Great colleges for kids with great grades, social skills, and athletics, but parents make minimal salaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That graph indicates that nearly 1 in 3 Princeton students have a household income below $70k and 1 in 5 have a household income of less than $45k. Sure, there are still lots of rich kids, but a poor student is in very good company there.

No, a poor student is not in “good company” if the vast majority of students are either rich or poor. The society these kids need to be prepared for is not a dumbbell distribution. Poor students don’t like to be patronized by the rich kids, nor do they want to constantly be reminded of where they came from (by being expected to hang with the fellow poors). This is why a great state school is a better place for these kids on so many levels.

Hugely depends on the state school. Some of them have extremely Greek dominated social scenes that encourage extreme conspicuous consumption.

Agreed. I’m a recent college grad and came from a poor background. State universities seemed like they’d suck- many are built on partying and Greek life that require pretty deep pockets and there’s so much social stratification based off class.

At my top private college, I didn’t have to worry about housing my whole 4 years and all the housing was pretty similar and equitable. My school had no Greek life, so rich kids actually did have to talk with the normal people and occasionally learn a thing or two about privilege. And there was a general emphasis on student life being pretty fun, so I didn’t have the issue of feeling like I needed to shell out on expensive bars or whatnot to have fun.

[Anonymous]

I don't know why everyone is saying big flagship state schools. Not only do they they often have a major Greek scene, many of them have most of their undergrads living off-campus after freshman year. A poor student may get a housing stipend, but it will not be enough to live in the "nice" off-campus apartments with pools and gyms (nor will they have parents with high enough incomes to co-sign on these nicer apartments).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That graph indicates that nearly 1 in 3 Princeton students have a household income below $70k and 1 in 5 have a household income of less than $45k. Sure, there are still lots of rich kids, but a poor student is in very good company there.

No, a poor student is not in “good company” if the vast majority of students are either rich or poor. The society these kids need to be prepared for is not a dumbbell distribution. Poor students don’t like to be patronized by the rich kids, nor do they want to constantly be reminded of where they came from (by being expected to hang with the fellow poors). This is why a great state school is a better place for these kids on so many levels.

Hugely depends on the state school. Some of them have extremely Greek dominated social scenes that encourage extreme conspicuous consumption.

Agreed. I’m a recent college grad and came from a poor background. State universities seemed like they’d suck- many are built on partying and Greek life that require pretty deep pockets and there’s so much social stratification based off class.

I went to the classic Greek / party school - Arizona State - and while I was certainly aware that frats and parties existed, it was such a big school that you didn't have to pay attention to that if you didn't want to, and there were plenty of social opportunities for people who weren't interested in that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't know why everyone is saying big flagship state schools. Not only do they they often have a major Greek scene, many of them have most of their undergrads living off-campus after freshman year. A poor student may get a housing stipend, but it will not be enough to live in the "nice" off-campus apartments with pools and gyms (nor will they have parents with high enough incomes to co-sign on these nicer apartments).

You're going to pay for housing no matter where you go.

There is no "right" to live in "nice off campus apartments" and if you're poor you're not going to live like that no matter what school you attend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know why everyone is saying big flagship state schools. Not only do they they often have a major Greek scene, many of them have most of their undergrads living off-campus after freshman year. A poor student may get a housing stipend, but it will not be enough to live in the "nice" off-campus apartments with pools and gyms (nor will they have parents with high enough incomes to co-sign on these nicer apartments).

You're going to pay for housing no matter where you go.

There is no "right" to live in "nice off campus apartments" and if you're poor you're not going to live like that no matter what school you attend.

Okay, but there are schools where most everyone lives on campus for four years and the housing the same for rich or poor students since it is one price.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:State flagships. Filled with donut hole families.

"donut hole" families qualify for NO aid but have a hard time being full pay, usually make 220-320k. That group is overrepresented among in-state students UVA and come off as quite rich because their parents are so happy not to be shelling out more for a private, frankly. They have no need to have a campus job and have plenty of $ for frats and vacations. This is not what OP is describing. OP said minimal salaries implying below average. OP's family will qualify for great aid and will go for free at the elite schools and have lots of company with similar families.
Anyone over 320k should be able to be full pay without much trouble.

Yep, tons of donut hole families who did Prepaid 529 and are getting what they feel is a bargain and aren't spending anything out of pocket. They're happy to give their kids lots of spending money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know why everyone is saying big flagship state schools. Not only do they they often have a major Greek scene, many of them have most of their undergrads living off-campus after freshman year. A poor student may get a housing stipend, but it will not be enough to live in the "nice" off-campus apartments with pools and gyms (nor will they have parents with high enough incomes to co-sign on these nicer apartments).

