If college is so expensive ... why don't more families get need-based aid?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Huh? What is that, like “source”? 🙄 It’s obvious- how do you think these schools magically maintain the same proportion of financial aid year in year out? They can’t afford to give everyone free tuition. They know if they admit the same number of kids from the same schools and towns year in year out, the financial aid requirements will be stable. They don’t need to know the specific financial circumstances of each applicant. |
Anonymous
|
We have always had two working parents and had a household income on $350,000 when our kids started college. We are full pay. And not whining— it’s a nice income. Although a SFH house in Fairfax County in a decent school district (decent— not the best) is now $1 million. So, expenses add up fast here.
And I agree— you should start saving for college at birth. And if you and your spouse make $350,000 at birth and have no extra expenses or decrease in income for 18 years, you should have a 529 funded for Harvard. But usually, that’s not how life happens. We had about $250k per kid in their 529s when they hit college. Enough for a Midwestern LAC with merit and WM, both with no loans. WM kid will have about $50k left over for grad school. Why not the $400k they would need to full pay? Because people looking at a $350k income seem to assume we had an $350,000 income and $0 in extra expenses from the day Kid 1 was born until we filed the FAFSA 18 years later. And that was not remotely true. To start with, we had kids relatively young, and we didn’t always make $350,000. It was closer to/ slightly below $200k the kids were born. Now subtract $1500-1800 a kid a month for childcare (at the time) for the first 5 years. Just as we were getting ready to stop needing FT childcare for kid1, we bought into a decent school district just before (like 3 months before) the housing bubble burst, the recession happened- and we went from having plenty of equity to being underwater on our mortgage. It took us 10 years to regain our housing value and get back to square 1. At the same time, one parent lost their job. And we couldn’t move for a job, because underwater on the mortgage. That parent found a new job relatively fast, but took a big pay cut. Lots of people hit by the recession now have kids entering or in college. A year later, the other parent had a huge health event and was out of work for 18 months, most of the time in treatment. And the rest of the time was was too sick/ occupied with treatment to reliably care for the kids and save that money. Meanwhile, even when school started, the childcare expenses didn’t just go away. From K-6, we were paying for before and after care so that we could both work. Not cheap for two kids, even if it’s just SACC. And summer care was just ungodly expensive. Plus, care on all the random days school was closed for TWDs, 1/2 day Mondays (still a thing in FCPS at the time), snow days, rain days, cold days. And FCPS just hates to operate for a full uninterrupted week days. So, our salaries were not at $350k for most of the years we saved. And many years, we saved very little because childcare was bleeding us dry— and high quality childcare was not a place we were willing to scrimp. And those were also the years where compounded interest could have worked its magic. That’s reality for many two income families. Add on for us the recession happened and we bought at a house at the worst possible time, that we we had a job loss and pay cut and had one parent who was very sick (but thankfully now has a clean bill of health), but was out of work for a significant period of time. So when people say— just start saving when the baby is born, I agree on principle. But people (and Harvard) make a lot of assumptions about a family’s ability to save when their kid was 4 based on what the family finances look like when the kid is 18. And FAFSA doesn’t really capture childcare expenses, serious illness in the family, recession eating away $200,000 in equity overnight, job loss, etc— especially when those things happened. when a kid is in ES or younger. But those things prevent savings at a point when savings can be most valuable if you invest right because of compounded interest. I’m glad we both worked, especially since one of us was unemployed for a period of time and one of us was too sick to work for a longer period of time. When we only had one adult who could work, I was grateful we had two adults with active careers that carried benefits. But realistically, my salary covered childcare for several years and that’s about it. We sucked it up to keep me in the workforce. But financially, we might have been in a better position for college if I had just never worked at all, rather than working to pay for childcare, and then ultimately having that income counted against us on the FAFSA. |
Anonymous
This sounds like us, too, including the boost in income about 3 years ago. We don't take fancy vacations and only take 1 vacation per year. We rarely eat out. Kids are on track to graduate debt free and we are fully on track for retirement. Mortgage could be paid off today, but it's not a big deal to keep the mortgage until March 2026. Youngest graduates May 2026. Maybe grad school for him? Who knows, but we will have enough in the 529 to cover him. |
Anonymous
I brown bag my lunch every day. $1 will get you 2 slices of bread and half an apple or a cup of yogurt. You are really eating light. |
Anonymous
You are a bit tone death when you are living in a million dollar house and don't realize some of it is lifestyle choices. Many of us have the same health issues, child care, helping family/caring for elderly family, special needs kids. |
Anonymous
There comments are silly when their mortgage is $4300. That's a huge mortgage. And private school. Our mortgage was less than half that. I cannot even imagine a mortgage that high. |
Anonymous
This isn't true. The vast majority of need blind schools are public schools that don't guarantee aid. They just accept people and don't offer aid. There are a small number of need blind schools that are also meets full need schools. What you say may be true. Kids who have economic advantages generally have many other advantages that translate into increased odds in the college application process, such as access to extracurriculars, test prep, higher quality K-8 so they enter high school and are tracked at a higher level etc . . . |
Anonymous
| 529 plans. $10k/year per kid. |
Anonymous
|
I remember when I was a middle class kid in college being in awe that 60% of my fellow students had no financial aid. I imagined that their parents could just write out checks, but I suppose maybe some did take out loans.
