Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just posted this in the UVA thread. It really is an effed up system. People that were careless get rewarded and people that scrimped and saved and built wealth and equity through long hours and sacrifice are expected to drain three entire savings. Their kids end up not going to the elite private universities while their neighbors with no 529s, family wealth so they work at non-profits making little $ since their parents bought their homes and paid for their college have kids that meet the “need based” criteria and go virtually free to Ivies and places like Hopkins. Our system is broken.

Also relevant:
$350-400k in North Arlington or McLean with 2-3 kids makes you a donut hole where spending $85k/year for each of them is a serious burden. That is $680k for two kids for 4 years or a whopping $1,020,000 for 3 kids. With housing costs over $1.5 million (and much more) the closer you get to DC you can see why in-state universities (which VA has many great ones) are such a draw to ppl that would be wealthy in a lower cost state/area, but it’s really effed up that people that started with nothing and worked 70-80 hour weeks to attain that salary are full pay while people with better backgrounds and family help so they didn’t need the high salaries work at non-profits making a 1/4 of that and their kids can go to Ivies for free.

You act like this is a big part of the population but it’s not. It’s a very rare circumstance. You’re so mad it exists (rarely) that you want to blow up the whole system.[b]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just posted this in the UVA thread. It really is an effed up system. People that were careless get rewarded and people that scrimped and saved and built wealth and equity through long hours and sacrifice are expected to drain three entire savings. Their kids end up not going to the elite private universities while their neighbors with no 529s, family wealth so they work at non-profits making little $ since their parents bought their homes and paid for their college have kids that meet the “need based” criteria and go virtually free to Ivies and places like Hopkins. Our system is broken.

Also relevant:
$350-400k in North Arlington or McLean with 2-3 kids makes you a donut hole where spending $85k/year for each of them is a serious burden. That is $680k for two kids for 4 years or a whopping $1,020,000 for 3 kids. With housing costs over $1.5 million (and much more) the closer you get to DC you can see why in-state universities (which VA has many great ones) are such a draw to ppl that would be wealthy in a lower cost state/area, but it’s really effed up that people that started with nothing and worked 70-80 hour weeks to attain that salary are full pay while people with better backgrounds and family help so they didn’t need the high salaries work at non-profits making a 1/4 of that and their kids can go to Ivies for free.

You act like this is a big part of the population but it’s not. It’s a very rare circumstance. You’re so mad it exists (rarely) that you want to blow up the whole system.

Anonymous wrote:If you want to catch the same breaks as poor people, it's not too hard to put yourself into poverty, I guess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just posted this in the UVA thread. It really is an effed up system. People that were careless get rewarded and people that scrimped and saved and built wealth and equity through long hours and sacrifice are expected to drain three entire savings. Their kids end up not going to the elite private universities while their neighbors with no 529s, family wealth so they work at non-profits making little $ since their parents bought their homes and paid for their college have kids that meet the “need based” criteria and go virtually free to Ivies and places like Hopkins. Our system is broken.

Also relevant:
$350-400k in North Arlington or McLean with 2-3 kids makes you a donut hole where spending $85k/year for each of them is a serious burden. That is $680k for two kids for 4 years or a whopping $1,020,000 for 3 kids. With housing costs over $1.5 million (and much more) the closer you get to DC you can see why in-state universities (which VA has many great ones) are such a draw to ppl that would be wealthy in a lower cost state/area, but it’s really effed up that people that started with nothing and worked 70-80 hour weeks to attain that salary are full pay while people with better backgrounds and family help so they didn’t need the high salaries work at non-profits making a 1/4 of that and their kids can go to Ivies for free.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just posted this in the UVA thread. It really is an effed up system. People that were careless get rewarded and people that scrimped and saved and built wealth and equity through long hours and sacrifice are expected to drain three entire savings. Their kids end up not going to the elite private universities while their neighbors with no 529s, family wealth so they work at non-profits making little $ since their parents bought their homes and paid for their college have kids that meet the “need based” criteria and go virtually free to Ivies and places like Hopkins. Our system is broken.

