14 ms·

Rich Families Are Legally Separating from Their Kids to Pay Less for College

144 points by HillaryBriss 7y ago

quaquaqua1 7y ago
Wow lol. Some people will use every trick in the book. FAFSA must be seeing a lot of "orphans" with famous last names out there. The issue is that the system tries to force people to pay proportionally to their assets/income. Pricing in this way is messy. What is worse is that college already is inefficient at creating good employees-- rich people are going through private channels to get their kids in good jobs these days anyway.
NorthOf33rd 7y ago
It’s easy to be enraged by reports like this, but I just see it as proof that the system is too damned expensive. There’s opportunity cost here, along with actual cost, and risk, and even then the savings is justifiable.
- scarface74 7y ago
  It’s not that the “system is too damn expensive”, they think they need to go to a prestigious more expensive school whether or not the ROI on going to a less expensive school is worth it. On top of that, while middle class families see college more of a way to help getting a better job, wealthier families actually believe their kids are going to college to be “better citizens of the world” and to “gain new experiences”.
- Aunche 7y ago
  Stanford has an endowment of $26.46 billion. Even with just a fraction of the interest from that fund, universities like Stanford can easily pay everyone's tuition. Instead, they'd rather hoard money, hire unnecessary admins, and build new buildings with another billionaire's name on it.
sct202 7y ago
The sad thing is that kids who actually are cut off or estranged from their rich parents don't have lawyers and consultants helping them to legally sever ties, and they end up having to drop out of school because they can't get the forms needed to file the FAFSA or their parents make too much and won't help them.
- codexon 7y ago
  They don't even have to be cut off or estranged. I've known people who had rich 300k+ parents that were the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" kind of people who were able to pay for private college with a high school job back in the day. They feel that they were teaching their kid a valuable lesson. They didn't get any help for college and were disqualified from all financial aid.
  - loganfrederick 7y ago
    I was in this situation. This post plus the grandparent post above it really strike a chord. On one hand, creating a sink or swim environment means I am probably a more resilient person having gone through college with limited family support compared to my peers. On the flip side, I am sure I'd be even more "successful" had I been able to focus more on improving my own skills or grades or academic research than working multiple jobs just to raise cash to pay bills. The above may sound a little like venting, but it's more to stress the point that financially stringent or irresponsible parents, or parents who just don't believe in investing in kids, is a negative drag on the economy and we are under-utilizing young people's intellectual potential by stressing them out over money. Related to the top-level post, I'd be angrier at rich families gaming the system except this is absolutely a whole system that needs re-worked from near-scratch.
    - TimTheTinker 7y ago
      I grew up in a lower-middle-class family, and my parents were only able to support me during college with a monthly $100 check. Not wanting to go into debt, I went to a Cal State school, lived and commuted with roommates, and worked 2 days/week to pay for rent. I paid tuition bills by working full-time during quarter breaks. I also volunteered significantly at church. All to say, my grades and ability to engage fully at school were strongly impacted by my financial situation. I wouldn’t wish my college situation on others. But I have no regrets. For me, it was character-shaping. That’s more important than economic opportunity and success.
neaden 7y ago
In general a problem is that wealthier people have the time, energy, and expertise to manipulate the system better than poorer people. Another place we see it is in the usage of IEPs and other accommodations for learning disabilities by wealthy families, in some areas more than 10% of students have accommodations like this. See this article for more: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/30/us/extra-time-504-sat-act.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/30/us/extra-time-504-sat-act...
- jcims 7y ago
  I doubt they have more time and energy, but they do have more resources to engage advisors and experts to act on their behalf.
  - philipov 7y ago
    same thing, the point is that money buys time and energy.
  - Ancalagon 7y ago
    When bus rides take 1 hour each way, you can be sure wealthier people have more time and energy
  - UncleMeat 7y ago
    Wealthy people don't need to work a side gig. They get paid vacation. They can afford homes with shorter commutes. They can pay for services like cleaning to free up time for other stuff. They probably have parents with more free time (due to wealth) to take care of their kids. They can afford preschool. All that means more time.
