The New America: Elite Privates forever out of reach for UMC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even with all the talk of financial aid obscures the large middle ground demographics that used to be able to afford expensive private colleges in the past, the upper middle classes (or lower upper middle class if we want to narrow it more specifically) are now priced out - they don't get financial aid or only a token amount, and they can't really cover the full tuition without enormous financial sacrifice that is not worth it at that level.

Your part in bold: "worth it" is subjective, and you'd be better off just saying "I can afford it but I don't think it is worth it". That's completely acceptable.

Funnily enough, all the defensive posters talking about the amazing financial aids at the Ivies don't talk about it relative to their own kids. Did their kids get amazing packages? Or are they just making an assumption without firsthand experience? There are certainly those who get full or substantial financial packages but the funny thing is that package offers can and do vary widely between the Ivies for admitted students and that alone tells you something about not taking it for granted anyone with a HHI under x amount is getting a full ride, or even with a HHI of 150 or whatever they'll get the aid they need to make it work.

Again to the parts in bold: They are people who have done the research, run the NPCs, and quite probably prepared for the occurrence.

Personally I am full pay at an Ivy and a NESCAC. Yeah I'd love to have a beach house but that is not what I saved for during the last 20 years. And I feel good about it. My choice, you make yours.

Cool it Marie Antoinette.

Being judgmental about other people's lifestyle decisions or career decisions that are not "bad" decisions is petty and silly. As is dismissing other people's pointing out the flaws in the higher education economic model. The whole model is morally bankrupt if it demands this degree of financial sacrifice that could nearly bankrupt a family. It's effectively robbing the rich to pay the poor and telling the donut hole "middle" to suck it up without any sympathy.

Of course many in the donut middle are looking at other options and making things work, but trying to shame people for talking about the increasingly unsustainable world of higher education costs only makes you, well, Marie Antoinette.

Your reading comprehension is bad and you don't understand the history of the French revolution either.

My post says clearly: "My choice, you make yours." I respect any choice WRT what something is worth.

My post also answers a question (I assume) you asked about whether the opposing side had any experience.

Where do you see judgment? You are the one (unsuccessfully) throwing pejoratives.

NP. I think your insinuation that people could afford the most expensive colleges if only they didn’t buy that beach house (or luxury cars, or whatever) is where the pushback is. I don’t have a beach house, or a luxury car (love my Honda), my kitchen just screams 1992 (when the house was built), and so on. Still couldn’t have saved the $80K needed to go to Amherst or Yale.

Sorry, but I was speaking of my own decision only. I would like a beach house. I could have bought one. I didn't. Me. No insinuation. My choices. I don't know how many times I have to say it.

As for you: What did the NPC for Amherst or Yale say when you entered your data?

Not PP, and I would like a beach house, too - but cannot afford one.

The NPC for Yale (where my DC was admitted) for us said $68K. Yale offered $5500 in student loans and work-study. That's it.

I will politely ask you also:

https://admissions.yale.edu/affordability-details

Families earning between $75,000 and $200,000 (with typical assets) contribute a percentage of their yearly income towards their child’s Yale education, on a sliding scale that begins at 1% and moves toward 20%.

There is no income cutoff for financial aid awards. Some families with over $200,000 in annual income receive need-based aid from Yale.

So your income is well above $200k? Or do you have assets that you cannot liquidate?

I don't know what Yale means by "typical assets." Our house is paid off and our HHI is $240K. We have about a year's worth of living expenses in a savings account per our financial planner's advice (the FP also advised us to have the house paid off by the time DH was 65), and we have retirement savings.

I'm 60 and DH will be 65 this year, and has Parkinson's - he will retire in the next year or so. We certainly expect he will need long-term care, which neither FAFSA nor the CSS contemplate. He has other health issues that have made him ineligible for long-term care insurance (and for that matter, for disability insurance other than what he has at work). Dementia and longevity run in both of our families.

We can pay about $50K/year per kid for college, and no more.

I anticipate that DCUM will tell us to use everything we have outside of retirement accounts, including our home equity, but our FP (and any others who know what they are talking about) would disagree.

Yes, any financial planner worth even the smallest sliver of a damn will tell you this...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:$69K**

If it is Yale:

https://admissions.yale.edu/affordability-details

Families earning between $75,000 and $200,000 (with typical assets) contribute a percentage of their yearly income towards their child’s Yale education, on a sliding scale that begins at 1% and moves toward 20%.

There is no income cutoff for financial aid awards. Some families with over $200,000 in annual income receive need-based aid from Yale.

So your income is well above $200k? Or do you have assets that you cannot liquidate?

No, income is $210K. I’m not liquidating my retirement account or selling my house to pay for something that research shows makes little difference in one’s life trajectory.

