<p>Ahh the welfare state…</p>
<p>The lack of appreciation by some people who call full payers as “entitled”</p>
<p>Not your business - </p>
<p>I don’t think most people view the parents who pay full freight as entitled. It’s more the kids who expect it without appreciation of the cost and sacrifice.</p>
<p>“You see this as noble, but I see it as sad”</p>
<p>Sylvan, I don’t know why you see this as sad. We don’t see ourselves as noble, just trying to live within our means and not indulge in expenses we can’t afford. We are better off than most people in the world and really appreciate that. We don’t deprive ourselves of what is really important, just don’t indulge in what a lot of people think is necessary.</p>
<p>It tends to come off as self-righteous and judgmental of how others spend their money and what they place value on.</p>
<p>I admit to feeling “punished” for saving and working rather than staying home (which I would have LOVED to have done) so that I could pay for my kids’ educations. It also irks me that my mom paid a ton of money for my dad’s nursing home while his roommate paid NOTHING just because my parents had saved. Maybe it is wrong to feel that it’s not “fair” that I pay more because I planned, worked, saved, and spaced out my kids, but I do!</p>
<p>Sylvan,</p>
<p>I am sorry if you see it as judgmental. I was just stating that people have choices. We are not wealthy. So we don’t make choices that put us in debt. Some people do. If we had more to spend, we would probably go on great vacations. But that’s not an option for us.</p>
<p>However, some people get into debt and end up with minimal savings because they make choices that result in overspending. It’s like the housing bust a few years back. Many people felt compelled to purchase homes at inflated prices way above what they could afford And many are stuck now. </p>
<p>This thread is about aid as a gift and not a right. I was suggesting that aid is a gift and that some people, like us, who receive fin. aid are not out wildly spending on extravagant things and then having little in savings, resulting in a better position to get aid.</p>
<p>It is interesting isn’t it! Maybe we’ve all been sold a bill of goods (like one of those crappy mortgages from a few years ago) by corporate America. If you rent, spend $ on luxury items, and live like it might be your last day- could you come out ahead on the spreadsheet of life? Maybe saving and being frugal the way society tells you to isn’t actually the smartest behavior.</p>
<p>omedog - that’s exactly it. Our family fits a similar profile to maggiedog’s (though we do vacation, but do so on a budget). Sylvan wants to call us judgemental when we say that many others in the same income range don’t live within their means - so be it. They do so because they can, and we will end up paying for them in the end: financial aid for their kids to attend college, assistance of various sorts when they retire and are low income because they didn’t save for their retirement, assistance to pay for their nursing care, while we use up our savings before we get the same assistance.</p>
<p>Working in a tax office, I’ve seen many things we could do to get more aid, as I’ve seen many tricks to get other types of assistance. Given the current system of things, our behavior is not the most beneficial, but money doesn’t grow on trees. I have to believe that doing the right thing and living within our means is ultimately the best things to do, because when we do retire, we will already know how to survive should Social Security and the other safety nets disappear. I’m not so sure many of my contemporaries will be so lucky.</p>
<p>
There is a difference between “living within your means” and living so far below your means that you can have $X in savings for college and/or retirement. The question then becomes: how far below “your means” is it reasonable/responsible to live and how much do you have to put into the savings in order to be in the “acceptable” range?</p>
<p>If you’re saving for something you want - the ability to send your children to college, or tha ability to maintain your current lifestyle during retirement, then living at a level that you can save $x to do those things is not living well below your means. Americans have gotten so used to easy credit that we don’t know how to figure out what “within our means” means.</p>
<p>The desire for all the luxuries is rampant, and the sense of entitlement is everywhere. It starts with the low-income family in subsidized housing with the 50" TV (they’re entitled to some enjoyment aren’t they?), and moves up to the middle class family that feels they should be able to afford more than the low income family. </p>
<p>If you want to know what’s acceptable, it’s somewhat more than the average family is puting away now. If you put away 5% of your income each year from the time your first child is born, and your increases to income match the earnings, you will have 90% of your annual salary set aside - enough that you would could afford to pay 10% of your earnings toward tuition each year for 9 years - that should cushion need to pay EFC nicely. For retirement, run a calculator to see what you should put away each year if you want to maintain the same level of spending - you can take into account any pension you might have, as well as social security. Most people simply don’t save enough.</p>
<p>This thread summarized my thoughts pretty accurately. I understand the frustration with receiving a smaller aid package than expected, but I’m honestly tired of hearing people complain about it. Especially ED applicants.</p>
