Top Colleges Are Cheaper Than You Think (Unless You’re Rich)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ Interesting fact. Only .4 percent (four tenths of one percent) of college students attend an Ivy

source: https://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/the-college-solution/2011/09/06/20-surprising-higher-education-facts

Sure, the Ivies, Stanford, and MIT are the wealthiest and most generous with financial. But, all the better private colleges (for example, Amherst, Barnard, Bowdoin, Carleton, Claremont colleges, Colby, Conn College, Duke, Emory, Georgetown, Macalaster, Oberlin, Smith, Swarthmore, Tufts, Wash U, Wesleyan, Wiliams) offer full-need financial aid packages that don't "gap" (i.e. the aid packages meet all the demonstrated financial need) and only include federal guaranteed student loans (no private or parent loans). A family earning $130k will only pay a fraction of the cost of attendance at these schools, nowhere near the sticker price. For the best students, finances are a weighty consideration, but they will find many great college options that are affordable. The majority of students at the top schools receive very large financial aid packages.

The picture only gets really ugly when you start to look at regional private colleges. They don't have resources to provide full-need aid and many devote a significant portion of their aid to "merit" scholarships to attract students who don't need the money. These colleges have a disappearing business model as they have almost no advantages over non-flagship in-state public options.

1. The scholarships are not "merit" scholarships; they are merit scholarships.

2. The families in question, including mine, definitely need the money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there seriously people here making 200k+ and bitching about not getting need based aid? Do you even listen to yourselves?

I have been trying to say this, but in a kinder way. It's a sensitive issue. I agree with your point but your method is questionable and won't convince anyone. It's hard when you realize you haven't planned properly to give your kid something they really want. It's painful. A little sympathy and understanding is called for.

Are you reading what people are writing?

People are planning and saving. And it is still inaccessible.

So, send your kid to a good state school. Really how is that even close to a bad thing?

Agreed, that is what people are doing (and that is why the flagship schools are increasingly difficult to get into), but that's not the point of this thread.

Read the OP - the assertion is that elite schools are accessible to all. They are not.

They aren't and never have been accessible to everyone, hence the 'elite'. The whole thing has devolved into a bunch of rich people whining that they are expected to pay for their kids to attend college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there seriously people here making 200k+ and bitching about not getting need based aid? Do you even listen to yourselves?

I have been trying to say this, but in a kinder way. It's a sensitive issue. I agree with your point but your method is questionable and won't convince anyone. It's hard when you realize you haven't planned properly to give your kid something they really want. It's painful. A little sympathy and understanding is called for.

Are you reading what people are writing?

People are planning and saving. And it is still inaccessible.

Tell you what, let's trade paychecks. I'll still live on $40k and have $160k to send my kid to school. You can get a Pell grant. Win/Win

You are missing the point.

I acknowledge that I am affluent with a HHI of $200K. That is not in dispute.

What is in dispute is the proposition that I can access education at an elite school for my kid, so long as I can handle that it will be "decidedly unpleasant" for my family. Which is simply not the case. It is not a matter of "decidedly unpleasant"; it is a matter of impossible.

I would be very happy to pay say, $40K for that education and for you to pay nothing.

Or you could decide to live with less and pay what the school is asking. It isn't impossible, you just don't think it is worth it. I don't either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The issue for me isn't whether one can pay for an elite private college out of a 200 or 300k income, but whether the college is actually worth the investment.

The second issue is why the college tuitions have so rapidly escalated far beyond inflation rates for the same time period. There is something seriously wrong with the financial model of higher education in today's world that that I resent spending a fortune into a system that is effectively broken.

I went to Ivy schools, undergrad and grad. I had an elite education. It was a great experience. But I'm not sure if it was that much better of an experience than, say, in-state at UVA or a good flagship, or at a private LAC or "lesser" college with a big merit package. Because I'm 20 years out I can look around my fellow graduates and see where they are in life, and compare it to my other friends and coworkers. Believe me when I say plenty of Ivy grads go on to have humble lives. And plenty of state school grads go on to have very successful lives.