OK then, I just ran the Yale quick NPC https://admissions.yale.edu/estimate-your-cost with these stats:

$210 K income
$500K house with $250K remaining on mortgage
$25K in non-retirement savings
$250K in retirement savings

and it came up $54,900. So you have even more assets than I entered. And your post itself indicates that you don't think it makes a difference in a person's life - so if your kid had the stats to be admitted to Yale you'd probably get a free ride lots of places, and a big discount at many more. You've got lots of assets and myriad choices 99% of families wish they had - including totally free college.

And you wonder why people find it a bit offensive that you don't keep your dissatisfaction to yourself?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even with all the talk of financial aid obscures the large middle ground demographics that used to be able to afford expensive private colleges in the past, the upper middle classes (or lower upper middle class if we want to narrow it more specifically) are now priced out - they don't get financial aid or only a token amount, and they can't really cover the full tuition without enormous financial sacrifice that is not worth it at that level.

Your part in bold: "worth it" is subjective, and you'd be better off just saying "I can afford it but I don't think it is worth it". That's completely acceptable.

Funnily enough, all the defensive posters talking about the amazing financial aids at the Ivies don't talk about it relative to their own kids. Did their kids get amazing packages? Or are they just making an assumption without firsthand experience? There are certainly those who get full or substantial financial packages but the funny thing is that package offers can and do vary widely between the Ivies for admitted students and that alone tells you something about not taking it for granted anyone with a HHI under x amount is getting a full ride, or even with a HHI of 150 or whatever they'll get the aid they need to make it work.

Again to the parts in bold: They are people who have done the research, run the NPCs, and quite probably prepared for the occurrence.

Personally I am full pay at an Ivy and a NESCAC. Yeah I'd love to have a beach house but that is not what I saved for during the last 20 years. And I feel good about it. My choice, you make yours.

Cool it Marie Antoinette.

Being judgmental about other people's lifestyle decisions or career decisions that are not "bad" decisions is petty and silly. As is dismissing other people's pointing out the flaws in the higher education economic model. The whole model is morally bankrupt if it demands this degree of financial sacrifice that could nearly bankrupt a family. It's effectively robbing the rich to pay the poor and telling the donut hole "middle" to suck it up without any sympathy.

Of course many in the donut middle are looking at other options and making things work, but trying to shame people for talking about the increasingly unsustainable world of higher education costs only makes you, well, Marie Antoinette.

Your reading comprehension is bad and you don't understand the history of the French revolution either.

My post says clearly: "My choice, you make yours." I respect any choice WRT what something is worth.

My post also answers a question (I assume) you asked about whether the opposing side had any experience.

Where do you see judgment? You are the one (unsuccessfully) throwing pejoratives.

NP. I think your insinuation that people could afford the most expensive colleges if only they didn’t buy that beach house (or luxury cars, or whatever) is where the pushback is. I don’t have a beach house, or a luxury car (love my Honda), my kitchen just screams 1992 (when the house was built), and so on. Still couldn’t have saved the $80K needed to go to Amherst or Yale.

Sorry, but I was speaking of my own decision only. I would like a beach house. I could have bought one. I didn't. Me. No insinuation. My choices. I don't know how many times I have to say it.

As for you: What did the NPC for Amherst or Yale say when you entered your data?

Not PP, and I would like a beach house, too - but cannot afford one.

The NPC for Yale (where my DC was admitted) for us said $68K. Yale offered $5500 in student loans and work-study. That's it.

I will politely ask you also:

https://admissions.yale.edu/affordability-details

Families earning between $75,000 and $200,000 (with typical assets) contribute a percentage of their yearly income towards their child’s Yale education, on a sliding scale that begins at 1% and moves toward 20%.

There is no income cutoff for financial aid awards. Some families with over $200,000 in annual income receive need-based aid from Yale.

So your income is well above $200k? Or do you have assets that you cannot liquidate?

I don't know what Yale means by "typical assets." Our house is paid off and our HHI is $240K. We have about a year's worth of living expenses in a savings account per our financial planner's advice (the FP also advised us to have the house paid off by the time DH was 65), and we have retirement savings.

I'm 60 and DH will be 65 this year, and has Parkinson's - he will retire in the next year or so. We certainly expect he will need long-term care, which neither FAFSA nor the CSS contemplate. He has other health issues that have made him ineligible for long-term care insurance (and for that matter, for disability insurance other than what he has at work). Dementia and longevity run in both of our families.

We can pay about $50K/year per kid for college, and no more.

I anticipate that DCUM will tell us to use everything we have outside of retirement accounts, including our home equity, but our FP (and any others who know what they are talking about) would disagree.

Sorry for the cross-post, but that is very close to the number the calculator showed. Add $5K a year in loans and your kid can attend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Not PP, but a substantial number of my HS friends, in the mixed-SES town I grew up, in attended top-20 schools: Harvard, Yale, Brown, Williams, Amherst, Dartmouth - those are the names I recall off the top of my head.

