schools w/ no merit aid

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A little tough love.
My perfect house would be a $3 million mini mansion on an acre of land but I'm ok with my 70s split level.
My perfect vacation would be Hawaii, but we're going to Rehoboth instead.

Colleges that you can't afford are NOT "perfect fits." It doesn't mean that you've failed your child by not saving more, but it also doesn't mean that the system is inherently unfair--some things are just out of your price range. There's a reason why the vast majority of students look at their public in-state options.

Yeah, life isn't "fair". Someone will always have more than you. Doesn't mean you cannot live an amazing life---it's all about attitude. Plenty of affordable options to get an education

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Long story short: we will not get any financial aid. We make too much for help but don't make enough to go full pay at a private in a way that leaves any wiggle room.

We are just starting this process, and child is an athlete that is in the midst of recruiting (only D3 at this point b/c of NCAA limits- and FTR I don't care if DC plays a sport or not but she does). I'm looking at the finances of the various schools and was shocked to learn that some of the schools she's been talking to give NO MERIT aid. DC has excellent grades, community service, ECs, and athletics.

I get she's one of many like man others . . . and I know at DC there are no athletic scholarships. But, how are people affording places like Wellesley? Their website and what I'm finding says they give ZERO aid on the basis that, essentially, "everyone there is special."

Yes, she can look elsewhere. And she is. But it is so sad to have to shut down a possibility that would, honestly, be such a perfect fit for her in every way. With room and board, etc. the cost per year is nearly $80K!!!! Two years would eat up more than our 529 has in it. Super bummed to have to limit her.

They are either poor enough to get a lot of aid, rich enough to not need it, or had parents putting away a lot of money from conception.

Well it is no shock that top schools would cost ~$80K/year when my kid would enter college. So we did plan for that and sock away as much as we could from an early age, as we knew we wouldn't qualify for any FA. Had we not been able to do that, our kid would have had to search out more affordable schools.

Congratulations on making enough money to save 320k per kid?

No, it's congratulation on planning. Anyone smart enough to save $160K should be smart enough to know that college will be up to $80K/year in 2022. SO if attending those "Top schools" is important you plan accordingly.
Had we not been able to save enough, I would have set the mindset with my kids that while you can apply to T40 schools, we might not be able to afford them. So, you need to have a balanced list of college choices. To me, the most important part is finding great schools that are affordable to YOU. And there are many, many, many choices available for everyone. The OP has ~$40K/year saved for DD. There are literally hundreds of amazing options that will allow DD to graduate debt free. If only the OP would change their mindset and focus on what's available instead of complaining.

Similarly, I don't buy a house/car/vacation that I can't afford. I live within my means, or deal with the consequences. I don't expect others to compensate me for my lack of planning. OP could likely now cash flow another $10K+/year if they wanted to, based on their statements. So if the Top college is that important, they can do that and take parent loans and pay them off now that they have a higher income. (not saying I'd recommend that, as I actually think that's a bad idea----no school is worth going into debt for). But there are options. Smartest option (IMO) is to find a great school list that is affordable....and many many exist, just not T20 schools.

This is such an uber-American, "personal responsibility" thought pattern. So when college costs $200K/year in the future, anyone who didn't "plan" should just be shut out? How about when it gets to a million dollars a year? Are we all good with it only being for the children of Elon Musk and the like and if we can't do it, well then the fault is somehow our own?

It has not always been like this. Private schools have always been more expensive than public, but not to the degree they are now.



Instead of pointing fingers at people for "lack of planning" by saving $300K+ / child, why aren't we demanding to know why the costs are so outrageously impossible for even wealthy people to handle?

You are NOT SHUT OUT. You are simply shut out of the “luxury” product version of college. You feel entitled to a Louis Vuitton degree for your kid on your Coach budget. I’m sorry that you’ve bought into the idea that admissions are the ultimate arbiter of your kids’ merit but there are plenty of affordable options including community college.

That is your reaction to these graphics?

I'm not the PP, but basically yes. College costs are crazy and, being a former FAFSA kid, I'm kinda shocked that OP, who also claims to have been on FA in college, didn't realize that the costs were outpacing inflation and wasn't setting expectations accordingly with their DCs. The number of parents who get to their kids' junior or senior years and have absolutely no idea on how financing college works is stunning.

