<p>Agree Mombot. I live in a community where many won't sacrifice their BMWs though.</p>
<p>What a great discussion. </p>
<p>My husband and I both went to a state schools for our undergrad and graduate educations (UCs and CSUs in Calif.) but are spending big bucks to send our daughter to a private school, starting this fall. Maybe it isn't true in all cases, but in our daughter's case, I believe you actually do get what you pay for. </p>
<p>We are NOT rich, by any stretch: I'm a freelance writer and teacher, and he's a journalist at our local paper. So we're cobbling together the money from many resources, and we'll eventually downsize and sell our home--which we had planned to do anyway.</p>
<p>Our daughter got accepted to a fine UC, as well. But when we tallied the difference between the UC and the private school, it was only about $10K/year. No, that's not small potatoes--but it wasn't a big enough difference to make cost the deciding factor between the two schools.</p>
<p>I think many people don't look at the total cost of college to see that there isn't that much difference sometimes between public and private. Nor do they look at the fact that private schools generally offer a lot more grant money. I think students should apply for private and public schools and then see what the schools offer in terms of aid. </p>
<p>Plus, many state schools have lower 4-year graduation rates, which mean 1-2 more years of tuition, etc., and 1-2 years they're not in the workforce earning money.</p>
<p>Lastly, education is such a wonderful investment, I don't consider it a sacrifice at all--especially since we have only 1 child. I'm not concerned about retirement, either. We have no plans to retire--we both love what we do, and we plan to live out our last act somwhere other than the U.S.: someplace where the cost of living is cheaper and medical care is better. We'll manage!</p>
<p>I come from the "we'll manage" school of thought as well.</p>
<p>I see no reason my kids should ever be paying for me. We have some retirement funds, we're aiming toward being mortgage free in the next few years, and we just plain live cheap--I'm not talking about eschewing fine dining and Euro vacations. If the dang country would stop playing games with SS and Medicare, which are very efficient programs, that woudl be nice.</p>
<p>If I turn out, in the end, to be wrong, feel free to laugh at me. But I'm at peace with my choices.</p>
<p>Whatever garland--but your attitude is actually contributing to the sense of guilt the OP was talking about. If you choose to roll the dice and fully fund private college for your kids, then that's fine, but to imply that anybody can do it if they would just be as virtuous in their financial choices is pretty sanctimonious. </p>
<p>I'll say it again: Middle and upper middle class families who fully fund in-state public but choose not to take on financial risk to go above and beyond that should not feel a smidgen of guilt. If they are feeling guilty, it's because of fearmongering and image marketing on the part of the higher education industry, or it is because their kids have outsized senses of entitlement.</p>
<p>Well, that's a little judgmental, don't you think?</p>
<p>I don't expect everyone to make the same choices I make. What I have always emphasized is that they are choices. there is more than one way to think about the question; I'm presenting one approach.</p>
<p>There are plenty others to say differently.</p>
<p>If you knew my kids, you'd know tht your blanket assertion of entitlement is plainly ridiculous.</p>
<p>Once again the point sails right over your head. YOU are the one being judgmental here. </p>
<p>I'm not saying people shouldn't do what they want---I'm saying that nobody should feel GUILTY if they don't want to fund higher education beyond in state public. My comment was directed at the OP and other parents who may be having misgivings that they aren't doing "enough."</p>
<p>Many parents decide for whatever reason that it is in their kids' best interest not to get a free ride through college, or they do the cost/benefit and decide that for their kid, it is not worth paying a premium over in state public tuition.</p>
<p>If you saw a family who lived well, yet heard their kids complain that their parents wouldn't send them to NYU, what conclusion would you draw? My sense is that you would side with the kids on that, when in fact there may be really valid reasons for the parents to set limits on what they will cover. Maybe they have other family members, like aging parents, to consider. Maybe they don't have pension plans at work. Maybe somebody in the family has bigger than average medical costs. Maybe there are younger kids. It's not like kids really factor in all the variables that go into the household budget before they complain. </p>
<p>Parents should be free to make whatever choices they need to based on their financial situation and their values--but instead we read about parents feeling like failures becuase they can't send their kids to an Ivy, or they pony up and go into debt because they fear that their kids will be disadvantaged if they do NOT go to a fancy school.</p>
<p>And you are completely misreading my post--I didn't say anything about you or your kids. I was posting about parents like the OP who have looked closely at the finances and can't see how they can come up with the money, so instead of telling their kids that's what they have to work with, they feel guilt, or feel like there is something wrong with them.</p>
<p>You are the one that assumed I was posting about your particular situation when in fact the only comment I intended to be about you in particular was about your slightly holier-than-thou tone about the choices you made for your family.</p>
<p>OK, I actually WAS talking about vacations (more like travel than vacations) and fine dining (well, sort of medium dining) ;) ;) ;) ...so what is wrong with that?</p>
<p>onetimeparent, I have not read the posts here and do not intend in the interest of time.</p>
