How Princeton is Getting Around the Endowment Tax

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems like a win for everyone!

Seems like it makes the endowment tax arbitrary stupid nonsense. Don't tax Princeton but tax MIT. Don't text Amherst or NYU but tax Notre Dame. This whole thing just seems pointless.

It is a Pigovian tax. It wasn’t intended to raise revenue. This is an optimal outcome, perhaps even an intended one.

It’s kind of crappy to be a family who makes just a tad over the line (or who have more than typical assets) who will pay full price while others just a tiny bit under the line pay none. I get the rationale but it’s not optimal from that perspective.

Totally agree - this system is very binary - all or nothing. There will be a lot of gamesmanship among families to get below the line - ironically people will have an incentive to take a pay cut for a few years. It makes very little sense yet given the constraints Princeton is dealing with, I don't blame them. But as one who is not far over the line and also had the audacity to live somewhat conservatively and save money for college, it is frustrating. But life isn't fair - I'm fortunate to have more than most other Americans and college is not a God-given right.

Plus don't pretend that your approach to money and saving isn't helping you out in other ways. You might not be getting a college break, but there are so many other benefits you get by living this way.

NP. Like what? We have a single car, don’t do vacations at all beyond drive to the beach and stay in a motel type of thing or camping, shop at Walmart for clothes, literally never eat out, we do spend more money than most people on food because our kids have severe food allergies and we need to. We have other therapies for special needs but basically just a typical middle class lifestyle plus some extra frugality compared to most people, and yet we just miss out on all financial aid. No family money at all (we were first gen), actually we support our parents a little if anything. Our kids are very high stats and so could definitely get some merit at some places but it’s frustrating that ivys are out for them because we really can’t afford it. If we lived irresponsibly and didn’t work so hard, they would get financial aid. The system sucks.

So apparently you have figured out how to have some of the things you want plus get financial aid but you refuse to do it? Maybe the system doesn't suck. Maybe you just aren't understanding how to benefit from the system?

And if you don't want to shop at Walmart like most people so that your kid can get a Princeton education, then dont. No one is forcing you to do that. The system sucks because you you have to shop at lower price stores like most people instead of expensive stores?

You are a total insincere jerk. This person was very frank and honest and is trying to be fiscally responsible and you jump all over them. Can you respond in a kind, thoughtful way? What happened to intelligent conflict and discourse?

The low class trash who have no hopes of having their children ever attend a place like Princeton really stand out here. But I'm sure they will argue they didn't want Princeton anyway.

And thank you to the poster who this jerk was responding to. That was a very interesting, meaningful post that demonstrates what a lot of people are dealing with. And as the other poster who is being wrongfully demonized noted, no one is saying woe is me or that they would trade their lives with a homeless person. They are just saying that the system could use fixing. Is that so wrong?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would bet there are 5x more kids from families earning $150k-$350k ($350k is the max where you receive no FA) vs families under $150k.

Thats why Princeton ranks in the top 15 of all schools by median income which isn’t skewed by billionaires for the average.

BTW, this press release looked largely identical last year, but they upped the no tuition limit to $250k from $200k. This isn’t a new policy to avoid the endowment tax as I believe in fact last year like 69% received significant aid and now they say 65%.

Agree to disagree. They just increased the undergraduate financial aid budget by $21 million over what was approved by the Trustees in April. This is absolutely intended to avoid the endowment tax.

I don’t know how you qualify for the 3000 mark…but if 69% received significant aid last year and 65% rec I’ve it this year, what’s the change exactly?

Is the number paying $0?

I don't know where you're getting the 69% and 65% numbers. Earlier in the year they increased the undergraduate financial aid budget from $283 million (for 24-25) to $306 million for 25-26, and now they've increased it another $21 million for 25-26. This added $21 million will go toward getting more students into the non-tuition-paying category.

The 65% (it actually says 2/3 so it’s 66 2/3%) is from the press release in this thread and the 69% is from last year’s release.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would bet there are 5x more kids from families earning $150k-$350k ($350k is the max where you receive no FA) vs families under $150k.

Thats why Princeton ranks in the top 15 of all schools by median income which isn’t skewed by billionaires for the average.

