schools w/ no merit aid

[Anonymous]

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.

This whole thread is weird, and I gave up in the middle after people just kept yelling at this person for being rightly upset that college costs have gotten so insane. I went to NYU in 1993, which I think was literally the most expensive college in the country. It was about 25,000 a year. My dad was a doctor. Not a specialist. We were upper middle class, and my parents had saved money. I later transferred and that savings had enough money to support me through a graduate degree.

I did the math, and the cost of NYU has gone wayyyyy up proportionally from what it used to be--- and that's all colleges. Yes. If you were paying attention you knew it. We have a 529 plan and my parents did the in state tuition plan for our kid (which now I sort of regret), but it's still a big difference when you're theoretically considering this stuff to being like--wow---we could end up spending 360,000 for one kid's undergraduate education? We are probably top 2% of household wealth, and WE don't want to pay that. Not unless our kid is getting into an Ivy, which she isn't.

That is why merit aid exists. It's not a "subsidy." It's because colleges realize that even wealthy families understand that the price is NOT worth it--not when you consider that your kid might go on to some kind of graduate program.

Thank you for the merit aid website. I was actually looking for a list JUST like that after reading his book.

OP, I get it. I think most of my friends get it. They either stick to the top publics if their kids can get in, go for lower ranking schools with merit, and few bite the bullet and pay full price.

You make 400K+?

where does it state they make "400k+"? It just says college could cost 360K for one kid.

for example, We were making 300K combined when our first was born. One of us became SAHP, so income went to 200K. We started saving for education immediately. So even with the cut in income, we were able to save $10-12k/year. By time oldest was 12,we had enough saved for them at "top tier university". Did same thing for next kid as well. Now Our income increased to ~300K when oldest was 4. So at that point we upped the amount saved per year--that's how we achieved our savings by time they were 12. But we choose to redirect ~$15-30K/year per kid to savings until we had enough saved. We made the choice to save, as we knew they would NOT get any financial aide and didn't want them restricted to colleges that would give enough merit. We knew it would be much easier to save for college than attempt to figure out how to cash flow $75-80K/year.

Then we let it grown, adjusted/added if needed and made sure to pull it out to "safer" investments as we approached college. We live in the DC area, so HCOL and even spent 4 years in San Fran, which makes DC look LCOL. But when we got married, we chose to buy a house that could be afforded on one income if needed (at about 2.5x the highest income at that point). We didn't purchase a home worth double that despite the fact we could have easily done that. Instead we learned to live on a bit less in anticipation of wanting a SAHP (despite the fact I made over 6 figures when I took leave and we could have easily afforded a nanny). That choice (among others) allowed us to save for college once kids came along. But mainly it was making the choice to forgo other things in life in order to save.

SO while not everyone can do that (if you are truly living paycheck to paycheck, it's hard to save), I'd argue that most people making $200K+ (even in DCUM area) can probably find a way to save enough for a kid to have $50-60K/year and if you are earning that much can afford to take parent loans/cashflow the difference, if attending an 80K school is that important to you.

We are in our "starter home", driving 12 year old cars. Haven't been on a real vacation in almost 4 years. I had a serious medical issue, as did my DH, which tallied about $400K in medical bills. 4 sets of elderly parents that need help from time to time. Then there are taxes, insurance, and all the little fees and costs that eat way at the salary. We aren't "paycheck to paycheck." But we cannot save what you think we can. And it is absurd to think you speak for what everyone else "should be able to do." Screw you.

I never said "everyone else should be able to do so". I get that some have other financial issues. I grew up in a LMC family---I ate free lunch for several years at school when my parents were laid off and job searching, I stood in line for free food from local food banks back in the 70s/80s. So I get that. However, I was not eligible for full FA when attending college. So I had to choose what was AFFORDABLE for my family. I did not demand that I go to Harvard or Yale without paying the price. I choose a school that we could afford without me going into major debt (I took the student loans each year, my parents could not afford to take parent loans or help much at all). So I looked for merit and went that route. Got into more elite schools (3 of them) but still couldn't' afford it, so I didn't attend.

But I still will hold that many many could make changes and afford more but they CHOOSE not to. 50%+ of people I know drive new cars every 4-5 years, get Starbucks (or the equivalent) multiple times per day for themselves and all 3 kids, eat out constantly, go on vacation all the time, etc. Yet as our kids hit College age, many complain they can't afford more than in-state because they have not saved. For them, it was truly a choice, and they choose to live a fancy life when they could have saved and still had a better life than 80% of people.


Basically, everyone can find somewhere that's affordable---if 80K/year isn't for you, then search for merit elsewhere.
There are still many many many great options for college---going into debt is silly for college

No one is "demanding" anything. And I agree with the posters who say that people should not -have- to give those options up. There is a big benefit to going to some of those schools and you know it. But, it's somehow acceptable to dump on UMC people who aren't wealthy in the sense most of you think they are. After working their butts off (I also come from poor beginnings) and then they're punished for it.

The rest of your post is just conjecture and silly. Eating out and Starbucks is not a "fancy life."

I'm not "demanding" your car I just don't think I should -have- to give up the option of taking off in it. There is a big benefit to me having your car and we all know it. But somehow it's acceptable to dump on people without a car just because I can't afford to buy it from you.

Except you can buy a car that will drive from A to B, you just want a fancier brand name. And no, I don’t think the brand name matters.

[Anonymous]

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.

This whole thread is weird, and I gave up in the middle after people just kept yelling at this person for being rightly upset that college costs have gotten so insane. I went to NYU in 1993, which I think was literally the most expensive college in the country. It was about 25,000 a year. My dad was a doctor. Not a specialist. We were upper middle class, and my parents had saved money. I later transferred and that savings had enough money to support me through a graduate degree.

I did the math, and the cost of NYU has gone wayyyyy up proportionally from what it used to be--- and that's all colleges. Yes. If you were paying attention you knew it. We have a 529 plan and my parents did the in state tuition plan for our kid (which now I sort of regret), but it's still a big difference when you're theoretically considering this stuff to being like--wow---we could end up spending 360,000 for one kid's undergraduate education? We are probably top 2% of household wealth, and WE don't want to pay that. Not unless our kid is getting into an Ivy, which she isn't.

That is why merit aid exists. It's not a "subsidy." It's because colleges realize that even wealthy families understand that the price is NOT worth it--not when you consider that your kid might go on to some kind of graduate program.

Thank you for the merit aid website. I was actually looking for a list JUST like that after reading his book.

