What Will Some Wealthy Parents Not Do if a Free Buck to be Made?

Anonymous
MAGA of course.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:To quote one poster:

"Parent’s income and assets shouldn’t determine the price of a future working adult’s college education, but that’s exactly what the aid and so-called scholarship system has produced in just the last two decades. That and exorbitant tuition costs that are not justifiable.

This is the real scam."

Yes, this.


How is this a scam? I am a parent who fully intends to pay 75-100k per year for each of our 3 kids to go to college. Am I happy about spending that amount of money? No. But I know that's what it costs so I will willingly shoulder the burden. That's my choice and I know it going into it.


+1000
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Shrugs.

I have a nephew. Son of a single mother. I pay his private school tuition ($35k a year) and my parents helped my sister buy her house, a modest rowhouse in a very nice area, and pay for his camps and tutors and activities and trips abroad. If you met my nephew, he will come across as a nice upper middle class kid. When the time comes to go to college, based on my sister's income and assets he will qualify for substantial financial aid despite that the larger family is more affluent and could easily pay his tuition. We will do it if it needs to be the case, but you better believe we're going to game the system to try to get as much financial aid as we can. We're not going to pass up that chance. The system is broken, dysfunctional and hypocritical and we're not going to take the higher moral road because there is none.



Sorry, but you know their is a high ground, and you are not choosing it. Hence your use of the term “game the system”.

You do you, go ahead. To some, ethics are more important than money or sibling jealousy. The lucky poors!


People who claim a higher moral road often ignore that no one else cares. In most cases it's a self imposed punishment that accomplishes nothing. In this case it's no more unethical than a college claiming to be need blind and only offering token financial aid that is clearly insufficient, squeezing out people while rapidly becoming a campus divided between the rich and the lucky poor, as all the donut hole families can tell you.

In a system where top schools justify charging 70k a year for a degree, there are no ethics. It's as simple as that.

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:To quote one poster:

"Parent’s income and assets shouldn’t determine the price of a future working adult’s college education, but that’s exactly what the aid and so-called scholarship system has produced in just the last two decades. That and exorbitant tuition costs that are not justifiable.

This is the real scam."

Yes, this.


I believe private college is overpriced. But the solution to this is in your own hands - look at public, look at universities abroad, etc. It is not ethical to game the system so that your child can benefit from subsidies aimed at much poorer children.
Anonymous
This shakes me something fierce because I was living on my own at age 21 (1.5 FT jobs) with car insurance, phone, rent, etc paid for by me. This was before ACA so I also was not on my parents health insurance. Still had to claim my parents income- making me ineligible for grants and other need-based aid.

Fast forward a few years going back to school since I never completed my degree and my FT income per my last tax return was used for need-based aid calculations. Mind you, I couldnt work a FT job and finish my bachelors so I asked to have it reviewed at my current income using pay stubs. They denied the review and stated I should have "saved more money."

I know plenty of people who fudged the FAFSA in other ways. My step siblings used my dads income (their stepdad) versus their dads income even though their dad was a millionaire and paid for whatever was left. One went to UNC, the other ECU.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:To quote one poster:

"Parent’s income and assets shouldn’t determine the price of a future working adult’s college education, but that’s exactly what the aid and so-called scholarship system has produced in just the last two decades. That and exorbitant tuition costs that are not justifiable.

This is the real scam."

Yes, this.


wha ...? I am all for reducing college costs, but your parents should absolutely have to contribute what they can.

Can you put the rationale for your thinking in words, other than to use the word "absolutely"?


I don't think anyone except you need this explained.

Again, try using words instead of insinuations. Here's an attempt: "Parents are asked to pay for their adult children's college expenses (*) because .... "

For extra credit, also complete the sentence: "If parents who are asked to pay do not pay, their children do not have a recourse because ... "

Try it, and then proofread what you were trying to say.

See how difficult this is?

(*) except if they allowed their underage children to marry, or their children chose to have grandchildren, or the relinquished custodianship of their children


Again, you're literally the only person who needs this explained. If you'd like to state your arguments and beliefs, go'head.


