Donut hole reality

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s not donut hole. That’s a comfortable family. The rest of our kids go to state schools.

This. If you have sticker shock, but the ability to pay you aren't really a donut hole.

Ability to pay is often at the cost of liquidating retirement funds, home equity, life style and nursing home savings.

Shouldn't be. The top schools have excellent need based FA. Many who would be a fafsa doughnut hole would get FA. To be paying full price means, you are well off in earnings and non-retirement assets. Even home equity is often capped (not 2nd or 3rd home of course).

The real problem is failing to save. No one should expect to cashflow college. We started saving when kids in elementary and thought we were late to the game.

Bullsh. First of all, by the time you get to college aged kids, you may be making the most salary you've made. But almost no one makes that their entire career. We saved and save a LOT. We have old cars. No second home. No generational wealth. We have good retirement. Those are the things we've funded: college and retirement.

But all of those things are counted against us, as if we can cashflow $50-90k/year. We can't. And we aren't getting aid. We've made our peace with the schools are high stats kid can go (based on finances) and have had to forego much better schools b/c of money. It should not be this way.

I get that those of you not as well off like to dump on higher earners (UMC) to make yourselves feel better. But we've done everything right. Both coming from just above poverty line upbringings. The "American Dream" of work hard and good things flow from that is a bunch of horse sh-- when it comes to college admissions and sending your kids to the best school. The very wealthy get that opportunity. The poor get that opportunity. No one else.

You live under your means, you save starting at birth and when your income increases you save it vs changing your spending.

Will you be repeating this same ridiculous, tone-deaf message when the cost of elite schools exceeds $100K/year? $200K? Just save, sacrifice, drive an old car?

At what point in your view is it just not possible for donut hole families?

And why is this ok again?

DP: why is it okay for you to assume that everyone is entitled to an education at an elite university? There are tons of affordable universities for students that most kids can gain admission to. VCU/JMU/GMU in VA. Towson, UMBC in MD. Just to name a few.
There are places to get a great education that can be affordable to you. Instead of complaining about the elite T25 schools (That are more highly rejective than selective---most likely your kid isn't getting in), focus your efforts on finding schools that are affordable.

There is the CC to 4 year college plan as well. It's extremely affordable. Even more affordable if you do DE in HS and graduate HS with your AA as well. Then the first 2 years cost you maybe $4K (in my area it's cost of books only). Then you only need 2 years at 4 year to finish up.

I agree it's ridiculous things cost $85K+. But that's really only 50-60 schools that cost more than that and some of them do give merit awards.

Why? Because this is $%#$% The United States of America where hard work is supposed to net results. That is what we are told since the day we are born. It is why immigrants flock to this country and always have. But the reality is, that's not the reality. You can work as hard as you want, check every box, save lots of money and you'll still be iced out of the "top schools."

Why should that be just b/c some family is in a "donut hole" range? Why should the uber rich or the poor get those spots or be more deserving of those spots? They shouldn't. Plain and simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s not donut hole. That’s a comfortable family. The rest of our kids go to state schools.

This. If you have sticker shock, but the ability to pay you aren't really a donut hole.

Ability to pay is often at the cost of liquidating retirement funds, home equity, life style and nursing home savings.

Shouldn't be. The top schools have excellent need based FA. Many who would be a fafsa doughnut hole would get FA. To be paying full price means, you are well off in earnings and non-retirement assets. Even home equity is often capped (not 2nd or 3rd home of course).

The real problem is failing to save. No one should expect to cashflow college. We started saving when kids in elementary and thought we were late to the game.

Bullsh. First of all, by the time you get to college aged kids, you may be making the most salary you've made. But almost no one makes that their entire career. We saved and save a LOT. We have old cars. No second home. No generational wealth. We have good retirement. Those are the things we've funded: college and retirement.

But all of those things are counted against us, as if we can cashflow $50-90k/year. We can't. And we aren't getting aid. We've made our peace with the schools are high stats kid can go (based on finances) and have had to forego much better schools b/c of money. It should not be this way.

I get that those of you not as well off like to dump on higher earners (UMC) to make yourselves feel better. But we've done everything right. Both coming from just above poverty line upbringings. The "American Dream" of work hard and good things flow from that is a bunch of horse sh-- when it comes to college admissions and sending your kids to the best school. The very wealthy get that opportunity. The poor get that opportunity. No one else.

You live under your means, you save starting at birth and when your income increases you save it vs changing your spending.

