making $250-$400K in NW DC and paying for college out of Wilson High school or similar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the problem:

1) If you are medium HHI and living in a less expensive area, you aren't expected to make any sacrifices to send your kid to a private.

2) If you are high HHI and living in a high cost area, you are expected to make tangible sacrifices to send your kid to private. And you are expected to subsidize #2.

Edit: subsidize #1.

How so?

This:

"People do this at YOUR income level by saving 2/3 up front over the course of 18 years and cash flowing the rest, using loans as a last resort."

Why should the above quote only apply to the high HHI folks? Why is it that only the "YOUR income level" folks need to be doing this?

? Because lower income folks will qualify for financial aid? This is a weird thread.

Financial advisors recomend saving 4 figures a month per kid for college for a reason, you know. How did this escape your attention?

There are plenty of ways in which both #1 and #2 could live normal lives for their location and have little left over each month. There is an expectation here that only #2 should be making sacrifices.

This is insane. Yes of course high HHI folks should be expected to pay full freight! Typically those who get full or close to financial aid have families that make less than 120k. OP makes at least double if not triple or more. She should have been saving, end of story. She knew this expense was coming up. Sounds like she wants her dd to go to an expensive school (Smith) so yes, to make it doable she should be saving around 1k a month for that one child. How else can you make it work without loans?

You are assuming that all people who are expected to pay full freight have the ability to save the amounts that are expected. If they live in high cost areas, pay high mortgages, pay for private schools vs publics, etc...they might not. "Should have been saving" makes plenty of sense if they have anything left over.

Those are all expensive choices though and the government or the school in question does not have to subsidize those choices for you so that you can have your cake and eat it too. Before you take on a large mortgage, you need to have your financial house in order which means on track for retirement and college savings if you have kids.

The answer to the question is: savings, cash flow, loans, and/or move.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a weird question, OP, because it sounds like you are trying to imply that your income level is not that high or at least not high enough to be putting any money away for this purpose, such that you deserve some kind of financial break. To which I have no choice but to seriously side eye. If you've been saving all along, as you say you have been, then you already know the answer: a combination of savings, cash flow, and loans (if the student is unlucky). So why ask the question then?

Anyway assuming this is a genuine q, the general rule of thumb is to save 2/3 up front and cash flow the rest.

12:37 here.

I don't read OP's question as having that implication at all. I read it as, how do people who are rich but not 1%'ers afford to pay tuition that is currently $65K/year/kid and rising faster than inflation? Or do they not pay it, and choose a cheaper option?

We have saved but cannot pay full freight at top-tier schools, nor do we qualify for FA.

We have 2/3rds saved (as of now; tuition increases outpace inflation) but there is no way we could cash flow the rest. Moreover, we are older parents (DH is 64) and one of us will likely need to retire while our second is still in college.

Families like us are in the "donut hole." We can neither pay full sticker price, nor qualify for FA. Children of families like ours are therefore increasingly attending state schools (hence the rise in UMD's competitiveness), or going to second and third tier schools with big merit scholarships.

+1. Same boat as OP- 3 kids. All public in DC. We had our own loans to pay off first, and while we've saved a lot, we do not have enough for 3 kids full freight. We have about 40K a year for each, so they go to state schools, and one receives merit $ as well. We have two in at once and no break for 9 years. I resent when people think we should have saved enough for full freight because of our HHI. Our HHI has not increased in years; it's actually decreased, and we have done the best we can. I have no issue with state schools, second or third tiers either. You send them where you can afford to send them. They'll survive.

This is ridiculous. You obviously feel wronged being asked to pay full freight at an income level that is several times higher than the national median. You do know that a private college education is a luxury not a human right, yes? So save in advance or don't, it doesn't change the basic rules of the game and matters to me personally not one iota. The OP asked a question and I answered. People do this at YOUR income level by saving 2/3 up front over the course of 18 years and cash flowing the rest, using loans as a last resort.

No one has expressed any feeling remotely like this.

Oh really? Then why ask the question if you know what the answer is? Save. Or move to VA it MD for the in state tuition. That's it. What else is there? It's well known that top tier schools are scaling back on merit scholarships if they ever gave in the first place.

OP was asking about others' experiences.

