Is anyone else not saving or paying for college?

[Janepod]

One thing Id like to say. If kids aren't appreciating a financed education and their grades aren't good because their parents are paying for school, then the issue is in the parenting, NOT in the money.

Succinct and true.

 

[bettymae1121]

I don't understand where this notion came that a parent should delay their retirement or borrow on behalf of their children and go into debt to do it.

I don't plan on delaying retirement and still plan to pay for all or most of my DD's college education. Some people earn enough to fully fund retirement, enjoy life and still pay for college for their kid(s), either in whole or in part. If our income falls and we can't afford both, retirement is the priority and DD will have to make do. But if we can afford both we certainly will do so.

If you choose not to pay for your kid's college, even if you have the money to do so, knock yourself out. Just don't assume that those of us who do pay for it are working into our 90's or living off of cat food.

 

[gert]

One thing Id like to say. If kids aren't appreciating a financed education and their grades aren't good because their parents are paying for school, then the issue is in the parenting, NOT in the money.

Quoted for truth.

 

[sasywtch]

I just don't understand the perspective that parents should pay to their children's college education. Or that kids shouldn't have debt. When does it stop?

I think it's more of a generational type thing. In the 60's/70's I don't remember anyone's parents saving for college. Kids either went to the junior college for 2 years first, got scholarships or went into the Army. When I was growing up, 18 was adulthood.
When I had my first kids in the 70's, there was also no push for saving for college. Heck, most of us were finishing off our own college.

I noticed a huge change when I had my daughter in 1983. I got mailer after mailer on college education funds. I can remember those mailers and a lot of what they said was a guilt trip the same as some on here have mentioned. If you didn't save, you shouldn't have kids, I owe it to my kids, etc...notice they are no longer adults at 18 as these mailers call them kids. All of a sudden, parents were now suppose to pay off mortgages, buy new cars, save for retirement, save for college funds and make sure the kids had the same as all the other kids on the block. Having kids in the 60's and 70's was different than what I felt when I had one in the 80's and 1 in the 90's. Those that did not have kids over a 25 year period may not notice the difference. There was so much more pressure put upon me on the later two than the older 2. Those that grew up in the 80's and 90's are only seeing the previous guilt advertising that led to this belief that adults should be handed an education free of charge because it's their responsibility.

 

[Tinijocaro]

As my kid is in a sports program where 90% of the participants have received full ride scholarships, it will be encumbent on my child to be n that 90%. Or end up paying or earning their keep for college. Even if it means taking on debt or WORKING. A semester And attending a semester.

As I said our true hope will be for our kid to be an entrepreneur and not have to eventually work for anyone else. If others want to different for their children fine, but by asking this question I had HOPED to find like minded people and not contrarians, but that is ok.

It's great to say your kid must get scholarships, what if you kid ends up, down the road, just being average? Not all kids can get sports scholarships, no matter how badly their parents want them to.

Kids have minds of their own. It's nice to want these things for our kids but your kids are going to do what they want. Maybe one will want to be a teacher, or a hairdresser. You never know what your kids will end up doing and to assume they will be entrepreneurs because you want them to is naive.

 

[TXinmyheart]

I think it's more of a generational type thing. In the 60's/70's I don't remember anyone's parents saving for college. Kids either went to the junior college for 2 years first, got scholarships or went into the Army. When I was growing up, 18 was adulthood.
When I had my first kids in the 70's, there was also no push for saving for college. Heck, most of us were finishing off our own college.

I noticed a huge change when I had my daughter in 1983. I got mailer after mailer on college education funds. I can remember those mailers and a lot of what they said was a guilt trip the same as some on here have mentioned. If you didn't save, you shouldn't have kids, I owe it to my kids, etc...notice they are no longer adults at 18 as these mailers call them kids. All of a sudden, parents were now suppose to pay off mortgages, buy new cars, save for retirement, save for college funds and make sure the kids had the same as all the other kids on the block. Having kids in the 60's and 70's was different than what I felt when I had one in the 80's and 1 in the 90's. Those that did not have kids over a 25 year period may not notice the difference. There was so much more pressure put upon me on the later two than the older 2. Those that grew up in the 80's and 90's are only seeing the previous guilt advertising that led to this belief that adults should be handed an education free of charge because it's their responsibility.