OP, I get it. I think most of my friends get it. They either stick to the top publics if their kids can get in, go for lower ranking schools with merit, and few bite the bullet and pay full price.

You make 400K+?

where does it state they make "400k+"? It just says college could cost 360K for one kid.

for example, We were making 300K combined when our first was born. One of us became SAHP, so income went to 200K. We started saving for education immediately. So even with the cut in income, we were able to save $10-12k/year. By time oldest was 12,we had enough saved for them at "top tier university". Did same thing for next kid as well. Now Our income increased to ~300K when oldest was 4. So at that point we upped the amount saved per year--that's how we achieved our savings by time they were 12. But we choose to redirect ~$15-30K/year per kid to savings until we had enough saved. We made the choice to save, as we knew they would NOT get any financial aide and didn't want them restricted to colleges that would give enough merit. We knew it would be much easier to save for college than attempt to figure out how to cash flow $75-80K/year.

Then we let it grown, adjusted/added if needed and made sure to pull it out to "safer" investments as we approached college. We live in the DC area, so HCOL and even spent 4 years in San Fran, which makes DC look LCOL. But when we got married, we chose to buy a house that could be afforded on one income if needed (at about 2.5x the highest income at that point). We didn't purchase a home worth double that despite the fact we could have easily done that. Instead we learned to live on a bit less in anticipation of wanting a SAHP (despite the fact I made over 6 figures when I took leave and we could have easily afforded a nanny). That choice (among others) allowed us to save for college once kids came along. But mainly it was making the choice to forgo other things in life in order to save.

SO while not everyone can do that (if you are truly living paycheck to paycheck, it's hard to save), I'd argue that most people making $200K+ (even in DCUM area) can probably find a way to save enough for a kid to have $50-60K/year and if you are earning that much can afford to take parent loans/cashflow the difference, if attending an 80K school is that important to you.

We are in our "starter home", driving 12 year old cars. Haven't been on a real vacation in almost 4 years. I had a serious medical issue, as did my DH, which tallied about $400K in medical bills. 4 sets of elderly parents that need help from time to time. Then there are taxes, insurance, and all the little fees and costs that eat way at the salary. We aren't "paycheck to paycheck." But we cannot save what you think we can. And it is absurd to think you speak for what everyone else "should be able to do." Screw you.

I never said "everyone else should be able to do so". I get that some have other financial issues. I grew up in a LMC family---I ate free lunch for several years at school when my parents were laid off and job searching, I stood in line for free food from local food banks back in the 70s/80s. So I get that. However, I was not eligible for full FA when attending college. So I had to choose what was AFFORDABLE for my family. I did not demand that I go to Harvard or Yale without paying the price. I choose a school that we could afford without me going into major debt (I took the student loans each year, my parents could not afford to take parent loans or help much at all). So I looked for merit and went that route. Got into more elite schools (3 of them) but still couldn't' afford it, so I didn't attend.

But I still will hold that many many could make changes and afford more but they CHOOSE not to. 50%+ of people I know drive new cars every 4-5 years, get Starbucks (or the equivalent) multiple times per day for themselves and all 3 kids, eat out constantly, go on vacation all the time, etc. Yet as our kids hit College age, many complain they can't afford more than in-state because they have not saved. For them, it was truly a choice, and they choose to live a fancy life when they could have saved and still had a better life than 80% of people.


Basically, everyone can find somewhere that's affordable---if 80K/year isn't for you, then search for merit elsewhere.
There are still many many many great options for college---going into debt is silly for college

No one is "demanding" anything. And I agree with the posters who say that people should not -have- to give those options up. There is a big benefit to going to some of those schools and you know it. But, it's somehow acceptable to dump on UMC people who aren't wealthy in the sense most of you think they are. After working their butts off (I also come from poor beginnings) and then they're punished for it.

The rest of your post is just conjecture and silly. Eating out and Starbucks is not a "fancy life."

I'm not "demanding" your car I just don't think I should -have- to give up the option of taking off in it. There is a big benefit to me having your car and we all know it. But somehow it's acceptable to dump on people without a car just because I can't afford to buy it from you.

Except you can buy a car that will drive from A to B, you just want a fancier brand name. And no, I don’t think the brand name matters.

Look, I think brand name matters a lot. It’s true that after your first job it’s generally your experience and not your school that matters, but to get experience you need to get good early jobs and that can be hard or even impossible without the right credentials. So I’m not going to deny that PPs have a point there.

But that’s just life. There are lots of things we all guess would probably advantage our kids but can’t or won’t pay for. It’s nothing new, unique, or special about this generation. I didn’t apply to top schools because I knew my parents hadn’t saved for college. That was true of literally all my classmates at my small midwestern high school. A kid who graduated with an unweighted 4.0 and a 35 ACT went to Big State U. That’s always been normal.

[Anonymous]

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.

This whole thread is weird, and I gave up in the middle after people just kept yelling at this person for being rightly upset that college costs have gotten so insane. I went to NYU in 1993, which I think was literally the most expensive college in the country. It was about 25,000 a year. My dad was a doctor. Not a specialist. We were upper middle class, and my parents had saved money. I later transferred and that savings had enough money to support me through a graduate degree.

I did the math, and the cost of NYU has gone wayyyyy up proportionally from what it used to be--- and that's all colleges. Yes. If you were paying attention you knew it. We have a 529 plan and my parents did the in state tuition plan for our kid (which now I sort of regret), but it's still a big difference when you're theoretically considering this stuff to being like--wow---we could end up spending 360,000 for one kid's undergraduate education? We are probably top 2% of household wealth, and WE don't want to pay that. Not unless our kid is getting into an Ivy, which she isn't.

That is why merit aid exists. It's not a "subsidy." It's because colleges realize that even wealthy families understand that the price is NOT worth it--not when you consider that your kid might go on to some kind of graduate program.

Thank you for the merit aid website. I was actually looking for a list JUST like that after reading his book.

OP, I get it. I think most of my friends get it. They either stick to the top publics if their kids can get in, go for lower ranking schools with merit, and few bite the bullet and pay full price.

You make 400K+?

where does it state they make "400k+"? It just says college could cost 360K for one kid.

for example, We were making 300K combined when our first was born. One of us became SAHP, so income went to 200K. We started saving for education immediately. So even with the cut in income, we were able to save $10-12k/year. By time oldest was 12,we had enough saved for them at "top tier university". Did same thing for next kid as well. Now Our income increased to ~300K when oldest was 4. So at that point we upped the amount saved per year--that's how we achieved our savings by time they were 12. But we choose to redirect ~$15-30K/year per kid to savings until we had enough saved. We made the choice to save, as we knew they would NOT get any financial aide and didn't want them restricted to colleges that would give enough merit. We knew it would be much easier to save for college than attempt to figure out how to cash flow $75-80K/year.

