As schools near $100K/year when will that affect the pool of students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just read on another post that someone is paying $95K/year for USC.
Several kids from my kids' schools are starting there this fall.

I know most on DCUM can pony up $400K for 4 years but how many people like this are really out there?
I also know these schools have 40% (or whatnot) that pay $0/year.
At what point will the price of some of these schools begin to effect the size of their applicant pool?
Either because people don't have the cash or say "that is insane--screw it".

When you’re no longer allowed to take out Parent Plus Loans up to the cost of attendance. NYU & USC graduates are #1 for PPL debt.

Or how about when the schools are on the hook when people default on loans? At the moment, the schools risk nothing when they jack up costs.

What? Why would schools be "on the hook when people default on loans?" Schools do NOT take the loans. Plenty of people go to these schools withOUT PPL.
If parents are dumb enough to take PPL, then they need to deal with the repayment. Nobody is forcing you to do this. There are literally hundreds of schools you can attend that will be affordable and not require more than regular student loans that max out at 27K for 4 years

How can the PPL even work? If you assume that most of these parents are 50+ years old at the time of signing the loan (and don't have cash in hand at the time) how the heck are they going to pay back $200-300K by the time
they retire at age 65? And yes, they can work until they're 80 but realistically not a huge percentage of people have significant earning power over the age of 65 (or are even employable!!)
And not to be too macabre but some (not an insignificant number) will be dead by 65.

I can't imagine 95% of these loans are paid back in full (and many go completely unpaid).
Does the school eat this cost or the federal government?

The schools have NOTHING to do with these loans. These loans are between the people who take them out (Parents/Aunts/Uncles/Adults) and the government/whomever gives them the loan.
I agree, how will most people pay these huge amounts back. The entities giving these loans are responsible for that (and if its the govt they need to stop as I don't need to pay for what stupid people do). I think it is STUPID to take these loans. No school is worth it.

Find a school you can AFFORD---it's not that difficult to do. Search merit awards, go to a state school, make your kid work breaks and summer and earn $10-12K/year. Start at CC if you can't afford 4 year directly. Take Dual entry classes in HS and graduate with your AA and then will likely only need 2-3 years in a 4 year college (3 years if engineering, many can finish in 2 if you planned HS dual entry courses well). Go outside of the T50 schools and get an education you can afford. The T50 is not worth it if you need to take out 200+ in loans.

You’re missing the point. The availability of these loans drives up the COA even for people who are sending their kids to college full pay without loans. And the school can make up whatever COA it wants.

[Anonymous]

There are cheap schools out there, but they tend to be much more spartan. Students usually want the full four-to-six year cruise experience and... well, there's a reason that credit card companies really want students as clients.

New College Franklin (very small, classical Christian liberal arts): $12,500

Deep Springs (very small two-year elite): $0

Webb Institute (very small, elite naval engineering): ~$16,000

Williamson (three-year vocational, for low income): $0

Berea (for low income, Christian work college): $11,000-ish COA or lower

Apprentice School (vocational + engineering): Negative tuition. They pay you, but you are building ships for the Navy.

College of the Ozarks (Christian, conservative work college): ~$15,000 COA

Colleges that use English for instruction in Puerto Rico. e.g. Interamerican's program ($20,000, room+ board).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The international pool is nearly infinite. But I’m already seeing the true UMC (referred to erroneously as MC on DCUM) increasingly headed to, of course, in state flagships (especially kids aiming for med school) but also international universities (Uk, Canada, Netherlands in particular). If you took $400K and skipped college and invested it for your child at 18, would they ever even need to work? Probably not much. Or they’d at least be set for retirement.

Would they ever even need to work? Apparently you need to go back to HS math. 400K is definately not enough at age 18 to live the rest of your life not working. However, it is a huge investment for retirement. But you don't need to skip college. There are plenty of colleges that are only $100-120 all in for 4 years, maybe less once you can live off campus. Pick one of those, student works and earns $10-12K/year, student takes the entire 27K of student loans and parents help with the rest, which is $30-50K TOTAL for 4 years. Hopefully the parents can help with $10-15K/year. If not, worst case they take PPL of only $30K total. Much smarter plan.

In reality, you can search merit and find a place that only costs $10-20K/year. It's possible, just step down a tier from your stats.

