Which college is worth $90k?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My DC (home on break) is currently an undergrad at an Ivy, we are a full pay family that saved in a 529. Yesterday he told me that thinking back to the college process he now finds it funny that he worried about location, school spirit etc, while it has all of that and he loves it he said was he really loves is the academic environment. He said his professors, the labs, the libraries and all of the other students are inspiring and he feels like he learns and grows every day.
To me that is worth it. . .

Which Ivy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is ridiculous. When anyone says yes they feel it’s worth it then you argue it’s not. Costs rise. Universities offer more programming and support. They don’t have to justify it to you. If it’s not worth it TO YOU at whatever the cost is going to be for your kid to attend, go elsewhere. Everyone has choices in this process. Make yours and move on.

Oh sure, it’s totally absurd to actually look for the best fit and benefits. Just throw your money around blindly—why bother asking anyone with experience? Can’t be bothered to read? Perfect you don't have to participate the discussion if you don't know how to justify the worth.

Who has said that? Find one post in this chain where someone said they paid/pay 90+ and didn't care about fit, whether it had the major/EC's etc that their student was interested in, that they simply picked the most expensive school their kid was accepted to? Literally no one said that. People keep dismissing the "personal experiences" others are offering on why they think the price tag is worth it for them.

Yeah right "the experiences". Why is that answer ridiculous? There is nothing ridiculous about wanting a better personal experiences. You can buy a gold toilet and thinking it's the world best toilet to you. Why is that ridiculous, why can't this be discussed.

Well the question specifically was “based on personal experience.”
But I take your post as an acknowledgment that you found no responses just picking based on highest price

Huh? The question was ‘Which college is worth $90K? Acknowledge what? I don't understand your point. Picking based on highest price is also a form of personal experience lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is ridiculous. When anyone says yes they feel it’s worth it then you argue it’s not. Costs rise. Universities offer more programming and support. They don’t have to justify it to you. If it’s not worth it TO YOU at whatever the cost is going to be for your kid to attend, go elsewhere. Everyone has choices in this process. Make yours and move on.

The thread was started to ask a simple question, dear. If it triggers you you’re free to click away.

I don't think it triggers the parents who have answered that they think the 90k price tag has been worth it. It seems others can't stand the fact that we actually think there has been value for money and our kids are benefiting . . .

Not really, do whatever you like as said. Quite the opposite, want to hear more about why you enjoy paying this much

[Anonymous]

The one my kid is at because he loves it, is getting great grades, loves his professors, has made friends and we can afford it.
This is an “eye of the beholder” question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The one my kid is at because he loves it, is getting great grades, loves his professors, has made friends and we can afford it.
This is an “eye of the beholder” question.

Agree, it’s all in the eye of the beholder. Those are all valid reasons, but a lot of the same benefits exist at lower-cost schools too. What’s the student-to-teacher ratio? Do the schools help with internships?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Duke, Stanford, UChicago, MIT, and Cal Tech. Has been that way for decades and will be in the future.

Sub UChicago for Penn/Wharton. Not throwing $360k of my hard earned money down a sinking ship that’s $6B in debt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not interested in judging how other people spend their money. Showing off wealth is a life style sure.

I am just really curious why college tuition keep increasing yoy, it is not even tied to any performance benchmark.

Sounds like you aren’t interested in looking further than your navel.

Are you really not aware of how these schools spend money and why tuition has gone up?
Low class ratios and nice facilities don’t grow on trees.
Also, much of the student experience is subjective. It isn’t just what you learn, but how you feel about the experience.
Also, remember most kids are not paying full freight. The rich are subsidizing the less-well-off.

Did you know that in a study participants were presented with two glasses of wine and told one is from a $100 bottle and one is from a $20 bottle (roughly), and they consistently rated the $100 wine much higher across every metric?

The trick? It’s the exact same wine.

LOL, nice try. That trick might work for wine, but it won’t work for something you have to live and breathe for 4 years.

Have someone look at a $650,000 old 1000 square foot house and then a $1.2 mil updated 2500 square foot house in the same area. But switch the price tags and try to trick them!
Do you really think that someone will believe that the fake “$1.2 mil” 1000 square foot house is “better” than the updated 2500 square foot house because it has a higher price tag?

I get your point, since I have a relative who refuses to buy store-brand foods because she believes them inferior. But hardly comparable to the bigger ticket items and experiences in life.

The bigger, more expensive, updated house might be a total POS and the older, less expensive, smaller house might be a charming well-crafted quality home. I could EASILY believe the price tags could be switched and you’d have people calling it fair. I’m shocked that you can’t.