Then we let it grown, adjusted/added if needed and made sure to pull it out to "safer" investments as we approached college. We live in the DC area, so HCOL and even spent 4 years in San Fran, which makes DC look LCOL. But when we got married, we chose to buy a house that could be afforded on one income if needed (at about 2.5x the highest income at that point). We didn't purchase a home worth double that despite the fact we could have easily done that. Instead we learned to live on a bit less in anticipation of wanting a SAHP (despite the fact I made over 6 figures when I took leave and we could have easily afforded a nanny). That choice (among others) allowed us to save for college once kids came along. But mainly it was making the choice to forgo other things in life in order to save.

SO while not everyone can do that (if you are truly living paycheck to paycheck, it's hard to save), I'd argue that most people making $200K+ (even in DCUM area) can probably find a way to save enough for a kid to have $50-60K/year and if you are earning that much can afford to take parent loans/cashflow the difference, if attending an 80K school is that important to you.

We are in our "starter home", driving 12 year old cars. Haven't been on a real vacation in almost 4 years. I had a serious medical issue, as did my DH, which tallied about $400K in medical bills. 4 sets of elderly parents that need help from time to time. Then there are taxes, insurance, and all the little fees and costs that eat way at the salary. We aren't "paycheck to paycheck." But we cannot save what you think we can. And it is absurd to think you speak for what everyone else "should be able to do." Screw you.

4 sets of elderly parents? Lol

LOL? Ever hear of divorce? Yes, 4 sets. Two in their MID 80s. Two sets in their 70s. Not sure why you think that is laughable but it's rude.

Divorce? Are you including your ex’s parents? 4 sets means 8 parents… explain please

NP, and I am going to give you a hint: There are multiple generations being discussed, so the PP you're quoting is not necessarily divorced, but . . . Think hard: Who could be divorced and remarried?

[Anonymous]

I was a second generation college student. My parents both grew up in working class households. They were dismayed to learn that I didn't qualify for work study or financial aid. In their heads, they were still that working class kid working as a janitor, RA, at the library on financial aid. Meanwhile, they are a managing partner at a law firm and a head of an upper school. There was no way we were receiving anything. My parents where outraged when the FAFSA came back in the late 90s saying not only could they afford my school, but MORE. My dad could not understand how my sister and I couldn't get any work study jobs and didn't help out with college. So I had a bunch of creepy jobs while attending the Big State U. Meanwhile, my DH went to a private school fully paid by a merit scholarship while his parents paid for living expenses, bought him a new car, etc. I was working at a bar, as an academic tutor, as a waitress, at a collection agency, at the university college all while going to class full-time. It was HELL.

[Anonymous]

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.

This whole thread is weird, and I gave up in the middle after people just kept yelling at this person for being rightly upset that college costs have gotten so insane. I went to NYU in 1993, which I think was literally the most expensive college in the country. It was about 25,000 a year. My dad was a doctor. Not a specialist. We were upper middle class, and my parents had saved money. I later transferred and that savings had enough money to support me through a graduate degree.

I did the math, and the cost of NYU has gone wayyyyy up proportionally from what it used to be--- and that's all colleges. Yes. If you were paying attention you knew it. We have a 529 plan and my parents did the in state tuition plan for our kid (which now I sort of regret), but it's still a big difference when you're theoretically considering this stuff to being like--wow---we could end up spending 360,000 for one kid's undergraduate education? We are probably top 2% of household wealth, and WE don't want to pay that. Not unless our kid is getting into an Ivy, which she isn't.

That is why merit aid exists. It's not a "subsidy." It's because colleges realize that even wealthy families understand that the price is NOT worth it--not when you consider that your kid might go on to some kind of graduate program.

Thank you for the merit aid website. I was actually looking for a list JUST like that after reading his book.

OP, I get it. I think most of my friends get it. They either stick to the top publics if their kids can get in, go for lower ranking schools with merit, and few bite the bullet and pay full price.

You make 400K+?

where does it state they make "400k+"? It just says college could cost 360K for one kid.

for example, We were making 300K combined when our first was born. One of us became SAHP, so income went to 200K. We started saving for education immediately. So even with the cut in income, we were able to save $10-12k/year. By time oldest was 12,we had enough saved for them at "top tier university". Did same thing for next kid as well. Now Our income increased to ~300K when oldest was 4. So at that point we upped the amount saved per year--that's how we achieved our savings by time they were 12. But we choose to redirect ~$15-30K/year per kid to savings until we had enough saved. We made the choice to save, as we knew they would NOT get any financial aide and didn't want them restricted to colleges that would give enough merit. We knew it would be much easier to save for college than attempt to figure out how to cash flow $75-80K/year.

Then we let it grown, adjusted/added if needed and made sure to pull it out to "safer" investments as we approached college. We live in the DC area, so HCOL and even spent 4 years in San Fran, which makes DC look LCOL. But when we got married, we chose to buy a house that could be afforded on one income if needed (at about 2.5x the highest income at that point). We didn't purchase a home worth double that despite the fact we could have easily done that. Instead we learned to live on a bit less in anticipation of wanting a SAHP (despite the fact I made over 6 figures when I took leave and we could have easily afforded a nanny). That choice (among others) allowed us to save for college once kids came along. But mainly it was making the choice to forgo other things in life in order to save.

SO while not everyone can do that (if you are truly living paycheck to paycheck, it's hard to save), I'd argue that most people making $200K+ (even in DCUM area) can probably find a way to save enough for a kid to have $50-60K/year and if you are earning that much can afford to take parent loans/cashflow the difference, if attending an 80K school is that important to you.

We are in our "starter home", driving 12 year old cars. Haven't been on a real vacation in almost 4 years. I had a serious medical issue, as did my DH, which tallied about $400K in medical bills. 4 sets of elderly parents that need help from time to time. Then there are taxes, insurance, and all the little fees and costs that eat way at the salary. We aren't "paycheck to paycheck." But we cannot save what you think we can. And it is absurd to think you speak for what everyone else "should be able to do." Screw you.

I never said "everyone else should be able to do so". I get that some have other financial issues. I grew up in a LMC family---I ate free lunch for several years at school when my parents were laid off and job searching, I stood in line for free food from local food banks back in the 70s/80s. So I get that. However, I was not eligible for full FA when attending college. So I had to choose what was AFFORDABLE for my family. I did not demand that I go to Harvard or Yale without paying the price. I choose a school that we could afford without me going into major debt (I took the student loans each year, my parents could not afford to take parent loans or help much at all). So I looked for merit and went that route. Got into more elite schools (3 of them) but still couldn't' afford it, so I didn't attend.

