<p>xiggi: I, too, like to be informed, so as I said, I will read the links. However, as a personality, I am usually more moved by anecdotal evidence than statistics, hence my career in literature and not the social sciences.</p>
<p>I will keep an open mind.</p>
<p>"However, ranting without providing ANYTHING in the form of a possible solution does deserve a “slam.”
That is such a guy thing to say. Sometimes there is no solution. Sometimes a rant is just a rant is just a rant.</p>
<p>Oh, zoosermom, how true, how true!</p>
<p>1 of 42; The one thing that is easiest about claiming America is the freest, best government, best country, etc… is that it is SO EASY to substantiate. And what make it so easy, is it is basically universally accepted as the truth. OK, ready for me to substantiate??? </p>
<p>United States accepts more legal immigrants as permanent residents than any other country in the world. In 2006, the number of immigrants totaled 37.5 million. With the exception of Canada and Mexico, the United States is the furthest from any other country. It is one of the hardest countries in the world to get to. Oceans on 2 sides, arctic tundra on 1 side, and vastness on the 4th side. YET, we have more legal immigration than ANY country in the world.</p>
<p>Now; we haven’t even gotten to the ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. But hey, we probably don’t have to even count them. So; I guess our politics, government, economy, freedoms, lack of persecution, etc… isn’t all that great. There must be some other reason why the United States year after year still has the highest amount of immigration. Sorry of you are not from the United States and have had your feelings hurt. Don’t know what to tell you. I have lived and worked in 15 countries. I am only 2nd generation American. I have relatives in Europe. I know I am prejudice towards the United States, but as open minded as I can be from my travels and looking at the yearly immigration records, there is no doubt when I claim the United States as being about the best country to live in.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For Christ(corp) sakes, something we agree upon! Lol!</p>
<p>pretty good country. Just wish it would give more of its tax revenue to, and for, higher education. Education is what will lead US into the future. Educare means to lead out, I think.</p>
<p>The greater education for the greater number of citizens, the better our country will be. Darn right, more grants.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>International comparisons make very clear that the best national development play for a country is to invest most public funding in education in K-6 education. Higher education funding, by comparison to funding at that level, doesn’t have the same impact (in large part because it reaches a much smaller part of the population).</p>
<p>And who cares tokenadult? Don’t you think that there is some foolish government giveaway program to the rich and powerful that can be cut to pay a little more of the college costs for disadvantaged folks? Maybe just one they can do without? Take it from there, not K-6 funding. The fact that one valuable program is of marginally less effect than another valuable program is just not salient when the budget is ripe with Halliburton and friends no-bid lunacy.</p>
<p>I, too, as someone else mentioned a few pages ago, more than a little surprised by the antagonism evident in this discussion. I truly hope that the sons and daughters of those who are so adamantly opposed to some aspects of financial aid are not being influenced by their parents’ opinions. Experience tells me that this is a hope that is not likely to come true.</p>
<p>We are in a somewhat different situation than many of those discussed on this thread. It’s not something I usually talk about but I think that it’s useful in this discussion so thought I’d post. We are, by anyone’s definition, rich. We have paid ‘full freight’ for D1 (including grad school), D2, currently for D3, and in September for D4. In addition, we have paid for a niece who is like a fifth daughter to us and will continue to pay when she starts law school in the fall (we’ve basically raised her), and also have given substantial financial support for college for three boyfriends, two of whom are no longer involved with our Ds. I can’t imagine feeling resentful for ANY kid who is fortunate enough to get the financial aid he/she needs to go to college. I don’t know anyone who is resentful. Maybe it’s just the people I hang around with but who knows. ;)</p>
<p>We are incredibly fortunate that we are in this position, and we realize that. It has happened solely because of our own hard work, but, regardless, the fact that it HAS happened makes us very lucky indeed. Are there really that many people who cheat? Who game the system? Who have positioned themselves financially so that they get more than they ‘deserve’? I’m sure there are some, although I don’t think I’ve ever met someone who has done this, or admitted it anyway. I have a feeling that maybe it’s an exaggerated number who may do this? Maybe I’m wrong, or naive. Maybe it’s a lot of people. Maybe it’s as many as those who cheat on their taxes, or as many as those who pay cash for something so that they get it cheaper, and help someone else avoid paying tax! </p>
<p>Although it’s true that college is not for everyone, I think that it is imperative that we, as a society, do everything possible to make education a priority, and to make it available to as many kids who are qualified as possible. This doesn’t mean a Harvard education for everyone. Not everyone would want that anyway! I also think that it is in everyone’s best interests, ours, the students, and the larger community, to allow kids to graduate with as little debt as we can. Anyone who has read CC for more than a day knows that a lot of these kids are going to be crippled for years following graduation with the debt they’re carrying. I honestly don’t know what the solution is, but I don’t understand the resentment. I truly don’t. </p>