Will you be repeating this same ridiculous, tone-deaf message when the cost of elite schools exceeds $100K/year? $200K? Just save, sacrifice, drive an old car?

At what point in your view is it just not possible for donut hole families?

And why is this ok again?

The point is when you choose an expensive house, cars, vacations and lifestyle while others of us save and don't do those things on equal or less income, why do you feel entitled to tons of aid while we have to full pay?

It's all about choices. You chose to have the house, fancy cars, fancy vacations and fancy lifestyle and not save as much for college. No problem with that. As long as you don't now feel entitled to financial aid.
If I cannot afford a $80K car, I buy a $30K Honda/Toyota. I don't complain that it's not fair. Or I drive my current car another 2-3 years and actively save so that I can afford a nicer car (maybe a $50K). But I dont' complain that others can afford it and life isn't fair.
Same with a house or vacations. We lived our 20s paying off college debt and saving saving saving. Didn't have kids until we were 30+ so we could be financially sound. We were mid to late 30s before we took "fancy vacations". We still enjoyed life, just did it on a reasonable budget. But we knew plenty of people who spent spent spent. Maybe it was worth it for them. maybe not. I just know I don't regret getting a strong financial base when young, even if it meant forgoing "luxury items"

blah blah blah. We drive Hondas. We save aggressively. We paid off our own loans and our mortgage. We don't take elaborate vacations or into name brands --Canadian goose jackets and other expensive sh**t.

And, yeah, 95-100k/year for college for two kids is still ridiculous. $800k for two BA or BS degrees---yeah--incredibly ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We don’t qualify for need-based aid. Here’s how it shook out for us, including merit aid:

Regional in-state: 15k
Flagship in-state: 30k
Flagship out-of-state public: $48k
Higher-ranked private: $72k

We went with the third option. My guess is that employers will begin to take private school grads with a grain of salt: they may be very bright, or they may just be very rich.

You can be rich and very bright at same time. Rich kids do not just "get admission" to an elite private because they are rich (except for someone ala Bush or Clinton or parent is Hollywood star). Those kids are also very smart, they just happen to have rich parents or parents who have saved for $90K/year college.
I'd argue it doesn't make sense to do option 3, unless your state flagship is not very good. UVA/VAtech and UMD are all great schools and I cannot see paying extra to go anywhere else if my kid gets in

Some out of state flagships give better merit aid. Look at WVU, it's cheaper than most instate MD and VA schools.

Exactly! There are plenty of options if you have a specific price point in mind. I'm West Coast and good friends kid went to WVU for engineering because it's excellent for MEchE/Aerospace. With merit it was less than our excellent flagship. If you think you have the resume for UMD/UVA/VaTech, you most certainly will get into WVU and it will be very affordable.

And if you don’t like WVU, there are lots of other colleges where you can do the same sort of thing: Arizona, Florida State, Kansas, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, Nebraska etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of why it's gotten so insanely expensive to go to many colleges is because families that are UMC are expected to shoulder not just the cost of their own kid attending but all the kids that are attending for free or at low rates. I want those kids to go to college too but that should be funded from either government money or endowments not jacking up tuition on other families struggling to pay for school too.

That is not UMC. That is wealthy families not wanting to make sacrifices and save.

Disagree. I shouldn’t have to subsidize other peoples kids. Let the government do it or the schools endowment.

Exactly. The classmate who called me poor for saving in 529s since my kids were born still hasn’t paid off her student loans 20 years after graduation. These are the sorts of people I am expected to subsidize by private colleges that have facilities falling apart because they invested huge portions of the endowment in speculative investments that they can’t access due to geopolitical events. While visiting one for a tour and washing my hands at a bathroom sink, a ceiling panel literally fell on me and tore my shirt. Their mismanagement of the endowment is not my liability. Hard pass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We don’t qualify for need-based aid. Here’s how it shook out for us, including merit aid:

Regional in-state: 15k
Flagship in-state: 30k
Flagship out-of-state public: $48k
Higher-ranked private: $72k

We went with the third option. My guess is that employers will begin to take private school grads with a grain of salt: they may be very bright, or they may just be very rich.

