Are top private colleges mainly for poor people now?

[Anonymous]

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.

That's fine but look what you've done. You've sacrificed your whole life only to be ripped off by a system where more than half the kids are practically going for free, while maybe a quarter of the parents are rich people for whom $320k is a fraction of an annual bonus. You are kind of the sucker here.

And I’m sure Harvard’s $50+ BILLION endowment appreciates all the sacrifice. We shouldn’t have a system that requires such deprivation when colleges are sitting on tax protected billions. We are the suckers. Chileans took to the streets when universities were too expensive. We shame each other for taking a vacation.

+1 And most of our vacations aren't even that nice. I've never taken our kids to a beach resort or Disneyworld. Most of our vacations are to see family. We drive our cars for like 15 years. We chose to live in a nice neighborhood for the safety and schools, but that's about it. We live in a hcol area because of our jobs, but that's about it.

We don't wear expensive clothes; we shop at Old Navy and Kohls. I have no jewelry except my engagement ring.

We save a lot more for retirement because we don't have family money, and we don't want to burden our children with our retirement. And actually, we help out our families financially.

Colleges that take federal money for research should have their costs regulated.

It's ridiculous for them to expect families making $280K to pay the same as a family making $800K.

I'm the same as you, but I'm not so sure it is ridiculous for them to expect that families making $280k should pay the same as a family making $800k. I think of these $80k per year colleges as a luxury car. There are people that pay $80k for a car. I suppose I could do that-- you could do that-- but I don't because the used Toyota Rav4 is fine. Likewise, I could pay $80k per year for my kids to go to a college, but why would I when they can get just as good an education at a public school.

Why do these schools decide to not help upper-middle class attend? Maybe those endowments are restricted and can only be used to help families that are truly middle class? OR maybe the odd mix of obscenely wealthy and middle class/ poor kids and nothing in between is working for them. Gives the student body une certaine frissione that having a bunch of upper-middle class people would cause to go flat.

The fact is kids in upper-middle class families will largely do very well at whatever school they attend. They don't need the access that less affluent kids require. For a school to brag about rags-to-riches stories the kids actually needs to be in rags, and $280k per year families ain't going to bring it.

Anyway, if your argument is that private elite schools should give a better deal to families making $280k than for $800k, where does that kind of thinking end? Tesla has luxury cars and the company has taken federal money for research-- should society require Tesla to charge families making $800k more for their luxury car than families making $280k? IF not, why would we require Harvard to do it? To my mind Harvard is a luxury just like a luxury car.

Well said!

Nobody is entitled to an elite education. Plenty of excellent options that will be affordable.
But if you really want it, just like a luxury car, you can choose to divert your money to pay for it.

But no, someone making $800k should not pay more than someone making $280k. That is not poor, not MC. Wealthy do not need to subdidize your kids education when you at in top 5%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


I'm the same as you, but I'm not so sure it is ridiculous for them to expect that families making $280k should pay the same as a family making $800k. I think of these $80k per year colleges as a luxury car. There are people that pay $80k for a car. I suppose I could do that-- you could do that-- but I don't because the used Toyota Rav4 is fine. Likewise, I could pay $80k per year for my kids to go to a college, but why would I when they can get just as good an education at a public school.

Why do these schools decide to not help upper-middle class attend? Maybe those endowments are restricted and can only be used to help families that are truly middle class? OR maybe the odd mix of obscenely wealthy and middle class/ poor kids and nothing in between is working for them. Gives the student body une certaine frissione that having a bunch of upper-middle class people would cause to go flat.

The fact is kids in upper-middle class families will largely do very well at whatever school they attend. They don't need the access that less affluent kids require. For a school to brag about rags-to-riches stories the kids actually needs to be in rags, and $280k per year families ain't going to bring it.

Anyway, if your argument is that private elite schools should give a better deal to families making $280k than for $800k, where does that kind of thinking end? Tesla has luxury cars and the company has taken federal money for research-- should society require Tesla to charge families making $800k more for their luxury car than families making $280k? IF not, why would we require Harvard to do it? To my mind Harvard is a luxury just like a luxury car.


Well said!

Nobody is entitled to an elite education. Plenty of excellent options that will be affordable.
But if you really want it, just like a luxury car, you can choose to divert your money to pay for it.

But no, someone making $800k should not pay more than someone making $280k. That is not poor, not MC. Wealthy do not need to subdidize your kids education when you at in top 5%

All of this is true, but I think that implementing pricing and policies that exclude a significant part of the American middle class from accessing top 25 schools is not a good political move, as it plays to the allegations of elitism that are routinely hurled at those institutions. And it isn't really the $280K family that is the cut-off. It is the families below that who are being told that they qualify for a sliver of aid, but nothing close to what they need. FAFSA also rewards the spendthrifts and penalizes the savers. A 50 yo couple who have saved 10-20% of their income over the years qualifies for nothing while the couple who spent every dime will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


I'm the same as you, but I'm not so sure it is ridiculous for them to expect that families making $280k should pay the same as a family making $800k. I think of these $80k per year colleges as a luxury car. There are people that pay $80k for a car. I suppose I could do that-- you could do that-- but I don't because the used Toyota Rav4 is fine. Likewise, I could pay $80k per year for my kids to go to a college, but why would I when they can get just as good an education at a public school.

Why do these schools decide to not help upper-middle class attend? Maybe those endowments are restricted and can only be used to help families that are truly middle class? OR maybe the odd mix of obscenely wealthy and middle class/ poor kids and nothing in between is working for them. Gives the student body une certaine frissione that having a bunch of upper-middle class people would cause to go flat.

The fact is kids in upper-middle class families will largely do very well at whatever school they attend. They don't need the access that less affluent kids require. For a school to brag about rags-to-riches stories the kids actually needs to be in rags, and $280k per year families ain't going to bring it.

Anyway, if your argument is that private elite schools should give a better deal to families making $280k than for $800k, where does that kind of thinking end? Tesla has luxury cars and the company has taken federal money for research-- should society require Tesla to charge families making $800k more for their luxury car than families making $280k? IF not, why would we require Harvard to do it? To my mind Harvard is a luxury just like a luxury car.


Well said!

Nobody is entitled to an elite education. Plenty of excellent options that will be affordable.
But if you really want it, just like a luxury car, you can choose to divert your money to pay for it.

But no, someone making $800k should not pay more than someone making $280k. That is not poor, not MC. Wealthy do not need to subdidize your kids education when you at in top 5%

All of this is true, but I think that implementing pricing and policies that exclude a significant part of the American middle class from accessing top 25 schools is not a good political move, as it plays to the allegations of elitism that are routinely hurled at those institutions. And it isn't really the $280K family that is the cut-off. It is the families below that who are being told that they qualify for a sliver of aid, but nothing close to what they need. FAFSA also rewards the spendthrifts and penalizes the savers. A 50 yo couple who have saved 10-20% of their income over the years qualifies for nothing while the couple who spent every dime will.

There is another thread wondering "Are top private colleges mainly for poor people now?"

It is like some social scientist is doing A/B testing here on DCUM. So unexpected

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


I'm the same as you, but I'm not so sure it is ridiculous for them to expect that families making $280k should pay the same as a family making $800k. I think of these $80k per year colleges as a luxury car. There are people that pay $80k for a car. I suppose I could do that-- you could do that-- but I don't because the used Toyota Rav4 is fine. Likewise, I could pay $80k per year for my kids to go to a college, but why would I when they can get just as good an education at a public school.

Why do these schools decide to not help upper-middle class attend? Maybe those endowments are restricted and can only be used to help families that are truly middle class? OR maybe the odd mix of obscenely wealthy and middle class/ poor kids and nothing in between is working for them. Gives the student body une certaine frissione that having a bunch of upper-middle class people would cause to go flat.

The fact is kids in upper-middle class families will largely do very well at whatever school they attend. They don't need the access that less affluent kids require. For a school to brag about rags-to-riches stories the kids actually needs to be in rags, and $280k per year families ain't going to bring it.

Anyway, if your argument is that private elite schools should give a better deal to families making $280k than for $800k, where does that kind of thinking end? Tesla has luxury cars and the company has taken federal money for research-- should society require Tesla to charge families making $800k more for their luxury car than families making $280k? IF not, why would we require Harvard to do it? To my mind Harvard is a luxury just like a luxury car.


