My DS was accepted by USC in 2019 with neither merit nor financial aid. He decided to attend UVA instead and will graduate in May. DH and I will give him 100K and a tesla model 3 as graduation gifts from the savings of not attending USC. 90k/yr tuition is absolutely nut, imho.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d pay $400,000 today for a USC or Columbia, NYU, for a guaranteed admit for junior DS.

These three schools have something in common…

https://www.wsj.com/articles/nyu-college-graduate-parent-student-loans-11639618241

https://www.wsj.com/articles/usc-online-social-work-masters-11636435900

https://www.wsj.com/articles/financially-hobbled-for-life-the-elite-masters-degrees-that-dont-pay-off-11625752773

These are not unique to these schools.

Master's in social work pouring in $$?
These people made poor choices.
You can only blame yourself.

They shouldn’t have been allowed to take out loans for that much. You do know that the those govt loans will never be paid back in full?

Or as a society, or at least Columbia for one, can decide we need social workers. And they can decide that a degree in social work should cost less. So how about the school reduce tuition?

A masters in social work at Columbia or NYU is for a trust fund kid who wants to work a little. It is not for someone who actually needs a career to pay the bills (including student loans). A generation or two ago, that was clear to everyone but a bye product of these schools pushing for diversity and first gen college access is the marketing influencing people who would have known better years ago.

Asian immigrant here, genuine question - why do we need full fledged degrees in Social Work that cost $$$'s? Can't social work knowledge acquired by an elective class, enrichment lectures, internships ?

You can work as a social work with a BS in social work (usually offered by state schools).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d pay $400,000 today for a USC or Columbia, NYU, for a guaranteed admit for junior DS.

These three schools have something in common…

https://www.wsj.com/articles/nyu-college-graduate-parent-student-loans-11639618241

https://www.wsj.com/articles/usc-online-social-work-masters-11636435900

https://www.wsj.com/articles/financially-hobbled-for-life-the-elite-masters-degrees-that-dont-pay-off-11625752773

These are not unique to these schools.

Master's in social work pouring in $$?
These people made poor choices.
You can only blame yourself.

They shouldn’t have been allowed to take out loans for that much. You do know that the those govt loans will never be paid back in full?

Or as a society, or at least Columbia for one, can decide we need social workers. And they can decide that a degree in social work should cost less. So how about the school reduce tuition?

A masters in social work at Columbia or NYU is for a trust fund kid who wants to work a little. It is not for someone who actually needs a career to pay the bills (including student loans). A generation or two ago, that was clear to everyone but a bye product of these schools pushing for diversity and first gen college access is the marketing influencing people who would have known better years ago.

Asian immigrant here, genuine question - why do we need full fledged degrees in Social Work that cost $$$'s? Can't social work knowledge acquired by an elective class, enrichment lectures, internships ?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you take simple vacations, skip Starbucks, and don't renovate your kitchen, you can save to pay for four years at a school like this for multiple kids. There is no such thing as the donut hole.

Just ask DCUM, they'll tell you.

I have done all that and more (drive 15 yr old cars, cheap clothes, no restaurants, small house, …) so we can save for retirement and now we are expected to blow our life savings if kids want to attend the selective colleges.

Nobody is forcing you to send your kid to ritzy private universities ranked 20 to 30. They can get the same degree for much cheaper at more economical schools, many which may offer some merit as well to sweeten the deal. Obviously USC and NYU have plenty of people willing to pay, so why do you care how they blow their money? Move on and stop wasting mindshare on such trivial perceived slights.

+1000

There are many things in life most people will not be able to afford and choices are made, where to attend college is no different, nobody is entitled to an elite education. Choices: Honda vs Tesla, renting vs owning a townhome vs owning a house vs owning a large fancy house, private schools vs accepting the publics in area you can afford to own/rent, driving vacation to see family vs driving vacation to the beach vs flying to Disney vs flying to Europe, saving for retirement vs hoping you somehow survive or can continue to work, cooking all meals at home vs dining out for lunches and many dinners, driving 15 yo cars vs owning new luxury vehicles, letting your 16 yo new driver share Mom/Dad's car vs 16 yo getting a brand new car to drive, the list goes on and on.

Only in the United States is higher education compared to luxury goods.

Actually in Germany people laugh at the spoiled children of the rich who attend private college because they couldn’t get into an affordable public school. So I can’t agree. The difference is that *some* Americans are too impressed by expensive schools.