You can be rich and very bright at same time. Rich kids do not just "get admission" to an elite private because they are rich (except for someone ala Bush or Clinton or parent is Hollywood star). Those kids are also very smart, they just happen to have rich parents or parents who have saved for $90K/year college.
I'd argue it doesn't make sense to do option 3, unless your state flagship is not very good. UVA/VAtech and UMD are all great schools and I cannot see paying extra to go anywhere else if my kid gets in

“Good” is measured in relation to what the kid wants to study. Some out of state flagships are better at specific degrees than UMD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A tiny subset of people think it's smart and shows "value" by saving for 18 years - skipping out on taking kids to see London or having an apartment with a third bedroom - so you can blow it all for 4 years of Vassar. Just so that kid can then grow up to save and scrimp for 18 years in their 2 bedroom, 1 bathroom apartment with 1.4 kids

Most Americans making 250k feel fine about having a 4th kid, putting in a pool, buying that Serena and Lilly patio set, going to see the World Cup, sending their parents on a cruise, buying their 18 year old a car, throwing a big wedding, writing a check for kid's downpayment and generally enjoying life. Sure, their kids go to U of Illinois or Wisconsin. Guess what? They have a ball and then get the same jobs as our kids.

DCUM is home to that first tiny subset. Most Americans do not find this life at all aspirational.

I actually think most of DCUM does all this AND they send their kid to private T30. You paint it as mutually exclusive but for certain levels of wealth, its both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A tiny subset of people think it's smart and shows "value" by saving for 18 years - skipping out on taking kids to see London or having an apartment with a third bedroom - so you can blow it all for 4 years of Vassar. Just so that kid can then grow up to save and scrimp for 18 years in their 2 bedroom, 1 bathroom apartment with 1.4 kids

Most Americans making 250k feel fine about having a 4th kid, putting in a pool, buying that Serena and Lilly patio set, going to see the World Cup, sending their parents on a cruise, buying their 18 year old a car, throwing a big wedding, writing a check for kid's downpayment and generally enjoying life. Sure, their kids go to U of Illinois or Wisconsin. Guess what? They have a ball and then get the same jobs as our kids.

DCUM is home to that first tiny subset. Most Americans do not find this life at all aspirational.

I actually think most of DCUM does all this AND they send their kid to private T30. You paint it as mutually exclusive but for certain levels of wealth, its both.

if you're doing all that, I don't worry that you can't afford 90k for college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s not donut hole. That’s a comfortable family. The rest of our kids go to state schools.

This. If you have sticker shock, but the ability to pay you aren't really a donut hole.

Ability to pay is often at the cost of liquidating retirement funds, home equity, life style and nursing home savings.

Shouldn't be. The top schools have excellent need based FA. Many who would be a fafsa doughnut hole would get FA. To be paying full price means, you are well off in earnings and non-retirement assets. Even home equity is often capped (not 2nd or 3rd home of course).

The real problem is failing to save. No one should expect to cashflow college. We started saving when kids in elementary and thought we were late to the game.

Bullsh. First of all, by the time you get to college aged kids, you may be making the most salary you've made. But almost no one makes that their entire career. We saved and save a LOT. We have old cars. No second home. No generational wealth. We have good retirement. Those are the things we've funded: college and retirement.

But all of those things are counted against us, as if we can cashflow $50-90k/year. We can't. And we aren't getting aid. We've made our peace with the schools are high stats kid can go (based on finances) and have had to forego much better schools b/c of money. It should not be this way.

I get that those of you not as well off like to dump on higher earners (UMC) to make yourselves feel better. But we've done everything right. Both coming from just above poverty line upbringings. The "American Dream" of work hard and good things flow from that is a bunch of horse sh-- when it comes to college admissions and sending your kids to the best school. The very wealthy get that opportunity. The poor get that opportunity. No one else.

You live under your means, you save starting at birth and when your income increases you save it vs changing your spending.

Will you be repeating this same ridiculous, tone-deaf message when the cost of elite schools exceeds $100K/year? $200K? Just save, sacrifice, drive an old car?

At what point in your view is it just not possible for donut hole families?

And why is this ok again?

The point is when you choose an expensive house, cars, vacations and lifestyle while others of us save and don't do those things on equal or less income, why do you feel entitled to tons of aid while we have to full pay?

It's all about choices. You chose to have the house, fancy cars, fancy vacations and fancy lifestyle and not save as much for college. No problem with that. As long as you don't now feel entitled to financial aid.
If I cannot afford a $80K car, I buy a $30K Honda/Toyota. I don't complain that it's not fair. Or I drive my current car another 2-3 years and actively save so that I can afford a nicer car (maybe a $50K). But I dont' complain that others can afford it and life isn't fair.
Same with a house or vacations. We lived our 20s paying off college debt and saving saving saving. Didn't have kids until we were 30+ so we could be financially sound. We were mid to late 30s before we took "fancy vacations". We still enjoyed life, just did it on a reasonable budget. But we knew plenty of people who spent spent spent. Maybe it was worth it for them. maybe not. I just know I don't regret getting a strong financial base when young, even if it meant forgoing "luxury items"

blah blah blah. We drive Hondas. We save aggressively. We paid off our own loans and our mortgage. We don't take elaborate vacations or into name brands --Canadian goose jackets and other expensive sh**t.