BTW, this press release looked largely identical last year, but they upped the no tuition limit to $250k from $200k. This isn’t a new policy to avoid the endowment tax as I believe in fact last year like 69% received significant aid and now they say 65%.

Agree to disagree. They just increased the undergraduate financial aid budget by $21 million over what was approved by the Trustees in April. This is absolutely intended to avoid the endowment tax.

I don’t know how you qualify for the 3000 mark…but if 69% received significant aid last year and 65% rec I’ve it this year, what’s the change exactly?

Is the number paying $0?

I don't know where you're getting the 69% and 65% numbers. Earlier in the year they increased the undergraduate financial aid budget from $283 million (for 24-25) to $306 million for 25-26, and now they've increased it another $21 million for 25-26. This added $21 million will go toward getting more students into the non-tuition-paying category.

The 65% (it actually says 2/3 so it’s 66 2/3%) is from the press release in this thread and the 69% is from last year’s release.

There is no real difference between "about two-thirds" and "69 percent." At any rate, what matters for the endowment tax is how many of those 67-69 percent are getting full tuition. Princeton has 5700 undergraduates, of which about 3800 (about two-thirds) are getting financial aid, and 1900 are not. Putting aside graduate students (the vast majority of which receive tuition grants at Princeton), if about 2750 out of those 3800 are getting at least full tuition, then voila -- Princeton has fewer than 3000 tuition-paying students. Princeton doesn't need to increase the number of students getting aid; it can just give more money to the students currently getting aid.

This puts Princeton in a different category than, say, Dartmouth, which actually would need to start giving aid to a lot more students who currently don't receive it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just here to reiterate that "getting more students into the non-tuition-paying category" means students admitted and choosing to enroll, in a need-blind admissions environment.

They should drop the pretense of need-blind since need will, in fact, play a role in this process one way or another. Right now it's on the back end, but one bad algorithm from enrollment management consulting can really mess with the budget.

Because of Princeton's current numbers, it wouldn't need to drop its need blind policy; it can get where it wants without doing so, by giving more aid to students already getting it. But i agree that there are other schools (like Dartmouth) that would really have to go need-aware (in favor of those who have need) in order to get to fewer than 3,000 tuition-paying students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems like a win for everyone!

Seems like it makes the endowment tax arbitrary stupid nonsense. Don't tax Princeton but tax MIT. Don't text Amherst or NYU but tax Notre Dame. This whole thing just seems pointless.

It is a Pigovian tax. It wasn’t intended to raise revenue. This is an optimal outcome, perhaps even an intended one.

It’s kind of crappy to be a family who makes just a tad over the line (or who have more than typical assets) who will pay full price while others just a tiny bit under the line pay none. I get the rationale but it’s not optimal from that perspective.

Totally agree - this system is very binary - all or nothing. There will be a lot of gamesmanship among families to get below the line - ironically people will have an incentive to take a pay cut for a few years. It makes very little sense yet given the constraints Princeton is dealing with, I don't blame them. But as one who is not far over the line and also had the audacity to live somewhat conservatively and save money for college, it is frustrating. But life isn't fair - I'm fortunate to have more than most other Americans and college is not a God-given right.

Plus don't pretend that your approach to money and saving isn't helping you out in other ways. You might not be getting a college break, but there are so many other benefits you get by living this way.

NP. Like what? We have a single car, don’t do vacations at all beyond drive to the beach and stay in a motel type of thing or camping, shop at Walmart for clothes, literally never eat out, we do spend more money than most people on food because our kids have severe food allergies and we need to. We have other therapies for special needs but basically just a typical middle class lifestyle plus some extra frugality compared to most people, and yet we just miss out on all financial aid. No family money at all (we were first gen), actually we support our parents a little if anything. Our kids are very high stats and so could definitely get some merit at some places but it’s frustrating that ivys are out for them because we really can’t afford it. If we lived irresponsibly and didn’t work so hard, they would get financial aid. The system sucks.

So apparently you have figured out how to have some of the things you want plus get financial aid but you refuse to do it? Maybe the system doesn't suck. Maybe you just aren't understanding how to benefit from the system?

And if you don't want to shop at Walmart like most people so that your kid can get a Princeton education, then dont. No one is forcing you to do that. The system sucks because you you have to shop at lower price stores like most people instead of expensive stores?