But I still will hold that many many could make changes and afford more but they CHOOSE not to. 50%+ of people I know drive new cars every 4-5 years, get Starbucks (or the equivalent) multiple times per day for themselves and all 3 kids, eat out constantly, go on vacation all the time, etc. Yet as our kids hit College age, many complain they can't afford more than in-state because they have not saved. For them, it was truly a choice, and they choose to live a fancy life when they could have saved and still had a better life than 80% of people.


Basically, everyone can find somewhere that's affordable---if 80K/year isn't for you, then search for merit elsewhere.
There are still many many many great options for college---going into debt is silly for college

No one is "demanding" anything. And I agree with the posters who say that people should not -have- to give those options up. There is a big benefit to going to some of those schools and you know it. But, it's somehow acceptable to dump on UMC people who aren't wealthy in the sense most of you think they are. After working their butts off (I also come from poor beginnings) and then they're punished for it.

The rest of your post is just conjecture and silly. Eating out and Starbucks is not a "fancy life."

You definitely are demanding something.

+1

"should not have to give those options up"? That's demanding something---there are so many things in life that people don't have access to, because of where they live, family situations, income, etc....
However, once again, nobody is restricting you going to a good college. There are still many ways to do that. You just might not be able to afford the T20/T25 schools.

Eating out and Starbucks may not be a "fancy life" but it's a way to suck $800-1000 out of a budget each month for many families. It's all about choices---if I choose to spend that, then I wouldn't complain there are other things I can't afford.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was a second generation college student. My parents both grew up in working class households. They were dismayed to learn that I didn't qualify for work study or financial aid. In their heads, they were still that working class kid working as a janitor, RA, at the library on financial aid. Meanwhile, they are a managing partner at a law firm and a head of an upper school. There was no way we were receiving anything. My parents where outraged when the FAFSA came back in the late 90s saying not only could they afford my school, but MORE. My dad could not understand how my sister and I couldn't get any work study jobs and didn't help out with college. So I had a bunch of creepy jobs while attending the Big State U. Meanwhile, my DH went to a private school fully paid by a merit scholarship while his parents paid for living expenses, bought him a new car, etc. I was working at a bar, as an academic tutor, as a waitress, at a collection agency, at the university college all while going to class full-time. It was HELL.

I very much relate to this. I ended up in a lot of unsafe situations including couch surfing for a semester.

Other than in-state schools I applied to one fancy private school on hopes I would get merit aid. My parents had a call with a financial aid officer at that school that left them absolutely furious. I guess she called out their failure to save and also their ability to cash flow tuition. It apparently didn’t sink in though.

[Anonymous]

From the aggressive responses it looks like OP is back.

The responses have moved from paying for Wellesley would cost them their “wiggle room” to complaints about having had to pay for hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical care plus eldercare for a small village.

Zero sympathy for OP’s plight but I will be fascinated to learn what additional financially catastrophic event that happened to her we will learn about next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was a second generation college student. My parents both grew up in working class households. They were dismayed to learn that I didn't qualify for work study or financial aid. In their heads, they were still that working class kid working as a janitor, RA, at the library on financial aid. Meanwhile, they are a managing partner at a law firm and a head of an upper school. There was no way we were receiving anything. My parents where outraged when the FAFSA came back in the late 90s saying not only could they afford my school, but MORE. My dad could not understand how my sister and I couldn't get any work study jobs and didn't help out with college. So I had a bunch of creepy jobs while attending the Big State U. Meanwhile, my DH went to a private school fully paid by a merit scholarship while his parents paid for living expenses, bought him a new car, etc. I was working at a bar, as an academic tutor, as a waitress, at a collection agency, at the university college all while going to class full-time. It was HELL.

That sucks, sorry. I went through something similar to pay for college back in the day. I cannot imagine not helping out my kids if I can afford it, even if it's just in-state tuition. My relationship with my parents has also suffered.

[Anonymous]

OMG. Your husband really needs to spread the word that parents shouldn't make the same mistake his mom did. I was a low-income first-gen kid from Texas in the 1980s and Stanford, Harvard, Yale, and all the other top schools that admitted me were much more affordable than UT Austin. Maybe UTEP would have been about the same price. But who goes there for the same price as those top schools?! Now, if the single mother you're talking about made over $100K back then, that's a whole different thing. But I'm guessing that by describing her that way you're trying to make the point that money was tight.

And of course some kids from schools like UTEP manage to still find their way to top law schools. But the odds are very much against you at a school like UTEP relative to the elite schools.

"My husband attended university of Chicago Law and was accepted at Harvard, Standford and Georgetow n and went to UTEP undergrad. He had a single mom and that was the most she could afford. I would not spemd over $300k for a 4 year degree to raise my kid’ s chances to go to a top law school. That is silly."

[Anonymous]

As a follow-up, how is the DC processing this? Is she getting excited about other schools that are more feasible for her family where she can still pursue her athletic and academic interests? Kids are pretty "resilient" (not that I think this is some earth-shattering revelation or great trauma, but what I mean is that kids are pretty good at adjusting their expectations and moving on and staying positive). Good luck to her!

[Anonymous]

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.

This whole thread is weird, and I gave up in the middle after people just kept yelling at this person for being rightly upset that college costs have gotten so insane. I went to NYU in 1993, which I think was literally the most expensive college in the country. It was about 25,000 a year. My dad was a doctor. Not a specialist. We were upper middle class, and my parents had saved money. I later transferred and that savings had enough money to support me through a graduate degree.

I did the math, and the cost of NYU has gone wayyyyy up proportionally from what it used to be--- and that's all colleges. Yes. If you were paying attention you knew it. We have a 529 plan and my parents did the in state tuition plan for our kid (which now I sort of regret), but it's still a big difference when you're theoretically considering this stuff to being like--wow---we could end up spending 360,000 for one kid's undergraduate education? We are probably top 2% of household wealth, and WE don't want to pay that. Not unless our kid is getting into an Ivy, which she isn't.

That is why merit aid exists. It's not a "subsidy." It's because colleges realize that even wealthy families understand that the price is NOT worth it--not when you consider that your kid might go on to some kind of graduate program.

Thank you for the merit aid website. I was actually looking for a list JUST like that after reading his book.

