Are top private colleges mainly for poor people now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Families in the bottom band of the upper middle class can't afford to pay for t20 schools. Everyone else can. The system excludes one group of students from those elite schools. It excludes no one else. That's about it.

That is a fair assessment but the bottom band of the UMC is quite large. Income is a pyramid. There are many more 200-400k households than 400k+. So you are minimizing it. In essence, the half of the middle class that is above the median line is being excluded. That is what, 30% of the US population?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Families in the bottom band of the upper middle class can't afford to pay for t20 schools. Everyone else can. The system excludes one group of students from those elite schools. It excludes no one else. That's about it.

$120-180k is squarely “bottom of the upper middle class,” and they get good financial aid.

People have no idea what actual middle class is, and it shows.

[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:Often 2/3 of students at top ranked schools are getting need based aid that covers the vast majority of costs, on average.

200k is the typical cut off for need based aid (about the income level of a couple of school teachers at the peak of their careers aka “the wealthy”)

It just seems these schools must be populated primarily with lower income kids and then 1/3 rich kids.

I guess middle class kids end up at state school.

Poverty line is $35k per year. Median American income is $69k. $200 k annual warning is top 10% nationally.

$220K in DC area is considered MC. It depends on where you live.

Choosing to live in an expensive zip code doesn’t change what socioeconomic class you’re in.

Once again, people don't necessarily "choose" to live in a hcol; they go where the jobs are. Notice how during the pandemic when people could wfh, a lot of people moved out of higher col areas. But, now many are returning because companies are requiring RTO.

220k will get you a 900k house in Silver Spring, IB for perfectly good schools, close enough to the metro to commute that way but also not an insane driving commute, meals out a few times a week, a few nice vacations a year, two cars, and once you've saved up for that first down payment and gotten through the childcare years, you'll be able to max out your retirement and put a ton away towards college (unless you choose to have more than 2 kids, but that is on you friend).

The issue is that those of you in this income bracket don't want to live in a 1950s split level in Silver Spring because you think it's beneath you. You think you are middle class because you are living in a house built for a middle class person in 1955. But this is what happens in high COL areas. It doesn't magically make you middle class. You are living in a house worth close to a million dollars. Middle class peopel can't afford that.

OK, but even in Silver Spring, median income is much higher than somewhere like WV. Like I said, it depends on where you live.

Your argument is that the high cost of living magically makes someone making over 200k middle class, but if that income provides you with plenty of very nice options in the region without an obscenely long commute, then no, it doesn't. You're UMC. But none of this matters because (1) your kid isn't getting into Harvard anyway, and (2) if they do, you could absolutely afford to pay the sticker price, it would just take some sacrifice on your part. Whereas an actual middle class family, making under 150k/yr, simply could not afford it no matter how much they sacrifice because they can't afford any kind of home PLUS 70k/yr in tuition. Thus they get money and you don't. Get over it, and maybe focus your attention on making public colleges and universities very high quality and affordable to anyone. Harvard gets to decide how they handle their endowment themselves. They disagree with you.

? my kid is going to a state university, but you are side stepping the point because you can't argue with the point: it's ridiculous that these colleges expect a family that is making $280K to pay the same amount as a family making $800K.

Harvard gets federal money for research. Why on earth should they get all that money if their endowment is so large that they could let in every freshmen come in for free for 10 years or more. Those schools are greedy, and the rich are keeping it that way for a reason. It makes such schools unreachable for the majority simply due to finances.

Spot on.

To add to this, they are making everything a racial issue. So they are prioritizing black and Hispanic students and giving full rides to many (most?) of them. It's all part of a political compromise where rich people for whom $80k a year is nothing retain priority access for their progeny to the schools that feed into the highest layer of the economy. They don't want smart upper middle class kids competing for these seats with their kids.

They are deflecting from the outrageous cost of a private education by pounding the table on DEI and FGLI. Btw, DEI also lets them put a lid on the middle class Asians who have been outcompeting their kids.

Financial aid has nothing to do with race. Bolded is a total myth.