OP, you have enough money set aside that your DC can land a merit scholarship, attend a great school, and graduate debt free. That would be so great for your kid and an opportunity neither you nor your husband were able to have. Rather than focusing on what probably cannot happen, lean in to the fabulous opportunities your DC can have that many kids are not able to experience.

GL to your DC!

Just my observation, people who were themselves on FA feel the most entitled to aid and are the most blindsided to find out they’re supposed to be able to afford sticker.

Yes, I fall into that category. I think it is because we paid for our own down payments on houses, supporting our elderly parents, expecting no “generational transfer of wealth,” while we see the majority of our DC friends and colleagues not in that situation at all.

But who should be paying this for you? The government? The government needs to allocate its scarce resources to the highest need. The school? The school also needs to consider what is good stewardship of its funds. Merit is by definition not based on need. If all students are meritorious (‘meaning you don’t have to buy higher stats kids with merit aid), what is the good reason to give merit aid to some and not others. Schools like Duke have a few scholarships, UVA has Echols, UNC Chapel Hill has Morehouse, but these are for tippy top academic students. Some student on another thread got a full ride at University of Chicago, probably an exceptional student among exceptional students. But the discounting you hear about, that is to lure desirable (relative the the general student body) students to attend schools most would consider safety or likely schools for those students.

I did not have a generational transfer of wealth other than my parents paid for my undergraduate education at a state school. You can do that for your kids. That is an amazing gift.

It should not cost so much. Tuition rises should not be exceeding inflation.

It’s wrong.

I do not think you understand very much about economics. Yelling it shouldn't cost so much is silly. I have heard administrative bloat and unnecessary climbing walls as complaints on unnecessary expenses, but someone would have to actually look at what a school is spending money on. The only thing I am certain it is not being spent on are adjunct salaries, but I digress. When a school lowers it tuition, it needs to cut costs. No one is asserting they are making profits, they are by definition non profit entities that I am fairly certain have heavily audited accounts.

Maybe there should be limits on how much money families can borrow as an indirect way to limit tuition as schools will adjust to the market. There are limits on how much money students can borrow for undergraduate degrees. Over time, limiting a parents ability to borrow money would make a difference to the extent it limited the number of students that could attend college. Chances are the students hurt by this would not be UMC families but students of families with fewer options for paying for college. This is also pretty paternalistic.

[Anonymous]

OP has a horrible, entitled attitude. How are they JUST realizing private colleges cost $80,000?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Long story short: we will not get any financial aid. We make too much for help but don't make enough to go full pay at a private in a way that leaves any wiggle room.

We are just starting this process, and child is an athlete that is in the midst of recruiting (only D3 at this point b/c of NCAA limits- and FTR I don't care if DC plays a sport or not but she does). I'm looking at the finances of the various schools and was shocked to learn that some of the schools she's been talking to give NO MERIT aid. DC has excellent grades, community service, ECs, and athletics.

I get she's one of many like man others . . . and I know at DC there are no athletic scholarships. But, how are people affording places like Wellesley? Their website and what I'm finding says they give ZERO aid on the basis that, essentially, "everyone there is special."

Yes, she can look elsewhere. And she is. But it is so sad to have to shut down a possibility that would, honestly, be such a perfect fit for her in every way. With room and board, etc. the cost per year is nearly $80K!!!! Two years would eat up more than our 529 has in it. Super bummed to have to limit her.

They are either poor enough to get a lot of aid, rich enough to not need it, or had parents putting away a lot of money from conception.

Well it is no shock that top schools would cost ~$80K/year when my kid would enter college. So we did plan for that and sock away as much as we could from an early age, as we knew we wouldn't qualify for any FA. Had we not been able to do that, our kid would have had to search out more affordable schools.

Congratulations on making enough money to save 320k per kid?

No, it's congratulation on planning. Anyone smart enough to save $160K should be smart enough to know that college will be up to $80K/year in 2022. SO if attending those "Top schools" is important you plan accordingly.
Had we not been able to save enough, I would have set the mindset with my kids that while you can apply to T40 schools, we might not be able to afford them. So, you need to have a balanced list of college choices. To me, the most important part is finding great schools that are affordable to YOU. And there are many, many, many choices available for everyone. The OP has ~$40K/year saved for DD. There are literally hundreds of amazing options that will allow DD to graduate debt free. If only the OP would change their mindset and focus on what's available instead of complaining.