You are a total insincere jerk. This person was very frank and honest and is trying to be fiscally responsible and you jump all over them. Can you respond in a kind, thoughtful way? What happened to intelligent conflict and discourse?

The low class trash who have no hopes of having their children ever attend a place like Princeton really stand out here. But I'm sure they will argue they didn't want Princeton anyway.

And thank you to the poster who this jerk was responding to. That was a very interesting, meaningful post that demonstrates what a lot of people are dealing with. And as the other poster who is being wrongfully demonized noted, no one is saying woe is me or that they would trade their lives with a homeless person. They are just saying that the system could use fixing. Is that so wrong?

The poster is entitled to their opinion that people that are crying about having to shop at Walmart to afford Princeton are totally in a bubble. You want Princeton to give more aid to your family so that you don't have to shop at Walmart? Do you know how entitled and ridiculous that sounds? If a poster is of the opinion that that indicates you live in a bubble, then that is that poster's opinion. It is no less valid than yours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems like a win for everyone!

Seems like it makes the endowment tax arbitrary stupid nonsense. Don't tax Princeton but tax MIT. Don't text Amherst or NYU but tax Notre Dame. This whole thing just seems pointless.

It is a Pigovian tax. It wasn’t intended to raise revenue. This is an optimal outcome, perhaps even an intended one.

It’s kind of crappy to be a family who makes just a tad over the line (or who have more than typical assets) who will pay full price while others just a tiny bit under the line pay none. I get the rationale but it’s not optimal from that perspective.

Totally agree - this system is very binary - all or nothing. There will be a lot of gamesmanship among families to get below the line - ironically people will have an incentive to take a pay cut for a few years. It makes very little sense yet given the constraints Princeton is dealing with, I don't blame them. But as one who is not far over the line and also had the audacity to live somewhat conservatively and save money for college, it is frustrating. But life isn't fair - I'm fortunate to have more than most other Americans and college is not a God-given right.

Plus don't pretend that your approach to money and saving isn't helping you out in other ways. You might not be getting a college break, but there are so many other benefits you get by living this way.

NP. Like what? We have a single car, don’t do vacations at all beyond drive to the beach and stay in a motel type of thing or camping, shop at Walmart for clothes, literally never eat out, we do spend more money than most people on food because our kids have severe food allergies and we need to. We have other therapies for special needs but basically just a typical middle class lifestyle plus some extra frugality compared to most people, and yet we just miss out on all financial aid. No family money at all (we were first gen), actually we support our parents a little if anything. Our kids are very high stats and so could definitely get some merit at some places but it’s frustrating that ivys are out for them because we really can’t afford it. If we lived irresponsibly and didn’t work so hard, they would get financial aid. The system sucks.

So apparently you have figured out how to have some of the things you want plus get financial aid but you refuse to do it? Maybe the system doesn't suck. Maybe you just aren't understanding how to benefit from the system?

And if you don't want to shop at Walmart like most people so that your kid can get a Princeton education, then dont. No one is forcing you to do that. The system sucks because you you have to shop at lower price stores like most people instead of expensive stores?

You are a total insincere jerk. This person was very frank and honest and is trying to be fiscally responsible and you jump all over them. Can you respond in a kind, thoughtful way? What happened to intelligent conflict and discourse?

The low class trash who have no hopes of having their children ever attend a place like Princeton really stand out here. But I'm sure they will argue they didn't want Princeton anyway.

And thank you to the poster who this jerk was responding to. That was a very interesting, meaningful post that demonstrates what a lot of people are dealing with. And as the other poster who is being wrongfully demonized noted, no one is saying woe is me or that they would trade their lives with a homeless person. They are just saying that the system could use fixing. Is that so wrong?

The poster is entitled to their opinion that people that are crying about having to shop at Walmart to afford Princeton are totally in a bubble. You want Princeton to give more aid to your family so that you don't have to shop at Walmart? Do you know how entitled and ridiculous that sounds? If a poster is of the opinion that that indicates you live in a bubble, then that is that poster's opinion. It is no less valid than yours.

Once again ignoring the point. It can be said in a more kind, adult way. Everyone here needs to show how clever and snarky they can be. No one can have adult disagreements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems like a win for everyone!