Unclench.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the problem:

1) If you are medium HHI and living in a less expensive area, you aren't expected to make any sacrifices to send your kid to a private.

2) If you are high HHI and living in a high cost area, you are expected to make tangible sacrifices to send your kid to private. And you are expected to subsidize #2.

Edit: subsidize #1.

How so?

This:

"People do this at YOUR income level by saving 2/3 up front over the course of 18 years and cash flowing the rest, using loans as a last resort."

Why should the above quote only apply to the high HHI folks? Why is it that only the "YOUR income level" folks need to be doing this?

? Because lower income folks will qualify for financial aid? This is a weird thread.

Financial advisors recomend saving 4 figures a month per kid for college for a reason, you know. How did this escape your attention?

There are plenty of ways in which both #1 and #2 could live normal lives for their location and have little left over each month. There is an expectation here that only #2 should be making sacrifices.

This is insane. Yes of course high HHI folks should be expected to pay full freight! Typically those who get full or close to financial aid have families that make less than 120k. OP makes at least double if not triple or more. She should have been saving, end of story. She knew this expense was coming up. Sounds like she wants her dd to go to an expensive school (Smith) so yes, to make it doable she should be saving around 1k a month for that one child. How else can you make it work without loans?

You are assuming that all people who are expected to pay full freight have the ability to save the amounts that are expected. If they live in high cost areas, pay high mortgages, pay for private schools vs publics, etc...they might not. "Should have been saving" makes plenty of sense if they have anything left over.

Those are all expensive choices though and the government or the school in question does not have to subsidize those choices for you so that you can have your cake and eat it too. Before you take on a large mortgage, you need to have your financial house in order which means on track for retirement and college savings if you have kids.

The answer to the question is: savings, cash flow, loans, and/or move.

Expensive choices, but not necessarily luxuries. For example, let's say you work in DC. You make the choice to inside the Beltway instead of Manassas because you'd like to see your family every now and then. Higher mortgage, less college savings. Are you suggesting that this person should bite the bullet and move to Manassas?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone that pays full freight for a bachelors degree is doing it wrong.

^ Only poor people say this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the problem:

1) If you are medium HHI and living in a less expensive area, you aren't expected to make any sacrifices to send your kid to a private.

2) If you are high HHI and living in a high cost area, you are expected to make tangible sacrifices to send your kid to private. And you are expected to subsidize #2.

Edit: subsidize #1.

How so?

This:

"People do this at YOUR income level by saving 2/3 up front over the course of 18 years and cash flowing the rest, using loans as a last resort."

Why should the above quote only apply to the high HHI folks? Why is it that only the "YOUR income level" folks need to be doing this?

? Because lower income folks will qualify for financial aid? This is a weird thread.

Financial advisors recomend saving 4 figures a month per kid for college for a reason, you know. How did this escape your attention?

There are plenty of ways in which both #1 and #2 could live normal lives for their location and have little left over each month. There is an expectation here that only #2 should be making sacrifices.

By virtue of lower HHI, #1 is already "sacrificing" things that #2 will not be required to give up in order to pay full freight for college. The logic is that if you really want this expensive, coveted, scarce thing and you have the resources to afford it, then you will have to pay for it. If there is no way you could afford it, and we really want your kid, we won't charge you. And if we think you are somewhere between those two poles, we'll expect you to contribute.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the problem:

1) If you are medium HHI and living in a less expensive area, you aren't expected to make any sacrifices to send your kid to a private.

2) If you are high HHI and living in a high cost area, you are expected to make tangible sacrifices to send your kid to private. And you are expected to subsidize #2.

Edit: subsidize #1.

How so?

This:

"People do this at YOUR income level by saving 2/3 up front over the course of 18 years and cash flowing the rest, using loans as a last resort."

Why should the above quote only apply to the high HHI folks? Why is it that only the "YOUR income level" folks need to be doing this?

? Because lower income folks will qualify for financial aid? This is a weird thread.

Financial advisors recomend saving 4 figures a month per kid for college for a reason, you know. How did this escape your attention?

There are plenty of ways in which both #1 and #2 could live normal lives for their location and have little left over each month. There is an expectation here that only #2 should be making sacrifices.

