Why do donut hole families

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I never complain about it. But if I ever mention that we're not willing to pay higher than in-state prices, I get attacked for that position.

This is a lightning rod sort of statement. You can avoid attacks by filtering what you say. Why not just stick to a simpler narrative - my kid goes to X school. It's nobody's business why.

Why? It's a consumption, like everything else. It's perfectly fine saying that you, personally, are not willing to pay for first class tickets, brand name cereal or designer eyeglasses. Nothing controversial here - you are entitled to your spending preferences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a big difference between a donut hole family that is right above the cusp of qualifying for financial aid and a donut hole family that is swimming in millions. A big difference. The ones just above the cusp, who perhaps sacrificed and saved for college, could perhaps be justifiably a little resentful of the ones just below the cusp... The ones swimming in millions don't really care about 25k a year here or there.

We qualify for some aid, but have an efc of around 40k a year. Now that fafsa ignores siblings, that turns into 90k for the two years they’ll overlap. I consider us to be donut hole even though we’ll get some financial aid

Something is missing here.

FAFSA really governs the public colleges and the less competitive private schools. If you aim at those, you can certainly find ways to attend a school for less than $40K/year per student.

If your goal is the top private schools, FAFSA doesn't mean much there (unless you are very poor and receiving Pell grants). They have their own ways of determining need and do take into account siblings attending at the same time.

Discounting siblings means that we pay full freight for overlap years at twice the efc that Fafsa says we can afford. That means elite privates using css and meeting full need or bust which is a massive amount of pressure

No, that also means actively searching for merit aid and/or considering schools within a commuting distance.

Merit schools may be safeties, but they will still try for css schools meeting full need. It may be self imposed pressure, but it is still pressure. They can either go to one of those schools which are not extremely hard to get into or they can go to a state school with massive merit aid. That cuts out the normal instate options

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The donut hole is a myth that poor savers tell themselves. Decisions have consequences. Buying a larger house or nicer car - spending more for vacations and fancy summer camps are all decisions.

College costs are not unexpected. You have nearly two decades to save.

Plus, you don’t have to save for the most expensive college. All of you who consider yourselves middle class- that means kids stay at home and go to college or they go to an instate college. That is what middle class parents have done for generations. Paying the full amount for high end tuitions for private schools are for rich families not yours.

“You have nearly two decades to save” - what?? Two decades ago, no one thought colleges would cost $90K/year. No one saved at that rate PER KID back then, if they were also paying off student loans, buying a house, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People see some kid getting full FA an Ivy and think, “Wow, poor people are so lucky.” What they don’t see is that A) that kid would be taking out loans to go to a state school if they hadn’t gotten into that Ivy and B) Most poor kids are in community college.

Yes but 1) Ivy don’t give loans any more, so FA is all grants and 2) oftennthose donut hole families have a SAHM or mom doing a creative field like interior design or something, which is way more fun and flexible than the dual GS14 family who won’t get any aid.

In both cases we are talking about kids who were accepted to Ivy, who worked hard, so no idea why you talk about state schools.

Because the lucky few poorer kids who get into Ivies get significant financial aid. The ones who don’t or just miss the cut can barely afford state schools.

And then they often have to figure out how to afford plane tickets home for breaks. And worry about how their families are going to get by without income from the part-time job they had in high school. And how to afford winter clothes if they are going from a warm to cold climate. And how to balance their work study obligations on top of their classes. And how to make the “summer earnings” contribution most top schools still expect even from the poorest students.

These kids are not lucky. They are tenacious and successful, and the achievement of getting full FA to an elite school creates a whole new set of challenges for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s insane that our $250K family did not get 1 penny FA for a $60K/year school.

We were also not always $250K family, we were closer to $160/year, then $180K for a few years. Plus the $250 includes one of us having 2 jobs.

My H is a cop and I was a GS-13 most our lives so we could not really save that much.

It's absurd to characterize 250k families as privileged in 2023. After taxes, there is not much left.

But it's more absurd to characterize financial aid as a unique burden on you, when a $100K family is being asked to pay $20K. In both cases it's more disposable income than the family feels like they have, and is going to require either substantial loans, or changes in housing, etc . . . Plus the $250K family almost certainly has options that would cost them less than $60K, whether that's instate or schools with merit aid, whereas the $100K family likely won't have choices that cost less than $20K. So, one family is choosing between multiple schools, some of which feel too expensive, and others that are reasonably priced for them but that they like less, while the other family is choosing between schools that feel too expensive and no college at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I never complain about it. But if I ever mention that we're not willing to pay higher than in-state prices, I get attacked for that position.

This is a lightning rod sort of statement. You can avoid attacks by filtering what you say. Why not just stick to a simpler narrative - my kid goes to X school. It's nobody's business why.