In our generation (I'm 58yo), the cost of attendance could be covered from savings, current income, the student's summer earnings, work study, and some modest loans. E.g. the expensive private SLAC I attended cost about $8,000 when I started in 1979, and I contributed about 25% of that from my summer and school-year work. Proportionally, a student today would have to contribute almost $25,000 to make the same dent in the same school's costs.

Adjusted for inflation, $8,000.00 in 1979 is equal to $29,687.80 in 2019. But that school now costs almost $75,000/year.

+1

I'm 59 and this describes the shift well.

It's really about who gets access to the elite institutions and therefore into the ruling class.

I'm in the same age bracket. My experience is that I know very successful people with community college and state college degrees. A lot of the Ivy League grads that I know honestly didn't amount to much and worked secretarial
jobs that they could have done with a high school degree. The male Ivy League grads that I know tutor for test prep companies.

I know a guy who is extremely successful who didn’t go to college but did drugs for a decade after high school. I guess that’s the best path.

Kid, I'm an Ivy grad. Two degrees when you get down to it. I'm in my 40s and after working in the professional world for 20+ years (in other words, real life) the more I came to realize an Ivy degree is nice but doesn't say much. You'd be surprised at how many Ivy grads float through life in unremarkable positions while state school grads, and not even just from the big state universities but genuine no-name local state schools in Podunkville are blossoming in their careers and making fortunes and achieving senior positions. The return on the investment for an Ivy degree over UVA or MD is minimal. If you're capable enough to go to an Ivy, you will do well in life if you apply yourself regardless of what school you went to.

Agreed. Community college would save you a ton over UVA and UMD. Apply yourself regardless of what school you went to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:$69K**

If it is Yale:

https://admissions.yale.edu/affordability-details

Families earning between $75,000 and $200,000 (with typical assets) contribute a percentage of their yearly income towards their child’s Yale education, on a sliding scale that begins at 1% and moves toward 20%.

There is no income cutoff for financial aid awards. Some families with over $200,000 in annual income receive need-based aid from Yale.

So your income is well above $200k? Or do you have assets that you cannot liquidate?

No, income is $210K. I’m not liquidating my retirement account or selling my house to pay for something that research shows makes little difference in one’s life trajectory.

OK then, I just ran the Yale quick NPC https://admissions.yale.edu/estimate-your-cost with these stats:

$210 K income
$500K house with $250K remaining on mortgage
$25K in non-retirement savings
$250K in retirement savings

and it came up $54,900. So you have even more assets than I entered. And your post itself indicates that you don't think it makes a difference in a person's life - so if your kid had the stats to be admitted to Yale you'd probably get a free ride lots of places, and a big discount at many more. You've got lots of assets and myriad choices 99% of families wish they had - including totally free college.

And you wonder why people find it a bit offensive that you don't keep your dissatisfaction to yourself?

And you still don't understand people find it offensive you seem to know everything wrong the other person is doing and what they should be doing and that somehow they're still lying to you when they say they got a terrible aid package from Yale?

If your kid got an amazing package offer from a top college, great! But don't assume it always works for other people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even with all the talk of financial aid obscures the large middle ground demographics that used to be able to afford expensive private colleges in the past, the upper middle classes (or lower upper middle class if we want to narrow it more specifically) are now priced out - they don't get financial aid or only a token amount, and they can't really cover the full tuition without enormous financial sacrifice that is not worth it at that level.

Your part in bold: "worth it" is subjective, and you'd be better off just saying "I can afford it but I don't think it is worth it". That's completely acceptable.

Funnily enough, all the defensive posters talking about the amazing financial aids at the Ivies don't talk about it relative to their own kids. Did their kids get amazing packages? Or are they just making an assumption without firsthand experience? There are certainly those who get full or substantial financial packages but the funny thing is that package offers can and do vary widely between the Ivies for admitted students and that alone tells you something about not taking it for granted anyone with a HHI under x amount is getting a full ride, or even with a HHI of 150 or whatever they'll get the aid they need to make it work.

Again to the parts in bold: They are people who have done the research, run the NPCs, and quite probably prepared for the occurrence.

Personally I am full pay at an Ivy and a NESCAC. Yeah I'd love to have a beach house but that is not what I saved for during the last 20 years. And I feel good about it. My choice, you make yours.

Cool it Marie Antoinette.

Being judgmental about other people's lifestyle decisions or career decisions that are not "bad" decisions is petty and silly. As is dismissing other people's pointing out the flaws in the higher education economic model. The whole model is morally bankrupt if it demands this degree of financial sacrifice that could nearly bankrupt a family. It's effectively robbing the rich to pay the poor and telling the donut hole "middle" to suck it up without any sympathy.