<p>In Canada, the university and college system is all public, and the costs are largely subsidized by general tax revenues. As a result, costs are much lower than they are in the U.S. This doesn’t keep Canadians from complaining, neither parents nor students, who regularly protest any potential increase in the already low fees. We’re lucky in Canada, in many respects, but post-secondary education is one important area where the general population benefits from kids who will have an easier time of it financially, and who won’t have the kind of debt upon graduation that many U.S. kids will. It does become the old ‘how much are you willing to pay in taxes’ question, though, and in that regard, is similar to the debate that arises over universal healthcare.</p>
<p>"We are incredibly fortunate that we are in this position, and we realize that. It has happened solely because of our own hard work, but, regardless, the fact that it HAS happened makes us very lucky indeed. "</p>
<p>Thank you for taking the time to post that, it’s wonderful to be able to put another perspective on this issue. Your generosity and grace are remarkable.</p>
<p>One thing that continually seems to getting left out of these discussions. The universities are using need based money to BUY the best and brightest regardless of economic factors. That is why so many of them are turning to need blind admissions. The simple formula for a lot of them is TCA less EFC equals need based money at the 100%'ers. If a school isn’t offering what you think they should it isn’t because they are stingy or anything like that. Perhaps they aren’t a 100% school and your child isn’t at the top of their list. If they were and they wanted them to attend no matter what they would have offered the needed aid.</p>
<p>Hi, Cur, </p>
<p>On the one hand I’m not advocating any cuts to any of the taxpayer-supported programs that </p>
<p>a) subsidize the cost of individuals attending college, </p>
<p>or </p>
<p>b) subsidize the general costs of operation of colleges. </p>
<p>But I was just pointing out to another participant that economists of education (I particularly recommend Mark Blaug as one of the experts on this subject) have noticed that if you have two countries, one that spends most of its education funding on primary education and one that spends mostly on higher education, the country that emphasizes primary education will end up more prosperous, more inventive, more equal in income distribution, and even will end up with more people who complete HIGHER education. While education is short of funds, the first place to invest is in primary education. (International comparisons also lead to some interesting ideas about how much funding might or might not be enough, and about what sources besides governmental appropriations might be put to the use of funding education.) I’m not proposing radical policy change here in the United States* but simply noting a well replicated policy observation. Here in the United States, K-12 schooling is the single biggest major line item in most state budgets, and in many states higher education is one of the top three line items. There is a lot of public funding of education (mostly schools, but also a little to libraries and some other programs) from various levels of government in the United States. There is also a lot of private charity devoted to education. I’m happy and approving that some colleges have seen fit to come up with various programs to give need-based grants to students, which I recall is the subject of this thread. </p>
<p>*the one economic policy change I would advocate, a la the G.I. bill or most governmental aid for higher education, is aiming dollars at learners rather than at schools, to give learners in the K-12 system more shopping power. Some parts of Canada (and I think Australia) and some countries in Europe, notably the Netherlands, have systems based on this principle.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>All of which merely shows that the United States is an extremely desirable country to immigrate to for economic purposes. If potential economic opportunity is your only metric of best, then you are undoubtedly correct that America is the best country in the world. But many, many people have broader interpretations and would disagree with you.</p>
<p>Either way, this is quite a tangent from the real point of the thread; if you want to continue discussing it we can do so through PM.</p>
<p>alwaysamom: I’ve missed you. Yes, your generosity is commendable and your attitude is perfect.</p>
<p>My feelings, exactly. Let’s bring more, not less, under the umbrella. And to me that means more kids getting to be a places they really want to be, not last resorts.</p>
<p>Sometimes the Puritan legacy in the US causes us to believe that being forced to sacrifice is, in itself, a good thing.</p>
<p>I don’t agree. If a sacrifice is necessary, then yes, it must be made. But so much nicer when it doesn’t have to be made.</p>
<p>alwaysamom, my parents would say the same, after paying full freight for 4 BA’s, 2 JD’s, and an MD for their 4 daughters (all private schools). They do not feel ripped off because they had to pay full price; they feel proud and grateful that they made it possible.</p>
<p>I meant education, and not higher education when I said,</p>
<p>pretty good country. Just wish it would give more of its tax revenue to, and for, higher education.</p>
<p>I would agree that the order in which the funds be given is to the less than higher education first, then higher education, then to the DOD, and NOT in the reverse order.</p>
<p>I saw the news item recently of the new ‘oldest person in the world’. When asked the inevitable question on what advice she would give, this person, born in 1893 in Indiana, said…</p>
<p>“More education”.</p>
<p>(she was a 1911 graduate of little Franklin College in Indiana)
[World?s</a> oldest person celebrates birthday - Life - MSNBC.com](<a href=“http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20310925/]World?s”>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20310925/)</p>
<p>zoosermom and mythmom, thank you for your kind words. I wasn’t trying to fish for compliments, just trying to put forward another perspective in the discussion. Your kind words are appreciated, nonetheless. 