  - JustSomeNobody 7y ago
    > I doubt they have more time and energy You'd be wrong. The poor are working two jobs. The poor are begging their boss for a couple hours off to go stand in line to get their kids on medicaid. The poor are walking to the bus stop. The poor are rushing to the apartment manager to give them partial rent so they still have a roof over their head. Time is something the poor have very little of. Edit: I see some of you drive by disagree with me. I see this all the time as foster parents. The poor are much more likely to be in a situation where their children are removed and so talking with the bio parents, I hear their struggles. But keep drive by disagreeing with me if that makes you feel better.
olliej 7y ago
As long as their former kids pay taxes on any resources given to them from their now non-relatives, and their parents don't claim their non-children as dependents, and they get taxed on any inheritance from non-relatives.
- walshemj 7y ago
  Yes is does seem silly to save a few thousands now when your going to get stung for a lot more when your parents die. Maybe some very good (but shady) lawyers are enrolling the parents in dodgy schemes. A bit like how some "self employed" people in the UK got suckered into tax avoidance schemes and are now facing tax bills of 500k plus
bcheung 7y ago
I'm supportive of this. Children should not be held accountable for "the sins of their parents". My parents started charging me rent when I was 18 and told me I had to pay for college entirely by myself. I don't see why their income should be held against me.
- dmoy 7y ago
  From reading the article, I think the point is that these kids aren't actually supporting themselves, they're just made to seem that way on paper.
  - martin8412 7y ago
    Surely their income from their parents is taxable at normal income tax level then?
    - ohyeshedid 7y ago
      Only if they give/receive more than 11.1 million over the course of their lifetime.
      - dmoy 7y ago
        And that, only the amount over $30k/yr for a couple gifting their child.
    - jkdufair 7y ago
      Alas there are some pretty generous tax breaks on gifts.
- cdmcmahon 7y ago
  Yeah, that's not what's happening with the people in this story...
breck 7y ago
The solution is simple: make student loans dischargeable in bankruptcy, just like every other kind of loan. Otherwise there is no incentive for banks and colleges to not charge infinity for college. The current system is like a legal modern form of slavery or mafioso. It's mind boggling how people don't see this simple explanation.
- harryh 7y ago
  This is a possible solution, but it's not simple. If you do this, the current system of student loans we have will collapse completely. Now, maybe that would be good...but it's not simple.
  - breck 7y ago
    It is simple. Not easy, but simple. This is the solution. It works for all other industries. If I loan you money to buy a house or buy a car, without doing due diligence to that loan, the courts tell me "tough luck" if you file for bankruptcy. But if I lend you $250,000 for an arts degree, the power of the state will force you to pay me. That's insane!!!
    - harryh 7y ago
      Yes, and home and car loans still exist because if people don't pay it back there is an asset to repossess. That's not the case with college loans. Which is why they are fundamentally different.
      - breck 7y ago
        > they are fundamentally different. Perhaps it's good there are some things that are different. Some things are property. Some are not. In history there always seems to be a trend for those in power to try and enslave those not in power, by putting property laws on people. This student loan bankruptcy exception is one example. Intellectual slavery laws like copyright and patents are another.
wcunning 7y ago
The issue here is that perfect price discrimination doesn't actually seem fair to the vast majority of "normal" people. I was the youngest child of old parents, so we looked fabulously wealthy to the FAFSA. In reality, my parents were only mildly better prepared for retirement, which they were entering, than the average local government employee (both of their careers). This meant that my family paid full cost for flagship state university, despite much much wealthier people paying less. Similarly, my out-of-state friends were given "scholarships" that put them down to in-state tuition rates, but no lower. People do not generally pay the "full" price of these things[0]. [0] https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/18/private-colleges-costs-35830-on-averagebut-students-may-pay-less.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/18/private-colleges-costs-35830...
