At what HHI are you willing to pay for an ivy league school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We make $200K and have $250K saved so far for our 15 year old. Have been saving for 15 years. If she gets in, we will pay for it. Education is so important IMO.

Your "education is so important IMO" comment implies that you think the only way to get one is to spend $250K for an undergraduate degree. That's just plain silly.

We are part of the 1% (new money--so tacky I know we actually had to earn it ourselves with our public school education--shocking!) and we struggle with this concept of giving our kids everything. DH and I succeeded because we were "hungry." No one was going to pay our tuition, our bills, buy our cars, give us a down payment, etc. Success or failure fell squarely on our shoulders and because of that we were motivated to make all of it happen. Our children will get their college paid 100% but they won't get a private just for bragging rights. There has to be a darn good reason for doubling the tuition besides "I want to go out of state," or "I want to go to an Ivy." Unless that out-of-state school or that Ivy has the best department for what they want to study, it just isn't happening. Too many kids are getting too much too soon without working for it. It is skewing their reality and stifling their initiative. What is it that financial advisors say about wealth--the first generation makes it, the second generation spends it, and the third generation blows it. Our kids will not have to struggle like we did but they will not have everything handed to them on a silver platter either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We make $200K and have $250K saved so far for our 15 year old. Have been saving for 15 years. If she gets in, we will pay for it. Education is so important IMO.

Your "education is so important IMO" comment implies that you think the only way to get one is to spend $250K for an undergraduate degree. That's just plain silly.

We are part of the 1% (new money--so tacky I know we actually had to earn it ourselves with our public school education--shocking!) and we struggle with this concept of giving our kids everything. DH and I succeeded because we were "hungry." No one was going to pay our tuition, our bills, buy our cars, give us a down payment, etc. Success or failure fell squarely on our shoulders and because of that we were motivated to make all of it happen. Our children will get their college paid 100% but they won't get a private just for bragging rights. There has to be a darn good reason for doubling the tuition besides "I want to go out of state," or "I want to go to an Ivy." Unless that out-of-state school or that Ivy has the best department for what they want to study, it just isn't happening. Too many kids are getting too much too soon without working for it. It is skewing their reality and stifling their initiative. What is it that financial advisors say about wealth--the first generation makes it, the second generation spends it, and the third generation blows it. Our kids will not have to struggle like we did but they will not have everything handed to them on a silver platter either.

All of that makes sense, but I think if a kid from around here gets into an Ivy, they've generally had to work pretty hard to do so. Ivy league admissions are generally not handed out on a silver platter. I'm not sure what you mean by "working for it," but for me that doesn't necessarily mean making money to pay for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We would pay if our children are accepted and would like to attend our undergrad, which happens to be an Ivy (though a much maligned one on these boards, since, gasp! it's not HYP). Our parents paid for it for us, which was a sacrifice for mine, not so much for his, and we both had excellent experiences at a small school with an incredible focus on undergrad teaching.

As to those who say they don't know anyone who married someone from college, I find that surprising. Among my closest college friends half are married to someone they knew in undergrad or met after at a college event or through mutual college friends.

Because the "elite" look down on anyone who marries before they are 35. They feel it is better to get married at 40 when you have gobs of money to pay for IVF. There is nothing wrong with going to state school and getting married in your twenties when you are at your peak fertility. These normal people have a happy life. Thinking you will be happier getting two Ivy League degrees and spending 100 hours a week working and putting off family life will lead to bliss is a story people make up in their heads.

Again, this was not my experience at all. Among my closest friends from my "elite" college, almost all were married prior to turning 30. One of my female friends married at 32 and a male friend married at 34 as the outliers. All but one set of friends already has at least one child, most have 2, and we range in age from 34-37. Half us are in marriages where we both got Ivy League degrees, and none of us put off married life or children.

I really don't understand this board's split obsession with/hatred of the Ivy League. I loved my school. I'm sure I could have had an equally great experience somewhere else and I'd likely have loved that school. It does not make me any better than anyone else that I scored well on the SAT and had the stats to get into a specific college. Lots of people have the stats, many will never apply for a variety of reasons.

