<p>Momma, let it go. I have friends and co-workers who have no trouble explaining that if they send their kids to their first choice colleges the week in Aspen would no longer be affordable and therefore, the kid can commute to third tier state college. Oh, plus some complaining about financial aid policies that are “confiscatory”.</p>
<p>Everyone loves choices, everyone loves having someone else pay for their choices. Folks with good health insurance have no trouble demanding an MRI for a headache while wondering why folks with no insurance end up in an ER for routine medical care.</p>
<p>Just the way it is. Don’t be resentful, be happy you have kids who are taking advantage of the wonderful opportunities you are providing for them!!!</p>
I’m not looking for sympathy, either, but I can tell you that a property like this can be a total non-blessing. In my case, it’s located in my hometown (where I don’t live), isn’t a vacation home, and is of no use to me. I don’t own a share yet, but when I eventually do, it’s unlikely that any of the other owners will want to buy my share, or even take it if I were to give it to them. That would only raise their share of the upkeep. My only option may be to refuse to contribute to the upkeep, which will cause a family rift. Again, I’m not asking for sympathy, just pointing out that something like this can be an albatross.</p>
<p>But what if the parents don’t see added value to going to an expensive school? </p>
<p>That doesn’t mean the kids don’t want to go but they don’t have that opportunity because their parents won’t fund a school they feel costs too much.</p>
<p>Hunt, not being critical. Just pointing out the obvious- colleges don’t develop financial aid policies designed to figure out the nuances (financial, sociological, psychological) of every single asset or liability on a family’s balance sheet. They just try to develop some general guidelines, i.e. all things being equal, more assets are better than fewer. All things being equal, higher income is better than lower. People with more assets or more income can generally pay more for tuition than those with less.</p>
<p>Lots of dual income families in towns in New Jersey or Long Island pay huge property taxes and huge insurance premiums and huge other kinds of taxes have much less income at the end of the month than a one-income earner in less expensive places. But the aid differential nowhere comes close to closing that gap. We see posters here talking about a family earning 150K in the New York metro area as though they are trust fund candidates. That can be a cop married to a social worker renting a two bedroom apartment in a decent (but not fancy) neighborhood in Queens.</p>
<p>Any chance that you and your family members will agree to donate the property to charity? The tax advantages may well outweigh the benefits and costs of keeping it.</p>
<p>Post 143:
not to derail the thread, Hunt, but isn’t it usual that if co-owners don’t want to buy each other out when one wants release of responsibility, a decision is made to sell and divide? (And if it isn’t specified in a contract, it should be/should have been.)</p>
<p>But that falls under Life’s Not Fair Sometimes, bigtrees. You can’t institute a solution which says “Hey, if your parents could fund the school but don’t see the value in paying for it, we’ll fund the difference” (absent extreme situations, where the student declares independence). Because every single well-to-do family would all of a sudden “not see” the value in paying beyond what it costs to send Jennifer and Jason to State U if they could get substantial aid just by “refusing” to spend that kind of money for Jennifer and Jason.</p>
<p>Yes, it sucks for Jennifer and Jason. But there’s no other way around it.</p>
Well, some of the “owners” with a really tiny share like to use it, and others think it’s a holy shrine. For me, it will be a net financial drain, unless I want to spark family conflict.</p>
<p>It’s not DD fault that she didn’t qualify for the FA and it was her decision to go where she wanted too.</p>
<p>I can have grievances with HMSPY FA policies but that has no bearing on DD decision’s to matriculate; whom we informed that we will fund her education no matter where she would decides to matriculate.</p>
<p>If you’re already in the top echelon of Americans if you are in the $175K-$200K bracket … AND you ARE willing to fund her education and go to whatever lengths it would take, even if it meant substantial financial hardship on your end and … then why SHOULD HYPSM offer you FA? It feels awfully entitled – as if your daughter is entitled to an MIT education <em>and</em> to have help paying for it. Isn’t that why you worked so hard in the first place? It’s why my husband and I worked / work as hard as we do. I won’t feel put out in the least that no one is going to offer us FA.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl: Do you mean to say if parents are willing to foot the bill at HMSPY then the institutes should not extend FA to them, no matter what the financial condition of the family?
I’m not asking for an entitlement. I would have not raised this question if everyone have been paying the same price.
It is like since some one have more than other than they should pay more for the same thing and we say we live in a capitalist society. </p>
<p>It seems like HMSPY are trying to snatch money from some to give it to other; what better an example of communism you can ask for.</p>
<p>Today if DD has to take a loan for this education then she will be under $200K debt with no fault of her while another student won’t even have $0 debt because of no effort on their part. </p>
<p>It seems like HMSPY will punish children or reward children because of what their parent have done in the past.</p>
<p>I’m going to speak for myself not PG…if a parent is ABLE to foot the bill for MIT (as is the case with POIH), that family should not be eligible to receive need based financial aid. POIH…in your case, not only did the computations indicate you COULD afford to pay for MIT, you also agreed to do so. The second factor has nothing to do with whether the school should give your kiddo need based aid, but for some families, it is the tipping point. Even though the financial aid formulas show they CAN pay…the families won’t pay…or have debt in other areas that prevents them from being able to do so. When a family CAN pay but decides they won’t pay…this is NOT the fault of the financial aid system or the school…it is a breakdown between what the parents seemingly can do and what they WILL do. </p>
<p>The most important discussion parents can have with their kids is what they WILL pay. It really doesn’t matter what your EFC is…what the family IS WILLING to pay annually is the single most important component in the college financial application equation. If a family is willing to pay X amount…and that is IT…this should be clearly stated to the high school student. AND kids should also be made aware that if family finances change (loss of job for example) this may have to be reconsidered.</p>
<p>That is exactly what they are trying not to do. They are trying to make their education available to anyone who can get in regardless of their parent’s ability to pay.</p>
<p>First and foremost Harvard and all institutions consider it the responsiblity of a parent to pay for their kid’s educations. Over 50% of the students enrolled at Harvard are full pays. Beyond that, if parents do not have the means to pay then Harvard would like the students to not be, for lack of a better word, punished, and they will extend what they deem to be enough financial aid so that the student can still attend Harvard.</p>
<p>^^^: What is the need to distinguish between the students? A student is a student irrespective of their parent ability to pay.
