Why do people insist that their kid can always "go to an Ivy for grad school?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of people on this board myopically insist that undergrad prestige doesn't matter and that their kid can go to an Ivy for grad school. This seems misguided. The top firms only recruit from Ivies and other T20 schools. Going to an HYPSM for undergrad will increase your odds of landing at one of them.

If you go to an elite school and do everything right, you don't even need to go to grad school. The people on here saying that their kids at a state school or some no-name SLAC can "always go to an Ivy for grad school" seem misguided. Not all grad schools pay off. I had a woman in my neighborhood say the same thing -- her daughter went to a selective but not elite SLAC, and her mom insisted that her college education paid off since she's at Columbia for her PhD in History. Ummm.... hello?!!!! A PhD in the humanities is the LAST thing I would want my kid to do.

Different strokes for different folks. Going to an Ivy is no guarantee of anything!

I’m a poster who subscribes to this belief. I did it and our kids in STEM are doing it. It works for some. Not everyone wants to go into investment banking or management consulting, which frankly do nothing to help our world from what I’ve seen.. For us, mental health trumps academic prestige. The kid has to want it, we’re not going to push it. Life is about so much more.

OP here. So you would be okay with your kid going to an Ivy for a PhD in, say, Biology and then end up as a fed scientist? That would be awful. They would have no earning power in their 20s (as they'd be living on a grad student stipend) and they would top out at an income of $180k. How would they afford housing or childcare in their 30s in the DMV?

Life is more than money, I agree. But money is damn important.

There is more to life than money and a top scientist at a good agency is nice life. It is interesting work, family friendly and good benefits.

-Double fed family, with an nice house in a good school district in NWDC and can afford to send my kid to college full pay.

I assume you have family money. No way can a HHI of ~$300k afford a nice house in NWDC (unless you bought that house in the 90s) and afford another $300k for college. Again, this is talking about young adults right now -- so Gen X anecdotes shouldn't apply here.

NP--EVERYONE I know who works for the feds or local government or doing research, regardless of age, is doing fine financially and enjoys their job enough to stay there despite knowing they could make more doing something else. I've lived in the DC area for decades, so we're talking hundreds of people.

You do you, we'll do us. If you want to believe that being a one-percenter is key to happiness, go ahead and pursue that. Just be prepared for all the stress that comes with that path, and the very large chance that you won't make it and will either end up changing your outlook or will have a very bitter life.

OP here. I think people are really missing my point. A stint (even for just three years) at a top consulting firm, investment bank, or quant trading company will open tons of doors that otherwise wouldn't have opened. Those doors are mostly other high-paying jobs with better work/life balance. It's not like you have to stay at Goldman/Jane Street/McKinsey forever. But just doing a three-year stint right out of undergrad at one of those firms will open the door for high-paying jobs with great work/life balance.

I don't want my kid to be a one-percenter. But because of the way that compound interest works -- as well as the daunting costs of housing and childcare -- I know that it's important for my kids to make a lot of money in their twenties and then ratchet back down in their 30s than the other way around. And going to grad school in History or Biology, even if your PhD is from Stanford, seems like the opposite of a wise financial calculation. You'd be spending all your 20s living on a subsistence wage and the job that you'd get afterwards isn't likely to be high-paying (unless you get a PhD in CS or another hard science).

You need to worry about your own kid.

My kids are in high school, but I’ve already given them lessons on saving, investing, and compound interest. They understand that saving for retirement in your twenties and then never adding to that retirement fund will give them more money than working for minimum wage in their twenties and then spending the rest of their lives playing catch up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of people on this board myopically insist that undergrad prestige doesn't matter and that their kid can go to an Ivy for grad school. This seems misguided. The top firms only recruit from Ivies and other T20 schools. Going to an HYPSM for undergrad will increase your odds of landing at one of them.

If you go to an elite school and do everything right, you don't even need to go to grad school. The people on here saying that their kids at a state school or some no-name SLAC can "always go to an Ivy for grad school" seem misguided. Not all grad schools pay off. I had a woman in my neighborhood say the same thing -- her daughter went to a selective but not elite SLAC, and her mom insisted that her college education paid off since she's at Columbia for her PhD in History. Ummm.... hello?!!!! A PhD in the humanities is the LAST thing I would want my kid to do.

