Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By your reasoning, then no one is a spokesperson for anything. LOL. Like I said, I feel qualified to speak on the matter since I'm fairly sure I have a much better idea about what is going on in the minds of poor people more than you do. And umm, I never said that ONLY upper-middle calls families should get anything. What I said was your argument that somehow upper middle-class people are undeserving or do not contribute to diversity is a bunch of BS and based on some false notion of who you think would most benefit and why. Having been poor I would never say a poor person would not benefit from FA. Of course they would. Duh! I am all for any poor person, lower middle class, upper middle class -- whoever - who wants to send their child to private school getting FA in whatever amount they need to make it possible! I am all for donating to the annual fund and any other fundraising activities my DC's school has (which I do despite also being on FA). The fallacy of your anger towards the upper middle class, is that somehow our FA is impacting the ability of some lower middle class or poor person to get FA. It is not! When a school gives out FA, do you think they are handing it out to the upper middle class first and screwing the poor kid who they really want to admit? You cannot possibly think that. LOL.

Absolutely right the no one is a spokesperson for anything. Poor people are not monoliths, just as white people are not monolith, nor are Christians, Muslims, upper middle-class people, etc.

You may have first-hand experience to speak on a matter, but that does not make you a spokesperson. Nowhere near it.

And your description of the FA landscape is truly LOL and shows an inability to grasp simple math. Please enlighten us on why, in a world where schools have finite budgets, allocation of FA is not a zero-sum game.

For elite schools with a million plus dollars to hand out in aid it most certainly is NOT a sum zero game. It is very much a "who they want to invest in game."
So I guess there are never spokesmen? Huh? That's a new one. I guess the word is just a fantasy. You like I use absolute terms. I never said I spoke for ALL poor people. I said, and I stand by it, I have a much better idea of what is on the average poor person's mind than you do. The real issue is your inability to see that you are equally, if not more, in no position to speak on whether private schools are on the radar for poor people. You so arrogantly assume they must want this, as it's surely their avenue to rid themselves of poverty -- and oh gosh your charity helped. Ridiculous.

Anonymous wrote:By your reasoning, then no one is a spokesperson for anything. LOL. Like I said, I feel qualified to speak on the matter since I'm fairly sure I have a much better idea about what is going on in the minds of poor people more than you do. And umm, I never said that ONLY upper-middle calls families should get anything. What I said was your argument that somehow upper middle-class people are undeserving or do not contribute to diversity is a bunch of BS and based on some false notion of who you think would most benefit and why. Having been poor I would never say a poor person would not benefit from FA. Of course they would. Duh! I am all for any poor person, lower middle class, upper middle class -- whoever - who wants to send their child to private school getting FA in whatever amount they need to make it possible! I am all for donating to the annual fund and any other fundraising activities my DC's school has (which I do despite also being on FA). The fallacy of your anger towards the upper middle class, is that somehow our FA is impacting the ability of some lower middle class or poor person to get FA. It is not! When a school gives out FA, do you think they are handing it out to the upper middle class first and screwing the poor kid who they really want to admit? You cannot possibly think that. LOL.

Absolutely right the no one is a spokesperson for anything. Poor people are not monoliths, just as white people are not monolith, nor are Christians, Muslims, upper middle-class people, etc.

You may have first-hand experience to speak on a matter, but that does not make you a spokesperson. Nowhere near it.

And your description of the FA landscape is truly LOL and shows an inability to grasp simple math. Please enlighten us on why, in a world where schools have finite budgets, allocation of FA is not a zero-sum game.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am guessing you are the same poster that assumed we were American. You need to read what people le write carefully before answering.

No, because the PP who assumed you were American was quoting my post. Maybe you're the one who needs to read more carefully.

No, to me it sounded like you were adding to "your" previous post, but maybe I was wrong in thinking it was the same person.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well for example, my family works for international organizations, we speak 3 languages at home and I believe we would bring quite a bit of diversity. Our kids are still young, but when the time comes we will probably apply for FA. Our HHI is around 200-250 k. I am not sure we would get much (or anything at all). We are not below the 100k-150k threshold, but we still bring diversity on my opinion...