Similarly, I don't buy a house/car/vacation that I can't afford. I live within my means, or deal with the consequences. I don't expect others to compensate me for my lack of planning. OP could likely now cash flow another $10K+/year if they wanted to, based on their statements. So if the Top college is that important, they can do that and take parent loans and pay them off now that they have a higher income. (not saying I'd recommend that, as I actually think that's a bad idea----no school is worth going into debt for). But there are options. Smartest option (IMO) is to find a great school list that is affordable....and many many exist, just not T20 schools.

This is such an uber-American, "personal responsibility" thought pattern. So when college costs $200K/year in the future, anyone who didn't "plan" should just be shut out? How about when it gets to a million dollars a year? Are we all good with it only being for the children of Elon Musk and the like and if we can't do it, well then the fault is somehow our own?

It has not always been like this. Private schools have always been more expensive than public, but not to the degree they are now.



Instead of pointing fingers at people for "lack of planning" by saving $300K+ / child, why aren't we demanding to know why the costs are so outrageously impossible for even wealthy people to handle?

You are NOT SHUT OUT. You are simply shut out of the “luxury” product version of college. You feel entitled to a Louis Vuitton degree for your kid on your Coach budget. I’m sorry that you’ve bought into the idea that admissions are the ultimate arbiter of your kids’ merit but there are plenty of affordable options including community college.

That is your reaction to these graphics?

I'm not the PP, but basically yes. College costs are crazy and, being a former FAFSA kid, I'm kinda shocked that OP, who also claims to have been on FA in college, didn't realize that the costs were outpacing inflation and wasn't setting expectations accordingly with their DCs. The number of parents who get to their kids' junior or senior years and have absolutely no idea on how financing college works is stunning.

OP, you have enough money set aside that your DC can land a merit scholarship, attend a great school, and graduate debt free. That would be so great for your kid and an opportunity neither you nor your husband were able to have. Rather than focusing on what probably cannot happen, lean in to the fabulous opportunities your DC can have that many kids are not able to experience.

GL to your DC!

Just my observation, people who were themselves on FA feel the most entitled to aid and are the most blindsided to find out they’re supposed to be able to afford sticker.

Yes, I fall into that category. I think it is because we paid for our own down payments on houses, supporting our elderly parents, expecting no “generational transfer of wealth,” while we see the majority of our DC friends and colleagues not in that situation at all.

But who should be paying this for you? The government? The government needs to allocate its scarce resources to the highest need. The school? The school also needs to consider what is good stewardship of its funds. Merit is by definition not based on need. If all students are meritorious (‘meaning you don’t have to buy higher stats kids with merit aid), what is the good reason to give merit aid to some and not others. Schools like Duke have a few scholarships, UVA has Echols, UNC Chapel Hill has Morehouse, but these are for tippy top academic students. Some student on another thread got a full ride at University of Chicago, probably an exceptional student among exceptional students. But the discounting you hear about, that is to lure desirable (relative the the general student body) students to attend schools most would consider safety or likely schools for those students.

I did not have a generational transfer of wealth other than my parents paid for my undergraduate education at a state school. You can do that for your kids. That is an amazing gift.

It should not cost so much. Tuition rises should not be exceeding inflation.

It’s wrong.

I do not think you understand very much about economics. Yelling it shouldn't cost so much is silly. I have heard administrative bloat and unnecessary climbing walls as complaints on unnecessary expenses, but someone would have to actually look at what a school is spending money on. The only thing I am certain it is not being spent on are adjunct salaries, but I digress. When a school lowers it tuition, it needs to cut costs. No one is asserting they are making profits, they are by definition non profit entities that I am fairly certain have heavily audited accounts.

Maybe there should be limits on how much money families can borrow as an indirect way to limit tuition as schools will adjust to the market. There are limits on how much money students can borrow for undergraduate degrees. Over time, limiting a parents ability to borrow money would make a difference to the extent it limited the number of students that could attend college. Chances are the students hurt by this would not be UMC families but students of families with fewer options for paying for college. This is also pretty paternalistic.