Different strokes for different folks. Going to an Ivy is no guarantee of anything!

I’m a poster who subscribes to this belief. I did it and our kids in STEM are doing it. It works for some. Not everyone wants to go into investment banking or management consulting, which frankly do nothing to help our world from what I’ve seen.. For us, mental health trumps academic prestige. The kid has to want it, we’re not going to push it. Life is about so much more.

OP here. So you would be okay with your kid going to an Ivy for a PhD in, say, Biology and then end up as a fed scientist? That would be awful. They would have no earning power in their 20s (as they'd be living on a grad student stipend) and they would top out at an income of $180k. How would they afford housing or childcare in their 30s in the DMV?

Life is more than money, I agree. But money is damn important.

There is more to life than money and a top scientist at a good agency is nice life. It is interesting work, family friendly and good benefits.

-Double fed family, with an nice house in a good school district in NWDC and can afford to send my kid to college full pay.

I assume you have family money. No way can a HHI of ~$300k afford a nice house in NWDC (unless you bought that house in the 90s) and afford another $300k for college. Again, this is talking about young adults right now -- so Gen X anecdotes shouldn't apply here.

NP--EVERYONE I know who works for the feds or local government or doing research, regardless of age, is doing fine financially and enjoys their job enough to stay there despite knowing they could make more doing something else. I've lived in the DC area for decades, so we're talking hundreds of people.

You do you, we'll do us. If you want to believe that being a one-percenter is key to happiness, go ahead and pursue that. Just be prepared for all the stress that comes with that path, and the very large chance that you won't make it and will either end up changing your outlook or will have a very bitter life.

OP here. I think people are really missing my point. A stint (even for just three years) at a top consulting firm, investment bank, or quant trading company will open tons of doors that otherwise wouldn't have opened. Those doors are mostly other high-paying jobs with better work/life balance. It's not like you have to stay at Goldman/Jane Street/McKinsey forever. But just doing a three-year stint right out of undergrad at one of those firms will open the door for high-paying jobs with great work/life balance.

I don't want my kid to be a one-percenter. But because of the way that compound interest works -- as well as the daunting costs of housing and childcare -- I know that it's important for my kids to make a lot of money in their twenties and then ratchet back down in their 30s than the other way around. And going to grad school in History or Biology, even if your PhD is from Stanford, seems like the opposite of a wise financial calculation. You'd be spending all your 20s living on a subsistence wage and the job that you'd get afterwards isn't likely to be high-paying (unless you get a PhD in CS or another hard science).

You need to worry about your own kid.

My kids are in high school, but I’ve already given them lessons on saving, investing, and compound interest. They understand that saving for retirement in your twenties and then never adding to that retirement fund will give them more money than working for minimum wage in their twenties and then spending the rest of their lives playing catch up.

I hope you realize that most kids even at elite schools aren’t making it into Jane Street and the like.

[Anonymous]

OP, you are part of the problem.

Our children are stressed out of their minds because their parents are so panicked that if they don’t become investment bankers they’re going to be HOMELESS, I TELL YOU, HOMELESS!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, you are part of the problem.

Our children are stressed out of their minds because their parents are so panicked that if they don’t become investment bankers they’re going to be HOMELESS, I TELL YOU, HOMELESS!

+1 I always wonder what kind of weird world these people live in. So out of touch with typical salaries and the very wide range of colleges that lead people to good jobs. Thinking a $180k federal employee (probably married to a similarly-salaried spouse) couldn't possibly afford a home and children. I guess one plus of my kids not being competitive for the schools OP thinks are the only reasonable option is that they won't have to deal with a lot of people in this strange bubble.

[Anonymous]

OP, if you were really concerned about practicality as you say you are you’d have your kids go to vocational school for a 2 year program. I do not mean that in a derogatory way. But don’t say “we’re just a middle class family!” If you can afford to pay $70,000/year for college and are concerning yourself like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of people on this board myopically insist that undergrad prestige doesn't matter and that their kid can go to an Ivy for grad school. This seems misguided. The top firms only recruit from Ivies and other T20 schools. Going to an HYPSM for undergrad will increase your odds of landing at one of them.