- non-entity 7y ago
  I didn't go to school after HS, however at the time of my graduation, my parents had a large amount of dependants, was suffering the wrath or two mortgage payments and another monthly rent payment. Flash forward a few years later, he no longer has the mortgages, many of those dependants are now adults out on there own and he makes pretty good money. I wish I would have gone before, because from the calculations I've done, being under 24, I won't get hardly any aid, and school is now a financially impossibility (or financial suicide).
  - learc83 7y ago
    School isn't financial suicide if you to an affordable state school and take out public loans unless you plan on getting a degree that will add no earning power. And even then, if you don't make much, you will qualify for income based repayment, which means you will never have to pay back more than 10% of your disposable income (any income over 1.5x the federal poverty limit). If you want to go even cheaper, try community college for the firs 2 years.
    - non-entity 7y ago
      But if I'm only receiving a couple thousand in aid, that's still a lot of money that has to resort to loans (from what I understand public loans are limited in the amount you can take no?) Community college would be much cheaper yes, but if you're a working adult,you'll likely only have a handful of times you can take classes, dragging it out more than 2 years.
uniformlyrandom 7y ago
'Rich' is a relative term. > living in a $1.2 million home and earning more than $250,000 a year. In other words, you make enough to not qualify for any aid, bit not enough to have $60k/yr disposable income. I see where the parents are coming from.
- pier25 7y ago
  They could have not bought a 1.2M home...
  - okmokmz 7y ago
    That's certainly not true. For those of you downvoting me, my parents home is currently valued at 1.134m and at the time of purchasing my Dad made less than 250k a year. It absolutely is possible to purchase a house worth 1.2m making 250k a year. Maybe not a great financial decision, but certainly possible. It's pretty incredible that a statement such as "They could have not bought a 1.2M home..." is upvoted, despite being obviously false as there absolutely are people that make 250kish and purchase homes worth over a million (such as my parents) but I get downvoted for stating that that statement was false, even though it is accurate. The upvotes/downvotes on this site are just as toxic as reddit; people use them as an agree/disagree button regardless of factuality or relevancy, and don't even comment to provide a counter point
    - pier25 7y ago
      > despite being obviously false as there absolutely are people that make 250kish and purchase homes worth over a million Yes, but my point is not whether they can but whether they should.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - okmokmz 7y ago
        My mistake, I read "they could not have" rather than "they could have not"
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
cdmcmahon 7y ago
This is the strongest argument that can be made for universal programs when it comes to designing progressive public policy. Rich people have the time and resources to aggresively take advantage of any system that tries to implement means testing or scaled benefits. The winning play is to design programs where benefits are given completely independently of time, money, access or power, even if it means some people who do not need it will get some assistance.
- aantix 7y ago
  As long as the system has rules, those rules can be optimized for. As long as conditions exist, someone can study or hire expertise in helping to meet those conditions.
  - asdff 7y ago
    We can start by making these rules simple enough where you don't need a j.d. or accounting degree to parse them.
  - cdmcmahon 7y ago
    The point of universal programs is that the "condition" for eligibility is existence [1] and thus there is nothing to optimize for, by definition. [1] This is obviously a simplification because of in reality the condition is citizenship/residency, but that's a whole other issue.
- chongli 7y ago
  The winning play is to design programs where benefits are given completely independently of time, money, access or power, even if it means some people who do not need it will get some assistance. But then doesn't it come down to grades, test scores, and extracurriculars etc? Rich parents are already paying for huge amounts of tutoring, coaching, and test prep, along with personally chauffeuring their kids all over the place in order to rack up the extracurricular and volunteering hours. Sure, you can mandate an "equity score" for admissions but at some point are you going to be admitting students who can't handle the coursework? Grades are more than just an arbitrary barrier.
daenz 7y ago
This must be today's daily "here's how rich people are ruining X" article that has become so predictably regular on HN.