Np - I’d like to hear it explained, too. Why should the income or assets of parents be counted as those that will support another adult?

Please complete pp’s sentences.
Anonymous
Easy as hell to sniff out: Force the kids to provide proof of health insurance last 1-3 years; it’s obviously still going to be the parents family plan.

This is the new low-trust America. I guarantee I can guess the region of origin of those who did this.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Shrugs.

I have a nephew. Son of a single mother. I pay his private school tuition ($35k a year) and my parents helped my sister buy her house, a modest rowhouse in a very nice area, and pay for his camps and tutors and activities and trips abroad. If you met my nephew, he will come across as a nice upper middle class kid. When the time comes to go to college, based on my sister's income and assets he will qualify for substantial financial aid despite that the larger family is more affluent and could easily pay his tuition. We will do it if it needs to be the case, but you better believe we're going to game the system to try to get as much financial aid as we can. We're not going to pass up that chance. The system is broken, dysfunctional and hypocritical and we're not going to take the higher moral road because there is none.



Sorry, but you know their is a high ground, and you are not choosing it. Hence your use of the term “game the system”.

You do you, go ahead. To some, ethics are more important than money or sibling jealousy. The lucky poors!


People who claim a higher moral road often ignore that no one else cares. In most cases it's a self imposed punishment that accomplishes nothing. In this case it's no more unethical than a college claiming to be need blind and only offering token financial aid that is clearly insufficient, squeezing out people while rapidly becoming a campus divided between the rich and the lucky poor, as all the donut hole families can tell you.

In a system where top schools justify charging 70k a year for a degree, there are no ethics. It's as simple as that.



If you can't tell the difference between PP and engaging in a sham guardianship switch-up to effectively conceal the students's resources, I don't know what to tell you.
Anonymous
Don't legal custody changes have to go through the court system? And don't state laws generally require some kind of third party agency to assess the families involved? And wouldn't that process uncover spurious changes of custody?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Shrugs.

I have a nephew. Son of a single mother. I pay his private school tuition ($35k a year) and my parents helped my sister buy her house, a modest rowhouse in a very nice area, and pay for his camps and tutors and activities and trips abroad. If you met my nephew, he will come across as a nice upper middle class kid. When the time comes to go to college, based on my sister's income and assets he will qualify for substantial financial aid despite that the larger family is more affluent and could easily pay his tuition. We will do it if it needs to be the case, but you better believe we're going to game the system to try to get as much financial aid as we can. We're not going to pass up that chance. The system is broken, dysfunctional and hypocritical and we're not going to take the higher moral road because there is none.



Sorry, but you know their is a high ground, and you are not choosing it. Hence your use of the term “game the system”.

You do you, go ahead. To some, ethics are more important than money or sibling jealousy. The lucky poors!


People who claim a higher moral road often ignore that no one else cares. In most cases it's a self imposed punishment that accomplishes nothing. In this case it's no more unethical than a college claiming to be need blind and only offering token financial aid that is clearly insufficient, squeezing out people while rapidly becoming a campus divided between the rich and the lucky poor, as all the donut hole families can tell you.

In a system where top schools justify charging 70k a year for a degree, there are no ethics. It's as simple as that.



If you can't tell the difference between PP and engaging in a sham guardianship switch-up to effectively conceal the students's resources, I don't know what to tell you.


The PP accused me of sibling jealousy. If I was jealous I wouldn't be paying my nephew's tuition.

The difference between smart people and the gullible is that the smart know how to take advantage of the resources at their disposal, including the cards dealt to them. You don't know my sister or her particular circumstances beyond that she has a loving and supportive family. We will do what it takes to make sure my nephew has a great start in life. But we are not foolish enough to pass up opportunities to take advantage of loopholes due to how the financial aid system is structured. Morals and ethics ultimately boil down to treating people kindly and don't break unjust laws. Anything more than that is purely subjective.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:This shakes me something fierce because I was living on my own at age 21 (1.5 FT jobs) with car insurance, phone, rent, etc paid for by me. This was before ACA so I also was not on my parents health insurance. Still had to claim my parents income- making me ineligible for grants and other need-based aid.