Seems like it makes the endowment tax arbitrary stupid nonsense. Don't tax Princeton but tax MIT. Don't text Amherst or NYU but tax Notre Dame. This whole thing just seems pointless.

It is a Pigovian tax. It wasn’t intended to raise revenue. This is an optimal outcome, perhaps even an intended one.

It’s kind of crappy to be a family who makes just a tad over the line (or who have more than typical assets) who will pay full price while others just a tiny bit under the line pay none. I get the rationale but it’s not optimal from that perspective.

Totally agree - this system is very binary - all or nothing. There will be a lot of gamesmanship among families to get below the line - ironically people will have an incentive to take a pay cut for a few years. It makes very little sense yet given the constraints Princeton is dealing with, I don't blame them. But as one who is not far over the line and also had the audacity to live somewhat conservatively and save money for college, it is frustrating. But life isn't fair - I'm fortunate to have more than most other Americans and college is not a God-given right.

Plus don't pretend that your approach to money and saving isn't helping you out in other ways. You might not be getting a college break, but there are so many other benefits you get by living this way.

NP. Like what? We have a single car, don’t do vacations at all beyond drive to the beach and stay in a motel type of thing or camping, shop at Walmart for clothes, literally never eat out, we do spend more money than most people on food because our kids have severe food allergies and we need to. We have other therapies for special needs but basically just a typical middle class lifestyle plus some extra frugality compared to most people, and yet we just miss out on all financial aid. No family money at all (we were first gen), actually we support our parents a little if anything. Our kids are very high stats and so could definitely get some merit at some places but it’s frustrating that ivys are out for them because we really can’t afford it. If we lived irresponsibly and didn’t work so hard, they would get financial aid. The system sucks.

So apparently you have figured out how to have some of the things you want plus get financial aid but you refuse to do it? Maybe the system doesn't suck. Maybe you just aren't understanding how to benefit from the system?



And if you don't want to shop at Walmart like most people so that your kid can get a Princeton education, then dont. No one is forcing you to do that. The system sucks because you you have to shop at lower price stores like most people instead of expensive stores?

You are a total insincere jerk. This person was very frank and honest and is trying to be fiscally responsible and you jump all over them. Can you respond in a kind, thoughtful way? What happened to intelligent conflict and discourse?

The low class trash who have no hopes of having their children ever attend a place like Princeton really stand out here. But I'm sure they will argue they didn't want Princeton anyway.

And thank you to the poster who this jerk was responding to. That was a very interesting, meaningful post that demonstrates what a lot of people are dealing with. And as the other poster who is being wrongfully demonized noted, no one is saying woe is me or that they would trade their lives with a homeless person. They are just saying that the system could use fixing. Is that so wrong?

The poster is entitled to their opinion that people that are crying about having to shop at Walmart to afford Princeton are totally in a bubble. You want Princeton to give more aid to your family so that you don't have to shop at Walmart? Do you know how entitled and ridiculous that sounds? If a poster is of the opinion that that indicates you live in a bubble, then that is that poster's opinion. It is no less valid than yours.

Once again ignoring the point. It can be said in a more kind, adult way. Everyone here needs to show how clever and snarky they can be. No one can have adult disagreements.

You're ignoring the point. The system is getting better, not worse. There were zero women at Princeton in my lifetime. So large groups of excluded people are getting more access to that kind of high quality education then used to be the case. I think that's a better system, not a worse system. Is it perfect? No but it's getting better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems like a win for everyone!

Seems like it makes the endowment tax arbitrary stupid nonsense. Don't tax Princeton but tax MIT. Don't text Amherst or NYU but tax Notre Dame. This whole thing just seems pointless.

It is a Pigovian tax. It wasn’t intended to raise revenue. This is an optimal outcome, perhaps even an intended one.

It’s kind of crappy to be a family who makes just a tad over the line (or who have more than typical assets) who will pay full price while others just a tiny bit under the line pay none. I get the rationale but it’s not optimal from that perspective.

Entitled much?

[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:Seems like a win for everyone!

Seems like it makes the endowment tax arbitrary stupid nonsense. Don't tax Princeton but tax MIT. Don't text Amherst or NYU but tax Notre Dame. This whole thing just seems pointless.