Yes, college isn't all about the money. In theory. But we're now in a world when it actually is increasingly about the money, the shockingly high tuition for both undergrad and graduate schools. When you spend that 70+ a year for your kid, it's a gamble that it will pay off over going to UVA or College Park. Statistically speaking, odds are that your child will end up in a similar position in life regardless of whether he/she went to Penn or UVA. This is shown over and over again by multiple studies. The kids who do benefit from a fancy Ivy are mainly two distinct groups: the underrepresented minorities/poor students from disadvantaged backgrounds, and a small coterie of students who get recruited by premier banking/consulting firms. But if you're not one of the two, it really is not a long term advantage to go to a fancy private college over a solid cheaper alternative.

So why not take the cheaper route, take the 30-40k differential (per year) and pump that into a long term savings account for the kid to help out with a down on his/her first property, or even to start to build up a retirement fund. That will be far, far, far more valuable in the long run than a degree from Penn over UVA.

So the problem to me, with this, as an issue for our country, not for individual students is this: We used to have a diverse set of higher education schools that provided a wide variety of different kinds of higher education. I think this was one of the great strengths of the US higher education system. Now, we are all being forced to large, homogenous schools. The schools are good schools, but bland. It is the big box theory of education. Yes, you can get all you really need at Walmart, but is this really best for our nation? To standardize?

In the old days, the quirky, diverse (and even horrors! religion-affiliated) schools were cheaper. For some reason, their expensive has grown much faster than inflation. I don't think this is good. Sure, the elite can still get this diverse education. But the average upper middle class kid just can not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The issue for me isn't whether one can pay for an elite private college out of a 200 or 300k income, but whether the college is actually worth the investment.

The second issue is why the college tuitions have so rapidly escalated far beyond inflation rates for the same time period. There is something seriously wrong with the financial model of higher education in today's world that that I resent spending a fortune into a system that is effectively broken.

I went to Ivy schools, undergrad and grad. I had an elite education. It was a great experience. But I'm not sure if it was that much better of an experience than, say, in-state at UVA or a good flagship, or at a private LAC or "lesser" college with a big merit package. Because I'm 20 years out I can look around my fellow graduates and see where they are in life, and compare it to my other friends and coworkers. Believe me when I say plenty of Ivy grads go on to have humble lives. And plenty of state school grads go on to have very successful lives.

Yes, college isn't all about the money. In theory. But we're now in a world when it actually is increasingly about the money, the shockingly high tuition for both undergrad and graduate schools. When you spend that 70+ a year for your kid, it's a gamble that it will pay off over going to UVA or College Park. Statistically speaking, odds are that your child will end up in a similar position in life regardless of whether he/she went to Penn or UVA. This is shown over and over again by multiple studies. The kids who do benefit from a fancy Ivy are mainly two distinct groups: the underrepresented minorities/poor students from disadvantaged backgrounds, and a small coterie of students who get recruited by premier banking/consulting firms. But if you're not one of the two, it really is not a long term advantage to go to a fancy private college over a solid cheaper alternative.

So why not take the cheaper route, take the 30-40k differential (per year) and pump that into a long term savings account for the kid to help out with a down on his/her first property, or even to start to build up a retirement fund. That will be far, far, far more valuable in the long run than a degree from Penn over UVA.

So the problem to me, with this, as an issue for our country, not for individual students is this: We used to have a diverse set of higher education schools that provided a wide variety of different kinds of higher education. I think this was one of the great strengths of the US higher education system. Now, we are all being forced to large, homogenous schools. The schools are good schools, but bland. It is the big box theory of education. Yes, you can get all you really need at Walmart, but is this really best for our nation? To standardize?

In the old days, the quirky, diverse (and even horrors! religion-affiliated) schools were cheaper. For some reason, their expensive has grown much faster than inflation. I don't think this is good. Sure, the elite can still get this diverse education. But the average upper middle class kid just can not.

This is true, but what annoys me is threads like this pretending these privates really are affordable. And one person saying "well, 100K is the top 5% so what do you expect them to do"?

The school DC chose to attend says "we meet 100% of demonstrated financial need" -- they don't say: "according to our own secret formula that grossly overstates how much even an upper middle class family living in the Washington D.C. area can really afford to pay."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there seriously people here making 200k+ and bitching about not getting need based aid? Do you even listen to yourselves?

