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: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.

You've made my point. Only #2 is being asked to make a sacrifice.

So should #1 move to a cardboard box?

Are you suggesting that #1 has no discretionary income, particularly if they live in a place where the cost of living is low? In this example, I'm not suggesting that #1 is at poverty level.

We know a family living in the Midwest. The husband had a job in IT with pay alot lower than around here, and wife decided to "stay at home for the kids". The older kid got a scholarship to a good local private HS, did very well, got admitted into a Top-50 school, also private, and received financial aid. The younger kid went to the state flagship. I don't know if there is fin aid involved.
My kids, from a 2 income family, went to FCPS and the older one did not even consider private colleges. This was partly because we could not justify paying for private given the quality of VA schools (this kid was not Ivy material). Still, it rankled that I had to bust my a$$ at work while this woman sat on hers all those years, and the outcomes are similar.

+1. Exactly. In this scenario, you are the only one expected to make a sacrifice....and you'll get the holier-than-thou for thinking otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You've made my point. Only #2 is being asked to make a sacrifice.

So should #1 move to a cardboard box?

Are you suggesting that #1 has no discretionary income, particularly if they live in a place where the cost of living is low? In this example, I'm not suggesting that #1 is at poverty level.

We know a family living in the Midwest. The husband had a job in IT with pay alot lower than around here, and wife decided to "stay at home for the kids". The older kid got a scholarship to a good local private HS, did very well, got admitted into a Top-50 school, also private, and received financial aid. The younger kid went to the state flagship. I don't know if there is fin aid involved.
My kids, from a 2 income family, went to FCPS and the older one did not even consider private colleges. This was partly because we could not justify paying for private given the quality of VA schools (this kid was not Ivy material). Still, it rankled that I had to bust my a$$ at work while this woman sat on hers all those years, and the outcomes are similar.

+1. Exactly. In this scenario, you are the only one expected to make a sacrifice....and you'll get the holier-than-thou for thinking otherwise.

So obviously you should have stayed at home as well. You would have had a lower HHI and reaped the financial aid benefits. For some reason, though, you decided it was worth it to keep working. Why was that? Presumably you received some benefit for doing so that you wouldn't have otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You've made my point. Only #2 is being asked to make a sacrifice.

So should #1 move to a cardboard box?

Are you suggesting that #1 has no discretionary income, particularly if they live in a place where the cost of living is low? In this example, I'm not suggesting that #1 is at poverty level.

We know a family living in the Midwest. The husband had a job in IT with pay alot lower than around here, and wife decided to "stay at home for the kids". The older kid got a scholarship to a good local private HS, did very well, got admitted into a Top-50 school, also private, and received financial aid. The younger kid went to the state flagship. I don't know if there is fin aid involved.
My kids, from a 2 income family, went to FCPS and the older one did not even consider private colleges. This was partly because we could not justify paying for private given the quality of VA schools (this kid was not Ivy material). Still, it rankled that I had to bust my a$$ at work while this woman sat on hers all those years, and the outcomes are similar.

+1. Exactly. In this scenario, you are the only one expected to make a sacrifice....and you'll get the holier-than-thou for thinking otherwise.

So obviously you should have stayed at home as well. You would have had a lower HHI and reaped the financial aid benefits. For some reason, though, you decided it was worth it to keep working. Why was that? Presumably you received some benefit for doing so that you wouldn't have otherwise.

Because lowering your HHI to gain extra aid on something of dubious value (a private UG education) when compared to the alternatives is foolish.

[Anonymous]

Another way to look at the steep drop-off in financial aid as family income moves above $120K is as a very progressive tax rate. Top private colleges think it's fair to take up to 75% of your incremental income above $120K in the form of reduced grant aid. I can see how that stings and feels confiscatory. And there's usually no aid penalty for a spouse not working. It's similar to the situation where an income gets eaten up by childcare expenses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You've made my point. Only #2 is being asked to make a sacrifice.

So should #1 move to a cardboard box?

Are you suggesting that #1 has no discretionary income, particularly if they live in a place where the cost of living is low? In this example, I'm not suggesting that #1 is at poverty level.

We know a family living in the Midwest. The husband had a job in IT with pay alot lower than around here, and wife decided to "stay at home for the kids". The older kid got a scholarship to a good local private HS, did very well, got admitted into a Top-50 school, also private, and received financial aid. The younger kid went to the state flagship. I don't know if there is fin aid involved.
My kids, from a 2 income family, went to FCPS and the older one did not even consider private colleges. This was partly because we could not justify paying for private given the quality of VA schools (this kid was not Ivy material). Still, it rankled that I had to bust my a$$ at work while this woman sat on hers all those years, and the outcomes are similar.