You're going to pay for housing no matter where you go.

There is no "right" to live in "nice off campus apartments" and if you're poor you're not going to live like that no matter what school you attend.

Okay, but there are schools where most everyone lives on campus for four years and the housing the same for rich or poor students since it is one price.

This is the best model. Creates strong community and makes on campus housing pretty decent to live in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know why everyone is saying big flagship state schools. Not only do they they often have a major Greek scene, many of them have most of their undergrads living off-campus after freshman year. A poor student may get a housing stipend, but it will not be enough to live in the "nice" off-campus apartments with pools and gyms (nor will they have parents with high enough incomes to co-sign on these nicer apartments).

a
You're going to pay for housing no matter where you go.

There is no "right" to live in "nice off campus apartments" and if you're poor you're not going to live like that no matter what school you attend.

Okay, but there are schools where most everyone lives on campus for four years and the housing the same for rich or poor students since it is one price.

This is the best model. Creates strong community and makes on campus housing pretty decent to live in.

It is not the best model when the vast majority of the students are either rich or poor — with no middle class. It is a weird, synthetic barbell bubble. As for the flagship detractors: there will be frats/sororities at some, and some conspicuous consumption. That’s not the point: a significant proportion of students will be middle class. That’s good for the poor kids and the rich kids alike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know why everyone is saying big flagship state schools. Not only do they they often have a major Greek scene, many of them have most of their undergrads living off-campus after freshman year. A poor student may get a housing stipend, but it will not be enough to live in the "nice" off-campus apartments with pools and gyms (nor will they have parents with high enough incomes to co-sign on these nicer apartments).

a
You're going to pay for housing no matter where you go.

There is no "right" to live in "nice off campus apartments" and if you're poor you're not going to live like that no matter what school you attend.

Okay, but there are schools where most everyone lives on campus for four years and the housing the same for rich or poor students since it is one price.

This is the best model. Creates strong community and makes on campus housing pretty decent to live in.

It is not the best model when the vast majority of the students are either rich or poor — with no middle class. It is a weird, synthetic barbell bubble. As for the flagship detractors: there will be frats/sororities at some, and some conspicuous consumption. That’s not the point: a significant proportion of students will be middle class. That’s good for the poor kids and the rich kids alike.

Almost every institution of higher education with a need blind policy is actively solving what you’re talking about, but it is much much easier to complain incessantly I’m sure

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know why everyone is saying big flagship state schools. Not only do they they often have a major Greek scene, many of them have most of their undergrads living off-campus after freshman year. A poor student may get a housing stipend, but it will not be enough to live in the "nice" off-campus apartments with pools and gyms (nor will they have parents with high enough incomes to co-sign on these nicer apartments).

a
You're going to pay for housing no matter where you go.

There is no "right" to live in "nice off campus apartments" and if you're poor you're not going to live like that no matter what school you attend.

Okay, but there are schools where most everyone lives on campus for four years and the housing the same for rich or poor students since it is one price.

This is the best model. Creates strong community and makes on campus housing pretty decent to live in.

It is not the best model when the vast majority of the students are either rich or poor — with no middle class. It is a weird, synthetic barbell bubble. As for the flagship detractors: there will be frats/sororities at some, and some conspicuous consumption. That’s not the point: a significant proportion of students will be middle class. That’s good for the poor kids and the rich kids alike.

Almost every institution of higher education with a need blind policy is actively solving what you’re talking about, but it is much much easier to complain incessantly I’m sure

also the average income at most flagships is hardly different than their private counterparts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know why everyone is saying big flagship state schools. Not only do they they often have a major Greek scene, many of them have most of their undergrads living off-campus after freshman year. A poor student may get a housing stipend, but it will not be enough to live in the "nice" off-campus apartments with pools and gyms (nor will they have parents with high enough incomes to co-sign on these nicer apartments).

a
You're going to pay for housing no matter where you go.

There is no "right" to live in "nice off campus apartments" and if you're poor you're not going to live like that no matter what school you attend.

Okay, but there are schools where most everyone lives on campus for four years and the housing the same for rich or poor students since it is one price.

This is the best model. Creates strong community and makes on campus housing pretty decent to live in.

It is not the best model when the vast majority of the students are either rich or poor — with no middle class. It is a weird, synthetic barbell bubble. As for the flagship detractors: there will be frats/sororities at some, and some conspicuous consumption. That’s not the point: a significant proportion of students will be middle class. That’s good for the poor kids and the rich kids alike.

