and you posters are talking about social fairness theories. The entire thread started based on an article about the cost crisis in college tuition. Many of you said there was no crisis as you collected your FA checks. What jc 40 and I are saying is that the facts prove otherwise and it’s bad policy for the country.</p>
<p>I don’t know…</p>
<p>Maybe because the two parent family that has income of 240,000 makes more after taxes than a single head of household that makes 120,000.</p>
<p>And the one parent family isn’t getting a free ride, correct?</p>
<p>What is the real difference in college costs between those two examples?</p>
<p>Oh…i see…it’s two parent families in both examples…ok financially…i take the 240,000 and pay the full pop…</p>
<p>You can have the 120,000…</p>
<p>The 240,000 family is probably clearing 70,000 more than the 120,000 family. Maybe, more than 70,000.</p>
<p>The most accurate way to look at the current system is to view as another form of income tax that only kicks in above 200k and it is a huge tax 150k-500k per child. If you make millions this means nothing but the vast majority of families at selective colleges make between 120k-500k not millions. This education tax has huge implications for most affluent families and as always people adjust their behavior in response to the tax. In this case the best and brightest have far fewer children. It’s terrible policy and a huge waste of human potential and ultimately will decrease the wealth and productivity of America.</p>
<p>dstark if you make 240k even with two in college you get nothing but at 120k you would get as much as 75k in FA at some schools. You may not believe it but that’s how it works but to be fair we are only talking about the very top schools.</p>
<p>Right. 75,000 over 4 years.</p>
<p>Correct?</p>
<p>Or are you talking 75,000 a year because of two kids?</p>
<p>And the 240,000 family gets nothing a year with two kids in college?</p>