If you go to an elite school and do everything right, you don't even need to go to grad school. The people on here saying that their kids at a state school or some no-name SLAC can "always go to an Ivy for grad school" seem misguided. Not all grad schools pay off. I had a woman in my neighborhood say the same thing -- her daughter went to a selective but not elite SLAC, and her mom insisted that her college education paid off since she's at Columbia for her PhD in History. Ummm.... hello?!!!! A PhD in the humanities is the LAST thing I would want my kid to do.

DYK how many Ivy/T20 folks I know and the only notable thing they apparently have done is their "prestige" BA/BS because they cleave onto it like a life jacket? I don't have enough fingers for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of people on this board myopically insist that undergrad prestige doesn't matter and that their kid can go to an Ivy for grad school. This seems misguided. The top firms only recruit from Ivies and other T20 schools. Going to an HYPSM for undergrad will increase your odds of landing at one of them.

If you go to an elite school and do everything right, you don't even need to go to grad school. The people on here saying that their kids at a state school or some no-name SLAC can "always go to an Ivy for grad school" seem misguided. Not all grad schools pay off. I had a woman in my neighborhood say the same thing -- her daughter went to a selective but not elite SLAC, and her mom insisted that her college education paid off since she's at Columbia for her PhD in History. Ummm.... hello?!!!! A PhD in the humanities is the LAST thing I would want my kid to do.

Different strokes for different folks. Going to an Ivy is no guarantee of anything!

I’m a poster who subscribes to this belief. I did it and our kids in STEM are doing it. It works for some. Not everyone wants to go into investment banking or management consulting, which frankly do nothing to help our world from what I’ve seen.. For us, mental health trumps academic prestige. The kid has to want it, we’re not going to push it. Life is about so much more.

OP here. So you would be okay with your kid going to an Ivy for a PhD in, say, Biology and then end up as a fed scientist? That would be awful. They would have no earning power in their 20s (as they'd be living on a grad student stipend) and they would top out at an income of $180k. How would they afford housing or childcare in their 30s in the DMV?

Life is more than money, I agree. But money is damn important.

There is more to life than money and a top scientist at a good agency is nice life. It is interesting work, family friendly and good benefits.

-Double fed family, with an nice house in a good school district in NWDC and can afford to send my kid to college full pay.

I assume you have family money. No way can a HHI of ~$300k afford a nice house in NWDC (unless you bought that house in the 90s) and afford another $300k for college. Again, this is talking about young adults right now -- so Gen X anecdotes shouldn't apply here.

NP--EVERYONE I know who works for the feds or local government or doing research, regardless of age, is doing fine financially and enjoys their job enough to stay there despite knowing they could make more doing something else. I've lived in the DC area for decades, so we're talking hundreds of people.

You do you, we'll do us. If you want to believe that being a one-percenter is key to happiness, go ahead and pursue that. Just be prepared for all the stress that comes with that path, and the very large chance that you won't make it and will either end up changing your outlook or will have a very bitter life.

OP here. I think people are really missing my point. A stint (even for just three years) at a top consulting firm, investment bank, or quant trading company will open tons of doors that otherwise wouldn't have opened. Those doors are mostly other high-paying jobs with better work/life balance. It's not like you have to stay at Goldman/Jane Street/McKinsey forever. But just doing a three-year stint right out of undergrad at one of those firms will open the door for high-paying jobs with great work/life balance.

I don't want my kid to be a one-percenter. But because of the way that compound interest works -- as well as the daunting costs of housing and childcare -- I know that it's important for my kids to make a lot of money in their twenties and then ratchet back down in their 30s than the other way around. And going to grad school in History or Biology, even if your PhD is from Stanford, seems like the opposite of a wise financial calculation. You'd be spending all your 20s living on a subsistence wage and the job that you'd get afterwards isn't likely to be high-paying (unless you get a PhD in CS or another hard science).

But many of us are not primarily motivated by $$$$$$$$$$. You do not seem to grasp that.

Many of us want job satisfaction, or to contribute to society. Our values do not match yours, so you can stop explaining why you are right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone needs a hobby.

So very true… OP should go sign up for a night course in something fun.

[Anonymous]

OP here. So you would be okay with your kid going to an Ivy for a PhD in, say, Biology and then end up as a fed scientist? That would be awful. They would have no earning power in their 20s (as they'd be living on a grad student stipend) and they would top out at an income of $180k. How would they afford housing or childcare in their 30s in the DMV?

Life is more than money, I agree. But money is damn important.