By virtue of lower HHI, #1 is already "sacrificing" things that #2 will not be required to give up in order to pay full freight for college. The logic is that if you really want this expensive, coveted, scarce thing and you have the resources to afford it, then you will have to pay for it. If there is no way you could afford it, and we really want your kid, we won't charge you. And if we think you are somewhere between those two poles, we'll expect you to contribute.

I agree with everything you said with one exception. #1 isn't sacrificing anything. They are not making a choice to give something up. Only #2 is expected to do that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the problem:

1) If you are medium HHI and living in a less expensive area, you aren't expected to make any sacrifices to send your kid to a private.

2) If you are high HHI and living in a high cost area, you are expected to make tangible sacrifices to send your kid to private. And you are expected to subsidize #2.

Edit: subsidize #1.

How so?

This:

"People do this at YOUR income level by saving 2/3 up front over the course of 18 years and cash flowing the rest, using loans as a last resort."

Why should the above quote only apply to the high HHI folks? Why is it that only the "YOUR income level" folks need to be doing this?

? Because lower income folks will qualify for financial aid? This is a weird thread.

Financial advisors recomend saving 4 figures a month per kid for college for a reason, you know. How did this escape your attention?

There are plenty of ways in which both #1 and #2 could live normal lives for their location and have little left over each month. There is an expectation here that only #2 should be making sacrifices.

This is insane. Yes of course high HHI folks should be expected to pay full freight! Typically those who get full or close to financial aid have families that make less than 120k. OP makes at least double if not triple or more. She should have been saving, end of story. She knew this expense was coming up. Sounds like she wants her dd to go to an expensive school (Smith) so yes, to make it doable she should be saving around 1k a month for that one child. How else can you make it work without loans?

You are assuming that all people who are expected to pay full freight have the ability to save the amounts that are expected. If they live in high cost areas, pay high mortgages, pay for private schools vs publics, etc...they might not. "Should have been saving" makes plenty of sense if they have anything left over.

Those are all expensive choices though and the government or the school in question does not have to subsidize those choices for you so that you can have your cake and eat it too. Before you take on a large mortgage, you need to have your financial house in order which means on track for retirement and college savings if you have kids.

The answer to the question is: savings, cash flow, loans, and/or move.

Expensive choices, but not necessarily luxuries. For example, let's say you work in DC. You make the choice to inside the Beltway instead of Manassas because you'd like to see your family every now and then. Higher mortgage, less college savings. Are you suggesting that this person should bite the bullet and move to Manassas?

No, just bite the bullet and send your kid to UVA or UMd. Or to a SLAC in the Midwest that gives merit aid. Or to an OOS flagship.

Or find a job in a part of the country where you could afford to live closer to work. Yeah, you'll take a hit on income, but expenses will be lower and it may put you in a bracket where expected contribution is less.

Lots of trade-offs, lots of respectable ways to make them. But you can't necessarily have it all -- even at that income level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the problem:

1) If you are medium HHI and living in a less expensive area, you aren't expected to make any sacrifices to send your kid to a private.

2) If you are high HHI and living in a high cost area, you are expected to make tangible sacrifices to send your kid to private. And you are expected to subsidize #2.

Edit: subsidize #1.

How so?

This:

"People do this at YOUR income level by saving 2/3 up front over the course of 18 years and cash flowing the rest, using loans as a last resort."

Why should the above quote only apply to the high HHI folks? Why is it that only the "YOUR income level" folks need to be doing this?

? Because lower income folks will qualify for financial aid? This is a weird thread.

Financial advisors recomend saving 4 figures a month per kid for college for a reason, you know. How did this escape your attention?

There are plenty of ways in which both #1 and #2 could live normal lives for their location and have little left over each month. There is an expectation here that only #2 should be making sacrifices.

By virtue of lower HHI, #1 is already "sacrificing" things that #2 will not be required to give up in order to pay full freight for college. The logic is that if you really want this expensive, coveted, scarce thing and you have the resources to afford it, then you will have to pay for it. If there is no way you could afford it, and we really want your kid, we won't charge you. And if we think you are somewhere between those two poles, we'll expect you to contribute.