Are you really contending that if you looked at the racial composition of the 50-60% fo the Ivy student body that receives need based aid averaging $50-55k, you would not see a distinct skew towards URM students? How can that not be the case when we see the income statistics nationally of households sorted by race? Black and Hispanic families make far less than whites and Asians earn more than anyone.

The argument is not that they bend the rules in favor of URMs, it's that URMs are more likely to qualify for aid under the rules. Because URMs are less affluent, which is the main reason they are URMs!

From a Harvard Economist (Roland Fryer):

"But affirmative action is very often not targeted at individuals who, because of disadvantage, are achieving below their potential. Seventy-one percent of Harvard’s Black and Hispanic students come from wealthy backgrounds."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people who claim to be "donut hole" families have lived lives of increasing lifestyle creep as their incomes have climbed up 200k, and then want to complain that they don't get enough need-based aid. Well, did you really need a new car every 5 years? Expensive vacations? To redo the kitchen?

If you want to argue that a family making over 200k is middle class, then live like middle class people -- budget, accept you won't be able to afford everything you want to do, and sock money away for retirement and college.

We make well under 200k and this is what we do, and we have friends making over who go out to eat three nights a week, drive luxury cars, and take multiple vacations overseas every year, have weekly cleaners, etc. Those people are not entitled to need-based aid. It's not my fault, or the college's fault, that they chose to just live nicer, more luxurious, easier lives instead of saving their additional income for their child's education. We've scrimped and saved and still won't have enough. AND work in helping professions. I don't cry myself to sleep over the doctors and consultants and well-paid feds who will be disappointed in their FA award while crying into their Tesla upholstery and trying to console themselves on the flight to Aruba. Boo freaking hoo.

We make around 200k. Kids have never been abroad. Most vacations are to relatives, but we'll do long weekends at a cheap OBX hotel. Our cars get replaced at the 15 year mark and are not luxury. We still will not be able to pay 4x our annual income to put two kids through college. It's not a big deal because they can go to state school, but people pretending that people should attempt to live in poverty for the off chance that their kid gets into Harvard are insufferable.

+1 My kid is going to a great state school, but that's because we can't afford expensive private -- donut family. It's ridiculous for UMC to be expected to pay the same as wealthy families. $220K in the DC area is considered MC, btw. A HHI of $280K is not *that* different to $220K after taxes.

It's $20-25K extra per year. That's a huge difference. If you have been making that for at least 4 years before college you could have saved $80K in just that timeframe.

Why does everyone feel entitled to expensive private college? Just like most things in life, you go with what you can afford. There are literally still the majority of colleges that are/can be affordable for your family. Making $280K/year puts you in the Top 7-8% of all people in the USA. Let that sink in. You have so many more privileges than 92% of the people in our country.

Sure, but those expensive colleges are $80k per year, and we have multiple kids.

4 years to save $80K, so you'd have to work 16 years to cover $320K full four years of college, maybe a bit less if the markets were favorable during that time, and 32 years to cover two kids at $320K each, assuming you are making the same for 32 years and zero inflation. Let that sink in.

Maybe you only read the parts you wanted to read in my post, but I did say that my kid is going to a great state school with some merit aid.

Also, you have zero knowledge of my background. I didn't grow up UMC. My parents don't even speak English.

And your background is irrelevant. You make $280k/ year. That is no poor. And once again, how many kids you chose to have is your issue. Most families with multiple kids do not send them to elite universities because they can’t afford it. Desire to send them there only have 1 kid (or two).

And that 20k saved per year is jus t difference from w
220 time 280. Someone at 220 can make choices to save as well

My background is irrelevant yes, but math is math. Based on what you stated, such a person would have to work about 30 years to afford that kind of expense. Yes, it's a choice, but you make it sound like it's easy for donut whole families to pay the same amount as families making $800K. Yes, such a family has other choices, but that's not the point. The point is that expensive colleges expect $280K family to afford the same amount as a $800K family. That is ridiculous.

