What is a donut family? A donut hole family?

[Anonymous]

I don’t get this analogy either. I wish it was termed with a more accurate sounding word than donut hole. That makes no sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Can someone please properly define what a "donut family" and a "donut hole family" are?

Families in the top 10% of household income earners nationwide, who are butthurt that they don’t get need-based aid at elite private colleges that cost the same as what the national median HHI is per year. And while they are wealthy enough to have given their kids almost every advantage, are mad that they are not wealthy enough to have no problem paying 240k+ over four years for just one kid—without having that cut into their current lifestyle/being able to max out retirement contributions/not able to take that 10k+ yearly vacation, etc…

Another requirement of being a donut hole family not ever even considering loans. They either just suck it up and pay full price, or tell their kid to go to some other school that is somewhat cheaper even though it kills them since it’s only a T100 and not a T50.

Tl;dr. Families better off than 90-95% of every other household in the country, but still think they should get need-based aid since they’re not “rich”.

Donut hole is a euphemism for UMC families who have money, BUT don't want to spend it on MSRP tuition at top private colleges.

A whiny cohort, especially on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Typical DCUM donut hole family is not an object of pity for 95% of Americans, probably more. Average DCUM donut hole family probably has gross income of $300-400K. Yes, some are lower, but that’s how averages work. They’re unable to cash-flow college tuition because they have (some combination of these) a lot of house/s, a lot of private school tuition, a lot of travel spend, a lot of travel sports spend, a lot of retirement deductions, a lot of household service spend, etc.

You’re clueless if you think everyone making this salary has more than one house, private school tuition, and lots of travel. The reason DCUM is so angry in general is because we’re making that munch money and living completely unimpressive, uninteresting, not fun lives. And we grew up feeling confident that this much money would give us all those luxuries. Are you 15?

You are so delusional. People on this board constantly brag about their $20k vacations, nannies, home renos and new builds, and multi-million dollar investment and retirement accounts. Tons of home equity.

NONE of those people are “donut hole” families yet that’s exactly who comes here complaining, bc they don’t want to cut back in any of those other areas to help put their children through college. That is the very definition of delusion + entitlement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have never understood this metaphor and still don’t. If income distribution were circular, I could picture it, but great wealth doesn’t loop around and eventually become impoverished.

What am I missing?

The metaphor is for the middle being the part that gets left out.

The above is the simplest and best explanation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Typical DCUM donut hole family is not an object of pity for 95% of Americans, probably more. Average DCUM donut hole family probably has gross income of $300-400K. Yes, some are lower, but that’s how averages work. They’re unable to cash-flow college tuition because they have (some combination of these) a lot of house/s, a lot of private school tuition, a lot of travel spend, a lot of travel sports spend, a lot of retirement deductions, a lot of household service spend, etc.

You’re clueless if you think everyone making this salary has more than one house, private school tuition, and lots of travel. The reason DCUM is so angry in general is because we’re making that munch money and living completely unimpressive, uninteresting, not fun lives. And we grew up feeling confident that this much money would give us all those luxuries. Are you 15?

You are so delusional. People on this board constantly brag about their $20k vacations, nannies, home renos and new builds, and multi-million dollar investment and retirement accounts. Tons of home equity.

NONE of those people are “donut hole” families yet that’s exactly who comes here complaining, bc they don’t want to cut back in any of those other areas to help put their children through college. That is the very definition of delusion + entitlement.

No, you assume they’re same posters. You’re making stories up in your mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Typical DCUM donut hole family is not an object of pity for 95% of Americans, probably more. Average DCUM donut hole family probably has gross income of $300-400K. Yes, some are lower, but that’s how averages work. They’re unable to cash-flow college tuition because they have (some combination of these) a lot of house/s, a lot of private school tuition, a lot of travel spend, a lot of travel sports spend, a lot of retirement deductions, a lot of household service spend, etc.

You’re clueless if you think everyone making this salary has more than one house, private school tuition, and lots of travel. The reason DCUM is so angry in general is because we’re making that munch money and living completely unimpressive, uninteresting, not fun lives. And we grew up feeling confident that this much money would give us all those luxuries. Are you 15?