Well said!

Nobody is entitled to an elite education. Plenty of excellent options that will be affordable.
But if you really want it, just like a luxury car, you can choose to divert your money to pay for it.

But no, someone making $800k should not pay more than someone making $280k. That is not poor, not MC. Wealthy do not need to subdidize your kids education when you at in top 5%

All of this is true, but I think that implementing pricing and policies that exclude a significant part of the American middle class from accessing top 25 schools is not a good political move, as it plays to the allegations of elitism that are routinely hurled at those institutions. And it isn't really the $280K family that is the cut-off. It is the families below that who are being told that they qualify for a sliver of aid, but nothing close to what they need. FAFSA also rewards the spendthrifts and penalizes the savers. A 50 yo couple who have saved 10-20% of their income over the years qualifies for nothing while the couple who spent every dime will.

Well stated. There is this idea that everyone deserves access to these institutions but in practice the cutoff is so low that many don’t have such access

[Anonymous]

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.

That's fine but look what you've done. You've sacrificed your whole life only to be ripped off by a system where more than half the kids are practically going for free, while maybe a quarter of the parents are rich people for whom $320k is a fraction of an annual bonus. You are kind of the sucker here.

And I’m sure Harvard’s $50+ BILLION endowment appreciates all the sacrifice. We shouldn’t have a system that requires such deprivation when colleges are sitting on tax protected billions. We are the suckers. Chileans took to the streets when universities were too expensive. We shame each other for taking a vacation.

+1 And most of our vacations aren't even that nice. I've never taken our kids to a beach resort or Disneyworld. Most of our vacations are to see family. We drive our cars for like 15 years. We chose to live in a nice neighborhood for the safety and schools, but that's about it. We live in a hcol area because of our jobs, but that's about it.

We don't wear expensive clothes; we shop at Old Navy and Kohls. I have no jewelry except my engagement ring.

We save a lot more for retirement because we don't have family money, and we don't want to burden our children with our retirement. And actually, we help out our families financially.

Colleges that take federal money for research should have their costs regulated.

It's ridiculous for them to expect families making $280K to pay the same as a family making $800K.

I'm the same as you, but I'm not so sure it is ridiculous for them to expect that families making $280k should pay the same as a family making $800k. I think of these $80k per year colleges as a luxury car. There are people that pay $80k for a car. I suppose I could do that-- you could do that-- but I don't because the used Toyota Rav4 is fine. Likewise, I could pay $80k per year for my kids to go to a college, but why would I when they can get just as good an education at a public school.

Why do these schools decide to not help upper-middle class attend? Maybe those endowments are restricted and can only be used to help families that are truly middle class? OR maybe the odd mix of obscenely wealthy and middle class/ poor kids and nothing in between is working for them. Gives the student body une certaine frissione that having a bunch of upper-middle class people would cause to go flat.

The fact is kids in upper-middle class families will largely do very well at whatever school they attend. They don't need the access that less affluent kids require. For a school to brag about rags-to-riches stories the kids actually needs to be in rags, and $280k per year families ain't going to bring it.

Anyway, if your argument is that private elite schools should give a better deal to families making $280k than for $800k, where does that kind of thinking end? Tesla has luxury cars and the company has taken federal money for research-- should society require Tesla to charge families making $800k more for their luxury car than families making $280k? IF not, why would we require Harvard to do it? To my mind Harvard is a luxury just like a luxury car.

Well said!

Nobody is entitled to an elite education. Plenty of excellent options that will be affordable.
But if you really want it, just like a luxury car, you can choose to divert your money to pay for it.

But no, someone making $800k should not pay more than someone making $280k. That is not poor, not MC. Wealthy do not need to subdidize your kids education when you at in top 5%

If “nobody is entitled” then why do we have need based aid? The folks receiving that aid appear to be entitled to it.

[Anonymous]

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.

That's fine but look what you've done. You've sacrificed your whole life only to be ripped off by a system where more than half the kids are practically going for free, while maybe a quarter of the parents are rich people for whom $320k is a fraction of an annual bonus. You are kind of the sucker here.

And I’m sure Harvard’s $50+ BILLION endowment appreciates all the sacrifice. We shouldn’t have a system that requires such deprivation when colleges are sitting on tax protected billions. We are the suckers. Chileans took to the streets when universities were too expensive. We shame each other for taking a vacation.

+1 And most of our vacations aren't even that nice. I've never taken our kids to a beach resort or Disneyworld. Most of our vacations are to see family. We drive our cars for like 15 years. We chose to live in a nice neighborhood for the safety and schools, but that's about it. We live in a hcol area because of our jobs, but that's about it.

We don't wear expensive clothes; we shop at Old Navy and Kohls. I have no jewelry except my engagement ring.

We save a lot more for retirement because we don't have family money, and we don't want to burden our children with our retirement. And actually, we help out our families financially.

Colleges that take federal money for research should have their costs regulated.

It's ridiculous for them to expect families making $280K to pay the same as a family making $800K.

I'm the same as you, but I'm not so sure it is ridiculous for them to expect that families making $280k should pay the same as a family making $800k. I think of these $80k per year colleges as a luxury car. There are people that pay $80k for a car. I suppose I could do that-- you could do that-- but I don't because the used Toyota Rav4 is fine. Likewise, I could pay $80k per year for my kids to go to a college, but why would I when they can get just as good an education at a public school.

Why do these schools decide to not help upper-middle class attend? Maybe those endowments are restricted and can only be used to help families that are truly middle class? OR maybe the odd mix of obscenely wealthy and middle class/ poor kids and nothing in between is working for them. Gives the student body une certaine frissione that having a bunch of upper-middle class people would cause to go flat.

The fact is kids in upper-middle class families will largely do very well at whatever school they attend. They don't need the access that less affluent kids require. For a school to brag about rags-to-riches stories the kids actually needs to be in rags, and $280k per year families ain't going to bring it.

Anyway, if your argument is that private elite schools should give a better deal to families making $280k than for $800k, where does that kind of thinking end? Tesla has luxury cars and the company has taken federal money for research-- should society require Tesla to charge families making $800k more for their luxury car than families making $280k? IF not, why would we require Harvard to do it? To my mind Harvard is a luxury just like a luxury car.

Well said!

Nobody is entitled to an elite education. Plenty of excellent options that will be affordable.
But if you really want it, just like a luxury car, you can choose to divert your money to pay for it.

But no, someone making $800k should not pay more than someone making $280k. That is not poor, not MC. Wealthy do not need to subdidize your kids education when you at in top 5%

If “nobody is entitled” then why do we have need based aid? The folks receiving that aid appear to be entitled to it.

Because the "underprivileged" often need a bit of help to get ahead. Someone with a family who only earns $45k/year has so many other issues and obstacles they have had to overcome to have the resume for getting accepted at a T25 school. Life is not so grand for them, because if they don't get into a need blind school that funds ALL need, they often cannot afford anything but CC and then transferring.
They certainly could not save much if any for college as they can barely manage to live on that. And the T25/elite colleges recognize the benefits of having more than just wealthy and UMC families on campus. For an underprivileged kid, the doors opened with a T25 education are numerous (not so much so for the UMC/Wealthy vs attending your state U).

However, the $280K (and really even the $200K) could have made choices to save and be able to afford college, even saving enough for $50-60K/year or more. These are private universities, they can choose how to spend their endowment on financial aid/merit awards. And no, I don't think someone making $200K is entitled to financial aid. If they did not save, then they can search merit and attend a private for minimal cost (not hard to do if their kid has stats for Harvard) or their instate flagship, etc. They have many choices still available to them.

But the argument those that get "need based aid" are entitled is ridiculous. Do you go around lamenting that a family of 4 making only $30K gets food stamps while you making $200K has to pay for your own food? Doubt it, and I highly doubt you would want to change places with them in order to get the food stamps.
We provide help in many ways to better society as a whole. It benefits lower income students to get FA and be able to attend college (be it T25 or any college). Once they make the break out of poverty their kids will likely continue that path and often education is the key to having a good higher paying job (not all, but many jobs require it). So it benefits society to help ensure those kids have an opportunity.
If you are making $200K, your kids will be fine (or they should be anyways) no matter where they attend. They have so many privileges growing up it's difficult to enumerate.