It is a Pigovian tax. It wasn’t intended to raise revenue. This is an optimal outcome, perhaps even an intended one.

It’s kind of crappy to be a family who makes just a tad over the line (or who have more than typical assets) who will pay full price while others just a tiny bit under the line pay none. I get the rationale but it’s not optimal from that perspective.

Totally agree - this system is very binary - all or nothing. There will be a lot of gamesmanship among families to get below the line - ironically people will have an incentive to take a pay cut for a few years. It makes very little sense yet given the constraints Princeton is dealing with, I don't blame them. But as one who is not far over the line and also had the audacity to live somewhat conservatively and save money for college, it is frustrating. But life isn't fair - I'm fortunate to have more than most other Americans and college is not a God-given right.

Plus don't pretend that your approach to money and saving isn't helping you out in other ways. You might not be getting a college break, but there are so many other benefits you get by living this way.

NP. Like what? We have a single car, don’t do vacations at all beyond drive to the beach and stay in a motel type of thing or camping, shop at Walmart for clothes, literally never eat out, we do spend more money than most people on food because our kids have severe food allergies and we need to. We have other therapies for special needs but basically just a typical middle class lifestyle plus some extra frugality compared to most people, and yet we just miss out on all financial aid. No family money at all (we were first gen), actually we support our parents a little if anything. Our kids are very high stats and so could definitely get some merit at some places but it’s frustrating that ivys are out for them because we really can’t afford it. If we lived irresponsibly and didn’t work so hard, they would get financial aid. The system sucks.

So apparently you have figured out how to have some of the things you want plus get financial aid but you refuse to do it? Maybe the system doesn't suck. Maybe you just aren't understanding how to benefit from the system?



And if you don't want to shop at Walmart like most people so that your kid can get a Princeton education, then dont. No one is forcing you to do that. The system sucks because you you have to shop at lower price stores like most people instead of expensive stores?

You are a total insincere jerk. This person was very frank and honest and is trying to be fiscally responsible and you jump all over them. Can you respond in a kind, thoughtful way? What happened to intelligent conflict and discourse?

The low class trash who have no hopes of having their children ever attend a place like Princeton really stand out here. But I'm sure they will argue they didn't want Princeton anyway.

And thank you to the poster who this jerk was responding to. That was a very interesting, meaningful post that demonstrates what a lot of people are dealing with. And as the other poster who is being wrongfully demonized noted, no one is saying woe is me or that they would trade their lives with a homeless person. They are just saying that the system could use fixing. Is that so wrong?

The poster is entitled to their opinion that people that are crying about having to shop at Walmart to afford Princeton are totally in a bubble. You want Princeton to give more aid to your family so that you don't have to shop at Walmart? Do you know how entitled and ridiculous that sounds? If a poster is of the opinion that that indicates you live in a bubble, then that is that poster's opinion. It is no less valid than yours.

Once again ignoring the point. It can be said in a more kind, adult way. Everyone here needs to show how clever and snarky they can be. No one can have adult disagreements.

You're ignoring the point. The system is getting better, not worse. There were zero women at Princeton in my lifetime. So large groups of excluded people are getting more access to that kind of high quality education then used to be the case. I think that's a better system, not a worse system. Is it perfect? No but it's getting better.

Apples and oranges. No one is saying that some things aren't better (at least no one with a brain). But there is still room for improvement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems like a win for everyone!

Seems like it makes the endowment tax arbitrary stupid nonsense. Don't tax Princeton but tax MIT. Don't text Amherst or NYU but tax Notre Dame. This whole thing just seems pointless.

It is a Pigovian tax. It wasn’t intended to raise revenue. This is an optimal outcome, perhaps even an intended one.

It’s kind of crappy to be a family who makes just a tad over the line (or who have more than typical assets) who will pay full price while others just a tiny bit under the line pay none. I get the rationale but it’s not optimal from that perspective.

Totally agree - this system is very binary - all or nothing. There will be a lot of gamesmanship among families to get below the line - ironically people will have an incentive to take a pay cut for a few years. It makes very little sense yet given the constraints Princeton is dealing with, I don't blame them. But as one who is not far over the line and also had the audacity to live somewhat conservatively and save money for college, it is frustrating. But life isn't fair - I'm fortunate to have more than most other Americans and college is not a God-given right.