You are so delusional. People on this board constantly brag about their $20k vacations, nannies, home renos and new builds, and multi-million dollar investment and retirement accounts. Tons of home equity.

NONE of those people are “donut hole” families yet that’s exactly who comes here complaining, bc they don’t want to cut back in any of those other areas to help put their children through college. That is the very definition of delusion + entitlement.

Donut hole means you make too much to qualify for aid and not enough to pay for college outright. Seeing an actual budget and where your might differ and how to improve saving and investments is more useful than assumptions you are vacationing on the French Riviera’ every year and that’s why you don’t have 320K saved per child for college on a 300K salary . https://www.financialsamurai.com/living-a-middle-class-lifestyle-on-300000-year-expensive-city/

The people asking “is it worth filling out FAFSA” or “how do you afford college on x income” aren’t whining, they are asking for facts so they know their options. The majority of time people in that income bracket say their kid is at a public college or has merit as a fact. The other option is to reduce retirement and/or borrow against home equity for schools that only have need based aid. Either way, this is useful information to have before your kid builds their college list.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have never understood this metaphor and still don’t. If income distribution were circular, I could picture it, but great wealth doesn’t loop around and eventually become impoverished.

What am I missing?

The metaphor is for the middle being the part that gets left out.

The above is the simplest and best explanation.

And the most accurate. Our kids are too privileged to receive help and not privileged enough to be helpful or get special treatment.

Also, schools assume are kids are “fine” and don’t need to move up the ladder (risky since we’re far more likely to slide down than move up in any economic turmoil.)

The best our kids can hope for is merit aid at a state U. One of mine went this route but the other didn’t get merit aid. So we’re now first time home owners with two kids in college, one is full pay, the other still has insanely high rent, and we’re supporting my elderly mother. PP can stuff it with his fantasies. My clothes are from Amazon and half my furniture is from Craigslist. So yes, we’re paying it but no, we’re not living a luxurious life at all. It’s fun to be old and finally make a nice income and still have to check your balance before buying groceries - living the dream for sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have never understood this metaphor and still don’t. If income distribution were circular, I could picture it, but great wealth doesn’t loop around and eventually become impoverished.

What am I missing?

The metaphor is for the middle being the part that gets left out.

The above is the simplest and best explanation.

And the most accurate. Our kids are too privileged to receive help and not privileged enough to be helpful or get special treatment.

Also, schools assume are kids are “fine” and don’t need to move up the ladder (risky since we’re far more likely to slide down than move up in any economic turmoil.)

The best our kids can hope for is merit aid at a state U. One of mine went this route but the other didn’t get merit aid. So we’re now first time home owners with two kids in college, one is full pay, the other still has insanely high rent, and we’re supporting my elderly mother. PP can stuff it with his fantasies. My clothes are from Amazon and half my furniture is from Craigslist. So yes, we’re paying it but no, we’re not living a luxurious life at all. It’s fun to be old and finally make a nice income and still have to check your balance before buying groceries - living the dream for sure.

What you miss, is that people with less aren't getting much more help. Try doing all you do with half the income and a 10K coupon towards college. Think of all you wouldn't have if you were actually poverty level and receiving free college tuition.

Yes, donut hole means the middle is left out. But really that's a fiction and a way for the middle to pat themselves on the back and blame someone else. Sure there's a point that's wealthy enough that nothing matters, but everyone else makes sacrifices. Making sacrifices with 300K income, is clearly the better situation to be in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have never understood this metaphor and still don’t. If income distribution were circular, I could picture it, but great wealth doesn’t loop around and eventually become impoverished.

What am I missing?

The metaphor is for the middle being the part that gets left out.

The above is the simplest and best explanation.

And the most accurate. Our kids are too privileged to receive help and not privileged enough to be helpful or get special treatment.

Also, schools assume are kids are “fine” and don’t need to move up the ladder (risky since we’re far more likely to slide down than move up in any economic turmoil.)