(The next time I’m in NYC, it would be fun for the three of us to get together. I bet we could have an interesting conversation!)</p>
<p>hanna, I’m sure you’re absolutely right about the way your parents feel, and I have no doubt that they are as proud of you and your siblings as I am of my kids. I guess one reason I even commented in this discussion was that I don’t feel as though I am unique in this. I think there are many people in our financial situation who feel the same. I certainly know a lot who do and who find ways to assist those in need. Most do it quietly with no fanfare.</p>
<p>i would love such a get-together. I’m sure you’re right, alwaysamom, but still it bears celebration, even if other people do it. Money is so often used a weapon, that when it’s freely given it shows that love is freely given, too, and that really is the important thing.</p>
<p>Here are my picks, Curmudgeon. </p>
<p>First, I agree that scamming the FA system in illegal ways is despicable, and I hope they all get caught and punished. I hope that rules can be changed to prevent the legal loopholes, too. My comments below are about honest people. </p>
<p>My family is middle-income and my kids would not receive need-based FA from any schools except the elites with new enhanced aid programs, and I am FOR need-based grants for low-income families. I agree with the government and all the colleges that give need-based aid, that it is absolutely essential for many families. Many low-income college applicants have already overcome enormous obstacles to just get admitted to college.</p>
<p>And, as Curmudgeon says, until the broken need-based FA system is fixed to address inequities that seriously affect middle income families and more need-based aid is made available to them, merit aid is essential. Middle income families with high achieving students can get a break from the incredibly high COAs at many colleges with merit aid. State schools can be a bargain, but some of them cost the same as privates with merit aid. Our instate flagship engineering COA for this year was $28K+.</p>
<p>My kids applied for and got generous merit aid from many schools. They had the luxury of not having to work at minimum wage jobs during the school year. Their “work” was doing the very best they could in their classes. They had time to do the ECs and volunteer work that they enjoyed and that look good to admission and scholarship committees. My kids had parents with the time and inclination to help them in the college search and jump through the myriad hoops of applications, FAFSA, Profile and IDOC. Kids from low-income families often don’t have these and many other benefits that middle income families can provide. </p>
<p>I would not like to see a certain segment of society eliminated from higher education because of their financial situation. And only loans would be punitive for people who might not even be able to get the large loans necessary even for the cheapest schools, not to mention the extreme difficulty of paying off those big loans when their salaries are so small to begin with. Yes, hopefully the student will be able to make a decent living after graduating, and they can certainly work to pay off their own loans and help the parents to pay off theirs. But imagine a poor family trying to pay off loans for the entire cost of a college education for one or more kids. The stresses have to be huge - no money for the payments, no leeway, no cushion, no room for mistakes. Seems overwhelming to me. </p>
<p>The government gives a little to these students. Colleges give what they can for low-income families. They know how hard it is for these folks and the value in giving them a leg up. I hope that in future that more help can be given to middle-income families. But it has to start with the low-income families. They need it more than we do.</p>
<p>Well said, gladmom.</p>
<p>alwaysamom - I know I wasn’t invited, but I would love to attend another CC NY get-together. Please keep me in mind.</p>