<p>ouch thumper
I am still rounding up all our medical bills- I forgot about half of them- like when my daughter had full braces put on but took them off again in the 30 minutes it took to drive her back to school- insurance doesn’t really cover that 
<p>EAGLE: yeah, i want to be a doctor, so JHU is like my dream school, but i doubt that will happen…</p>
<p>“says that his former professors stongly suggest going to a state school for undergrad so you can save your money for grad school.”</p>
<p>Anybody who has to pay to get a PhD in arts or especially sciences (vs. a professional degree) is going to the wrong school or shouldn’t go to grad school at all.</p>
<p>It would be nice if the government fully funded higher education for all students who want to attend college, but I do not see that happening in the foreseeable future. For now, it is primarily the responsibility of parents and students to fund education. I’m a little dismayed that so many upper middle class parents do not seem to understand the realities of the college financial aid game. </p>
<p>I have actually felt a little guilty at times during the past few years because I couldn’t afford to send my D to just any school she wanted to attend regardless of price. Throughout her childhood, I had no trouble saying no when something did not fit within the family budget, but I didn’t want to have to say no to the college of her choice. I wanted to be able to send her to a school that would give her the best leg up on her chosen career. She, like her father and I, has decided to major in the arts - not exactly a high paying field. I never felt guilty about living in a tiny house, driving ancient cars, foregoing trips to the movies, expensive vacations, etc. Our earnings paid for all the basic necessities and I found unconventional ways to pay for arts lessons, which in my family ARE considered necessities, not frills. So, why the guilt? Because my husband and I chose to work in a field that pays badly. My husband is a retired teacher who is disabled and I am a private music instructor. I chose not to become a doctor or a lawyer, which were certainly possibilities (I was a NMS and a Phi Beta Kappa). Instead, I chose a field that I knew would not pay well. Life would have been easier had either my husband or I, or both, chosen more lucrative fields, but we always felt that our kids had what they needed. It was not until we began scouting out colleges for D2 that I began to have some real regrets. </p>
<p>D2 is one of those crazy Musical Theatre kids. An in-state school was not a good option for her. One school in our state offers a degree in MT. The program did not begin until our D was a college sophomore. So, it was out-of-state or nothing. </p>
<p>We fully expected that there would be schools we simply could not afford. I had no expectation that D would get a large financial aid package. We were fortunate that her top 2 school choices were state schools that do not have exorbitant rates for out-of-state students. The only financial aid that one of the schools offered her was a $2625 subsidized Stafford loan. Our income is in the $45,000 range. The other school, which she now attends, offered a Stafford loan and a university grant of $1700 per year. D also had an academic scholarship of $2000 - the largest the university grants. We managed to pay about $25,000 out of pocket for D’s freshman year (she attended summer school as her university requires, so 1st year expenses were high) and expect to spend around $20,000 this year. These figures are many times higher than our EFC. (Take note. Just because one has a low EFC doesn’t mean the school or the government is going to pay the rest of your cost!) Our D has taken the maximum Stafford loans, so currently owes about $7000. If you’ve done the math, you’ll see that I managed to spend half our gross income for the past two years on college expenses.</p>