Most do not understand the costs associated with running a university. During Covid, most lost Millions. My own kid's school refunded housing and board for the spring 2020 semester. In the fall they allowed students to take classes remotely and/or live off campus sophomore year (normally it's a 2 year requirement) to de-densify dorms. That meant 30-40% less students in dorms and on a meal plan. Yet the costs associated with providing those services really did not decrease (still have to heat the dorms, clean the bathrooms, etc) . When dorms are empty in the spring 2020, they still had overhead costs associated with it, so they lost a lot of money. Not to mention all the extra costs associated with setting up covid testing, covid quarantine dorms/hotels/extra cleaning/setting up Zoom classroom technology/training professors for zoom teaching/etc. Many schools are still bouncing back from those 2 years of lost income and extra costs. However, fall 2020 the university did NOT increase tuition at all (normally it's 3-5%). They lost 10s of Millions over these 2 years (likely over 100 Million). So either you increase tuition/room&Board or you provide less services for the same costs. Or you run the university into the red and wait to make drastic cuts in the future (not something I want at my kid's university)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Long story short: we will not get any financial aid. We make too much for help but don't make enough to go full pay at a private in a way that leaves any wiggle room.

We are just starting this process, and child is an athlete that is in the midst of recruiting (only D3 at this point b/c of NCAA limits- and FTR I don't care if DC plays a sport or not but she does). I'm looking at the finances of the various schools and was shocked to learn that some of the schools she's been talking to give NO MERIT aid. DC has excellent grades, community service, ECs, and athletics.

I get she's one of many like man others . . . and I know at DC there are no athletic scholarships. But, how are people affording places like Wellesley? Their website and what I'm finding says they give ZERO aid on the basis that, essentially, "everyone there is special."

Yes, she can look elsewhere. And she is. But it is so sad to have to shut down a possibility that would, honestly, be such a perfect fit for her in every way. With room and board, etc. the cost per year is nearly $80K!!!! Two years would eat up more than our 529 has in it. Super bummed to have to limit her.

They are either poor enough to get a lot of aid, rich enough to not need it, or had parents putting away a lot of money from conception.

Well it is no shock that top schools would cost ~$80K/year when my kid would enter college. So we did plan for that and sock away as much as we could from an early age, as we knew we wouldn't qualify for any FA. Had we not been able to do that, our kid would have had to search out more affordable schools.

Congratulations on making enough money to save 320k per kid?

No, it's congratulation on planning. Anyone smart enough to save $160K should be smart enough to know that college will be up to $80K/year in 2022. SO if attending those "Top schools" is important you plan accordingly.
Had we not been able to save enough, I would have set the mindset with my kids that while you can apply to T40 schools, we might not be able to afford them. So, you need to have a balanced list of college choices. To me, the most important part is finding great schools that are affordable to YOU. And there are many, many, many choices available for everyone. The OP has ~$40K/year saved for DD. There are literally hundreds of amazing options that will allow DD to graduate debt free. If only the OP would change their mindset and focus on what's available instead of complaining.

Similarly, I don't buy a house/car/vacation that I can't afford. I live within my means, or deal with the consequences. I don't expect others to compensate me for my lack of planning. OP could likely now cash flow another $10K+/year if they wanted to, based on their statements. So if the Top college is that important, they can do that and take parent loans and pay them off now that they have a higher income. (not saying I'd recommend that, as I actually think that's a bad idea----no school is worth going into debt for). But there are options. Smartest option (IMO) is to find a great school list that is affordable....and many many exist, just not T20 schools.

This is such an uber-American, "personal responsibility" thought pattern. So when college costs $200K/year in the future, anyone who didn't "plan" should just be shut out? How about when it gets to a million dollars a year? Are we all good with it only being for the children of Elon Musk and the like and if we can't do it, well then the fault is somehow our own?

It has not always been like this. Private schools have always been more expensive than public, but not to the degree they are now.



Instead of pointing fingers at people for "lack of planning" by saving $300K+ / child, why aren't we demanding to know why the costs are so outrageously impossible for even wealthy people to handle?

You are NOT SHUT OUT. You are simply shut out of the “luxury” product version of college. You feel entitled to a Louis Vuitton degree for your kid on your Coach budget. I’m sorry that you’ve bought into the idea that admissions are the ultimate arbiter of your kids’ merit but there are plenty of affordable options including community college.

That is your reaction to these graphics?

