Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even for high-end daycare, this kind of price just doesn’t make sense. Someone commented that it’s a public good and part of a trickle-down economy—but why is it the responsibility of middle-class families to stimulate the local economy? What does that have to do with the outrageous price tag, or even with education, which is the whole reason we send kids to college in the first place?

As someone just said, the middle class needs to just opt out of this stupid game. Community colleges and state (non-flagship) schools still exist, you know.

Yep, I’ve seen some families have their kids do two years at a community college and then transfer to a UC. Honestly, that seems like a really smart move.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely no school is worth $90k. How utterly stupid.

So what is the option? Frankly, the privates in the top 50 all cost around that much and don’t offer merit aid. Yes, there are excellent public colleges but not everyone gets in. For some families who have saved/can afford it they clearly believe it is worth it as they chose to pay it

The option is not to play the game, but the schools know many families will do ANYTHING to send their kids to T20s.

If you are selling a luxury good in a feeding frenzy it’s not rational to lower your price (merit aid) for those that can afford it.

It’s not just T20s asking for $90K+. Even OOS public schools are charging similar amounts.

So true. I get the frustration at the cost but think people suggesting we not "play the game" are either naive or the type of people willing to use their own kids to make a philosophical point. Or they can't afford it/will get aid and don't have to afford it so totally fine making up rules for a game they are never going to play in . . .

Kids can get an excellent education at any IN-STATE public university or even community college! They’re not being reaped for the hunger games.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely no school is worth $90k. How utterly stupid.

So what is the option? Frankly, the privates in the top 50 all cost around that much and don’t offer merit aid. Yes, there are excellent public colleges but not everyone gets in. For some families who have saved/can afford it they clearly believe it is worth it as they chose to pay it

The option is not to play the game, but the schools know many families will do ANYTHING to send their kids to T20s.

If you are selling a luxury good in a feeding frenzy it’s not rational to lower your price (merit aid) for those that can afford it.

It’s not just T20s asking for $90K+. Even OOS public schools are charging similar amounts.

So true. I get the frustration at the cost but think people suggesting we not "play the game" are either naive or the type of people willing to use their own kids to make a philosophical point. Or they can't afford it/will get aid and don't have to afford it so totally fine making up rules for a game they are never going to play in . . .

This.

We are a MC family and the 90k/year sticker price college my kid was accepted to offered a financial aid package with COA slightly better than our IS flagship's.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely no school is worth $90k. How utterly stupid.

So what is the option? Frankly, the privates in the top 50 all cost around that much and don’t offer merit aid. Yes, there are excellent public colleges but not everyone gets in. For some families who have saved/can afford it they clearly believe it is worth it as they chose to pay it

The option is not to play the game, but the schools know many families will do ANYTHING to send their kids to T20s.

If you are selling a luxury good in a feeding frenzy it’s not rational to lower your price (merit aid) for those that can afford it.

It’s not just T20s asking for $90K+. Even OOS public schools are charging similar amounts.

So true. I get the frustration at the cost but think people suggesting we not "play the game" are either naive or the type of people willing to use their own kids to make a philosophical point. Or they can't afford it/will get aid and don't have to afford it so totally fine making up rules for a game they are never going to play in . . .

Anonymous wrote:Even for high-end daycare, this kind of price just doesn’t make sense. Someone commented that it’s a public good and part of a trickle-down economy—but why is it the responsibility of middle-class families to stimulate the local economy? What does that have to do with the outrageous price tag, or even with education, which is the whole reason we send kids to college in the first place?

As someone just said, the middle class needs to just opt out of this stupid game. Community colleges and state (non-flagship) schools still exist, you know.

It’s a good thing that some people are starting to realize college isn’t the right path for them and are switching to careers that suit them better. I get that schools worry about enrollment numbers, but I suspect the ones that keep raising tuition aren’t exactly hurting for applicants. They can always admit more wealthy international students and charge even higher rates. At the end of the day, it’s just supply and demand.

Even for high-end daycare, this kind of price just doesn’t make sense. Someone commented that it’s a public good and part of a trickle-down economy—but why is it the responsibility of middle-class families to stimulate the local economy? What does that have to do with the outrageous price tag, or even with education, which is the whole reason we send kids to college in the first place?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely no school is worth $90k. How utterly stupid.

So what is the option? Frankly, the privates in the top 50 all cost around that much and don’t offer merit aid. Yes, there are excellent public colleges but not everyone gets in. For some families who have saved/can afford it they clearly believe it is worth it as they chose to pay it

The option is not to play the game, but the schools know many families will do ANYTHING to send their kids to T20s.

If you are selling a luxury good in a feeding frenzy it’s not rational to lower your price (merit aid) for those that can afford it.

It’s not just T20s asking for $90K+. Even OOS public schools are charging similar amounts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely no school is worth $90k. How utterly stupid.

So what is the option? Frankly, the privates in the top 50 all cost around that much and don’t offer merit aid. Yes, there are excellent public colleges but not everyone gets in. For some families who have saved/can afford it they clearly believe it is worth it as they chose to pay it

The option is not to play the game, but the schools know many families will do ANYTHING to send their kids to T20s.

If you are selling a luxury good in a feeding frenzy it’s not rational to lower your price (merit aid) for those that can afford it.

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely no school is worth $90k. How utterly stupid.