<p>You’re right that its not a right, but I find it highly disturbing and a little disgusting that, to go to my school of choice, I’ll have to take out 200k in loans… which is obviously not an option b/c theres simply no way any young person could ever make those payments. Commuting will cost me 130k in loans. My state school safeties? 105k in loans.</p>
<p>People tell you to avoid loans like they’re the plague but for some people its just not an option. It sucks that college is out of my reach. You’re right that going to a well-regarded private school isnt a <em>right</em> but it affords a lot more opportunities than the state schools in getting me a job that could actually pay these loans back post-graduation. Seriously, though, it absolutely sucks that despite working hard and getting in to my dream schools, I simply was not born into the privilege of attending those caliber schools that so many others are. You’re right that college and FA are not a right, and that’s the problem.</p>
<p>For me, the only reasonable option is community college, which is heartbreaking for someone who worked hard to get into school programs, not for the degree, as I would say is the point of CC, but for the training. You could say that the cost of college is justified, and only the twisted education system in the US could ever produce a mindset that 100-250k is a reasonable price range for a BFA.</p>
<p>and I dont mean to say that people that can afford college are entitled or spoiled or something… thats great and everything, I wish my parents had saved up for college, but sometimes unforseen things happen and it’s just not possible… My parents make decent enough money that I’m not eligible for FA like some people that are absolutely in dire financial distress. But my family made some unwise decisions, and with insurmountable debt and a twin sister and older brother all attending college at the same time as me, it’s just a shame that college should have such a price tag in the first place. Which I think we can all agree on.</p>
<p>I feel like I’m stuck between a rock and a hard place – tons of student debt and a Bachelors degree, or no debt and inadequate education to compete in this job market? Haha sorry to get so fired up but I just hate that my first big decision going out into the real world is which way to doom myself. That’s the price of following dreams, I suppose!</p>
<p>
Your education is what you make of it. You can maximize the education you DO get by getting the very best grades, connecting with your professors for possible opportunities for research, extra material in a subject, working hard to get internships or relevant summer jobs, etc. Most professors are happy to help enthusiastic young students get more from a course than the basic requirements.</p>
<p>I don’t think anyone should be denied a college education who is academically qualified due to financial hardship, that said, however, that does not mean they necessarily should get a free lunch at the most prestigious private universities. They should be able to attend the state universities in their state, if academically qualified. Otherwise, it is discrimination in a way if they cannot. And I don’t think they should have to pay 25 percent of their income to go unless they are well off enough that it is not a hardship - that is a huge percentage especially considering college does not guarantee a job in the future these days. A lot of people are paying about 75 percent of their income on rent right now.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is simply not true that graduates of “well-regarded privates” as a rule find it easier to get jobs than graduates of state flagship universities. The list of universities where national companies do the most recruiting is full of state schools, and not just “public ivies” either. Employability upon graduation also depends a lot more on your major than on where you got your degree.</p>
<p>Well, either way, it’s pretty much the same story with public schools for me right now. In-state NJ public schools are pretty expensive and a lot gave me almost no FA… I can’t afford private schools but I have equal trouble affording state schools.</p>
<p>Have kiddles go into business/accounting/CPA. They’ll become proficient at hiding $$ and assets. This way, hopefully, we won’t also have to pay for our grand kids college educations.</p>
<p>Part of the problem with the fin aid…
is there are no perfect solutions.</p>
<p>whether it be merit (being paid by the U to attend and to raise their stats)</p>
<p>athletic (being paid to play for a U- who by ncaa can never lose their $$ for not playing/injury/burnout)</p>
<p>and need–
Demonstrating need based on a variety of models…is that with the need model—some end up paying full freight instead of an equal percentage as compared to someone else-- it isn’t like the need is assess it to a certain %…
so it really penalizes people for having saved for college or for working 80-90 hr weeks.</p>
<p>And some need aid methodology penalizes self employed/entrepreners which sends the wrong message about success…sort of like taxing people for succes or complaining that someone’s IRA is “too big”</p>
<p>there are plenty of parents who work 80-90 hr work weeks that arent paying for their children’s college (my dad, for one). Because they cant. And I’m hardly getting any FA because of that, but the money is going to other things that are pretty urgent. Just because someone doesn’t have enough money or can’t afford to send their kids to school, fogfog, does not mean that they don’t work hard. I’m sure my dad would LOVE if he could afford to send me to school.</p>