Thank you for saying what I have been trying to say! I Agree hundred and 50% We feel absolutely no guilt by not paying for all of their college

 

[nchulka]

I think it's more of a generational type thing. In the 60's/70's I don't remember anyone's parents saving for college. Kids either went to the junior college for 2 years first, got scholarships or went into the Army. When I was growing up, 18 was adulthood.
When I had my first kids in the 70's, there was also no push for saving for college. Heck, most of us were finishing off our own college.

I noticed a huge change when I had my daughter in 1983. I got mailer after mailer on college education funds. I can remember those mailers and a lot of what they said was a guilt trip the same as some on here have mentioned. If you didn't save, you shouldn't have kids, I owe it to my kids, etc...notice they are no longer adults at 18 as these mailers call them kids. All of a sudden, parents were now suppose to pay off mortgages, buy new cars, save for retirement, save for college funds and make sure the kids had the same as all the other kids on the block. Having kids in the 60's and 70's was different than what I felt when I had one in the 80's and 1 in the 90's. Those that did not have kids over a 25 year period may not notice the difference. There was so much more pressure put upon me on the later two than the older 2. Those that grew up in the 80's and 90's are only seeing the previous guilt advertising that led to this belief that adults should be handed an education free of charge because it's their responsibility.

I absolutely agree with this. In general across the board ages seems to be changing. 25 is the new 18, 10 is the new 5 etc. I really hate it. This is the same reason we have post about taking 10 year old boys in the ladies room. Kids are babied considered "kids" way too long now!

 

[Ceila]

My spouse and I are looking forward to marriage 3.0 and have no problems traveling the world while our kid struggles after leaving home. I don't understand where this notion came that a parent should delay their retirement or borrow on behalf of their children and go into debt to do it.

While that may be OK in your book, it certainly is not in mine, and I personally find the bolded above to be quite sad. When my husband and I decided to have children, we took both our retirement as well as paying for their college educations into consideration. Both are equally important to us and we have planned for both. Of course, everyone is different, and obviously what is right for us is not right for everyone.

 

[mhsjax]

I think it's more of a generational type thing. In the 60's/70's I don't remember anyone's parents saving for college. Kids either went to the junior college for 2 years first, got scholarships or went into the Army. When I was growing up, 18 was adulthood.
When I had my first kids in the 70's, there was also no push for saving for college. Heck, most of us were finishing off our own college.

I noticed a huge change when I had my daughter in 1983. I got mailer after mailer on college education funds. I can remember those mailers and a lot of what they said was a guilt trip the same as some on here have mentioned. If you didn't save, you shouldn't have kids, I owe it to my kids, etc...notice they are no longer adults at 18 as these mailers call them kids. All of a sudden, parents were now suppose to pay off mortgages, buy new cars, save for retirement, save for college funds and make sure the kids had the same as all the other kids on the block. Having kids in the 60's and 70's was different than what I felt when I had one in the 80's and 1 in the 90's. Those that did not have kids over a 25 year period may not notice the difference. There was so much more pressure put upon me on the later two than the older 2. Those that grew up in the 80's and 90's are only seeing the previous guilt advertising that led to this belief that adults should be handed an education free of charge because it's their responsibility.

I had the exact opposite experience. I was born in the 60's and all of my friends parent's were saving and planning on sending their kids to college. There weren't actual savings plans that are available now, but our parents expected us to go to college. Some of us did, some of us didn't. Some only went for a couple of years, but we all were expected to go and the parents planning accordingly

They didn't walk around flaunting the fact that "they weren't paying for college" These kids may be babied more, but I can tell you that they are being held to a much higher standard scholastically that we ever were. I see parents every day that have college educations that look at what their kids are doing in school and saying they didn't do that until college or at the very least several grades higher than their child. I think we all need to get over" these kids are snowflakes and babies" attitudes. I am quite proud of most kids, they work harder and have more stress than we ever had. Just ask your local pediatrician, they will most likely tell you that the stress these kid encounter is through the roof and we need to get a handle on it. I do get so tired of parents acting like their generations was the end all be all. I guarantee you that your parents thought the same about your generation, they always do, they always will. Maybe our parents failed at being parents to us, if we are all raising little "snowflakes and babies" So I guess if parents are trying to keep up with the Joneses, by making sure their kids have everything that the others do, it is in fact the parents that are failing, not the kids. Just something to think about. We are so busy blaming the kids for being spoiled, well sweeties, it isn't the kids that are spoiling themselves, It is the parents. and if you are failing as a parent, then I guess your parents didn't do a great job of raising you. You in general, not you the poster.