For a lot of students, top privates are way cheaper to attend than state flagships. That’s partially where the frenzy to get in comes from.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you take simple vacations, skip Starbucks, and don't renovate your kitchen, you can save to pay for four years at a school like this for multiple kids. There is no such thing as the donut hole.

Just ask DCUM, they'll tell you.

I have done all that and more (drive 15 yr old cars, cheap clothes, no restaurants, small house, …) so we can save for retirement and now we are expected to blow our life savings if kids want to attend the selective colleges.

Nobody is forcing you to send your kid to ritzy private universities ranked 20 to 30. They can get the same degree for much cheaper at more economical schools, many which may offer some merit as well to sweeten the deal. Obviously USC and NYU have plenty of people willing to pay, so why do you care how they blow their money? Move on and stop wasting mindshare on such trivial perceived slights.

+1000

There are many things in life most people will not be able to afford and choices are made, where to attend college is no different, nobody is entitled to an elite education. Choices: Honda vs Tesla, renting vs owning a townhome vs owning a house vs owning a large fancy house, private schools vs accepting the publics in area you can afford to own/rent, driving vacation to see family vs driving vacation to the beach vs flying to Disney vs flying to Europe, saving for retirement vs hoping you somehow survive or can continue to work, cooking all meals at home vs dining out for lunches and many dinners, driving 15 yo cars vs owning new luxury vehicles, letting your 16 yo new driver share Mom/Dad's car vs 16 yo getting a brand new car to drive, the list goes on and on.

Only in the United States is higher education compared to luxury goods.

Actually in Germany people laugh at the spoiled children of the rich who attend private college because they couldn’t get into an affordable public school. So I can’t agree. The difference is that *some* Americans are too impressed by expensive schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you take simple vacations, skip Starbucks, and don't renovate your kitchen, you can save to pay for four years at a school like this for multiple kids. There is no such thing as the donut hole.

Just ask DCUM, they'll tell you.

I have done all that and more (drive 15 yr old cars, cheap clothes, no restaurants, small house, …) so we can save for retirement and now we are expected to blow our life savings if kids want to attend the selective colleges.

Nobody is forcing you to send your kid to ritzy private universities ranked 20 to 30. They can get the same degree for much cheaper at more economical schools, many which may offer some merit as well to sweeten the deal. Obviously USC and NYU have plenty of people willing to pay, so why do you care how they blow their money? Move on and stop wasting mindshare on such trivial perceived slights.

+1000

There are many things in life most people will not be able to afford and choices are made, where to attend college is no different, nobody is entitled to an elite education. Choices: Honda vs Tesla, renting vs owning a townhome vs owning a house vs owning a large fancy house, private schools vs accepting the publics in area you can afford to own/rent, driving vacation to see family vs driving vacation to the beach vs flying to Disney vs flying to Europe, saving for retirement vs hoping you somehow survive or can continue to work, cooking all meals at home vs dining out for lunches and many dinners, driving 15 yo cars vs owning new luxury vehicles, letting your 16 yo new driver share Mom/Dad's car vs 16 yo getting a brand new car to drive, the list goes on and on.

Only in the United States is higher education compared to luxury goods.

Not comparing "higher education" alone to luxury goods. Comparing the Elite T25-30 Universities. Those that only a few will gain admission to anyhow. Plenty of excellent options for getting a "higher education" available. The smart people recognize that and don't worry. They know they will excel no matter where they get their education.

Only 2 members of the Executive team at my company have anything near an "elite education". Yet somehow the other 18 managed this when they got their education from "lower level schools", and I'm not talking "they went to UVA instead of Harvard". I'm talking "they went to Towson or U Mary Washington instead of Harvard" for the majority of them. Yet somehow those 18 are also executives with impressive careers and damn good at what they do. They have accomplished careers and worth millions. They are there because of their hard word and smarts and dedication to the job. Once you get your first job nobody cares where you went to college and even for the first jobs, most don't care---in tech: FAANG hires outside of T25 schools, they might hire a few more from CMU/MIT/CalTech but they hire everywhere, and once you are at FAANG nobody cares where you went, they care what you do on the job.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you take simple vacations, skip Starbucks, and don't renovate your kitchen, you can save to pay for four years at a school like this for multiple kids. There is no such thing as the donut hole.

Just ask DCUM, they'll tell you.