[Anonymous]

It would be like if you could get mortgages from the government up to the COA of literally any house, because god forbid we make someone feel bad that they can’t afford a house in Jackson Hole Wyoming ($$$$$$). That jacks up prices for any prospective buyer because the seller knows that you have access to whatever amount of funding equal to the seller’s asking price.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It already is. In theory, we could "afford" to send our kids anywhere. In practice, DC1 chose to stay instate (where we get a tuition break on top of lower tuition anyway, due to one parent's job). Total for DC1 for 4 years should be around $100K, which is about what it was for me to go to an expensive private college back in the early 90's.

It's truly hard to imagine how it would be "worth" $300K more for an undergraduate education. We're already seeing more and more great students choosing public colleges and universities, and that helps to make those schools better. I think the tipping point will eventually be that if costs of private keep rising, the best students will be choosing public, and then the whole system will implode.

There will always be wealthy smart students who can afford the elite schools. Just look at the elite HS in NYC where people pay $50K+/year. Same for all the elite boarding schools in the Northeast. People paying $75 k+ for a year of HS will have the money for college

Yeah, but this pool of people is not that large. OP here and my kids go to a $50K private (on aid) in DC. There are about 500 kids in DC who attend $50K schools and at least 1/3 are on aid. So say 300 kids in DC who are paying $50K for high school (many of whom live in MD and VA).
That's not a whole lot of kids. It's only one city but ultimately there aren't that many boarding schools and other $50K high schools (plus the top boarding schools (Andover, Exeter, etc) have 50% of the kids on aid).
Yes, there are a lot of rich people out there but the pool is not endless.

You're sending your kids to private high school while also complaining that college is unaffordable? Maybe you should send them to public high school and save for college instead.

A lot of colleges give financial aid. They just don't give as much of it as a lot of people wish they would. But the university plan, roughly speaking, is to set the sticker price as high as possible so they can get as much as possible out of their rich students so they can afford to subsidize smart poorer kids. If they did away with financial aid, the price would go down. But they'd cut down their pool of applicants to those who can pay. They're choosing not to do so. Do you disagree with their philosophy, or are you just mad that you're rich enough that colleges think you "can pay"? Because you could quit your job and give all your money to charity and then you'd be very eligible for need-based aid!

[Anonymous]

This is the exact same theme as several other recent threads. Do you think you’re somehow lobbying through these repetitive threads?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The international pool is nearly infinite. But I’m already seeing the true UMC (referred to erroneously as MC on DCUM) increasingly headed to, of course, in state flagships (especially kids aiming for med school) but also international universities (Uk, Canada, Netherlands in particular). If you took $400K and skipped college and invested it for your child at 18, would they ever even need to work? Probably not much. Or they’d at least be set for retirement.

I don’t think international is that popular, but I think more of those type kids who miss out on the state flagship are going to the second or third instate school instead of somewhere like Lehigh that used to be UMC and is now UC

[Anonymous]

Zero donut hole families will be at the schools so you will only have the extremely rich and the poor attending the privates/ivies. Hopefully--in-state doesn't escalate as fast.

And, in the DMV--donut hole families with multiple kids are around $250k HHI. They can't afford $400k per CHILD. That is $800k for two kids to go to undergrad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It already is. In theory, we could "afford" to send our kids anywhere. In practice, DC1 chose to stay instate (where we get a tuition break on top of lower tuition anyway, due to one parent's job). Total for DC1 for 4 years should be around $100K, which is about what it was for me to go to an expensive private college back in the early 90's.

It's truly hard to imagine how it would be "worth" $300K more for an undergraduate education. We're already seeing more and more great students choosing public colleges and universities, and that helps to make those schools better. I think the tipping point will eventually be that if costs of private keep rising, the best students will be choosing public, and then the whole system will implode.

There will always be wealthy smart students who can afford the elite schools. Just look at the elite HS in NYC where people pay $50K+/year. Same for all the elite boarding schools in the Northeast. People paying $75 k+ for a year of HS will have the money for college

^This.

There is a long waiting list of wealthy people who are willing to pay 50K+/year for their kids to attend Potomac School here in the DMV. They can easily afford 95K/year at USC.

No, there is a drop-off here. Let's say you have 100 people who will pay $50K for Potomac. I'd say 85-90 of that 100 can or will pay $100K for USC. 10-15 can't or will not pay the $100K when there are cheaper options.
I'm in that 10-15%.

[Anonymous]

[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It already is. In theory, we could "afford" to send our kids anywhere. In practice, DC1 chose to stay instate (where we get a tuition break on top of lower tuition anyway, due to one parent's job). Total for DC1 for 4 years should be around $100K, which is about what it was for me to go to an expensive private college back in the early 90's.