+1. Exactly. In this scenario, you are the only one expected to make a sacrifice....and you'll get the holier-than-thou for thinking otherwise.

Honestly, staying at home for the kids sounds like the real sacrifice to me, LOL. Also, depending on where they were living in the midwest....also possibly a sacrifice. And of course, all these sacrifices are available to PP, too. There are plenty of jobs in other, less costly, parts of the country.

I'm puzzled, though, that this bothers some people so much. It "rankles" that PP had to bust her ass at work while someone else did something else and got a similar outcome? Are you just learning now, at your advanced age, that there are no guarantees in life and that things aren't always "fair?" How about the fact that there are other people around who work a helluva lot harder than you ever have, cleaning toilets e.g., but they don't get to live in as nice a house as you do? How come that kind of unfairness doesn't bother you?

[Anonymous]

I certainly hope that my children, being raised in the 5%, view themselves as among the lucky ones instead of the downtrodden, sacrificing ones. WTF. What a skewed view of life.

Newsflash: Even in this high COL area, $250k is a very high income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You've made my point. Only #2 is being asked to make a sacrifice.

So should #1 move to a cardboard box?

Are you suggesting that #1 has no discretionary income, particularly if they live in a place where the cost of living is low? In this example, I'm not suggesting that #1 is at poverty level.

We know a family living in the Midwest. The husband had a job in IT with pay a lot lower than around here, and wife decided to "stay at home for the kids". The older kid got a scholarship to a good local private HS, did very well, got admitted into a Top-50 school, also private, and received financial aid. The younger kid went to the state flagship. I don't know if there is fin aid involved.
My kids, from a 2 income family, went to FCPS and the older one did not even consider private colleges. This was partly because we could not justify paying for private given the quality of VA schools (this kid was not Ivy material). Still, it rankled that I had to bust my a$$ at work while this woman sat on hers all those years, and the outcomes are similar.

Ok, so their kids got financial aid. In all likelihood their FA packages included loans, whereas your kids (I assume) won't need student loans.

And you worked, whereas she didn't. So what? You have work experience, stability, retirement savings, benefits, and she doesn't. You could have chosen not to work, and for your kids to qualify for FA (including loans), but you didn't. Again - so what?

What would you prefer - that their kids not get FA? That they get no grants?

Count your blessings. FFS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I certainly hope that my children, being raised in the 5%, view themselves as among the lucky ones instead of the downtrodden, sacrificing ones. WTF. What a skewed view of life.

Newsflash: Even in this high COL area, $250k is a very high income.

Amen.

As I say to my college-age DC (who is at a "lesser" school according to DCUM), think through the entirety of human history and imagine how many people have been given this opportunity - this amazing opportunity to do nothing but study, think, grow, and expand your horizons for four years. Think about it for a moment. Then acknowledge to yourself just how rare and special this experience is. Never lose sight of that fact.

Good grief.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More interesting than lecturing OP on what he or she should do with income is considering the point that while many Wilson kids can get into top tier colleges that do not provide merit aid, many cannot afford to attend but rather choose state or "second-tier" schools. It is important to consider this when using the colleges attended by Wilson grads versus privates as a proxy for the education provided by each.

+1

Half the graduating class at the Montgomery Blair Math/Science Magnet enrolls at UMD-CP - not because they can't get into highly-ranked schools, but because of the expense of paying full price for those schools.

I agree with above and also want to point out that many high achieving students are likely to attend graduate school. We are on track (touch wood) to barely (!) afford one degree for ds but we will encourage him to consider UMD-CP in order to save some of that for grad. school. We did not think about this when we started saving for college but it has increasingly become clear to us that he will probably go to grad school (he is in a magnet HS in MCPS).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More interesting than lecturing OP on what he or she should do with income is considering the point that while many Wilson kids can get into top tier colleges that do not provide merit aid, many cannot afford to attend but rather choose state or "second-tier" schools. It is important to consider this when using the colleges attended by Wilson grads versus privates as a proxy for the education provided by each.

The is the key point in this whole thing, especially when expensive private schools like to show off that their graduates are going to expensive private colleges. It should not be surprising that kids whose parents were rich when they were 12 become kids whose parents are rich when they're 18.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You've made my point. Only #2 is being asked to make a sacrifice.

So should #1 move to a cardboard box?

Are you suggesting that #1 has no discretionary income, particularly if they live in a place where the cost of living is low? In this example, I'm not suggesting that #1 is at poverty level.

We know a family living in the Midwest. The husband had a job in IT with pay alot lower than around here, and wife decided to "stay at home for the kids". The older kid got a scholarship to a good local private HS, did very well, got admitted into a Top-50 school, also private, and received financial aid. The younger kid went to the state flagship. I don't know if there is fin aid involved.
My kids, from a 2 income family, went to FCPS and the older one did not even consider private colleges. This was partly because we could not justify paying for private given the quality of VA schools (this kid was not Ivy material). Still, it rankled that I had to bust my a$$ at work while this woman sat on hers all those years, and the outcomes are similar.