- devteambravo 7y ago
  So this is just typical media hype? Just wanna make sure I understand your pov
testfoobar 7y ago
To some extent, Universities are inviting this kind of gaming. Stanford 2019-20 undergraduate tuition Pay in full: "The total charges for full-tuition-paying families will be $69,962, which includes $16,433 for room and board and $672 for a mandatory health fee." Four years is just under $280K. Free: "Under Stanford’s program, parents with annual incomes below $125,000 and assets typical of that income level pay no tuition. Parents with an income at or less than $65,000 and typical assets pay no tuition or room and board." https://news.stanford.edu/2018/12/04/stanford-expands-financial-aid-middle-income-families-trustees-set-2019-20-tuition/ https://news.stanford.edu/2018/12/04/stanford-expands-financ...
- non-entity 7y ago
  From what I've heard, California does well with schooling, especially for lower income families. An internet acquaintance of mine mentioned something about paying $46 a credit hour at a community college near him. Conversely, the per credit hour cost of a community college near me is over 5x that!
  - wcunning 7y ago
    Several years ago, before it became unaffordable, California residents were entitled to education at any state school, including UC Berkeley, for free. Community colleges were very definitely part of that. The better question is what is the out of state or out of district cost of your friend's CC?
    - dhosek 7y ago
      In California, there is no out of district penalty for community college. Out of state tuition is expensive, but I think on par with out of state tuition for other states' community colleges.
    - non-entity 7y ago
      Hes actually a foreigner living in CA on a visa I believe, so I'm not sure.
    - 7y ago
ApolloFortyNine 7y ago
My parents made me pay for school, but because they're still my parents I have the 'bad' (high percentage) student loans, and of course paid full tuition. I think this is just a symptom of a broken system. And it's not only rich families that do this, unless we consider all middle class couples rich now. I personally know of a family where one of the spouses' suggested it, though the other ended up being so offended it eventually lead to a real divorce.
beeschlenker 7y ago
Speaking of wealthy people manipulating the system, see these guys take it as far as they can: .\Soros child rape ring protected by Trump for $4 billion bribe, Pelosi $3b to "ensure safe passage over border". Rapists include Obama, Schumer, Cuomo, Buttgieg, DeBlasio, Theil, Dorsey, Bill Murray. Over 60+ deaths from rapes, billions in payoffs. Listen to them do it here: Listen! to previously unprocessed footage now available [Soros, 0bama child rapes 15Jan 4-6am], Obama around 524: "Why is there so much blood? Someone get me something to clean the blood off my dick..." footage gets censored in LA, NYC, CHI, SF, BOS, DC...why are these wealthy high profile child rapists, who are caught in the act with no action by the FBI? *note: -> groups of links are multiple ways to get the same file -> 15JanCh3_347-528.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Q8YeDzghf95FQrxBaMpXK4b-SfJYERs8/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Q8YeDzghf95FQrxBaMpXK4b-SfJ... https://mega.nz/#!bTQwDQDA!jolSOqGR2Zomhtn7zIG0lGmqXSqe3KG1mO_7nKLrqNo https://mega.nz/#!bTQwDQDA!jolSOqGR2Zomhtn7zIG0lGmqXSqe3KG1m... 15JanCh3_528-545.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavyRFWTRv4_teHYewpQMwMCq6LDzb6Y/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavyRFWTRv4_teHYewpQMwMCq6L... https://mega.nz/#!DfBywKKR!llMUzB8DLM2Rcvm0QkOKdiE3PpCY5YeR3yJwrm9R_4U https://mega.nz/#!DfBywKKR!llMUzB8DLM2Rcvm0QkOKdiE3PpCY5YeR3... 15JanCh4_400-600.