<p>However I would offer some simple advice to your student. Do not rule out any college which may be a fit merely because of cost. However do not become "married" to any one college either. Also, let him/her know up front(ie.now) the max that you can reasonably afford.</p>
<p>Few student pay sticker price for college so wait for the acceptances and finaid packages to roll in. Only then will your child be in position to make a reasoned, rational and guilt free choice.</p>
<p>We did this with our son and though Oberlin was his first choice, the skimpy finaid package made it easy for him to eliminate without regret.</p>
<p>weenie--nothing.</p>
<p>IF you can live with yourself! (joke)</p>
<p>Weenie, you have been the poster here most honest bout the fact that you and your husband have things you waant to do that preclude you from spending on high priced colleges. You spoke of a $65K EFC and said if was because of savings. No judgement, but it would be interesting to hear what it is that you plan to do, how you chose the amount to give for college and what your rational is.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>Plus, many state schools have lower 4-year graduation rates, which mean 1-2 more years of tuition, etc., and 1-2 years they're not in the workforce earning money.<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>I agree with you, Sloparent--this is one of the problems with the UC system. Not every student will have this problem, but one of my friends has a son who took SEVEN years to get through Berkeley!</p>
<p>No money saved there.</p>
<p>mombot - Yeah, we can live with ourselves just fine. ;) Anyway, I know parents on CC are very education oriented (obviously) and I suppose what we've spent probably falls somewhere in the middle for CC, so it's not like my kids are exactly deprived. All I know is that like parents everywhere we love our kids to death, we have so much fun together, and I'm really proud of how they've turned out. (Well, so far anyway!) And mom to mom, the money is nothing compared to the time and effort though, wouldn't you say?</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>Middle and upper middle class families who fully fund in-state public but choose not to take on financial risk to go above and beyond that should not feel a smidgen of guilt.<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>I agree with you, Mombot, on this. But disagree with you on calling garland sanctimonious and judgmental. I took her post to mean that because of her interests and lifestyle, she doesn't have a lot of other things to spend her $$ on--so it might as well be education for her kids.</p>
<p>Maybe she can spend some $$ on the education of MY kids...</p>
<p>Well, ellem, maybe...</p>
<p>thanks, though, for the vote of confidence. I'm sorry Mombot, that you read it that way. I really think that the OP was asking for different viewpoints. I've never thought our way is the only way to go. It works for us. It 's worth putting out there. One thing I've learned in life is that everyone has different "stuff". I like hearing about everyone's. Isn't that why we're all here?:)</p>
<p>I would be less cranky about all of this if there were fewer threads devoted to "I'm accepted to NYU and (pick your flagship state school here) How do I get my parents to pay for NYU?</p>
<p>The answer is if your choices are NYU and your state school, go to your state school. Just because the Olsen twins matriculated there does not mkae it a quality undergrad experience.</p>
<p>I am among the many parents who have counseled a young woman against NYU. She did not have an adult to help her in college selection and no parent to pay for it. She was misinformed, but, she's only 18.
I actually see more parents on the parents'forum counseling students (and their parents) to go for the financially prudent choice. </p>
<p>Sometimes, though, the financially prudent choice does not happen to be the state school. If a student is stellar and has a family income of $60k, it may be better to be admitted to HYPS than to the state school.</p>
<p>I read that thread, and my heart hurt for that young woman. If she had had some real guidance she would not have been so fixed on one particular school, and even more specifically one that has such a record of bait and switch. The GSP admit was the final insult, and I will admit that that thread made me go off on this thread. </p>
<p>I realize that the financial aid equation is individual, but assuming an income of 60-$120K, which is the fat part of the curve for this demographic, e.g. educated and/or successful enough to perceive you have a choice about where your kids attend college, but not financially able to give them carte blanche, what makes sense?</p>
<p>I have a question: why does it seem like the families who are most able to shoulder debt are the least willing to take on debt to finance a college education?</p>
<p>It seems like the upper middle class families who complain the most about the financial aid system not only do not want to cut into their retirement assets or cut back on their lifestyle, but they also don't want to take on debt. To me, a person who has substantial assets is the one who SHOULD borrow. For example, my college's lender offers a 2% reduction in interest on a PLUS loan if the borrower signs up for automatic withdrawal, which means that money can be borrowed at 6.5%. A person with assets might very well have them invested in ways that exceed that return -- so borrowing would work very well for them. In the end, they are leveraging their assets in a way that increases their overall financial strength. </p>
<p>But lower middle class families typically don't have much in the way of assets - but they seem to also accept without much protest the idea that college will be financed with loans either to themselves or their kids. And they are the ones most hurt by borrowing, because they can't achieve a net gain their other investments. Debt for them is just chalked up on the negative side of a balance sheet, which may very well show a negative net worth. </p>
