Anonymous wrote:You just don’t want to pay for something that is expensive.

Everyone pays for college except scholarship students. So if you want free you have a choice. Either earn a scholarship somehow or I guess become poor. Would you rather be poor?

Or just pay for school like the majority of us. If you don’t want to pay then don’t. The military is free. That’s one option. Community college is cheaper.

You should have been saving all along. Did you think college was free? Who misinformed you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yep not F--King okay. Why should people both richer than my family and poorer than my family be able to afford it but not us in the doughnut hole. It is BS. I have twins at a local top private. One has a good shot at Ivy and the other a well known top 25. That is 150K a year by time they go. One more kid two years behind them. So for two years, I am expected to pay $225,000 a year? WTF? And we get discriminated anyway because we are Asian. Net worth is close to $2,000,000 (1.85 million). Income is $300,000. Of that net worth 1.1 Million is in retirement accounts. So I don't have the money to pay $900,000 for three private schools.

We have about $90,000 each for the older two and around $50,000 for the younger one. Another about $160,000 from selling two rental properties (doubly screwed because a lot goes to taxes--this is what the net is). We can get to around $400,000 total and can easily pay for in state in Virginia. But, why should my kids not have the right to go to the top schools? Because I am upper middle class? Those richer than us can do it and those poorer than us can do it. The whole system is out of order as Al Pacino said in Justice for All.


^^^
Touche'! This whole "system" needs to crash and burn, so hopefully, a better more equitable & meritorious one can 'rise up' to replace it. However the 'demand' for the top schools is so much greater than the 'supply' hence the change may not happen in our lifetimes.

The hole donut hole “concept” is just people who make plenty but can’t save and overspend to have a reason to complain.

It is a fact that the cost of college has outpaced inflation by a long shot.

The reason that the term "donut hole" came into existence and usage is that the rise in tuition costs has caused elite schools to become out of reach to families who are in a certain upper middle class income bracket.

You are not entitled to your own facts.

. My facts are that we are in the bottom of the “donut hole” and yet we managed to save for our children’s college education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why in the world would you expect to get financial aid when you make $260,000 a year???

Most people don't have an extra $6,000/mo that they don't already have going towards something else. Being expected to come up with that kind of money is daunting.

Most people don’t need to pay $70,000 a year for a kid to go to college either. There are plenty of less expensive options.

Most people don't pay $70,000 a year even at colleges with $70,000 price tags. Most people receive some level of financial aid.

But people with HHIs like OP's family's income do have to pay $70K/year - or look elsewhere.

That's why people call the general $150k-$300k range the donut hole. Obviously there are other colleges, but that's not the point. The point is that a certain category of college is accessible to the poor, LMC, and the rich, but not to UMC.

My parents' income dropped from $75k to $35k to temporary disability while I was in college so, in the grand scheme of things, I'll take having to stretch to pay for my DCs' college and limit them from the more expensive private colleges but it seems disingenuous to pretend the donut hole isn't a thing.

And that is OK. No one is entitled to Harvard, or an Ivy, or whatever other elite school he/she fancies. I promise you, your child will be just fine at any one of the 98% of schools that don't cost $70k.

So if not everyone is entitled to an Ivy, why do the Ivy's jack up the price of tuition to subsidize low income kids at the expense of donut hole kids. I guarantee if low income kids weren't subsidized a full ride, tuition would be much lower. I don't have a problem with schools subsidizing low income kids, I just don't like how dismissive some are to the lost opportunities for donut hole kids who've worked hard, gotten the scores and are essentially priced out of the "best" schools. I understand the reality, that doesn't mean I don't get the frustration.

Yeah, way to blame the poor kids when it's the rich kids that are the problem. Schools don't jack up prices so that they can let more poor kids in, they jack up prices because there are just so many more rich kids that are willing and able to pay. Wealth disparity is real and you've been priced out.

Colleges absolutely do jack up tuition to subsidize free rides for poor kids. Do you think all the free rides come from endowments? Yes, wealth disparity is real m, and when it comes to college tuition poor people have it way better than middle income families.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why in the world would you expect to get financial aid when you make $260,000 a year???

Most people don't have an extra $6,000/mo that they don't already have going towards something else. Being expected to come up with that kind of money is daunting.

Most people don’t need to pay $70,000 a year for a kid to go to college either. There are plenty of less expensive options.

Most people don't pay $70,000 a year even at colleges with $70,000 price tags. Most people receive some level of financial aid.

But people with HHIs like OP's family's income do have to pay $70K/year - or look elsewhere.

That's why people call the general $150k-$300k range the donut hole. Obviously there are other colleges, but that's not the point. The point is that a certain category of college is accessible to the poor, LMC, and the rich, but not to UMC.