Of course many in the donut middle are looking at other options and making things work, but trying to shame people for talking about the increasingly unsustainable world of higher education costs only makes you, well, Marie Antoinette.

Your reading comprehension is bad and you don't understand the history of the French revolution either.

My post says clearly: "My choice, you make yours." I respect any choice WRT what something is worth.

My post also answers a question (I assume) you asked about whether the opposing side had any experience.

Where do you see judgment? You are the one (unsuccessfully) throwing pejoratives.

NP. I think your insinuation that people could afford the most expensive colleges if only they didn’t buy that beach house (or luxury cars, or whatever) is where the pushback is. I don’t have a beach house, or a luxury car (love my Honda), my kitchen just screams 1992 (when the house was built), and so on. Still couldn’t have saved the $80K needed to go to Amherst or Yale.

Sorry, but I was speaking of my own decision only. I would like a beach house. I could have bought one. I didn't. Me. No insinuation. My choices. I don't know how many times I have to say it.

As for you: What did the NPC for Amherst or Yale say when you entered your data?

Not PP, and I would like a beach house, too - but cannot afford one.

The NPC for Yale (where my DC was admitted) for us said $68K. Yale offered $5500 in student loans and work-study. That's it.

I will politely ask you also:

https://admissions.yale.edu/affordability-details

Families earning between $75,000 and $200,000 (with typical assets) contribute a percentage of their yearly income towards their child’s Yale education, on a sliding scale that begins at 1% and moves toward 20%.

There is no income cutoff for financial aid awards. Some families with over $200,000 in annual income receive need-based aid from Yale.

So your income is well above $200k? Or do you have assets that you cannot liquidate?

I don't know what Yale means by "typical assets." Our house is paid off and our HHI is $240K. We have about a year's worth of living expenses in a savings account per our financial planner's advice (the FP also advised us to have the house paid off by the time DH was 65), and we have retirement savings.

I'm 60 and DH will be 65 this year, and has Parkinson's - he will retire in the next year or so. We certainly expect he will need long-term care, which neither FAFSA nor the CSS contemplate. He has other health issues that have made him ineligible for long-term care insurance (and for that matter, for disability insurance other than what he has at work). Dementia and longevity run in both of our families.

We can pay about $50K/year per kid for college, and no more.

I anticipate that DCUM will tell us to use everything we have outside of retirement accounts, including our home equity, but our FP (and any others who know what they are talking about) would disagree.

Sorry for the cross-post, but that is very close to the number the calculator showed. Add $5K a year in loans and your kid can attend.

Are you telling me I'm lying? And that you know better than I what college will cost for our kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:$69K**

If it is Yale:

https://admissions.yale.edu/affordability-details

Families earning between $75,000 and $200,000 (with typical assets) contribute a percentage of their yearly income towards their child’s Yale education, on a sliding scale that begins at 1% and moves toward 20%.

There is no income cutoff for financial aid awards. Some families with over $200,000 in annual income receive need-based aid from Yale.

So your income is well above $200k? Or do you have assets that you cannot liquidate?

No, income is $210K. I’m not liquidating my retirement account or selling my house to pay for something that research shows makes little difference in one’s life trajectory.

OK then, I just ran the Yale quick NPC https://admissions.yale.edu/estimate-your-cost with these stats:

$210 K income
$500K house with $250K remaining on mortgage
$25K in non-retirement savings
$250K in retirement savings

and it came up $54,900. So you have even more assets than I entered. And your post itself indicates that you don't think it makes a difference in a person's life - so if your kid had the stats to be admitted to Yale you'd probably get a free ride lots of places, and a big discount at many more. You've got lots of assets and myriad choices 99% of families wish they had - including totally free college.

And you wonder why people find it a bit offensive that you don't keep your dissatisfaction to yourself?

And you still don't understand people find it offensive you seem to know everything wrong the other person is doing and what they should be doing and that somehow they're still lying to you when they say they got a terrible aid package from Yale?

If your kid got an amazing package offer from a top college, great! But don't assume it always works for other people.

I am presenting facts. If people find the facts offensive, that is their prerogative. I entered data into the college's cost calculator. I do not believe the colleges -- especially a high profile elite -- could get away with lying. If anyone has evidence the Yale NPC is wrong/false/lying, please present it.

I understand many UMC families make different choices than I did, and I respect their right to make that choice. But I find their complaining offensive when the luckiest among society complain and compare people who make different choices to French aristocracy.

99% of families would give anything to be able to make that choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even with all the talk of financial aid obscures the large middle ground demographics that used to be able to afford expensive private colleges in the past, the upper middle classes (or lower upper middle class if we want to narrow it more specifically) are now priced out - they don't get financial aid or only a token amount, and they can't really cover the full tuition without enormous financial sacrifice that is not worth it at that level.