Fast forward a few years going back to school since I never completed my degree and my FT income per my last tax return was used for need-based aid calculations. Mind you, I couldnt work a FT job and finish my bachelors so I asked to have it reviewed at my current income using pay stubs. They denied the review and stated I should have "saved more money."

I know plenty of people who fudged the FAFSA in other ways. My step siblings used my dads income (their stepdad) versus their dads income even though their dad was a millionaire and paid for whatever was left. One went to UNC, the other ECU.

That isn't actually 'fudging' the FAFSA. The FAFSA asks for household members' income, defined as people who live in the same household, not relatives who live elsewhere. UNC, does not use FAFSA only, though. They require a CSS profile which would ask for bio parents income. My son's father refused to complete his portion of the CSS making him ineligible for aid at UNC.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Shrugs.

I have a nephew. Son of a single mother. I pay his private school tuition ($35k a year) and my parents helped my sister buy her house, a modest rowhouse in a very nice area, and pay for his camps and tutors and activities and trips abroad. If you met my nephew, he will come across as a nice upper middle class kid. When the time comes to go to college, based on my sister's income and assets he will qualify for substantial financial aid despite that the larger family is more affluent and could easily pay his tuition. We will do it if it needs to be the case, but you better believe we're going to game the system to try to get as much financial aid as we can. We're not going to pass up that chance. The system is broken, dysfunctional and hypocritical and we're not going to take the higher moral road because there is none.



Sorry, but you know their is a high ground, and you are not choosing it. Hence your use of the term “game the system”.

You do you, go ahead. To some, ethics are more important than money or sibling jealousy. The lucky poors!


People who claim a higher moral road often ignore that no one else cares. In most cases it's a self imposed punishment that accomplishes nothing. In this case it's no more unethical than a college claiming to be need blind and only offering token financial aid that is clearly insufficient, squeezing out people while rapidly becoming a campus divided between the rich and the lucky poor, as all the donut hole families can tell you.

In a system where top schools justify charging 70k a year for a degree, there are no ethics. It's as simple as that.



If you can't tell the difference between PP and engaging in a sham guardianship switch-up to effectively conceal the students's resources, I don't know what to tell you.


The PP accused me of sibling jealousy. If I was jealous I wouldn't be paying my nephew's tuition.

The difference between smart people and the gullible is that the smart know how to take advantage of the resources at their disposal, including the cards dealt to them. You don't know my sister or her particular circumstances beyond that she has a loving and supportive family. We will do what it takes to make sure my nephew has a great start in life. But we are not foolish enough to pass up opportunities to take advantage of loopholes due to how the financial aid system is structured. Morals and ethics ultimately boil down to treating people kindly and don't break unjust laws. Anything more than that is purely subjective.


It's not a "loophole." The FAFSA asks for your parents' income, not your extended family. You're not engaging in any sham or fraud.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:This shakes me something fierce because I was living on my own at age 21 (1.5 FT jobs) with car insurance, phone, rent, etc paid for by me. This was before ACA so I also was not on my parents health insurance. Still had to claim my parents income- making me ineligible for grants and other need-based aid.

Fast forward a few years going back to school since I never completed my degree and my FT income per my last tax return was used for need-based aid calculations. Mind you, I couldnt work a FT job and finish my bachelors so I asked to have it reviewed at my current income using pay stubs. They denied the review and stated I should have "saved more money."

I know plenty of people who fudged the FAFSA in other ways. My step siblings used my dads income (their stepdad) versus their dads income even though their dad was a millionaire and paid for whatever was left. One went to UNC, the other ECU.

That isn't actually 'fudging' the FAFSA. The FAFSA asks for household members' income, defined as people who live in the same household, not relatives who live elsewhere. UNC, does not use FAFSA only, though. They require a CSS profile which would ask for bio parents income. My son's father refused to complete his portion of the CSS making him ineligible for aid at UNC.


ugh. thank you for reminding me to put "complete the FAFSA" into my upcoming separation/custody agreement ...
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Shrugs.