Are you a product of a school that would be 90K today, by any chance?

I think you kind of proved my point. So the 2500 house might be a POS, yes, that is one possibility. The bigger point is that in comparing these houses and their prices, one might be prompted to ask questions and investigate, and ask WHY the seemingly nicer home is priced lower.
You would ask questions, you would get inspections done, you compare property taxes, schools, and myriad other things.
You would not simply accept at face value that the home with the higher price is better or worse, right?

That was not remotely your point. See the bolded word for a clue as to where you’ve gone wrong. Hint: In your argument as presented YOU have accepted one house as better than the other based on price and rather arbitrary criteria such as how new and how big, none of which suggests any concern about real quality or value. To you, expensive + big + new = better. There are people on the other side of the coin to whom expensive + small + old = better. So I repeat, I could EASILY believe the price tags could be switched and significant chunk of the population would evaluate accordingly. (e.g. Small, old, inexpensive is gross; small, old, and expensive is classic and charming. Big, new, and expensive = luxurious; hug, new, inexpensive = builder grade garbage that will fall apart in five years.)

“Do you really think that someone will believe that the fake “$1.2 mil” 1000 square foot house is “better” than the updated 2500 square foot house because it has a higher price tag?”

I must ask again, are you a product of one of these expensive institutions?

Nope, I went to an inexpensive college no one in DCUM ever talks about, and have no debt. Must be why I’m such a stupid old sod, eh?

You are right about new construction being generally not that great, so maybe this isn’t the best example. But you are still FOS on principal.

I’ll try again: let’s say you are planning a vacation to Mexico for spring break. You can spend 2k or 15k. You can have a wonderful experience either way. It will be a different experience at 2k (less-than-ideal flights, riding public buses, staying in cheap hotels, enjoying walking around a city, eating local food) or 15k (ideally timed nonstop flight, private transit, expensive resorts and activities) but either way, you will have taken a vacation to Mexico. By your logic, they are the same thing, right? A vacation to Mexico is a vacation to Mexico. So you’re wondering why would anyone ever do the 15k version, or are you just insisting they only do it due to the perception of luxury?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s a good thing that some people are starting to realize college isn’t the right path for them and are switching to careers that suit them better. I get that schools worry about enrollment numbers, but I suspect the ones that keep raising tuition aren’t exactly hurting for applicants. They can always admit more wealthy international students and charge even higher rates. At the end of the day, it’s just supply and demand.

This. Can we end the thread already?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Even for high-end daycare, this kind of price just doesn’t make sense. Someone commented that it’s a public good and part of a trickle-down economy—but why is it the responsibility of middle-class families to stimulate the local economy? What does that have to do with the outrageous price tag, or even with education, which is the whole reason we send kids to college in the first place?

No one is forcing you to.
There are plenty of cheaper options, and some 90k schools that DO offer enough aid to make the cost comparable to paying in-state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These posts are annoying and there is no satisfying anyone. For those that can afford it, they’ve deemed the $90k worth it for their reasons. For those that can’t or don’t have the option due to being denied, of course they’re going to dismiss the worth. Then add in all the different interpretations of a successful outcome, how can there possibly be a consensus.

The most annoying thing is when people use them to make some faux-moral point about how much they value education by paying for the most expensive schools relative to all of these other made-up people who apparently don’t value education. And these invented people are wasting their money on expensive cars, handbags, and vacations (it’s always those three) and then don’t let their kids go to an expensive school. Comes up multiple times on every thread related to college cost, even when that isn’t the question asked.

Horses for courses. An expensive private may have a program, class sizes and opportunities that make sense. Likewise, a flagship may have a social life and a program, especially in STEM, that make it a better choice.

Keeping in mind that applicants don’t get to pick among the best private and the best public for them, they have to choose the best of what they have available and what they can afford.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely no school is worth $90k. How utterly stupid.

So what is the option? Frankly, the privates in the top 50 all cost around that much and don’t offer merit aid. Yes, there are excellent public colleges but not everyone gets in. For some families who have saved/can afford it they clearly believe it is worth it as they chose to pay it

The option is not to play the game, but the schools know many families will do ANYTHING to send their kids to T20s.

If you are selling a luxury good in a feeding frenzy it’s not rational to lower your price (merit aid) for those that can afford it.

It’s not just T20s asking for $90K+. Even OOS public schools are charging similar amounts.

So true. I get the frustration at the cost but think people suggesting we not "play the game" are either naive or the type of people willing to use their own kids to make a philosophical point. Or they can't afford it/will get aid and don't have to afford it so totally fine making up rules for a game they are never going to play in . . .