Your part in bold: "worth it" is subjective, and you'd be better off just saying "I can afford it but I don't think it is worth it". That's completely acceptable.

Funnily enough, all the defensive posters talking about the amazing financial aids at the Ivies don't talk about it relative to their own kids. Did their kids get amazing packages? Or are they just making an assumption without firsthand experience? There are certainly those who get full or substantial financial packages but the funny thing is that package offers can and do vary widely between the Ivies for admitted students and that alone tells you something about not taking it for granted anyone with a HHI under x amount is getting a full ride, or even with a HHI of 150 or whatever they'll get the aid they need to make it work.

Again to the parts in bold: They are people who have done the research, run the NPCs, and quite probably prepared for the occurrence.

Personally I am full pay at an Ivy and a NESCAC. Yeah I'd love to have a beach house but that is not what I saved for during the last 20 years. And I feel good about it. My choice, you make yours.

Cool it Marie Antoinette.

Being judgmental about other people's lifestyle decisions or career decisions that are not "bad" decisions is petty and silly. As is dismissing other people's pointing out the flaws in the higher education economic model. The whole model is morally bankrupt if it demands this degree of financial sacrifice that could nearly bankrupt a family. It's effectively robbing the rich to pay the poor and telling the donut hole "middle" to suck it up without any sympathy.

Of course many in the donut middle are looking at other options and making things work, but trying to shame people for talking about the increasingly unsustainable world of higher education costs only makes you, well, Marie Antoinette.

Your reading comprehension is bad and you don't understand the history of the French revolution either.

My post says clearly: "My choice, you make yours." I respect any choice WRT what something is worth.

My post also answers a question (I assume) you asked about whether the opposing side had any experience.

Where do you see judgment? You are the one (unsuccessfully) throwing pejoratives.

NP. I think your insinuation that people could afford the most expensive colleges if only they didn’t buy that beach house (or luxury cars, or whatever) is where the pushback is. I don’t have a beach house, or a luxury car (love my Honda), my kitchen just screams 1992 (when the house was built), and so on. Still couldn’t have saved the $80K needed to go to Amherst or Yale.

Sorry, but I was speaking of my own decision only. I would like a beach house. I could have bought one. I didn't. Me. No insinuation. My choices. I don't know how many times I have to say it.

As for you: What did the NPC for Amherst or Yale say when you entered your data?

Not PP, and I would like a beach house, too - but cannot afford one.

The NPC for Yale (where my DC was admitted) for us said $68K. Yale offered $5500 in student loans and work-study. That's it.

I will politely ask you also:

https://admissions.yale.edu/affordability-details

Families earning between $75,000 and $200,000 (with typical assets) contribute a percentage of their yearly income towards their child’s Yale education, on a sliding scale that begins at 1% and moves toward 20%.

There is no income cutoff for financial aid awards. Some families with over $200,000 in annual income receive need-based aid from Yale.

So your income is well above $200k? Or do you have assets that you cannot liquidate?

I don't know what Yale means by "typical assets." Our house is paid off and our HHI is $240K. We have about a year's worth of living expenses in a savings account per our financial planner's advice (the FP also advised us to have the house paid off by the time DH was 65), and we have retirement savings.

I'm 60 and DH will be 65 this year, and has Parkinson's - he will retire in the next year or so. We certainly expect he will need long-term care, which neither FAFSA nor the CSS contemplate. He has other health issues that have made him ineligible for long-term care insurance (and for that matter, for disability insurance other than what he has at work). Dementia and longevity run in both of our families.

We can pay about $50K/year per kid for college, and no more.

I anticipate that DCUM will tell us to use everything we have outside of retirement accounts, including our home equity, but our FP (and any others who know what they are talking about) would disagree.

Sorry for the cross-post, but that is very close to the number the calculator showed. Add $5K a year in loans and your kid can attend.

Are you telling me I'm lying? And that you know better than I what college will cost for our kids?

No I am basing it on the data I entered, which I listed. Please correct it with your actual data and I'll run it again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:$69K**

If it is Yale:

https://admissions.yale.edu/affordability-details

Families earning between $75,000 and $200,000 (with typical assets) contribute a percentage of their yearly income towards their child’s Yale education, on a sliding scale that begins at 1% and moves toward 20%.

There is no income cutoff for financial aid awards. Some families with over $200,000 in annual income receive need-based aid from Yale.

So your income is well above $200k? Or do you have assets that you cannot liquidate?

No, income is $210K. I’m not liquidating my retirement account or selling my house to pay for something that research shows makes little difference in one’s life trajectory.