<p>Of course, most families in our income range cannot do that, nor can most families making many times more. However, my husband and I made some choices years ago that allowed us to be able to do that. We had a couple of good years a while back when we made a little more money than we do now. We decided to pay down the mortgage on the tiny house. We managed to pay it off in 17 years. The mortgage was gone a couple of years before D2 was to start college. We talked about building an addition onto our house, but because I did not know what kind of college expenses we might be facing, I convinced H that it was a bad idea. We have no car payment - the cars are 19 and 14 years old - and no other debt. We made a conscious decision not to incur any debt BECAUSE our D was heading toward a college program with unknown expenses. Our D had a small savings account. Most of the money was from birthday gifts over the years and from paychecks earned as a performer. We did not attempt to hide her money in our own bank account. Her savings went toward a computer, books, part of her room and board, and a few dorm room necessities (and I do mean necessities, not frills). My husband and I had managed to save a small amount for D’s education, though not much. Our plan is to try to pay as we go. By tightening our belts, we seem to be succeeding.</p>
<p>I apologize for the length of this post. I suppose what I’m trying to say is that those of us who have been fortunate enough to have gotten an education and have good incomes need to stop complaining that the have-nots get such a great deal when it comes to financial aid. We need to accept responsibility for our choices and accept the fact that choosing to send one’s offspring to a pricy school is just that - a choice. It’s true that the government does not take into account where you have chosen to live. Yep, some areas of the country cost more. The salaries are generally higher in those parts too. Yep, some of us have chosen to mortgage ourselves to the hilt. No one made you. I would feel that if I had an income as high as the OP, paying $40,000 a year toward college expenses would not be out of line. </p>
<p>I accepted years ago that no one made me choose a low paying occupation. No made made my H choose one either. We knew going into the game that we’d probably never live in a ritzy neighborhood. I feel no sense of entitlement when it comes to college financial aid either. I’m grateful that my D qualifies for subsidized loans. My H and I plan to pay off the loans the during year after D graduates. </p>
<p>I feel that parents need to take a look at their finances and decide what they believe they can spend on their kids’ education. Be up-front with the kids about how much money you can spend. If the kids want to go to a school that costs more than you can afford, they need to come up with a way to fund the difference. If it is important that neither your child nor you incur any debt, look for a school that guarantees to meet 100% of need. For kids in most majors, that’s a viable option. </p>
<p>If you feel strongly that our country’s system of access to higher education is fundamentally flawed, write your legislators. But, stop the belly-aching about how ridiculous it is for the government to expect people earning in the top 5% to be able to pay full freight.</p>
<p>A very good statement. Thank you.</p>
<p>It doesn’t sound like you exhausted all opportunities to find need-based financial aid.</p>
<p>I realize that nothing is going to happen to change the system soon enough for our kids but I think that the problem is political and not a matter of personal choices. Children should not suffer for the sins of their fathers. Too much of life now is a “crapshoot” - did your mom’s company drop their pension plan, did your grandparents invest in Enron or buy a house in Florida five years ago. In Europe and Canada kids go to the BEST colleges for practically nothing (probably nothing if they’re lower-middle class) based on merit alone. And I don’t think it’s a dance of extracurriculars - are you captain of the squash team, etc. If your daughter excels in musical theater she should have a chance to go to Yale if she’s good enough (I’m not sure if Yale gives a full ride to poor kids) but you get the idea.</p>
<p>I’m not a Communist but things have gotten so much worse than they were back in the 70’s when I was in college. I went to a state school for free. Totally free, and could borrow enough to live off campus for my 2nd two years and with little jobs graduated with very little debt (about $5000). If I had worked harder in high school I’m sure I could have gotten a scholarship to a good private school which would have probably paid almost everything. How did we let things get this bad?</p>
<p>I agree with Amazon.