OP, I get it. I think most of my friends get it. They either stick to the top publics if their kids can get in, go for lower ranking schools with merit, and few bite the bullet and pay full price.

You make 400K+?

where does it state they make "400k+"? It just says college could cost 360K for one kid.

for example, We were making 300K combined when our first was born. One of us became SAHP, so income went to 200K. We started saving for education immediately. So even with the cut in income, we were able to save $10-12k/year. By time oldest was 12,we had enough saved for them at "top tier university". Did same thing for next kid as well. Now Our income increased to ~300K when oldest was 4. So at that point we upped the amount saved per year--that's how we achieved our savings by time they were 12. But we choose to redirect ~$15-30K/year per kid to savings until we had enough saved. We made the choice to save, as we knew they would NOT get any financial aide and didn't want them restricted to colleges that would give enough merit. We knew it would be much easier to save for college than attempt to figure out how to cash flow $75-80K/year.

Then we let it grown, adjusted/added if needed and made sure to pull it out to "safer" investments as we approached college. We live in the DC area, so HCOL and even spent 4 years in San Fran, which makes DC look LCOL. But when we got married, we chose to buy a house that could be afforded on one income if needed (at about 2.5x the highest income at that point). We didn't purchase a home worth double that despite the fact we could have easily done that. Instead we learned to live on a bit less in anticipation of wanting a SAHP (despite the fact I made over 6 figures when I took leave and we could have easily afforded a nanny). That choice (among others) allowed us to save for college once kids came along. But mainly it was making the choice to forgo other things in life in order to save.

SO while not everyone can do that (if you are truly living paycheck to paycheck, it's hard to save), I'd argue that most people making $200K+ (even in DCUM area) can probably find a way to save enough for a kid to have $50-60K/year and if you are earning that much can afford to take parent loans/cashflow the difference, if attending an 80K school is that important to you.

We are in our "starter home", driving 12 year old cars. Haven't been on a real vacation in almost 4 years. I had a serious medical issue, as did my DH, which tallied about $400K in medical bills. 4 sets of elderly parents that need help from time to time. Then there are taxes, insurance, and all the little fees and costs that eat way at the salary. We aren't "paycheck to paycheck." But we cannot save what you think we can. And it is absurd to think you speak for what everyone else "should be able to do." Screw you.

I never said "everyone else should be able to do so". I get that some have other financial issues. I grew up in a LMC family---I ate free lunch for several years at school when my parents were laid off and job searching, I stood in line for free food from local food banks back in the 70s/80s. So I get that. However, I was not eligible for full FA when attending college. So I had to choose what was AFFORDABLE for my family. I did not demand that I go to Harvard or Yale without paying the price. I choose a school that we could afford without me going into major debt (I took the student loans each year, my parents could not afford to take parent loans or help much at all). So I looked for merit and went that route. Got into more elite schools (3 of them) but still couldn't' afford it, so I didn't attend.

But I still will hold that many many could make changes and afford more but they CHOOSE not to. 50%+ of people I know drive new cars every 4-5 years, get Starbucks (or the equivalent) multiple times per day for themselves and all 3 kids, eat out constantly, go on vacation all the time, etc. Yet as our kids hit College age, many complain they can't afford more than in-state because they have not saved. For them, it was truly a choice, and they choose to live a fancy life when they could have saved and still had a better life than 80% of people.


Basically, everyone can find somewhere that's affordable---if 80K/year isn't for you, then search for merit elsewhere.
There are still many many many great options for college---going into debt is silly for college

No one is "demanding" anything. And I agree with the posters who say that people should not -have- to give those options up. There is a big benefit to going to some of those schools and you know it. But, it's somehow acceptable to dump on UMC people who aren't wealthy in the sense most of you think they are. After working their butts off (I also come from poor beginnings) and then they're punished for it.

The rest of your post is just conjecture and silly. Eating out and Starbucks is not a "fancy life."

I'm not "demanding" your car I just don't think I should -have- to give up the option of taking off in it. There is a big benefit to me having your car and we all know it. But somehow it's acceptable to dump on people without a car just because I can't afford to buy it from you.

Except you can buy a car that will drive from A to B, you just want a fancier brand name. And no, I don’t think the brand name matters.

Look, I think brand name matters a lot. It’s true that after your first job it’s generally your experience and not your school that matters, but to get experience you need to get good early jobs and that can be hard or even impossible without the right credentials. So I’m not going to deny that PPs have a point there.

But that’s just life. There are lots of things we all guess would probably advantage our kids but can’t or won’t pay for. It’s nothing new, unique, or special about this generation. I didn’t apply to top schools because I knew my parents hadn’t saved for college. That was true of literally all my classmates at my small midwestern high school. A kid who graduated with an unweighted 4.0 and a 35 ACT went to Big State U. That’s always been normal.

The attitude that brand name matters a lot will set you and your kid up for disappointment.
98% of people do NOT attend undergrad at an elite school, yet majority go on to life fulfilling lives and contribute to society and are happy. Just because you are smart does not entitle you to a brand name/elite university. In fact, I'd argue if you are so smart, you might recognize that fact and realize that what you do at college matters so much more than where you go. Especially in today's world, where you can job search online and not just at what companies come to your career center. The world is your oyster, you just have to do something with it---and that something does not involve complaining that you deserve better

[Anonymous]

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.

This whole thread is weird, and I gave up in the middle after people just kept yelling at this person for being rightly upset that college costs have gotten so insane. I went to NYU in 1993, which I think was literally the most expensive college in the country. It was about 25,000 a year. My dad was a doctor. Not a specialist. We were upper middle class, and my parents had saved money. I later transferred and that savings had enough money to support me through a graduate degree.

I did the math, and the cost of NYU has gone wayyyyy up proportionally from what it used to be--- and that's all colleges. Yes. If you were paying attention you knew it. We have a 529 plan and my parents did the in state tuition plan for our kid (which now I sort of regret), but it's still a big difference when you're theoretically considering this stuff to being like--wow---we could end up spending 360,000 for one kid's undergraduate education? We are probably top 2% of household wealth, and WE don't want to pay that. Not unless our kid is getting into an Ivy, which she isn't.

That is why merit aid exists. It's not a "subsidy." It's because colleges realize that even wealthy families understand that the price is NOT worth it--not when you consider that your kid might go on to some kind of graduate program.

Thank you for the merit aid website. I was actually looking for a list JUST like that after reading his book.

OP, I get it. I think most of my friends get it. They either stick to the top publics if their kids can get in, go for lower ranking schools with merit, and few bite the bullet and pay full price.