+1. Exactly. In this scenario, you are the only one expected to make a sacrifice....and you'll get the holier-than-thou for thinking otherwise.

Honestly, staying at home for the kids sounds like the real sacrifice to me, LOL. Also, depending on where they were living in the midwest....also possibly a sacrifice. And of course, all these sacrifices are available to PP, too. There are plenty of jobs in other, less costly, parts of the country.

I'm puzzled, though, that this bothers some people so much. It "rankles" that PP had to bust her ass at work while someone else did something else and got a similar outcome? Are you just learning now, at your advanced age, that there are no guarantees in life and that things aren't always "fair?" How about the fact that there are other people around who work a helluva lot harder than you ever have, cleaning toilets e.g., but they don't get to live in as nice a house as you do? How come that kind of unfairness doesn't bother you?

Another sacrifice is not having a personal retirement fund. Even if it means we have to pay full tuition for college, I will have more than a few million in retirement after years of investing the full max, company match and a pension. At this point I'm contributing around 50k a year towards retirement and I'm in my 30s. That far outweighs having to pay an extra 100k so my child can attend college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You've made my point. Only #2 is being asked to make a sacrifice.

So should #1 move to a cardboard box?

Are you suggesting that #1 has no discretionary income, particularly if they live in a place where the cost of living is low? In this example, I'm not suggesting that #1 is at poverty level.

We know a family living in the Midwest. The husband had a job in IT with pay alot lower than around here, and wife decided to "stay at home for the kids". The older kid got a scholarship to a good local private HS, did very well, got admitted into a Top-50 school, also private, and received financial aid. The younger kid went to the state flagship. I don't know if there is fin aid involved.
My kids, from a 2 income family, went to FCPS and the older one did not even consider private colleges. This was partly because we could not justify paying for private given the quality of VA schools (this kid was not Ivy material). Still, it rankled that I had to bust my a$$ at work while this woman sat on hers all those years, and the outcomes are similar.

+1. Exactly. In this scenario, you are the only one expected to make a sacrifice....and you'll get the holier-than-thou for thinking otherwise.

Honestly, staying at home for the kids sounds like the real sacrifice to me, LOL. Also, depending on where they were living in the midwest....also possibly a sacrifice. And of course, all these sacrifices are available to PP, too. There are plenty of jobs in other, less costly, parts of the country.

I'm puzzled, though, that this bothers some people so much. It "rankles" that PP had to bust her ass at work while someone else did something else and got a similar outcome? Are you just learning now, at your advanced age, that there are no guarantees in life and that things aren't always "fair?" How about the fact that there are other people around who work a helluva lot harder than you ever have, cleaning toilets e.g., but they don't get to live in as nice a house as you do? How come that kind of unfairness doesn't bother you?[/quote]

+1

[Anonymous]

We know a family living in the Midwest. The husband had a job in IT with pay alot lower than around here, and wife decided to "stay at home for the kids". The older kid got a scholarship to a good local private HS, did very well, got admitted into a Top-50 school, also private, and received financial aid. The younger kid went to the state flagship. I don't know if there is fin aid involved.
My kids, from a 2 income family, went to FCPS and the older one did not even consider private colleges. This was partly because we could not justify paying for private given the quality of VA schools (this kid was not Ivy material). Still, it rankled that I had to bust my a$$ at work while this woman sat on hers all those years, and the outcomes are similar.

Am I missing something? Why didn't you move to the Midwest and sit on your ass too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More interesting than lecturing OP on what he or she should do with income is considering the point that while many Wilson kids can get into top tier colleges that do not provide merit aid, many cannot afford to attend but rather choose state or "second-tier" schools. It is important to consider this when using the colleges attended by Wilson grads versus privates as a proxy for the education provided by each.

OP here and this is a very, very good point.
I have three kids on my block who recently graduated from Wilson and all 3 are at good state schools. Turns out that 2 of the 3 were also admitted to top 20 schools (of the Duke, Amherst level) but neither attended. It just wasn't worth it to them to pay $70k/year for those schools vs. $25k/year for places like Madison or USC (after DC Tag money kicks in which is $10K a year).

which USC? One is private, one is not...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I certainly hope that my children, being raised in the 5%, view themselves as among the lucky ones instead of the downtrodden, sacrificing ones. WTF. What a skewed view of life.

Newsflash: Even in this high COL area, $250k is a very high income.

And $380K is the 1% wrt income nationally. It's more than 7x the median income nationally.