OK then, I just ran the Yale quick NPC https://admissions.yale.edu/estimate-your-cost with these stats:

$210 K income
$500K house with $250K remaining on mortgage
$25K in non-retirement savings
$250K in retirement savings

and it came up $54,900. So you have even more assets than I entered. And your post itself indicates that you don't think it makes a difference in a person's life - so if your kid had the stats to be admitted to Yale you'd probably get a free ride lots of places, and a big discount at many more. You've got lots of assets and myriad choices 99% of families wish they had - including totally free college.

And you wonder why people find it a bit offensive that you don't keep your dissatisfaction to yourself?

And you still don't understand people find it offensive you seem to know everything wrong the other person is doing and what they should be doing and that somehow they're still lying to you when they say they got a terrible aid package from Yale?

If your kid got an amazing package offer from a top college, great! But don't assume it always works for other people.

I am presenting facts. If people find the facts offensive, that is their prerogative. I entered data into the college's cost calculator. I do not believe the colleges -- especially a high profile elite -- could get away with lying. If anyone has evidence the Yale NPC is wrong/false/lying, please present it.

I understand many UMC families make different choices than I did, and I respect their right to make that choice. But I find their complaining offensive when the luckiest among society complain and compare people who make different choices to French aristocracy.

99% of families would give anything to be able to make that choice.

You are not presenting facts. You are presenting speculation. Just because you entered a bunch of information into a calculator from your end doesn't mean it's how Yale will crunch those numbers from their end. Nor does it take into account a lot of different factors affecting people's abilities to pay for college and other priorities they have to accommodate which is not part of the financial aid calculations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Looking at this issue from a historical perspective, I think we would find that it's only been within the last two or three generations (depending on how you count) that private colleges were anything but the province of the wealthy and well connected. Back in the day these schools offered scholarships to young bootstrappers but didn't consider an obligation to be accessible to the general public. I would warrant that this is how things are going to be moving forward.

The 50 years following WWII is proving to be a time of unusually broad-based prosperity rather than the new normal for generations to come.

I think this is the heart of what so many people find objectionable. We as a society are now essentially an oligarchy and a corpocracy. And yet, culturally speaking, we think of ourselves as a democracy in which anything is possible for people who work hard enough. And so, people who cannot afford X are told they just aren't trying hard enough. Are not trying hard enough, in the face of wage stagnation, out of control costs of higher education, and diminishing opportunities for the next generation.

The French aristocracy reference is spot-on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:$69K**

If it is Yale:

https://admissions.yale.edu/affordability-details

Families earning between $75,000 and $200,000 (with typical assets) contribute a percentage of their yearly income towards their child’s Yale education, on a sliding scale that begins at 1% and moves toward 20%.

There is no income cutoff for financial aid awards. Some families with over $200,000 in annual income receive need-based aid from Yale.

So your income is well above $200k? Or do you have assets that you cannot liquidate?

No, income is $210K. I’m not liquidating my retirement account or selling my house to pay for something that research shows makes little difference in one’s life trajectory.

OK then, I just ran the Yale quick NPC https://admissions.yale.edu/estimate-your-cost with these stats:

$210 K income
$500K house with $250K remaining on mortgage
$25K in non-retirement savings
$250K in retirement savings

and it came up $54,900. So you have even more assets than I entered. And your post itself indicates that you don't think it makes a difference in a person's life - so if your kid had the stats to be admitted to Yale you'd probably get a free ride lots of places, and a big discount at many more. You've got lots of assets and myriad choices 99% of families wish they had - including totally free college.

And you wonder why people find it a bit offensive that you don't keep your dissatisfaction to yourself?

And you still don't understand people find it offensive you seem to know everything wrong the other person is doing and what they should be doing and that somehow they're still lying to you when they say they got a terrible aid package from Yale?

If your kid got an amazing package offer from a top college, great! But don't assume it always works for other people.

I am presenting facts. If people find the facts offensive, that is their prerogative. I entered data into the college's cost calculator. I do not believe the colleges -- especially a high profile elite -- could get away with lying. If anyone has evidence the Yale NPC is wrong/false/lying, please present it.

I understand many UMC families make different choices than I did, and I respect their right to make that choice. But I find their complaining offensive when the luckiest among society complain and compare people who make different choices to French aristocracy.

99% of families would give anything to be able to make that choice.

Calm down Marie Antoinette. People are not judging you for your decision, whatever it is. I'm not even clear if you have a kid or not as it doesn't seem like you've talked about their experiences. But going nyah nyah nyah when other people openly talk about their experiences and saying they can't afford Yale and walking away is something that you somehow are taking very personally and defensive about, to the point you openly challenge their experiences and even implying they're fraudulent and then still slapping them in the face with claims of privilege.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are not presenting facts. You are presenting speculation. Just because you entered a bunch of information into a calculator from your end doesn't mean it's how Yale will crunch those numbers from their end.

You are going to have to back up that claim that the NPC is lying.