I have done all that and more (drive 15 yr old cars, cheap clothes, no restaurants, small house, …) so we can save for retirement and now we are expected to blow our life savings if kids want to attend the selective colleges.

Nobody is forcing you to send your kid to ritzy private universities ranked 20 to 30. They can get the same degree for much cheaper at more economical schools, many which may offer some merit as well to sweeten the deal. Obviously USC and NYU have plenty of people willing to pay, so why do you care how they blow their money? Move on and stop wasting mindshare on such trivial perceived slights.

+1000

There are many things in life most people will not be able to afford and choices are made, where to attend college is no different, nobody is entitled to an elite education. Choices: Honda vs Tesla, renting vs owning a townhome vs owning a house vs owning a large fancy house, private schools vs accepting the publics in area you can afford to own/rent, driving vacation to see family vs driving vacation to the beach vs flying to Disney vs flying to Europe, saving for retirement vs hoping you somehow survive or can continue to work, cooking all meals at home vs dining out for lunches and many dinners, driving 15 yo cars vs owning new luxury vehicles, letting your 16 yo new driver share Mom/Dad's car vs 16 yo getting a brand new car to drive, the list goes on and on.

Only in the United States is higher education compared to luxury goods.

No one compares a state flagship to luxury goods. Also note, schools that are compared to luxury goods do a good job attracting full pay international students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you take simple vacations, skip Starbucks, and don't renovate your kitchen, you can save to pay for four years at a school like this for multiple kids. There is no such thing as the donut hole.

Just ask DCUM, they'll tell you.

I have done all that and more (drive 15 yr old cars, cheap clothes, no restaurants, small house, …) so we can save for retirement and now we are expected to blow our life savings if kids want to attend the selective colleges.

Nobody is forcing you to send your kid to ritzy private universities ranked 20 to 30. They can get the same degree for much cheaper at more economical schools, many which may offer some merit as well to sweeten the deal. Obviously USC and NYU have plenty of people willing to pay, so why do you care how they blow their money? Move on and stop wasting mindshare on such trivial perceived slights.

+1000

There are many things in life most people will not be able to afford and choices are made, where to attend college is no different, nobody is entitled to an elite education. Choices: Honda vs Tesla, renting vs owning a townhome vs owning a house vs owning a large fancy house, private schools vs accepting the publics in area you can afford to own/rent, driving vacation to see family vs driving vacation to the beach vs flying to Disney vs flying to Europe, saving for retirement vs hoping you somehow survive or can continue to work, cooking all meals at home vs dining out for lunches and many dinners, driving 15 yo cars vs owning new luxury vehicles, letting your 16 yo new driver share Mom/Dad's car vs 16 yo getting a brand new car to drive, the list goes on and on.

Only in the United States is higher education compared to luxury goods.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't understand the point of raising the cost that much if the vast majority get aid. Just keep the cost lower, and don't provide as much aid. It makes it more affordable for more people that way.

Because low-income students wouldn’t be able to attend, then,

of course they can. They can still get FA. But making it $90K excludes a lot more kids. Low income kids in CA get all kinds of aid.. pell grant, cal grant, and USC will also provide aid.

I went to college in CA as a resident and got cal grants and pell grants.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you take simple vacations, skip Starbucks, and don't renovate your kitchen, you can save to pay for four years at a school like this for multiple kids. There is no such thing as the donut hole.

Just ask DCUM, they'll tell you.

Hardworking taxpaying middle class should be able to take some vacations, renovate old kitchen and at the same time should be able to send kids to whatever schools they are well qualified without losing arms and legs.

NYU and USC are rich kid schools. They give very little financial aid to anyone.

Honestly, so what? Why does this trigger people? It's not the end of the world if you can't afford two out of the thousands of four-year universities in the U.S. It's frankly a bit whiny and entitled (and delusional) to think your teen should be able to waltz in anywhere if you don't have the bucks to pay. I mean, can they just waltz into Sidwell too? Obviously not.

Because Americans, and American Universities like to pretend that college attendance is about merit and that getting into a great college is a reward for a kid who busts their ass in high school. NYU and USC are the last who want to admit that it's really about the ability to pay

You can bust your butt and get in, sure, but who says it's supposed to be free or cheap? Your kid can also bust their butt k-8th and get into Sidwell or Exeter, but unless you can pay, they can't go. How is this news to anyone or some horrific indictment of higher ed? You're all being super dramatic for no reason. Who freakin' cares.

