Anonymous wrote:Things that didn’t happen x all of it.

+1

Things that didn’t happen x all of it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a full pay family, this just makes me feel like a schmuck. Which is part of why we choose in-state publics even though we could easily cash flow private. I don’t want to pay double for something so that half the kids pay nothing.

You won't be missed.

Actually, their tuition money in fact will be missed.

it really won't be.

Harvard doesn't need tuition money. Not the rank and filing donations from alumni. They both pale compared to what the endowment throws off. It's only a matter of time before they go tuition free. And then you'll all be mad about that!

You can't win with racists.

They are still overcharging full-pay in order to allow students to attend for free. Otherwise they could just lower tuition. If some parents want to pay the cost of 2 kids’ college even though they are only sending one kid, that is certainly their choice.

not true. full cost to harvard is something like 110k a year. every kid is subsidized to some degree. the idea that full pay is paying for others is rooted in ignorance and classism/racism

It’s zero sum. They have decided an amount of revenue they want from tuition, and they have decided they are only going to charge it to a subset of students. If tuition was lowered for full pay, the school would have to spend even more money on non payers. It’s just simple math.

here's the simple math: my full pay student is not funding any other kid's eduction. full stop.

You’re absolutely right. Your full pay kid is not funding another kid’s education. Rather, as a long-term substantial donor, I (and many, many others like me) are subsidizing both your kid’s and those other kid’s education. You’re welcome.

it must suck to bribe a college long-term and then have your own kids shut out.

Uhh, don’t know where you’re getting any of that. One kid’s a graduate (summa, entered with stats well above average and strong ECs, and also has admits to Stanford and Yale, no bribing intended or needed) and the other’s at his preferred college (chose not to apply after rea acceptance to another ivy). But haters gonna hate I guess. And again, you’re welcome.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a full pay family, this just makes me feel like a schmuck. Which is part of why we choose in-state publics even though we could easily cash flow private. I don’t want to pay double for something so that half the kids pay nothing.

You won't be missed.

Actually, their tuition money in fact will be missed.

it really won't be.

Harvard doesn't need tuition money. Not the rank and filing donations from alumni. They both pale compared to what the endowment throws off. It's only a matter of time before they go tuition free. And then you'll all be mad about that!

You can't win with racists.

They are still overcharging full-pay in order to allow students to attend for free. Otherwise they could just lower tuition. If some parents want to pay the cost of 2 kids’ college even though they are only sending one kid, that is certainly their choice.

not true. full cost to harvard is something like 110k a year. every kid is subsidized to some degree. the idea that full pay is paying for others is rooted in ignorance and classism/racism

It’s zero sum. They have decided an amount of revenue they want from tuition, and they have decided they are only going to charge it to a subset of students. If tuition was lowered for full pay, the school would have to spend even more money on non payers. It’s just simple math.

here's the simple math: my full pay student is not funding any other kid's eduction. full stop.

You’re absolutely right. Your full pay kid is not funding another kid’s education. Rather, as a long-term substantial donor, I (and many, many others like me) are subsidizing both your kid’s and those other kid’s education. You’re welcome.

it must suck to bribe a college long-term and then have your own kids shut out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a full pay family, this just makes me feel like a schmuck. Which is part of why we choose in-state publics even though we could easily cash flow private. I don’t want to pay double for something so that half the kids pay nothing.

You won't be missed.

Actually, their tuition money in fact will be missed.

it really won't be.

Harvard doesn't need tuition money. Not the rank and filing donations from alumni. They both pale compared to what the endowment throws off. It's only a matter of time before they go tuition free. And then you'll all be mad about that!

You can't win with racists.

They are still overcharging full-pay in order to allow students to attend for free. Otherwise they could just lower tuition. If some parents want to pay the cost of 2 kids’ college even though they are only sending one kid, that is certainly their choice.

not true. full cost to harvard is something like 110k a year. every kid is subsidized to some degree. the idea that full pay is paying for others is rooted in ignorance and classism/racism

It’s zero sum. They have decided an amount of revenue they want from tuition, and they have decided they are only going to charge it to a subset of students. If tuition was lowered for full pay, the school would have to spend even more money on non payers. It’s just simple math.

here's the simple math: my full pay student is not funding any other kid's eduction. full stop.