I have been trying to say this, but in a kinder way. It's a sensitive issue. I agree with your point but your method is questionable and won't convince anyone. It's hard when you realize you haven't planned properly to give your kid something they really want. It's painful. A little sympathy and understanding is called for.

Are you reading what people are writing?

People are planning and saving. And it is still inaccessible.

So, send your kid to a good state school. Really how is that even close to a bad thing?

Agreed, that is what people are doing (and that is why the flagship schools are increasingly difficult to get into), but that's not the point of this thread.

Read the OP - the assertion is that elite schools are accessible to all. They are not.

They aren't and never have been accessible to everyone, hence the 'elite'. The whole thing has devolved into a bunch of rich people whining that they are expected to pay for their kids to attend college.

From a financial POV, actually, they used to be accessible to everyone.

These are the facts about the cost of college, including at elite schools, relative to median HHI:

https://college-education.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=005532

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/29/how-much-college-tuition-has-increased-from-1988-to-2018.html

It used to be that a student could work his way through college relatively easily, and that a student at an elite school could pay for a significant portion of the cost. This is no longer the case.

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/04/the-myth-of-working-your-way-through-college/359735/

Facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there seriously people here making 200k+ and bitching about not getting need based aid? Do you even listen to yourselves?

I have been trying to say this, but in a kinder way. It's a sensitive issue. I agree with your point but your method is questionable and won't convince anyone. It's hard when you realize you haven't planned properly to give your kid something they really want. It's painful. A little sympathy and understanding is called for.

Are you reading what people are writing?

People are planning and saving. And it is still inaccessible.

Tell you what, let's trade paychecks. I'll still live on $40k and have $160k to send my kid to school. You can get a Pell grant. Win/Win

You are missing the point.

I acknowledge that I am affluent with a HHI of $200K. That is not in dispute.

What is in dispute is the proposition that I can access education at an elite school for my kid, so long as I can handle that it will be "decidedly unpleasant" for my family. Which is simply not the case. It is not a matter of "decidedly unpleasant"; it is a matter of impossible.

I would be very happy to pay say, $40K for that education and for you to pay nothing.

Or you could decide to live with less and pay what the school is asking. It isn't impossible, you just don't think it is worth it. I don't either.

Actually, it is impossible. Unless you have a secret porthole into our HHI and a means of changing the facts, in which case, please do share.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there seriously people here making 200k+ and bitching about not getting need based aid? Do you even listen to yourselves?

I have been trying to say this, but in a kinder way. It's a sensitive issue. I agree with your point but your method is questionable and won't convince anyone. It's hard when you realize you haven't planned properly to give your kid something they really want. It's painful. A little sympathy and understanding is called for.

Are you reading what people are writing?

People are planning and saving. And it is still inaccessible.

So, send your kid to a good state school. Really how is that even close to a bad thing?

Agreed, that is what people are doing (and that is why the flagship schools are increasingly difficult to get into), but that's not the point of this thread.

Read the OP - the assertion is that elite schools are accessible to all. They are not.

They aren't and never have been accessible to everyone, hence the 'elite'. The whole thing has devolved into a bunch of rich people whining that they are expected to pay for their kids to attend college.

From a financial POV, actually, they used to be accessible to everyone.

These are the facts about the cost of college, including at elite schools, relative to median HHI:

https://college-education.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=005532

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/29/how-much-college-tuition-has-increased-from-1988-to-2018.html

It used to be that a student could work his way through college relatively easily, and that a student at an elite school could pay for a significant portion of the cost. This is no longer the case.

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/04/the-myth-of-working-your-way-through-college/359735/

Facts.

Nope, college in general used to be less expensive, no one disputes that, but there has never been a time when "everyone" could afford to go to whichever college they wanted to attend. You are just upset that you aren't quite as privileged as you thought you would be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there seriously people here making 200k+ and bitching about not getting need based aid? Do you even listen to yourselves?