And, yeah, 95-100k/year for college for two kids is still ridiculous. $800k for two BA or BS degrees---yeah--incredibly ridiculous.

+100000

I am laughing even thinking of it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A tiny subset of people think it's smart and shows "value" by saving for 18 years - skipping out on taking kids to see London or having an apartment with a third bedroom - so you can blow it all for 4 years of Vassar. Just so that kid can then grow up to save and scrimp for 18 years in their 2 bedroom, 1 bathroom apartment with 1.4 kids

Most Americans making 250k feel fine about having a 4th kid, putting in a pool, buying that Serena and Lilly patio set, going to see the World Cup, sending their parents on a cruise, buying their 18 year old a car, throwing a big wedding, writing a check for kid's downpayment and generally enjoying life. Sure, their kids go to U of Illinois or Wisconsin. Guess what? They have a ball and then get the same jobs as our kids.

DCUM is home to that first tiny subset. Most Americans do not find this life at all aspirational.

I actually think most of DCUM does all this AND they send their kid to private T30. You paint it as mutually exclusive but for certain levels of wealth, its both.

No. Most of DCUM cannot afford to do this. Lord

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of why it's gotten so insanely expensive to go to many colleges is because families that are UMC are expected to shoulder not just the cost of their own kid attending but all the kids that are attending for free or at low rates. I want those kids to go to college too but that should be funded from either government money or endowments not jacking up tuition on other families struggling to pay for school too.

💯

That’s the big secret of the schools that no one talks about. Who is really funding all of the need blind awards. It’s not the endowments. And it’s def not the government.

It’s the fact that tuition goes up every year and insane amount and families with over $300,000 in income are expected to be full pay. That is robbery from one group to satisfy the other.

Another +1

TO me the bigger issue is merit aid that takes away from the pot of money for financial need. If all that emrit aid went into the financial need jar, the income level you need to have to qualify for need based aid would be higher.

My nieces and nephews and cousins got 20 to 30k in merit aid for tons of schools. These are very well off kids whose parents can absolutely afford to be full pay. I'd rather see that money go to middle class kids, not kids whose parents make half a million a year.

Yup. It should all be need based.

Nope! If you need/want that, CC then transfer to VCU if you are a VA resident. There you go---college is completely affordable. We are not a socialist country---if you want that there are plenty to go live in. But you do not get to tell universities that they cannot attract top students by offering Merit awards. That's how outside of the t20 schools, they attract the top tier of students, thereby elevating the experience for everyone at the school. Kids in the 30-70 range are typically going to go where they get the best merit, and that is how you attract the top tiered students who were shut out of a T20/25 school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A tiny subset of people think it's smart and shows "value" by saving for 18 years - skipping out on taking kids to see London or having an apartment with a third bedroom - so you can blow it all for 4 years of Vassar. Just so that kid can then grow up to save and scrimp for 18 years in their 2 bedroom, 1 bathroom apartment with 1.4 kids

Most Americans making 250k feel fine about having a 4th kid, putting in a pool, buying that Serena and Lilly patio set, going to see the World Cup, sending their parents on a cruise, buying their 18 year old a car, throwing a big wedding, writing a check for kid's downpayment and generally enjoying life. Sure, their kids go to U of Illinois or Wisconsin. Guess what? They have a ball and then get the same jobs as our kids.

DCUM is home to that first tiny subset. Most Americans do not find this life at all aspirational.

This is true and I'm quite glad and quite proud to be part of the tiny subset. And that's because my parents - who were first generation - understood that education mattered, and took out a second mortgage so I could go to an Ivy League school. My career and my life as a whole are fundamentally different than the other kids I grew up with as a result. I will happily skip the cruise and the overpriced patio set so that I can give my kids the luxury of wider options in life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s not donut hole. That’s a comfortable family. The rest of our kids go to state schools.

This. If you have sticker shock, but the ability to pay you aren't really a donut hole.

Ability to pay is often at the cost of liquidating retirement funds, home equity, life style and nursing home savings.