Plus don't pretend that your approach to money and saving isn't helping you out in other ways. You might not be getting a college break, but there are so many other benefits you get by living this way.

NP. Like what? We have a single car, don’t do vacations at all beyond drive to the beach and stay in a motel type of thing or camping, shop at Walmart for clothes, literally never eat out, we do spend more money than most people on food because our kids have severe food allergies and we need to. We have other therapies for special needs but basically just a typical middle class lifestyle plus some extra frugality compared to most people, and yet we just miss out on all financial aid. No family money at all (we were first gen), actually we support our parents a little if anything. Our kids are very high stats and so could definitely get some merit at some places but it’s frustrating that ivys are out for them because we really can’t afford it. If we lived irresponsibly and didn’t work so hard, they would get financial aid. The system sucks.

So apparently you have figured out how to have some of the things you want plus get financial aid but you refuse to do it? Maybe the system doesn't suck. Maybe you just aren't understanding how to benefit from the system?



And if you don't want to shop at Walmart like most people so that your kid can get a Princeton education, then dont. No one is forcing you to do that. The system sucks because you you have to shop at lower price stores like most people instead of expensive stores?

You are a total insincere jerk. This person was very frank and honest and is trying to be fiscally responsible and you jump all over them. Can you respond in a kind, thoughtful way? What happened to intelligent conflict and discourse?

The low class trash who have no hopes of having their children ever attend a place like Princeton really stand out here. But I'm sure they will argue they didn't want Princeton anyway.

And thank you to the poster who this jerk was responding to. That was a very interesting, meaningful post that demonstrates what a lot of people are dealing with. And as the other poster who is being wrongfully demonized noted, no one is saying woe is me or that they would trade their lives with a homeless person. They are just saying that the system could use fixing. Is that so wrong?

The poster is entitled to their opinion that people that are crying about having to shop at Walmart to afford Princeton are totally in a bubble. You want Princeton to give more aid to your family so that you don't have to shop at Walmart? Do you know how entitled and ridiculous that sounds? If a poster is of the opinion that that indicates you live in a bubble, then that is that poster's opinion. It is no less valid than yours.

Once again ignoring the point. It can be said in a more kind, adult way. Everyone here needs to show how clever and snarky they can be. No one can have adult disagreements.

You're ignoring the point. The system is getting better, not worse. There were zero women at Princeton in my lifetime. So large groups of excluded people are getting more access to that kind of high quality education then used to be the case. I think that's a better system, not a worse system. Is it perfect? No but it's getting better.

Apples and oranges. No one is saying that some things aren't better (at least no one with a brain). But there is still room for improvement.

I don't think I'm missing anything. There was a poster that doesn't like the aid formula used by Princeton because they feel it requires sacrifices on the part of that family to send their child to Princeton. So I'm interpreting that to mean that they want the aid formula changed so it lessens their sacrifice of not being able to eat out in restaurants and having to shop at cheap stores. That is what was posted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems like a win for everyone!

Seems like it makes the endowment tax arbitrary stupid nonsense. Don't tax Princeton but tax MIT. Don't text Amherst or NYU but tax Notre Dame. This whole thing just seems pointless.

It is a Pigovian tax. It wasn’t intended to raise revenue. This is an optimal outcome, perhaps even an intended one.

It’s kind of crappy to be a family who makes just a tad over the line (or who have more than typical assets) who will pay full price while others just a tiny bit under the line pay none. I get the rationale but it’s not optimal from that perspective.

Totally agree - this system is very binary - all or nothing. There will be a lot of gamesmanship among families to get below the line - ironically people will have an incentive to take a pay cut for a few years. It makes very little sense yet given the constraints Princeton is dealing with, I don't blame them. But as one who is not far over the line and also had the audacity to live somewhat conservatively and save money for college, it is frustrating. But life isn't fair - I'm fortunate to have more than most other Americans and college is not a God-given right.

Plus don't pretend that your approach to money and saving isn't helping you out in other ways. You might not be getting a college break, but there are so many other benefits you get by living this way.