I have a nephew. Son of a single mother. I pay his private school tuition ($35k a year) and my parents helped my sister buy her house, a modest rowhouse in a very nice area, and pay for his camps and tutors and activities and trips abroad. If you met my nephew, he will come across as a nice upper middle class kid. When the time comes to go to college, based on my sister's income and assets he will qualify for substantial financial aid despite that the larger family is more affluent and could easily pay his tuition. We will do it if it needs to be the case, but you better believe we're going to game the system to try to get as much financial aid as we can. We're not going to pass up that chance. The system is broken, dysfunctional and hypocritical and we're not going to take the higher moral road because there is none.



Sorry, but you know their is a high ground, and you are not choosing it. Hence your use of the term “game the system”.

You do you, go ahead. To some, ethics are more important than money or sibling jealousy. The lucky poors!


People who claim a higher moral road often ignore that no one else cares. In most cases it's a self imposed punishment that accomplishes nothing. In this case it's no more unethical than a college claiming to be need blind and only offering token financial aid that is clearly insufficient, squeezing out people while rapidly becoming a campus divided between the rich and the lucky poor, as all the donut hole families can tell you.

In a system where top schools justify charging 70k a year for a degree, there are no ethics. It's as simple as that.



If you can't tell the difference between PP and engaging in a sham guardianship switch-up to effectively conceal the students's resources, I don't know what to tell you.


The PP accused me of sibling jealousy. If I was jealous I wouldn't be paying my nephew's tuition.

The difference between smart people and the gullible is that the smart know how to take advantage of the resources at their disposal, including the cards dealt to them. You don't know my sister or her particular circumstances beyond that she has a loving and supportive family. We will do what it takes to make sure my nephew has a great start in life. But we are not foolish enough to pass up opportunities to take advantage of loopholes due to how the financial aid system is structured. Morals and ethics ultimately boil down to treating people kindly and don't break unjust laws. Anything more than that is purely subjective.


Need to say I meant don't break just laws, not unjust ones!
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Shrugs.

I have a nephew. Son of a single mother. I pay his private school tuition ($35k a year) and my parents helped my sister buy her house, a modest rowhouse in a very nice area, and pay for his camps and tutors and activities and trips abroad. If you met my nephew, he will come across as a nice upper middle class kid. When the time comes to go to college, based on my sister's income and assets he will qualify for substantial financial aid despite that the larger family is more affluent and could easily pay his tuition. We will do it if it needs to be the case, but you better believe we're going to game the system to try to get as much financial aid as we can. We're not going to pass up that chance. The system is broken, dysfunctional and hypocritical and we're not going to take the higher moral road because there is none.



Sorry, but you know their is a high ground, and you are not choosing it. Hence your use of the term “game the system”.

You do you, go ahead. To some, ethics are more important than money or sibling jealousy. The lucky poors!


People who claim a higher moral road often ignore that no one else cares. In most cases it's a self imposed punishment that accomplishes nothing. In this case it's no more unethical than a college claiming to be need blind and only offering token financial aid that is clearly insufficient, squeezing out people while rapidly becoming a campus divided between the rich and the lucky poor, as all the donut hole families can tell you.

In a system where top schools justify charging 70k a year for a degree, there are no ethics. It's as simple as that.



If you can't tell the difference between PP and engaging in a sham guardianship switch-up to effectively conceal the students's resources, I don't know what to tell you.


The PP accused me of sibling jealousy. If I was jealous I wouldn't be paying my nephew's tuition.

The difference between smart people and the gullible is that the smart know how to take advantage of the resources at their disposal, including the cards dealt to them. You don't know my sister or her particular circumstances beyond that she has a loving and supportive family. We will do what it takes to make sure my nephew has a great start in life. But we are not foolish enough to pass up opportunities to take advantage of loopholes due to how the financial aid system is structured. Morals and ethics ultimately boil down to treating people kindly and don't break unjust laws. Anything more than that is purely subjective.


Need to say I meant don't break just laws, not unjust ones!


Well, you're not breaking any laws, so it's ok. Breaking the law would be pretending to give your sister guardianship over your own child so he can get Pell grants.
Forum Index » College and University Discussion
Go to: