This is interesting, and I think it may explain why so many members of my own family growing up (and now) have gone to University of California schools. This a

This is interesting, and I think it may explain why so many members of my own family growing up (and now) have gone to University of California schools. This article from the NYTimes really drove it home: Top Colleges are Cheaper Than You Think (Unless You're Rich). https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/06/05/opinion/columnists/what-college-really-costs.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/06/05/opinion/colum... The data is very interesting. They analysis breaks down family income into different socioeconomic categories, poor, lower-middle, middle, upper-middle, affluent, and very affluent. Well, it turns out the analysis is largely correct - there is substantial reduction in costs for all but the last two categories, "affluent" and "very affluent." But look at the graph - it's fascinating. There's a meaningful break for every income, but very little difference between what the "Affluent" (family income $186k) and "Very Affluent" ($246k a year). If you look at the graph, there's a big drop in what you pay below affluent, but "affluent" and "very affluent" pay roughly the same amount. Here's the thing - that's true at publics as well as privates, but top publics max out at about half the rate of a private (the only one considered here is university of Virginia, UC schools are left off, not sure why). In other words, even if you pay full freight, there's a limiting factor to total costs. The pattern of what various economic groups pay as a percentage of max is the same for UVA and more expensive privates like the ivies, it's just that the whole thing is compressed into a 0-30K/year range instead of a 0-75k/range. I think that this upper limit appeals immensely to people in the "affluent" but not "very affluent" category. Because they'll be paying "full costs", but are still limited in resources compared to the "very affluent" group, the actual upper limit ends up mattering a great deal. I grew up in that economic band (affluent but not very affluent), and want to be sure I'm clear on this, "Affluent" as defined here is most definitely not an oppressive place to be from. Actually, it's harder now, in my day (grew up in the 1970s), the equivalent of affluent had no trouble buying a pleasant 3-4 br house in nice if unfashionable part of San Francisco (now: no) But it does mean 3 kids at an ivy may be cost prohibitive, even for an "Affluent" family. UC schools (or UVA or others), on the other hand, have an upper limit (we were all in state) that makes it more possible. In short, state schools work as equalizers between the affluent and very affluent.