<p>I wish people would not dream up hypothetical scenarios to justify this particular parent’s strategy. I have not made a blanket statement.</p>
<p>If someone needs the money to buy a minivan for his disabled child, then by all means, request financial aid, in whatever form it comes. </p>
<p>I am specifically referring to the parent in this particular thread who is described as making “several millions dollars per year.”
In my book, in anybody’s book,this must qualify as super-rich. A saving of $200k over four years is nothing compared to an income of $10millions+ for that same period. Wouldn’t you agree? That income should cover the cost of a few minivans and even a McMansion or two.</p>
<p>“The cold war is over, your side lost. Merit aid is a vehicle for colleges to buy a valuable input into the educational process: bright students. It is no more unethical for his son to apply for merit aid than it is for anyone to sell something of value in the marketplace.”</p>
<p>I don’t know who “Mimi” is, and since I APPROVE of merit aid, I don’t know what you are talking about. To my way of thinking, ALL aid is merit aid - if they want to lease my kids, they should pay for the privilege. Except they don’t pay - it is all “tuition discount”. </p>
<p>But I think the lesson the father is giving to his son is nothing short of despicable. It’s not the son’s fault, or the agency giving the scholarship, or the school offering the merit aid. That’s another issue entirely. Rather it is one of entitlement piled on top of elitism - attitude, not money, mind you - that I find wholly obnoxious.</p>
<p>(And I subsidize the millionaires’ kids every year at my alma mater through my measly alumni contribution, and am happy to do it.)</p>
<p>All of you can dislike the practices of other families as much as you like, but you must consider the other side.</p>
<p>I find this is rather similar to donating to charities. Is a rich person entitled to donate a certain portion of their income to charities just because people who are not rich – possibly you – donate? The college will be fine with or without the money from this family, the only ones hurt are those students who need the scholarship more than the rich kid does. However, giving money to students who “need” it is the objective of need based scholarships, not merit ones.</p>
<p>As for giving money to the student for a future house, how can this be a bad idea? Keeping money within the family, not giving it away to others, is how a family becomes rich. Why pay a company to move your belongings if you could ask or even pay your cousins? Who would you rather help out, some random stranger, or a person that you would like to see succeed? These are rhetorical questions by the way, as I’m sure someone will say “I think the poor people working for the moving company should get my money” which may not even be the case.</p>
<p>If you decide to save money for eighteen years so that your child can attend college anywhere, and make the choice that merit scholarships should be only for those who need them – meaning not your child – then you’re free to do so. However, don’t blame the people who are actually concerned with getting ahead financially. You might not understand their thinking, but not everyone is as concerned with the welfare of others as some of the people here are.</p>
<p>So, if we are all so concerned about affordability of college, why aren’t we doing something concrete about it? How about a state law restricting the maximum tuition charged by not-for-profit instructional institutions? How about a boycott for colleges that charge too much? All this focus on “merit scholarships” and “athletic scholarships” and related kickbacks and discounts is covering up the fact that colleges as a class have raised prices at a rate faster than the oil companies that are so regularly excoriated in the US. Why do greed-sucking colleges get a pass and other enterprises don’t?</p>
<p>Once we all get it in our heads that colleges and universities are businesses without stockholders the sooner it will make sense. Institutionally, these enterprises are not your friend, and care a lot more about perpetuating their existence than fulfilling a mission. If you have any question about the real nature of college administration, I recommend serving on an alumni board or earning a PhD. (I’ll make an exception here for colleges with unusually low or free tuition. They aren’t hypocrites.) For example, if Harvard is so concerned about higher education, why don’t they donate part of their endowment to other colleges that can’t fully fund the need of students at those schools? My theory is that they care more about Harvard than about students. This not to say that they don’t also care about students, only that educating young people is only a focus in the narrow context of being a part of meeting their institutional goals.</p>
<p>We just paid our EFC-
I expect to do the same for D # 2.</p>
<p>If someone who can afford it- wants to apply for scholarships why not?
Many scholarships have an element of need involved- but if he does find some he qualifies for, he should go for it.</p>
<p>I don’t agree with how the parent is raising him & I know that other families of equal income don’t necessarily have the same priorities- but I know lots of lower income families who are doing a pretty crappy job- too
being able to procreate doesn’t mean you will be a wise parent</p>
<p>WashDad: If anyone has an issue with the price of private colleges, they can just choose to attend a public one. Many of the most expensive colleges have relatively little draw to people outside of New England, so I guess you could pass some state laws if you wish, but it just seems pretty inconsequential.</p>
<p>Concerning Harvard looking after Harvard rather than the students, I hope this isn’t surprising for anyone. Finding any organization or group of people that is truly altruistic is quite difficult.</p>
<p>I think that such a rich dad may need to be careful. How many millions and sons does he have? Given choices, he might worry about matching the kid to the “best” school (“true” education, experience and graduation success). The biggest names or the biggest offers may not be the best choice. If such a student drops out of the wrong school the first month or year, no victory. If the son screws up (some schools are pretty easy to blow it) and loses the merit award at a school he doesn’t love, what then? It is an interesting exercise, a lot of work on (re)bids, hope the son makes a good choice. My kids focused on school fit, I watched the cash and debt. Only one school choice was nixed by us for finances (post freshman fin’l aid quoted as “like giving birth to a Volvo”, the freshman package caused us stress, too). Both my wife and I were quite concerned about the school otherwise also. So we supported another close favorite of our student that we really liked and they really liked the kid, treated <em>very</em> well first 3 years. </p>
<p>Done right, the son’s exercise is interesting but should be kept under advisory.</p>
<p>Washdad:
I tried to run some figures based on what I found on the Harvard website. Bear in mind that while people talk about Harvard’s $30 billion endowment, much of it is not available to the College; furthermore, Harvard is not the only school with $45k tuition; there are many unis and LACs that are far less well endowed and charge the same amount. Sarah Lawrence College comes to mind.