My parents' income dropped from $75k to $35k to temporary disability while I was in college so, in the grand scheme of things, I'll take having to stretch to pay for my DCs' college and limit them from the more expensive private colleges but it seems disingenuous to pretend the donut hole isn't a thing.

And that is OK. No one is entitled to Harvard, or an Ivy, or whatever other elite school he/she fancies. I promise you, your child will be just fine at any one of the 98% of schools that don't cost $70k.

So if not everyone is entitled to an Ivy, why do the Ivy's jack up the price of tuition to subsidize low income kids at the expense of donut hole kids. I guarantee if low income kids weren't subsidized a full ride, tuition would be much lower. I don't have a problem with schools subsidizing low income kids, I just don't like how dismissive some are to the lost opportunities for donut hole kids who've worked hard, gotten the scores and are essentially priced out of the "best" schools. I understand the reality, that doesn't mean I don't get the frustration.

Yeah, way to blame the poor kids when it's the rich kids that are the problem. Schools don't jack up prices so that they can let more poor kids in, they jack up prices because there are just so many more rich kids that are willing and able to pay. Wealth disparity is real and you've been priced out.

Colleges absolutely do jack up tuition to subsidize free rides for poor kids. Do you think all the free rides come from endowments? Yes, wealth disparity is real m, and when it comes to college tuition poor people have it way better than middle income families.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why in the world would you expect to get financial aid when you make $260,000 a year???

Most people don't have an extra $6,000/mo that they don't already have going towards something else. Being expected to come up with that kind of money is daunting.

Most people don’t need to pay $70,000 a year for a kid to go to college either. There are plenty of less expensive options.

Most people don't pay $70,000 a year even at colleges with $70,000 price tags. Most people receive some level of financial aid.

But people with HHIs like OP's family's income do have to pay $70K/year - or look elsewhere.

That's why people call the general $150k-$300k range the donut hole. Obviously there are other colleges, but that's not the point. The point is that a certain category of college is accessible to the poor, LMC, and the rich, but not to UMC.

My parents' income dropped from $75k to $35k to temporary disability while I was in college so, in the grand scheme of things, I'll take having to stretch to pay for my DCs' college and limit them from the more expensive private colleges but it seems disingenuous to pretend the donut hole isn't a thing.

And that is OK. No one is entitled to Harvard, or an Ivy, or whatever other elite school he/she fancies. I promise you, your child will be just fine at any one of the 98% of schools that don't cost $70k.

So if not everyone is entitled to an Ivy, why do the Ivy's jack up the price of tuition to subsidize low income kids at the expense of donut hole kids. I guarantee if low income kids weren't subsidized a full ride, tuition would be much lower. I don't have a problem with schools subsidizing low income kids, I just don't like how dismissive some are to the lost opportunities for donut hole kids who've worked hard, gotten the scores and are essentially priced out of the "best" schools. I understand the reality, that doesn't mean I don't get the frustration.

Yeah, way to blame the poor kids when it's the rich kids that are the problem. Schools don't jack up prices so that they can let more poor kids in, they jack up prices because there are just so many more rich kids that are willing and able to pay. Wealth disparity is real and you've been priced out.

Anonymous wrote:I guess my question is why do you think you deserve help paying for a $70k college when there are plenty of great ones that will cost $30k, which you can easily afford. I make 45k working full time. Do you think someone should give me 20k toward my purchase of a Mercedes, or would it make more sense for me to just buy a Ford?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why in the world would you expect to get financial aid when you make $260,000 a year???

Most people don't have an extra $6,000/mo that they don't already have going towards something else. Being expected to come up with that kind of money is daunting.

Most people don’t need to pay $70,000 a year for a kid to go to college either. There are plenty of less expensive options.

Most people don't pay $70,000 a year even at colleges with $70,000 price tags. Most people receive some level of financial aid.

But people with HHIs like OP's family's income do have to pay $70K/year - or look elsewhere.

That's why people call the general $150k-$300k range the donut hole. Obviously there are other colleges, but that's not the point. The point is that a certain category of college is accessible to the poor, LMC, and the rich, but not to UMC.

My parents' income dropped from $75k to $35k to temporary disability while I was in college so, in the grand scheme of things, I'll take having to stretch to pay for my DCs' college and limit them from the more expensive private colleges but it seems disingenuous to pretend the donut hole isn't a thing.

And that is OK. No one is entitled to Harvard, or an Ivy, or whatever other elite school he/she fancies. I promise you, your child will be just fine at any one of the 98% of schools that don't cost $70k.

So if not everyone is entitled to an Ivy, why do the Ivy's jack up the price of tuition to subsidize low income kids at the expense of donut hole kids. I guarantee if low income kids weren't subsidized a full ride, tuition would be much lower. I don't have a problem with schools subsidizing low income kids, I just don't like how dismissive some are to the lost opportunities for donut hole kids who've worked hard, gotten the scores and are essentially priced out of the "best" schools. I understand the reality, that doesn't mean I don't get the frustration.