You’re absolutely right. Your full pay kid is not funding another kid’s education. Rather, as a long-term substantial donor, I (and many, many others like me) are subsidizing both your kid’s and those other kid’s education. You’re welcome.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a full pay family, this just makes me feel like a schmuck. Which is part of why we choose in-state publics even though we could easily cash flow private. I don’t want to pay double for something so that half the kids pay nothing.

You won't be missed.

Actually, their tuition money in fact will be missed.

it really won't be.

Harvard doesn't need tuition money. Not the rank and filing donations from alumni. They both pale compared to what the endowment throws off. It's only a matter of time before they go tuition free. And then you'll all be mad about that!

You can't win with racists.

They are still overcharging full-pay in order to allow students to attend for free. Otherwise they could just lower tuition. If some parents want to pay the cost of 2 kids’ college even though they are only sending one kid, that is certainly their choice.

You should def tell your kid to turn down their acceptance to Harvard. oh wait ...

This isn’t about my kid or Harvard. It’s about all private schools that overcharge tuition paying students to increase financial aid. When reviewing tuition increases, literally a line item for the additional revenue is how much will be allotted to financial aid. I know because I’ve worked in private higher education (not at Harvard but at a school many on here drool over.)

Harvard breaks down the sources of its operating revenue like this:

46% - endowment
22% - tuition
15% - sponsored research
17% - other


If they charged everyone the same tuition, everyone attending could pay less and still meet the 22% of the operating budget. Therefore students who must pay tuition pay more than they would if so many students didn’t go for free. It’s just reality.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a full pay family, this just makes me feel like a schmuck. Which is part of why we choose in-state publics even though we could easily cash flow private. I don’t want to pay double for something so that half the kids pay nothing.

You won't be missed.

Actually, their tuition money in fact will be missed.

it really won't be.

Harvard doesn't need tuition money. Not the rank and filing donations from alumni. They both pale compared to what the endowment throws off. It's only a matter of time before they go tuition free. And then you'll all be mad about that!

You can't win with racists.

They are still overcharging full-pay in order to allow students to attend for free. Otherwise they could just lower tuition. If some parents want to pay the cost of 2 kids’ college even though they are only sending one kid, that is certainly their choice.

You should def tell your kid to turn down their acceptance to Harvard. oh wait ...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a full pay family, this just makes me feel like a schmuck. Which is part of why we choose in-state publics even though we could easily cash flow private. I don’t want to pay double for something so that half the kids pay nothing.

You won't be missed.

Actually, their tuition money in fact will be missed.

it really won't be.

Harvard doesn't need tuition money. Not the rank and filing donations from alumni. They both pale compared to what the endowment throws off. It's only a matter of time before they go tuition free. And then you'll all be mad about that!

You can't win with racists.

They are still overcharging full-pay in order to allow students to attend for free. Otherwise they could just lower tuition. If some parents want to pay the cost of 2 kids’ college even though they are only sending one kid, that is certainly their choice.

not true. full cost to harvard is something like 110k a year. every kid is subsidized to some degree. the idea that full pay is paying for others is rooted in ignorance and classism/racism

It’s zero sum. They have decided an amount of revenue they want from tuition, and they have decided they are only going to charge it to a subset of students. If tuition was lowered for full pay, the school would have to spend even more money on non payers. It’s just simple math.

here's the simple math: my full pay student is not funding any other kid's eduction. full stop.

Whatever you need to believe.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a full pay family, this just makes me feel like a schmuck. Which is part of why we choose in-state publics even though we could easily cash flow private. I don’t want to pay double for something so that half the kids pay nothing.

You won't be missed.

Actually, their tuition money in fact will be missed.

it really won't be.