You make 400K+?

where does it state they make "400k+"? It just says college could cost 360K for one kid.

for example, We were making 300K combined when our first was born. One of us became SAHP, so income went to 200K. We started saving for education immediately. So even with the cut in income, we were able to save $10-12k/year. By time oldest was 12,we had enough saved for them at "top tier university". Did same thing for next kid as well. Now Our income increased to ~300K when oldest was 4. So at that point we upped the amount saved per year--that's how we achieved our savings by time they were 12. But we choose to redirect ~$15-30K/year per kid to savings until we had enough saved. We made the choice to save, as we knew they would NOT get any financial aide and didn't want them restricted to colleges that would give enough merit. We knew it would be much easier to save for college than attempt to figure out how to cash flow $75-80K/year.

Then we let it grown, adjusted/added if needed and made sure to pull it out to "safer" investments as we approached college. We live in the DC area, so HCOL and even spent 4 years in San Fran, which makes DC look LCOL. But when we got married, we chose to buy a house that could be afforded on one income if needed (at about 2.5x the highest income at that point). We didn't purchase a home worth double that despite the fact we could have easily done that. Instead we learned to live on a bit less in anticipation of wanting a SAHP (despite the fact I made over 6 figures when I took leave and we could have easily afforded a nanny). That choice (among others) allowed us to save for college once kids came along. But mainly it was making the choice to forgo other things in life in order to save.

SO while not everyone can do that (if you are truly living paycheck to paycheck, it's hard to save), I'd argue that most people making $200K+ (even in DCUM area) can probably find a way to save enough for a kid to have $50-60K/year and if you are earning that much can afford to take parent loans/cashflow the difference, if attending an 80K school is that important to you.

We are in our "starter home", driving 12 year old cars. Haven't been on a real vacation in almost 4 years. I had a serious medical issue, as did my DH, which tallied about $400K in medical bills. 4 sets of elderly parents that need help from time to time. Then there are taxes, insurance, and all the little fees and costs that eat way at the salary. We aren't "paycheck to paycheck." But we cannot save what you think we can. And it is absurd to think you speak for what everyone else "should be able to do." Screw you.

I never said "everyone else should be able to do so". I get that some have other financial issues. I grew up in a LMC family---I ate free lunch for several years at school when my parents were laid off and job searching, I stood in line for free food from local food banks back in the 70s/80s. So I get that. However, I was not eligible for full FA when attending college. So I had to choose what was AFFORDABLE for my family. I did not demand that I go to Harvard or Yale without paying the price. I choose a school that we could afford without me going into major debt (I took the student loans each year, my parents could not afford to take parent loans or help much at all). So I looked for merit and went that route. Got into more elite schools (3 of them) but still couldn't' afford it, so I didn't attend.

But I still will hold that many many could make changes and afford more but they CHOOSE not to. 50%+ of people I know drive new cars every 4-5 years, get Starbucks (or the equivalent) multiple times per day for themselves and all 3 kids, eat out constantly, go on vacation all the time, etc. Yet as our kids hit College age, many complain they can't afford more than in-state because they have not saved. For them, it was truly a choice, and they choose to live a fancy life when they could have saved and still had a better life than 80% of people.


Basically, everyone can find somewhere that's affordable---if 80K/year isn't for you, then search for merit elsewhere.
There are still many many many great options for college---going into debt is silly for college

No one is "demanding" anything. And I agree with the posters who say that people should not -have- to give those options up. There is a big benefit to going to some of those schools and you know it. But, it's somehow acceptable to dump on UMC people who aren't wealthy in the sense most of you think they are. After working their butts off (I also come from poor beginnings) and then they're punished for it.

The rest of your post is just conjecture and silly. Eating out and Starbucks is not a "fancy life."

I'm not "demanding" your car I just don't think I should -have- to give up the option of taking off in it. There is a big benefit to me having your car and we all know it. But somehow it's acceptable to dump on people without a car just because I can't afford to buy it from you.

Except you can buy a car that will drive from A to B, you just want a fancier brand name. And no, I don’t think the brand name matters.

Look, I think brand name matters a lot. It’s true that after your first job it’s generally your experience and not your school that matters, but to get experience you need to get good early jobs and that can be hard or even impossible without the right credentials. So I’m not going to deny that PPs have a point there.

But that’s just life. There are lots of things we all guess would probably advantage our kids but can’t or won’t pay for. It’s nothing new, unique, or special about this generation. I didn’t apply to top schools because I knew my parents hadn’t saved for college. That was true of literally all my classmates at my small midwestern high school. A kid who graduated with an unweighted 4.0 and a 35 ACT went to Big State U. That’s always been normal.

The attitude that brand name matters a lot will set you and your kid up for disappointment.
98% of people do NOT attend undergrad at an elite school, yet majority go on to life fulfilling lives and contribute to society and are happy. Just because you are smart does not entitle you to a brand name/elite university. In fact, I'd argue if you are so smart, you might recognize that fact and realize that what you do at college matters so much more than where you go. Especially in today's world, where you can job search online and not just at what companies come to your career center. The world is your oyster, you just have to do something with it---and that something does not involve complaining that you deserve better

But the world was not my oyster coming from Big State U because many employers that open doors, like Wall Street or consulting, wouldn’t give me an interview, despite my top grades. That’s my point. The name brand DOES matter because the UMC people doing the hiring believe that wherever you go to school, that was the best you could do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:From the aggressive responses it looks like OP is back.

The responses have moved from paying for Wellesley would cost them their “wiggle room” to complaints about having had to pay for hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical care plus eldercare for a small village.

Zero sympathy for OP’s plight but I will be fascinated to learn what additional financially catastrophic event that happened to her we will learn about next.

+2

[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: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.

This whole thread is weird, and I gave up in the middle after people just kept yelling at this person for being rightly upset that college costs have gotten so insane. I went to NYU in 1993, which I think was literally the most expensive college in the country. It was about 25,000 a year. My dad was a doctor. Not a specialist. We were upper middle class, and my parents had saved money. I later transferred and that savings had enough money to support me through a graduate degree.

I did the math, and the cost of NYU has gone wayyyyy up proportionally from what it used to be--- and that's all colleges. Yes. If you were paying attention you knew it. We have a 529 plan and my parents did the in state tuition plan for our kid (which now I sort of regret), but it's still a big difference when you're theoretically considering this stuff to being like--wow---we could end up spending 360,000 for one kid's undergraduate education? We are probably top 2% of household wealth, and WE don't want to pay that. Not unless our kid is getting into an Ivy, which she isn't.