 

[jodifla]

I think it's more of a generational type thing. In the 60's/70's I don't remember anyone's parents saving for college. Kids either went to the junior college for 2 years first, got scholarships or went into the Army. When I was growing up, 18 was adulthood.
When I had my first kids in the 70's, there was also no push for saving for college. Heck, most of us were finishing off our own college.

I noticed a huge change when I had my daughter in 1983. I got mailer after mailer on college education funds. I can remember those mailers and a lot of what they said was a guilt trip the same as some on here have mentioned. If you didn't save, you shouldn't have kids, I owe it to my kids, etc...notice they are no longer adults at 18 as these mailers call them kids. All of a sudden, parents were now suppose to pay off mortgages, buy new cars, save for retirement, save for college funds and make sure the kids had the same as all the other kids on the block. Having kids in the 60's and 70's was different than what I felt when I had one in the 80's and 1 in the 90's. Those that did not have kids over a 25 year period may not notice the difference. There was so much more pressure put upon me on the later two than the older 2. Those that grew up in the 80's and 90's are only seeing the previous guilt advertising that led to this belief that adults should be handed an education free of charge because it's their responsibility.

The difference isn't just the years...it's how fast the cost of college has risen. It's not "guilt advertising"....it's reality.

When I started college in '79, it was possible to pay for it on your own while working on the side. Now, it is NOT possible to work your way through college in most circumstances. An 18-year-old simply can't make enough to pay the tuition and other costs.

 

[anniemck]

DD 1 is 24, didn't decide until a month before graduation that she did indeed want to go to college. With that we did the paperwork, filled out the FASFA, and she applied for a scholarship that her fathers employer offers. This helped her and between the Pell Grant, Florida Grant and Scholarship, she will have her Bachelors this semester and has only taken one $3500 loan, this was for a internship to Ecuador. She has worked the entire time she has been in College, and at some points 2 jobs at the same time.

DD 2 is 22, knew what school she wanted to attend, applied in her senior year, was accepted and through a program she was in during high school she earned a 2 year scholarship. Add that to the Pell Grant, Florida Grant and Bright Futures, she was able to attend a great University for 2 years, earn her Associates Degree and this covered dorm, books, classes, everything except food. She would have finished her Bachelors at this same school, however she moved out of state 2 years ago, and will finish her Bachelors this semester having taken out loans 3 semesters, she had been making payments on the every month as well so that she does not have a ton of debt. She has also worked full time the whole time in college.

DD 3 is 21, will finish her Associates this semester, and works full time, actually went part time and did two semesters of the Disney College Program which she just came back home from 2 weeks ago.

My kids knew I was not going to be able to pay for them to attend college, heck; I am trying to put myself through college now, should finish my Associates in December.

Don't feel bad if you don't pay for your kids, mine have a stake in their education and are working hard to complete it. So far all three are A/B students and I am very pleased.

 

[jodifla]

DD 1 is 24, didn't decide until a month before graduation that she did indeed want to go to college. With that we did the paperwork, filled out the FASFA, and she applied for a scholarship that her fathers employer offers. This helped her and between the Pell Grant, Florida Grant and Scholarship, she will have her Bachelors this semester and has only taken one $3500 loan, this was for a internship to Ecuador. She has worked the entire time she has been in College, and at some points 2 jobs at the same time.

DD 2 is 22, knew what school she wanted to attend, applied in her senior year, was accepted and through a program she was in during high school she earned a 2 year scholarship. Add that to the Pell Grant, Florida Grant and Bright Futures, she was able to attend a great University for 2 years, earn her Associates Degree and this covered dorm, books, classes, everything except food. She would have finished her Bachelors at this same school, however she moved out of state 2 years ago, and will finish her Bachelors this semester having taken out loans 3 semesters, she had been making payments on the every month as well so that she does not have a ton of debt. She has also worked full time the whole time in college.

DD 3 is 21, will finish her Associates this semester, and works full time, actually went part time and did two semesters of the Disney College Program which she just came back home from 2 weeks ago.

My kids knew I was not going to be able to pay for them to attend college, heck; I am trying to put myself through college now, should finish my Associates in December.