Kids can get an excellent education at any IN-STATE public university or even community college! They’re not being reaped for the hunger games.

Sure, but not all do. For example, the 6 year graduation rate for U Mass Lowell is around 60%, at Bowie State it is around 40% . . . the graduation rates for the Ivies are all above 95%.

Do you think your Ivy caliber kid wouldn’t manage to graduate from Bowie State???

Most likely not, but life happens and I definitely think some of his joy comes from the deep relationships with classmates and the fact that they are there all 4 years and together at graduation and doing the weird ancient traditions together is definitely part of the glue that keeps everyone moving forward.

+1 so much this!!

We aren’t paying 90k, because we got financial aid. But we are paying 30k, where we could have paid 20k at a lower ranked state school.
However, the 30k (for us) private has an extremely high retention and 4 year graduation rate, and the 20k school does not. This is one of many reasons we went with the more expensive school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is ridiculous. When anyone says yes they feel it’s worth it then you argue it’s not. Costs rise. Universities offer more programming and support. They don’t have to justify it to you. If it’s not worth it TO YOU at whatever the cost is going to be for your kid to attend, go elsewhere. Everyone has choices in this process. Make yours and move on.

The thread was started to ask a simple question, dear. If it triggers you you’re free to click away.

I doubt PP is triggered, but it sure is annoying to see threads where OP is “only asking a question” and then proceeds to ignore, twist, or argue with any POV that isn’t in lockstep with the one they brought to the thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not interested in judging how other people spend their money. Showing off wealth is a life style sure.

I am just really curious why college tuition keep increasing yoy, it is not even tied to any performance benchmark.

Sounds like you aren’t interested in looking further than your navel.

Are you really not aware of how these schools spend money and why tuition has gone up?
Low class ratios and nice facilities don’t grow on trees.
Also, much of the student experience is subjective. It isn’t just what you learn, but how you feel about the experience.
Also, remember most kids are not paying full freight. The rich are subsidizing the less-well-off.

Did you know that in a study participants were presented with two glasses of wine and told one is from a $100 bottle and one is from a $20 bottle (roughly), and they consistently rated the $100 wine much higher across every metric?

The trick? It’s the exact same wine.

LOL, nice try. That trick might work for wine, but it won’t work for something you have to live and breathe for 4 years.

Have someone look at a $650,000 old 1000 square foot house and then a $1.2 mil updated 2500 square foot house in the same area. But switch the price tags and try to trick them!
Do you really think that someone will believe that the fake “$1.2 mil” 1000 square foot house is “better” than the updated 2500 square foot house because it has a higher price tag?

I get your point, since I have a relative who refuses to buy store-brand foods because she believes them inferior. But hardly comparable to the bigger ticket items and experiences in life.

The bigger, more expensive, updated house might be a total POS and the older, less expensive, smaller house might be a charming well-crafted quality home. I could EASILY believe the price tags could be switched and you’d have people calling it fair. I’m shocked that you can’t.

Are you a product of a school that would be 90K today, by any chance?

I think you kind of proved my point. So the 2500 house might be a POS, yes, that is one possibility. The bigger point is that in comparing these houses and their prices, one might be prompted to ask questions and investigate, and ask WHY the seemingly nicer home is priced lower.
You would ask questions, you would get inspections done, you compare property taxes, schools, and myriad other things.
You would not simply accept at face value that the home with the higher price is better or worse, right?

That was not remotely your point. See the bolded word for a clue as to where you’ve gone wrong. Hint: In your argument as presented YOU have accepted one house as better than the other based on price and rather arbitrary criteria such as how new and how big, none of which suggests any concern about real quality or value. To you, expensive + big + new = better. There are people on the other side of the coin to whom expensive + small + old = better. So I repeat, I could EASILY believe the price tags could be switched and significant chunk of the population would evaluate accordingly. (e.g. Small, old, inexpensive is gross; small, old, and expensive is classic and charming. Big, new, and expensive = luxurious; hug, new, inexpensive = builder grade garbage that will fall apart in five years.)

“Do you really think that someone will believe that the fake “$1.2 mil” 1000 square foot house is “better” than the updated 2500 square foot house because it has a higher price tag?”

I must ask again, are you a product of one of these expensive institutions?

Nope, I went to an inexpensive college no one in DCUM ever talks about, and have no debt. Must be why I’m such a stupid old sod, eh?

You are right about new construction being generally not that great, so maybe this isn’t the best example. But you are still FOS on principal.

