<p>
This is a statement that interests me - from the context of your post, I am assuming that you feel having students from well-off families is an automatic negative? The reality is that about 40% of students at USC are indeed full-pay, meaning that their families could, on a relative basis, be considered “well off.” Whether that equates to “rich” is a very relative judgement and will also depend on where they live, etc. The other side of that is that at least 60%, or a majority, of USC students receive some level of aid (whether they feel it is enough aid or not is another question 
). ALL USC students, regardless of level of wealth have to be pretty darn smart and accomplished to even be accepted - being “rich” won’t get you in these days.</p>
<p>What interests me is the oft-expressed sentiment that having some students from (relatively or not) wealthy families should be considered a negative. Why? Is there an assumption that those individuals are in some way inferior to those with less money? Why? I can tell you that I have personally met many USC students and their families. Some of them have been from families where money is scarce. Some have been from middle-income families who receive some aid and have to stretch every penny to afford USC. Some have been from families where paying full-price hurts, but is manageable. Some have been from families for whom paying full-price at USC is not a problem. I have found all of those students and their families to be smart, hard-working, kind, ambitious, funny, and just overall amazing. I am very grateful for the friendships that have come my way as a result of being a USC parent.</p>
<p>There is absolutely nothing wrong with being from a successful family - are people who make that statement really looking for schools where no one is “rich?” </p>
<p>Ramblings for the day… :)</p>