That is why merit aid exists. It's not a "subsidy." It's because colleges realize that even wealthy families understand that the price is NOT worth it--not when you consider that your kid might go on to some kind of graduate program.

Thank you for the merit aid website. I was actually looking for a list JUST like that after reading his book.

OP, I get it. I think most of my friends get it. They either stick to the top publics if their kids can get in, go for lower ranking schools with merit, and few bite the bullet and pay full price.

You make 400K+?

where does it state they make "400k+"? It just says college could cost 360K for one kid.

for example, We were making 300K combined when our first was born. One of us became SAHP, so income went to 200K. We started saving for education immediately. So even with the cut in income, we were able to save $10-12k/year. By time oldest was 12,we had enough saved for them at "top tier university". Did same thing for next kid as well. Now Our income increased to ~300K when oldest was 4. So at that point we upped the amount saved per year--that's how we achieved our savings by time they were 12. But we choose to redirect ~$15-30K/year per kid to savings until we had enough saved. We made the choice to save, as we knew they would NOT get any financial aide and didn't want them restricted to colleges that would give enough merit. We knew it would be much easier to save for college than attempt to figure out how to cash flow $75-80K/year.

Then we let it grown, adjusted/added if needed and made sure to pull it out to "safer" investments as we approached college. We live in the DC area, so HCOL and even spent 4 years in San Fran, which makes DC look LCOL. But when we got married, we chose to buy a house that could be afforded on one income if needed (at about 2.5x the highest income at that point). We didn't purchase a home worth double that despite the fact we could have easily done that. Instead we learned to live on a bit less in anticipation of wanting a SAHP (despite the fact I made over 6 figures when I took leave and we could have easily afforded a nanny). That choice (among others) allowed us to save for college once kids came along. But mainly it was making the choice to forgo other things in life in order to save.

SO while not everyone can do that (if you are truly living paycheck to paycheck, it's hard to save), I'd argue that most people making $200K+ (even in DCUM area) can probably find a way to save enough for a kid to have $50-60K/year and if you are earning that much can afford to take parent loans/cashflow the difference, if attending an 80K school is that important to you.

We are in our "starter home", driving 12 year old cars. Haven't been on a real vacation in almost 4 years. I had a serious medical issue, as did my DH, which tallied about $400K in medical bills. 4 sets of elderly parents that need help from time to time. Then there are taxes, insurance, and all the little fees and costs that eat way at the salary. We aren't "paycheck to paycheck." But we cannot save what you think we can. And it is absurd to think you speak for what everyone else "should be able to do." Screw you.

I never said "everyone else should be able to do so". I get that some have other financial issues. I grew up in a LMC family---I ate free lunch for several years at school when my parents were laid off and job searching, I stood in line for free food from local food banks back in the 70s/80s. So I get that. However, I was not eligible for full FA when attending college. So I had to choose what was AFFORDABLE for my family. I did not demand that I go to Harvard or Yale without paying the price. I choose a school that we could afford without me going into major debt (I took the student loans each year, my parents could not afford to take parent loans or help much at all). So I looked for merit and went that route. Got into more elite schools (3 of them) but still couldn't' afford it, so I didn't attend.

But I still will hold that many many could make changes and afford more but they CHOOSE not to. 50%+ of people I know drive new cars every 4-5 years, get Starbucks (or the equivalent) multiple times per day for themselves and all 3 kids, eat out constantly, go on vacation all the time, etc. Yet as our kids hit College age, many complain they can't afford more than in-state because they have not saved. For them, it was truly a choice, and they choose to live a fancy life when they could have saved and still had a better life than 80% of people.


Basically, everyone can find somewhere that's affordable---if 80K/year isn't for you, then search for merit elsewhere.
There are still many many many great options for college---going into debt is silly for college

No one is "demanding" anything. And I agree with the posters who say that people should not -have- to give those options up. There is a big benefit to going to some of those schools and you know it. But, it's somehow acceptable to dump on UMC people who aren't wealthy in the sense most of you think they are. After working their butts off (I also come from poor beginnings) and then they're punished for it.

The rest of your post is just conjecture and silly. Eating out and Starbucks is not a "fancy life."

I'm not "demanding" your car I just don't think I should -have- to give up the option of taking off in it. There is a big benefit to me having your car and we all know it. But somehow it's acceptable to dump on people without a car just because I can't afford to buy it from you.

Except you can buy a car that will drive from A to B, you just want a fancier brand name. And no, I don’t think the brand name matters.

Look, I think brand name matters a lot. It’s true that after your first job it’s generally your experience and not your school that matters, but to get experience you need to get good early jobs and that can be hard or even impossible without the right credentials. So I’m not going to deny that PPs have a point there.

But that’s just life. There are lots of things we all guess would probably advantage our kids but can’t or won’t pay for. It’s nothing new, unique, or special about this generation. I didn’t apply to top schools because I knew my parents hadn’t saved for college. That was true of literally all my classmates at my small midwestern high school. A kid who graduated with an unweighted 4.0 and a 35 ACT went to Big State U. That’s always been normal.

The attitude that brand name matters a lot will set you and your kid up for disappointment.
98% of people do NOT attend undergrad at an elite school, yet majority go on to life fulfilling lives and contribute to society and are happy. Just because you are smart does not entitle you to a brand name/elite university. In fact, I'd argue if you are so smart, you might recognize that fact and realize that what you do at college matters so much more than where you go. Especially in today's world, where you can job search online and not just at what companies come to your career center. The world is your oyster, you just have to do something with it---and that something does not involve complaining that you deserve better

But the world was not my oyster coming from Big State U because many employers that open doors, like Wall Street or consulting, wouldn’t give me an interview, despite my top grades. That’s my point. The name brand DOES matter because the UMC people doing the hiring believe that wherever you go to school, that was the best you could do.

In which case, it depends on which state u you attended. There are state schools that will still land you there, as well as mid tier slacs. Not sure Wellesley is known for placing students on Wall Street.

[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.

This whole thread is weird, and I gave up in the middle after people just kept yelling at this person for being rightly upset that college costs have gotten so insane. I went to NYU in 1993, which I think was literally the most expensive college in the country. It was about 25,000 a year. My dad was a doctor. Not a specialist. We were upper middle class, and my parents had saved money. I later transferred and that savings had enough money to support me through a graduate degree.

I did the math, and the cost of NYU has gone wayyyyy up proportionally from what it used to be--- and that's all colleges. Yes. If you were paying attention you knew it. We have a 529 plan and my parents did the in state tuition plan for our kid (which now I sort of regret), but it's still a big difference when you're theoretically considering this stuff to being like--wow---we could end up spending 360,000 for one kid's undergraduate education? We are probably top 2% of household wealth, and WE don't want to pay that. Not unless our kid is getting into an Ivy, which she isn't.

