<p>UC</a> proposes tuition hike, reduced pension benefits</p>
<p>UC President's recommendation would raise fees significantly, and use about a third of the funds to provide additional financial aid for families earning less than 80K.</p>
<p>How do families in California earning right above the cutoff feel about paying much higher college costs in order to more fully subsidize families earning a thousand or two less?</p>
<p>*How do families in California earning right above the cutoff feel about paying much higher college costs in order to more fully subsidize families earning a thousand or two less? *</p>
<p>EXCELLENT question! Especially when those who earn just over the amount often have to have THEIR kids commute to the local state school, while their taxes allow those who earn under that amount to have free tuition and live in the dorms.</p>
<p>Californians are going to have to say enough is enough. Those who can’t afford UCs can have help with tuition, but middle class taxpayers should not have to pay for these kids to skip over their local state school and “go away” to school.</p>
<p>Blue and Gold is stupid. A family who earns $69k and has one in college gets free tuition. However, a family who earns $72k and has 2 in college, doesn’t. Crazy!</p>
<p>I don’t live in California, but if I did, my question to the powers that be would be: why not just reduce tuition for everyone, rather than raising it & diverting it back to tuition subsidies? The rising cost of college is ridiculous. It’s time more emphasis was put on controlling tuition & fees, rather than simply expanding aid … especially when expanding aid is not really expanding aid, since it costs more to begin with.</p>
<p>I think they need to just improve all the UCs so that they are more equal in quality and then expect kids to go to their local UC unless they’re majoring in something unique.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It would be uneconomic to lower fees across the board. Just like many private colleges, there are plenty of people more than willing to pay full fare to attend, particularly Cal and UCLA. Heck, UC even finds plenty of OOS’ers who pony up private school prices ($55k/year) to attend.</p>
<p>The UC’s give big admission tips to low income folks, so each campus ends up with ~33% Pell Grantees. Thus, any fee increase is funneled back towards that group in the form of a grant. Moreover, it almost becomes a political requirement (in this egalitarian state). Otherwise, fewer poor would attend, or would have to commute.</p>
<p>I don’t think that the question is whether UC should give financial aid to needy students – but whether that financial aid should be paid for by students whose families might be only a little better off? </p>
<p>I don’t think I’d particularly like having the cost of my eyeglasses raised 12% so that everyone from a family with an income $1000 less than mine got free glasses. I support giving glasses to poor people, but shouldn’t that be a burden on society at large rather than just on other families that need eyewear?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, I get the question but it is moot. UC has been maintaining that practice for years – every time it raises fees it takes a portion and applies that amount to low income folks. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is a blue-blue state. The solution is to NOT apply and not attend so you would not be paying UC fees that are used to educate others.</p>
<p>With two kids at UC, I agree that Blue and Gold is stupid. Why should someone who has one kid and makes $79,000 get free tuition but someone who has two kids and makes $81,000 have to pay full tuition. </p>
<p>It’s so stupid that it makes financial sense for someone near the cut-off to take some unpaid leave so that he/she is below the magic number. Or if you own a business, just don’t pay yourself a salary for part of the year so you are below the magic number.</p>
<p>^^^</p>
<p>That’s the problem…there’s too much room for manipulation…families pretending to be separated, families pretending that the low-income parent is the custodial parent, families reducing income to qualify, etc.</p>
<p>And, when you have people who are making not much more money subsidizing the situation, then it’s just insane.</p>
<p>*The solution is to NOT apply and not attend so you would not be paying UC fees that are used to educate others. *</p>
<p>Ha…if you think that ONLY the UC participants are paying for the freebies, you haven’t looked closely to what pays for Cal Grants, Blue and Gold, and Pell.</p>
<p>With one kid in UC and two more in senior year of high school, why should I be asked to contribute to subsidize other students? I have been saving for my kids education from the day they were born and now it appears that someone making less than me can send their kids to a UC while I have to settle for less. When I’m all done with my kids education and IF I have money still left, I will gladly contribute to the UC system but to do it this way is so not fair!</p>
<p>The situation is ridiculous. Californians are going to have to wake up and come to their senses about this issue.</p>
<p>^^Not this year, since we just voted for more of the same ole’, same ole’ (“spreading the wealth around”).</p>
<p>*^^Not this year, since we just voted for more of the same ole’, same ole’ (“spreading the wealth around”). *</p>
<p>Very true…and that’s why those with any “wealth” are moving out of the state. Companies are leaving in droves.</p>