Better job opportunities out of top schools.

Not really. Where you go does not matter nearly as much as what you do while you are there. Smart highly motivated kids will excel wherever they go, perhaps even more so if they can go and not worry about finances/future loans/etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you take simple vacations, skip Starbucks, and don't renovate your kitchen, you can save to pay for four years at a school like this for multiple kids. There is no such thing as the donut hole.

Just ask DCUM, they'll tell you.

I have done all that and more (drive 15 yr old cars, cheap clothes, no restaurants, small house, …) so we can save for retirement and now we are expected to blow our life savings if kids want to attend the selective colleges.

Nobody is forcing you to send your kid to ritzy private universities ranked 20 to 30. They can get the same degree for much cheaper at more economical schools, many which may offer some merit as well to sweeten the deal. Obviously USC and NYU have plenty of people willing to pay, so why do you care how they blow their money? Move on and stop wasting mindshare on such trivial perceived slights.

+1000

There are many things in life most people will not be able to afford and choices are made, where to attend college is no different, nobody is entitled to an elite education. Choices: Honda vs Tesla, renting vs owning a townhome vs owning a house vs owning a large fancy house, private schools vs accepting the publics in area you can afford to own/rent, driving vacation to see family vs driving vacation to the beach vs flying to Disney vs flying to Europe, saving for retirement vs hoping you somehow survive or can continue to work, cooking all meals at home vs dining out for lunches and many dinners, driving 15 yo cars vs owning new luxury vehicles, letting your 16 yo new driver share Mom/Dad's car vs 16 yo getting a brand new car to drive, the list goes on and on.

Anonymous wrote:Since this is an anonymous board, I'll just share it. 83k for a high stats kid from 200k family from University of Rochester. I like the school but not for that much.

Given this, 90k for USC doesn’t shock me

Yep! My spouse when to U of R in the 90s when it was 25K a year. By the inflation calculator, it should *only* be 49K. They liked the school, but don't 83K a year like it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you take simple vacations, skip Starbucks, and don't renovate your kitchen, you can save to pay for four years at a school like this for multiple kids. There is no such thing as the donut hole.

Just ask DCUM, they'll tell you.

Hardworking taxpaying middle class should be able to take some vacations, renovate old kitchen and at the same time should be able to send kids to whatever schools they are well qualified without losing arms and legs.

NYU and USC are rich kid schools. They give very little financial aid to anyone.

Honestly, so what? Why does this trigger people? It's not the end of the world if you can't afford two out of the thousands of four-year universities in the U.S. It's frankly a bit whiny and entitled (and delusional) to think your teen should be able to waltz in anywhere if you don't have the bucks to pay. I mean, can they just waltz into Sidwell too? Obviously not.

Because Americans, and American Universities like to pretend that college attendance is about merit and that getting into a great college is a reward for a kid who busts their ass in high school. NYU and USC are the last who want to admit that it's really about the ability to pay

Not all Americans pretend that. I couldn’t afford the best school I could get into either. That’s normal! Some schools have always been out of reach for most people, no matter their “merit.” I’m sorry you bought into the myth so long but it’s time to let it go.

How many threads do we see on this board and on the other DCUM school forums about this topic? People want to know how many from Blair were admitted to MIT, HYPS, etc. and don't see the point of working hard in e.g. the Blair math magnet or TJ if the outcome is UMD-CP or UVA. Elite schools admissions serve as a proxy for achievement (and intelligence) in these discussions all the time.

It's ridiculous to pretend otherwise.

Anonymous wrote:This country is failing.

The cost of a college education (even at state schools) has gotten way out of hand.

They sharp spike upward in cost which isn't even remotely close to the pace of salaries is crazy.

Once the fed loan program came in and schools found out people would just borrow, borrow and borrow some more...the tuitions started spiking. And colleges started to become like country clubs with huge sports centers and coffee bars and luxury dorms, etc. I had a dorm room without air conditioning, that was bare bones and the cafeteria which was equivalent to my public high school cafeteria. Now these kids can get health shakes and have 50 different lunch options.

Don’t confuse optional (for upperclassmen) auxiliaries with other things. My senior lives off-campus with no meal plan.

Anonymous wrote:The funniest thing about the varsity blues schedule was this idea that USC was coveted.

I thought the same thing . Dumb actors.