NP. Like what? We have a single car, don’t do vacations at all beyond drive to the beach and stay in a motel type of thing or camping, shop at Walmart for clothes, literally never eat out, we do spend more money than most people on food because our kids have severe food allergies and we need to. We have other therapies for special needs but basically just a typical middle class lifestyle plus some extra frugality compared to most people, and yet we just miss out on all financial aid. No family money at all (we were first gen), actually we support our parents a little if anything. Our kids are very high stats and so could definitely get some merit at some places but it’s frustrating that ivys are out for them because we really can’t afford it. If we lived irresponsibly and didn’t work so hard, they would get financial aid. The system sucks.

So apparently you have figured out how to have some of the things you want plus get financial aid but you refuse to do it? Maybe the system doesn't suck. Maybe you just aren't understanding how to benefit from the system?



And if you don't want to shop at Walmart like most people so that your kid can get a Princeton education, then dont. No one is forcing you to do that. The system sucks because you you have to shop at lower price stores like most people instead of expensive stores?

You are a total insincere jerk. This person was very frank and honest and is trying to be fiscally responsible and you jump all over them. Can you respond in a kind, thoughtful way? What happened to intelligent conflict and discourse?

The low class trash who have no hopes of having their children ever attend a place like Princeton really stand out here. But I'm sure they will argue they didn't want Princeton anyway.

And thank you to the poster who this jerk was responding to. That was a very interesting, meaningful post that demonstrates what a lot of people are dealing with. And as the other poster who is being wrongfully demonized noted, no one is saying woe is me or that they would trade their lives with a homeless person. They are just saying that the system could use fixing. Is that so wrong?

The poster is entitled to their opinion that people that are crying about having to shop at Walmart to afford Princeton are totally in a bubble. You want Princeton to give more aid to your family so that you don't have to shop at Walmart? Do you know how entitled and ridiculous that sounds? If a poster is of the opinion that that indicates you live in a bubble, then that is that poster's opinion. It is no less valid than yours.

Once again ignoring the point. It can be said in a more kind, adult way. Everyone here needs to show how clever and snarky they can be. No one can have adult disagreements.

You're ignoring the point. The system is getting better, not worse. There were zero women at Princeton in my lifetime. So large groups of excluded people are getting more access to that kind of high quality education then used to be the case. I think that's a better system, not a worse system. Is it perfect? No but it's getting better.

Apples and oranges. No one is saying that some things aren't better (at least no one with a brain). But there is still room for improvement.

I don't think I'm missing anything. There was a poster that doesn't like the aid formula used by Princeton because they feel it requires sacrifices on the part of that family to send their child to Princeton. So I'm interpreting that to mean that they want the aid formula changed so it lessens their sacrifice of not being able to eat out in restaurants and having to shop at cheap stores. That is what was posted.

What they are saying is that it is "unfair" that if two families have identical income streams and one spends most of their money on cars, vacations, jewelry, clams on the half shell, roller skates, or whatever else and the other lives more conservatively and puts the money away to save for college, the one that spent the money will get more financial aid than the one that saved. So the financial aid system in some ways is discouraging savings, which one should think is a social good that should be encouraged (within reason - if people saved 100% and spent nothing, that would not be good either).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've never attended one of these private schools with the massive need-based aid programs. Is it a weird dichotomy with basically only poor kids and rich kids and no real middle class?

I attended a state school so there were basically all types of kids, but lots of middle class.

Did you look at the actual household incomes of the families that get aid?
If you did, then I think your definition of “real middle class” is pretty skewed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems like a win for everyone!

Seems like it makes the endowment tax arbitrary stupid nonsense. Don't tax Princeton but tax MIT. Don't text Amherst or NYU but tax Notre Dame. This whole thing just seems pointless.

It is a Pigovian tax. It wasn’t intended to raise revenue. This is an optimal outcome, perhaps even an intended one.

It’s kind of crappy to be a family who makes just a tad over the line (or who have more than typical assets) who will pay full price while others just a tiny bit under the line pay none. I get the rationale but it’s not optimal from that perspective.

Totally agree - this system is very binary - all or nothing. There will be a lot of gamesmanship among families to get below the line - ironically people will have an incentive to take a pay cut for a few years. It makes very little sense yet given the constraints Princeton is dealing with, I don't blame them. But as one who is not far over the line and also had the audacity to live somewhat conservatively and save money for college, it is frustrating. But life isn't fair - I'm fortunate to have more than most other Americans and college is not a God-given right.