Don't feel bad if you don't pay for your kids, mine have a stake in their education and are working hard to complete it. So far all three are A/B students and I am very pleased.

But basically in your case, it's the state of Florida that's filling in the parent role here with the Florida grant and scholarship, and paying a big chunk of their schooling.

I think that's great, but not everyone is lucky enough to live in Florida.

 

[gina2000]

I think it's more of a generational type thing. In the 60's/70's I don't remember anyone's parents saving for college. Kids either went to the junior college for 2 years first, got scholarships or went into the Army. When I was growing up, 18 was adulthood.
When I had my first kids in the 70's, there was also no push for saving for college. Heck, most of us were finishing off our own college.

I noticed a huge change when I had my daughter in 1983. I got mailer after mailer on college education funds. I can remember those mailers and a lot of what they said was a guilt trip the same as some on here have mentioned. If you didn't save, you shouldn't have kids, I owe it to my kids, etc...notice they are no longer adults at 18 as these mailers call them kids. All of a sudden, parents were now suppose to pay off mortgages, buy new cars, save for retirement, save for college funds and make sure the kids had the same as all the other kids on the block. Having kids in the 60's and 70's was different than what I felt when I had one in the 80's and 1 in the 90's. Those that did not have kids over a 25 year period may not notice the difference. There was so much more pressure put upon me on the later two than the older 2. Those that grew up in the 80's and 90's are only seeing the previous guilt advertising that led to this belief that adults should be handed an education free of charge because it's their responsibility.

You live in a different world than I do. I went to a top 25 university in the 70s. It was my parents' dream that I go away and go to a great univeristy. They struggled. They didn't have the money but they always put me first. And let me tell you...I appreciated it. I still do so much so that now my son is in a top 25 university and we are struggling to pay due to various reversals of fortune. I've been on cruises and I've been around the world. It ain't nothin' compared to the joy and satisfaction of giving someone you love an opportunity. And knowing that they understand how important that opportunity is and working hard to achieve the most and the best they can.

I notice that the article writer intends to pay for college for his/her students. I also notice that the differences cited in the article are small according to the author. I think it's hilarious that the author wrote the article and then admitted that his/her goal was markedly different than the information disseminated.

Sports scholarships? I think you are misinformed. Most sports scholarships are a percentage of total tuition unless you are underpriviledged and playing football. There is good money....but it won't cover an entire tuition unless you are extremely talented. And that's Division 1. Division 3 doesn't pay anything unless it's hidden in financial aid.

I have no problem with deciding to have a child work his/her way through college. I think it's unrealistic but it's your choice. But to rub in how much you are spending while your child is struggling is horrible.

 

[Brownsfan317]

I think it's more of a generational type thing.

Those that grew up in the 80's and 90's are only seeing the previous guilt advertising that led to this belief that adults should be handed an education free of charge because it's their responsibility.

I agree that it is generational, but I believe that is partially led by the evolution of our economy. Many positions that did not require a college degree or certification 20 or 30 years ago now do. Both of my parents have degrees, but growing up, the majority of my friends' parents did not have a degree. Many still had great jobs, they just did not require the degree.

I have seen several positions that have employees in the position without a degree, but if they leave/retire, the employer will fill with a person with a degree. There is preference in hiring those with a degree. I don't necessarily agree with it, but that is the way it is with many fields (not all!). In fact, I think many times employers make the wrong choice to pick a candidate with a degree over real world experience.

To give you an example, they wanted a receptionist in the office to field phone calls, light file work, making badges and setting up interviews. Minimum wage job -- they are asking for at least an Associate's Degree (back in 2004 it did not require the degree). I personally think they can find a candidate who can perform the job duties and not need the AD.

 

[Patience]

Now I know you're a troll.

Yes, I think so too.

 

[disykat]

I think it's interesting that the OP called me naive when I gave my experience of people I know who weren't going to help their kids with school changing their opinions and deciding to help them and why, (I know a lot of them since my kids are college aged) but she has now changed her mind and is just saying she won't pay for ALL of school.

She went from saying her kids were on their own for college to just wanting them to have some skin in the game - something that pretty much everyone on this thread agrees with.

OP, you're getting agreeable despite yourself!

 

[disykat]

Again, only my personal experience, but I hang out with a lot of parents of college aged kids in real life and all of us have some things in common.