I also have great concerns about the wealth-related disparity in public school elementary and secondary schools in this country. It is not right that because the quality of local schools is based on property taxes, poor kids get the schools with uncertified teaches, inadequate equipment, etc.</p>
<p>In light of how those educational disparities hurt so many poor children, keeping them from even graduating from high school, our middle class complaints about our kids not being able to go to pricey colleges of their choices seem trivial indeed.</p>
<p>As a volunteer, I do my best to address these issues. However, the changes that are needed need to be done on a systemic level, and that means that middle and upper class people need to start caring as much about poor kids getting the opportunities that they deeserve as middle/upper class people care about their own kids getting the opportunities that they deserve.</p>
<p>Sorry to be on a soapbox but my first impression of the elite private universities vs. state schools and less competitive schools such as BU or Syracuse (hope I’m not offending anyone - I think that’s about the caliber of school that my daughter will end up in) is that the top schools largely have no majors in anything which leads directly to a job. For example, only 2 Ivies have a business undergrad. Also, comments on another site about many of these schools mention, “I never knew there were so many ridiculously overprivileged, spoiled people in the world”. So, it seems like these schools are really geared to people who are not only rich enough to afford tuition, but also $120 jeans, dinners out, and not worry about getting a job right out of school. We are really becoming 2 countries.</p>
<p>“Sorry to be on a soapbox but my first impression of the elite private universities vs. state schools and less competitive schools such as BU or Syracuse (hope I’m not offending anyone - I think that’s about the caliber of school that my daughter will end up in) is that the top schools largely have no majors in anything which leads directly to a job.”</p>
<p>There are plenty of jobs that people can get straight out of college with Ivy league liberal arts educations.</p>
<p>
I think that many parents on this board, including myself, would disagree strongly with this statement. My son is attending one of those very selective, very expensive schools you describe, and neither he nor his friends would fall into this category. The kids I’ve met seem unaffected, and really don’t seem to come from “spoiled rich kid” backgrounds. They do, however, seem to come from families who value education above all else. Some of them, like my son, attended private elementary/secondary schools. And it’s been my experience that by the time we pay for that tuition, there’s no money left for $120 jeans, fancy cars or lots of spending money. The disposable income has been disposed of via tuition and music lessons. I also know plenty of kids from affluent families who attend Syracuse and BU. Finally, since both our son and we are taking out significant loans to make this education possible, he’s well aware that he’s going to have to pay for grad school himself or get a job ASAP. </p>
<p>I think it’s quite a disservice to many hardworking, focused students to paint them all with such a broad brush.</p>
<p>
Not to be facetious, but (1) international Communism fell without a shot in the late 1980s, and (2) Conservatism rose within American politics over the last few decades, and was manifested in tax limitations (which didn’t favor public schooling at any level) and greater deference to “market forces” with declining government regulation, accompanied in the last 5 years by widening income gaps between rich and poor.</p>
<p>I don’t think it is true that middle-class families don’t care about lower class opportunities. However, as a middle-class family, our college options are severly limited unless we wish to go into severe debt. We have saved for our children (and my children have worked summers since they were 15 to save for college). We can afford our EFC for four years - but not the six years that FAFSA predicts that we can. My children are basically applying to safety schools where they may hopefully qualify for merit aid. By shutting many of the middle class students out of the elite schools , the schools are not getting a good balanced demographic population. A year ago, I had seen a distribution of students by parental income at one elite college and there were very few students with parental incomes between $100,000 and $200,000 - I don’t recall the school. There were representative numbers at the lower ends and upper ends of the income levels, but the middle class (and in our state the above range would be middle-class). There are flaws in FAFSA. The calculation assumes assets are earning 6%, which has not been the case in recent years and ignores defined benefit pensions. For the same income level, the family that has spent their money on vacations and other luxuries will get a lower EFC than the family that has saved. I don’t have any answers, but the current situation does result in inequities.</p>
<p>I, too, take exception to Amazon’s statement about the spending habits of those who pay full fare (2 in my case). Our last vacation cost $1,000 for both housing and meals. We have never spent more than $40 on a pair of jeans. No one in my family cares a straw about brand names. And frankly, I’d rather give (and do) to charity than spend a small fortune on clothes. We (I) do not spend $1,000 on haircuts, and certainly not the amount listed by Dstark on food. We have a 7-8 year old car. Both our kids attended public schools.
