Why is this board relentlessly focused on ROI?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I think what you’re reacting to is the focus on quantifying ROI, as if there’s some formula that will make a certain college “worth it.”

For someone who has to take out loans, I get this perspective—there’s a very practical sense of needing to be able to pay them back and live comfortably.

But for people who can afford to pay for their kids’ schooling without loans (as my parents were able to do for me, and spouse and I can for our kids), the idea of expecting some financial return on investment is harder for me to understand. For me, the ROI on our kids’ college will be their happiness; bound up in that is that they will emerge from college able to pursue careers that they enjoy and that allow them to live comfortably (however they define that). But that has nothing to do with dollars in and dollars out.

FWIW, I double-majored in humanities fields and then went to grad school for one of them. I do very well financially now, and I was able to find my way here because I never felt any pressure to make a certain amount of money to make my parents’ “investment” worthwhile. I found jobs that paid the bills and figured out what I wanted to do next. I have a really happy, satisfying life, which I owe in part to my intrinsic motivation and in part to my parents’ willingness to let me figure it out without earning pressure.

Let me guess, you went to law school?

No, I got a master’s degree in English.

Curious, what job do you have now? Almost all of the MFA people I know as well as those with graduate degrees in the humanities ended up deeply regretting it, so I'm just curious as to what you do now.

Comms

Interesting. I was always under the impression that corporate comms jobs pay poorly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The obsession with STEM, with CS, with Wall Street, with Investment Banking “target schools,” with MBB consulting, with Silicon Valley, with Ivies, with T10s… I don’t get it. I was a first-gen, low-income kid at an Ivy (went for free) and double majored in psychology and philosophy. I never once did a corporate internship in college and worked at an NPO for a few years after graduating. I got a PhD in Psychology afterwards and make around ~$180k/year in private practice.

I met my husband in college (also a poor kid on a full ride), and he double majored in visual arts and English. He went to law school on a large merit scholarship and is now a GS14. Sure, our combined HHI isn’t nearly as high as many people on this board, and a lot of our friends from college who went into more lucrative fields outearn us significantly. But it’s enough to give us a nice life in NoVa and fully fund our two kids’ 529s, retirement, our mortgage, and send some money back to our parents.

So what gives? Why are so many people on this forum obsessed with ROI and making sure that their kid makes as much money as possible?

I love the kind of life you've described and have! Very happy for you and your family!

Yeah, that "kind of life" is called getting extremely lucky and winning the educational lottery several times over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I think what you’re reacting to is the focus on quantifying ROI, as if there’s some formula that will make a certain college “worth it.”

For someone who has to take out loans, I get this perspective—there’s a very practical sense of needing to be able to pay them back and live comfortably.

But for people who can afford to pay for their kids’ schooling without loans (as my parents were able to do for me, and spouse and I can for our kids), the idea of expecting some financial return on investment is harder for me to understand. For me, the ROI on our kids’ college will be their happiness; bound up in that is that they will emerge from college able to pursue careers that they enjoy and that allow them to live comfortably (however they define that). But that has nothing to do with dollars in and dollars out.

FWIW, I double-majored in humanities fields and then went to grad school for one of them. I do very well financially now, and I was able to find my way here because I never felt any pressure to make a certain amount of money to make my parents’ “investment” worthwhile. I found jobs that paid the bills and figured out what I wanted to do next. I have a really happy, satisfying life, which I owe in part to my intrinsic motivation and in part to my parents’ willingness to let me figure it out without earning pressure.

Let me guess, you went to law school?

No, I got a master’s degree in English.

Curious, what job do you have now? Almost all of the MFA people I know as well as those with graduate degrees in the humanities ended up deeply regretting it, so I'm just curious as to what you do now.

Comms

Interesting. I was always under the impression that corporate comms jobs pay poorly.

NP…And you’d be wrong. My DH is in marketing communications and has done well for years and is not even in a supervisory position.

[Anonymous]

OP, in case you didn’t know, many if not most on DCUM are single-mindedly fixated on money and perceived prestige

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I think what you’re reacting to is the focus on quantifying ROI, as if there’s some formula that will make a certain college “worth it.”

For someone who has to take out loans, I get this perspective—there’s a very practical sense of needing to be able to pay them back and live comfortably.

But for people who can afford to pay for their kids’ schooling without loans (as my parents were able to do for me, and spouse and I can for our kids), the idea of expecting some financial return on investment is harder for me to understand. For me, the ROI on our kids’ college will be their happiness; bound up in that is that they will emerge from college able to pursue careers that they enjoy and that allow them to live comfortably (however they define that). But that has nothing to do with dollars in and dollars out.

FWIW, I double-majored in humanities fields and then went to grad school for one of them. I do very well financially now, and I was able to find my way here because I never felt any pressure to make a certain amount of money to make my parents’ “investment” worthwhile. I found jobs that paid the bills and figured out what I wanted to do next. I have a really happy, satisfying life, which I owe in part to my intrinsic motivation and in part to my parents’ willingness to let me figure it out without earning pressure.

Let me guess, you went to law school?

No, I got a master’s degree in English.

Curious, what job do you have now? Almost all of the MFA people I know as well as those with graduate degrees in the humanities ended up deeply regretting it, so I'm just curious as to what you do now.

Comms

Interesting. I was always under the impression that corporate comms jobs pay poorly.

Glad I could teach something new today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With all due respect, it sounds like you and your spouse went to college and grad schools on full rides. There was no "investment." What if you had taken out loans for all of that? Would you want a way to pay them back?

+ 1
And also they were very low income to begin with. People who are MC and UMC do not want to become poorer because they paid $$$ for college and are only making $ after their education.