The money parent save not paying towards tuition can be put to better use to boost the economy. HMSPY not necessarily using the money in any perceived better fashion.
I’m really against the concept of need based FA for tuition as it promote the concept of communism. Either HMSPY makes it free tuition like Olin or Copper Union for everyone and provide need based FA for boarding/lodging or make everyone pay for the tuition.</p>
<p>What these institutes have done is increased tuition for those who can pay while subsidizing for those who can’t? Is there any reason for increasing tuition in the last 5 year. The cost of living has not increased or neither anyone’s ability to pay have increased but the tuition at these institutes have increased steadily.</p>
<p>That’s right, a student is a student and every students deserves the same opportunity for an education at Harvard regardless of their parent’s ability to pay. That is the underlying philosophy of need based assistance, that it isn’t only the students who come from a family of means that gets to attend Harvard.</p>
<p>^^^: That is not the case because if HMSPY feel parent can pay but in reality parent can’t or won’t the student won’t get to attend these.
Which is not fair to the student who did all that was possible to get into these school but has to drop out because HMSPY thought parent can pay but in reality either they can’t or won’t.</p>
<p>The schools compute the financial aid award based on what the parents and kids provide for information via the FAFSA/Profile/School finaid form. If the parents CAN pay…but won’t…that is NOT THE SCHOOL’S fault. It is a family issue. Folks make financial choices. Some choose to fund college (as you did POIH) and others prefer to have other kinds of consumer debt or use their money for other things. THAT IS A FAMILY DECISION. </p>
<p>HYPSM have meet full need AS THEY COMPUTE IT for all admitted students. This is MOST generous and something most schools do not do. In addition, HYS have amongst the most generous need based financial aid the country, awarding need based aid to families with incomes in the $150,000 range. Again something MOST SCHOOLS do not do.</p>
<p>I’m not sure I understand what your complaint is POIH…do you really think MIT should be offering FREE schooling to all admitted students? If that’s how you feel…then withdraw your child and send her to Olin or Cooper Union where student costs are adjusted for all admitted students.</p>
<p>Well, then why does the school seem to think it’s their job to fix the situation for the kids from families where Mommy and/or Daddy simply didn’t work hard enough or save diligently enough for their kid’s Ivy education? Why must those irresponsible bad parents be compensated but not the prosperous ones who are too crude to appreciate the wonders of the elite college education for their kid?</p>
<p>The basic problem with the HYP “elite school with big endowment” FA model is that they make it what they think of as fair by redistributing the wealth of their admitted students’ parents when the parents, in fact, are no longer guardians of these kids and not financially responsible for them in any way.</p>
<p>These schools give parents absolutely no rights to their kids records or say in any aspect of what they study or do at their institutions. None. Yet they haul every aspect of these lowly parents’ incomes under a magnifying glass and charge them as much as they can possibly extract.</p>
<p>Here’s the irony: There is much handwringing over the disadvantaged kids who come from impoverished homes without books. Huge efforts to bring them into the pool. But for the kids with prosperous parents, there is the enormous assumption that the parents care about Ivy education and are willing to pay. </p>
<p>The big ugly bias at work is the assumption that prosperous parents are good parents, education oriented parents, indulgent parents. That’s a pretty big assumption.</p>
<p>I think the endowments at the top schools we are talking about here can easily allow ALL admitted students to attend tuition free. Why on Earth not do that? Think of the enormous administrative savings. And if it was that simple, then they actually would see all kids apply.</p>
<p>There are few or no other products or services that engage in price discrimination as much as college tuition.</p>
<p>Generally, if you want a product but can’t afford it you are out of luck. See that million dollar house down the street but only make $10,000 a year? Sorry, there is not FA to allow you to afford the house.</p>
<p>See that flashy BMW? Well, if you don’t have enough cash, you can’t buy it. No FA provided to help you buy it.</p>
<p>Colleges have tried to not hold this against the student by providing financial aid. But that leaves the gap of the parents who the school feels can afford it but are unwilling. There is little that can be done for these students and it is the student that is punished. As I said earlier, unfortunately, life is unfair.</p>
<p>Need-based financial aid is for students whose parents are poor, not for parents who are jerks. (not the term my son uses)</p>
<p>Doesn’t have to be fair, its their private endowments. Many of the private endowments specify what their donation can be applied to.</p>
<p>If one is seeking a rigorous, highly-competitive academic environment only for the “best of the best” that is merit based there are FIVE distinct options here in the US that are completely TUITION FREE, no room and board and student receives other benefits.</p>
<p>The 5 service academies do not care if the parents are poor or rich, every cadet or midshipman pays the same, $0.</p>
<p>They will however, pay in other ways, some will pay dearly. So if it is a merit-based irregardless of family income, assets or desire to pay education equivilant to the ivies a student and family are searching for, they do exist and only for the “best of the best”. Their letters of rec MUST come from their senator, MOC, vice-president or president of the US.</p>
<p>So if you are searching for this you have 5 choices, West Point USMA, the Naval Academy, Air Force Academy, Coast Guard and Merchant Marine. Completely merit-based, family finances do not matter at all, it is up to the student and what they personally are willing to sacrifice.</p>