Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For all those who claim they didn't know what it was going to cost... that is BS, you didn't educate yourself. The information flow started with the advent of the internet, it has been in the news for 2 decades, savingforcollege.com came online at that time. We chose our family size because of the impending cost of college. That was 20 years ago. The information was there, you were ignorant bc you didn't inform yourself.

You waited until you were married to start saving for your future kids college? Why not earlier? SO weird you didn't plan even earlier, like you said the writing has been on the wall for decades.

This may come as a shock to you, but some people have student loans of their own, medical expenses or are low-paid.

Choices, people, choices.

Poor people shouldn’t go to college, got it

Poor people get financial aid. That’s not who the discussion is about.

Right. It’s about people who the institutions think can afford college, and the fact those people disagree.

You think you are entitled to live in a million dollar house and your kids get a free ride to college. Nope, you save and your kids go to state schools. Simple.

My house is a 600k house and my kid will be in state.

And, we have a 400K house so we saved that 200K you spent on a house for college.

Where is there a $400K house?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My firm recruits kids out of undergrad for some roles at $130k salaries with high bonus potential. That’s only from top schools, though, but it is the most desirable line of service. For the other lines of service (recruited from other schools) you’re starting at more like $70-95k. Good luck switching to the most desirable LOS without an MBA from a top school.

That’s why the rat race to get into top schools persists.

+1 my experience as well

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no other good or service where the amount you pay is determined by the company selling it to you deciding how much they think you can afford.

Because college is supposed to be a public good.

It is. There are plenty of good universities that do not cost 60 or 80K/year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no other good or service where the amount you pay is determined by the company selling it to you deciding how much they think you can afford.

Because college is supposed to be a public good.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The worst is when your income growth is very recent. My best friend, a single parent of 2, made low 100s most of career. Her career took off 2-3 years before the fist went to school and income quickly went to the high 200s. No FA, and no time to save. So her good luck with work is basically just going to the colleges like she never got the career boost (with the added benefit of a more stressful role and more hours of work)!

They could save those two years. As your income goes up you don’t change your lifestyle and save.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Complain about being a donut hole family? When there are thousands of colleges that could work between in state options and merit aid at lower tier privates and other oos public’s?l is it bc ivies and top 25 are not options?

Entitlement and status obsession. Middle class who pretend to not be status obsessed pompous snobs, but they are -- they just don't have the money to play. They put on this bogus public persona that they they're just regular modest middle class people but secretly they are seething and obsessed with social hierarchy and status.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe I missed someone else posting this, but it is about to get WORSE for donut hole families who have two kids close in age! Quietly how financial aid is calculated for people who have two kids in college has changed. Instead of factoring in having to pay tuition for multiple kids now financial aid is no calculating this.

By this it used to be that let's say you earn 150000 and the EFC says you can contribute 60,000. It used to be that if you had two kids then you paid 30K per kid. Or if you had three kids in college you were expected to contribute 20K per year. Now you are expected to contribute 60K no matter how many other college tuitions you are paying. So if you have two kids you would pay 120,000 which is ridiculous for a family making 150,000.

You should consider that when you decide the number of kids you have. Life is about choices. Saving is a choice, the house and expenses you have are choices, and the number of kids you have are choices.

Anonymous wrote:The worst is when your income growth is very recent. My best friend, a single parent of 2, made low 100s most of career. Her career took off 2-3 years before the fist went to school and income quickly went to the high 200s. No FA, and no time to save. So her good luck with work is basically just going to the colleges like she never got the career boost (with the added benefit of a more stressful role and more hours of work)!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a tough thread to read - i can sense the frustration in many of the responses.
We could not afford $80k per year (we saved enough to swing $60k per year) but still encouraged our child to apply wherever their stats might lead to a good chance of admission (sat 1560 gpa 4/4.8 etc). We did however insist that he apply in state and to several lower tier universities that offer merit aid.
He got into three schools we couldn’t afford without any FA (one with very modest merit) and all the lower tier schools with merit aid
One reason we allowed him to apply to the more expensive schools is because we weren’t sure what to expect wrt financial aid - turns out nothing.
We were open with him from the outset but it was difficult to watch him at the college visits and then working on the “why I belong here” universities, knowing that he was working so hard for a ticket we might not be able to afford. In the end he decided on the instate option and has not really looked back and I am also more sanguine about how things worked out. Like many people here I thought he would have the same opportunities we had at his age. It is what it is.
Maybe we should start thinking of top 30 universities the way we think about private high schools. It never occurred to me to want my child to attend Sidwell or St Albans or GDS. We couldn’t afford them and our high performing public school was just fine. The top private schools in the DMV provide their students with an excellent education, interesting experiences and wonderful opportunities for future advancement However, you can’t get in unless you meet their standards and can pay their tuition. Otoh they will make exceptions for students with hooks (legacies, talents etc). I wonder whether when my child is planning for his own children, whether we will think of top 30 schools in a similar way.