I have been trying to say this, but in a kinder way. It's a sensitive issue. I agree with your point but your method is questionable and won't convince anyone. It's hard when you realize you haven't planned properly to give your kid something they really want. It's painful. A little sympathy and understanding is called for.

Are you reading what people are writing?

People are planning and saving. And it is still inaccessible.

So, send your kid to a good state school. Really how is that even close to a bad thing?

Agreed, that is what people are doing (and that is why the flagship schools are increasingly difficult to get into), but that's not the point of this thread.

Read the OP - the assertion is that elite schools are accessible to all. They are not.

They aren't and never have been accessible to everyone, hence the 'elite'. The whole thing has devolved into a bunch of rich people whining that they are expected to pay for their kids to attend college.

From a financial POV, actually, they used to be accessible to everyone.

These are the facts about the cost of college, including at elite schools, relative to median HHI:

https://college-education.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=005532

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/29/how-much-college-tuition-has-increased-from-1988-to-2018.html

It used to be that a student could work his way through college relatively easily, and that a student at an elite school could pay for a significant portion of the cost. This is no longer the case.

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/04/the-myth-of-working-your-way-through-college/359735/

Facts.

Nope, college in general used to be less expensive, no one disputes that, but there has never been a time when "everyone" could afford to go to whichever college they wanted to attend. You are just upset that you aren't quite as privileged as you thought you would be.

It was certainly a lot easier in the past so why are you seemingly justifying that it's no longer so easy? No one, rich or poor or middle class, has benefited from the astronomical rise in college tuition. So instead of complaints about privilege (a major red herring that says more about you than the reality), can't we just talk about the real issue, which is why colleges are so damn expensive now? And what do we get in exchange?

[Anonymous]

If you are UMC (which in the DCUM area means an income above $150,000) you have three options:

1. Go instate. Generally very affordable if you have been saving a reasonable amount even for people who could not begin saving for college until they had finished paying their own graduate school loans and finished paying for childcare.
2. If you have been able to save aggressively you might be able to fully fund a $70k x 4 college education from savings and paying as you go but if you do this you cannot really help your child much with graduate school.
3. Apply to colleges that cost somewhere between $30k a year instate and $70K a year. There are two types of colleges that fit the bill. OOS publics which are great for students who don't mind a big school The second include schools in the midwest and south that are more reasonably priced or which offer merit aid for highly qualified students. The latter aren't generally top tier schools.
So yes you have options if you are UMC. It gets trickiest if you have a really bright kid who would thrive in a top 25 school and who also wants a SLAC. Not too many schools for these kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there seriously people here making 200k+ and bitching about not getting need based aid? Do you even listen to yourselves?

I have been trying to say this, but in a kinder way. It's a sensitive issue. I agree with your point but your method is questionable and won't convince anyone. It's hard when you realize you haven't planned properly to give your kid something they really want. It's painful. A little sympathy and understanding is called for.

Are you reading what people are writing?

People are planning and saving. And it is still inaccessible.

So, send your kid to a good state school. Really how is that even close to a bad thing?

Agreed, that is what people are doing (and that is why the flagship schools are increasingly difficult to get into), but that's not the point of this thread.

Read the OP - the assertion is that elite schools are accessible to all. They are not.

They aren't and never have been accessible to everyone, hence the 'elite'. The whole thing has devolved into a bunch of rich people whining that they are expected to pay for their kids to attend college.

From a financial POV, actually, they used to be accessible to everyone.

These are the facts about the cost of college, including at elite schools, relative to median HHI:

https://college-education.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=005532

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/29/how-much-college-tuition-has-increased-from-1988-to-2018.html

It used to be that a student could work his way through college relatively easily, and that a student at an elite school could pay for a significant portion of the cost. This is no longer the case.

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/04/the-myth-of-working-your-way-through-college/359735/

Facts.

Nope, college in general used to be less expensive, no one disputes that, but there has never been a time when "everyone" could afford to go to whichever college they wanted to attend. You are just upset that you aren't quite as privileged as you thought you would be.

It was certainly a lot easier in the past so why are you seemingly justifying that it's no longer so easy? No one, rich or poor or middle class, has benefited from the astronomical rise in college tuition. So instead of complaints about privilege (a major red herring that says more about you than the reality), can't we just talk about the real issue, which is why colleges are so damn expensive now? And what do we get in exchange?