Almost every institution of higher education with a need blind policy is actively solving what you’re talking about, but it is much much easier to complain incessantly I’m sure

I guess you have never heard of donut hole families. I guess you do not understood that need blind = no or almost no merit aid. I guess you do not know how tuition increases have surpassed inflation for some time. But, OK, the schools are, as you say, “actively solving” the problem. I sure am relieved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know why everyone is saying big flagship state schools. Not only do they they often have a major Greek scene, many of them have most of their undergrads living off-campus after freshman year. A poor student may get a housing stipend, but it will not be enough to live in the "nice" off-campus apartments with pools and gyms (nor will they have parents with high enough incomes to co-sign on these nicer apartments).

a
You're going to pay for housing no matter where you go.

There is no "right" to live in "nice off campus apartments" and if you're poor you're not going to live like that no matter what school you attend.

Okay, but there are schools where most everyone lives on campus for four years and the housing the same for rich or poor students since it is one price.

This is the best model. Creates strong community and makes on campus housing pretty decent to live in.

It is not the best model when the vast majority of the students are either rich or poor — with no middle class. It is a weird, synthetic barbell bubble. As for the flagship detractors: there will be frats/sororities at some, and some conspicuous consumption. That’s not the point: a significant proportion of students will be middle class. That’s good for the poor kids and the rich kids alike.

Almost every institution of higher education with a need blind policy is actively solving what you’re talking about, but it is much much easier to complain incessantly I’m sure

also the average income at most flagships is hardly different than their private counterparts.

This is an ignorant comment that does not merit a serious response.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know why everyone is saying big flagship state schools. Not only do they they often have a major Greek scene, many of them have most of their undergrads living off-campus after freshman year. A poor student may get a housing stipend, but it will not be enough to live in the "nice" off-campus apartments with pools and gyms (nor will they have parents with high enough incomes to co-sign on these nicer apartments).

a
You're going to pay for housing no matter where you go.

There is no "right" to live in "nice off campus apartments" and if you're poor you're not going to live like that no matter what school you attend.

Okay, but there are schools where most everyone lives on campus for four years and the housing the same for rich or poor students since it is one price.

This is the best model. Creates strong community and makes on campus housing pretty decent to live in.

It is not the best model when the vast majority of the students are either rich or poor — with no middle class. It is a weird, synthetic barbell bubble. As for the flagship detractors: there will be frats/sororities at some, and some conspicuous consumption. That’s not the point: a significant proportion of students will be middle class. That’s good for the poor kids and the rich kids alike.

Almost every institution of higher education with a need blind policy is actively solving what you’re talking about, but it is much much easier to complain incessantly I’m sure

also the average income at most flagships is hardly different than their private counterparts.

This is an ignorant comment that does not merit a serious response.

UVA median family income is $155,000, but sure there are so many people who definitely aren’t at the top of American households there

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know why everyone is saying big flagship state schools. Not only do they they often have a major Greek scene, many of them have most of their undergrads living off-campus after freshman year. A poor student may get a housing stipend, but it will not be enough to live in the "nice" off-campus apartments with pools and gyms (nor will they have parents with high enough incomes to co-sign on these nicer apartments).

a
You're going to pay for housing no matter where you go.

There is no "right" to live in "nice off campus apartments" and if you're poor you're not going to live like that no matter what school you attend.

Okay, but there are schools where most everyone lives on campus for four years and the housing the same for rich or poor students since it is one price.

This is the best model. Creates strong community and makes on campus housing pretty decent to live in.

It is not the best model when the vast majority of the students are either rich or poor — with no middle class. It is a weird, synthetic barbell bubble. As for the flagship detractors: there will be frats/sororities at some, and some conspicuous consumption. That’s not the point: a significant proportion of students will be middle class. That’s good for the poor kids and the rich kids alike.

Almost every institution of higher education with a need blind policy is actively solving what you’re talking about, but it is much much easier to complain incessantly I’m sure

I guess you have never heard of donut hole families. I guess you do not understood that need blind = no or almost no merit aid. I guess you do not know how tuition increases have surpassed inflation for some time. But, OK, the schools are, as you say, “actively solving” the problem. I sure am relieved.

Wow you seriously like talking about things you don’t understand and under research. Pls say which incomes these “donut hole families” are at, and I can nearly guarantee you that there are need blind institutions working to help these middle income families.

[Anonymous]

People should know that colleges define middle income as $75,000-$150,000. Above that, you are not middle income and you represent a wealthier band of America. At most elite colleges, those making more than $150,000 make up a majority of the students, so yes, you can cough up the funds.