Note, we don't usually hear people making $45K/year complaining if their kid does not get into Harvard/Yale/etc. They move on and find anyway they can to get their kid an education that is affordable to them---they are just thrilled their kid is getting the opportunity to attend any college.

[Anonymous]

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.

That's fine but look what you've done. You've sacrificed your whole life only to be ripped off by a system where more than half the kids are practically going for free, while maybe a quarter of the parents are rich people for whom $320k is a fraction of an annual bonus. You are kind of the sucker here.

And I’m sure Harvard’s $50+ BILLION endowment appreciates all the sacrifice. We shouldn’t have a system that requires such deprivation when colleges are sitting on tax protected billions. We are the suckers. Chileans took to the streets when universities were too expensive. We shame each other for taking a vacation.

+1 And most of our vacations aren't even that nice. I've never taken our kids to a beach resort or Disneyworld. Most of our vacations are to see family. We drive our cars for like 15 years. We chose to live in a nice neighborhood for the safety and schools, but that's about it. We live in a hcol area because of our jobs, but that's about it.

We don't wear expensive clothes; we shop at Old Navy and Kohls. I have no jewelry except my engagement ring.

We save a lot more for retirement because we don't have family money, and we don't want to burden our children with our retirement. And actually, we help out our families financially.

Colleges that take federal money for research should have their costs regulated.

It's ridiculous for them to expect families making $280K to pay the same as a family making $800K.

I'm the same as you, but I'm not so sure it is ridiculous for them to expect that families making $280k should pay the same as a family making $800k. I think of these $80k per year colleges as a luxury car. There are people that pay $80k for a car. I suppose I could do that-- you could do that-- but I don't because the used Toyota Rav4 is fine. Likewise, I could pay $80k per year for my kids to go to a college, but why would I when they can get just as good an education at a public school.

Why do these schools decide to not help upper-middle class attend? Maybe those endowments are restricted and can only be used to help families that are truly middle class? OR maybe the odd mix of obscenely wealthy and middle class/ poor kids and nothing in between is working for them. Gives the student body une certaine frissione that having a bunch of upper-middle class people would cause to go flat.

The fact is kids in upper-middle class families will largely do very well at whatever school they attend. They don't need the access that less affluent kids require. For a school to brag about rags-to-riches stories the kids actually needs to be in rags, and $280k per year families ain't going to bring it.

Anyway, if your argument is that private elite schools should give a better deal to families making $280k than for $800k, where does that kind of thinking end? Tesla has luxury cars and the company has taken federal money for research-- should society require Tesla to charge families making $800k more for their luxury car than families making $280k? IF not, why would we require Harvard to do it? To my mind Harvard is a luxury just like a luxury car.

Well said!

Nobody is entitled to an elite education. Plenty of excellent options that will be affordable.
But if you really want it, just like a luxury car, you can choose to divert your money to pay for it.

But no, someone making $800k should not pay more than someone making $280k. That is not poor, not MC. Wealthy do not need to subdidize your kids education when you at in top 5%

If “nobody is entitled” then why do we have need based aid? The folks receiving that aid appear to be entitled to it.

Because the "underprivileged" often need a bit of help to get ahead. Someone with a family who only earns $45k/year has so many other issues and obstacles they have had to overcome to have the resume for getting accepted at a T25 school. Life is not so grand for them, because if they don't get into a need blind school that funds ALL need, they often cannot afford anything but CC and then transferring.
They certainly could not save much if any for college as they can barely manage to live on that. And the T25/elite colleges recognize the benefits of having more than just wealthy and UMC families on campus. For an underprivileged kid, the doors opened with a T25 education are numerous (not so much so for the UMC/Wealthy vs attending your state U).

However, the $280K (and really even the $200K) could have made choices to save and be able to afford college, even saving enough for $50-60K/year or more. These are private universities, they can choose how to spend their endowment on financial aid/merit awards. And no, I don't think someone making $200K is entitled to financial aid. If they did not save, then they can search merit and attend a private for minimal cost (not hard to do if their kid has stats for Harvard) or their instate flagship, etc. They have many choices still available to them.

But the argument those that get "need based aid" are entitled is ridiculous. Do you go around lamenting that a family of 4 making only $30K gets food stamps while you making $200K has to pay for your own food? Doubt it, and I highly doubt you would want to change places with them in order to get the food stamps.
We provide help in many ways to better society as a whole. It benefits lower income students to get FA and be able to attend college (be it T25 or any college). Once they make the break out of poverty their kids will likely continue that path and often education is the key to having a good higher paying job (not all, but many jobs require it). So it benefits society to help ensure those kids have an opportunity.
If you are making $200K, your kids will be fine (or they should be anyways) no matter where they attend. They have so many privileges growing up it's difficult to enumerate.

Note, we don't usually hear people making $45K/year complaining if their kid does not get into Harvard/Yale/etc. They move on and find anyway they can to get their kid an education that is affordable to them---they are just thrilled their kid is getting the opportunity to attend any college.

Not convinced. Schools have set up a system whereby certain kids get basically full rides and others don’t, depending on financial condition of their parents. So it seems we have set up an entitlement system. Poor kids are entitled to attend at no cost if they meet the standards of the school - admissions officers (at need blind schools) cannot even look at the financial condition of the parents

[Anonymous]

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.

That's fine but look what you've done. You've sacrificed your whole life only to be ripped off by a system where more than half the kids are practically going for free, while maybe a quarter of the parents are rich people for whom $320k is a fraction of an annual bonus. You are kind of the sucker here.

And I’m sure Harvard’s $50+ BILLION endowment appreciates all the sacrifice. We shouldn’t have a system that requires such deprivation when colleges are sitting on tax protected billions. We are the suckers. Chileans took to the streets when universities were too expensive. We shame each other for taking a vacation.

+1 And most of our vacations aren't even that nice. I've never taken our kids to a beach resort or Disneyworld. Most of our vacations are to see family. We drive our cars for like 15 years. We chose to live in a nice neighborhood for the safety and schools, but that's about it. We live in a hcol area because of our jobs, but that's about it.

We don't wear expensive clothes; we shop at Old Navy and Kohls. I have no jewelry except my engagement ring.

We save a lot more for retirement because we don't have family money, and we don't want to burden our children with our retirement. And actually, we help out our families financially.

Colleges that take federal money for research should have their costs regulated.

It's ridiculous for them to expect families making $280K to pay the same as a family making $800K.

I'm the same as you, but I'm not so sure it is ridiculous for them to expect that families making $280k should pay the same as a family making $800k. I think of these $80k per year colleges as a luxury car. There are people that pay $80k for a car. I suppose I could do that-- you could do that-- but I don't because the used Toyota Rav4 is fine. Likewise, I could pay $80k per year for my kids to go to a college, but why would I when they can get just as good an education at a public school.

Why do these schools decide to not help upper-middle class attend? Maybe those endowments are restricted and can only be used to help families that are truly middle class? OR maybe the odd mix of obscenely wealthy and middle class/ poor kids and nothing in between is working for them. Gives the student body une certaine frissione that having a bunch of upper-middle class people would cause to go flat.

The fact is kids in upper-middle class families will largely do very well at whatever school they attend. They don't need the access that less affluent kids require. For a school to brag about rags-to-riches stories the kids actually needs to be in rags, and $280k per year families ain't going to bring it.

Anyway, if your argument is that private elite schools should give a better deal to families making $280k than for $800k, where does that kind of thinking end? Tesla has luxury cars and the company has taken federal money for research-- should society require Tesla to charge families making $800k more for their luxury car than families making $280k? IF not, why would we require Harvard to do it? To my mind Harvard is a luxury just like a luxury car.

Well said!

Nobody is entitled to an elite education. Plenty of excellent options that will be affordable.
But if you really want it, just like a luxury car, you can choose to divert your money to pay for it.

But no, someone making $800k should not pay more than someone making $280k. That is not poor, not MC. Wealthy do not need to subdidize your kids education when you at in top 5%

If “nobody is entitled” then why do we have need based aid? The folks receiving that aid appear to be entitled to it.