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavnBCyhq_JRmST2QH5qlojUE6dr5IWS/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavnBCyhq_JRmST2QH5qlojUE6d... https://mega.nz/#!faZggSja!yF_QOcodvYXwk7qEO1N8eSaV90ZWUUaS18Surn8rnEU https://mega.nz/#!faZggSja!yF_QOcodvYXwk7qEO1N8eSaV90ZWUUaS1... See pgs 18-23,8,11,12,35,45,61,62, and update list at end of doc.. Having trouble getting traction. Getting censored/banned. Billions in bribes paid to Trump, Pelosi, Schumer, Harris to enable a Soros funded child raping ring to operate in the USA. Please listen to the links below. Turn up the volume and put headphones on. You will hear these people, and many other high profile people, incriminate themselves in unbelievable fashion. Full 80 page document [update 20Aug] filled with red handed evidence like this at the bottom. Go to pages 18 through 36 of this document and you will hear Dorsey and Thiel raping children. You will hear their screams. They both rape and kill three. Also at the "rape party" of note: Bill DeBlasio, Andrew Cuomo, Bill Murray, Peter Buttgieg, George Soros, Barack Obama. Please copy and paste this post and repost it, or save it for later because it will likely get removed sooner or later. I keep getting censored by these people. Bill DeBlasio's turn starts at 2100 (page 35): https://mega.nz/#!OCJwQSBC!AlER6vRRTKS8yvSxnVwAl3ha3kGDLqoouQe53zkGARg https://mega.nz/#!OCJwQSBC!AlER6vRRTKS8yvSxnVwAl3ha3kGDLqoou... Andrew Cuomo's starts at 2200 (pages 35-36): https://mega.nz/#!qKZChABY!zy-2jIHqEg4gWHNbiEym-YBdSs5Y9qzT2ARieV_eozA https://mega.nz/#!qKZChABY!zy-2jIHqEg4gWHNbiEym-YBdSs5Y9qzT2... Both files in one here: 14JanCh3_2100-2300.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yolCgVtY5b8d8YDcshwb-Yd3kS0Jg-Bk/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yolCgVtY5b8d8YDcshwb-Yd3kS0... Peter Thiel starts at 100, Jack Dorsey at 130 each raping and killing three boys. Turn the volume all the way up and put head phones on. Pages 19-20. https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv1/Overnight_14-17Jan/15JanCh3_100-200.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mzZrjobxhNIEf38M3xk-IeA5SeF4aUtB/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!qHhRiKLI!Tl1AnP0Lq6GIBH2MGitYNuXoe81uYeVQdxwSaZ8CY7o \0bama admits to raping and killing boys here at about 547, with commentary from Peter Thiel, George Soros, Matt Porter: https://s3.wasabisys.com/out2/Out2/15JanCh3_0545.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LCDoc1kT7cfSeKQ1vniP_sx32_bRsHau/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!veBk1KrL!zkO_keTyZAtNoTGEGsfRmXyuVIj9p8c3R8GtY-o_Nt8 DTrump demands $4 billion to "take a blind eye" at 1015++ (link missing from report, unsure how). Here's pieces of dialogue: 1018 Henry Porter: The child raping. 1018 Donald Trump: What the fuck are you talking about? 1018 Gigi Hadid: Mr. President we are child rapists. 1018 Donald Trump: You cannot be serious. 1018 Donald Trump: You're gonna need $4 billion for me to take a blind eye. 1019 Porter: People are laughing because they think four billion is too much. I think it's not a problem when you have $35 billion. 1022 Donald Trump: You better have that $4 billion or you can kiss this shit goodbye. https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv2/3Jan/3JanCh3_900-1100.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Grdr8xF2psKNsuYlEnl9dIRV-77YG0Vr/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!TKgxzS5J!i-nWn3HaOAJPU7rju83B4qcwSzun4Dl2B29FEZxtMSU Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi agreeing to $3 billion for safe passage at "Monterrey" (page 11): 1033 Nancy Pelosi: We want to make sure you have safe passage at Monterrey. 1033 Matthew Porter: We appreciate that Speaker Pelosi. 1033 Gigi Hadid: I think we may have to scale back a little bit though. 