Also relevant:
$350-400k in North Arlington or McLean with 2-3 kids makes you a donut hole where spending $85k/year for each of them is a serious burden. That is $680k for two kids for 4 years or a whopping $1,020,000 for 3 kids. With housing costs over $1.5 million (and much more) the closer you get to DC you can see why in-state universities (which VA has many great ones) are such a draw to ppl that would be wealthy in a lower cost state/area, but it’s really effed up that people that started with nothing and worked 70-80 hour weeks to attain that salary are full pay while people with better backgrounds and family help so they didn’t need the high salaries work at non-profits making a 1/4 of that and their kids can go to Ivies for free.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just posted this in the UVA thread. It really is an effed up system. People that were careless get rewarded and people that scrimped and saved and built wealth and equity through long hours and sacrifice are expected to drain three entire savings. Their kids end up not going to the elite private universities while their neighbors with no 529s, family wealth so they work at non-profits making little $ since their parents bought their homes and paid for their college have kids that meet the “need based” criteria and go virtually free to Ivies and places like Hopkins. Our system is broken.

Don’t be bitter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just posted this in the UVA thread. It really is an effed up system. People that were careless get rewarded and people that scrimped and saved and built wealth and equity through long hours and sacrifice are expected to drain three entire savings. Their kids end up not going to the elite private universities while their neighbors with no 529s, family wealth so they work at non-profits making little $ since their parents bought their homes and paid for their college have kids that meet the “need based” criteria and go virtually free to Ivies and places like Hopkins. Our system is broken.

Don’t be bitter.

Anonymous wrote:I just posted this in the UVA thread. It really is an effed up system. People that were careless get rewarded and people that scrimped and saved and built wealth and equity through long hours and sacrifice are expected to drain three entire savings. Their kids end up not going to the elite private universities while their neighbors with no 529s, family wealth so they work at non-profits making little $ since their parents bought their homes and paid for their college have kids that meet the “need based” criteria and go virtually free to Ivies and places like Hopkins. Our system is broken.

Anonymous wrote:I just posted this in the UVA thread. It really is an effed up system. People that were careless get rewarded and people that scrimped and saved and built wealth and equity through long hours and sacrifice are expected to drain three entire savings. Their kids end up not going to the elite private universities while their neighbors with no 529s, family wealth so they work at non-profits making little $ since their parents bought their homes and paid for their college have kids that meet the “need based” criteria and go virtually free to Ivies and places like Hopkins. Our system is broken.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you really feel that they are getting some kind of unfair advantage because they get more money for this one thing, while you have access to more money for... everything else.
….
What bugs me is the griping from people who's kids are exiting high school that seem to suddenly have the huge amount of outrage, and act like this is some kind of new explosive revelation.

I think the issue here is that one family has earned the access to more money, while the other family was given it. That is a really poor comparison.

Then you follow by blaming these people that earned their money for their choices while seemingly ignoring that a low income recipient of free college money are also responsible for their choices and maybe should also deal with the outcomes.

You cannot help who your parents are. The kid whose parents make only $30K/year will never be able to break out of that cycle without some help.
Whereas the kid whose parents make $150K/year has most likely had a much, much, much better life their first 18 years and can attend many many schools without too much debt.

So you think we should penalize the poor kid and make them "Deal with the outcomes" being born to parents with shitty jobs gave them? I'd rather help that kid and ensure they get a college education which most likely is their path to a much better life. The kid whose parents make $150K will still go to college and have a great life.