Why? It's a consumption, like everything else. It's perfectly fine saying that you, personally, are not willing to pay for first class tickets, brand name cereal or designer eyeglasses. Nothing controversial here - you are entitled to your spending preferences.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't go around saying out loud to other people what I am and am not willing to pay for (including all of the other things you mention). Sure you are entitled to your preferences - but when you start saying those things publicly it's going to draw attention. If you don't mind the attention, go for it. But you said people attack you and it seemed like that bothers you. So, if it bothers you that you are attacked for saying you won't pay for your kids to go to an OOS school - I suggest you take a different approach and not mention that. Everyone is different - if you like to lay it all out there - go for it (and I have no problem with that).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
We're European immigrants who went to tuition-free universities in our home country (still need to find room and board and pay for books - a lot of undergrads live at home if they can commute).

And yet here, we are prepared to pay for any college for our kids, as long as they have a good reason to go. One of our kids wants to go to Georgetown SFS, and it's probably 85K a year.

But we don't complain. It's a choice we made.

It's a choice for everyone, just like most things in life. I don't get to choose the fancy luxury apartment/condo with water views or the luxury home in the nicest school district if I cannot afford it. I don't get to choose a 100K car if I can only afford a $25K car---I buy the car I can afford and go about life. If I really really want the fancier car or fancier home, I make a plan to save for it---for majority of people, they will never be able to afford a $100K car (or at least should not be buying one with their financial situation).
If you are a donut hole family, you still have a fairly privileged life. Your kids go to decent/good schools, they don't worry about safety while walking around their neighborhood or where dinner is going to come from tonight.
Yes, it sucks to not be able to save enough for T20 schools, but in reality most people can't, just like most people will never drive a $100K car. However, nobody is saying you cannot go to college and get a GREAT education. If you truly wanted your kid to attend Harvard, then you had to make choices along the way to save for it or perhaps smartly say, "we cannot afford to save that much on our budget, but we will save $200K for each kid so they can attend any school (state or private) that costs less than $50K/year without having to take on any debt.

If your kid has the resume to compete for a T20 school, they can find many schools in the 20-100 rankings that will be less than $50K/year. All good schools.

This complaining that "we can't afford T20 schools" is akin to complaining you can't afford a 100K Tesla. Just like there are many other completely affordable cars to get that fully work and get you where you need to be, there are hundreds of great schools that your kid can afford with $50K/year limit. Just get out of the mindset that "it's not fair" and "Johnny deserves to attend Harvard". Rankings are not really that important. Much more important to Get a great education that's affordable to you. There are literally only about 2k*20 freshman slots at T20 schools (actually it's less, because many of them only enroll 1400-1600 freshman, not 2K).
Similarly, the poor kid from a rural area cannot afford to attend Harvard even if they get in and get FA, because the cost of travel, cost of being away from home (family might need them around more than just 2 weeks at xmas)---the intangibles of costs for a very poor person attending an elite university with mostly MC and Rich people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's because it just feels unfair to people that if they were richer or poorer, their kids might have more options. It isn't necessarily unfair, or maybe it is, but this is how people feel. I also think that many donut hole families have parents who attended top private universities at a time when they were more affordable and it is a shock that their kids can't do the same, even though they have been saving for years. We are not a donut hole family, so this is just my guess as to how people feel.

But the "poor people have more options" thing is a myth.

I think that people who complain about being a "donut hole" family are implying that things are better on the other side of the hole. But in reality, it isn't. And continuing to use the term when that's been pointed out, is basically a dog whistle, because once you know how college financial aid works, complaining about being a donut hole family means that you think that actual middle class (not DCUM middle class) and low income families don't deserve what you deserve, which is affordable college choices for their kids.

Now, if you want to complaining that EFC's are unrealistic for many families. Or that college costs too much. Yes! Those are very valid complaints, and things worth advocating around. But the idea that college is only a financial burden for some subset of kinda rich but not very rich people is simply untrue.

This should be the end of the thread right here.

+1000

So very well stated!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The donut hole is a myth that poor savers tell themselves. Decisions have consequences. Buying a larger house or nicer car - spending more for vacations and fancy summer camps are all decisions.

College costs are not unexpected. You have nearly two decades to save.

Plus, you don’t have to save for the most expensive college. All of you who consider yourselves middle class- that means kids stay at home and go to college or they go to an instate college. That is what middle class parents have done for generations. Paying the full amount for high end tuitions for private schools are for rich families not yours.

“You have nearly two decades to save” - what?? Two decades ago, no one thought colleges would cost $90K/year. No one saved at that rate PER KID back then, if they were also paying off student loans, buying a house, etc.

I'm sorry but this is not true. When I was in college in the late 90's one of our projects in a computer class was to extrapolate college tuition into future using the current growth rate in tuition. College tuition has ALWAYS outpaced earnings and inflation growth and has never slowed down. Anyone paying attention to trends knew this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One reason we complain is that we are also sandwich generation families, not just donut holes. Our families made less money when we were kids, so we received financial aid in college, took out student loans, then excelled in life, got good jobs, but spent so much $$$ paying off student loans that we didn't have enough cash to save for our own kids' colleges. However, we earn enough now to receive no financial aid, and can probably only afford in-state tuition and not full-pay private tuition, so that's why we're upset. And now some of us sandwich generation have to give money to provide for our aging parents (who were not earning much $$ to begin with) all while figuring out how to pay for our kids' educations. When I went to undergrad, tuition was $17k at a top 10/15 private university. Now that tuition is $60k. It's just sad.