[Anonymous]

09:40--

I agree with most of what you're saying, but "best department for what they want to study" strikes me as a problematic standard. "Offers significantly better opportunities in DC's areas of interest" might make more sense because (a) kids change majors (b) it seems weird to say it's either whatever quality department the public school offers or the absolute best and (c) most students will not be well-served by being in "the best" department in a field. They need a program suited to their academic background, ability, and learning style.

Either way, you're giving your kid a "free" college education (in quotation marks because the kid actually had to earn the degree). The difference is how much *you* pay -- and the message you risk sending with that formulation is "I'll invest more in you/your education only if you are/can be among 'the best.'"

By contrast, "Why do you think this school is worth tens of thousands of dollars more than that school?" seems like a better approach -- and it gets DC thinking for him/herself (and talking with you) about what it's worth paying a premium for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:09:40--

I agree with most of what you're saying, but "best department for what they want to study" strikes me as a problematic standard. "Offers significantly better opportunities in DC's areas of interest" might make more sense because (a) kids change majors (b) it seems weird to say it's either whatever quality department the public school offers or the absolute best and (c) most students will not be well-served by being in "the best" department in a field. They need a program suited to their academic background, ability, and learning style.

Either way, you're giving your kid a "free" college education (in quotation marks because the kid actually had to earn the degree). The difference is how much *you* pay -- and the message you risk sending with that formulation is "I'll invest more in you/your education only if you are/can be among 'the best.'"

By contrast, "Why do you think this school is worth tens of thousands of dollars more than that school?" seems like a better approach -- and it gets DC thinking for him/herself (and talking with you) about what it's worth paying a premium for.

I disagree. Most kids have an idea if they for example stem or non stem and some schools are better or worse in these areas. Being accepted to an Ivy does not mean the kid is going to get the best education for what he or she wants to do. Teaching them to evaluate or do cost benefit is wise money management and a good lesson for life. I can write a check for any school in the country but I will not write it for some because they just aren't worth it no matter what the brand. I have a perfect 4.0 kid with a near perfect SAT ago has worked incredibly hard- it so have I -- but I am not throwing away money for a bragging rights. Ivy if it makes s nice but she has to be able to articulate why it makes sense and that has to be more than the DCUM mommies are I are obsessed.

[Anonymous]

I have always taught my kids that just because you have $$ doesn't mean you have to spend it. Paying full freight for an ivy for something like a social work degree is ludicrous. Don't get me wrong, it is an honorable profession and I would be proud of any child who chooses this path but paying a quarter of a million for this degree is ignorant. There is that saying about a fool and his money...more people should be doing the cost benefit analysis especially before going into to debt to fund degrees based upon college prestige.

[Anonymous]

Waste of money for undergrad. And will also probably make your kid insufferable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I really don't understand this board's split obsession with/hatred of the Ivy League. I loved my school. I'm sure I could have had an equally great experience somewhere else and I'd likely have loved that school. It does not make me any better than anyone else that I scored well on the SAT and had the stats to get into a specific college. Lots of people have the stats, many will never apply for a variety of reasons.

I'm convinced it's flyover state fatties from the college confidential parent board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:09:40--

I agree with most of what you're saying, but "best department for what they want to study" strikes me as a problematic standard. "Offers significantly better opportunities in DC's areas of interest" might make more sense because (a) kids change majors (b) it seems weird to say it's either whatever quality department the public school offers or the absolute best and (c) most students will not be well-served by being in "the best" department in a field. They need a program suited to their academic background, ability, and learning style.

Either way, you're giving your kid a "free" college education (in quotation marks because the kid actually had to earn the degree). The difference is how much *you* pay -- and the message you risk sending with that formulation is "I'll invest more in you/your education only if you are/can be among 'the best.'"

By contrast, "Why do you think this school is worth tens of thousands of dollars more than that school?" seems like a better approach -- and it gets DC thinking for him/herself (and talking with you) about what it's worth paying a premium for.