And you make it sound like your kids do not have a way to get a good education. They do—just not t25. But they can go to a t100 school or state school for minimal debt and get a great education.
Fact is most with stats won’t get into t25 anyhow. Do find a great school you can afford

The point is they should have to settle for what is left over after the rich folks pay, and the poor households get paid to attend. They should have the same options available but don't. They're being screened out and told to suck it up and go somewhere else. That's not ok.

They have to "settle"? Fact is majority are not going to to gain admission anyhow.

But in case they do and you earn $250K/year, you have the choice to find a way for your kid to attend. So you are complaining about something that is not likely to happen no matter what the cost.

Do you complain that you cannot afford to attend Sidwell or another "elite K-12 Private"?
Do you complain that you don't get to take the nicest vacations or drive luxury cars? There is always a gap between what people can afford for everything. However, we have public schools K-12 so everyone can get an education. We have state universities and CC so that there are options for everyone.

They are not being told to suck it up and go elsewhere. They are being told to pay for a service. These are private schools. If you want to pay for the service and gain admission you get to attend. If you choose not to pay, then that is your choice. Fact still remains the odds of even gaining admission are small and where you go does NOT matter nearly as much as what you do while you are there.

We are full pay and my kids did not get into their T20 choices despite having 1550+, 3.9+UW and 8+ APs, so they attended schools in the 30-60 range. They got/are getting a great education, in some ways I think the ultimate choices are better for them than their first/top choices.

Most people realize that attending Sidwell has no bearing on a kid's life after high school. Can you say the same about MIT?

I think the opposite. The college preparation a school like Sidwell offers is so priceless. A kid could succeed in any college or major after attending there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Families in the bottom band of the upper middle class can't afford to pay for t20 schools. Everyone else can. The system excludes one group of students from those elite schools. It excludes no one else. That's about it.

$120-180k is squarely “bottom of the upper middle class,” and they get good financial aid.

People have no idea what actual middle class is, and it shows.

It’s not $200k.

[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:A lot of people who claim to be "donut hole" families have lived lives of increasing lifestyle creep as their incomes have climbed up 200k, and then want to complain that they don't get enough need-based aid. Well, did you really need a new car every 5 years? Expensive vacations? To redo the kitchen?

If you want to argue that a family making over 200k is middle class, then live like middle class people -- budget, accept you won't be able to afford everything you want to do, and sock money away for retirement and college.

We make well under 200k and this is what we do, and we have friends making over who go out to eat three nights a week, drive luxury cars, and take multiple vacations overseas every year, have weekly cleaners, etc. Those people are not entitled to need-based aid. It's not my fault, or the college's fault, that they chose to just live nicer, more luxurious, easier lives instead of saving their additional income for their child's education. We've scrimped and saved and still won't have enough. AND work in helping professions. I don't cry myself to sleep over the doctors and consultants and well-paid feds who will be disappointed in their FA award while crying into their Tesla upholstery and trying to console themselves on the flight to Aruba. Boo freaking hoo.

We make around 200k. Kids have never been abroad. Most vacations are to relatives, but we'll do long weekends at a cheap OBX hotel. Our cars get replaced at the 15 year mark and are not luxury. We still will not be able to pay 4x our annual income to put two kids through college. It's not a big deal because they can go to state school, but people pretending that people should attempt to live in poverty for the off chance that their kid gets into Harvard are insufferable.

+1 My kid is going to a great state school, but that's because we can't afford expensive private -- donut family. It's ridiculous for UMC to be expected to pay the same as wealthy families. $220K in the DC area is considered MC, btw. A HHI of $280K is not *that* different to $220K after taxes.

It's $20-25K extra per year. That's a huge difference. If you have been making that for at least 4 years before college you could have saved $80K in just that timeframe.

Why does everyone feel entitled to expensive private college? Just like most things in life, you go with what you can afford. There are literally still the majority of colleges that are/can be affordable for your family. Making $280K/year puts you in the Top 7-8% of all people in the USA. Let that sink in. You have so many more privileges than 92% of the people in our country.

Sure, but those expensive colleges are $80k per year, and we have multiple kids.