That is why merit aid exists. It's not a "subsidy." It's because colleges realize that even wealthy families understand that the price is NOT worth it--not when you consider that your kid might go on to some kind of graduate program.

Thank you for the merit aid website. I was actually looking for a list JUST like that after reading his book.

OP, I get it. I think most of my friends get it. They either stick to the top publics if their kids can get in, go for lower ranking schools with merit, and few bite the bullet and pay full price.

You make 400K+?

where does it state they make "400k+"? It just says college could cost 360K for one kid.

for example, We were making 300K combined when our first was born. One of us became SAHP, so income went to 200K. We started saving for education immediately. So even with the cut in income, we were able to save $10-12k/year. By time oldest was 12,we had enough saved for them at "top tier university". Did same thing for next kid as well. Now Our income increased to ~300K when oldest was 4. So at that point we upped the amount saved per year--that's how we achieved our savings by time they were 12. But we choose to redirect ~$15-30K/year per kid to savings until we had enough saved. We made the choice to save, as we knew they would NOT get any financial aide and didn't want them restricted to colleges that would give enough merit. We knew it would be much easier to save for college than attempt to figure out how to cash flow $75-80K/year.

Then we let it grown, adjusted/added if needed and made sure to pull it out to "safer" investments as we approached college. We live in the DC area, so HCOL and even spent 4 years in San Fran, which makes DC look LCOL. But when we got married, we chose to buy a house that could be afforded on one income if needed (at about 2.5x the highest income at that point). We didn't purchase a home worth double that despite the fact we could have easily done that. Instead we learned to live on a bit less in anticipation of wanting a SAHP (despite the fact I made over 6 figures when I took leave and we could have easily afforded a nanny). That choice (among others) allowed us to save for college once kids came along. But mainly it was making the choice to forgo other things in life in order to save.

SO while not everyone can do that (if you are truly living paycheck to paycheck, it's hard to save), I'd argue that most people making $200K+ (even in DCUM area) can probably find a way to save enough for a kid to have $50-60K/year and if you are earning that much can afford to take parent loans/cashflow the difference, if attending an 80K school is that important to you.

We are in our "starter home", driving 12 year old cars. Haven't been on a real vacation in almost 4 years. I had a serious medical issue, as did my DH, which tallied about $400K in medical bills. 4 sets of elderly parents that need help from time to time. Then there are taxes, insurance, and all the little fees and costs that eat way at the salary. We aren't "paycheck to paycheck." But we cannot save what you think we can. And it is absurd to think you speak for what everyone else "should be able to do." Screw you.

I never said "everyone else should be able to do so". I get that some have other financial issues. I grew up in a LMC family---I ate free lunch for several years at school when my parents were laid off and job searching, I stood in line for free food from local food banks back in the 70s/80s. So I get that. However, I was not eligible for full FA when attending college. So I had to choose what was AFFORDABLE for my family. I did not demand that I go to Harvard or Yale without paying the price. I choose a school that we could afford without me going into major debt (I took the student loans each year, my parents could not afford to take parent loans or help much at all). So I looked for merit and went that route. Got into more elite schools (3 of them) but still couldn't' afford it, so I didn't attend.

But I still will hold that many many could make changes and afford more but they CHOOSE not to. 50%+ of people I know drive new cars every 4-5 years, get Starbucks (or the equivalent) multiple times per day for themselves and all 3 kids, eat out constantly, go on vacation all the time, etc. Yet as our kids hit College age, many complain they can't afford more than in-state because they have not saved. For them, it was truly a choice, and they choose to live a fancy life when they could have saved and still had a better life than 80% of people.


Basically, everyone can find somewhere that's affordable---if 80K/year isn't for you, then search for merit elsewhere.
There are still many many many great options for college---going into debt is silly for college

No one is "demanding" anything. And I agree with the posters who say that people should not -have- to give those options up. There is a big benefit to going to some of those schools and you know it. But, it's somehow acceptable to dump on UMC people who aren't wealthy in the sense most of you think they are. After working their butts off (I also come from poor beginnings) and then they're punished for it.

The rest of your post is just conjecture and silly. Eating out and Starbucks is not a "fancy life."

I'm not "demanding" your car I just don't think I should -have- to give up the option of taking off in it. There is a big benefit to me having your car and we all know it. But somehow it's acceptable to dump on people without a car just because I can't afford to buy it from you.

Except you can buy a car that will drive from A to B, you just want a fancier brand name. And no, I don’t think the brand name matters.

Look, I think brand name matters a lot. It’s true that after your first job it’s generally your experience and not your school that matters, but to get experience you need to get good early jobs and that can be hard or even impossible without the right credentials. So I’m not going to deny that PPs have a point there.

But that’s just life. There are lots of things we all guess would probably advantage our kids but can’t or won’t pay for. It’s nothing new, unique, or special about this generation. I didn’t apply to top schools because I knew my parents hadn’t saved for college. That was true of literally all my classmates at my small midwestern high school. A kid who graduated with an unweighted 4.0 and a 35 ACT went to Big State U. That’s always been normal.

The attitude that brand name matters a lot will set you and your kid up for disappointment.
98% of people do NOT attend undergrad at an elite school, yet majority go on to life fulfilling lives and contribute to society and are happy. Just because you are smart does not entitle you to a brand name/elite university. In fact, I'd argue if you are so smart, you might recognize that fact and realize that what you do at college matters so much more than where you go. Especially in today's world, where you can job search online and not just at what companies come to your career center. The world is your oyster, you just have to do something with it---and that something does not involve complaining that you deserve better

But the world was not my oyster coming from Big State U because many employers that open doors, like Wall Street or consulting, wouldn’t give me an interview, despite my top grades. That’s my point. The name brand DOES matter because the UMC people doing the hiring believe that wherever you go to school, that was the best you could do.

In which case, it depends on which state u you attended. There are state schools that will still land you there, as well as mid tier slacs. Not sure Wellesley is known for placing students on Wall Street.

I love the shift from brand name doesn’t matter and the world is your Oyster for 98% of graduates to, but only if you go to the right school. If you’re rich enough that you aren’t getting any aid, the odds that a graduate of any school, let alone a random school, will do as well as you are small. Look at the average salaries both a lot graduation and mid career, and it becomes apparent that brand name does matter and that the world is not your Oyster if you have a BA from Savannah State.