Could we have spent more on any of these items? Yes. But we chose to invest our money into our children’s education from the time they were born. </p>
<p>I have noticed that far too many posters either denigrate those who pay full fare as trust fund babies who do not have to work hard for their income or castigate the poor for not being smarter or making wrong choices and now benefitting from full rides from top colleges. This is a caricature of both groups and I wish it would stop.</p>
<p>
Since I’m still feeling irritated, I feel the need to point out that of the 6 or 7 kids I’ve met at my son’s school, at least 4 parents work in research and/or education. You can’t tell me that they are pulling down the big bucks. And 2 of them come from families with 6 children. If there’s any mother out there with 6 children who’s willing to fork out $120 for jeans or who eat out often as a family, I’d be shocked. We have spent/are spending a fortune on education for our kids – but I’ve never spent more than $35 for a pair of pants (even dress pants) or $50 for a pair of shoes. If they wanted something more expensive, it was out of their own money, and my kids could never imagine spending their own money on such nonsense – they’ve worked too hard for the little they have. Sorry for the rant, but these sweeping, negative generalizations just drive me crazy – they are unfair, untrue and sound like sour grapes to me.</p>
<p>I think you have to look at this from worst case scenario. If my kids get zero aid, merit or other wise, I will still be able to fund their education through our state college system. I’ll be able to write out the checks without them having to worry about loans. That may or may not be their first choice, but if they apply themselves, they’ll come out the other side with a college degree and move on with their lives. Contrast that with a family trying to live in my community on 70 or 80K who would have a much more difficult time coming up with even public school tuition, especially when 100% of need is not guarenteed to be met. Those kids may never finish their degrees because they keep having to take years off to fund the next year of school. There are plenty of kids who get through school that way. The worst thing isn’t having to say to your kid that you’re sorry you can’t afford the top-ranked private college, it would be having to say you can’t afford any college.</p>
<p>It is true that a liberal arts education is not a trade school – it does not prepare you for a specific job. A liberal arts education was never intended to land you a great job. The intention is to make you an educated person in the liberal arts disciplines. </p>
<p>If you want a specific job that college specifically prepares you for, go to a school that has majors in engineering, accounting, etc. Or go to a trade school and learn to be a truck driver or a plumber.</p>
<p>We shouldn’t feel that acceptance at a “top” college or university is a guarantee for financial security for our kids. There has been more than enough research that shows that attending a “top” college has no statistically significant impact on future incomes. And surveys of adults with great life accomplishments (CEOs, Senators, inventors, etc.) show that most of them did not attend HPYS or similar institutions.</p>
<p>So why send your kid to a “top” college for a liberal arts education? Besides hoping they become truly educated people, the liberal arts programs talk about graduates who have learned how to learn, can write and communicate exceptionally well, and have a broad knowledge of the world. We (their parents) hope that this will make them adaptable in a rapidly changing world and job market, where people will have 3 or 4 different careers over their working lifetime. But I don’t expect that they will be able to walk out of college and land a $45,000+ salary job the next day.</p>
<p>Thanks, MOF. Despite somebody denigrating my Niemann Marcus vs. Macy’s vs. Wal-Mart analogy, your point is well taken. We also counted on the various financial and qualifications backups in case we were not able to afford the “all choice” option for our kids.</p>
<p>At the state university where I teach, 70% of students work part-time during the school year. While some of those earnings go for luxuries – electronics, designer this and that, and cars – much of it is essential to the students’ completing college but it also strings out their completion time. This is brought about to a significant extent by the rising tuition costs as the state continues to reduce its share of contribution to the operating expenses of the university. The “communist era” whose demise Amazon bemoans is long gone and will never return. But somehow these kids and their families mainly do find an alternative to the “free tuition” (read: 100% taxation-based funding).</p>
<p>And there are two-step alternatives, via the community college to state college/university path.</p>
<p>But frankly I’m more concerned at this stage about the failure of so many of our country’s kids to get even to that stage because they drop out of high school. That is a tragic waste of lives and talent.</p>
<p>To add to what Dadx3 says, my D, with a pricey LAC education under her belt, is working the counter at Barnes and Noble. Am I subsidizing her? Nope, not a dime. Do we regret paying for this education? NOt in the least. I see the value of it every day. And luckily, the frugality we practiced getting it paid for was good training for her present life.</p>
<p>Agree with you, Garland. Our goals were to allow the kids to get the best education we could afford, and to do our best to afford the best education the kids could qualify for. The in-state, public options in this state were excellent backups for them, but they chose otherwise.</p>