Harvard doesn't need tuition money. Not the rank and filing donations from alumni. They both pale compared to what the endowment throws off. It's only a matter of time before they go tuition free. And then you'll all be mad about that!

You can't win with racists.

They are still overcharging full-pay in order to allow students to attend for free. Otherwise they could just lower tuition. If some parents want to pay the cost of 2 kids’ college even though they are only sending one kid, that is certainly their choice.

not true. full cost to harvard is something like 110k a year. every kid is subsidized to some degree. the idea that full pay is paying for others is rooted in ignorance and classism/racism

It’s zero sum. They have decided an amount of revenue they want from tuition, and they have decided they are only going to charge it to a subset of students. If tuition was lowered for full pay, the school would have to spend even more money on non payers. It’s just simple math.

here's the simple math: my full pay student is not funding any other kid's eduction. full stop.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a full pay family, this just makes me feel like a schmuck. Which is part of why we choose in-state publics even though we could easily cash flow private. I don’t want to pay double for something so that half the kids pay nothing.

You won't be missed.

Actually, their tuition money in fact will be missed.

it really won't be.

Harvard doesn't need tuition money. Not the rank and filing donations from alumni. They both pale compared to what the endowment throws off. It's only a matter of time before they go tuition free. And then you'll all be mad about that!

You can't win with racists.

They are still overcharging full-pay in order to allow students to attend for free. Otherwise they could just lower tuition. If some parents want to pay the cost of 2 kids’ college even though they are only sending one kid, that is certainly their choice.

not true. full cost to harvard is something like 110k a year. every kid is subsidized to some degree. the idea that full pay is paying for others is rooted in ignorance and classism/racism

It’s zero sum. They have decided an amount of revenue they want from tuition, and they have decided they are only going to charge it to a subset of students. If tuition was lowered for full pay, the school would have to spend even more money on non payers. It’s just simple math.

there are PLENTY of full pay people at these schools. the idea that you think 1/3 paying 90k is too low is nuts

Anonymous wrote:Only 37% white is deeply concerning. Someone needs to check their admissions practices.

I'm surprised there are that many white people scoring that high on the SAT.

So ~20 % are FGLI and have a full ride.
Next ~20 % pay no tuition ~ 60k/yr ( so they pay about 30 k )These are from 50 percentile to ~85 percentile families networth wise…
Families who are > 90 percentile in networth are full pay.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a full pay family, this just makes me feel like a schmuck. Which is part of why we choose in-state publics even though we could easily cash flow private. I don’t want to pay double for something so that half the kids pay nothing.

You won't be missed.

Actually, their tuition money in fact will be missed.

it really won't be.

Harvard doesn't need tuition money. Not the rank and filing donations from alumni. They both pale compared to what the endowment throws off. It's only a matter of time before they go tuition free. And then you'll all be mad about that!

You can't win with racists.

They are still overcharging full-pay in order to allow students to attend for free. Otherwise they could just lower tuition. If some parents want to pay the cost of 2 kids’ college even though they are only sending one kid, that is certainly their choice.

not true. full cost to harvard is something like 110k a year. every kid is subsidized to some degree. the idea that full pay is paying for others is rooted in ignorance and classism/racism

at yale, it's like 125k

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of threads here recently at self segregating at Stanford, Duke and Ivies. Look at the decline in student attendance at Stanford football and most Ivies.

Smart people are giving up on football because it damages brains. Which smart people are extremely concerned about.

Also, it seems more than a bit uncool to watch people play and damage their brains for your entertainment. The current generation mostly realizes we should care about other people's health.

Because certain populations don't play as much football, there's less interest in watching it. Also teams that are middling to bad tend to draw less fan enthusiasm. Everyone knows that the Ivy Leagues teams don't have champion potential. The schools can't make enough academic concessions to ensure a truly great team.

These are just facets of the contemporary reality of Ivy football. It's a moderately popular campus anachronism.

I do wonder if/how this will change as the rise of AI diminishes the value of the human brain.