Anonymous wrote:I am glad the OP and his child seem to have made peace with their situation (which may be disappointing, but is no tragedy). I think people who have not had to settle or budget before are shocked and mad they have to with college. Keep things in perspective. Many others choose between medicine and food or shoes and rent. This can be humbling, in a good way.

Anonymous wrote:I am glad the OP and his child seem to have made peace with their situation (which may be disappointing, but is no tragedy). I think people who have not had to settle or budget before are shocked and mad they have to with college. Keep things in perspective. Many others choose between medicine and food or shoes and rent. This can be humbling, in a good way.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yep not F--King okay. Why should people both richer than my family and poorer than my family be able to afford it but not us in the doughnut hole. It is BS. I have twins at a local top private. One has a good shot at Ivy and the other a well known top 25. That is 150K a year by time they go. One more kid two years behind them. So for two years, I am expected to pay $225,000 a year? WTF? And we get discriminated anyway because we are Asian. Net worth is close to $2,000,000 (1.85 million). Income is $300,000. Of that net worth 1.1 Million is in retirement accounts. So I don't have the money to pay $900,000 for three private schools.

We have about $90,000 each for the older two and around $50,000 for the younger one. Another about $160,000 from selling two rental properties (doubly screwed because a lot goes to taxes--this is what the net is). We can get to around $400,000 total and can easily pay for in state in Virginia. But, why should my kids not have the right to go to the top schools? Because I am upper middle class? Those richer than us can do it and those poorer than us can do it. The whole system is out of order as Al Pacino said in Justice for All.


^^^
Touche'! This whole "system" needs to crash and burn, so hopefully, a better more equitable & meritorious one can 'rise up' to replace it. However the 'demand' for the top schools is so much greater than the 'supply' hence the change may not happen in our lifetimes.

The hole donut hole “concept” is just people who make plenty but can’t save and overspend to have a reason to complain.

It is a fact that the cost of college has outpaced inflation by a long shot.

The reason that the term "donut hole" came into existence and usage is that the rise in tuition costs has caused elite schools to become out of reach to families who are in a certain upper middle class income bracket.

You are not entitled to your own facts.

. My facts are that we are in the bottom of the “donut hole” and yet we managed to save for our children’s college education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why in the world would you expect to get financial aid when you make $260,000 a year???

Most people don't have an extra $6,000/mo that they don't already have going towards something else. Being expected to come up with that kind of money is daunting.

Most people don’t need to pay $70,000 a year for a kid to go to college either. There are plenty of less expensive options.

Most people don't pay $70,000 a year even at colleges with $70,000 price tags. Most people receive some level of financial aid.

But people with HHIs like OP's family's income do have to pay $70K/year - or look elsewhere.

That's why people call the general $150k-$300k range the donut hole. Obviously there are other colleges, but that's not the point. The point is that a certain category of college is accessible to the poor, LMC, and the rich, but not to UMC.

My parents' income dropped from $75k to $35k to temporary disability while I was in college so, in the grand scheme of things, I'll take having to stretch to pay for my DCs' college and limit them from the more expensive private colleges but it seems disingenuous to pretend the donut hole isn't a thing.

And that is OK. No one is entitled to Harvard, or an Ivy, or whatever other elite school he/she fancies. I promise you, your child will be just fine at any one of the 98% of schools that don't cost $70k.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We live in the DMV, make 120k a year (and have never made more than that) and our high achieving kid is not raking in financial aid other than loans or merit aid at the highest ranked schools. Our two kids are separated by 5 years so they are never in college at the same time, but their costs will drain our assets just as much as if they were going at the same time--is that fair? No, there's all sorts of wonkiness in all systems. But I don't feel an elite private school "owes" me anything. They decide part of their mission is to achieve socioeconomic diversity--fine, that's how they spend their resources. No private school is required to meet or not meet anyone's financial needs.

Well just stating your income never shows the whole story. Do you have a lot of assets, own a second home, did you run the NPC calculators before applying? If your strategy was to go for merit aid then that is your answer. I think most schools can't provide generous financial aid AND generous merit aid. It is usually either one or the other. The tippy top schools don't provide merit aid just financial aid.

Anonymous wrote:We live in the DMV, make 120k a year (and have never made more than that) and our high achieving kid is not raking in financial aid other than loans or merit aid at the highest ranked schools. Our two kids are separated by 5 years so they are never in college at the same time, but their costs will drain our assets just as much as if they were going at the same time--is that fair? No, there's all sorts of wonkiness in all systems. But I don't feel an elite private school "owes" me anything. They decide part of their mission is to achieve socioeconomic diversity--fine, that's how they spend their resources. No private school is required to meet or not meet anyone's financial needs.