Plus don't pretend that your approach to money and saving isn't helping you out in other ways. You might not be getting a college break, but there are so many other benefits you get by living this way.

NP. Like what? We have a single car, don’t do vacations at all beyond drive to the beach and stay in a motel type of thing or camping, shop at Walmart for clothes, literally never eat out, we do spend more money than most people on food because our kids have severe food allergies and we need to. We have other therapies for special needs but basically just a typical middle class lifestyle plus some extra frugality compared to most people, and yet we just miss out on all financial aid. No family money at all (we were first gen), actually we support our parents a little if anything. Our kids are very high stats and so could definitely get some merit at some places but it’s frustrating that ivys are out for them because we really can’t afford it. If we lived irresponsibly and didn’t work so hard, they would get financial aid. The system sucks.

So apparently you have figured out how to have some of the things you want plus get financial aid but you refuse to do it? Maybe the system doesn't suck. Maybe you just aren't understanding how to benefit from the system?



And if you don't want to shop at Walmart like most people so that your kid can get a Princeton education, then dont. No one is forcing you to do that. The system sucks because you you have to shop at lower price stores like most people instead of expensive stores?

You are a total insincere jerk. This person was very frank and honest and is trying to be fiscally responsible and you jump all over them. Can you respond in a kind, thoughtful way? What happened to intelligent conflict and discourse?

The low class trash who have no hopes of having their children ever attend a place like Princeton really stand out here. But I'm sure they will argue they didn't want Princeton anyway.

And thank you to the poster who this jerk was responding to. That was a very interesting, meaningful post that demonstrates what a lot of people are dealing with. And as the other poster who is being wrongfully demonized noted, no one is saying woe is me or that they would trade their lives with a homeless person. They are just saying that the system could use fixing. Is that so wrong?

The poster is entitled to their opinion that people that are crying about having to shop at Walmart to afford Princeton are totally in a bubble. You want Princeton to give more aid to your family so that you don't have to shop at Walmart? Do you know how entitled and ridiculous that sounds? If a poster is of the opinion that that indicates you live in a bubble, then that is that poster's opinion. It is no less valid than yours.

Once again ignoring the point. It can be said in a more kind, adult way. Everyone here needs to show how clever and snarky they can be. No one can have adult disagreements.

You're ignoring the point. The system is getting better, not worse. There were zero women at Princeton in my lifetime. So large groups of excluded people are getting more access to that kind of high quality education then used to be the case. I think that's a better system, not a worse system. Is it perfect? No but it's getting better.

Apples and oranges. No one is saying that some things aren't better (at least no one with a brain). But there is still room for improvement.

I don't think I'm missing anything. There was a poster that doesn't like the aid formula used by Princeton because they feel it requires sacrifices on the part of that family to send their child to Princeton. So I'm interpreting that to mean that they want the aid formula changed so it lessens their sacrifice of not being able to eat out in restaurants and having to shop at cheap stores. That is what was posted.

What they are saying is that it is "unfair" that if two families have identical income streams and one spends most of their money on cars, vacations, jewelry, clams on the half shell, roller skates, or whatever else and the other lives more conservatively and puts the money away to save for college, the one that spent the money will get more financial aid than the one that saved. So the financial aid system in some ways is discouraging savings, which one should think is a social good that should be encouraged (within reason - if people saved 100% and spent nothing, that would not be good either).

I get it. Life is unfair is certainly on display at a place like Princeton. The lower income and middle income kids are watching their peers jet off on fancy vacations and go to their second homes and drive their cars and get their internships from mommy's contact list.

And the aid formulas are not perfect. Understand them and then use that knowledge. I think in the big picture I would focus on what Princeton has to offer. And every kid getting that kind of education has advantages that the vast majority of people on this globe will not have.

But if you are really unhappy with the aid formula. Most kids with the stats to get into Princeton could get a very generous merit award from another institution and lessen the financial burden on their families that are too wealthy to get much aid from Princeton.

[Anonymous]

any reason to think Yale will do this too?

[Anonymous]

is it tuition-paying undergrad only?