It's truly hard to imagine how it would be "worth" $300K more for an undergraduate education. We're already seeing more and more great students choosing public colleges and universities, and that helps to make those schools better. I think the tipping point will eventually be that if costs of private keep rising, the best students will be choosing public, and then the whole system will implode.

There will always be wealthy smart students who can afford the elite schools. Just look at the elite HS in NYC where people pay $50K+/year. Same for all the elite boarding schools in the Northeast. People paying $75 k+ for a year of HS will have the money for college

Yeah, but this pool of people is not that large. OP here and my kids go to a $50K private (on aid) in DC. There are about 500 kids in DC who attend $50K schools and at least 1/3 are on aid. So say 300 kids in DC who are paying $50K for high school (many of whom live in MD and VA).
That's not a whole lot of kids. It's only one city but ultimately there aren't that many boarding schools and other $50K high schools (plus the top boarding schools (Andover, Exeter, etc) have 50% of the kids on aid).
Yes, there are a lot of rich people out there but the pool is not endless.

You're sending your kids to private high school while also complaining that college is unaffordable? Maybe you should send them to public high school and save for college instead.

A lot of colleges give financial aid. They just don't give as much of it as a lot of people wish they would. But the university plan, roughly speaking, is to set the sticker price as high as possible so they can get as much as possible out of their rich students so they can afford to subsidize smart poorer kids. If they did away with financial aid, the price would go down. But they'd cut down their pool of applicants to those who can pay. They're choosing not to do so. Do you disagree with their philosophy, or are you just mad that you're rich enough that colleges think you "can pay"? Because you could quit your job and give all your money to charity and then you'd be very eligible for need-based aid!

It’s this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are cheap schools out there, but they tend to be much more spartan. Students usually want the full four-to-six year cruise experience and... well, there's a reason that credit card companies really want students as clients.

New College Franklin (very small, classical Christian liberal arts): $12,500

Deep Springs (very small two-year elite): $0

Webb Institute (very small, elite naval engineering): ~$16,000

Williamson (three-year vocational, for low income): $0

Berea (for low income, Christian work college): $11,000-ish COA or lower

Apprentice School (vocational + engineering): Negative tuition. They pay you, but you are building ships for the Navy.

College of the Ozarks (Christian, conservative work college): ~$15,000 COA

Colleges that use English for instruction in Puerto Rico. e.g. Interamerican's program ($20,000, room+ board).

Also 2 years community college -> 4 year school, military then college via GI bill, purposely choosing a school where you can graduate a year early due to AP/IB/CLEP/DE/overload credits, service academics, ROTC scholarships, schools that have the same tuition for everyone (such as Eastern Michigan U), commuting from parents’ house (could live on campus freshman year then commute the following years) and schools that have automatic full rides for national merit finalists & for excellent students like at Arizona State.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just read on another post that someone is paying $95K/year for USC.
Several kids from my kids' schools are starting there this fall.

I know most on DCUM can pony up $400K for 4 years but how many people like this are really out there?
I also know these schools have 40% (or whatnot) that pay $0/year.
At what point will the price of some of these schools begin to effect the size of their applicant pool?
Either because people don't have the cash or say "that is insane--screw it".

When you’re no longer allowed to take out Parent Plus Loans up to the cost of attendance. NYU & USC graduates are #1 for PPL debt.

Or how about when the schools are on the hook when people default on loans? At the moment, the schools risk nothing when they jack up costs.

What? Why would schools be "on the hook when people default on loans?" Schools do NOT take the loans. Plenty of people go to these schools withOUT PPL.
If parents are dumb enough to take PPL, then they need to deal with the repayment. Nobody is forcing you to do this. There are literally hundreds of schools you can attend that will be affordable and not require more than regular student loans that max out at 27K for 4 years

How can the PPL even work? If you assume that most of these parents are 50+ years old at the time of signing the loan (and don't have cash in hand at the time) how the heck are they going to pay back $200-300K by the time
they retire at age 65? And yes, they can work until they're 80 but realistically not a huge percentage of people have significant earning power over the age of 65 (or are even employable!!)
And not to be too macabre but some (not an insignificant number) will be dead by 65.

I can't imagine 95% of these loans are paid back in full (and many go completely unpaid).
Does the school eat this cost or the federal government?

The federal government. The school gets off scot-free.

+1 The Fed student loan program is the reason college tuition exponentially increased so quickly. As students could borrow more, the schools hiked tuition. They could care less about student debt (the colleges). They get more $$$$$.

