I don’t get it!

[Anonymous]

I don’t see why this is so mystifying to all of you. Since the 1980s (thanks, Reagan), the middle class has been hollowed out. The gap between the haves and the have nots has expanded greatly. The differences between the two groups are extreme; it’s not just a slight difference, it’s a huge gulf. Parents who are paying attention see this. They want their kids to have healthcare, to live in safe neighborhoods, to be able to own a home, and to have whatever economic security is possible in a culture where employees are entirely disposable and companies care only about creating shareholder value. They don’t want their kids to become the have nots, so this anxiety drives them to work to ensure that their kids have every advantage, whether real or perceived.

Sure, you can be very successful wherever you go to school, and going to a top school guarantees nothing. But setting aside individual stories, on the whole, going to a top school confers an advantage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see why this is so mystifying to all of you. Since the 1980s (thanks, Reagan), the middle class has been hollowed out. The gap between the haves and the have nots has expanded greatly. The differences between the two groups are extreme; it’s not just a slight difference, it’s a huge gulf. Parents who are paying attention see this. They want their kids to have healthcare, to live in safe neighborhoods, to be able to own a home, and to have whatever economic security is possible in a culture where employees are entirely disposable and companies care only about creating shareholder value. They don’t want their kids to become the have nots, so this anxiety drives them to work to ensure that their kids have every advantage, whether real or perceived.

Sure, you can be very successful wherever you go to school, and going to a top school guarantees nothing. But setting aside individual stories, on the whole, going to a top school confers an advantage.

Because all of the things you mentioned are not just possible, but highly likely at pretty much any school in the top 100 and even some further down the list. This kind of comment is the exact type of thing OP is talking about. You don’t need to go to a T20 or Ivy+ or whatever to “have healthcare, to live in safe neighborhoods, to be able to own a home, and to have whatever economic security is possible in a culture where employees are entirely disposable and companies care only about creating shareholder value.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see why this is so mystifying to all of you. Since the 1980s (thanks, Reagan), the middle class has been hollowed out. The gap between the haves and the have nots has expanded greatly. The differences between the two groups are extreme; it’s not just a slight difference, it’s a huge gulf. Parents who are paying attention see this. They want their kids to have healthcare, to live in safe neighborhoods, to be able to own a home, and to have whatever economic security is possible in a culture where employees are entirely disposable and companies care only about creating shareholder value. They don’t want their kids to become the have nots, so this anxiety drives them to work to ensure that their kids have every advantage, whether real or perceived.

Sure, you can be very successful wherever you go to school, and going to a top school guarantees nothing. But setting aside individual stories, on the whole, going to a top school confers an advantage.

If you really, really believe that your kid has only a 6% chance of having a good life, which is contingent upon that Ivy League admission or other lottery ticket to the aristocracy, then your time shouldn't be spent jockeying for an Ivy League admission; it should be spent rioting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see why this is so mystifying to all of you. Since the 1980s (thanks, Reagan), the middle class has been hollowed out. The gap between the haves and the have nots has expanded greatly. The differences between the two groups are extreme; it’s not just a slight difference, it’s a huge gulf. Parents who are paying attention see this. They want their kids to have healthcare, to live in safe neighborhoods, to be able to own a home, and to have whatever economic security is possible in a culture where employees are entirely disposable and companies care only about creating shareholder value. They don’t want their kids to become the have nots, so this anxiety drives them to work to ensure that their kids have every advantage, whether real or perceived.

Sure, you can be very successful wherever you go to school, and going to a top school guarantees nothing. But setting aside individual stories, on the whole, going to a top school confers an advantage.

Pedigree. It was always the American dream and what immigrant families worked hard for. Elite college and circles was always the goal. Look at the Kennedys. Irish were looked down upon, huge discrimination. Same with Italians.

The fancy prep school and Ivy League degree confer social standing. Joe Kennedy saw this. It didn’t matter how much $$ he had unless the kids also had the degrees/fancy education.