NP. Yup - totally ok with this. I have a graduate Biology related degree (though not IVY), and if my kids want to do this, then I'd support them. I didn't live in fancy housing in my 20s or 30s, but I did have housing...and I was able to afford childcare once I eventually had kids. It was more than doable and certainly not awful.

BTW, I still make a lot less than $180k - I probably NEVER will make $180k/year. Also fwiw, I don't know why anyone would be laser-focused on getting on graduate STEM degree from an IVY - I just don't really see how an IVY degree makes much difference at the pH.D. level. It matters much more which individual lab you were in, what research you did, and what publications you authored or were listed on co-author on, not so much which specific institution you're at.

[Anonymous]

NP here with a clueless question. How do PhD programs work? Do you pay tuition or does the school pay you to go to their program? Obviously I've never asked this question. But I have a high schooler who's talking about wanting to get a PhD in Physics or Math. How does one pay for a PhD program?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of people on this board myopically insist that undergrad prestige doesn't matter and that their kid can go to an Ivy for grad school. This seems misguided. The top firms only recruit from Ivies and other T20 schools. Going to an HYPSM for undergrad will increase your odds of landing at one of them.

If you go to an elite school and do everything right, you don't even need to go to grad school. The people on here saying that their kids at a state school or some no-name SLAC can "always go to an Ivy for grad school" seem misguided. Not all grad schools pay off. I had a woman in my neighborhood say the same thing -- her daughter went to a selective but not elite SLAC, and her mom insisted that her college education paid off since she's at Columbia for her PhD in History. Ummm.... hello?!!!! A PhD in the humanities is the LAST thing I would want my kid to do.

Different strokes for different folks. Going to an Ivy is no guarantee of anything!

I’m a poster who subscribes to this belief. I did it and our kids in STEM are doing it. It works for some. Not everyone wants to go into investment banking or management consulting, which frankly do nothing to help our world from what I’ve seen.. For us, mental health trumps academic prestige. The kid has to want it, we’re not going to push it. Life is about so much more.

OP here. So you would be okay with your kid going to an Ivy for a PhD in, say, Biology and then end up as a fed scientist? That would be awful. They would have no earning power in their 20s (as they'd be living on a grad student stipend) and they would top out at an income of $180k. How would they afford housing or childcare in their 30s in the DMV?

Life is more than money, I agree. But money is damn important.

There is more to life than money and a top scientist at a good agency is nice life. It is interesting work, family friendly and good benefits.

-Double fed family, with an nice house in a good school district in NWDC and can afford to send my kid to college full pay.

I assume you have family money. No way can a HHI of ~$300k afford a nice house in NWDC (unless you bought that house in the 90s) and afford another $300k for college. Again, this is talking about young adults right now -- so Gen X anecdotes shouldn't apply here.

NP--EVERYONE I know who works for the feds or local government or doing research, regardless of age, is doing fine financially and enjoys their job enough to stay there despite knowing they could make more doing something else. I've lived in the DC area for decades, so we're talking hundreds of people.

You do you, we'll do us. If you want to believe that being a one-percenter is key to happiness, go ahead and pursue that. Just be prepared for all the stress that comes with that path, and the very large chance that you won't make it and will either end up changing your outlook or will have a very bitter life.

OP here. I think people are really missing my point. A stint (even for just three years) at a top consulting firm, investment bank, or quant trading company will open tons of doors that otherwise wouldn't have opened. Those doors are mostly other high-paying jobs with better work/life balance. It's not like you have to stay at Goldman/Jane Street/McKinsey forever. But just doing a three-year stint right out of undergrad at one of those firms will open the door for high-paying jobs with great work/life balance.

I don't want my kid to be a one-percenter. But because of the way that compound interest works -- as well as the daunting costs of housing and childcare -- I know that it's important for my kids to make a lot of money in their twenties and then ratchet back down in their 30s than the other way around. And going to grad school in History or Biology, even if your PhD is from Stanford, seems like the opposite of a wise financial calculation. You'd be spending all your 20s living on a subsistence wage and the job that you'd get afterwards isn't likely to be high-paying (unless you get a PhD in CS or another hard science).