*We all have kids who know how much school costs.
*We all have kids who did their research and tried to find scholarships, deals, etc. based on their individual situations.
*We all have kids who have some of their own money in the game. Mostly savings from high school jobs and current summer and/or part time jobs during the school year. Many have their kids take the federally substidized loans.
*We are all proudly and happily putting some of our own money in the pot, the easiest bit coming from cash flow - the money we aren't spending on food at home if our kid is away,(about $150 a month between home, eating out, and feeding his friends, 10 months a year for us) the money we aren't spending on high school activites, (about $1500 for us between marching band, music lessons, youth group expenses, etc.) and about the 2K in tax incentives. 5K total in our case that really isn't even a change from what we were spending before, just sort of moving around the cash flow. Over 4 years time that's 20K that was pretty painless for me but could be a painful amount of debt load to try to pay off if added to an additional loan amount.
*We are all encouraging our kids to take out the minimum amount of loans possible.
*We are all willing to put high expectations on our kids and follow through on them, but at the same time challenge ourselves to tighten our belts to help them out if they meet those expectations.
*None of us are taking money out of our retirement funds for college or blindly funding everything without requiring anything of our kids.

Some of my friends have no college savings, some of us have some, some of us are paying with cash that was freed up by paying off a mortgage or having a SAHP go back to work as the kids got older but continuing to live on one income. I'm a combination of the last three. People are able to help to differing degrees. People have some differing expectations on how much skin their kid has to have in the game. However, I don't know anyone (again, my personal experience) who isn't trying to help if their students are doing their part - yes, as I said, even my friends who previously had no plans to help with college.

 

[fortwildernessishome]

The difference isn't just the years...it's how fast the cost of college has risen. It's not "guilt advertising"....it's reality.

When I started college in '79, it was possible to pay for it on your own while working on the side. Now, it is NOT possible to work your way through college in most circumstances. An 18-year-old simply can't make enough to pay the tuition and other costs.

Exactly! The price of college has risen so fast and so high.

My husband graduated college in 1987, his college was roughly 4,000.00 a year.

Our son now goes to the same college, it is now roughly 25,000 a year.

No way can a kid work and pay the yearly tutition, its just too much!

 

[NotUrsula]

If you are looking for a watershed event that changed perspectives re: a parent's responsibility to pay for post-secondary education in the US, then the answer can be traced to 1992.

That is the year that Federal student aid rules re-defined the criteria for status as an independent undergraduate student. Prior to 1992, all you had to do to make yourself legally independent and eligible for aid based on your income alone was to have your parents stop claiming you as a dependent on their income taxes and stop listing their home as your permanent address.

Congress at that time felt that too many middle-class families were using this loophole to take Pell Grant monies that were meant to go to the truly impoverished, so they changed the eligibility criteria to deliberately exclude the vast majority of traditional single undergraduate students.

The post-1991 rules state that if you are under age 24, then by definition you are not a financially independent adult for purposes of UNDERGRADUATE student aid contribution unless you:

-are married
-are the parent of a minor dependent child
-are a veteran of the US Armed services
-were made a ward of the Court before turning age 18
-are a true orphan, meaning that BOTH of your parents are deceased and you were never legally adopted by anyone

 

[Southernmiss]

If you are looking for a watershed event that changed perspectives re: a parent's responsibility to pay for post-secondary education in the US, then the answer can be traced to 1992.

That is the year that Federal student aid rules re-defined the criteria for status as an independent student. Prior to 1992, all you had to do to make yourself legally independent and eligible for aid based on your income alone was to have your parents stop claiming you as a dependent on their income taxes and stop listing their home as your permanent address.

Congress at that time felt that too many middle-class families were using this loophole to take Pell Grant monies that were meant to go to the truly impoverished, so they changed the eligibility criteria to deliberately exclude the vast majority of traditional single undergraduate students.

The post-1991 rules state that if you are under age 24, then by definition you are not a financially independent adult for purposes of student aid contribution unless you:

-are married
-are the parent of a minor dependent child
-are a veteran of the US Armed services
-were made a ward of the Court before turning age 18
-are a true orphan, meaning that BOTH of your parents are deceased and you were never legally adopted by anyone

Very interesting. I did not remember this, but it makes sense. So many more people going to college now than before for many reasons also adds to the escalating inflation rate for tuition.