I’m not saying I agree. I went to public school and a public state university. I’m just commenting on the “why”. Ironically, spouse and I made $ and our kids are at an Ivy. My parents couldn’t afford to send me to an Ivy as middle class/donut hole. I am at a place after several generations (starting very poor) where I didn’t have to set a limit on school choice.

Holistic admissions has opened the doors. There is less need now for the Harvard degree, etc. But, they still hold sway in many circles.

[Anonymous]

It’s funny that Trump, Musk, Vance and Musk/Trump kids are all Ivy grads. They are closeted and try to appear “every man” yet they send their own kids to elite schools. Actions speak louder than words.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP there's a lot of talk about prestige and bragging rights but it goes beyond that. You're aware of Oxford, Cambridge, The Sorbonne, university of Bologna etc?

What do you think comes of attending those? You are surrounded by the "best minds" and you make connections with those people, you form a creative or business network that you carry with you out into the world.

I have a friend who attended Harvard and never mentions it, avoids it if possible. Yet her network of friends and colleagues who she met there still exist and they are all doing extraordinarily well and can occasionally help each other out.

Is this unique to Harvard though? You get that at a lot of schools. I mean Penn State is supposed to have an amazing alumni network.

Sure. My husband went to Penn State and there's an excellent alumni network. I can assure you it's a quite different network than what you would get with an Ivy though.

How is the Ivy network different from the one you’d get at Penn State? No, seriously, I am asking because I feel these Ivy alumni networks are a myth. It’s not like you go to Harvard and can reach out to Bill Gates.

I don't know what you're confused about. There exactly how it works.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_McCollum

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dustin_Moskovitz

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Hughes

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduardo_Saverin

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see why this is so mystifying to all of you. Since the 1980s (thanks, Reagan), the middle class has been hollowed out. The gap between the haves and the have nots has expanded greatly. The differences between the two groups are extreme; it’s not just a slight difference, it’s a huge gulf. Parents who are paying attention see this. They want their kids to have healthcare, to live in safe neighborhoods, to be able to own a home, and to have whatever economic security is possible in a culture where employees are entirely disposable and companies care only about creating shareholder value. They don’t want their kids to become the have nots, so this anxiety drives them to work to ensure that their kids have every advantage, whether real or perceived.

Sure, you can be very successful wherever you go to school, and going to a top school guarantees nothing. But setting aside individual stories, on the whole, going to a top school confers an advantage.

Pedigree. It was always the American dream and what immigrant families worked hard for. Elite college and circles was always the goal. Look at the Kennedys. Irish were looked down upon, huge discrimination. Same with Italians.

The fancy prep school and Ivy League degree confer social standing. Joe Kennedy saw this. It didn’t matter how much $$ he had unless the kids also had the degrees/fancy education.

I’m not saying I agree. I went to public school and a public state university. I’m just commenting on the “why”. Ironically, spouse and I made $ and our kids are at an Ivy. My parents couldn’t afford to send me to an Ivy as middle class/donut hole. I am at a place after several generations (starting very poor) where I didn’t have to set a limit on school choice.

Holistic admissions has opened the doors. There is less need now for the Harvard degree, etc. But, they still hold sway in many circles.

Joe Kennedy made himself a winner. (Whether it was criminal is a different matter.)

The Ivy League turned his mediocre children and grandchildren into winners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The prestige of HYPMS is huge in Asia. Harvard most of all. Sometimes I think it's the only school some have heard of.

Harvard sweatshirt is the uniform of children of Chinese immigrants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m a foreigner and newcomer to DC - we moved here for my husband’s work ~ 2 years ago from Western Europe. We have two boys and the oldest just started high school here, so I’ve been trying to learn about US college admissions in case my kids express interest in attending school here.

This is what I have trouble understanding:
- if now desirable employers recruit from a large range of schools rather than only from a few elite schools
- if you can have access to quality peers beyond the T20 schools since there are way more qualified kids than spots at these schools
- if you can get a quality education at pretty much any top 100 school, and
- if life outcomes are truly dependent on the kid rather than the school

Then why oh why are kids (and parents) putting themselves through so much stress and anxiety to get into HYPSM? This is what I don’t get.