I'm not the PP, but basically yes. College costs are crazy and, being a former FAFSA kid, I'm kinda shocked that OP, who also claims to have been on FA in college, didn't realize that the costs were outpacing inflation and wasn't setting expectations accordingly with their DCs. The number of parents who get to their kids' junior or senior years and have absolutely no idea on how financing college works is stunning.

OP, you have enough money set aside that your DC can land a merit scholarship, attend a great school, and graduate debt free. That would be so great for your kid and an opportunity neither you nor your husband were able to have. Rather than focusing on what probably cannot happen, lean in to the fabulous opportunities your DC can have that many kids are not able to experience.

GL to your DC!

Just my observation, people who were themselves on FA feel the most entitled to aid and are the most blindsided to find out they’re supposed to be able to afford sticker.

Yes, I fall into that category. I think it is because we paid for our own down payments on houses, supporting our elderly parents, expecting no “generational transfer of wealth,” while we see the majority of our DC friends and colleagues not in that situation at all.

But who should be paying this for you? The government? The government needs to allocate its scarce resources to the highest need. The school? The school also needs to consider what is good stewardship of its funds. Merit is by definition not based on need. If all students are meritorious (‘meaning you don’t have to buy higher stats kids with merit aid), what is the good reason to give merit aid to some and not others. Schools like Duke have a few scholarships, UVA has Echols, UNC Chapel Hill has Morehouse, but these are for tippy top academic students. Some student on another thread got a full ride at University of Chicago, probably an exceptional student among exceptional students. But the discounting you hear about, that is to lure desirable (relative the the general student body) students to attend schools most would consider safety or likely schools for those students.

I did not have a generational transfer of wealth other than my parents paid for my undergraduate education at a state school. You can do that for your kids. That is an amazing gift.

It should not cost so much. Tuition rises should not be exceeding inflation.

It’s wrong.

As I already said in this thread, that reflects growing income inequality. The top 10% can afford much more tuition than they could when your parents were paying for college.

We are in vehement agreement. It's wrong. Studies all show that education is critical to a productive life and economic security just as healthcare, housing, and food are. Comparing it to luxury cars and vacations is a false equivalence.

Education is critical yet that doesn't mean that OP's DC will not survive - better yet thrive - at a "less expensive" option (merit + 529). Studies also show that those who can really benefit the most from a T25 education are those who can least afford it. As long as higher ed remains financed as it currently is, then there will be people who need to make decisions based on their budget. You may not like the luxury cars and high-end vacations comparison, but it may be the most apt for a broad range of folks to grasp.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Long story short: we will not get any financial aid. We make too much for help but don't make enough to go full pay at a private in a way that leaves any wiggle room.

We are just starting this process, and child is an athlete that is in the midst of recruiting (only D3 at this point b/c of NCAA limits- and FTR I don't care if DC plays a sport or not but she does). I'm looking at the finances of the various schools and was shocked to learn that some of the schools she's been talking to give NO MERIT aid. DC has excellent grades, community service, ECs, and athletics.

I get she's one of many like man others . . . and I know at DC there are no athletic scholarships. But, how are people affording places like Wellesley? Their website and what I'm finding says they give ZERO aid on the basis that, essentially, "everyone there is special."

Yes, she can look elsewhere. And she is. But it is so sad to have to shut down a possibility that would, honestly, be such a perfect fit for her in every way. With room and board, etc. the cost per year is nearly $80K!!!! Two years would eat up more than our 529 has in it. Super bummed to have to limit her.

They are either poor enough to get a lot of aid, rich enough to not need it, or had parents putting away a lot of money from conception.

Well it is no shock that top schools would cost ~$80K/year when my kid would enter college. So we did plan for that and sock away as much as we could from an early age, as we knew we wouldn't qualify for any FA. Had we not been able to do that, our kid would have had to search out more affordable schools.

Congratulations on making enough money to save 320k per kid?

No, it's congratulation on planning. Anyone smart enough to save $160K should be smart enough to know that college will be up to $80K/year in 2022. SO if attending those "Top schools" is important you plan accordingly.
Had we not been able to save enough, I would have set the mindset with my kids that while you can apply to T40 schools, we might not be able to afford them. So, you need to have a balanced list of college choices. To me, the most important part is finding great schools that are affordable to YOU. And there are many, many, many choices available for everyone. The OP has ~$40K/year saved for DD. There are literally hundreds of amazing options that will allow DD to graduate debt free. If only the OP would change their mindset and focus on what's available instead of complaining.

