Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Do your kids qualify for needs-based financial aid for college?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by ENT Doc View Post

    Apply the concept to other aspects of life. Grocery store gets your tax return and charges you $25 for steak and $2 to someone else. Your Civic? $35k. $8k for someone else. It’s de facto communism. The system breaks down. And we’re not talking about a $5 difference. This is tens of thousands - maybe hundreds of thousands - we’re talking about. Travesty seems like a weak description to me.
    As you describe yourself as a lover of freedom, I'd think that at least as far as private colleges are concerned, you would think that they should be free to charge whoever they want whatever they want to.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by AR View Post

      As you describe yourself as a lover of freedom, I'd think that at least as far as private colleges are concerned, you would think that they should be free to charge whoever they want whatever they want to.
      Without overt discrimination, yeah.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by AR View Post

        As you describe yourself as a lover of freedom, I'd think that at least as far as private colleges are concerned, you would think that they should be free to charge whoever they want whatever they want to.
        So many snarky ways to respond, none of which are politically correct!

        Yes, allow folks to make a business decision.

        Comment


        • #34
          It is best to simply distinguish between need-based and merit aid. We have two entering college this fall, expected zero need-based aid and received zero. However, Child 1 did receive competitive merit aid packages and is attending private school x for 32K annually instead of 64K thanks to merit aid. One private school the Child 1 applied to required FAFSA to be considered for any merit aid, so we filled it out and submitted. They came back with zero need-based as expected and a competitive merit aid package. If you have high income, and or large taxable, investment property...chances for need-based are slim to none.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by ENT Doc View Post

            Without overt discrimination, yeah.
            Whoa, there. You mean to tell me that people shouldn't be free to discriminate? And who should stop them from doing that? The government?

            I'm beginning to think you don't love freedom as much as you claim to.

            Comment


            • #36
              Access to private college education is one area where I believe there's a significant unequal access too that need based scholarships are warranted. I was fortunate enough to be born into a successful family as was my daughter. Other families -- not so much.

              While it hurts me to pay full tuition for private education while the needs based person next my child maybe getting a fully ride for the same-- I'm good with that for education. That said, that student has to be on par in every other way with my child. Merit entry criteria are not altered in any fashion.

              great example is My High School Alma Mater has an program -- Horizons Upward Bound -- that paid full ride scholarships, room and board, to ten students from underserved, 1st generation college bound kids. As a border, I would say I benefited as much from that program as the HUB recipient. They certainly made me a better person living and learning with them over my fours years there.

              ....and this is when I'm about to cut a $50,000 tuition check end of the month ---

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by AR View Post

                Whoa, there. You mean to tell me that people shouldn't be free to discriminate? And who should stop them from doing that? The government?

                I'm beginning to think you don't love freedom as much as you claim to.
                Give me a break. This isn’t just at private universities - it occurs at public universities as well. You aren’t discerning between different types of discrimination with your argument. We discriminate in benign ways on a daily basis - applying personal choices, for example. And then there are ways of discriminating that violate a neutral standard that start getting into uglier territory. And no I don’t think the government should be setting up a system to inspire the latter.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by ENT Doc View Post

                  Apply the concept to other aspects of life. Grocery store gets your tax return and charges you $25 for steak and $2 to someone else. Your Civic? $35k. $8k for someone else. It’s de facto communism. The system breaks down. And we’re not talking about a $5 difference. This is tens of thousands - maybe hundreds of thousands - we’re talking about. Travesty seems like a weak description to me.
                  Hmmm. You have heard of government programs that are by designed to pay things for people based on their tax returns.
                  Food for the family, housing, and get this “free medical care”. Even free public education charges a higher tax for the same square footage because it is “worth more” ((location, location, location). Are you surprised that earnings or wealth is a factor? Yes, you pay more for the steak in the grocery store. Farm subsidies. Taxes as well as college tuition have wealth redistribution baked in. The question is what is the fair share and the mechanism.
                  Not a rant, just direct and indirect costs are unequally distributed.