I disagree. Most kids have an idea if they for example stem or non stem and some schools are better or worse in these areas. Being accepted to an Ivy does not mean the kid is going to get the best education for what he or she wants to do. Teaching them to evaluate or do cost benefit is wise money management and a good lesson for life. I can write a check for any school in the country but I will not write it for some because they just aren't worth it no matter what the brand. I have a perfect 4.0 kid with a near perfect SAT ago has worked incredibly hard- it so have I -- but I am not throwing away money for a bragging rights. Ivy if it makes s nice but she has to be able to articulate why it makes sense and that has to be more than the DCUM mommies are I are obsessed.

I don't see why you think we're disagreeing. STEM = areas of interest (vs. department). "Why is this school worth more than that?"= cost-benefit analysis/and articulation of reasons.

I said nothing about Ivies. Not a useful category in my mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We make $200K and have $250K saved so far for our 15 year old. Have been saving for 15 years. If she gets in, we will pay for it. Education is so important IMO.

Your "education is so important IMO" comment implies that you think the only way to get one is to spend $250K for an undergraduate degree. That's just plain silly.

We are part of the 1% (new money--so tacky I know we actually had to earn it ourselves with our public school education--shocking!) and we struggle with this concept of giving our kids everything. DH and I succeeded because we were "hungry." No one was going to pay our tuition, our bills, buy our cars, give us a down payment, etc. Success or failure fell squarely on our shoulders and because of that we were motivated to make all of it happen. Our children will get their college paid 100% but they won't get a private just for bragging rights. There has to be a darn good reason for doubling the tuition besides "I want to go out of state," or "I want to go to an Ivy." Unless that out-of-state school or that Ivy has the best department for what they want to study, it just isn't happening. Too many kids are getting too much too soon without working for it. It is skewing their reality and stifling their initiative. What is it that financial advisors say about wealth--the first generation makes it, the second generation spends it, and the third generation blows it. Our kids will not have to struggle like we did but they will not have everything handed to them on a silver platter either.

All of that makes sense, but I think if a kid from around here gets into an Ivy, they've generally had to work pretty hard to do so. Ivy league admissions are generally not handed out on a silver platter. I'm not sure what you mean by "working for it," but for me that doesn't necessarily mean making money to pay for it.

+1 If you have no hooks, you have to work your butt off these days to get into any Ivy or top 20 school. At that point, I personally think it would be bizarre to force them to go to a cheaper option if you are wealthy. You are not going to be able to replicate for your kids the experience you had growing up, and I don't think it makes sense to try. I too grew up without a lot, and killed myself to do whatever it took to get out of the life and town where I was raised. And I ended up with the exact same level of success as my DH, who grew up in comfort in DC. You'll find a whole lot of kids driven to succeed at all levels of wealth.

[Anonymous]

The only folks who are anti-elite don't know what they're talking about and/or don't have the money saved.

Elite grads don't rail against the elites. It's always bitter UMD or JMU moms who try to convince you their average kids are soo!! happy at their mediocre college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only folks who are anti-elite don't know what they're talking about and/or don't have the money saved.

Elite grads don't rail against the elites. It's always bitter UMD or JMU moms who try to convince you their average kids are soo!! happy at their mediocre college.

Well, I'm personally tired of working with fools who, 15 years later, care about what school they went to. It's pathetic. I make more and do better work than peers who spent $300k on school. Truly, 80% of the equation is the student.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only folks who are anti-elite don't know what they're talking about and/or don't have the money saved.

Elite grads don't rail against the elites. It's always bitter UMD or JMU moms who try to convince you their average kids are soo!! happy at their mediocre college.

Meh. I am an Ivy grad (whose child is also attending an Ivy) and I laugh at the people who are 10+ years out of undergrad and still bring up where they went to school or how "elite" their institution was. It reeks of insecurity and/or navelgazing. No one cares.

[Anonymous]

+1 to the last two PPs.

These discussions always remind me of Andy Bernard from The Office. Not at all impressive in the workplace, always manages to bring up the fact he went to Cornell as if that somehow makes up for his shortcomings.

Umm, no.

[Anonymous]

Our HHI is about $170K.

For my kid to go to UMD, in-state, it would cost $25,700. To go to Brown (with some of the worst financial aid in the Ivy League), it's costing about $28K.

The extra $2,300 per year is worth it.