Similarly, I don't buy a house/car/vacation that I can't afford. I live within my means, or deal with the consequences. I don't expect others to compensate me for my lack of planning. OP could likely now cash flow another $10K+/year if they wanted to, based on their statements. So if the Top college is that important, they can do that and take parent loans and pay them off now that they have a higher income. (not saying I'd recommend that, as I actually think that's a bad idea----no school is worth going into debt for). But there are options. Smartest option (IMO) is to find a great school list that is affordable....and many many exist, just not T20 schools.

This is such an uber-American, "personal responsibility" thought pattern. So when college costs $200K/year in the future, anyone who didn't "plan" should just be shut out? How about when it gets to a million dollars a year? Are we all good with it only being for the children of Elon Musk and the like and if we can't do it, well then the fault is somehow our own?

It has not always been like this. Private schools have always been more expensive than public, but not to the degree they are now.



Instead of pointing fingers at people for "lack of planning" by saving $300K+ / child, why aren't we demanding to know why the costs are so outrageously impossible for even wealthy people to handle?

You are NOT SHUT OUT. You are simply shut out of the “luxury” product version of college. You feel entitled to a Louis Vuitton degree for your kid on your Coach budget. I’m sorry that you’ve bought into the idea that admissions are the ultimate arbiter of your kids’ merit but there are plenty of affordable options including community college.

That is your reaction to these graphics?

I'm not the PP, but basically yes. College costs are crazy and, being a former FAFSA kid, I'm kinda shocked that OP, who also claims to have been on FA in college, didn't realize that the costs were outpacing inflation and wasn't setting expectations accordingly with their DCs. The number of parents who get to their kids' junior or senior years and have absolutely no idea on how financing college works is stunning.

OP, you have enough money set aside that your DC can land a merit scholarship, attend a great school, and graduate debt free. That would be so great for your kid and an opportunity neither you nor your husband were able to have. Rather than focusing on what probably cannot happen, lean in to the fabulous opportunities your DC can have that many kids are not able to experience.

GL to your DC!

Just my observation, people who were themselves on FA feel the most entitled to aid and are the most blindsided to find out they’re supposed to be able to afford sticker.

Yes, I fall into that category. I think it is because we paid for our own down payments on houses, supporting our elderly parents, expecting no “generational transfer of wealth,” while we see the majority of our DC friends and colleagues not in that situation at all.

But who should be paying this for you? The government? The government needs to allocate its scarce resources to the highest need. The school? The school also needs to consider what is good stewardship of its funds. Merit is by definition not based on need. If all students are meritorious (‘meaning you don’t have to buy higher stats kids with merit aid), what is the good reason to give merit aid to some and not others. Schools like Duke have a few scholarships, UVA has Echols, UNC Chapel Hill has Morehouse, but these are for tippy top academic students. Some student on another thread got a full ride at University of Chicago, probably an exceptional student among exceptional students. But the discounting you hear about, that is to lure desirable (relative the the general student body) students to attend schools most would consider safety or likely schools for those students.

I did not have a generational transfer of wealth other than my parents paid for my undergraduate education at a state school. You can do that for your kids. That is an amazing gift.

It should not cost so much. Tuition rises should not be exceeding inflation.

It’s wrong.

As I already said in this thread, that reflects growing income inequality. The top 10% can afford much more tuition than they could when your parents were paying for college.

We are in vehement agreement. It's wrong. Studies all show that education is critical to a productive life and economic security just as healthcare, housing, and food are. Comparing it to luxury cars and vacations is a false equivalence.

No it's not a false equivalence. Of course education is critical. Nothing is preventing you from getting a great education (except maybe your own false notions). There are LITERALLY Hundreds of excellent schools that do not cost $80K/year. Nobody is stopping your kid from getting an education, except you who sets up the mentality that it's "IVY/Stanford/T20 or bust".

If you have stats for a T20/Top SLAC, you will find plenty of universities that will provide that education at a rate you can afford.

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP has a horrible, entitled attitude. How are they JUST realizing private colleges cost $80,000?