The best our kids can hope for is merit aid at a state U. One of mine went this route but the other didn’t get merit aid. So we’re now first time home owners with two kids in college, one is full pay, the other still has insanely high rent, and we’re supporting my elderly mother. PP can stuff it with his fantasies. My clothes are from Amazon and half my furniture is from Craigslist. So yes, we’re paying it but no, we’re not living a luxurious life at all. It’s fun to be old and finally make a nice income and still have to check your balance before buying groceries - living the dream for sure.

What you miss, is that people with less aren't getting much more help. Try doing all you do with half the income and a 10K coupon towards college. Think of all you wouldn't have if you were actually poverty level and receiving free college tuition.

Yes, donut hole means the middle is left out. But really that's a fiction and a way for the middle to pat themselves on the back and blame someone else. Sure there's a point that's wealthy enough that nothing matters, but everyone else makes sacrifices. Making sacrifices with 300K income, is clearly the better situation to be in.

I don’t miss that at all. I’m taking issue with being told we are taking $20,000 vacations, have equity, and live some luxurious life. Not true. AND, this “hole” applies to acceptances too. And taxes. The middle is grrreat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have never understood this metaphor and still don’t. If income distribution were circular, I could picture it, but great wealth doesn’t loop around and eventually become impoverished.

What am I missing?

The metaphor is for the middle being the part that gets left out.

The above is the simplest and best explanation.

And the most accurate. Our kids are too privileged to receive help and not privileged enough to be helpful or get special treatment.

Also, schools assume are kids are “fine” and don’t need to move up the ladder (risky since we’re far more likely to slide down than move up in any economic turmoil.)

The best our kids can hope for is merit aid at a state U. One of mine went this route but the other didn’t get merit aid. So we’re now first time home owners with two kids in college, one is full pay, the other still has insanely high rent, and we’re supporting my elderly mother. PP can stuff it with his fantasies. My clothes are from Amazon and half my furniture is from Craigslist. So yes, we’re paying it but no, we’re not living a luxurious life at all. It’s fun to be old and finally make a nice income and still have to check your balance before buying groceries - living the dream for sure.

You're blessed.

[Anonymous]

Not possible to discuss the doughnut hole concept on DCUM at this point. Too many vicious trolls who are insanely triggered the merest reference to it. This thread is typical with all the multi-paragraph rants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not possible to discuss the doughnut hole concept on DCUM at this point. Too many vicious trolls who are insanely triggered the merest reference to it. This thread is typical with all the multi-paragraph rants.

Sad but true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have never understood this metaphor and still don’t. If income distribution were circular, I could picture it, but great wealth doesn’t loop around and eventually become impoverished.

What am I missing?

The metaphor is for the middle being the part that gets left out.

The above is the simplest and best explanation.

And the most accurate. Our kids are too privileged to receive help and not privileged enough to be helpful or get special treatment.

Also, schools assume are kids are “fine” and don’t need to move up the ladder (risky since we’re far more likely to slide down than move up in any economic turmoil.)

The best our kids can hope for is merit aid at a state U. One of mine went this route but the other didn’t get merit aid. So we’re now first time home owners with two kids in college, one is full pay, the other still has insanely high rent, and we’re supporting my elderly mother. PP can stuff it with his fantasies. My clothes are from Amazon and half my furniture is from Craigslist. So yes, we’re paying it but no, we’re not living a luxurious life at all. It’s fun to be old and finally make a nice income and still have to check your balance before buying groceries - living the dream for sure.

What you miss, is that people with less aren't getting much more help. Try doing all you do with half the income and a 10K coupon towards college. Think of all you wouldn't have if you were actually poverty level and receiving free college tuition.

Yes, donut hole means the middle is left out. But really that's a fiction and a way for the middle to pat themselves on the back and blame someone else. Sure there's a point that's wealthy enough that nothing matters, but everyone else makes sacrifices. Making sacrifices with 300K income, is clearly the better situation to be in.

I don’t miss that at all. I’m taking issue with being told we are taking $20,000 vacations, have equity, and live some luxurious life. Not true. AND, this “hole” applies to acceptances too. And taxes. The middle is grrreat.

The donut hole is not actually the middle though. Top 9% (higher than 90% but less wealthy than the 1%) is not the middle.

Calling it donut hole is a dumb analogy.