1033 Nancy Pelosi: Gigi I think we'll be just fine. ... 1035 Nancy Pelosi: God damn it! I want Kamala to get a billion out of yours, not out of mine. 1035 Gigi Hadid: I think we can accommodate you but we need to find out if Monterrey will be open on the 30th of January. 1036 Nancy Pelosi: Of course it will Gigi. 1036 Nancy Pelosi: $3 billion goes a long way Peter [Theil]. 17JanCh3_949-1100.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eodHu4o5Cm3xEWhDqipSuTj-M1CZUvmE/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eodHu4o5Cm3xEWhDqipSuTj-M1C... https://mega.nz/#!uXJUTYrI!-6eJXCWHSKhbHRv5p3df1a9k2-hHr9bxd5bkjxvgguY https://mega.nz/#!uXJUTYrI!-6eJXCWHSKhbHRv5p3df1a9k2-hHr9bxd... Trump wants $138 million to ensure smooth outcome for false judgment, as in no trial or hearing, simlpy entering in a judgement into the system thus bypassing the fifth amendment right of due process: https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv1/10JanCh3/10JanCh3_951-1033.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iSeGHDToFRoRdIht50Wii0i30mlw9INp/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!jSwzFYLY!RFQvL8KIyFZf1WfC6tGoPFgJ4aREeGE_pe3i2fwshy8 Obama explains the Illuminati with Jack Dorsey...At 230 a conversation is occurring on the embedded Porter camera system with Jack Dorsey, Peter Thiel, Barack Obama, Bill Murray, and the Porter's. Jack Dorsey provides a statement defining who their group is: "The Illuminati is an underground organization of child rapists and homosexuals." Matthew Porter: "We have to thin the herd, so Barack is going to explain a few things." At 232 Barack Obama says the following: "You people have to realize we are child rapists. The Illuminati are child rapists. As soon as you figure that out, you can decide what to do. Everybody is freaking out about what just happened [child raping event still going on]. This is who we are.": https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv1/Overnight_14-17Jan/15JanCh3_200-347.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ok1-9IvANULzKBOwADFgaiYCFi6yszfj/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!nbhTwALA!qmf_0Lq0jApSwxRj1KRS_Q7QYbg4aJc4JMU9rDjR_yo Full 80 page document [updated 20Aug]: three ways to get it: https://s3.wasabisys.com/aviewmefirst/FBI_FinalDraft_26Jul2019_BSchlenker.pdf https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sj9EN_pHmicKS6rFQlmk67knMdJc9cGk/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!OKYwES6A!zPGcRSg5de1XALI3FtUH3FCNCuLUzQbZN0l5iNCQqmU \Please post this anywhere you can! Each google drive link is a backup to the wasabi link just in case one is "down". Getting blocked, censored, "downvoted" etc. These people are extremely wealthy and throw money to anyone who will help them cover up their child rapes & murders, corruption. Ironically, this is usually done through a receivership transfer, where you receive the funds after four or more day, and it can be pulled at the last second, whch is usually the case, after you've done them the "service". A word about the "f@\&&ot" usage: it was a necessary tool. It showed three things: they were not in control, if they were the usage would have be stopped. Everyone out there needed to see t%his. Two, it made it unpleasant for them to be in the headspace, which has obvious advantages. Three, it pointed out impersonators of BS because they would not call each other f@%%ot, thus helping to mitigate the spread of false information. Apologies for those unintentionally offended. On that notey,, I give you Barack Obama in a foursome with Peter Thiel, Jack Dorsey, and Matthew Porter. It is on page 12 of the document where you can download the video containing audio footage of the "event". Link for the doc is just above under "Full 80 page document".
nickbauman 7y ago
This has been going on for a looong time.