I’ll try again: let’s say you are planning a vacation to Mexico for spring break. You can spend 2k or 15k. You can have a wonderful experience either way. It will be a different experience at 2k (less-than-ideal flights, riding public buses, staying in cheap hotels, enjoying walking around a city, eating local food) or 15k (ideally timed nonstop flight, private transit, expensive resorts and activities) but either way, you will have taken a vacation to Mexico. By your logic, they are the same thing, right? A vacation to Mexico is a vacation to Mexico. So you’re wondering why would anyone ever do the 15k version, or are you just insisting they only do it due to the perception of luxury?

Yes, assuming some minimum baseline is met (in this case having a wonderful experience) they are in fact the same thing except your luxurious version costs five times as much.

But I’m FOS because? You don’t like what I’m saying?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Duke, Stanford, UChicago, MIT, and Cal Tech. Has been that way for decades and will be in the future.

Sub UChicago for Penn/Wharton. Not throwing $360k of my hard earned money down a sinking ship that’s $6B in debt.

I like the list. Wharton no go for my students. Productive debt is no problema!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not interested in judging how other people spend their money. Showing off wealth is a life style sure.

I am just really curious why college tuition keep increasing yoy, it is not even tied to any performance benchmark.

Sounds like you aren’t interested in looking further than your navel.

Are you really not aware of how these schools spend money and why tuition has gone up?
Low class ratios and nice facilities don’t grow on trees.
Also, much of the student experience is subjective. It isn’t just what you learn, but how you feel about the experience.
Also, remember most kids are not paying full freight. The rich are subsidizing the less-well-off.

Did you know that in a study participants were presented with two glasses of wine and told one is from a $100 bottle and one is from a $20 bottle (roughly), and they consistently rated the $100 wine much higher across every metric?

The trick? It’s the exact same wine.

LOL, nice try. That trick might work for wine, but it won’t work for something you have to live and breathe for 4 years.

Have someone look at a $650,000 old 1000 square foot house and then a $1.2 mil updated 2500 square foot house in the same area. But switch the price tags and try to trick them!
Do you really think that someone will believe that the fake “$1.2 mil” 1000 square foot house is “better” than the updated 2500 square foot house because it has a higher price tag?

I get your point, since I have a relative who refuses to buy store-brand foods because she believes them inferior. But hardly comparable to the bigger ticket items and experiences in life.

The bigger, more expensive, updated house might be a total POS and the older, less expensive, smaller house might be a charming well-crafted quality home. I could EASILY believe the price tags could be switched and you’d have people calling it fair. I’m shocked that you can’t.

Are you a product of a school that would be 90K today, by any chance?

I think you kind of proved my point. So the 2500 house might be a POS, yes, that is one possibility. The bigger point is that in comparing these houses and their prices, one might be prompted to ask questions and investigate, and ask WHY the seemingly nicer home is priced lower.
You would ask questions, you would get inspections done, you compare property taxes, schools, and myriad other things.
You would not simply accept at face value that the home with the higher price is better or worse, right?

That was not remotely your point. See the bolded word for a clue as to where you’ve gone wrong. Hint: In your argument as presented YOU have accepted one house as better than the other based on price and rather arbitrary criteria such as how new and how big, none of which suggests any concern about real quality or value. To you, expensive + big + new = better. There are people on the other side of the coin to whom expensive + small + old = better. So I repeat, I could EASILY believe the price tags could be switched and significant chunk of the population would evaluate accordingly. (e.g. Small, old, inexpensive is gross; small, old, and expensive is classic and charming. Big, new, and expensive = luxurious; hug, new, inexpensive = builder grade garbage that will fall apart in five years.)

“Do you really think that someone will believe that the fake “$1.2 mil” 1000 square foot house is “better” than the updated 2500 square foot house because it has a higher price tag?”

I must ask again, are you a product of one of these expensive institutions?

Nope, I went to an inexpensive college no one in DCUM ever talks about, and have no debt. Must be why I’m such a stupid old sod, eh?

You are right about new construction being generally not that great, so maybe this isn’t the best example. But you are still FOS on principal.

I’ll try again: let’s say you are planning a vacation to Mexico for spring break. You can spend 2k or 15k. You can have a wonderful experience either way. It will be a different experience at 2k (less-than-ideal flights, riding public buses, staying in cheap hotels, enjoying walking around a city, eating local food) or 15k (ideally timed nonstop flight, private transit, expensive resorts and activities) but either way, you will have taken a vacation to Mexico. By your logic, they are the same thing, right? A vacation to Mexico is a vacation to Mexico. So you’re wondering why would anyone ever do the 15k version, or are you just insisting they only do it due to the perception of luxury?

well to start, we'd never vacation in mexico