Because the "underprivileged" often need a bit of help to get ahead. Someone with a family who only earns $45k/year has so many other issues and obstacles they have had to overcome to have the resume for getting accepted at a T25 school. Life is not so grand for them, because if they don't get into a need blind school that funds ALL need, they often cannot afford anything but CC and then transferring.
They certainly could not save much if any for college as they can barely manage to live on that. And the T25/elite colleges recognize the benefits of having more than just wealthy and UMC families on campus. For an underprivileged kid, the doors opened with a T25 education are numerous (not so much so for the UMC/Wealthy vs attending your state U).

However, the $280K (and really even the $200K) could have made choices to save and be able to afford college, even saving enough for $50-60K/year or more. These are private universities, they can choose how to spend their endowment on financial aid/merit awards. And no, I don't think someone making $200K is entitled to financial aid. If they did not save, then they can search merit and attend a private for minimal cost (not hard to do if their kid has stats for Harvard) or their instate flagship, etc. They have many choices still available to them.

But the argument those that get "need based aid" are entitled is ridiculous. Do you go around lamenting that a family of 4 making only $30K gets food stamps while you making $200K has to pay for your own food? Doubt it, and I highly doubt you would want to change places with them in order to get the food stamps.
We provide help in many ways to better society as a whole. It benefits lower income students to get FA and be able to attend college (be it T25 or any college). Once they make the break out of poverty their kids will likely continue that path and often education is the key to having a good higher paying job (not all, but many jobs require it). So it benefits society to help ensure those kids have an opportunity.
If you are making $200K, your kids will be fine (or they should be anyways) no matter where they attend. They have so many privileges growing up it's difficult to enumerate.

Note, we don't usually hear people making $45K/year complaining if their kid does not get into Harvard/Yale/etc. They move on and find anyway they can to get their kid an education that is affordable to them---they are just thrilled their kid is getting the opportunity to attend any college.

Not convinced. Schools have set up a system whereby certain kids get basically full rides and others don’t, depending on financial condition of their parents. So it seems we have set up an entitlement system. Poor kids are entitled to attend at no cost if they meet the standards of the school - admissions officers (at need blind schools) cannot even look at the financial condition of the parents

Once again, the kids who are getting full aid, or close to full aid do not live a privileged life. Yes, universities are free to offer aid to them because they want to increase socioeconomic diversity on their campuses. All private schools are free to set these standards for financial need/meeting financial need. Note: if the schools get rid of financial need, then the costs to attend would not go down, yet you still would not be able to attend since you have not saved. Only the rich would be able to attend. At least with $280K/year income you had some chance to save something to help your kid along with college. Those making $45K likely had no chance at all and now might struggle to attend college.


If you earn $280K, you are entitled to quit your job, ditch all savings and sell your home and give away the earnings and get a job making $45K and go live where you can with $45K/year. Then you too will be "entitled" to financial aid at need blind schools. But, please do this while your kid is a toddler, because it's not fair if you let them attend schools where you made $280K up until 2 years before college...you need to go all in and get the full experience of what it means to grow up poor/underprivileged.

[Anonymous]

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.

That's fine but look what you've done. You've sacrificed your whole life only to be ripped off by a system where more than half the kids are practically going for free, while maybe a quarter of the parents are rich people for whom $320k is a fraction of an annual bonus. You are kind of the sucker here.

And I’m sure Harvard’s $50+ BILLION endowment appreciates all the sacrifice. We shouldn’t have a system that requires such deprivation when colleges are sitting on tax protected billions. We are the suckers. Chileans took to the streets when universities were too expensive. We shame each other for taking a vacation.

+1 And most of our vacations aren't even that nice. I've never taken our kids to a beach resort or Disneyworld. Most of our vacations are to see family. We drive our cars for like 15 years. We chose to live in a nice neighborhood for the safety and schools, but that's about it. We live in a hcol area because of our jobs, but that's about it.

We don't wear expensive clothes; we shop at Old Navy and Kohls. I have no jewelry except my engagement ring.

We save a lot more for retirement because we don't have family money, and we don't want to burden our children with our retirement. And actually, we help out our families financially.

Colleges that take federal money for research should have their costs regulated.

It's ridiculous for them to expect families making $280K to pay the same as a family making $800K.

I'm the same as you, but I'm not so sure it is ridiculous for them to expect that families making $280k should pay the same as a family making $800k. I think of these $80k per year colleges as a luxury car. There are people that pay $80k for a car. I suppose I could do that-- you could do that-- but I don't because the used Toyota Rav4 is fine. Likewise, I could pay $80k per year for my kids to go to a college, but why would I when they can get just as good an education at a public school.

Why do these schools decide to not help upper-middle class attend? Maybe those endowments are restricted and can only be used to help families that are truly middle class? OR maybe the odd mix of obscenely wealthy and middle class/ poor kids and nothing in between is working for them. Gives the student body une certaine frissione that having a bunch of upper-middle class people would cause to go flat.

The fact is kids in upper-middle class families will largely do very well at whatever school they attend. They don't need the access that less affluent kids require. For a school to brag about rags-to-riches stories the kids actually needs to be in rags, and $280k per year families ain't going to bring it.

Anyway, if your argument is that private elite schools should give a better deal to families making $280k than for $800k, where does that kind of thinking end? Tesla has luxury cars and the company has taken federal money for research-- should society require Tesla to charge families making $800k more for their luxury car than families making $280k? IF not, why would we require Harvard to do it? To my mind Harvard is a luxury just like a luxury car.

Well said!

Nobody is entitled to an elite education. Plenty of excellent options that will be affordable.
But if you really want it, just like a luxury car, you can choose to divert your money to pay for it.

But no, someone making $800k should not pay more than someone making $280k. That is not poor, not MC. Wealthy do not need to subdidize your kids education when you at in top 5%

If “nobody is entitled” then why do we have need based aid? The folks receiving that aid appear to be entitled to it.

Because the "underprivileged" often need a bit of help to get ahead. Someone with a family who only earns $45k/year has so many other issues and obstacles they have had to overcome to have the resume for getting accepted at a T25 school. Life is not so grand for them, because if they don't get into a need blind school that funds ALL need, they often cannot afford anything but CC and then transferring.
They certainly could not save much if any for college as they can barely manage to live on that. And the T25/elite colleges recognize the benefits of having more than just wealthy and UMC families on campus. For an underprivileged kid, the doors opened with a T25 education are numerous (not so much so for the UMC/Wealthy vs attending your state U).

However, the $280K (and really even the $200K) could have made choices to save and be able to afford college, even saving enough for $50-60K/year or more. These are private universities, they can choose how to spend their endowment on financial aid/merit awards. And no, I don't think someone making $200K is entitled to financial aid. If they did not save, then they can search merit and attend a private for minimal cost (not hard to do if their kid has stats for Harvard) or their instate flagship, etc. They have many choices still available to them.

But the argument those that get "need based aid" are entitled is ridiculous. Do you go around lamenting that a family of 4 making only $30K gets food stamps while you making $200K has to pay for your own food? Doubt it, and I highly doubt you would want to change places with them in order to get the food stamps.
We provide help in many ways to better society as a whole. It benefits lower income students to get FA and be able to attend college (be it T25 or any college). Once they make the break out of poverty their kids will likely continue that path and often education is the key to having a good higher paying job (not all, but many jobs require it). So it benefits society to help ensure those kids have an opportunity.
If you are making $200K, your kids will be fine (or they should be anyways) no matter where they attend. They have so many privileges growing up it's difficult to enumerate.

Note, we don't usually hear people making $45K/year complaining if their kid does not get into Harvard/Yale/etc. They move on and find anyway they can to get their kid an education that is affordable to them---they are just thrilled their kid is getting the opportunity to attend any college.

Not convinced. Schools have set up a system whereby certain kids get basically full rides and others don’t, depending on financial condition of their parents. So it seems we have set up an entitlement system. Poor kids are entitled to attend at no cost if they meet the standards of the school - admissions officers (at need blind schools) cannot even look at the financial condition of the parents

Once again, the kids who are getting full aid, or close to full aid do not live a privileged life. Yes, universities are free to offer aid to them because they want to increase socioeconomic diversity on their campuses. All private schools are free to set these standards for financial need/meeting financial need. Note: if the schools get rid of financial need, then the costs to attend would not go down, yet you still would not be able to attend since you have not saved. Only the rich would be able to attend. At least with $280K/year income you had some chance to save something to help your kid along with college. Those making $45K likely had no chance at all and now might struggle to attend college.


