Donut hole reality

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is sad that so many of us have bought into the notion that high-quality higher ed is a luxury good, like a Gucci bag.

For most of these schools, their prestige comes from how few people can access what they're selling. Drive up the price. Drive down the admission rate. That makes the school hot!

Instead of endless marketing and building luxury amenities at keeping-up-with-the-Jones rates, schools should invest in growing their capacity and holding down costs.

That s chool endowments have more than tripled over the last two decades and the number of enrolled undergrads hasnt gone up by much tells you a lot about the basic supply demand imbalance that we are seeing today.

I think that DCUMers make the grave mistake of thinking that the endowment of each school is the bottom line. It is not. Yes, the full pay parents are paying for the next kid to attend - but the real issue is the donut hole people who have their hand out like it is their job. The same people who attended private school for nothing, but magically had multiple renovations, and the luxury car/s, living in a house worth a substantial amount. These are not people making the sacrifices they think they are making. They are getting much for nothing, and still refusing to save. Where does it end? DP here.

As far as colleges cramming as many kids as possible into the colleges, you want to live like China? Does that seem appealing? Where are all these professors and seats going to come from? The same tuition rate? Likely not. Again, where does it end?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is sad that so many of us have bought into the notion that high-quality higher ed is a luxury good, like a Gucci bag.

For most of these schools, their prestige comes from how few people can access what they're selling. Drive up the price. Drive down the admission rate. That makes the school hot!

Instead of endless marketing and building luxury amenities at keeping-up-with-the-Jones rates, schools should invest in growing their capacity and holding down costs.

That s chool endowments have more than tripled over the last two decades and the number of enrolled undergrads hasnt gone up by much tells you a lot about the basic supply demand imbalance that we are seeing today.

I think that DCUMers make the grave mistake of thinking that the endowment of each school is the bottom line. It is not. Yes, the full pay parents are paying for the next kid to attend - but the real issue is the donut hole people who have their hand out like it is their job. The same people who attended private school for nothing, but magically had multiple renovations, and the luxury car/s, living in a house worth a substantial amount. These are not people making the sacrifices they think they are making. They are getting much for nothing, and still refusing to save. Where does it end? DP here.

As far as colleges cramming as many kids as possible into the colleges, you want to live like China? Does that seem appealing? Where are all these professors and seats going to come from? The same tuition rate? Likely not. Again, where does it end?

What? You think donut hole families all went to private school for nothing?!?!! Lmaof.

I am from a donut hole family and went in-state public university. Private was out of the question. It was my only option. I make more than my parents did- but still donut hole—just above the cutoff for financial aid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is sad that so many of us have bought into the notion that high-quality higher ed is a luxury good, like a Gucci bag.

For most of these schools, their prestige comes from how few people can access what they're selling. Drive up the price. Drive down the admission rate. That makes the school hot!

Instead of endless marketing and building luxury amenities at keeping-up-with-the-Jones rates, schools should invest in growing their capacity and holding down costs.

That s chool endowments have more than tripled over the last two decades and the number of enrolled undergrads hasnt gone up by much tells you a lot about the basic supply demand imbalance that we are seeing today.

I think that DCUMers make the grave mistake of thinking that the endowment of each school is the bottom line. It is not. Yes, the full pay parents are paying for the next kid to attend - but the real issue is the donut hole people who have their hand out like it is their job. The same people who attended private school for nothing, but magically had multiple renovations, and the luxury car/s, living in a house worth a substantial amount. These are not people making the sacrifices they think they are making. They are getting much for nothing, and still refusing to save. Where does it end? DP here.

As far as colleges cramming as many kids as possible into the colleges, you want to live like China? Does that seem appealing? Where are all these professors and seats going to come from? The same tuition rate? Likely not. Again, where does it end?

What? You think donut hole families all went to private school for nothing?!?!! Lmaof.

I am from a donut hole family and went in-state public university. Private was out of the question. It was my only option. I make more than my parents did- but still donut hole—just above the cutoff for financial aid.

Donut hole is often a code for we make a good income and choose to spend it in a way that we aren't saving enough and want to whine about it. We don't do things like vacations to save...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is sad that so many of us have bought into the notion that high-quality higher ed is a luxury good, like a Gucci bag.

For most of these schools, their prestige comes from how few people can access what they're selling. Drive up the price. Drive down the admission rate. That makes the school hot!

Instead of endless marketing and building luxury amenities at keeping-up-with-the-Jones rates, schools should invest in growing their capacity and holding down costs.

That s chool endowments have more than tripled over the last two decades and the number of enrolled undergrads hasnt gone up by much tells you a lot about the basic supply demand imbalance that we are seeing today.

I think that DCUMers make the grave mistake of thinking that the endowment of each school is the bottom line. It is not. Yes, the full pay parents are paying for the next kid to attend - but the real issue is the donut hole people who have their hand out like it is their job. The same people who attended private school for nothing, but magically had multiple renovations, and the luxury car/s, living in a house worth a substantial amount. These are not people making the sacrifices they think they are making. They are getting much for nothing, and still refusing to save. Where does it end? DP here.

As far as colleges cramming as many kids as possible into the colleges, you want to live like China? Does that seem appealing? Where are all these professors and seats going to come from? The same tuition rate? Likely not. Again, where does it end?

What? You think donut hole families all went to private school for nothing?!?!! Lmaof.

I am from a donut hole family and went in-state public university. Private was out of the question. It was my only option. I make more than my parents did- but still donut hole—just above the cutoff for financial aid.

Donut hole is often a code for we make a good income and choose to spend it in a way that we aren't saving enough and want to whine about it. We don't do things like vacations to save...