When did people quit thinking of top private colleges this way?

The costs relative to HHI didn't use to be so high.

DP. I went to in-state college and my parents went to in-state college. It’s eye-opening to me that people think their kids need to go to Top 30 private schools.

Anonymous wrote:My firm recruits kids out of undergrad for some roles at $130k salaries with high bonus potential. That’s only from top schools, though, but it is the most desirable line of service. For the other lines of service (recruited from other schools) you’re starting at more like $70-95k. Good luck switching to the most desirable LOS without an MBA from a top school.

That’s why the rat race to get into top schools persists.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a tough thread to read - i can sense the frustration in many of the responses.
We could not afford $80k per year (we saved enough to swing $60k per year) but still encouraged our child to apply wherever their stats might lead to a good chance of admission (sat 1560 gpa 4/4.8 etc). We did however insist that he apply in state and to several lower tier universities that offer merit aid.
He got into three schools we couldn’t afford without any FA (one with very modest merit) and all the lower tier schools with merit aid
One reason we allowed him to apply to the more expensive schools is because we weren’t sure what to expect wrt financial aid - turns out nothing.
We were open with him from the outset but it was difficult to watch him at the college visits and then working on the “why I belong here” universities, knowing that he was working so hard for a ticket we might not be able to afford. In the end he decided on the instate option and has not really looked back and I am also more sanguine about how things worked out. Like many people here I thought he would have the same opportunities we had at his age. It is what it is.
Maybe we should start thinking of top 30 universities the way we think about private high schools. It never occurred to me to want my child to attend Sidwell or St Albans or GDS. We couldn’t afford them and our high performing public school was just fine. The top private schools in the DMV provide their students with an excellent education, interesting experiences and wonderful opportunities for future advancement However, you can’t get in unless you meet their standards and can pay their tuition. Otoh they will make exceptions for students with hooks (legacies, talents etc). I wonder whether when my child is planning for his own children, whether we will think of top 30 schools in a similar way.

That's the point. You cannot afford it so your child goes where you can afford but if you can save $60K per year you are not a donut family and you are pretty comfortable financially.

We did not save $60 k per year, we spent a couple of decades saving enough so we could afford to spend $60k per year for four years But you are correct that we are pretty comfortable and ultimately we are satisfied with the quality of education our child is receiving and he seems to be doing well. We just didn’t fully realize at the time that some opportunities would not be available to him. Perhaps we were naive or perhaps tuition rose faster than our ability to change our expectations.

What opportunities? You could have taken out loans if it was that important to you. Lots of options.

Exactly, which is what someone with less income would do, to pay for college. Maybe there's savings or cash flow for about 20K a year, with federal loans that makes in-state is doable with another 20K to pay after graduation. To say this is a problem of too much income is silly. It's just a decision to be made, and a painful expense for anyone who lives on a budget.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Complain about being a donut hole family? When there are thousands of colleges that could work between in state options and merit aid at lower tier privates and other oos public’s?l is it bc ivies and top 25 are not options?

Entitlement and status obsession. Middle class who pretend to not be status obsessed pompous snobs, but they are -- they just don't have the money to play. They put on this bogus public persona that they they're just regular modest middle class people but secretly they are seething and obsessed with social hierarchy and status.

Are you guys actually reading the responses of donut hole families? Again over here-no fancy vacays, modest home, and it will be def be in state for my kids. How much do you think a donut hole family actually makes????

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a tough thread to read - i can sense the frustration in many of the responses.
We could not afford $80k per year (we saved enough to swing $60k per year) but still encouraged our child to apply wherever their stats might lead to a good chance of admission (sat 1560 gpa 4/4.8 etc). We did however insist that he apply in state and to several lower tier universities that offer merit aid.
He got into three schools we couldn’t afford without any FA (one with very modest merit) and all the lower tier schools with merit aid
One reason we allowed him to apply to the more expensive schools is because we weren’t sure what to expect wrt financial aid - turns out nothing.
We were open with him from the outset but it was difficult to watch him at the college visits and then working on the “why I belong here” universities, knowing that he was working so hard for a ticket we might not be able to afford. In the end he decided on the instate option and has not really looked back and I am also more sanguine about how things worked out. Like many people here I thought he would have the same opportunities we had at his age. It is what it is.
Maybe we should start thinking of top 30 universities the way we think about private high schools. It never occurred to me to want my child to attend Sidwell or St Albans or GDS. We couldn’t afford them and our high performing public school was just fine. The top private schools in the DMV provide their students with an excellent education, interesting experiences and wonderful opportunities for future advancement However, you can’t get in unless you meet their standards and can pay their tuition. Otoh they will make exceptions for students with hooks (legacies, talents etc). I wonder whether when my child is planning for his own children, whether we will think of top 30 schools in a similar way.

