I know there are exceptions to this. Hence, I said “for the most part…” There are also upper-class earners who drive old beaters. I once worked for a guy who owned a newspaper, several minor league sports teams, and other businesses, and he drove a 15 year old rusted K car.
There are exceptions to everything.
Cheers
I don’t think we are outliers. Many, many of D’s friends took similar routes because the publics had the best programs for their majors.
10k extra per year for an ivy/prestigious private versus state school… so a 4yr total of 40k. Which is about 1k per month or $30 extra per day at school. But the private would also have to be more highly regarded for the field of study/major.
I think the “high income but not sending to expensive school be it top 20 or expensive private” exception is becoming the norm. At least in certain parts of the country. And the idea that high income people all drive expensive/new cars is behind the book the Millionaire Next Door.
“Are you willing to pay or loan for the expensive ivy or top 20 schools instead of a cheap state Univ.?”
Yes.
@Twoin18 “Also there’s an inherent contradiction since UCLA is in fact a “top 20 school” but is also a “cheap state university” for us fortunate Californians. Sometimes you can have the best of both worlds.”
“Cheap” is all relative. 4 years at UCLA will cost us full pay in-staters 150K.
Here is an article from 2017: ** Some Colleges Have More Students From the Top 1 Percent Than the Bottom 60 **
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/18/upshot/some-colleges-have-more-students-from-the-top-1-percent-than-the-bottom-60.html
It’s behind the NYT paywall, but everyone gets a few free visits every month.
Of course, some of this has to do with the fact that students with wealthier parents may have received a better pre-college education than other students, thus making them more likely to qualify academically for “elite” universities. But the parents could have chosen to save money by sending their children to less-expensive, but still high-quality, options. The parents instead chose to pay more to send their children to the more expensive options.
I’m not making a judgement that such a decision is right or wrong. As I said, if I had the income and my children were admitted, I might also send my children to high-priced options at my expense.
A cool feature of the article is that it allows you to enter the name of any university and it will reveal some interesting information regarding parental income and more.
Direct link to interactive portion: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobility/city-college-of-new-york
I don’t post this to “prove” who is right or wrong. Only posting because I find it interesting. And because I think it will be interesting to some people posting in this thread.
That is an article that has made the rounds here multiple times. So a lot of people here have already seen it,
That articles indicates there are more kids from top 1% families at various schools than kids in bottom 50% (or whatever the percentage). But it doesn’t tell you what percentage of top 1% kids are at those schools. So its not helpful to prove your statement that its only the exception to send your kid to top 20/expensive privates if you have “high income.”
Another issue is high income. Last I looked, top 1% is something north of $400k/year income. Full pay for colleges starts a lot lower (depending on assets and certain other factors, $200k-250k/income). Maybe you do not view that has high income but I think most people would (though that is a subject discussed here often).
Like blossom we live below our means and with two incomes and an inheritance we were able to tell our kids they could apply where they liked. I’m not a fan of the SUNY colleges and didn’t feel like they were good fits for either child. I have no regrets about the money we spent. If our older son had had loans he could easily have paid them off in a few years.
The real question is why is this conversation happening after the kid is accepted? If I give my child a budget before applying and they stick to the budget and all parties agree on the school at the time the application went in then they are free to pick whatever school they want to attend and was accepted to. If you didn’t have a problem with the price before why would it be a big deal after they got accepted.
Actually, it seems to be common for people with $200k+ income to see themselves as “middle class” “donut hole” people complaining about the cost of college (even lower cost in-state publics) and resenting the fact that people with much lower incomes may get college financial aid for their kids, even though $200k income is top 8% according to https://dqydj.com/united-states-household-income-brackets-percentiles/ .
Of course, if those with $200k income spent like the median $60k income people did, then they could be saving lots and lots of money to afford college for their kids. Or even if they spent like top 29% $100k income people did.
According to an article I read today a 6 figure income is considered middle class in Silicon Valley due to the high cost of living.
@gwnorth = here ya go https://www.sfgate.com/expensive-san-francisco/article/SF-household-income-192k-middle-class-median-13637536.php
@ucbalumnus Depends on the cost of living. Sometimes in order to get the 200K you have to live in high cost areas.
I would only pay 70k per year for college if 1) My kid was crazy about the college and 2) the college was Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Princeton or Yale. The 100k+ premium for the cachet over 4 years may be worth that. This does not mean that I think these schools will give my kid a substantially better education or experience than less expensive top (50?) schools with merit. But there is certainly a difference in quality further down from that.
At the point we are now with college costs, standard rich people are starting to think it’s a rippoff. The trick is to get the parents to drink the Kool aid. Marketing to the parents is more important than to the kids. Top LACs do a good job with that.
@suzyQ7 “I would only pay 70k per year for college if 1) My kid was crazy about the college and 2) the college was Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Princeton or Yale.”
So you wouldn’t pay 70K per year if you had a kid majoring in Finance, and accepted to UPenn (Warton) and wanting to work on Wall Street or an Economics major at University of Chicago with goal of getting his PhD or a top chemistry student who was accepted to Cal Tech?
I would as long as it is a school my kid loves and has his potential major(s).
I’m in the exact same situation as momofsenior1 - in fact our kids are at the same school, same year, same major(?). I need to figure out how to spend the rest of her 529 without excess taxes. A lower cost state school happened to be the best school for her. If one of the pricey private’s had been a better fit, we would have paid for that. But it wasn’t.
But if “the rich” shouldn’t answer and certain answers are simply “outliers”, then it appears some are just looking for confirmation, not opinion.
(FWIW, our car was indeed 80k new, but I bought it used for 30k and it has 200k+ miles 11 years later. The rest went to 529s.)
For those with incomes under $150k, a school like Harvard is less than state schools. For those with incomes under $65k Harvard would be free.
That article says that “In San Francisco, where the median household income is $96,265, the middle income range is $64,177 to an eye-popping $192,530.” The methodology is the two-thirds to twice the median income is defined as “middle class”, so the $192,530 is at the upper edge of the “middle class” range as defined. Of course, the lower edge of $64,177 is probably what many on these forums would think of as “poor”, even is not-so-high cost-of-living areas.
But note that even $192,530 is lower than the $250k+ incomes of those on these forums who describe themselves as “middle class” “donut hole” people who complain that their kids will not get financial aid at any college.