4 years to save $80K, so you'd have to work 16 years to cover $320K full four years of college, maybe a bit less if the markets were favorable during that time, and 32 years to cover two kids at $320K each, assuming you are making the same for 32 years and zero inflation. Let that sink in.

Maybe you only read the parts you wanted to read in my post, but I did say that my kid is going to a great state school with some merit aid.

Also, you have zero knowledge of my background. I didn't grow up UMC. My parents don't even speak English.

And your background is irrelevant. You make $280k/ year. That is no poor. And once again, how many kids you chose to have is your issue. Most families with multiple kids do not send them to elite universities because they can’t afford it. Desire to send them there only have 1 kid (or two).

And that 20k saved per year is jus t difference from w
220 time 280. Someone at 220 can make choices to save as well

My background is irrelevant yes, but math is math. Based on what you stated, such a person would have to work about 30 years to afford that kind of expense. Yes, it's a choice, but you make it sound like it's easy for donut whole families to pay the same amount as families making $800K. Yes, such a family has other choices, but that's not the point. The point is that expensive colleges expect $280K family to afford the same amount as a $800K family. That is ridiculous.

And you make it sound like your kids do not have a way to get a good education. They do—just not t25. But they can go to a t100 school or state school for minimal debt and get a great education.
Fact is most with stats won’t get into t25 anyhow. Do find a great school you can afford

The point is they should have to settle for what is left over after the rich folks pay, and the poor households get paid to attend. They should have the same options available but don't. They're being screened out and told to suck it up and go somewhere else. That's not ok.

They have to "settle"? Fact is majority are not going to to gain admission anyhow.

But in case they do and you earn $250K/year, you have the choice to find a way for your kid to attend. So you are complaining about something that is not likely to happen no matter what the cost.

Do you complain that you cannot afford to attend Sidwell or another "elite K-12 Private"?
Do you complain that you don't get to take the nicest vacations or drive luxury cars? There is always a gap between what people can afford for everything. However, we have public schools K-12 so everyone can get an education. We have state universities and CC so that there are options for everyone.

They are not being told to suck it up and go elsewhere. They are being told to pay for a service. These are private schools. If you want to pay for the service and gain admission you get to attend. If you choose not to pay, then that is your choice. Fact still remains the odds of even gaining admission are small and where you go does NOT matter nearly as much as what you do while you are there.

We are full pay and my kids did not get into their T20 choices despite having 1550+, 3.9+UW and 8+ APs, so they attended schools in the 30-60 range. They got/are getting a great education, in some ways I think the ultimate choices are better for them than their first/top choices.

Most people realize that attending Sidwell has no bearing on a kid's life after high school. Can you say the same about MIT?

I think the opposite. The college preparation a school like Sidwell offers is so priceless. A kid could succeed in any college or major after attending there.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Families in the bottom band of the upper middle class can't afford to pay for t20 schools. Everyone else can. The system excludes one group of students from those elite schools. It excludes no one else. That's about it.

$120-180k is squarely “bottom of the upper middle class,” and they get good financial aid.

But $200K is not that much more than $180K, after taxes.

[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:Often 2/3 of students at top ranked schools are getting need based aid that covers the vast majority of costs, on average.

200k is the typical cut off for need based aid (about the income level of a couple of school teachers at the peak of their careers aka “the wealthy”)

It just seems these schools must be populated primarily with lower income kids and then 1/3 rich kids.

I guess middle class kids end up at state school.

Poverty line is $35k per year. Median American income is $69k. $200 k annual warning is top 10% nationally.

$220K in DC area is considered MC. It depends on where you live.

Choosing to live in an expensive zip code doesn’t change what socioeconomic class you’re in.

Once again, people don't necessarily "choose" to live in a hcol; they go where the jobs are. Notice how during the pandemic when people could wfh, a lot of people moved out of higher col areas. But, now many are returning because companies are requiring RTO.