Shouldn't be. The top schools have excellent need based FA. Many who would be a fafsa doughnut hole would get FA. To be paying full price means, you are well off in earnings and non-retirement assets. Even home equity is often capped (not 2nd or 3rd home of course).

The real problem is failing to save. No one should expect to cashflow college. We started saving when kids in elementary and thought we were late to the game.

Bullsh. First of all, by the time you get to college aged kids, you may be making the most salary you've made. But almost no one makes that their entire career. We saved and save a LOT. We have old cars. No second home. No generational wealth. We have good retirement. Those are the things we've funded: college and retirement.

But all of those things are counted against us, as if we can cashflow $50-90k/year. We can't. And we aren't getting aid. We've made our peace with the schools are high stats kid can go (based on finances) and have had to forego much better schools b/c of money. It should not be this way.

I get that those of you not as well off like to dump on higher earners (UMC) to make yourselves feel better. But we've done everything right. Both coming from just above poverty line upbringings. The "American Dream" of work hard and good things flow from that is a bunch of horse sh-- when it comes to college admissions and sending your kids to the best school. The very wealthy get that opportunity. The poor get that opportunity. No one else.

You live under your means, you save starting at birth and when your income increases you save it vs changing your spending.

Will you be repeating this same ridiculous, tone-deaf message when the cost of elite schools exceeds $100K/year? $200K? Just save, sacrifice, drive an old car?

At what point in your view is it just not possible for donut hole families?

And why is this ok again?

DP: why is it okay for you to assume that everyone is entitled to an education at an elite university? There are tons of affordable universities for students that most kids can gain admission to. VCU/JMU/GMU in VA. Towson, UMBC in MD. Just to name a few.
There are places to get a great education that can be affordable to you. Instead of complaining about the elite T25 schools (That are more highly rejective than selective---most likely your kid isn't getting in), focus your efforts on finding schools that are affordable.

There is the CC to 4 year college plan as well. It's extremely affordable. Even more affordable if you do DE in HS and graduate HS with your AA as well. Then the first 2 years cost you maybe $4K (in my area it's cost of books only). Then you only need 2 years at 4 year to finish up.

I agree it's ridiculous things cost $85K+. But that's really only 50-60 schools that cost more than that and some of them do give merit awards.

Why? Because this is $%#$% The United States of America where hard work is supposed to net results. That is what we are told since the day we are born. It is why immigrants flock to this country and always have. But the reality is, that's not the reality. You can work as hard as you want, check every box, save lots of money and you'll still be iced out of the "top schools."

Why should that be just b/c some family is in a "donut hole" range? Why should the uber rich or the poor get those spots or be more deserving of those spots? They shouldn't. Plain and simple.

I have news for you, you will still likely be "iced out at the top schools" because you won't even get admitted, so you won't need to worry about how to pay for it.
You are complaining about 50K spots in uber elite schools in the country, at schools that have 4-6% acceptance rates (that translates to 94-96% rejection rates). Odds are your kid is not even getting admitted as there are many more "highly qualified students" than there are spots each year.

Living in the USA and working hard does NOT entitle you to an elite education. It entitles you to AN education. Collegewas never intended to be free in the USA. And if your kid is smart enough to have resume for T25 school, then there are plenty of schools in the 25-100 range that they will gain admission to, get great merit to and be affordable. If they go in the 100-200 range, they might even do it for close to free with full tuition and some R&B merit awards.
There is also the CC to 4 year school approach that will be very affordable as well.

But stop complaining that your life sucks because you make $200K/year and can't send your kid to a T25 school. That is not what the USA is about. Part of working hard means that sometimes you succeed, sometimes you don't. It's all about having choices in life. You could have chosen to save, but instead are made at the person making $75K/year getting college paid for---a kid who has had so far fewer luxuries and advantages in life than your kids. Perhaps you also want to share those luxuries from 0-18----send your kid to Baltimore City public schools or DC public schools, since everyone is entitled to the same thing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s not donut hole. That’s a comfortable family. The rest of our kids go to state schools.

This. If you have sticker shock, but the ability to pay you aren't really a donut hole.

Ability to pay is often at the cost of liquidating retirement funds, home equity, life style and nursing home savings.

Shouldn't be. The top schools have excellent need based FA. Many who would be a fafsa doughnut hole would get FA. To be paying full price means, you are well off in earnings and non-retirement assets. Even home equity is often capped (not 2nd or 3rd home of course).

The real problem is failing to save. No one should expect to cashflow college. We started saving when kids in elementary and thought we were late to the game.