Yes, it doesn't make much sense. Anyone who has made a tiny effort would know that's what the top private colleges would cost in 2022/2023. Our goal was 80K/year for a top university, 50-60K/year for mid level and 30-35K for state---that was what most college calculators have been telling us (along with our financial advisor) since our kids were little.
For one kid we planned on 50-60K (smart kid but hates school, has ADHD/processing issues/executive functioning/test taking issues, so we knew early by MS that they would not be targeting universities that cost 80K and not likely to want to continue onto grad school immediately, and if that changed we would be able to cashflow the difference), for the other two we could see them possibly wanting to attend an elite/top university so we saved accordingly-if they go somewhere that costs less then they have some $$ for grad school. However, if we had not been able to save enough, we would have known that by 9th/10th grade and would have worked to develop an appropriate list of colleges to apply to that includes mostly schools we could afford. It's ok to tell your kids you can only afford certain schools, and that while you can apply to the T20 school it's a lottery, you might not get in, and without merit we cannot afford it.
Same way you tell your kid they are not getting a brand new sports car for their 16th birthday, despite the fact classmates will get one (my kid's attended a HS where many kids drive 60K sports cars, brand new Teslas---I wouldn't do that for a 16yo even if I could afford it).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A little tough love.
My perfect house would be a $3 million mini mansion on an acre of land but I'm ok with my 70s split level.
My perfect vacation would be Hawaii, but we're going to Rehoboth instead.

Colleges that you can't afford are NOT "perfect fits." It doesn't mean that you've failed your child by not saving more, but it also doesn't mean that the system is inherently unfair--some things are just out of your price range. There's a reason why the vast majority of students look at their public in-state options.

Or, some of us are not taking vacations and living in 1000 fixer uppers in a dcum bad school district to save.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A little tough love.
My perfect house would be a $3 million mini mansion on an acre of land but I'm ok with my 70s split level.
My perfect vacation would be Hawaii, but we're going to Rehoboth instead.

Colleges that you can't afford are NOT "perfect fits." It doesn't mean that you've failed your child by not saving more, but it also doesn't mean that the system is inherently unfair--some things are just out of your price range. There's a reason why the vast majority of students look at their public in-state options.

Or, some of us are not taking vacations and living in 1000 fixer uppers in a dcum bad school district to save.

Plenty of people do that---everyone makes life choices and saves accordingly. That's the point. Someone who has been able to save $160K for education is doing well and they are not "struggling". Plenty of people live in older homes and don't take vacations and still can't save much.

[Anonymous]

I’m always amazed at people who blame “lack of planning” when people don’t have $300K saved for their kid’s education. Some people simply can’t put that much money into a 529 because, wait for it, they simply don’t make enough money to do so. No amount of scrimping, saving, driving beater cars, not taking vacations, will change that. It’s not a character flaw that they don’t have a $300K 529 and I wish people would stop making it sound like it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m always amazed at people who blame “lack of planning” when people don’t have $300K saved for their kid’s education. Some people simply can’t put that much money into a 529 because, wait for it, they simply don’t make enough money to do so. No amount of scrimping, saving, driving beater cars, not taking vacations, will change that. It’s not a character flaw that they don’t have a $300K 529 and I wish people would stop making it sound like it is.

For families with financial need, there is financial aid. This thread is about merit aid and why many top schools don’t offer it. No one is saying that everyone should have saved $300K for college. What we are saying is that people without financial need are not entitled to a subsidized elite education and that the cost of such education is a surprise to no one paying attention. OP managed to save $160K for college and OP’s student can use that money to get through college debt free and is in better position than many. Do we sympathize that OP cannot afford to send her child to Wellesley with the amount of money she has already saved? No we do not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m always amazed at people who blame “lack of planning” when people don’t have $300K saved for their kid’s education. Some people simply can’t put that much money into a 529 because, wait for it, they simply don’t make enough money to do so. No amount of scrimping, saving, driving beater cars, not taking vacations, will change that. It’s not a character flaw that they don’t have a $300K 529 and I wish people would stop making it sound like it is.

It is not a character flaw. But it would be a character flaw to expect to be able to attend a university that you cannot afford (as in $80K/year) because you were not able to save. There are many, many good universities that do offer merit, that can be affordable to your family. So if you were not able to save and don't qualify for any/enough FA, then an $80K/year school just might not be the "right fit" school for your kids. So like you have done (and most people have to do at some level) with lots of things in life, you pick schools that are affordable to you. There are plenty to pick from.

