<p>I have an associate who can afford to send many kids to $50K schools out of income alone. Yet his oldest is furiously applying for big scholarships. He has told his son that he will give him cash to help with future home to match any scholarship as he’d rather him have the money than a college. Opinions?</p>
<p>Since money the kid knows that he will get in where his merits take him and no matter where he is accepted the parents will pay for college, maybe having son apply for scholarships is helping the student ‘put some skin in the game’ or be an active participant in the financing of his education. </p>
<p>In addition maybe the parent feels that having the kid go to college as a scholarship student will show him that he too has to “work” for his education. remember if he gets merit money and does not meet the terms of the scholarship then the scholarship is gone.</p>
<p>Just because the parent has vast weath, it doesn’t give the kid a free pass to take advantage of it nor does it absolve him of having any ownership, responsibility or accountablity in the process. </p>
<p>IF dad acquired his wealth by his own sweat, maybe he believes that son should not have to work for his too.</p>
<p>“Should The Wealthy Apply for Scholarships?”</p>
<p>Why, sure! (they just shouldn’t be awarded them. ;)) (the college gets the same amount of money in any case.)</p>
<p>If a scholarship is awarded based on merit and not need, I see no reason why a high-achieving student from any family shouldn’t apply. </p>
<p>If people have concerns with this practice, it’s the schools and organizations offering non-need-based awards with whom those concerns should be taken up.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I hope the kid does not get admitted on scholarship to the universities to which H and I contribute. We don’t mind subsidizing the poor with our full fares and annual alumni contributions, but I draw the line at subsidizing a rich kid’s education or mortgage. </p>
<p>Can he be reminded that the college to which he does not want to give his money has to pay the profs (remind him that someone has to teach his kids), the many administrators and support staff which he will most likely contact about his kid since he seems to have a huge sense of entitlement, the janitors who will be cleaning after his kids, the heating and water bills to which his kid will be contributing, the food which his kid will be consuming. and on and on and on.</p>
<p>Can he also be reminded that scholarship funds are limited and that there are kids who truly really need scholarships to attend college? </p>
<p>Is your associate extremely smart or extremely dumb? I can’t make up my mind.</p>
<p>EDIT: I have qualms about the use of merit aid. The reason I still support the practice is because I realize that for many middle class families, this is the only way to make college affordable. But I draw the line at throwing merit aid to a kid whose father can support “many kids.”</p>
<p>gotta stop writing walking away and coming back</p>
<p>what I meant to say was</p>
<p>Since money is not an issue and kid already knows that he has to go where his merits can take him, and no matter where he is accepted the parents will pay for college, maybe having son apply for scholarships is helping the student ‘put some skin in the game’ or be an active participant in the financing of his education. </p>
<p>While I understand why the parent may want the kid to “earn his way” I think that other things could be done with the $$ saved</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yabbut, “merit aid” has become a scam where private schools artificially inflate their tuitions above the level required to operate the institution so that they can then give “scholarships” as marketing discounts to candidates they want. “Merit scholarships” are not given as a way to allow kids to attend schools they couldn’t afford, they are come-ons offered to desirable prospects. Think of them as annual signing bonuses to athletes. Denying “merit aid” to academically superior “rich kids” would be like an NCAA Division 1 college basing their athletic scholarships on a combination of physical skills and financial need. It just doesn’t make sense.</p>
<p>If the “needs based” aid pool was reduced to fund the “merit aid” pool I suppose I would feel differently, but I doubt that is the case. I welcome proof to the contrary.</p>
<p>Most outside scholarships factor in need. For those that don’t, well–he’s not breaking any rules. I don’t understand the point about not wanting to give the colleges money, and I think it’s a little strange that the father is giving the kid equal money after graduation, but if it works for their family, then I don’t have a problem with it. I would have a problem if they went about this process dishonestly and somehow pretended as if they have less money than they actually do. As is, well, I don’t have any major qualms.</p>
<p>I don’t have a problem with it either. Should the fastest car accept the pole position for a race? Should the fastest runner accept the preferred lane? What message does it send when the scholarship is “merit but only if you’re not wealthy.” Besides, where do you draw the line? If you eliminate children of the wealthy do you also eliminate those whose wealthy parents decline to fund their education?</p>
<p>That said I do think it’s an unfortunate practice, but this ethical lament isn’t the student’s making and therefore shouldn’t be the student’s liability. JMHO.</p>
<p>That’s an interesting question. </p>