If you earn $280K, you are entitled to quit your job, ditch all savings and sell your home and give away the earnings and get a job making $45K and go live where you can with $45K/year. Then you too will be "entitled" to financial aid at need blind schools. But, please do this while your kid is a toddler, because it's not fair if you let them attend schools where you made $280K up until 2 years before college...you need to go all in and get the full experience of what it means to grow up poor/underprivileged.

+100

[Anonymous]

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.

That's fine but look what you've done. You've sacrificed your whole life only to be ripped off by a system where more than half the kids are practically going for free, while maybe a quarter of the parents are rich people for whom $320k is a fraction of an annual bonus. You are kind of the sucker here.

And I’m sure Harvard’s $50+ BILLION endowment appreciates all the sacrifice. We shouldn’t have a system that requires such deprivation when colleges are sitting on tax protected billions. We are the suckers. Chileans took to the streets when universities were too expensive. We shame each other for taking a vacation.

+1 And most of our vacations aren't even that nice. I've never taken our kids to a beach resort or Disneyworld. Most of our vacations are to see family. We drive our cars for like 15 years. We chose to live in a nice neighborhood for the safety and schools, but that's about it. We live in a hcol area because of our jobs, but that's about it.

We don't wear expensive clothes; we shop at Old Navy and Kohls. I have no jewelry except my engagement ring.

We save a lot more for retirement because we don't have family money, and we don't want to burden our children with our retirement. And actually, we help out our families financially.

Colleges that take federal money for research should have their costs regulated.

It's ridiculous for them to expect families making $280K to pay the same as a family making $800K.

I'm the same as you, but I'm not so sure it is ridiculous for them to expect that families making $280k should pay the same as a family making $800k. I think of these $80k per year colleges as a luxury car. There are people that pay $80k for a car. I suppose I could do that-- you could do that-- but I don't because the used Toyota Rav4 is fine. Likewise, I could pay $80k per year for my kids to go to a college, but why would I when they can get just as good an education at a public school.

Why do these schools decide to not help upper-middle class attend? Maybe those endowments are restricted and can only be used to help families that are truly middle class? OR maybe the odd mix of obscenely wealthy and middle class/ poor kids and nothing in between is working for them. Gives the student body une certaine frissione that having a bunch of upper-middle class people would cause to go flat.

The fact is kids in upper-middle class families will largely do very well at whatever school they attend. They don't need the access that less affluent kids require. For a school to brag about rags-to-riches stories the kids actually needs to be in rags, and $280k per year families ain't going to bring it.

Anyway, if your argument is that private elite schools should give a better deal to families making $280k than for $800k, where does that kind of thinking end? Tesla has luxury cars and the company has taken federal money for research-- should society require Tesla to charge families making $800k more for their luxury car than families making $280k? IF not, why would we require Harvard to do it? To my mind Harvard is a luxury just like a luxury car.

Well said!

Nobody is entitled to an elite education. Plenty of excellent options that will be affordable.
But if you really want it, just like a luxury car, you can choose to divert your money to pay for it.

But no, someone making $800k should not pay more than someone making $280k. That is not poor, not MC. Wealthy do not need to subdidize your kids education when you at in top 5%

If “nobody is entitled” then why do we have need based aid? The folks receiving that aid appear to be entitled to it.

Because the "underprivileged" often need a bit of help to get ahead. Someone with a family who only earns $45k/year has so many other issues and obstacles they have had to overcome to have the resume for getting accepted at a T25 school. Life is not so grand for them, because if they don't get into a need blind school that funds ALL need, they often cannot afford anything but CC and then transferring.
They certainly could not save much if any for college as they can barely manage to live on that. And the T25/elite colleges recognize the benefits of having more than just wealthy and UMC families on campus. For an underprivileged kid, the doors opened with a T25 education are numerous (not so much so for the UMC/Wealthy vs attending your state U).

However, the $280K (and really even the $200K) could have made choices to save and be able to afford college, even saving enough for $50-60K/year or more. These are private universities, they can choose how to spend their endowment on financial aid/merit awards. And no, I don't think someone making $200K is entitled to financial aid. If they did not save, then they can search merit and attend a private for minimal cost (not hard to do if their kid has stats for Harvard) or their instate flagship, etc. They have many choices still available to them.

But the argument those that get "need based aid" are entitled is ridiculous. Do you go around lamenting that a family of 4 making only $30K gets food stamps while you making $200K has to pay for your own food? Doubt it, and I highly doubt you would want to change places with them in order to get the food stamps.
We provide help in many ways to better society as a whole. It benefits lower income students to get FA and be able to attend college (be it T25 or any college). Once they make the break out of poverty their kids will likely continue that path and often education is the key to having a good higher paying job (not all, but many jobs require it). So it benefits society to help ensure those kids have an opportunity.
If you are making $200K, your kids will be fine (or they should be anyways) no matter where they attend. They have so many privileges growing up it's difficult to enumerate.

Note, we don't usually hear people making $45K/year complaining if their kid does not get into Harvard/Yale/etc. They move on and find anyway they can to get their kid an education that is affordable to them---they are just thrilled their kid is getting the opportunity to attend any college.

Not convinced. Schools have set up a system whereby certain kids get basically full rides and others don’t, depending on financial condition of their parents. So it seems we have set up an entitlement system. Poor kids are entitled to attend at no cost if they meet the standards of the school - admissions officers (at need blind schools) cannot even look at the financial condition of the parents

Schools also give free rides to kids who catch a football and run fast or row a boat or play golf or the list goes on and on. How is that fair?
Point is not everything in life will be fair. But complaining that a poor kid is getting a free ride to a T25 school when you make over $200K/year shows your values are misplaced. And all this complaining is for private schools who get to set their own rules and for elite schools that the odds of your kid getting into are a lottery anyhow. So should we now make admissions at Harvard be, everyone who applies gets a lottery number and Harvard draws X numbers and sends admission letters?

[Anonymous]

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.

That's fine but look what you've done. You've sacrificed your whole life only to be ripped off by a system where more than half the kids are practically going for free, while maybe a quarter of the parents are rich people for whom $320k is a fraction of an annual bonus. You are kind of the sucker here.

And I’m sure Harvard’s $50+ BILLION endowment appreciates all the sacrifice. We shouldn’t have a system that requires such deprivation when colleges are sitting on tax protected billions. We are the suckers. Chileans took to the streets when universities were too expensive. We shame each other for taking a vacation.

+1 And most of our vacations aren't even that nice. I've never taken our kids to a beach resort or Disneyworld. Most of our vacations are to see family. We drive our cars for like 15 years. We chose to live in a nice neighborhood for the safety and schools, but that's about it. We live in a hcol area because of our jobs, but that's about it.

We don't wear expensive clothes; we shop at Old Navy and Kohls. I have no jewelry except my engagement ring.

We save a lot more for retirement because we don't have family money, and we don't want to burden our children with our retirement. And actually, we help out our families financially.

Colleges that take federal money for research should have their costs regulated.

It's ridiculous for them to expect families making $280K to pay the same as a family making $800K.

I'm the same as you, but I'm not so sure it is ridiculous for them to expect that families making $280k should pay the same as a family making $800k. I think of these $80k per year colleges as a luxury car. There are people that pay $80k for a car. I suppose I could do that-- you could do that-- but I don't because the used Toyota Rav4 is fine. Likewise, I could pay $80k per year for my kids to go to a college, but why would I when they can get just as good an education at a public school.

Why do these schools decide to not help upper-middle class attend? Maybe those endowments are restricted and can only be used to help families that are truly middle class? OR maybe the odd mix of obscenely wealthy and middle class/ poor kids and nothing in between is working for them. Gives the student body une certaine frissione that having a bunch of upper-middle class people would cause to go flat.

The fact is kids in upper-middle class families will largely do very well at whatever school they attend. They don't need the access that less affluent kids require. For a school to brag about rags-to-riches stories the kids actually needs to be in rags, and $280k per year families ain't going to bring it.