Just like I pay taxes to improve all schools, provide roads and infrastructure and everything else that society benefits from as a whole, I do not have issues with schools providing a path for poor kids to attend. Seems it might cost us less in the long run, if that kid gets out of poverty and makes a better life for themselves.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get frustrated by people that get so bent out of shape about this.
I get being frustrated by the rich (I say we eat them! ) but the simmering resentment about people at lower incomes disturbs me.
Yes, you will not qualify for financial aid (or very little financial aid) if you are at a certain income level. But people just throw the word "aid" around like it's just a big present wrapped up in a bow with no strings attached. Yes, some aid is just a grant--essentially free money. You have to be very low income indeed to qualify for that. Would you really want your income to be that low, just for the four years of grant money that your student would be eligible for. Think of the impact that lower income has on every facet of a person's life. Do you really feel that they are getting some kind of unfair advantage because they get more money for this one thing, while you have access to more money for... everything else.

Lots of aid is work study. It's not a free ride--the student has to spend hours of their week doing work. We did not qualify for financial aid, but both of my kids have found part time work while they are in undergrad to offset living expenses. If your student doesn't get officially "work study" you can make your own work study.

Finally there's the financial aid that is loans. Loans are not free money. Loans have to be paid back, and they have to be paid back with interest. That student that got the big aid package is often getting a big loan with it. Yes, it's the "nicer" loan, but it's still a loan. It's still starting off post grad with debt, and because that student is from a lower income family they do not have the "cushion" that a student from a middle class family has.

I'm grateful that we had the means to put a lot of money into a 529 to pay for tuition at state schools. I'm grateful that we are able to continue to put that same amount of money away each month while they are in school to pay for rent/expenses as they finish up. We were able to do this because I used the many, MANY tools that are available to give middle class people a VERY CLEAR picture of the cost of education. Having that knowlege, and having the goal of paying for undergrad for our two children, allowed us to plan accordingly.
-We made it abundantly clear to our kids that we could do in-state tuition (or the equivalent if they somehow won the merit scholarship lottery)
-We live in a modest townhouse
-We have one car
-Our family vacation were in state parks, while some classmates went to Europe

I'm not begrudging people who made different choices. If we had more $$$, heck yeah I'd have done European vacations!
It would also be fun to be able to tell my kids they could go to literally any college they wanted, private or public, that would have them.
It's also fine for people to put a higher value on certain kinds of homes, or activities, and be putting less money away in college savings.
What bugs me is the griping from people who's kids are exiting high school that seem to suddenly have the huge amount of outrage, and act like this is some kind of new explosive revelation.

I agree there's resentment and the college cartel and their enablers are telling us to direct it at the lower income folks while it should be direct at the college cartel. They are for-profit non-profits, pay no taxes (i.e. we subsidize them), government funds a lot of their research (i.e. we pay for their prestige and salaries of several staff), they hoard wealth (i.e. sit on their endowments which should really be used to subsidize tuition for everyone. I know what an endowment means. f' that!), their staff have fantastic job security, fantastic work environment, fantastic pay and we pay for all that through annual tuition increases regardless of whether inflation is zero percent or 10. And please google their salaries and benefits before coming on here and saying they don't get paid enough.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you really feel that they are getting some kind of unfair advantage because they get more money for this one thing, while you have access to more money for... everything else.
….
What bugs me is the griping from people who's kids are exiting high school that seem to suddenly have the huge amount of outrage, and act like this is some kind of new explosive revelation.

I think the issue here is that one family has earned the access to more money, while the other family was given it. That is a really poor comparison.

Then you follow by blaming these people that earned their money for their choices while seemingly ignoring that a low income recipient of free college money are also responsible for their choices and maybe should also deal with the outcomes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you really feel that they are getting some kind of unfair advantage because they get more money for this one thing, while you have access to more money for... everything else.
….
What bugs me is the griping from people who's kids are exiting high school that seem to suddenly have the huge amount of outrage, and act like this is some kind of new explosive revelation.

I think the issue here is that one family has earned the access to more money, while the other family was given it. That is a really poor comparison.

Then you follow by blaming these people that earned their money for their choices while seemingly ignoring that a low income recipient of free college money are also responsible for their choices and maybe should also deal with the outcomes.