If I am full pay, am I a sucker?

[Anonymous]

I keep hearing this forum that people who are full pay are suckers. Honestly, the only way we could be not full pay is with merit. And there is little or no merit offered at the schools which our DS would like to attend. He has already been accepted at his first choice (top 20) school. Clearly, we will be full pay. But with an income of $800K plus, shouldn't we be? I don't see how anyone can call us suckers, when we make probably twice or more what most people on this forum make. He has been offered some merit at one of his safeties, but minimal, and certainly not worth the investment on our part. Still waiting to hear from some other schools.

[Anonymous]

OP here, I should add that 529s are fully funded for both kids already.

[Anonymous]

OP do what is right for your kid. We make a LOT less than you and are saving every penny in hopes of making sure our kids are able to pursue whatever option is best for their futures. If someone wants to call me a sucker for that, it's completely irrelevant to my calculations. Same goes for you.

[Anonymous]

Almost 50% of the students at Harvavrd and Yale are there full pay. Is that being a sucker?
I have heard this sucker trope and it seems predicated on the mistaken belief that “no one oays full price!” People do pay full price.

[Anonymous]

No, you're not a sucker, you're very fortunate. Y


50% of the students at my SLAC weren't on financial aid (no merit at top schools). You can look up the statistics for your DS's school, I promise it's not just you.

[Anonymous]

Even at full pay, you aren't paying the full cost of your kid's education, which is subsidized by the endowment. A college that doesn't offer merit is often stronger academically than one that does, and it may be providing a good education without exploiting faculty and staff.

I feel fine about sending my kid somewhere that doesn't offer merit. I don't think I'm a sucker. (People who buy timeshares or SUVs, on the other hand, are suckers.)

tl;dr Spending money on education does not make you a sucker.

[Anonymous]

If you're full pay at a top 20 school, that means your income is in the top 0.5%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you're full pay at a top 20 school, that means your income is in the top 0.5%.

More like top 5%. Need-based aid cuts off at ~$200K for top schools. The top 5% earn about $250K annually.

[Anonymous]

You’re a sucker in the sense that your full pay is subsidizing other kids. But at your alleged salary, it’s no big deal, right? In any event, try to adjust your attitude to understanding that there are those less fortunate than you are.

[Anonymous]

Reconceptualize it. Consider yourself not a sucker, but as privileged family that can afford to pay sticker price.

[Anonymous]

Reconceptualize it. Consider yourself not a sucker, but as privileged family that can afford to pay sticker price.

[Anonymous]

As a full pay parent here, I am 100% o.k (actually, better than ok) with the idea that some of my money is covering financial aid. But I would not be OK if my son's school offered merit aid, which would mean that my tuition dollars would be going to subsidize some upper middle class parents you just don't want to pay the full tuition. That seems like a bad dynamic.

[Anonymous]

OP, the people you hear that from are not in your category, or make enough to full pay but would rather go to a less prestigious school at a discount than a better school full pay. Everyone makes different value judgments about how to spend money or not. There isn't one right way to approach it.

Very few people are in a position to tell their children they can go to the best school they get into no matter the cost differential. Very few.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You’re a sucker in the sense that your full pay is subsidizing other kids. But at your alleged salary, it’s no big deal, right? In any event, try to adjust your attitude to understanding that there are those less fortunate than you are.

This is such a myth. Full-pay families are not subsidizing other kids because the cost per student is far more than the sticker price. Actually educating a student at an elite college costs $100K+/year. At these schools (the elite ones that don't really offer merit aid), the difference between tuition and the actual cost is paid for by interest from enormously large endowments.

FWIW, I know that we are likely to be full pay parents, but I don't consider ourselves suckers. As one PP noted, I consider ourselves very, very fortunate. In the grand scheme of things, it is really morally appalling and politically unsustainable that there is such a huge difference in wealth between the top 1% and the lower 90%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You’re a sucker in the sense that your full pay is subsidizing other kids. But at your alleged salary, it’s no big deal, right? In any event, try to adjust your attitude to understanding that there are those less fortunate than you are.

This is such a myth. Full-pay families are not subsidizing other kids because the cost per student is far more than the sticker price. Actually educating a student at an elite college costs $100K+/year. At these schools (the elite ones that don't really offer merit aid), the difference between tuition and the actual cost is paid for by interest from enormously large endowments.

FWIW, I know that we are likely to be full pay parents, but I don't consider ourselves suckers. As one PP noted, I consider ourselves very, very fortunate. In the grand scheme of things, it is really morally appalling and politically unsustainable that there is such a huge difference in wealth between the top 1% and the lower 90%.

sjw