This is a repost as I think I posted in the wrong area. What do you all think?
Read it here:
If the UCSA is still as left-leaning as I remember it once was, it seems interesting that they have not figured out that UC financial aid policy is very friendly to lower and middle income California residents, and that UC list price tuition increases would be mainly or solely borne by the highest income families (the ones that typical left-leaning people would want to “tax”).
Then again, perhaps it is now populated by scions of wealth whose families would be the ones paying the added tuition.
The problem @ucbalumnus is the rules are so skewed to low income people, that families in the middle are screwed. We are not high income by a long shot but because of assets I am paying full tuition for both my kids without the option of any merit scholarship (even though my daughter was 4.0). Even regents - it first separates by merit, than filters for FA. That seems unfair. A friend who was president of the Berkeley Alumni chapter on the peninsula for four years, finally stepped down, as did the other three alumni scholarship interviewers, because during that entire four year period there was not one applicant who did not have hardship/great financial need/disability. Not one in four years! These interviewers are people who are very philanthropic, but the term she used was “disgusted.” They were disgusted that not one deserving candidate was brought forth who just had strong leadership and academic achievement in four years. No, the system is set up to reward one group, and the ultra-high group can get by easily. The middle group has no options.
I can say that virtually every single UC scholarship eliminates students who are not in dire need, even though for some (such as Regents), it is often noted as just one consideration of many. In reality, it’s the one required consideration. So just be upfront and say it, UC.
Another weird thing: UCB TAP does not give priority, merely helps a student achieve the best possible application submission. It’s written everywhere on the Berkeley site. But then it is also urged by UC counselors to note in the essay that you’re UCB TAP. Clearly, that is to signal special treatment. Why else do they say to put that in?
Don’t get me wrong, I have no problem with that. Give aid to those who need it. I just think the system could be more fair to all applicants. And I think there is a duplicity in how things are presented by the UCs.
I am paying full tuition, my income is low, and I cannot afford the cost of living in CA. I am depleting my assets and will undoubtedly have to sell my house. Why? Because the system has discarded us. Raising tuition year after year is not making an even playing field across all income tiers. I’m paying about $33,000 a year.
Also, lowering tuition also would provide more aid to more students, no?
On Sunday, this same group passed a resolution urging the public university system to divest from corporations that do business with the United States. Yea…not the UC’s best and brightest.
How does the UC Student Association propose to lower tuition to 2008 levels? Are they willing to make cuts in programs & infrastructure maintenance? Or do they simply expect taxpayers to cough up more money?
I think, the UC system is subsidized by the State & Fed government by over a billon a year. Sometimes, all that need be said is thank you.
I’m planning to head to the grocery store and demand it lowers the prices to 2008 levels too. Great idea! After that, I’ll inform my landlord my rent should be less.
I am, however, enjoying the 2008 gas prices.
I’d love to have one of those students in front of me for a job interview. “And can you explain to me how that is to be achieved again?”
It’s a symbolic vote noting how funding to the UCs, a public university which is meant to support students in CA, has deteriorated year after year, even as CA has gotten back on its feet. The lack of funding is the culprit behind hiked tuition. It’s a relevant observation if you live in CA.
I suppose i should have read further rather than to take the “sound bit” approach. Because the sound bit makes them sound ludicrous. For the real issue, I have sympathy – many states and students are under the same crunch.
Naive? Stupid? Not Econ majors?
Instead of demanding “free” stuff, maybe the best and brightest at Cal could put their heads together and come up with some solutions…
Presumably, you have high (non-home-equity) assets, if you have low income (note: median household income in California is about $61,000, and median per capita income in California is about $30,000). Seems like a retiree profile…
And those with incomes up to $80k – 30% more than median – can attend UC for no cost.
Actually, the Blue and Gold Opportunity Plan for California residents means that financial aid grants will be at least the amount of UC systemwide tuition and fees. Even the maximum UC financial aid (without merit scholarships) leaves a student contribution of $8,500 to $10,000, depending on the campus.
Note also that the qualification is under $80,000 and have financial need. A high (non-home-equity) asset family or custodial parent may not qualify.
I’m a little confused by these statements - my child (0 diversity, 0 hardship, absolutely no need-based aid) received Regents offers from 4 UC’s and also one of Berkeley’s alumni merit scholarships.
Right, but statistically, what is the probability of a median income household holding a LOT of financial assets which are not a home. (For most folks, the home equity is it, and UC/fafsa ignores home equity.) Now I grant you, that there are hundreds of thousands of small business owners living with several sets of ‘books’ and thousands of immigrants living off of offshore (family) wealth and who pay cash for homes in really nice 'hoods, but we ought not be designing statewide policies to cover these outliers.
btw: my S, non diverse, non hardship, non anything else, also received a Regents offer and they even threw in a research stipend of xx dollars for study abroad or whatever (but that was a few years ago). But yes, the UC makes it quite public what the two flagships are seeking.
It is indeed relevant to California and relevant to the rest of the college world. Typical California: senseless protesting from the pulpit of morons. Instead on focusing on issues where changes are possible, those students are simply making noise. Back to the hippie days!
A waste of time. Of course the kids that pay tuition want to pay less. What difference is that going to make to the adults that make the rules? These students all probably think raising the minimum wage to $13 or $15 is a good idea too. But how do you do that without charging others more for goods and services? Costs of all labor at UC will go up 20%. So, tuition must go up to cover it. Simple. Slash pensions and union contracts and you can lower tuition. But, in Ca, those things are sacred. We just can’t have it both ways.
Bottom line is…go to school outside of California. There are so many good reasons to move elsewhere if you are beginning a young life. There are hundreds of colleges where your COA will be lower. Even at private schools, you can easily get merit aid to bring your cost under the UC.
Not one of my 3 kids applied to any UC.
Jerry Brown could keep tuition down simply by taking the $250 million he has earmarked EVERY year now for the bullet train that nobody in Ca wants, except the politicians and contractors getting the business.
Other than from current students, where does the pressure come from to lower tuition? No where that I can see. The UCs continue to see record numbers of applicants and (other than Merced, maybe) have no trouble filling seats. When students stop going to UCs due to cost, then something will be done. I don’t think we will see that happen in our lifetimes.
Agree with @Bay, seeing more talk about raising tuition aside from the student groups. The LA Times has an article today about a proposal to raise OOS tuition, since UC is less than Michigan and VA:
http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-higher-learning-tuition-20150211-story.html