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there seriously people here making 200k+ and bitching about not getting need based aid? Do you even listen to yourselves?

I have been trying to say this, but in a kinder way. It's a sensitive issue. I agree with your point but your method is questionable and won't convince anyone. It's hard when you realize you haven't planned properly to give your kid something they really want. It's painful. A little sympathy and understanding is called for.

Are you reading what people are writing?

People are planning and saving. And it is still inaccessible.

So, send your kid to a good state school. Really how is that even close to a bad thing?

Agreed, that is what people are doing (and that is why the flagship schools are increasingly difficult to get into), but that's not the point of this thread.

Read the OP - the assertion is that elite schools are accessible to all. They are not.

They aren't and never have been accessible to everyone, hence the 'elite'. The whole thing has devolved into a bunch of rich people whining that they are expected to pay for their kids to attend college.

From a financial POV, actually, they used to be accessible to everyone.

These are the facts about the cost of college, including at elite schools, relative to median HHI:

https://college-education.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=005532

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/29/how-much-college-tuition-has-increased-from-1988-to-2018.html

It used to be that a student could work his way through college relatively easily, and that a student at an elite school could pay for a significant portion of the cost. This is no longer the case.

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/04/the-myth-of-working-your-way-through-college/359735/

Facts.

Nope, college in general used to be less expensive, no one disputes that, but there has never been a time when "everyone" could afford to go to whichever college they wanted to attend. You are just upset that you aren't quite as privileged as you thought you would be.

It was certainly a lot easier in the past so why are you seemingly justifying that it's no longer so easy? No one, rich or poor or middle class, has benefited from the astronomical rise in college tuition. So instead of complaints about privilege (a major red herring that says more about you than the reality), can't we just talk about the real issue, [B]which is why colleges are so damn expensive now? And what do we get in exchange? {/B]

+1

You get a certification in exchange for your tuition. That is what you are paying for. Knowledge is pretty much free these days. The certification allows you to earn higher wages in most cases, thus the expense. They charge what they feel the market will bear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there seriously people here making 200k+ and bitching about not getting need based aid? Do you even listen to yourselves?

I have been trying to say this, but in a kinder way. It's a sensitive issue. I agree with your point but your method is questionable and won't convince anyone. It's hard when you realize you haven't planned properly to give your kid something they really want. It's painful. A little sympathy and understanding is called for.

Are you reading what people are writing?

People are planning and saving. And it is still inaccessible.

So, send your kid to a good state school. Really how is that even close to a bad thing?

Agreed, that is what people are doing (and that is why the flagship schools are increasingly difficult to get into), but that's not the point of this thread.

Read the OP - the assertion is that elite schools are accessible to all. They are not.

They aren't and never have been accessible to everyone, hence the 'elite'. The whole thing has devolved into a bunch of rich people whining that they are expected to pay for their kids to attend college.

From a financial POV, actually, they used to be accessible to everyone.

These are the facts about the cost of college, including at elite schools, relative to median HHI:

https://college-education.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=005532

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/29/how-much-college-tuition-has-increased-from-1988-to-2018.html

It used to be that a student could work his way through college relatively easily, and that a student at an elite school could pay for a significant portion of the cost. This is no longer the case.

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/04/the-myth-of-working-your-way-through-college/359735/

Facts.

Nope, college in general used to be less expensive, no one disputes that, but there has never been a time when "everyone" could afford to go to whichever college they wanted to attend. You are just upset that you aren't quite as privileged as you thought you would be.

It was certainly a lot easier in the past so why are you seemingly justifying that it's no longer so easy? No one, rich or poor or middle class, has benefited from the astronomical rise in college tuition. So instead of complaints about privilege (a major red herring that says more about you than the reality), can't we just talk about the real issue, which is why colleges are so damn expensive now? And what do we get in exchange? {/B]

+1

[b]You get a certification in exchange for your tuition. That is what you are paying for. Knowledge is pretty much free these days. The certification allows you to earn higher wages in most cases, thus the expense. They charge what they feel the market will bear.