<p>If they are merit scholarships, then it follows that many of the competitors might not have documented need. But each of us probably has our own internal meter that says it is “fine” for somebody of X income to receive a merit scholarship, and well, sort of “ok” for somebody with X<em>2 income, and obscene for somebody with X</em>100 to receive a merit scholarship. </p>
<p>And no matter what your associate’s income, he may be teaching his kid a valuable lesson that money does not grow on trees.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Really, it looks like the dad thinks the money goes on the trees belonging to the college which he hopes his kid will attent but to which he does not want to give any money.</p>
<p>I purposely did not steer my kids toward merit money because we can afford to pay full fare (having worked hard in order to do so–no trust fund for us or them) and we know other kids need the money more. Silly me. I should have saved the money and put it toward my kids’ “future home” instead.</p>
<p>Sorry, this makes me gag.</p>
<p>“And no matter what your associate’s income, he may be teaching his kid a valuable lesson that money does not grow on trees.”</p>
<p>The kid could sweep some floors, hand out meals in the soup kitchen, or get a real job. I mean, isn’t this elitism on top of elitism? Dad doesn’t require junior to contribute anything to his own education, but if junior wins a scholarship (so that dad can brag about it), dad will buy him a condo? </p>
<p>Some lesson.</p>
<p>Marite, my first response was exactly yours, I do not want my money paying his tuition as a full payer and donor.</p>
<p>Yet he is a great kid and a fabulous student and deserves to be recognized. He’s a very top student at a very top high school. Also, rich athletes do get money at many schools.</p>
<p>Mini is correct. Jr. willl not be working a work study job. He is applying for outside scholarships as well as to top schools offering merit scholarships.</p>
<p>Dad is a financier and he looks to leverage everything. It’s an intellectual game to him as far as my guess goes. In addition to a salary of more than a feww million/yr it is a very wealthy family.</p>
<p>And how is this any more or less ethical than families whose parents barely eek out a living in order to “fulfill themselves”–so that the schools get to “pay to get their kid?”</p>
<p>One parent grinds to make money and takes money from the school–which he gives his kid in the end.</p>
<p>One parent “fulfills himself”, and also takes money from the school, leaving no money for his kid in the end.</p>
<p>Both intellectual games.</p>
<p>Which is more ethical.</p>
<p>I’m with Mini and Marite on this one.</p>
<p>Well, fabulous students have all sorts of ways of being recognized–if recognition is what they seek–that do not ental withholding money from colleges they are attending. Is the kid going to walk around with “I got a full ride to XXX” on his forehead?</p>
<p>Washdad: Yes, I think about this issue quite a bit, too. I don’t have the figures to argue that getting rid of merit money would make college more affordable to everyone, including those who depend on merit money. So, I’m refraining from making that case.</p>
<p>I tend to agree that this seems greedy, or at least ethically questionable. My family is certainly not as well-off as these people are, but we are a non finaid family that can truly afford the price tag of these colleges, though not without any sacrifices. I applied for a single relatively small private scholarship ($1500), because it was quite narrow in scope (German students in my area looking to continue their German studies in college), and we are not so rich that I should pass up scholarships that practically fall into my lap. If this makes my family greedy, then we have a fight on our hands. </p>
<p>However, I am certainly not looking to suck up scholarship money left and right from those who really need it–many of my friends are in an understandable scholarship frenzy right now, and I have no desire to expend extra effort to take money away from them and others who could really use it. </p>
<p>The merit thing is also questionable. Of course, my parents would be happy to take the $10,000 rebate that NYU is offering me, if I decide to attend, but it is admittedly money that we don’t really need that NYU–which is, as I am sure many here know, notoriously stingy with finaid–could have given to another family who really needs it. In my case, however, it just isn’t enough for me to go there if I decide that I don’t want to. Personally, I find the perks of the honors program as or more attractive than the merit money. I wouldn’t say that I would feel bad taking the scholarship money–I didn’t apply for it–but my family feels, as do many on here, that we want to pay our money to college to help those who need the money attend.</p>
<p>“Which is more ethical.”</p>
<p>I don’t have ANY ethical problems with wealthy folks applying for merit scholarships (though I hope they don’t get 'em. ;))</p>
<p>My problem is with the lesson the father thinks he’s teaching his kid.</p>
<p>Each family teachs children different valuable lessons. I went alone with my DD2 when she only applied to one early action school, as she was fairly confident that she will get in and she didn’t want to occupy additional spot. Later when she was awarded merit-based free-ride from school (and additional out-of-school merit award) which she was automatically considered, she urged us to donate a summer research fellowship from her fund. By the way, I believe that she already learned that money does not grow on trees.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I don’t mind subsidizing genius or great talent–whatever makes the university better. My alumni donations subsidize salaries for star professors.</p>