Anyway, if your argument is that private elite schools should give a better deal to families making $280k than for $800k, where does that kind of thinking end? Tesla has luxury cars and the company has taken federal money for research-- should society require Tesla to charge families making $800k more for their luxury car than families making $280k? IF not, why would we require Harvard to do it? To my mind Harvard is a luxury just like a luxury car.

Well said!

Nobody is entitled to an elite education. Plenty of excellent options that will be affordable.
But if you really want it, just like a luxury car, you can choose to divert your money to pay for it.

But no, someone making $800k should not pay more than someone making $280k. That is not poor, not MC. Wealthy do not need to subdidize your kids education when you at in top 5%

If “nobody is entitled” then why do we have need based aid? The folks receiving that aid appear to be entitled to it.

Because the "underprivileged" often need a bit of help to get ahead. Someone with a family who only earns $45k/year has so many other issues and obstacles they have had to overcome to have the resume for getting accepted at a T25 school. Life is not so grand for them, because if they don't get into a need blind school that funds ALL need, they often cannot afford anything but CC and then transferring.
They certainly could not save much if any for college as they can barely manage to live on that. And the T25/elite colleges recognize the benefits of having more than just wealthy and UMC families on campus. For an underprivileged kid, the doors opened with a T25 education are numerous (not so much so for the UMC/Wealthy vs attending your state U).

However, the $280K (and really even the $200K) could have made choices to save and be able to afford college, even saving enough for $50-60K/year or more. These are private universities, they can choose how to spend their endowment on financial aid/merit awards. And no, I don't think someone making $200K is entitled to financial aid. If they did not save, then they can search merit and attend a private for minimal cost (not hard to do if their kid has stats for Harvard) or their instate flagship, etc. They have many choices still available to them.

But the argument those that get "need based aid" are entitled is ridiculous. Do you go around lamenting that a family of 4 making only $30K gets food stamps while you making $200K has to pay for your own food? Doubt it, and I highly doubt you would want to change places with them in order to get the food stamps.
We provide help in many ways to better society as a whole. It benefits lower income students to get FA and be able to attend college (be it T25 or any college). Once they make the break out of poverty their kids will likely continue that path and often education is the key to having a good higher paying job (not all, but many jobs require it). So it benefits society to help ensure those kids have an opportunity.
If you are making $200K, your kids will be fine (or they should be anyways) no matter where they attend. They have so many privileges growing up it's difficult to enumerate.

Note, we don't usually hear people making $45K/year complaining if their kid does not get into Harvard/Yale/etc. They move on and find anyway they can to get their kid an education that is affordable to them---they are just thrilled their kid is getting the opportunity to attend any college.

Not convinced. Schools have set up a system whereby certain kids get basically full rides and others don’t, depending on financial condition of their parents. So it seems we have set up an entitlement system. Poor kids are entitled to attend at no cost if they meet the standards of the school - admissions officers (at need blind schools) cannot even look at the financial condition of the parents

Once again, the kids who are getting full aid, or close to full aid do not live a privileged life. Yes, universities are free to offer aid to them because they want to increase socioeconomic diversity on their campuses. All private schools are free to set these standards for financial need/meeting financial need. Note: if the schools get rid of financial need, then the costs to attend would not go down, yet you still would not be able to attend since you have not saved. Only the rich would be able to attend. At least with $280K/year income you had some chance to save something to help your kid along with college. Those making $45K likely had no chance at all and now might struggle to attend college.


If you earn $280K, you are entitled to quit your job, ditch all savings and sell your home and give away the earnings and get a job making $45K and go live where you can with $45K/year. Then you too will be "entitled" to financial aid at need blind schools. But, please do this while your kid is a toddler, because it's not fair if you let them attend schools where you made $280K up until 2 years before college...you need to go all in and get the full experience of what it means to grow up poor/underprivileged.

You are wrong in that if there were no financial aid, tuition would be lower. Full pay students subsidize financial aid students. Just look at the financial statements of any school. Financial aid is like half the tuition revenue.

[Anonymous]

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.

That's fine but look what you've done. You've sacrificed your whole life only to be ripped off by a system where more than half the kids are practically going for free, while maybe a quarter of the parents are rich people for whom $320k is a fraction of an annual bonus. You are kind of the sucker here.

And I’m sure Harvard’s $50+ BILLION endowment appreciates all the sacrifice. We shouldn’t have a system that requires such deprivation when colleges are sitting on tax protected billions. We are the suckers. Chileans took to the streets when universities were too expensive. We shame each other for taking a vacation.

+1 And most of our vacations aren't even that nice. I've never taken our kids to a beach resort or Disneyworld. Most of our vacations are to see family. We drive our cars for like 15 years. We chose to live in a nice neighborhood for the safety and schools, but that's about it. We live in a hcol area because of our jobs, but that's about it.

We don't wear expensive clothes; we shop at Old Navy and Kohls. I have no jewelry except my engagement ring.

We save a lot more for retirement because we don't have family money, and we don't want to burden our children with our retirement. And actually, we help out our families financially.

Colleges that take federal money for research should have their costs regulated.

It's ridiculous for them to expect families making $280K to pay the same as a family making $800K.

I'm the same as you, but I'm not so sure it is ridiculous for them to expect that families making $280k should pay the same as a family making $800k. I think of these $80k per year colleges as a luxury car. There are people that pay $80k for a car. I suppose I could do that-- you could do that-- but I don't because the used Toyota Rav4 is fine. Likewise, I could pay $80k per year for my kids to go to a college, but why would I when they can get just as good an education at a public school.

Why do these schools decide to not help upper-middle class attend? Maybe those endowments are restricted and can only be used to help families that are truly middle class? OR maybe the odd mix of obscenely wealthy and middle class/ poor kids and nothing in between is working for them. Gives the student body une certaine frissione that having a bunch of upper-middle class people would cause to go flat.

The fact is kids in upper-middle class families will largely do very well at whatever school they attend. They don't need the access that less affluent kids require. For a school to brag about rags-to-riches stories the kids actually needs to be in rags, and $280k per year families ain't going to bring it.

Anyway, if your argument is that private elite schools should give a better deal to families making $280k than for $800k, where does that kind of thinking end? Tesla has luxury cars and the company has taken federal money for research-- should society require Tesla to charge families making $800k more for their luxury car than families making $280k? IF not, why would we require Harvard to do it? To my mind Harvard is a luxury just like a luxury car.

Well said!

Nobody is entitled to an elite education. Plenty of excellent options that will be affordable.
But if you really want it, just like a luxury car, you can choose to divert your money to pay for it.

But no, someone making $800k should not pay more than someone making $280k. That is not poor, not MC. Wealthy do not need to subdidize your kids education when you at in top 5%

If “nobody is entitled” then why do we have need based aid? The folks receiving that aid appear to be entitled to it.

Because the "underprivileged" often need a bit of help to get ahead. Someone with a family who only earns $45k/year has so many other issues and obstacles they have had to overcome to have the resume for getting accepted at a T25 school. Life is not so grand for them, because if they don't get into a need blind school that funds ALL need, they often cannot afford anything but CC and then transferring.
They certainly could not save much if any for college as they can barely manage to live on that. And the T25/elite colleges recognize the benefits of having more than just wealthy and UMC families on campus. For an underprivileged kid, the doors opened with a T25 education are numerous (not so much so for the UMC/Wealthy vs attending your state U).

However, the $280K (and really even the $200K) could have made choices to save and be able to afford college, even saving enough for $50-60K/year or more. These are private universities, they can choose how to spend their endowment on financial aid/merit awards. And no, I don't think someone making $200K is entitled to financial aid. If they did not save, then they can search merit and attend a private for minimal cost (not hard to do if their kid has stats for Harvard) or their instate flagship, etc. They have many choices still available to them.

But the argument those that get "need based aid" are entitled is ridiculous. Do you go around lamenting that a family of 4 making only $30K gets food stamps while you making $200K has to pay for your own food? Doubt it, and I highly doubt you would want to change places with them in order to get the food stamps.
We provide help in many ways to better society as a whole. It benefits lower income students to get FA and be able to attend college (be it T25 or any college). Once they make the break out of poverty their kids will likely continue that path and often education is the key to having a good higher paying job (not all, but many jobs require it). So it benefits society to help ensure those kids have an opportunity.
If you are making $200K, your kids will be fine (or they should be anyways) no matter where they attend. They have so many privileges growing up it's difficult to enumerate.