OP here. I realize with our HHI that we'd be considered UMC, but I'm fine with my kids having a lower quality of life than the well-off NoVA life that surrounds them (and quite frankly, at some point, disturbs me). If my kids, for example, can't afford a SFH in the DMV and have to move to, say, Richmond and "only" live in a townhouse, I'm fine with that (and I'm guessing my kids would be as well given their frugal habits and lack of materialism). I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'm fine with my kids going into a lower-paying field that they love instead of going into a career that they only mildly tolerate or somewhat dislike in order to keep up with the Joneses in this area.

But maybe that's just a reflection of me seeing a lot of miserable high earners all day as a psychologist. A lot of these people were pushed into high-paying career fields by their parents and now have significant mental health issues as a result.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, in case you didn’t know, many if not most on DCUM are single-mindedly fixated on money and perceived prestige

Is that really true? Where do you see that on this forum?

[Anonymous]

It’s gross and a big part of what’s wrong with higher education. Entitled parents raising entitled kids with zero intellectual curiosity, just money and status obsessed.

[Anonymous]

I don’t want my kids to experience downward mobility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With all due respect, it sounds like you and your spouse went to college and grad schools on full rides. There was no "investment." What if you had taken out loans for all of that? Would you want a way to pay them back?

+ 1
And also they were very low income to begin with. People who are MC and UMC do not want to become poorer because they paid $$$ for college and are only making $ after their education.

OP here. I realize with our HHI that we'd be considered UMC, but I'm fine with my kids having a lower quality of life than the well-off NoVA life that surrounds them (and quite frankly, at some point, disturbs me). If my kids, for example, can't afford a SFH in the DMV and have to move to, say, Richmond and "only" live in a townhouse, I'm fine with that (and I'm guessing my kids would be as well given their frugal habits and lack of materialism). I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'm fine with my kids going into a lower-paying field that they love instead of going into a career that they only mildly tolerate or somewhat dislike in order to keep up with the Joneses in this area.

But maybe that's just a reflection of me seeing a lot of miserable high earners all day as a psychologist. A lot of these people were pushed into high-paying career fields by their parents and now have significant mental health issues as a result.

I think you’re wildly underestimating how hard it is to be downwardly mobile, and thus not able to give your children the quality of life you had growing up. I’ve known people who experienced it and it’s very painful for them as parents.

[Anonymous]

OP you and your husband pretty much got your college educations for FREE.

Most people who need to finance a college education via savings and / or loans are looking for a ROI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With all due respect, it sounds like you and your spouse went to college and grad schools on full rides. There was no "investment." What if you had taken out loans for all of that? Would you want a way to pay them back?

+ 1
And also they were very low income to begin with. People who are MC and UMC do not want to become poorer because they paid $$$ for college and are only making $ after their education.

OP here. I realize with our HHI that we'd be considered UMC, but I'm fine with my kids having a lower quality of life than the well-off NoVA life that surrounds them (and quite frankly, at some point, disturbs me). If my kids, for example, can't afford a SFH in the DMV and have to move to, say, Richmond and "only" live in a townhouse, I'm fine with that (and I'm guessing my kids would be as well given their frugal habits and lack of materialism). I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'm fine with my kids going into a lower-paying field that they love instead of going into a career that they only mildly tolerate or somewhat dislike in order to keep up with the Joneses in this area.

But maybe that's just a reflection of me seeing a lot of miserable high earners all day as a psychologist. A lot of these people were pushed into high-paying career fields by their parents and now have significant mental health issues as a result.

I think you’re wildly underestimating how hard it is to be downwardly mobile, and thus not able to give your children the quality of life you had growing up. I’ve known people who experienced it and it’s very painful for them as parents.

That's a good point, and one I wouldn't be all that privy to given that I grew up poor. But like... my kids (who are currently in high school) are just as happy taking camping vacations to the Blue Ridge Mountains as they are with much fancier vacations. They've also never asked me for expensive/trendy clothes/items (even my daughter who goes to a high school with lots of wealthy girls whose parents buy them expensive items). Their favorite activities are all relatively low-cost ones in the outdoors. We don't send them to private school and plan on limiting their college options to in-state VA schools (or any private school that gives enough merit aid to equal that cost).

I don't know. Maybe they've adopted our relatively laid-back, frugal mindset. Maybe they're just a bit more resistant to peer pressure. I do find a lot of the materialism of the DMV to be off-putting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP you and your husband pretty much got your college educations for FREE.

Most people who need to finance a college education via savings and / or loans are looking for a ROI.

Well, if your parents are typical DCUM UMC and can finance an in-state school with no loans and just 529 savings/cash flow, wouldn't you have the privilege of taking a low-paying job after graduation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s gross and a big part of what’s wrong with higher education. Entitled parents raising entitled kids with zero intellectual curiosity, just money and status obsessed.

Or maybe they just want a decent life for themselves? Judgmental much...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone I know who works in medicine, consulting, corporate law, and investment banking is miserable and burnt out.

There are so many careers out there.

Tech. Tech is the best. Good work-life balance and little burn out.

And potentially very boring and not rewarding on giving back to society. Not judging....just sayin.

I had a tech job right out of college (with no tech degree - it's easy to teach this stuff on the job via training programs). I decided to go back to grad school and was able to use that tech experience with a social science discipline to end up with a much more interesting and rewarding career. One that also has great work-life balance and little burn-out.

you are wired. all the innovating interesting futuristic exciting stuff are all coming out of Tech field.

+1

The humanities are obsolete and have been for a while.

What a limited way of viewing life around you.