I agree with everything you said with one exception. #1 isn't sacrificing anything. They are not making a choice to give something up. Only #2 is expected to do that.

Actually, first gen and low income families often are giving something up to send their kids to elite colleges -- proximity, income/labor contributions to the HH, higher costs for OOP expenses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree with everything you said with one exception. #1 isn't sacrificing anything. They are not making a choice to give something up. Only #2 is expected to do that.

#1 is already living in "Manassas" (or equivalent), drives a junker, and has no $$ for tennis lessons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with everything you said with one exception. #1 isn't sacrificing anything. They are not making a choice to give something up. Only #2 is expected to do that.

#1 is already living in "Manassas" (or equivalent), drives a junker, and has no $$ for tennis lessons.

This! The OP and others defending her are out of their minds. $250-400k HHI is 5% territory and you should be able to afford to save for college on that income. If you're not, that's on you and unwise spending choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with everything you said with one exception. #1 isn't sacrificing anything. They are not making a choice to give something up. Only #2 is expected to do that.

#1 is already living in "Manassas" (or equivalent), drives a junker, and has no $$ for tennis lessons.

And #1 has provided a stable environment for their child so they are capable of pursuing a top-level education. As has #2. Neither #1 or #2 may have any $$$ left at the end of each month. But only #2 is forced to make a sacrifice.

[Anonymous]

If #2 had been living the way #1 has been living all along, #2 sure as hell would consider it a sacrifice!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with everything you said with one exception. #1 isn't sacrificing anything. They are not making a choice to give something up. Only #2 is expected to do that.

#1 is already living in "Manassas" (or equivalent), drives a junker, and has no $$ for tennis lessons.

And #1 has provided a stable environment for their child so they are capable of pursuing a top-level education. As has #2. Neither #1 or #2 may have any $$$ left at the end of each month. But only #2 is forced to make a sacrifice.

You know, you are welcome to take a lower paying job or move to a different city if you feel so wronged. Also, you could move to PG County or SE DC and still be in close commuting range for a much smaller mortgage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the problem:

1) If you are medium HHI and living in a less expensive area, you aren't expected to make any sacrifices to send your kid to a private.

2) If you are high HHI and living in a high cost area, you are expected to make tangible sacrifices to send your kid to private. And you are expected to subsidize #2.

Edit: subsidize #1.

How so?

This:

"People do this at YOUR income level by saving 2/3 up front over the course of 18 years and cash flowing the rest, using loans as a last resort."

Why should the above quote only apply to the high HHI folks? Why is it that only the "YOUR income level" folks need to be doing this?

? Because lower income folks will qualify for financial aid? This is a weird thread.

Financial advisors recomend saving 4 figures a month per kid for college for a reason, you know. How did this escape your attention?

There are plenty of ways in which both #1 and #2 could live normal lives for their location and have little left over each month. There is an expectation here that only #2 should be making sacrifices.

This is insane. Yes of course high HHI folks should be expected to pay full freight! Typically those who get full or close to financial aid have families that make less than 120k. OP makes at least double if not triple or more. She should have been saving, end of story. She knew this expense was coming up. Sounds like she wants her dd to go to an expensive school (Smith) so yes, to make it doable she should be saving around 1k a month for that one child. How else can you make it work without loans?

The OP's kids are in elementary school!

She was simply curious about their likely future.

Second, for those that that think this is an idiotic question because the answer is to save, save, save (yes, of course), if their income is $250k, it is challenging to save enough for one child for full freight (which will be what? 80k when her kids are college age?). 80k x 4 = $320. If she has two children, it is $640k for their four years... c'mon on guys! a little understanding...that the rise in college tuition has made it prohibitive to even folks who earn $250k, or $350k, or whatever they earn (have to save for retirement too and health care costs are exploding...)

Let's not just dismiss her genuine curiosity. I hope my kids get into public universities, but I live in CA where it is very very hard to get the universities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If #2 had been living the way #1 has been living all along, #2 sure as hell would consider it a sacrifice!

Exactly! If you live below your means and actually save, you could easily afford to send your kids to any college. We specifically did not choose private school and take meager vacations because we know we need to save for college. I'm sure all our NW DC friends think we are poor living outside the beltway in an average home and not going to Aspen every year.