Bullsh. First of all, by the time you get to college aged kids, you may be making the most salary you've made. But almost no one makes that their entire career. We saved and save a LOT. We have old cars. No second home. No generational wealth. We have good retirement. Those are the things we've funded: college and retirement.

But all of those things are counted against us, as if we can cashflow $50-90k/year. We can't. And we aren't getting aid. We've made our peace with the schools are high stats kid can go (based on finances) and have had to forego much better schools b/c of money. It should not be this way.

I get that those of you not as well off like to dump on higher earners (UMC) to make yourselves feel better. But we've done everything right. Both coming from just above poverty line upbringings. The "American Dream" of work hard and good things flow from that is a bunch of horse sh-- when it comes to college admissions and sending your kids to the best school. The very wealthy get that opportunity. The poor get that opportunity. No one else.

You live under your means, you save starting at birth and when your income increases you save it vs changing your spending.

Will you be repeating this same ridiculous, tone-deaf message when the cost of elite schools exceeds $100K/year? $200K? Just save, sacrifice, drive an old car?

At what point in your view is it just not possible for donut hole families?

And why is this ok again?

The point is when you choose an expensive house, cars, vacations and lifestyle while others of us save and don't do those things on equal or less income, why do you feel entitled to tons of aid while we have to full pay?

It's all about choices. You chose to have the house, fancy cars, fancy vacations and fancy lifestyle and not save as much for college. No problem with that. As long as you don't now feel entitled to financial aid.
If I cannot afford a $80K car, I buy a $30K Honda/Toyota. I don't complain that it's not fair. Or I drive my current car another 2-3 years and actively save so that I can afford a nicer car (maybe a $50K). But I dont' complain that others can afford it and life isn't fair.
Same with a house or vacations. We lived our 20s paying off college debt and saving saving saving. Didn't have kids until we were 30+ so we could be financially sound. We were mid to late 30s before we took "fancy vacations". We still enjoyed life, just did it on a reasonable budget. But we knew plenty of people who spent spent spent. Maybe it was worth it for them. maybe not. I just know I don't regret getting a strong financial base when young, even if it meant forgoing "luxury items"

blah blah blah. We drive Hondas. We save aggressively. We paid off our own loans and our mortgage. We don't take elaborate vacations or into name brands --Canadian goose jackets and other expensive sh**t.

And, yeah, 95-100k/year for college for two kids is still ridiculous. $800k for two BA or BS degrees---yeah--incredibly ridiculous.

So as you stated, a lot of things in life "are ridiculous" and you will never be able to afford them. There will always be someone who drives a nicer car, takes more and fancier vacations, lives in a nicer home, etc. Do you routinely complain that is not fair? When did people become so entitled to an elite education?
Yes $800K is ridiculous for a 2 kids to get their BA/BS. So is driving a Maserati at $150K+ Some people will be able to afford it, others wont. But you can still get a great education that is affordable. The vast majority of people DO NOT pay $85K+ for college---most go to state schools and still have to take on some loans. So if it's not in your budget, then you search for schools that are. The vast majority of the 4000 schools in the USA cost under $50K (or do after the merit many award)....in fact the average cost currently for tuition and R&B is $36K.

Just don't understand why you think you are entitled to send your kid to Harvard or MIT just because they did well in HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We don’t qualify for need-based aid. Here’s how it shook out for us, including merit aid:

Regional in-state: 15k
Flagship in-state: 30k
Flagship out-of-state public: $48k
Higher-ranked private: $72k

We went with the third option. My guess is that employers will begin to take private school grads with a grain of salt: they may be very bright, or they may just be very rich.

You can be rich and very bright at same time. Rich kids do not just "get admission" to an elite private because they are rich (except for someone ala Bush or Clinton or parent is Hollywood star). Those kids are also very smart, they just happen to have rich parents or parents who have saved for $90K/year college.
I'd argue it doesn't make sense to do option 3, unless your state flagship is not very good. UVA/VAtech and UMD are all great schools and I cannot see paying extra to go anywhere else if my kid gets in

“Good” is measured in relation to what the kid wants to study. Some out of state flagships are better at specific degrees than UMD.

That is a given. However, overall UMD is a very good school. If you don't have the money for spending more, then you go to UMD and get your degree that you can afford. Or you choose to take the loans and have debt, but don't complain that you are in debt for student loans---you made a choice. No school is worth massive debt, no school

[Anonymous]

Some of you mock the 50-100 LACs, but I’m telling you: we have looked at a lot of schools, and some of these are the best deals in higher education right now.

Viva la merit aid!