I am an idiot: Next year I will have three kids at expensive private colleges in non-technical majors

Who's complaining? My point is that sending kids to college involves sacrifice even for those of us fortunate enough to be near the upper end of the income scale.

FWIW, I did not come from wealth, and I didn't experience much in the way of prosperity until I was in my late 30s.

Just going to be honest wrote:

You guys don't understand its relative. Someone making 350k a year can be in a worse financial situation than someone making 50k.

You shouldn't comment on people lives. There are people making millions that are getting sued by everyone and declare bankruptcy.

Stop acting ignorant.

all because of their own choices....

Someone making 350k a year will not be in a worse finanacial situation than someone making 50k unless they made some terrible choices.

The whole point is the guy who said he made 150k a year said he was lower middle class and was complaining about how hard his life was. He is a moron who really doesn't have any perspective on how the average American truly lives and needs to keep his ignorant statements to himself.

Stinky McCheesefart wrote:Who's complaining? My point is that sending kids to college involves sacrifice even for those of us fortunate enough to be near the upper end of the income scale.

FWIW, I did not come from wealth, and I didn't experience much in the way of prosperity until I was in my late 30s.

I notice you ignored my car question.

Do your kids realize you'll be paying for their school until they're 32?

I don't know if you're parent of the year or a serious enabler.

bruinfan wrote:

I notice you ignored my car question.

Do your kids realize you'll be paying for their school until they're 32?

I don't know if you're parent of the year or a serious enabler.

We drive two 2007 model year sedans purchased used.

Yes, my kid understand that we will be paying for a decade. A highlight of my weekend was my daughter taking me aside to tell me how much she appreciates the opportunity she has. My hope is that my children will do the same for theirs.

...and yes, I'm enabling them. I'm enabling them to get the best education money can buy. Is it worth it? I believe it is. I hope it is.

The "best education money can buy" is kind of over played. In our state (average size, lower cost of living, true) the most expensive public school is ~12,500 a year and is a top 25 school. 12,500 is, if memory serves, one of the most expensive public schools in the nation. I attended the school and the teaching was terrible; such a big university was so focused on research that the actual instruction took a back seat.Now I took extra classes at a much less prestigious university partly because money was tight; it had small classes and great professors. It costs roughly 9,000 a year.You can't pay for knowledge; I would wager that the vast majority of what we learn in college is due to hard work. It might help a *tiny* bit having a big name professor helping you, but there better be small class sizes because it can be hard getting personal instruction.I know people that are attending some of the most expensive (literally) colleges in the nation for 40,000 or so a year. They will probably never amount to anything since they are spoiled and lazy. (these colleges are not ivy leagues but universities that you probably have never heard of) You can't buy success.You sleep in the bed you make; if you really want to send your kids to private schools that cost 30,000 a year or whatever, it is your choice. A lot of posters are getting annoyed when you say that you make 150,000 gross and that it is not that great. 150,000 gross is roughly 90,000 net. Could you have taken another job that paid slightly less but was in a cheaper area? In our neck of the woods we have some of the most highly rated public schools in the nation and 300,000 buys a BIG house. Heck, 200,000 buys a house in a nice location. Safe, great educational system, and even lakes around here.If most people can survive on 50,000 gross or whatever,you can definitely make do on 150,000 gross.

Stinky McCheesefart wrote:

...and yes, I'm enabling them. I'm enabling them to get the best education money can buy. Is it worth it? I believe it is. I hope it is.

Our state is not a "boonies" state, to clarify. Its definitely not California but its not uber cheap. There are ways to be creative in building your wealth. I do commend you on buying used cars, though it depends what kind of sedans you bought! A 7 series BMW can be 60,000 if bought certified used. Big difference from a Chevy Malibu (which does have the top IIHS safety rating) which can be found for 12,000 for a low mileage 2008 certified used model.

chinocochino wrote:

The "best education money can buy" is kind of over played..

I do think it's possible to get a good education just about anywhere if you're motivated and work hard. That said, there's no comparing the quality of undergraduate education between Giant State University and Small Top Notch LAC, where the average class size is 10, especially in this era of continual cut backs to public education.

Going back into the earlier posts... I'm a freshie from SJSU. I was an engr major and now I'm undeclared and planning to go into business (also plan to walk-on to their xc team next year). In 1.5 years or 2(depending who accepts spring transfers), I plan to transfer out. But apparently my parents don't support my decision of studying business. I think it's because of their ego and money, but at the same time they want the best of me. Since they don't support it, I am 98% sure that I'll have to pay my own tuition, but Idgaf because it's my life. They have paid first semester tuition, but I might start paying next semester... we'll see..

Overall, to all lets run readers or posters.. its up to the kid's decision(but thats my view). Because they have to go to work everyday. And if they study what they don't want to study.. then they're gonna get owned or studying that degree and doing something different after wards is a waste of time... plus thats because they don't study something non technical it doesn't mean they are gonna be failures in life...

Stinky McCheesefart wrote:

...and yes, I'm enabling them. I'm enabling them to get the best education money can buy. Is it worth it? I believe it is. I hope it is.

Hi Stinky,

I have enjoyed your posts on this topic. out of curiosity, what do you do for a living/career?

What planet are you living on? I would like to live on it. Tax on the top end is 25-28% Federal, 9.3% state ... throw in SS which I will never see the value from it and all of the little other nick nacks they take out and you get close to 45%. You can't protect the top end from the full force of taxes. No deductions or anything can be applied to shield the top end unless you are really gaming it.

