Are top private colleges mainly for poor people now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

?no one has stated that.

[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:

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.

? How do you know where they live?

[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:

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.

? How do you know where they live?

https://www.census.gov/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I'm not sympathetic to them either.

[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:

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.

If they are truly wealthy/rich, then that is their choice to remain in neighborhoods with low achieving schools. They could move to a better public or find a private that is good and more affordable than Sidwell type.

But "trying to get their kids into a college where there will be other students that will put in the same level of effort"? Almost every college in the T150-200 will have high level students. There may be less at a T150-200, but they will still be there in the honors college. Go to a T60-80 and there will be many many students that meet your criteria.
And at the T20 there will be a group who don't put in much effort and still hope to ride the coattails of being wealthy/having connections and not actually do the work.

[Anonymous]

I think the consideration of income should also take into consideration the home prices and general income of the population. It wouldn't be hard to measure.

My family's income in DC is much different than my sister's family in Kentucky, but my nephew is not only able to apply to reasonably priced in state schools but also will get means help at private elites. The difference in our family income? $80k. They live in a 4 bedroom home and we live in a 2 bedroom. We will have to get loans no matter what. We cannot afford over $50K per year. DC TAG is a joke to add insult to injury.

And no, we can't just pick up and move to KY - our jobs don't really exist there.

[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:

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.

If they are truly wealthy/rich, then that is their choice to remain in neighborhoods with low achieving schools. They could move to a better public or find a private that is good and more affordable than Sidwell type.

But "trying to get their kids into a college where there will be other students that will put in the same level of effort"? Almost every college in the T150-200 will have high level students. There may be less at a T150-200, but they will still be there in the honors college. Go to a T60-80 and there will be many many students that meet your criteria.
And at the T20 there will be a group who don't put in much effort and still hope to ride the coattails of being wealthy/having connections and not actually do the work.

Their choice? You have so much bubble wrap around your life you don't even recognize the lasting effects of reclining?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining

[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:

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.

? How do you know where they live?

https://www.census.gov/

That doesn't explain where the wealthy black people who go to elite schools live. For example, look at Obama's children. Their kids went to $$$ private schools. I'm betting that a lot of wealthy black families send their kids to private schools, just like a lot of wealthy white families do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the consideration of income should also take into consideration the home prices and general income of the population. It wouldn't be hard to measure.

My family's income in DC is much different than my sister's family in Kentucky, but my nephew is not only able to apply to reasonably priced in state schools but also will get means help at private elites. The difference in our family income? $80k. They live in a 4 bedroom home and we live in a 2 bedroom. We will have to get loans no matter what. We cannot afford over $50K per year. DC TAG is a joke to add insult to injury.

And no, we can't just pick up and move to KY - our jobs don't really exist there.

thank you.. someone who finally gets the difference in col in different areas, and how that impacts whether you are middle class or not.

[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:

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.

? How do you know where they live?

https://www.census.gov/

That doesn't explain where the wealthy black people who go to elite schools live. For example, look at Obama's children. Their kids went to $$$ private schools. I'm betting that a lot of wealthy black families send their kids to private schools, just like a lot of wealthy white families do.

You're betting?

Dang, I thought you were someone with some insight. I assumed. You assumed. Pointless conversation...

[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!

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

So you are arguing that URMs are *under-represented* among financial aid recipients? I'm sorry, I went to a school like this. Certainly some URM kids were probably not getting much aid but most I knew would have been.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not clear what OP wants. For it to be free for everyone? For it to be like private k-12 where there are no truly poor students?

For it to be free up to her personal income level. But no higher.

[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:

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.

So you are arguing that URMs are *under-represented* among financial aid recipients? I'm sorry, I went to a school like this. Certainly some URM kids were probably not getting much aid but most I knew would have been.

? That wasn't the point. A PP somewhere stated that the majority black students at elite schools are from wealthier families. So, it doesn't matter that national statistics show that there is a higher % of low income black families.

Are there stats that breakdown the demographics of financial aid recipients at these colleges?

I'm sure there are URM who get need based aid, but there are also asian and white students who get aid, too. I don't know what that breakdown looks like. I was simply stating that if it's true that the majority of black students at Harvard, let's say, are from wealthier families, then need based aid is not really race related, as a PP claimed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not clear what OP wants. For it to be free for everyone? For it to be like private k-12 where there are no truly poor students?

For it to be free up to her personal income level. But no higher.

OP: Really I was just making a point. We wouldn't qualify for aid under any scenario, assets way too high.

The core issue is that the retail price tag has just gotten soooooo high. Much higher than it was on a relative basis a generation ago.

The practical effect of this is that the only students who can really attend are the ones who qualify for a ton of aid (because they come from very modest backgrounds) or students who come from very affluent backgrounds where full price is not an issue. Sure, there are some UMC donut hole families who choose to take out tons of loans to make it happen, but many probably choose a cheaper option.

[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:

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.

So you are arguing that URMs are *under-represented* among financial aid recipients? I'm sorry, I went to a school like this. Certainly some URM kids were probably not getting much aid but most I knew would have been.

? That wasn't the point. A PP somewhere stated that the majority black students at elite schools are from wealthier families. So, it doesn't matter that national statistics show that there is a higher % of low income black families.

Are there stats that breakdown the demographics of financial aid recipients at these colleges?

I'm sure there are URM who get need based aid, but there are also asian and white students who get aid, too. I don't know what that breakdown looks like. I was simply stating that if it's true that the majority of black students at Harvard, let's say, are from wealthier families, then need based aid is not really race related, as a PP claimed.

Schools would never share this data but I would be floored if there wasn't a meaningful URM tilt in the group of students receiving substantial financial aid. Notwithstanding the article that was posted. And frankly there should be a URM tilt--because I thought the whole point of DEI was to provide opportunities to disadvantaged kids