220k will get you a 900k house in Silver Spring, IB for perfectly good schools, close enough to the metro to commute that way but also not an insane driving commute, meals out a few times a week, a few nice vacations a year, two cars, and once you've saved up for that first down payment and gotten through the childcare years, you'll be able to max out your retirement and put a ton away towards college (unless you choose to have more than 2 kids, but that is on you friend).

The issue is that those of you in this income bracket don't want to live in a 1950s split level in Silver Spring because you think it's beneath you. You think you are middle class because you are living in a house built for a middle class person in 1955. But this is what happens in high COL areas. It doesn't magically make you middle class. You are living in a house worth close to a million dollars. Middle class peopel can't afford that.

OK, but even in Silver Spring, median income is much higher than somewhere like WV. Like I said, it depends on where you live.

Your argument is that the high cost of living magically makes someone making over 200k middle class, but if that income provides you with plenty of very nice options in the region without an obscenely long commute, then no, it doesn't. You're UMC. But none of this matters because (1) your kid isn't getting into Harvard anyway, and (2) if they do, you could absolutely afford to pay the sticker price, it would just take some sacrifice on your part. Whereas an actual middle class family, making under 150k/yr, simply could not afford it no matter how much they sacrifice because they can't afford any kind of home PLUS 70k/yr in tuition. Thus they get money and you don't. Get over it, and maybe focus your attention on making public colleges and universities very high quality and affordable to anyone. Harvard gets to decide how they handle their endowment themselves. They disagree with you.

? my kid is going to a state university, but you are side stepping the point because you can't argue with the point: it's ridiculous that these colleges expect a family that is making $280K to pay the same amount as a family making $800K.

Harvard gets federal money for research. Why on earth should they get all that money if their endowment is so large that they could let in every freshmen come in for free for 10 years or more. Those schools are greedy, and the rich are keeping it that way for a reason. It makes such schools unreachable for the majority simply due to finances.

Spot on.

To add to this, they are making everything a racial issue. So they are prioritizing black and Hispanic students and giving full rides to many (most?) of them. It's all part of a political compromise where rich people for whom $80k a year is nothing retain priority access for their progeny to the schools that feed into the highest layer of the economy. They don't want smart upper middle class kids competing for these seats with their kids.

They are deflecting from the outrageous cost of a private education by pounding the table on DEI and FGLI. Btw, DEI also lets them put a lid on the middle class Asians who have been outcompeting their kids.

Financial aid has nothing to do with race. Bolded is a total myth.

Are you really contending that if you looked at the racial composition of the 50-60% fo the Ivy student body that receives need based aid averaging $50-55k, you would not see a distinct skew towards URM students? How can that not be the case when we see the income statistics nationally of households sorted by race? Black and Hispanic families make far less than whites and Asians earn more than anyone.

The argument is not that they bend the rules in favor of URMs, it's that URMs are more likely to qualify for aid under the rules. Because URMs are less affluent, which is the main reason they are URMs!

DP.. if the majority of URM students are from wealthy families, then it doesn't matter what national statistics look like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Families in the bottom band of the upper middle class can't afford to pay for t20 schools. Everyone else can. The system excludes one group of students from those elite schools. It excludes no one else. That's about it.

$120-180k is squarely “bottom of the upper middle class,” and they get good financial aid.

People have no idea what actual middle class is, and it shows.

It’s not $200k.

tell that to CNBC and the Census Bureau. Some high col areas have median income around $200K. You can argue that people choose to live in hcol areas, but the fact remains, that $200K in hcol is median income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Families in the bottom band of the upper middle class can't afford to pay for t20 schools. Everyone else can. The system excludes one group of students from those elite schools. It excludes no one else. That's about it.

$120-180k is squarely “bottom of the upper middle class,” and they get good financial aid.

But $200K is not that much more than $180K, after taxes.

There will always be a "cutoff". But those making $180K are not getting full rides, they are getting some financial aid. Someone making $200K has the ability to send their kids to State schools or OOS equivalent for minimal debt. For someone making $100K, unless they find a "meets full need" school (most are in T25-40), they probably have not had the means to save enough for even In-State. So Majority of MC/LMC are left out of attending college without major debt. I'm much more concerned about that and it's impact on our society than the "we make $250k and cannot afford Harvard" crowd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Families in the bottom band of the upper middle class can't afford to pay for t20 schools. Everyone else can. The system excludes one group of students from those elite schools. It excludes no one else. That's about it.

That is a fair assessment but the bottom band of the UMC is quite large. Income is a pyramid. There are many more 200-400k households than 400k+. So you are minimizing it. In essence, the half of the middle class that is above the median line is being excluded. That is what, 30% of the US population?

They aren't excluded. Many people in that income range are able to save for college (or could have but for lifestyle choices. If you paid for your kid to private school in this area, you could have saved for college), have family money available, qualify for various athletic or other scholarships, etc. This is evidenced by the fact that the vast majority of students at elite colleges are well above the poverty line; most are in the top 20 percent. And what are they being excluded from? Not college. Just certain colleges.

I just can't take anyone seriously who thinks that it's easier to get into and afford college if you are actually poor than if you make $200-$400K. That betrays such a complete lack of understanding of poverty that it's clear the person isn't worth listening to. Seriously, if you think being poor is so great, nothing is stopping you. This sad resentment of the poor by the upper middle class is so ridiculous. Yes, college is overpriced. Everyone expressing outrage about this is mad because their kid didn't or won't qualify for as much financial aid as they want and think they are entitled to. Show me what you're doing about growing income inequality in any other area and I might take you seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Families in the bottom band of the upper middle class can't afford to pay for t20 schools. Everyone else can. The system excludes one group of students from those elite schools. It excludes no one else. That's about it.

exactly. That's the donut family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Families in the bottom band of the upper middle class can't afford to pay for t20 schools. Everyone else can. The system excludes one group of students from those elite schools. It excludes no one else. That's about it.

$120-180k is squarely “bottom of the upper middle class,” and they get good financial aid.

But $200K is not that much more than $180K, after taxes.

There will always be a "cutoff". But those making $180K are not getting full rides, they are getting some financial aid. Someone making $200K has the ability to send their kids to State schools or OOS equivalent for minimal debt. For someone making $100K, unless they find a "meets full need" school (most are in T25-40), they probably have not had the means to save enough for even In-State. So Majority of MC/LMC are left out of attending college without major debt. I'm much more concerned about that and it's impact on our society than the "we make $250k and cannot afford Harvard" crowd.

A family making $100K would get some financial aid even in some public schools.

Yes, agree that college costs in general are out of control, but that does include elite schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Families in the bottom band of the upper middle class can't afford to pay for t20 schools. Everyone else can. The system excludes one group of students from those elite schools. It excludes no one else. That's about it.

$120-180k is squarely “bottom of the upper middle class,” and they get good financial aid.

But $200K is not that much more than $180K, after taxes.

There will always be a "cutoff". But those making $180K are not getting full rides, they are getting some financial aid. Someone making $200K has the ability to send their kids to State schools or OOS equivalent for minimal debt. For someone making $100K, unless they find a "meets full need" school (most are in T25-40), they probably have not had the means to save enough for even In-State. So Majority of MC/LMC are left out of attending college without major debt. I'm much more concerned about that and it's impact on our society than the "we make $250k and cannot afford Harvard" crowd.

Yep. But this is just a tarted-up version of complaining that the poor have it too good because they get so much free stuff. It betrays a total lack of understanding of what assistance is actually available, and what living on a true MC/LMC/LC income is like. I'm happy to talk about the rising cost of college and other issues, but as someone who expects that her kid will not receive a dime of need-based financial aid despite the fact that college tuition will be a very hefty percentage of our income, I'm not sympathetic to my fellow $200K-$400K earners upset that they can't afford tuition at one of a very few institutions in the country because they've convinced themselves that they are the only ones worth attending.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Often 2/3 of students at top ranked schools are getting need based aid that covers the vast majority of costs, on average.

200k is the typical cut off for need based aid (about the income level of a couple of school teachers at the peak of their careers aka “the wealthy”)

It just seems these schools must be populated primarily with lower income kids and then 1/3 rich kids.