I am not trying to make people feel bad about the $150K family income, but just pointing out that it's far from rich. The gap between the rich and everyone else is widening and getting wider. You need to fall into the top 2-3% these days. Sure, 30-40 years ago, the lower end of the top 10% could buy you a nice home and a vacation home and lots of vacations, but that's not the case these days.

I can't come close to duplicating what my dad was able to do with just one job in the family 30-40 years ago on 1/3 the income ($50K). Those days are gone. It's funny most people can't see how they are getting slowly screwed over by this ponzi economy and dollar system held captive by the banking system...and they are bickering about some smuck making $150K like that's a big deal.

150,000 gross is roughly 90,000 net with 40% lost to taxes. Its very misleading to just quote the highest tax bracket that you are in; its far from the effective tax rate."Rich" or "wealthy" are definitely dependent on where you live and what your lifestyle "needs" are. That said, most people can choose to live in a lower cost area or have a cheaper house and car.However, making 90,000 net is still a very comfortable living for most people in this country. I know engineers work hard in college and out in the workforce so their actual salary may or may not be commensurate with the work put in. That said, the absolute salary is still very solid for most.Personally, I don't consider 150,000 gross or even 300,000 gross to be "rich." I consider "rich" to be top end professional athletes making 5+ million a year or successful business owners. However, I'll be financially independent whether I make 50,000 or 500,000 because I have few lifestyle "needs." Wealth does give you more options, however. Options are good.

This thread is interesting to me. On one hand, you have the exaggeration that 150K plus is lower middle class, yet on the other hand you have people who also have no clue that income is relative to a region.

My wife and I gross maybe 165k per year, live in a modest 1200 sq ft townhouse in Montgomery County, MD. After taxes, maxing out our Roth IRAs and 401Ks, paying our mortgage, etc. there really isn't much left each month. I guarantee we live less lavishly than the average middle class family. My car is 14 years old.

I am not complaining about any of this, just pointing out that some of you have no clue about relative cost of living. We could live in a palace in Texas for a lot less money than what we pay now.

As to the OP, this is what I plan to do with my kids - tell them from a very early age that you will fund their education up to the cost of tuition plus room and board at their state school and anything above that they will need to pay. I fund the max in the education IRA so hopefully that will cover it.

Calgary Stampede wrote:

This thread is interesting to me.

Me too. There have been some really interesting points and a downright unletsrun-like quantity of complete paragraphs. I'm personally more interested in the conversation about what a college degree is worth and what majors are the best ones and how parents should incentivize certain majors/school choice, and don't really care about what income brackets are what "class." Some further reading on the general state of college education in America if anybody is interested and has 30 minutes to read:

1) Well, others have told you that you shouldn't have paid so much to send them to school. I'll agree with them.

That's it pretty much...just the one point.

This thread makes me feel very fortunate.

I live in Canada and will be graduating from one of the top 100 universities in the WORLD...

at a total cost of 50k for all 4 years, and literally will include everything

tuition, room, books, housing, food money and every associated cost.

oh, and I didnt get a single scholarship.

Ok cool wrote:

This thread makes me feel very fortunate.

I live in Canada and will be graduating from one of the top 100 universities in the WORLD...

at a total cost of 50k for all 4 years, and literally will include everything

tuition, room, books, housing, food money and every associated cost.

oh, and I didnt get a single scholarship.

Socialist!

Running Faja wrote:

To g4asdsdds:

If you'd agree that more selective schools typically cost more money than less selective schools, then that is exactly what the study suggests (suggesting that going to Skidmore, which is more expensive yet less selective than Harvard, is clearly an anomoly).

So let's not digress: The study suggests that if you have a child that could get into an Ivy, and they turn it down for a less selective school (=less expensive school) it will probably have no impact on their lifetime earnings...so you are not "short-changing" your child if you choose this approach.

Now back to the Jets....

You are clearly completely misunderstanding the study. TUITION COST IS CORRELLATED WITH LATER WAGE EARNINGS! This means NO MATTER WHAT ELSE, the more expensive the school, the MORE MONEY YOU WILL MAKE later in life. What the study says is that selectivity, BY ITSELF (i.e. NOT taking cost differences into account) does NOT affect wage earnings.

So if you compare two schools that cost the same amount of money (say two liberal arts colleges with $50,000 tuition +room/board), THEN selectivity has NO effect on wage earnings. But if you compare two equally selective schools with a difference in cost (i.e. a liberal arts college at $50,000 vs. a good state school at $25,000), then there IS a SIGNIFICANT benefit by attending the MORE COSTLY school.

It makes sense—it's like investment in R&D in a business. More money in now means more payoff later. But anyways, you are making the wrong conclusions from this study (hope you weren't a science major). The point is, selectivity alone does not affect later wages, but tuition cost DOES, and so if you are telling your kid to go to a cheaper school (independent of whether it is more or less selective!) you ARE short-changing him or her if they have the opportunity to go to a more expensive school.

Too many people focus on tuition and not on the bottom line, which is wealth creation. (if we are only talking about finances)You may have free tuition but what will you make when you get out? In medical school, a lot of schools give you "free" education but make very little compared to the US. Conversely, us medical professionals in the US will be in debt ~200,000 after school but it is WELL worth it later on. Punch the numbers; your situation is probably worse than in the US.

Ok cool wrote:

This thread makes me feel very fortunate.

I live in Canada and will be graduating from one of the top 100 universities in the WORLD...

at a total cost of 50k for all 4 years, and literally will include everything

tuition, room, books, housing, food money and every associated cost.

oh, and I didnt get a single scholarship.