I don't think anyone is arguing that going to an Ivy and then McKinsey isn't lucrative, which is all you've really shown here. Yes. If your kid does that, they can live in a 3000 square foot house in a tony suburb and pay for private school. If they do something else, they mind end up in a townhouse or an apartment (or a SFH not in the big city metro area) and go to public school. Lots of people live that second life and are very happy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here with a clueless question. How do PhD programs work? Do you pay tuition or does the school pay you to go to their program? Obviously I've never asked this question. But I have a high schooler who's talking about wanting to get a PhD in Physics or Math. How does one pay for a PhD program?

You normally go for free (so you don't pay tuition), and you use your TA/RA stipend to pay for living expenses.

[Anonymous]

How do you become a lawyer, doctor, professor or other without graduate school. Please explain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How do you become a lawyer, doctor, professor or other without graduate school. Please explain.

The bolded is a dying profession so don’t bother with that. Don’t bother with non-T14 law on scholarship, either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of people on this board myopically insist that undergrad prestige doesn't matter and that their kid can go to an Ivy for grad school. This seems misguided. The top firms only recruit from Ivies and other T20 schools. Going to an HYPSM for undergrad will increase your odds of landing at one of them.

If you go to an elite school and do everything right, you don't even need to go to grad school. The people on here saying that their kids at a state school or some no-name SLAC can "always go to an Ivy for grad school" seem misguided. Not all grad schools pay off. I had a woman in my neighborhood say the same thing -- her daughter went to a selective but not elite SLAC, and her mom insisted that her college education paid off since she's at Columbia for her PhD in History. Ummm.... hello?!!!! A PhD in the humanities is the LAST thing I would want my kid to do.

Different strokes for different folks. Going to an Ivy is no guarantee of anything!

I’m a poster who subscribes to this belief. I did it and our kids in STEM are doing it. It works for some. Not everyone wants to go into investment banking or management consulting, which frankly do nothing to help our world from what I’ve seen.. For us, mental health trumps academic prestige. The kid has to want it, we’re not going to push it. Life is about so much more.

OP here. So you would be okay with your kid going to an Ivy for a PhD in, say, Biology and then end up as a fed scientist? That would be awful. They would have no earning power in their 20s (as they'd be living on a grad student stipend) and they would top out at an income of $180k. How would they afford housing or childcare in their 30s in the DMV?

Life is more than money, I agree. But money is damn important.

There is more to life than money and a top scientist at a good agency is nice life. It is interesting work, family friendly and good benefits.

-Double fed family, with an nice house in a good school district in NWDC and can afford to send my kid to college full pay.

I assume you have family money. No way can a HHI of ~$300k afford a nice house in NWDC (unless you bought that house in the 90s) and afford another $300k for college. Again, this is talking about young adults right now -- so Gen X anecdotes shouldn't apply here.

NP--EVERYONE I know who works for the feds or local government or doing research, regardless of age, is doing fine financially and enjoys their job enough to stay there despite knowing they could make more doing something else. I've lived in the DC area for decades, so we're talking hundreds of people.

You do you, we'll do us. If you want to believe that being a one-percenter is key to happiness, go ahead and pursue that. Just be prepared for all the stress that comes with that path, and the very large chance that you won't make it and will either end up changing your outlook or will have a very bitter life.

OP here. I think people are really missing my point. A stint (even for just three years) at a top consulting firm, investment bank, or quant trading company will open tons of doors that otherwise wouldn't have opened. Those doors are mostly other high-paying jobs with better work/life balance. It's not like you have to stay at Goldman/Jane Street/McKinsey forever. But just doing a three-year stint right out of undergrad at one of those firms will open the door for high-paying jobs with great work/life balance.

I don't want my kid to be a one-percenter. But because of the way that compound interest works -- as well as the daunting costs of housing and childcare -- I know that it's important for my kids to make a lot of money in their twenties and then ratchet back down in their 30s than the other way around. And going to grad school in History or Biology, even if your PhD is from Stanford, seems like the opposite of a wise financial calculation. You'd be spending all your 20s living on a subsistence wage and the job that you'd get afterwards isn't likely to be high-paying (unless you get a PhD in CS or another hard science).

It's funny to me you think you have to go to an Ivy to do this. My DH went to ODU, got an engineering degree and cut his expenses to the bone in his 20s to max out savings. So by the time we met he owned a (fixer upper) house and had a great start on retirement savings. It's about making good choices with the resources you have.