This is my personal story, so not everyone is in the same boat. We have saved enough in 529s for all 3 kids to go to in-state schools. We could use cash flow + 529 for one child if they get into a private worth paying full price for. This is where it's sad because we can't afford to do that for all 3, but oh well, what are the odds they'll all 3 be smart enough to get into a top 10/15 school anyway? There is no guarantee that they will have the same experiences that I had and I accept that.

I personally think you should be proud that you have saved enough for 3 kids to go to in-state schools and strong students in MD and VA have solid options. And your kids should be psyched that they can go to college debt free.

As for the sandwich generation - we are all in this boat.

It should be all about preparing your kids. Ditch the mentality that rankings matter and focus on finding the best school for your kid---that includes fit, cost, being able to switch majors easily and having a variety of majors so your kid will eventually be satisfied whatever they choose. Any kid who is capable of getting into T20 school will excel at any school---it's really only the parents telling their snowflake they are so special and need to be "with other like minded individuals to succeed" that hampers the kid. No where in life will you be only with others who all got 1600 and 4.0UW. You will work with all types of people and soon learn everyone has something to offer. Sooner your kid recognizes this, the sooner they will excel and be genuinely happy. College is a great time to start this, if you have not already done so in MS/HS while growing up

[Anonymous]

It’s because they’re downwardly mobile. They themselves sent to the best school they could get into but they can’t afford to do the same for their kids. This feels unfair so they complain.

[Anonymous]

Some families who seem to complain about this are people who had a fancy education but chose not to take a private sector job in DC for the fed/non-profit lifestyle and are now aggrieved that schools won't make up the difference for them because they want to l live an UMC lifestyle they assume their education entitles them to - this comes up in the college and private school threads. We make trade offs in our lives only each family can figure out what works for them - there is alot of merit aid sloshing around for high performing students just a few rungs down the ladder - no one is entitled to go to any school they want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some families who seem to complain about this are people who had a fancy education but chose not to take a private sector job in DC for the fed/non-profit lifestyle and are now aggrieved that schools won't make up the difference for them because they want to l live an UMC lifestyle they assume their education entitles them to - this comes up in the college and private school threads. We make trade offs in our lives only each family can figure out what works for them - there is alot of merit aid sloshing around for high performing students just a few rungs down the ladder - no one is entitled to go to any school they want.

So true. I’ve noticed that the majority of the time, those who complain went to fancy schools themselves. As someone who went to Big State U I find it so confusing—the school I graduated from costs under $10k/yr in-state still. Not exactly crisis levels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Poor people do not have more options. Most truly poor people are not in the college pipeline.

Additionally, if those "donut hole" families lived like the poor people, rented where they rent, shopped where they shop, etc., they'd have tons of options too. Just saying.

+1

I get that some have special circumstances--medical debt or something unforeseen. But most donut hole families that I know made choices to spend elsewhere. New iPhone every year, 2 Starbucks trips per day, eating lunch out daily, eating half of dinners out, taking really nice vacations, new cars every 3-4 years, etc. Yes those are all "small things" in the grand scheme of savings, but that is just what is visible to me---I'm sure there is much more I don't even see. Someone with a mindset like that is choosing to spend on things when they could choose to save.
We knew our kids would get no aid, so we started saving as soon as they were born. We didn't start living a luxury lifestyle until we could afford it. We paid only 50% of what we could easily afford for our first house and lived there for 7 years. Sure we could afford a newer/nicer home, but we did not need it, this house had 4 bedrooms and 2.5 baths so enough space for a young family---it was relatively speaking much nicer than the apartment we came from. So we lived nicely but not luxuriously and saved the extras. We drove cars for 8-10 years and saved to pay cash for the next ones.
We also choose to not have kids until 30, so that allowed us to consciously save the extra salary and live off of basically one. We aggressively paid off all student loans, invested in our retirement. Other than our honeymoon, I was 35 before I took a "fancy vacation", yet we could have easily afforded to do so at 25/26. But that restraint allowed us to front load saving for college and then we could change our lifestyle as desired.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People see some kid getting full FA an Ivy and think, “Wow, poor people are so lucky.” What they don’t see is that A) that kid would be taking out loans to go to a state school if they hadn’t gotten into that Ivy and B) Most poor kids are in community college.

+1

Or the behind the scenes costs that poor FA student cannot afford. They go home only for xmas break, not fall, spring, long weekends, etc because they can't afford the airfare. They struggle to "fit in socially" on a campus where majority of kids have a free flow of $$$ and they are just hoping they can eat on Sunday when the dorm cafeteria only offers Brunch and is closed for dinner.