Note, we don't usually hear people making $45K/year complaining if their kid does not get into Harvard/Yale/etc. They move on and find anyway they can to get their kid an education that is affordable to them---they are just thrilled their kid is getting the opportunity to attend any college.

Not convinced. Schools have set up a system whereby certain kids get basically full rides and others don’t, depending on financial condition of their parents. So it seems we have set up an entitlement system. Poor kids are entitled to attend at no cost if they meet the standards of the school - admissions officers (at need blind schools) cannot even look at the financial condition of the parents

Schools also give free rides to kids who catch a football and run fast or row a boat or play golf or the list goes on and on. How is that fair?
Point is not everything in life will be fair. But complaining that a poor kid is getting a free ride to a T25 school when you make over $200K/year shows your values are misplaced. And all this complaining is for private schools who get to set their own rules and for elite schools that the odds of your kid getting into are a lottery anyhow. So should we now make admissions at Harvard be, everyone who applies gets a lottery number and Harvard draws X numbers and sends admission letters?

I am not complaining. I am just observing that no one is entitled to a private college education except low income families, who are literally entitled to it. They apply need blind and then the school pays for it. Not saying it is fair or unfair, good or bad, just observing that in the current system these families are literally entitled to it. They don’t have to pay for it. It is just given to them.

[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.

That's fine but look what you've done. You've sacrificed your whole life only to be ripped off by a system where more than half the kids are practically going for free, while maybe a quarter of the parents are rich people for whom $320k is a fraction of an annual bonus. You are kind of the sucker here.

And I’m sure Harvard’s $50+ BILLION endowment appreciates all the sacrifice. We shouldn’t have a system that requires such deprivation when colleges are sitting on tax protected billions. We are the suckers. Chileans took to the streets when universities were too expensive. We shame each other for taking a vacation.

+1 And most of our vacations aren't even that nice. I've never taken our kids to a beach resort or Disneyworld. Most of our vacations are to see family. We drive our cars for like 15 years. We chose to live in a nice neighborhood for the safety and schools, but that's about it. We live in a hcol area because of our jobs, but that's about it.

We don't wear expensive clothes; we shop at Old Navy and Kohls. I have no jewelry except my engagement ring.

We save a lot more for retirement because we don't have family money, and we don't want to burden our children with our retirement. And actually, we help out our families financially.

Colleges that take federal money for research should have their costs regulated.

It's ridiculous for them to expect families making $280K to pay the same as a family making $800K.

I'm the same as you, but I'm not so sure it is ridiculous for them to expect that families making $280k should pay the same as a family making $800k. I think of these $80k per year colleges as a luxury car. There are people that pay $80k for a car. I suppose I could do that-- you could do that-- but I don't because the used Toyota Rav4 is fine. Likewise, I could pay $80k per year for my kids to go to a college, but why would I when they can get just as good an education at a public school.

Why do these schools decide to not help upper-middle class attend? Maybe those endowments are restricted and can only be used to help families that are truly middle class? OR maybe the odd mix of obscenely wealthy and middle class/ poor kids and nothing in between is working for them. Gives the student body une certaine frissione that having a bunch of upper-middle class people would cause to go flat.

The fact is kids in upper-middle class families will largely do very well at whatever school they attend. They don't need the access that less affluent kids require. For a school to brag about rags-to-riches stories the kids actually needs to be in rags, and $280k per year families ain't going to bring it.

Anyway, if your argument is that private elite schools should give a better deal to families making $280k than for $800k, where does that kind of thinking end? Tesla has luxury cars and the company has taken federal money for research-- should society require Tesla to charge families making $800k more for their luxury car than families making $280k? IF not, why would we require Harvard to do it? To my mind Harvard is a luxury just like a luxury car.

Well said!

Nobody is entitled to an elite education. Plenty of excellent options that will be affordable.
But if you really want it, just like a luxury car, you can choose to divert your money to pay for it.

But no, someone making $800k should not pay more than someone making $280k. That is not poor, not MC. Wealthy do not need to subdidize your kids education when you at in top 5%

If “nobody is entitled” then why do we have need based aid? The folks receiving that aid appear to be entitled to it.

Because the "underprivileged" often need a bit of help to get ahead. Someone with a family who only earns $45k/year has so many other issues and obstacles they have had to overcome to have the resume for getting accepted at a T25 school. Life is not so grand for them, because if they don't get into a need blind school that funds ALL need, they often cannot afford anything but CC and then transferring.
They certainly could not save much if any for college as they can barely manage to live on that. And the T25/elite colleges recognize the benefits of having more than just wealthy and UMC families on campus. For an underprivileged kid, the doors opened with a T25 education are numerous (not so much so for the UMC/Wealthy vs attending your state U).

However, the $280K (and really even the $200K) could have made choices to save and be able to afford college, even saving enough for $50-60K/year or more. These are private universities, they can choose how to spend their endowment on financial aid/merit awards. And no, I don't think someone making $200K is entitled to financial aid. If they did not save, then they can search merit and attend a private for minimal cost (not hard to do if their kid has stats for Harvard) or their instate flagship, etc. They have many choices still available to them.

But the argument those that get "need based aid" are entitled is ridiculous. Do you go around lamenting that a family of 4 making only $30K gets food stamps while you making $200K has to pay for your own food? Doubt it, and I highly doubt you would want to change places with them in order to get the food stamps.
We provide help in many ways to better society as a whole. It benefits lower income students to get FA and be able to attend college (be it T25 or any college). Once they make the break out of poverty their kids will likely continue that path and often education is the key to having a good higher paying job (not all, but many jobs require it). So it benefits society to help ensure those kids have an opportunity.
If you are making $200K, your kids will be fine (or they should be anyways) no matter where they attend. They have so many privileges growing up it's difficult to enumerate.

Note, we don't usually hear people making $45K/year complaining if their kid does not get into Harvard/Yale/etc. They move on and find anyway they can to get their kid an education that is affordable to them---they are just thrilled their kid is getting the opportunity to attend any college.

Not convinced. Schools have set up a system whereby certain kids get basically full rides and others don’t, depending on financial condition of their parents. So it seems we have set up an entitlement system. Poor kids are entitled to attend at no cost if they meet the standards of the school - admissions officers (at need blind schools) cannot even look at the financial condition of the parents

Once again, the kids who are getting full aid, or close to full aid do not live a privileged life. Yes, universities are free to offer aid to them because they want to increase socioeconomic diversity on their campuses. All private schools are free to set these standards for financial need/meeting financial need. Note: if the schools get rid of financial need, then the costs to attend would not go down, yet you still would not be able to attend since you have not saved. Only the rich would be able to attend. At least with $280K/year income you had some chance to save something to help your kid along with college. Those making $45K likely had no chance at all and now might struggle to attend college.


If you earn $280K, you are entitled to quit your job, ditch all savings and sell your home and give away the earnings and get a job making $45K and go live where you can with $45K/year. Then you too will be "entitled" to financial aid at need blind schools. But, please do this while your kid is a toddler, because it's not fair if you let them attend schools where you made $280K up until 2 years before college...you need to go all in and get the full experience of what it means to grow up poor/underprivileged.

You are wrong in that if there were no financial aid, tuition would be lower. Full pay students subsidize financial aid students. Just look at the financial statements of any school. Financial aid is like half the tuition revenue.

At this point, if Harvard had to stop providing FA for anyone, they would not lower their tuition and they would still fill a class with full pay students.
Yes, full pay help finance the FA. But schools would NOT lower tuition if forced to implement your plan (which cannot be forced on any private university).

However, you would rather tuition be $20K less so you might be able to afford it, but then nobody making less than maybe $200K would be able to afford to attend elite universities? So no kids from the inner cities who work so hard under difficult situations to get an education and find a path to a better life? No kids from rural towns in the midwest? Nobody at all making less than $200K (which is maybe top 7-10% of the US) could attend?