<p>Maybe it is just anecdotal. Maybe lower middle class parents who are getting generous grants to send their kids to private colleges for less than the sticker price of a public education simply feel that it would be bad form and ungrateful to complain about also being asked to shoulder a portion of the costs through loans - so they aren't going to come online to complain. And maybe it just is hard for a person who is financially well off to feel comfortable about paying or borrowing $45K a year -- that's a lot of money, and a lot more to gripe about in an online discussion. </p>
<p>But I have always felt that I would gladly trade places with the $100K earner along with their higher EFC... no matter how I do the math, they end up with more money left at the end.</p>
<p>What makes sense depends so much on the individual family's circumstances (are there other children and/or parents who will require financial support?); the student's own profile (is the student eligible for merit money?) Even with an income of $120k, it can be possible to receive financial aid, though probably not much.</p>
<p>I would advise applying to one's state school, perhaps to other state schools if OOS costs are not out of line (and applying early for rolling admissions), and to schools which give merit money. In 1999-2000, U of Rochester was promising $10k for students who had SAT scores of 1200 or above. I believe the qualifying score has risen, but not beyond the capability of many students.</p>
<p>I also want to point out that some less selective schools can be as, if not more, expensive than the most selective ones and that some truly excellent schools actually cost less than others. Grinnell (ranked 12 in my old USN&WR) will cost about $36k next year. Sarah Lawrence (ranked 49) will cost well into the $40k. Grinnell may still be out of reach for many families; I just want to underscore that expensive and excellent don't always go together.</p>
<p>Well, I just read most of this thread. I wanted to copy and paste an article that my H sent me yesterday from the newswire but I can't seem to do it. O.K., I will just cut and paste the first couple of paragraphs: </p>
<p>"College Debt Has Profound Effect on Financial Security, Well-2006-05-26 08:00 (New York)Being and Life Choices for Years to Come" </p>
<p>College debt has a profound effect on well-being, financial security, and career and lifestyle choices for
years after college, according to "The College Debt Crunch," a survey of
college graduates released today by AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc.</p>
<pre><code>"Large amounts of college debt put graduates in a hole that can take
</code></pre>
<p>years, even decades from which to emerge," said Richard A. Davies, Senior
Managing Director, Retirement and College Savings Plans, AllianceBernstein
Investments, the retail asset management arm of AllianceBernstein, L.P.
"Funding a college education isn't just about those four years; it's about a
young adult's ability to start a family, buy a house and, ultimately, even to
one day retire.</p>
<pre><code>"College funding is a fundamental financial and life planning issue,"
</code></pre>
<p>Davies said. "When you saddle young adults with debt, they're not just
borrowing their college tuition; they're borrowing from their future."</p>
<p>It's a very interesting article. I tell my graduate son that the best graduation gift we gave him is that he graduated debt free. I think he is seeing the value of that as he goes about in the work world, living in NYC, driving a car to work in CT, etc.</p>
<p>My #2 S just finished his first year at NYU. A little over a year ago, we were helping our S decide between 4 good schools including UCONN, our flagship state school where he was to be in the Honors program and he received 50 % merit scholarship. CT wants their strong students to stay in the state and hopefully come out working in the state. Our S liked UCONN. It's a beautiful campus (albeit in the cow patches), many brand new buildings (including state of the art business school) and many new faculty hired. CT has been spending millions and millions to improve this campus. He loved it and we loved it but in the end he chose NYU b/c he felt the internship opportunities and the location in NYC would pay off in the end. Actually, after he got accepted to Stern, he found out that he could play volleyball there. Being a part of this team has been a great plus in his college life. He could not have done that at UCONN (there is no mens team and if there had been, it would be Div. I which would have made it a different experience). Did we make the right decision to have him enroll at NYU?? We think so. He loves NYU, his varied roommates, NYC, the Yankees, his CA girlfriend that he met at NYU and he loves being part of a team. If he had gone to UCONN, he would only be cheering for the b-ball team instead of being on a team. </p>
<p>My H had said to my S that if he went to UCONN and since he had so many AP credits that it would have knocked off a year of Ugrad, we would throw in a year of graduate study in the offering to make it even more attractive. He would have gone there if we insisted. UCONN has been a very good experience for many neighbor kids.
We are paying $50,000/yr. instead of $11,000/yr. I thank God daily that we can afford it (we have saved and had the kids pick stocks with some of their savings which have done well) but we let the kids know that they are very fortunate b/c there are many who are strapped with debt for many years to come. We paid $160,000 for our #1 S to attend UChicago. By the time #2 S graduates, we will have paid $200,000 and then we have a D who is a junior in HS. All of this would have added up to a nice second home somewhere or something else but we don't want a second home. We are happy and feel blessed that our children will be well educated. </p>
<p>I agree with marite's statement: "What makes sense depends so much on the individual family's circumstances".</p>