But the reason many mention the "saving" is because we routinely see people complain about not having enough money yet "waste" their money on non-essentials. I see people get a $5 latte daily (sometime two), eat lunch out daily, eat half their dinners out/go to bars, etc yet complain they can't save for something else. So while it won't solve "all the world's problems", those people are wasting $200-800 per month---that could be saved for something else. So if education was more important to them, they could choose to save. It's those people I'm referencing when I make statements like that.

When I was younger (and didn't have enough money), I took my lunch 9/10 days, always took coffee and snacks from home, cooked dinner at home most nights, didn't take fancy vacations (ie we took 3-4 day trips that were within a 5-6 hour drive from home and stayed at discount hotels). I grew up poor, so I get that many people simply cannot "just save instead of spending". My family dining out treat when going up was pizza on Sat night or a trip to Ponderosa (steak and all you can eat salad bar for $8/person). However, many, many people I know could save if they wanted to, yet choose to complain about not having everything in life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m always amazed at people who blame “lack of planning” when people don’t have $300K saved for their kid’s education. Some people simply can’t put that much money into a 529 because, wait for it, they simply don’t make enough money to do so. No amount of scrimping, saving, driving beater cars, not taking vacations, will change that. It’s not a character flaw that they don’t have a $300K 529 and I wish people would stop making it sound like it is.

For families with financial need, there is financial aid. This thread is about merit aid and why many top schools don’t offer it. No one is saying that everyone should have saved $300K for college. What we are saying is that people without financial need are not entitled to a subsidized elite education and that the cost of such education is a surprise to no one paying attention. OP managed to save $160K for college and OP’s student can use that money to get through college debt free and is in better position than many. Do we sympathize that OP cannot afford to send her child to Wellesley with the amount of money she has already saved? No we do not.

+1000

[Anonymous]

For those of you wondering why tuition has gone up so much--it's not just climbing walls and administrative creep (although that doesn't hurt. Here are some of the things schools must now provide that cost a lot of money:
1) Mental health services
2) ADA and accommodation services (extra test time et al)
3) FERPA/HIIPA administrators
4)DEI deans, programs, counselors, et al
5) Improved housing and dining

I'm not saying that these changes are bad--it's great that kids with mental health issues, disabilities, needing accommodations can now go to school, and DEI is important. But if you think about how it was when the boomers went to school -- some large lectures and bare bones housing, no counseling at all -- and what it is like today at schools, you see why it costs so much more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m always amazed at people who blame “lack of planning” when people don’t have $300K saved for their kid’s education. Some people simply can’t put that much money into a 529 because, wait for it, they simply don’t make enough money to do so. No amount of scrimping, saving, driving beater cars, not taking vacations, will change that. It’s not a character flaw that they don’t have a $300K 529 and I wish people would stop making it sound like it is.

It is not a character flaw. But it would be a character flaw to expect to be able to attend a university that you cannot afford (as in $80K/year) because you were not able to save. There are many, many good universities that do offer merit, that can be affordable to your family. So if you were not able to save and don't qualify for any/enough FA, then an $80K/year school just might not be the "right fit" school for your kids. So like you have done (and most people have to do at some level) with lots of things in life, you pick schools that are affordable to you. There are plenty to pick from.

But the reason many mention the "saving" is because we routinely see people complain about not having enough money yet "waste" their money on non-essentials. I see people get a $5 latte daily (sometime two), eat lunch out daily, eat half their dinners out/go to bars, etc yet complain they can't save for something else. So while it won't solve "all the world's problems", those people are wasting $200-800 per month---that could be saved for something else. So if education was more important to them, they could choose to save. It's those people I'm referencing when I make statements like that.

When I was younger (and didn't have enough money), I took my lunch 9/10 days, always took coffee and snacks from home, cooked dinner at home most nights, didn't take fancy vacations (ie we took 3-4 day trips that were within a 5-6 hour drive from home and stayed at discount hotels). I grew up poor, so I get that many people simply cannot "just save instead of spending". My family dining out treat when going up was pizza on Sat night or a trip to Ponderosa (steak and all you can eat salad bar for $8/person). However, many, many people I know could save if they wanted to, yet choose to complain about not having everything in life.