Anonymous wrote:Nor does it take into account a lot of different factors affecting people's abilities to pay for college and other priorities they have to accommodate which is not part of the financial aid calculations.

No, I do take that into account. I mentioned so above. If they are brand new hardship priorities they can be discussed with the financial aid office. If they are older hardships they would affect assets and be reflected in the financial aid award.

You chose not to spend what Yale asked. Totally your prerogative, and based on how you feel about an elite education, a completely intelligent and informed one. Your family is financially and academically successful and has many great choices - and you made one. Take the W and stop complaining.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m almost 60 and I totally agree with the OP. The sticker price hike over the last 40 years is a shame. My parents struggled but they were able to pay for a SLAC for me without forfeiting their home or retirement funds or inheritances.

What bothers me is the expectation that my family should be one of the very very few that pays full price even though we are not wealthy-wealthy like those families around us who drive new cars and vacation all over the world and dress well and renovate their homes and have vacation homes and eat out whenever they want and etc.

We’re living on one federal salary and we will have two kids in college next year. We’re applying but in spite of those quotes from top colleges’ websites I don’t expect any aid because (1) my in-laws left a little money to my spouse (2j we’ve been contributing to our retirement funds over the four decades we’ve worked, which makes us look rich and c) inside the beltway a normal house in a good school district is very pricy.

A lot of it has to do with being older parents in an expensive town. If we were doing this at age 40 in flyover country we could look poor, get college aid for our kids, work 25 more years, and then really enjoy our golden years once the kids were gone.

Okay, I’m ready to get roasted.

Well I, for one, will give you credit for being honest and at least understanding the other side.

I'll not roast you but simply ask you how you think it should work? (and we all agree costs for privates are too high)

I think you're underestimating the sophistication of private colleges' financial aid offices. 1, they don't consider retirement assets (though they are reported), 2, they consider your age and years of income-production afterwards, 3, they consider the cost of living of your location and tend not to consider the value of your primary residence (though this varies).

The inherited money is an unusual thing, but it would only be considered at about 8% of its value if you haven't rolled it into retirement accounts. And considering that the median inheritance is 69k (divided up among kids so even less per person) 8% of that really isn't a lot. And if you inherited more than that, it is a windfall.

Not 16:09, but I agree with them. You are mostly right about the financial aid approach (e.g. retirement isn't a consideration - but CSS schools do take home equity into account), but that doesn't speak to the comment that it is a shame that costs have risen so dramatically faster than inflation over the last 40 years. There is NO reason for that to be the case.

PP's comment that

"(w)hat bothers me is the expectation that my family should be one of the very very few that pays full price even though we are not wealthy-wealthy like those families around us who drive new cars and vacation all over the world and dress well and renovate their homes and have vacation homes and eat out whenever they want and etc."

resonates with me because we are in the same boat. I'm 61, DH is 65, we have a lot of equity in our house. We have saved aggressively for college and lived pretty modestly to prioritize those savings. Our HHI is upper middle class, for sure - and therefore we are expected to pay full price. Although we have saved for twenty years, we cannot pay $600,000 in post-tax dollars for our kids' undergraduate degrees - we just can't. If we do that, we jeopardize our own security in retirement, and given the lack of any social safety net in this country, high healthcare costs, the high cost of long-term care (longevity and dementia run in both of our families), and our unwillingness to become a burden on our kids, we just cannot afford to take that risk.

Most of the people on this thread are saying that (1) no one is entitled to an education at an elite school, and/or (2) choose something you can afford. Indeed, our kids ultimately chose schools we can afford, and they are making it work. But to PP's point, were the economics of paying for private college the same or similar to what they were in the 70s, our savings over the years would have covered everything just fine at schools that probably would have met their needs better.

It is insane that costs have soared to such an extent that only the very wealthy and those who qualify for need-based financial aid can attend elite schools. One can both accept and deal with this reality, and be disappointed and outraged by it.

If you have saved aggressively for 20 years, you can pay a substantial portion of $600,000. You, or your kids, can take out loans for the rest (and a lot of people, including me, did that 30 years ago).

This notion that if you can't comfortably pay full price for an elite college, you deserve aid, and it's unfair if you don't get it, is ludicrous. As for this: "It is insane that costs have soared to such an extent that only the very wealthy and those who qualify for need-based financial aid can attend elite schools." That's a false dichotomy. It isn't true. You can attend. You may need ot take out loans. That you are not willing to do that does *not* mean that your kid cannot attend. It's your, and her, choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Calm down Marie Antoinette. People are not judging you for your decision, whatever it is. I'm not even clear if you have a kid or not as it doesn't seem like you've talked about their experiences. But going nyah nyah nyah when other people openly talk about their experiences and saying they can't afford Yale and walking away is something that you somehow are taking very personally and defensive about, to the point you openly challenge their experiences and even implying they're fraudulent and then still slapping them in the face with claims of privilege.