Not knowing how much Harvard could save in other areas, I will be using tuition income alone. Harvard claims that it spends $86 million per year on financial aid; presumably this is on undergraduates. There are roughly 6,500 undergrads, of whom 1/4 or about 1,600 receive a full ride. This amounts to $72 millions per year. A further 1/3 or so of the students receive some financial aid. I calculate that this second group receives roughly $14 millions.
This second group is the one which would benefit from an across the board reduction in tuition, since the full-ride students have family income of $60k or less per year and could not afford to attend Harvard even on a slightly reduced tuition. So the $72 millions used to cover their full rides needs to continue being earmarked for that purpose. The $14 millions, spread among 4,900 undergrads would yield only a saving of less than $2,100.
Of course, Harvard and other colleges could save in other areas and charge the same costs as state universities. But they might need to resemble state universities in terms of size, offerings and amenities. While some are excellent, many are not. Our state uni is, unfortunately, among the latter.</p>
to me this thought is at the heart of the discussion … and we do not know the true answer to the question. And my guess points the other direction … that schools are first deciding how much money to give for aid and then the split between merit and need based aid … if true having a smaller pot for need based aid is the big “con” of merit programs. We don’t know the true suituation about the connection of the budgets of need and merit based aid but I can’t imagine a budget discussion that works taking any other approach.</p>
<p>I could probably go either way on the dad giving $ to the kid for getting the scholarships, but I am big-time in favor of merit scholarships and I don’t care if the family is rich or not. I compare this to athletic scholarships and my blood starts boiling. If schools can justify spending boatloads on athletic scholarships, then I think they should be required to spend the same or more on merit scholarships for non-athletes. The emphasis on sports is out of control at too many schools. Sports has a place in college life, but not to where it crowds out other areas of student excellence that should be attracted and rewarded via merit money.</p>
<p>Using the figures for Harvard (which does not award merit aid), if $14 millions that were used for merit aid at a university of comparable size were no longer earmarked for that purpose, families that paid full fare or received need-based aid would only lower their costs by around $2,100.<br>
with this in mind, I don’t blame universities for using merit aid to attract students who might otherwise go elsewhere.<br>
I really was questioning the ethics of the millionnaire father in this case. But I have been reminded by posters that some families put the accent on getting ahead in life.</p>
I hear you … that said, however small the relief would be for for familes with greater financial need to attend I’d prefer that all aid go to those families. (and hawk, yes, I also wish the monsy spent on athletic scholarships was funneled into financial aid also).</p>
<p>Marite’s comment that " . . . they might need to resemble state universities in terms of size, offerings and amenities. While some are excellent, many are not. Our state uni is, unfortunately, among the latter" is worth noting.</p>
<p>With the ever-rising costs of university tuition, this is where I think people should be putting their energy, time, and angst. If your own state university is “among the latter,” then those people who pay taxes in those states, should start working to demand a better state university system, in my opinion. For those people who can afford full freight at a university such as Harvard, to ignore the real issues of others in your state who have neither the good fortune to be able to afford $200K+ for an undergraduate education, nor have a fine state university they’d be proud to attend, well–this is what’s shameful. For everyone in a state in that same situation, I’d suggest putting your energy, focus, and expertise on improving that state university system. That would ultimately help a lot more people and have a much more positive, and probably longer-lasting impact, than eliminating merit or athletic scholarships.</p>
<p>The best “lesson” for a kid, imo, is to see his parents work hard and sacrifice to save money for their child’s education.</p>
<p>I fail to see why a family who has made other choices (i.e. taking a less stressful and demanding job in order to travel, or choosing a lesser-paying job for “fulfillment,” or who are just plain unwilling to adequately support their own families, and who therefore may be eligible to receive full-rides for their kids) is any more ethical than the millionaire’s family. </p>
<p>In fact, it sounds to me that the father may be using this tactic in order to get his son to work at his greatest level of ability. In that case, I would actually tip the ethics meter favorably in his direction over some ivy-educated parents I know who have lived in exotic locations with their kids and done interesting and exciting things with their lives (while earning very little money), so that their kids are practically shoe-ins for need-based aid at elite American institutions. Frankly, I view this as a lesson in selfishness.</p>
<p>Of course, people will use mental gymnastics all day long to justify their own choices.</p>
<p>“ALL aid is merit aid.” Aid given to people for being of Latvian origin is “merit”? Interesting concept. To define all aid as “merit aid” is to deprive the word of meaning. I guess that is your intent.</p>
<p>I see nothing at all wrong with the wealthy applying for scholarships. If a child has worked hard throughout his academic career and done well, why would they not deserve the same academic scholarship opportunities as anyone else? When it comes to academic scholarships, I don’t believe a family’s financial situation should come into play at all.</p>
<p>“In fact, it sounds to me that the father may be using this tactic in order to get his son to work at his greatest level of ability. In that case, I would actually tip the ethics meter favorably in his direction over some ivy-educated parents I know who have lived in exotic locations with their kids and done interesting and exciting things with their lives (while earning very little money), so that their kids are practically shoe-ins for need-based aid at elite American institutions. Frankly, I view this as a lesson in selfishness.”</p>
<p>Yup, those missionaries, Peace Corps volunteers, NGO affiliated people- terribly selfish every one. The most selfish person I know is on his way to Iraq for an emergency food relief program. Sure selfish of him to waste his Ivy league education- not like those Investment Bankers. </p>
<p>Get off the judgemental chair and use your heart as well as your brain.</p>