But the diversity that you offer has nothing to do with the fact that your HHI is in the low $200K range. Are you seriously claiming that those with lower HHIs cannot also provide the same kind of diversity that your family offers? If not, then what's your point? Because I'm saying that there are plenty of other families that offer the same kind of "international" diversity as yours, but also provide the additional diversity of a more financially modest background. These are the families that private schools should be targeting with FA. Not yours.

Plus it sounds like PP works for an international organization, but is American. I am not sure working for an international organization itself really adds much to the diversity, even if you are teaching your kids foreign languages.

Oh my! What is your problem? What has been denied to you that you are so angry and make such assumptions. We are NOT American and we speak at least 3 languages at home (4 if you count the nanny speaking Spanish). My DD is learning English at school in PK3. I am aware that DC if full of people like us; all (or most) of our friends have three nationalities at home; that is one big reason why we live here. My point was that we bring diversity even if we are not "poor" or "black, Asian, Hispanic". Diversity goes beyond HHI and skin color. As of now, we would not be able to afford 80k for private school (we can do 40k, but not 80k) so if the school wants our kids they will need to give us Some FA. We might move out to Bethesda like many of our friends did.
I don't even know if we will apply to one of "those" private schools if they are full of parents like you.

WTF? Your hostility is absurd considering my post. You highlighted your work for an international organization- not that you were an international family - in arguing you brought diversity. I reasonably, but perhaps mistakenly, assumed that meant you were American because I would have otherwise expected you to highlight your national origin, rather than your work for an international organization, in arguing you brought diversity.

All I said was that I didn't think working for an international organization really added to diversity, something I still believe.

And I live in Bethesda, so please stay in the district and collect your Nobel Prize for teaching your kids multiple languages.

Anonymous wrote:I am guessing you are the same poster that assumed we were American. You need to read what people le write carefully before answering.

No, because the PP who assumed you were American was quoting my post. Maybe you're the one who needs to read more carefully.

*accepted*

Anonymous wrote:
And stop it with this notion that those making between $75K and $105K are "poor people."

Thank you!

I'm the head of household for a family with income in that range. I would consider our family to be middle class. All of our needs are met, but there's not a lot left over. I am constantly amazed that people making 300K seem to forget that families like our exist in this area. They rebrand themselves as "middle class", and everyone else as "the poors".

Our family benefited from 50% aid for preschool. For elementary school, we applied and were accepted to our first choice private with 0% aid. The school basically admitted that the acceptance was symbolic. They knew that they couldn't afford the kind of aid we needed, so they chose not to give any, and instead used their money for other families who needed less. My kid did well enough in public school that we didn't look into aid for later years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well for example, my family works for international organizations, we speak 3 languages at home and I believe we would bring quite a bit of diversity. Our kids are still young, but when the time comes we will probably apply for FA. Our HHI is around 200-250 k. I am not sure we would get much (or anything at all). We are not below the 100k-150k threshold, but we still bring diversity on my opinion...

But the diversity that you offer has nothing to do with the fact that your HHI is in the low $200K range. Are you seriously claiming that those with lower HHIs cannot also provide the same kind of diversity that your family offers? If not, then what's your point? Because I'm saying that there are plenty of other families that offer the same kind of "international" diversity as yours, but also provide the additional diversity of a more financially modest background. These are the families that private schools should be targeting with FA. Not yours.