First: You need to read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution. I think you misunderstand which side you are on.

Second: I mentioned previously I am full pay X2. My choice, I do not hold anyone to my financial values.

But when people say they are pissed because the most generous schools on the planet are unaffordable, they ignore the fact that 99.9% of the families in the world don't get to make that choice for many reasons. That's what offends me. Don't come in here and dump on the most generous colleges, who moved hard to need-based aid over the past years, to justify your choice. Think about the people who have real hardships and no assets, and can't afford their state directional because the governments are choking the funds. I actually can't believe this is even a discussion. What about those kids?

I'm going to stop now, because I am repeating myself. I will return if the poster wants to show the actual data and I will run the NPC again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m almost 60 and I totally agree with the OP. The sticker price hike over the last 40 years is a shame. My parents struggled but they were able to pay for a SLAC for me without forfeiting their home or retirement funds or inheritances.

What bothers me is the expectation that my family should be one of the very very few that pays full price even though we are not wealthy-wealthy like those families around us who drive new cars and vacation all over the world and dress well and renovate their homes and have vacation homes and eat out whenever they want and etc.

We’re living on one federal salary and we will have two kids in college next year. We’re applying but in spite of those quotes from top colleges’ websites I don’t expect any aid because (1) my in-laws left a little money to my spouse (2j we’ve been contributing to our retirement funds over the four decades we’ve worked, which makes us look rich and c) inside the beltway a normal house in a good school district is very pricy.

A lot of it has to do with being older parents in an expensive town. If we were doing this at age 40 in flyover country we could look poor, get college aid for our kids, work 25 more years, and then really enjoy our golden years once the kids were gone.

Okay, I’m ready to get roasted.

Well I, for one, will give you credit for being honest and at least understanding the other side.

I'll not roast you but simply ask you how you think it should work? (and we all agree costs for privates are too high)

I think you're underestimating the sophistication of private colleges' financial aid offices. 1, they don't consider retirement assets (though they are reported), 2, they consider your age and years of income-production afterwards, 3, they consider the cost of living of your location and tend not to consider the value of your primary residence (though this varies).

The inherited money is an unusual thing, but it would only be considered at about 8% of its value if you haven't rolled it into retirement accounts. And considering that the median inheritance is 69k (divided up among kids so even less per person) 8% of that really isn't a lot. And if you inherited more than that, it is a windfall.

Not 16:09, but I agree with them. You are mostly right about the financial aid approach (e.g. retirement isn't a consideration - but CSS schools do take home equity into account), but that doesn't speak to the comment that it is a shame that costs have risen so dramatically faster than inflation over the last 40 years. There is NO reason for that to be the case.

PP's comment that

"(w)hat bothers me is the expectation that my family should be one of the very very few that pays full price even though we are not wealthy-wealthy like those families around us who drive new cars and vacation all over the world and dress well and renovate their homes and have vacation homes and eat out whenever they want and etc."

resonates with me because we are in the same boat. I'm 61, DH is 65, we have a lot of equity in our house. We have saved aggressively for college and lived pretty modestly to prioritize those savings. Our HHI is upper middle class, for sure - and therefore we are expected to pay full price. Although we have saved for twenty years, we cannot pay $600,000 in post-tax dollars for our kids' undergraduate degrees - we just can't. If we do that, we jeopardize our own security in retirement, and given the lack of any social safety net in this country, high healthcare costs, the high cost of long-term care (longevity and dementia run in both of our families), and our unwillingness to become a burden on our kids, we just cannot afford to take that risk.

Most of the people on this thread are saying that (1) no one is entitled to an education at an elite school, and/or (2) choose something you can afford. Indeed, our kids ultimately chose schools we can afford, and they are making it work. But to PP's point, were the economics of paying for private college the same or similar to what they were in the 70s, our savings over the years would have covered everything just fine at schools that probably would have met their needs better.

It is insane that costs have soared to such an extent that only the very wealthy and those who qualify for need-based financial aid can attend elite schools. One can both accept and deal with this reality, and be disappointed and outraged by it.

If you have saved aggressively for 20 years, you can pay a substantial portion of $600,000. You, or your kids, can take out loans for the rest (and a lot of people, including me, did that 30 years ago).

This notion that if you can't comfortably pay full price for an elite college, you deserve aid, and it's unfair if you don't get it, is ludicrous. As for this: "It is insane that costs have soared to such an extent that only the very wealthy and those who qualify for need-based financial aid can attend elite schools." That's a false dichotomy. It isn't true. You can attend. You may need ot take out loans. That you are not willing to do that does *not* mean that your kid cannot attend. It's your, and her, choice.

It’s almost like people *gasp!* reach their peak earnings around the time their kids go to college, and weren’t making that $220K income (or whatever) to “save aggressively”.