More recently, I was looking at stats for one school (Holy Cross) and I think half of the class came from private schools so I guess it's not surprising that they can afford to pay for private college, too. |
Anonymous
Those at Harvard who don't get Need based scholarships are typically making more than $200-250K/year. So yes, if you make more than $250K, it is not unreasonable to assume that you could/should have saved for college. THe T50 schools/ones that cost $75-90K+/year typically are filled with kids whose parents make $200K+, at least 40-50% of the student families fall into that at most. It's been that way for decades. And yes, if you make $250K+, it is reasonable to assume you can save for college. You may not choose to save for $90K costs, but certainly for in-state ($30K now). |
Anonymous
Because most people don't actually budget. And if they do, they value vacations, eating out, new cars, etc more than saving $400-500/month for college. But I agree, most should be able to budget and plan and not at the detriment of retirement either. |
Anonymous
But it doesn't. Only "elite"/T25-50 schools cost that. Most state schools are approximately $25-30K, all in. Here's how you can "afford college": Kid works summers, breaks and a PT/10 hours per week job while in college. Kid earns $12K+/year doing that. Kid takes the federal loans (~$5.5K/year) and you max out with only $27K in student loans. $30K-$17.5K leaves $12.5K (or less) for the parent to help with each year. So you as a parent need to come up with ~$1K/month extra. I bet $200 of that will come from your lower food budget or the dropping of paid activities while kid was in HS. So now it's $800/month for you to figure out. Or if you saved even $100/month since the kid got out of daycare and into K, you would have the $48K you need. Or you attend a slightly lower ranked state school that gives you merit awards to reduce the price (or private schools that give great merit). But it isn't $90K/year. It's your kid working (as kids should be doing over summers and breaks) and you contributing $12-15K/ year. |
Anonymous
So you do what the vast majority of kids do---you attend a State University that is affordable or you find a private school (a tier or two down from your stats) that gives excellent merit and makes it cheaper or similar to State U. Nobody is requiring you to spend 90K/year. It's not very smart to do that, unless you can afford it. |
Anonymous
Yes I was referring to the top private schools that are the focus of these threads. Ivy League +, well endowed SLACS etc that promote their need blind policies. The truth is - these schools cannot operate unless some percentage of the class is paying full freight. Princeton is an exception but usually it’s half or more. So the only way they can sustain need blind at the individual applicant level is to make sure in aggregate they are enrolling enough affluent kids. They know this through statistical experience. Which zip codes don’t generally need aid. Which schools don’t generally need aid. Which sports. Need aware schools don’t have enough money to manage it. So they favor full pay applicants, sometimes heavily, using financial aid as a means of serving “institutional priorities” or attracting very strong students. The rejections at need aware schools no doubt are heavily skewed toward kids who need money. |
Anonymous
Well the schools wont' agree, but look at the world around you. Look at your job and the companies you have worked for. You are most likely surrounded by people (in your same position, and in the management levels above you, possibly even into the C suites) that attended State University and schools ranked lower than 100. Good chance you have never heard of some of the schools they people attend. Yet they are paid the same as you, might even be your manager or a few levels up. What you accomplish in life is due to what you put into it, not where you attend college. Once you realize that you will be happier and likely "wealthier" |