The actual cost of education should be more than just college tuitions. With multiple kids all going to private school from K–12, or numerous expensive extracurriculars, travel teams, tutoring, admissions consulting, and all sorts of pay to play activities. Lot of sunk cost and time.... quite expensive to raise kids.

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely no school is worth $90k. How utterly stupid.

So what is the option? Frankly, the privates in the top 50 all cost around that much and don’t offer merit aid. Yes, there are excellent public colleges but not everyone gets in. For some families who have saved/can afford it they clearly believe it is worth it as they chose to pay it

Absolutely no school is worth $90k. How utterly stupid.

Anonymous wrote:Between merit and/or financial aid, we're NOT paying $90k for any college, regardless of "ranking."

+100

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not interested in judging how other people spend their money. Showing off wealth is a life style sure.

I am just really curious why college tuition keep increasing yoy, it is not even tied to any performance benchmark.

Sounds like you aren’t interested in looking further than your navel.

Are you really not aware of how these schools spend money and why tuition has gone up?
Low class ratios and nice facilities don’t grow on trees.
Also, much of the student experience is subjective. It isn’t just what you learn, but how you feel about the experience.
Also, remember most kids are not paying full freight. The rich are subsidizing the less-well-off.

Did you know that in a study participants were presented with two glasses of wine and told one is from a $100 bottle and one is from a $20 bottle (roughly), and they consistently rated the $100 wine much higher across every metric?

The trick? It’s the exact same wine.

LOL, nice try. That trick might work for wine, but it won’t work for something you have to live and breathe for 4 years.

Have someone look at a $650,000 old 1000 square foot house and then a $1.2 mil updated 2500 square foot house in the same area. But switch the price tags and try to trick them!
Do you really think that someone will believe that the fake “$1.2 mil” 1000 square foot house is “better” than the updated 2500 square foot house because it has a higher price tag?

I get your point, since I have a relative who refuses to buy store-brand foods because she believes them inferior. But hardly comparable to the bigger ticket items and experiences in life.

The bigger, more expensive, updated house might be a total POS and the older, less expensive, smaller house might be a charming well-crafted quality home. I could EASILY believe the price tags could be switched and you’d have people calling it fair. I’m shocked that you can’t.

Are you a product of a school that would be 90K today, by any chance?

I think you kind of proved my point. So the 2500 house might be a POS, yes, that is one possibility. The bigger point is that in comparing these houses and their prices, one might be prompted to ask questions and investigate, and ask WHY the seemingly nicer home is priced lower.
You would ask questions, you would get inspections done, you compare property taxes, schools, and myriad other things.
You would not simply accept at face value that the home with the higher price is better or worse, right?

That was not remotely your point. See the bolded word for a clue as to where you’ve gone wrong. Hint: In your argument as presented YOU have accepted one house as better than the other based on price and rather arbitrary criteria such as how new and how big, none of which suggests any concern about real quality or value. To you, expensive + big + new = better. There are people on the other side of the coin to whom expensive + small + old = better. So I repeat, I could EASILY believe the price tags could be switched and significant chunk of the population would evaluate accordingly. (e.g. Small, old, inexpensive is gross; small, old, and expensive is classic and charming. Big, new, and expensive = luxurious; hug, new, inexpensive = builder grade garbage that will fall apart in five years.)

“Do you really think that someone will believe that the fake “$1.2 mil” 1000 square foot house is “better” than the updated 2500 square foot house because it has a higher price tag?”

I must ask again, are you a product of one of these expensive institutions?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not interested in judging how other people spend their money. Showing off wealth is a life style sure.

I am just really curious why college tuition keep increasing yoy, it is not even tied to any performance benchmark.

Sounds like you aren’t interested in looking further than your navel.

Are you really not aware of how these schools spend money and why tuition has gone up?
Low class ratios and nice facilities don’t grow on trees.
Also, much of the student experience is subjective. It isn’t just what you learn, but how you feel about the experience.
Also, remember most kids are not paying full freight. The rich are subsidizing the less-well-off.

Did you know that in a study participants were presented with two glasses of wine and told one is from a $100 bottle and one is from a $20 bottle (roughly), and they consistently rated the $100 wine much higher across every metric?

The trick? It’s the exact same wine.

LOL, nice try. That trick might work for wine, but it won’t work for something you have to live and breathe for 4 years.

Have someone look at a $650,000 old 1000 square foot house and then a $1.2 mil updated 2500 square foot house in the same area. But switch the price tags and try to trick them!
Do you really think that someone will believe that the fake “$1.2 mil” 1000 square foot house is “better” than the updated 2500 square foot house because it has a higher price tag?

I get your point, since I have a relative who refuses to buy store-brand foods because she believes them inferior. But hardly comparable to the bigger ticket items and experiences in life.

The bigger, more expensive, updated house might be a total POS and the older, less expensive, smaller house might be a charming well-crafted quality home. I could EASILY believe the price tags could be switched and you’d have people calling it fair. I’m shocked that you can’t.

Are you a product of a school that would be 90K today, by any chance?

I think you kind of proved my point. So the 2500 house might be a POS, yes, that is one possibility. The bigger point is that in comparing these houses and their prices, one might be prompted to ask questions and investigate, and ask WHY the seemingly nicer home is priced lower.
You would ask questions, you would get inspections done, you compare property taxes, schools, and myriad other things.
You would not simply accept at face value that the home with the higher price is better or worse, right?