Is it purely because Harvard and Yale are more prestigious than Penn State and Miami? So it’s just about prestige and bragging rights?

All of the answers to your if questions are yes. And yet it still can matter to go to an elite school. So it is yes and or yes but. Nothing to do with status or the like. There are more options in an elite school. More pathways. More openings. A student there maybe die not or cannot take advantage. Who knows.

But all you points are right but all things being equal you would still do an elite school.

[Anonymous]

New to this convo.

Honestly it’s really only to help get your kids to Wall Street, private equity, hedge funds or worst case biglaw or even worse case, MBB consulting.

The path to those senior level careers is helped enormously by Ivy connections. Ask me how I know.

If you are already connected, the school pedigree matters less or can help a midtier (3.3) Ivy applicant get the creme de La creme job beating out the 4.0 kid from Wisco.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a kid at UMD majoring in CS. DC is an academic superstar, always has been since they were 3 (gifted program, magnet programs, etc). But, they got shut out of the T15, though UMD is T20 for CS.

The reason why parents want their kids to go to more prestigious schools is because of internship/employment recruiting. While I agree that where you went to school won't matter after working for 5 years, where you go matters to open that first door. The top paying employers recruit mostly from certain schools. It's harder to get recruited to those companies from the lesser tier schools.

I went to a no name u here in the states, and while I did eventually work my way up to a very well known prestigious company, it took me a lot longer to get there than my colleagues at work who went to a big name u.

But, I agree, as my experience has shown me, a really smart, motivated person can do well in life no matter where they go. It will just take them longer.

Parents just want their kids to get there faster if they can.

DC has an internship this summer with a well known company. They had to really hustle last year to get to that stepping stone, but it was their smarts and personality that got them there.

Let's be honest.. if you have an applicant from MIT and one from UMD, you would look at the MIT applicant first.

This person is telling you the truth. Plus, there are some fields that are very prestige based and degrees from top universities propel you and serve you well. My sibling graduated from two ivies and has one child at a top Ivy and another who graduated from a top 25 university. The one with the liberal arts degree from the top 25 university just hasn’t had the same doors open to them. They applied to many internships and didn’t hear back. They did not have a job waiting for them. It’s all very different from the kid at the top Ivy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All of your points are correct but you’ll never convince the high anxiety, status-chasing people here so best of luck with this post.

This. Don't sweat it, OP. You're right. It simply doesn't matter where you go for undergrad. My DC got into a top 15 but went to a small instate school in VA and will grad debt free. And is far less stressed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, that’s about it.

This!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see why this is so mystifying to all of you. Since the 1980s (thanks, Reagan), the middle class has been hollowed out. The gap between the haves and the have nots has expanded greatly. The differences between the two groups are extreme; it’s not just a slight difference, it’s a huge gulf. Parents who are paying attention see this. They want their kids to have healthcare, to live in safe neighborhoods, to be able to own a home, and to have whatever economic security is possible in a culture where employees are entirely disposable and companies care only about creating shareholder value. They don’t want their kids to become the have nots, so this anxiety drives them to work to ensure that their kids have every advantage, whether real or perceived.

Sure, you can be very successful wherever you go to school, and going to a top school guarantees nothing. But setting aside individual stories, on the whole, going to a top school confers an advantage.

If you really, really believe that your kid has only a 6% chance of having a good life, which is contingent upon that Ivy League admission or other lottery ticket to the aristocracy, then your time shouldn't be spent jockeying for an Ivy League admission; it should be spent rioting.

At times I consider what it would take to get me to (wo)man a barricade, LOL. Not quite there yet...

[Anonymous]

It's like people are having two different conversations.

If you are comfortably middle class, have a stable job, health insurance, and a home in NoVa in a half way decent school district, then you can expect your child can attain the same by attending pretty much any state school, or really, any accredited school that anyone anywhere has heard of.

But high net worth individuals (let's say making over 3 mil a year) who expect their children to do the same or better will need to fight tooth and nail to get them into a select group of schools, where they can appropriately hob nob with the other super rich and obtain the needed pedigree.

Totally different worlds.