I think I agree with your point generally, but there's a bit more to it than that. You need to attend classes. You need to pass tests. Usually you participate in classroom discussions and projects. You may assist the profs with their research. You will write papers. This will take you approximately four years. Employers who also went to college tend to prefer others who were able to persevere through a demanding curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there seriously people here making 200k+ and bitching about not getting need based aid? Do you even listen to yourselves?

I have been trying to say this, but in a kinder way. It's a sensitive issue. I agree with your point but your method is questionable and won't convince anyone. It's hard when you realize you haven't planned properly to give your kid something they really want. It's painful. A little sympathy and understanding is called for.

Are you reading what people are writing?

People are planning and saving. And it is still inaccessible.

So, send your kid to a good state school. Really how is that even close to a bad thing?

Agreed, that is what people are doing (and that is why the flagship schools are increasingly difficult to get into), but that's not the point of this thread.

Read the OP - the assertion is that elite schools are accessible to all. They are not.

They aren't and never have been accessible to everyone, hence the 'elite'. The whole thing has devolved into a bunch of rich people whining that they are expected to pay for their kids to attend college.

From a financial POV, actually, they used to be accessible to everyone.

These are the facts about the cost of college, including at elite schools, relative to median HHI:

https://college-education.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=005532

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/29/how-much-college-tuition-has-increased-from-1988-to-2018.html

It used to be that a student could work his way through college relatively easily, and that a student at an elite school could pay for a significant portion of the cost. This is no longer the case.

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/04/the-myth-of-working-your-way-through-college/359735/

Facts.

Nope, college in general used to be less expensive, no one disputes that, but there has never been a time when "everyone" could afford to go to whichever college they wanted to attend. You are just upset that you aren't quite as privileged as you thought you would be.

It was certainly a lot easier in the past so why are you seemingly justifying that it's no longer so easy? No one, rich or poor or middle class, has benefited from the astronomical rise in college tuition. So instead of complaints about privilege (a major red herring that says more about you than the reality), can't we just talk about the real issue, which is why colleges are so damn expensive now? And what do we get in exchange? {/B]

+1

You get a certification in exchange for your tuition. That is what you are paying for. Knowledge is pretty much free these days. [b]The certification allows you to earn higher wages in most cases, thus the expense. They charge what they feel the market will bear.

The absurdity of this, of course, is that many of the kids who will go on to earn higher wages compared to if they got a shittier (or no) college degree will just end up trapped in the same cycle that so many on here suggest is the norm: that they will spend much of that higher income on childcare and then saving almost all of it to send their own kids to college one day -- so that their own kids can enjoy the thankless benefits of a higher wage associated with a good college degree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there seriously people here making 200k+ and bitching about not getting need based aid? Do you even listen to yourselves?

I have been trying to say this, but in a kinder way. It's a sensitive issue. I agree with your point but your method is questionable and won't convince anyone. It's hard when you realize you haven't planned properly to give your kid something they really want. It's painful. A little sympathy and understanding is called for.

Are you reading what people are writing?

People are planning and saving. And it is still inaccessible.

Tell you what, let's trade paychecks. I'll still live on $40k and have $160k to send my kid to school. You can get a Pell grant. Win/Win

You are missing the point.

I acknowledge that I am affluent with a HHI of $200K. That is not in dispute.

What is in dispute is the proposition that I can access education at an elite school for my kid, so long as I can handle that it will be "decidedly unpleasant" for my family. Which is simply not the case. It is not a matter of "decidedly unpleasant"; it is a matter of impossible.

I would be very happy to pay say, $40K for that education and for you to pay nothing.

So I should either donate more to my alma mater so it can give $30k/year to students from families earning $200k who are already over represented on campus or pay tens of thousands more in full pay tuition (that would also have the effect of scaring away students from families earning <$100k)?

There is no magic money that does not require trade offs or enough "waste" to eliminate that will cut tuition by more than half. Should colleges just give less financial aid to those who aren't in the top 10% of incomes. In the old days (before 1970) there might have been a couple dozen students in an Ivy class that were truly middle income or lower. Now, they get financial aid and are the majority of students.