I am guessing you are the same poster that assumed we were American. You need to read what people le write carefully before answering. English is my second language, but I am pretty sure that nowhere in my post I said that we bring more diversity than people with lower HHI. All I said that (in my opinion) we ALSO bring diversity. I never measured (nor I think is possible) how diverse we or anybody else is. Diversity encompasses many things. We are diverse because we bring different languages and cultures. Other people are diverse because of their skin color or lower HHI... I am sure there are many "kinds" of diversity...
I nevr in my post said that I think we are more deserving than anyone else. But if we can apply for aid, why should 't we? Worst thing that can happen is that my Kids won't get aid or won't get accord to a school that we would not be able to afford anyway.
Easy

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What makes a spokesperson is that my family was, in fact, one of those poor people. What makes me a spokesperson is that many of my family members are currently those poor people that I refer too. See, despite my current income I actually know, hang around, friends with many of those poor people that you think of in the hypothetical.

Well, that's just the height of arrogance. How in hell can you be a spokesperson for poor people any more than I can be a spokesperson for people who are my gender, my race, or my socioeconomic status? You may know how a small subset of people think by having lived and interacted with them, but it takes quite a bit of gall to then claim that you can speak for a whole demographic.

Claiming that only upper-middle class families should get FA because they meet a minimum threshold to afford a $40K private school is about as class-perpetuating and inegalitarian as one can be. Awfully hypocritical if your family was in fact poor.

By your reasoning, then no one is a spokesperson for anything. LOL. Like I said, I feel qualified to speak on the matter since I'm fairly sure I have a much better idea about what is going on in the minds of poor people more than you do. And umm, I never said that ONLY upper-middle calls families should get anything. What I said was your argument that somehow upper middle-class people are undeserving or do not contribute to diversity is a bunch of BS and based on some false notion of who you think would most benefit and why. Having been poor I would never say a poor person would not benefit from FA. Of course they would. Duh! I am all for any poor person, lower middle class, upper middle class -- whoever - who wants to send their child to private school getting FA in whatever amount they need to make it possible! I am all for donating to the annual fund and any other fundraising activities my DC's school has (which I do despite also being on FA). The fallacy of your anger towards the upper middle class, is that somehow our FA is impacting the ability of some lower middle class or poor person to get FA. It is not! When a school gives out FA, do you think they are handing it out to the upper middle class first and screwing the poor kid who they really want to admit? You cannot possibly think that. LOL. As a family who receives 60% I know a few of the families who are getting close to full aid (say 96% FA). I also know quite a few families getting only 10% FA. And before you ask how could I possibly know, people divulge a lot more than people on DCUM are willing to admit. My point is this, there is a full range of FA awards at any given school. To the extent that a school wants to award more money to a poor family or lower middle class family it will. This foolish idea that a school would reject a student they really want because it would prefer to give upper middle class families 10% FA each is not true. Schools admit who they really want and they give money to who they want. Period. If you are lower middle class and did not get in or did not get enough aid -- read between the lines: they did not really want you. Hard pill to swallow, but that is reality!

Anonymous wrote:Oh, good grief. Some schools (ours and I'm sure many others) just look at the applicant pool and decide which kids they want to create the strongest class (which does factor in diversity in many forms, including SES). Then they look at the finances of those families and the aid they have available and figure out how to apply it to that set of kids so that the school ends up with as many of them as possible. Their goal is not to help address income inequality and the many associated challenges; it's just to build a class of kids that will bring as much as possible to the school. The end.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well for example, my family works for international organizations, we speak 3 languages at home and I believe we would bring quite a bit of diversity. Our kids are still young, but when the time comes we will probably apply for FA. Our HHI is around 200-250 k. I am not sure we would get much (or anything at all). We are not below the 100k-150k threshold, but we still bring diversity on my opinion...

But the diversity that you offer has nothing to do with the fact that your HHI is in the low $200K range. Are you seriously claiming that those with lower HHIs cannot also provide the same kind of diversity that your family offers? If not, then what's your point? Because I'm saying that there are plenty of other families that offer the same kind of "international" diversity as yours, but also provide the additional diversity of a more financially modest background. These are the families that private schools should be targeting with FA. Not yours.

Plus it sounds like PP works for an international organization, but is American. I am not sure working for an international organization itself really adds much to the diversity, even if you are teaching your kids foreign languages.