I guess middle class kids end up at state school.

Poverty line is $35k per year. Median American income is $69k. $200 k annual warning is top 10% nationally.

$220K in DC area is considered MC. It depends on where you live.

Choosing to live in an expensive zip code doesn’t change what socioeconomic class you’re in.

Once again, people don't necessarily "choose" to live in a hcol; they go where the jobs are. Notice how during the pandemic when people could wfh, a lot of people moved out of higher col areas. But, now many are returning because companies are requiring RTO.

220k will get you a 900k house in Silver Spring, IB for perfectly good schools, close enough to the metro to commute that way but also not an insane driving commute, meals out a few times a week, a few nice vacations a year, two cars, and once you've saved up for that first down payment and gotten through the childcare years, you'll be able to max out your retirement and put a ton away towards college (unless you choose to have more than 2 kids, but that is on you friend).

The issue is that those of you in this income bracket don't want to live in a 1950s split level in Silver Spring because you think it's beneath you. You think you are middle class because you are living in a house built for a middle class person in 1955. But this is what happens in high COL areas. It doesn't magically make you middle class. You are living in a house worth close to a million dollars. Middle class peopel can't afford that.

OK, but even in Silver Spring, median income is much higher than somewhere like WV. Like I said, it depends on where you live.

Your argument is that the high cost of living magically makes someone making over 200k middle class, but if that income provides you with plenty of very nice options in the region without an obscenely long commute, then no, it doesn't. You're UMC. But none of this matters because (1) your kid isn't getting into Harvard anyway, and (2) if they do, you could absolutely afford to pay the sticker price, it would just take some sacrifice on your part. Whereas an actual middle class family, making under 150k/yr, simply could not afford it no matter how much they sacrifice because they can't afford any kind of home PLUS 70k/yr in tuition. Thus they get money and you don't. Get over it, and maybe focus your attention on making public colleges and universities very high quality and affordable to anyone. Harvard gets to decide how they handle their endowment themselves. They disagree with you.

? my kid is going to a state university, but you are side stepping the point because you can't argue with the point: it's ridiculous that these colleges expect a family that is making $280K to pay the same amount as a family making $800K.

Harvard gets federal money for research. Why on earth should they get all that money if their endowment is so large that they could let in every freshmen come in for free for 10 years or more. Those schools are greedy, and the rich are keeping it that way for a reason. It makes such schools unreachable for the majority simply due to finances.

Spot on.

To add to this, they are making everything a racial issue. So they are prioritizing black and Hispanic students and giving full rides to many (most?) of them. It's all part of a political compromise where rich people for whom $80k a year is nothing retain priority access for their progeny to the schools that feed into the highest layer of the economy. They don't want smart upper middle class kids competing for these seats with their kids.

They are deflecting from the outrageous cost of a private education by pounding the table on DEI and FGLI. Btw, DEI also lets them put a lid on the middle class Asians who have been outcompeting their kids.

Financial aid has nothing to do with race. Bolded is a total myth.

Are you really contending that if you looked at the racial composition of the 50-60% fo the Ivy student body that receives need based aid averaging $50-55k, you would not see a distinct skew towards URM students? How can that not be the case when we see the income statistics nationally of households sorted by race? Black and Hispanic families make far less than whites and Asians earn more than anyone.

The argument is not that they bend the rules in favor of URMs, it's that URMs are more likely to qualify for aid under the rules. Because URMs are less affluent, which is the main reason they are URMs!

From a Harvard Economist (Roland Fryer):

"But affirmative action is very often not targeted at individuals who, because of disadvantage, are achieving below their potential. Seventy-one percent of Harvard’s Black and Hispanic students come from wealthy backgrounds."

And here is the grey area. Many wealthy URM families are still living in neighborhoods with low achieving schools. There are a tiny, tiny number that can afford to send their kids to Sidwell friends. The rest coach their kids to the top 5% of their kids' sh**y schools and then they are in the same boat as everyone else. Trying to get their kids into a college where there will be other students that will put in the same level of effort.