When did people quit thinking of top private colleges this way?

The costs relative to HHI didn't use to be so high.

The top schools were always full of wealthy families and some interlopers. Maybe financially they were more attainable a generation ago but far, far fewer people thought to apply.

I went to a large suburban HS out west, maybe 10/500 students went to privates. It was very notable, and basically learning at the end of senior year that a few kids came from privilege. One guy went to Yale turned out his estranged father was wealthy. One guy went to CMU turned out his grandparents founded an outdoor equipment company we've all heard of. One guy on the tennis team went to Clairmont then Stanford law, turned out he wasn't just into tennis but everyone in his family was ranked and his grandmother had played Wimbledon in the forties. One gal went to SMU, I don't know her family story, but her personal style was always out of place, 15 going on 30, too formal, so it checked. The rest of us went in-state. The people who went private were good students, but not the very top. Our valedictorian is now an econ professor, he went in-state honors college full ride, then Caltech for grad school. Boring to recount, just completely different from how applications go out at my kid's HS today.

So genuine question, when did we all decide to bum-rush the privates? and why do we expect it to be low-cost?

Elite private colleges chose to make it affordable for poor and middle class (yes, a family making $120k is middle class) families because they believed that students being exposed to economic diversity was important. There isn’t much meritocratic about accepting students and then them not being able to go based their ability to pay. Poor families absolutely do not have the ability to pay.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Complain about being a donut hole family? When there are thousands of colleges that could work between in state options and merit aid at lower tier privates and other oos public’s?l is it bc ivies and top 25 are not options?

Entitlement and status obsession. Middle class who pretend to not be status obsessed pompous snobs, but they are -- they just don't have the money to play. They put on this bogus public persona that they they're just regular modest middle class people but secretly they are seething and obsessed with social hierarchy and status.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a tough thread to read - i can sense the frustration in many of the responses.
We could not afford $80k per year (we saved enough to swing $60k per year) but still encouraged our child to apply wherever their stats might lead to a good chance of admission (sat 1560 gpa 4/4.8 etc). We did however insist that he apply in state and to several lower tier universities that offer merit aid.
He got into three schools we couldn’t afford without any FA (one with very modest merit) and all the lower tier schools with merit aid
One reason we allowed him to apply to the more expensive schools is because we weren’t sure what to expect wrt financial aid - turns out nothing.
We were open with him from the outset but it was difficult to watch him at the college visits and then working on the “why I belong here” universities, knowing that he was working so hard for a ticket we might not be able to afford. In the end he decided on the instate option and has not really looked back and I am also more sanguine about how things worked out. Like many people here I thought he would have the same opportunities we had at his age. It is what it is.
Maybe we should start thinking of top 30 universities the way we think about private high schools. It never occurred to me to want my child to attend Sidwell or St Albans or GDS. We couldn’t afford them and our high performing public school was just fine. The top private schools in the DMV provide their students with an excellent education, interesting experiences and wonderful opportunities for future advancement However, you can’t get in unless you meet their standards and can pay their tuition. Otoh they will make exceptions for students with hooks (legacies, talents etc). I wonder whether when my child is planning for his own children, whether we will think of top 30 schools in a similar way.

When did people quit thinking of top private colleges this way?

The costs relative to HHI didn't use to be so high.

The top schools were always full of wealthy families and some interlopers. Maybe financially they were more attainable a generation ago but far, far fewer people thought to apply.

I went to a large suburban HS out west, maybe 10/500 students went to privates. It was very notable, and basically learning at the end of senior year that a few kids came from privilege. One guy went to Yale turned out his estranged father was wealthy. One guy went to CMU turned out his grandparents founded an outdoor equipment company we've all heard of. One guy on the tennis team went to Clairmont then Stanford law, turned out he wasn't just into tennis but everyone in his family was ranked and his grandmother had played Wimbledon in the forties. One gal went to SMU, I don't know her family story, but her personal style was always out of place, 15 going on 30, too formal, so it checked. The rest of us went in-state. The people who went private were good students, but not the very top. Our valedictorian is now an econ professor, he went in-state honors college full ride, then Caltech for grad school. Boring to recount, just completely different from how applications go out at my kid's HS today.

So genuine question, when did we all decide to bum-rush the privates? and why do we expect it to be low-cost?