The more money the federal government pumps into financial aid, the more money the colleges charge for tuition. Inflation-adjusted tuition and fees have tripled over those same 30 years while aid quadrupled; the aid is going up faster than the tuition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The international pool is nearly infinite. But I’m already seeing the true UMC (referred to erroneously as MC on DCUM) increasingly headed to, of course, in state flagships (especially kids aiming for med school) but also international universities (Uk, Canada, Netherlands in particular). If you took $400K and skipped college and invested it for your child at 18, would they ever even need to work? Probably not much. Or they’d at least be set for retirement.

Would they ever even need to work? Apparently you need to go back to HS math. 400K is definately not enough at age 18 to live the rest of your life not working. However, it is a huge investment for retirement. But you don't need to skip college. There are plenty of colleges that are only $100-120 all in for 4 years, maybe less once you can live off campus. Pick one of those, student works and earns $10-12K/year, student takes the entire 27K of student loans and parents help with the rest, which is $30-50K TOTAL for 4 years. Hopefully the parents can help with $10-15K/year. If not, worst case they take PPL of only $30K total. Much smarter plan.

In reality, you can search merit and find a place that only costs $10-20K/year. It's possible, just step down a tier from your stats.

If you invested it and assumed 6% annually, you’d have over $7 million at age 68. How many of us have that much after working stressful jobs all those years?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just read on another post that someone is paying $95K/year for USC.
Several kids from my kids' schools are starting there this fall.

I know most on DCUM can pony up $400K for 4 years but how many people like this are really out there?
I also know these schools have 40% (or whatnot) that pay $0/year.
At what point will the price of some of these schools begin to effect the size of their applicant pool?
Either because people don't have the cash or say "that is insane--screw it".

When you’re no longer allowed to take out Parent Plus Loans up to the cost of attendance. NYU & USC graduates are #1 for PPL debt.

Or how about when the schools are on the hook when people default on loans? At the moment, the schools risk nothing when they jack up costs.

What? Why would schools be "on the hook when people default on loans?" Schools do NOT take the loans. Plenty of people go to these schools withOUT PPL.
If parents are dumb enough to take PPL, then they need to deal with the repayment. Nobody is forcing you to do this. There are literally hundreds of schools you can attend that will be affordable and not require more than regular student loans that max out at 27K for 4 years

How can the PPL even work? If you assume that most of these parents are 50+ years old at the time of signing the loan (and don't have cash in hand at the time) how the heck are they going to pay back $200-300K by the time
they retire at age 65? And yes, they can work until they're 80 but realistically not a huge percentage of people have significant earning power over the age of 65 (or are even employable!!)
And not to be too macabre but some (not an insignificant number) will be dead by 65.

I can't imagine 95% of these loans are paid back in full (and many go completely unpaid).
Does the school eat this cost or the federal government?

The federal government. The school gets off scot-free.

+1 The Fed student loan program is the reason college tuition exponentially increased so quickly. As students could borrow more, the schools hiked tuition. They could care less about student debt (the colleges). They get more $$$$$.

The more money the federal government pumps into financial aid, the more money the colleges charge for tuition. Inflation-adjusted tuition and fees have tripled over those same 30 years while aid quadrupled; the aid is going up faster than the tuition.

History behind it:

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2011/11/23/why-the-government-is-to-blame-for-high-college-costs#:~:text=The%20more%20money%20the%20federal,up%20faster%20than%20the%20tuition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It already is. In theory, we could "afford" to send our kids anywhere. In practice, DC1 chose to stay instate (where we get a tuition break on top of lower tuition anyway, due to one parent's job). Total for DC1 for 4 years should be around $100K, which is about what it was for me to go to an expensive private college back in the early 90's.

It's truly hard to imagine how it would be "worth" $300K more for an undergraduate education. We're already seeing more and more great students choosing public colleges and universities, and that helps to make those schools better. I think the tipping point will eventually be that if costs of private keep rising, the best students will be choosing public, and then the whole system will implode.

There will always be wealthy smart students who can afford the elite schools. Just look at the elite HS in NYC where people pay $50K+/year. Same for all the elite boarding schools in the Northeast. People paying $75 k+ for a year of HS will have the money for college

Yes, there are rich people with smart kids, but my point is, if the smart but less rich kids are all choosing public universities, eventually, the "name brand" private colleges will be diluted with rich but less smart kids, and then what advantage will that name have? I mean, I don't see this happening soon, but as another PP pointed out, back in our day, UMD was an easy, guaranteed admit, and now it's coveted. Plus, Gen Z is just a lot smarter about not leaving college in debt.