PP here. Point is, donut hole is an enormous range - not all donut hole are conscientiously making an effort to plan and provide for their children. Some simply expect a handout, because of their poor planning and lack of effort, even though it would have been possible for them to pay more out of pocket. This is obviously not all donut hole parents, but it is annoying to see the disparity between those paying full freight and those who could pay full freight, but refuse - but still want the same as other groups (be it too poor to pay, not for lack of trying, those who pay full freight, and anyone in between). The range is enormous.

[Anonymous]

30-40 years ago people did cash flow college educations. No one “saved from birth” to send multiple children to college. Why did that change? When did financial aide mean here you go - take out loans? And once the student maxes out their allotted loan amount - here are special loans for the parents? Why do colleges enable this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:30-40 years ago people did cash flow college educations. No one “saved from birth” to send multiple children to college. Why did that change? When did financial aide mean here you go - take out loans? And once the student maxes out their allotted loan amount - here are special loans for the parents? Why do colleges enable this?

My parents saved and grandparents were very generous. We saved since birth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:30-40 years ago people did cash flow college educations. No one “saved from birth” to send multiple children to college. Why did that change? When did financial aide mean here you go - take out loans? And once the student maxes out their allotted loan amount - here are special loans for the parents? Why do colleges enable this?

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is sad that so many of us have bought into the notion that high-quality higher ed is a luxury good, like a Gucci bag.

For most of these schools, their prestige comes from how few people can access what they're selling. Drive up the price. Drive down the admission rate. That makes the school hot!

Instead of endless marketing and building luxury amenities at keeping-up-with-the-Jones rates, schools should invest in growing their capacity and holding down costs.

That s chool endowments have more than tripled over the last two decades and the number of enrolled undergrads hasnt gone up by much tells you a lot about the basic supply demand imbalance that we are seeing today.

I think that DCUMers make the grave mistake of thinking that the endowment of each school is the bottom line. It is not. Yes, the full pay parents are paying for the next kid to attend - but the real issue is the donut hole people who have their hand out like it is their job. The same people who attended private school for nothing, but magically had multiple renovations, and the luxury car/s, living in a house worth a substantial amount. These are not people making the sacrifices they think they are making. They are getting much for nothing, and still refusing to save. Where does it end? DP here.

As far as colleges cramming as many kids as possible into the colleges, you want to live like China? Does that seem appealing? Where are all these professors and seats going to come from? The same tuition rate? Likely not. Again, where does it end?

What? You think donut hole families all went to private school for nothing?!?!! Lmaof.

I am from a donut hole family and went in-state public university. Private was out of the question. It was my only option. I make more than my parents did- but still donut hole—just above the cutoff for financial aid.

Donut hole is often a code for we make a good income and choose to spend it in a way that we aren't saving enough and want to whine about it. We don't do things like vacations to save...

+1000000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is sad that so many of us have bought into the notion that high-quality higher ed is a luxury good, like a Gucci bag.

For most of these schools, their prestige comes from how few people can access what they're selling. Drive up the price. Drive down the admission rate. That makes the school hot!

Instead of endless marketing and building luxury amenities at keeping-up-with-the-Jones rates, schools should invest in growing their capacity and holding down costs.

so you are ok with high end brand but just not for higher education? how do you draw the line?

Most people think spending 6k for a bag is dumb too. We never drew a line because we never cared for the logo on the bag. How insecure do you think most people are?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:30-40 years ago people did cash flow college educations. No one “saved from birth” to send multiple children to college. Why did that change? When did financial aide mean here you go - take out loans? And once the student maxes out their allotted loan amount - here are special loans for the parents? Why do colleges enable this?

My parents saved and grandparents were very generous. We saved since birth.

How old are you? when I was college age it cost about $10k to attend pretty much everywhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:30-40 years ago people did cash flow college educations. No one “saved from birth” to send multiple children to college. Why did that change? When did financial aide mean here you go - take out loans? And once the student maxes out their allotted loan amount - here are special loans for the parents? Why do colleges enable this?

My parents saved and grandparents were very generous. We saved since birth.

How old are you? when I was college age it cost about $10k to attend pretty much everywhere.

DP here. Did you attend an public college in Iowa in the 70's?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:30-40 years ago people did cash flow college educations. No one “saved from birth” to send multiple children to college. Why did that change? When did financial aide mean here you go - take out loans? And once the student maxes out their allotted loan amount - here are special loans for the parents? Why do colleges enable this?

People were paying for their own kid to go to school then not for their kid plus a need based scholarship. It is the burden of educating two kids rather than that is sinking UMC families re: college costs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is sad that so many of us have bought into the notion that high-quality higher ed is a luxury good, like a Gucci bag.

For most of these schools, their prestige comes from how few people can access what they're selling. Drive up the price. Drive down the admission rate. That makes the school hot!

Instead of endless marketing and building luxury amenities at keeping-up-with-the-Jones rates, schools should invest in growing their capacity and holding down costs.

so you are ok with high end brand but just not for higher education? how do you draw the line?

I draw the line at industries designed to serve the common good, made up of nonprofits subsidized by taxpayers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At least 1/4 is room & board, but it's still expensive.

Hope she saved some money attending public K-12. I rather invest in private college over white-flight "elite" private K-12.

You sound like a humongous ass, just FYI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:30-40 years ago people did cash flow college educations. No one “saved from birth” to send multiple children to college. Why did that change? When did financial aide mean here you go - take out loans? And once the student maxes out their allotted loan amount - here are special loans for the parents? Why do colleges enable this?

You need to educate yourself. The colleges were enable to raise tuition to astronomical levels when the federal government expanded federal student loans. Read up on Al Lord the former CEO of Sallie Mae who is now confessing that his actions have left him appalled by his grandchildren’s tuition bills.