Oh my! What is your problem? What has been denied to you that you are so angry and make such assumptions. We are NOT American and we speak at least 3 languages at home (4 if you count the nanny speaking Spanish). My DD is learning English at school in PK3. I am aware that DC if full of people like us; all (or most) of our friends have three nationalities at home; that is one big reason why we live here. My point was that we bring diversity even if we are not "poor" or "black, Asian, Hispanic". Diversity goes beyond HHI and skin color. As of now, we would not be able to afford 80k for private school (we can do 40k, but not 80k) so if the school wants our kids they will need to give us Some FA. We might move out to Bethesda like many of our friends did.
I don't even know if we will apply to one of "those" private schools if they are full of parents like you.

Anonymous wrote:What makes a spokesperson is that my family was, in fact, one of those poor people. What makes me a spokesperson is that many of my family members are currently those poor people that I refer too. See, despite my current income I actually know, hang around, friends with many of those poor people that you think of in the hypothetical.

Well, that's just the height of arrogance. How in hell can you be a spokesperson for poor people any more than I can be a spokesperson for people who are my gender, my race, or my socioeconomic status? You may know how a small subset of people think by having lived and interacted with them, but it takes quite a bit of gall to then claim that you can speak for a whole demographic.

Claiming that only upper-middle class families should get FA because they meet a minimum threshold to afford a $40K private school is about as class-perpetuating and inegalitarian as one can be. Awfully hypocritical if your family was in fact poor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm amazed that your definition of diversity is "poor people." Since when does diversity mean a sprinkling of poor people? Give me a break. Poor people rarely have any interest in sending their kids to a $40K school.

It's not my definition. I was simply responding to PP's preposterous claim that giving FA to top 10 to 20 percent families somehow helps make private schools more diverse, because otherwise, if you don't, private schools will be full of really rich and really poor students and that's just terrible.

And stop it with this notion that those making between $75K and $105K are "poor people."

Finally, who made you the spokesperson for poor people? How do you know they don't have any interest in sending their kids to private schools, whether ones that cost $40K or much less? In some ways it's quite condescending to assume that poor families wouldn't want the benefits of a private school education, especially if schools made legitimate efforts to accommodate their financial circumstances.

What makes a spokesperson is that my family was, in fact, one of those poor people. What makes me a spokesperson is that many of my family members are currently those poor people that I refer too. See, despite my current income I actually know, hang around, friends with many of those poor people that you think of in the hypothetical. Like I said, most poor people have bigger fish to fry and the last thing they are doing is trying to figure out how to send their kid to a Big 3. Of course, there may be some here and there but certainly they are not in abundance and there certainly are not enough of them to diversify a school in any significant way. The hypocrisy of it all is that you are the same people who will tell someone who may be able to squeak out being full pay to not do it because it is not a wise financial decision for a myriad of reasons (i.e., you will have no money left over for camps, enrichments, birthday party gifts, vacations), but yet you seem to think that attending a $40K school on FA for a poor kid (who most certainly will have no money for all of the "other things") is somehow a good thing. Give me a break. It is the upper middle class families that can actually attend with FA (and can manage to squeeze out a few extra "others") who are actually making the better financial decision.

Anonymous wrote:Then they look at the finances of those families and the aid they have available and figure out how to apply it to that set of kids so that the school ends up with as many of them as possible.

Right, but this automatically has the indirect effect of schools denying admission on financial grounds to many more applicants in the middle class who are otherwise just as qualified as those from families who make more money.

It's their prerogative to take this approach, but schools can't then turn around and credibly claim to be committed to having a student body that's meaningfully diverse and representative of the community at large. Not possible to have it both ways.

Oh, good grief. Some schools (ours and I'm sure many others) just look at the applicant pool and decide which kids they want to create the strongest class (which does factor in diversity in many forms, including SES). Then they look at the finances of those families and the aid they have available and figure out how to apply it to that set of kids so that the school ends up with as many of them as possible. Their goal is not to help address income inequality and the many associated challenges; it's just to build a class of kids that will bring as much as possible to the school. The end.