                  ”And no I don’t think the government should be setting up a system to inspire the latter.”
                  Possibly the unintended consequences of another government program. A student cannot control family finances. Should money be a barrier to college education? EFC was designed for a mechanism for family, which has primary skin in the game, not to be a financial barrier for a student. Unfortunately, eliminating this skin in the game means “free college for all” if everyone pays the same price (some can’t pay). Indirectly, who pays?
                  Last edited by Tim; Yesterday, 01:49 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Tim View Post

                    Hmmm. You have heard of government programs that are by designed to pay things for people based on their tax returns.
                    Food for the family, housing, and get this “free medical care”. Even free public education charges a higher tax for the same square footage because it is “worth more” ((location, location, location). Are you surprised that earnings or wealth is a factor? Yes, you pay more for the steak in the grocery store. Farm subsidies. Taxes as well as college tuition have wealth redistribution baked in. The question is what is the fair share and the mechanism.
                    Not a rant, just direct and indirect costs are unequally distributed.
                    I fully realize that there’s a societal balance between providing what’s “right” and doing it in a fair manner. I understand why you have governmental programs that provide for food and healthcare coverage. My opinion is that going to college is in a different level entirely from allowing for a basic standard of living/decency. The current college system is ludicrous.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by ENT Doc View Post

                      I fully realize that there’s a societal balance between providing what’s “right” and doing it in a fair manner. I understand why you have governmental programs that provide for food and healthcare coverage. My opinion is that going to college is in a different level entirely from allowing for a basic standard of living/decency. The current college system is ludicrous.
                      Not a personal debate and limiting it to just finances, the broad goal is to provide “upward mobility” path to breakdown class/wealth barriers. Not basic, but “you can be anything”.
                      That “American Dream” is important from the student perspective.
                      The Universities have abused the loopholes to subsidize “non-revenue” higher education with the productive higher education raising the total cost. I see pass through of costs in general rather than a motive to provide productive higher education. It’s screwed up for sure.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Tim View Post

                        Not a personal debate and limiting it to just finances, the broad goal is to provide “upward mobility” path to breakdown class/wealth barriers. Not basic, but “you can be anything”.
                        That “American Dream” is important from the student perspective.
                        The Universities have abused the loopholes to subsidize “non-revenue” higher education with the productive higher education raising the total cost. I see pass through of costs in general rather than a motive to provide productive higher education. It’s screwed up for sure.
                        And I get all that too. But the value of a degree is completely detached from its price. And not all degrees of the same institution have the same value (think STEM vs some humanities major). If you priced things off value or, better yet, put the schools on the hook for funding the education and receipt of subsequent payback (as a % of income) you better believe you’d see more appropriate pricing. Same would hold true in medicine.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by ENT Doc View Post

                          And I get all that too. But the value of a degree is completely detached from its price. And not all degrees of the same institution have the same value (think STEM vs some humanities major). If you priced things off value or, better yet, put the schools on the hook for funding the education and receipt of subsequent payback (as a % of income) you better believe you’d see more appropriate pricing. Same would hold true in medicine.
                          Thank you for succinctly clarifying my point. Some higher education is a “luxury purchase”, a once in a lifetime experience that the cost is not paid for directly. A lack of accountability on the universities.
                          The only university (anecdotal) I every saw go through a top to bottom housekeeping and eliminating classes, majors, programs and departments was Tulane post-Katrina. It was survival, cut out the fluff. Government and students and alumni weren’t going to bail them out. No choice.
                          Life in the non-profit world is different.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Tim View Post

                            Thank you for succinctly clarifying my point. Some higher education is a “luxury purchase”, a once in a lifetime experience that the cost is not paid for directly. A lack of accountability on the universities.
                            The only university (anecdotal) I every saw go through a top to bottom housekeeping and eliminating classes, majors, programs and departments was Tulane post-Katrina. It was survival, cut out the fluff. Government and students and alumni weren’t going to bail them out. No choice.
                            Life in the non-profit world is different.
                            The idea has been out there. Schools need to be held more accountable. But so should students who take out exorbitant debt who have little intent or capacity (due to major/job choice) to pay it back.

                            https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bro...tudents/%3famp

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by ENT Doc View Post

                              The idea has been out there. Schools need to be held more accountable. But so should students who take out exorbitant debt who have little intent or capacity (due to major/job choice) to pay it back.

                              https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bro...tudents/%3famp
                              Add to this the “degree requirements” that universities put out that are intended only to require a student to take a class in that department. Why? So they have a revenue base to support a useless “major”. I have no problem with a broad based requirement for a degree. That runs up the bill for not the students benefit, but the university. Fine arts is great for exposure. Make no mistake, the Dept chair wants to “build a legacy”.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                There is a nice boglehead podcast that just came out about alot of this college issues. I wish I heard it before paying for 4 college educations for my kids. It explains needs based vs "merit" based college discounts.

                                Nothing like spending $200,000 for college education so a kid can earn $40,000 / year with their major.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X