While the current system is not perfect, I much prefer it to the above. Fact is $200K+ is still living a very privileged life. You could have saved for Harvard if it truly mattered. You likely have enough to pay for good state school or a bit more, just not the $80K/year.
Those getting full FA could not do 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: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.

That's fine but look what you've done. You've sacrificed your whole life only to be ripped off by a system where more than half the kids are practically going for free, while maybe a quarter of the parents are rich people for whom $320k is a fraction of an annual bonus. You are kind of the sucker here.

And I’m sure Harvard’s $50+ BILLION endowment appreciates all the sacrifice. We shouldn’t have a system that requires such deprivation when colleges are sitting on tax protected billions. We are the suckers. Chileans took to the streets when universities were too expensive. We shame each other for taking a vacation.

+1 And most of our vacations aren't even that nice. I've never taken our kids to a beach resort or Disneyworld. Most of our vacations are to see family. We drive our cars for like 15 years. We chose to live in a nice neighborhood for the safety and schools, but that's about it. We live in a hcol area because of our jobs, but that's about it.

We don't wear expensive clothes; we shop at Old Navy and Kohls. I have no jewelry except my engagement ring.

We save a lot more for retirement because we don't have family money, and we don't want to burden our children with our retirement. And actually, we help out our families financially.

Colleges that take federal money for research should have their costs regulated.

It's ridiculous for them to expect families making $280K to pay the same as a family making $800K.

I'm the same as you, but I'm not so sure it is ridiculous for them to expect that families making $280k should pay the same as a family making $800k. I think of these $80k per year colleges as a luxury car. There are people that pay $80k for a car. I suppose I could do that-- you could do that-- but I don't because the used Toyota Rav4 is fine. Likewise, I could pay $80k per year for my kids to go to a college, but why would I when they can get just as good an education at a public school.

Why do these schools decide to not help upper-middle class attend? Maybe those endowments are restricted and can only be used to help families that are truly middle class? OR maybe the odd mix of obscenely wealthy and middle class/ poor kids and nothing in between is working for them. Gives the student body une certaine frissione that having a bunch of upper-middle class people would cause to go flat.

The fact is kids in upper-middle class families will largely do very well at whatever school they attend. They don't need the access that less affluent kids require. For a school to brag about rags-to-riches stories the kids actually needs to be in rags, and $280k per year families ain't going to bring it.

Anyway, if your argument is that private elite schools should give a better deal to families making $280k than for $800k, where does that kind of thinking end? Tesla has luxury cars and the company has taken federal money for research-- should society require Tesla to charge families making $800k more for their luxury car than families making $280k? IF not, why would we require Harvard to do it? To my mind Harvard is a luxury just like a luxury car.

Well said!

Nobody is entitled to an elite education. Plenty of excellent options that will be affordable.
But if you really want it, just like a luxury car, you can choose to divert your money to pay for it.

But no, someone making $800k should not pay more than someone making $280k. That is not poor, not MC. Wealthy do not need to subdidize your kids education when you at in top 5%

If “nobody is entitled” then why do we have need based aid? The folks receiving that aid appear to be entitled to it.

Because the "underprivileged" often need a bit of help to get ahead. Someone with a family who only earns $45k/year has so many other issues and obstacles they have had to overcome to have the resume for getting accepted at a T25 school. Life is not so grand for them, because if they don't get into a need blind school that funds ALL need, they often cannot afford anything but CC and then transferring.
They certainly could not save much if any for college as they can barely manage to live on that. And the T25/elite colleges recognize the benefits of having more than just wealthy and UMC families on campus. For an underprivileged kid, the doors opened with a T25 education are numerous (not so much so for the UMC/Wealthy vs attending your state U).

However, the $280K (and really even the $200K) could have made choices to save and be able to afford college, even saving enough for $50-60K/year or more. These are private universities, they can choose how to spend their endowment on financial aid/merit awards. And no, I don't think someone making $200K is entitled to financial aid. If they did not save, then they can search merit and attend a private for minimal cost (not hard to do if their kid has stats for Harvard) or their instate flagship, etc. They have many choices still available to them.

But the argument those that get "need based aid" are entitled is ridiculous. Do you go around lamenting that a family of 4 making only $30K gets food stamps while you making $200K has to pay for your own food? Doubt it, and I highly doubt you would want to change places with them in order to get the food stamps.
We provide help in many ways to better society as a whole. It benefits lower income students to get FA and be able to attend college (be it T25 or any college). Once they make the break out of poverty their kids will likely continue that path and often education is the key to having a good higher paying job (not all, but many jobs require it). So it benefits society to help ensure those kids have an opportunity.
If you are making $200K, your kids will be fine (or they should be anyways) no matter where they attend. They have so many privileges growing up it's difficult to enumerate.

Note, we don't usually hear people making $45K/year complaining if their kid does not get into Harvard/Yale/etc. They move on and find anyway they can to get their kid an education that is affordable to them---they are just thrilled their kid is getting the opportunity to attend any college.

Not convinced. Schools have set up a system whereby certain kids get basically full rides and others don’t, depending on financial condition of their parents. So it seems we have set up an entitlement system. Poor kids are entitled to attend at no cost if they meet the standards of the school - admissions officers (at need blind schools) cannot even look at the financial condition of the parents

Once again, the kids who are getting full aid, or close to full aid do not live a privileged life. Yes, universities are free to offer aid to them because they want to increase socioeconomic diversity on their campuses. All private schools are free to set these standards for financial need/meeting financial need. Note: if the schools get rid of financial need, then the costs to attend would not go down, yet you still would not be able to attend since you have not saved. Only the rich would be able to attend. At least with $280K/year income you had some chance to save something to help your kid along with college. Those making $45K likely had no chance at all and now might struggle to attend college.


If you earn $280K, you are entitled to quit your job, ditch all savings and sell your home and give away the earnings and get a job making $45K and go live where you can with $45K/year. Then you too will be "entitled" to financial aid at need blind schools. But, please do this while your kid is a toddler, because it's not fair if you let them attend schools where you made $280K up until 2 years before college...you need to go all in and get the full experience of what it means to grow up poor/underprivileged.

You are wrong in that if there were no financial aid, tuition would be lower. Full pay students subsidize financial aid students. Just look at the financial statements of any school. Financial aid is like half the tuition revenue.

At this point, if Harvard had to stop providing FA for anyone, they would not lower their tuition and they would still fill a class with full pay students.
Yes, full pay help finance the FA. But schools would NOT lower tuition if forced to implement your plan (which cannot be forced on any private university).

However, you would rather tuition be $20K less so you might be able to afford it, but then nobody making less than maybe $200K would be able to afford to attend elite universities? So no kids from the inner cities who work so hard under difficult situations to get an education and find a path to a better life? No kids from rural towns in the midwest? Nobody at all making less than $200K (which is maybe top 7-10% of the US) could attend?

While the current system is not perfect, I much prefer it to the above. Fact is $200K+ is still living a very privileged life. You could have saved for Harvard if it truly mattered. You likely have enough to pay for good state school or a bit more, just not the $80K/year.
Those getting full FA could not do that.

I have no plan. I can fully afford Harvard if my DC got in but no way my DC would ever get in! I just think it’s odd to tell people at the 200k level to buzz off and go to state school - and be thankful for your “privilege” - while people at the 100k level get the red carpet rolled out because they are not “privileged.”

I feel bad for kids at the 200k level for whom Harvard is not a realistic option in most cases. They are being squeezed out. I think this is basically deliberate. It ensures the very affluent maintain half the seats. The rest get distributed to their pet causes - Black, Hispanic, now FGLI.

[Anonymous]

I was raised in foster care and got my education ( BS and MS) from my state flagship. I worked a number of jobs through college. I also got some aid. I specifically chose a state university because it was the most affordable.

Now, I am in a responsible job and am paying full freight for my kid.

Why do low income kids think they should get aid to attend an expensive private school? This was not even in my thought process when I was trying to get through school. Why isn’t the state school good enough? It was for me and many of my friends.

My kid got accepted to a private college. Nice but no aid for $60,000 per year. Yet the school doles out all these first gen scholarships and me tori g programs and other URM programs out the wazoo. We are going to turn down the private college. It’s too costly for us.