0xcafecafe 7y ago
I always genuinely wonder where does the high cost of college tuition come from? Ok, if you doing some highly technical major (medicine or technology) which involves you working with cutting edge equipment with maintenance cost but does it really have to be that much? (~$50k pa). Doesn't scale up reduce cost? Also, what about majors like liberal arts? What are the students paying for? The only other thing that comes to mind is faculty cost but are teachers that highly paid to warrant such high tuition?
- Ancalagon 7y ago
  The cost comes from running the facilities, paying the likely bloated administration, and expanding campus programs and offerings to attract smarter/wealthier student tuition dollars. All of this is perpetuated by the endless mountain of cash that are Federally-backed, impossible-to-bankrupt student loans.
- teddyh 7y ago
  Never look to the back-end costs to explain the price of anything. The price is always set to what the market can barely tolerate. This is capitalism. If you think that margins are too high, then this could indicate a lack of competition. That’s what you should look to for a possible explanation. Why is there apparently a lack of competition between colleges?
  - rdtwo 7y ago
    In a true free for all anti competitive system like college and medicine the list price is some extreme number that is discounted based on each individual ability to pay. In both cases individual discounts should not be allowed because otherwise prices cannot be competitive
  - tomatotomato37 7y ago
    Margins being high isn't just caused lack of competition, it can also be caused by unwarranted prestige e.g. De Beers diamonds. You could go to an affordable community college with professors who attend because they enjoy teaching, but then you wouldn't have a sexy expensive degree from MIT/Berkely/Stanford college where the world's most esteemed professors send their TA's to teach you so they can focus on more cutting-edge research.
viburnum 7y ago
It’s insane that college finance has anything to do with parents. Probably a mistake to even have expensive colleges, unless you’re deliberately trying to reproduce inequality.
- Kneecaps07 7y ago
  Because you're an adult legally. Well except when it comes to paying for college. Then you're a child dependent on your parents.
  - asdff 7y ago
    You are a child dependent on your parents until you are 25 and have to pay for your own health insurance.
rdtwo 7y ago
I don’t see anything wrong with this. Colleges are priced for maximum wealth extraction by charging people as much as they can possibly pay so smart families are working the system to outplay them at their own game. This is exactly the same as the medical system where prices are set based on ability to pay and not service provided.
seanmcdirmid 7y ago
It’s almost like this problem should be handled via progressive income/wealth taxation that makes tuition free/affordable to everyone. That way, the rich still pay more, just not in direct tuition.
kazinator 7y ago
What if a kid is actually disowned by their rich parents, and isn't getting anything from them? No aid for you?
- zaccus 7y ago
  Assuming they're not legally separated and the kid is under 24, yes. Happens a lot actually.
qwerty456127 7y ago
Not surprising when education is so ridiculously expensive, next only to healthcare. Who wouldn't evade prices so high when possible? I'm amazed about how the US insist on regulating everything and fail to leverage free market in these areas letting fair competition to drive the prices down.
supersharklaser 7y ago
I think it’s worth pointing out that universities only care so much as it’s a PR matter and preserving the view of “fairness”. They don’t care in the sense they are getting paid. Overall, the increase in government funding and the effective use of university as the expected next level of education, along with the very mixed financial incentives schools have are the primary causes of the ballooning of cost of education. Wouldn’t this just play more into this problem? I’m in favor of more professional schooling, trade schools and apprenticeships. There are very few reasons why everyone needs full liberal arts degree—especially at the quality it is now. Oddly, I think Europe is more effective in some regards. I don’t agree with free educations—psychologically I think it devalues education. But there is a lot more emphasis on trades, professional and other sorts of schooling, overall a lot more variety in tracks of education. And while I don’t agree with free education, I think the education system is much more aligned with the public benefit.
- zaccus 7y ago
  >I don’t agree with free educations—psychologically I think it devalues education. There are good reasons to be against free college, but this is not one of them.
jimbob45 7y ago
>The Wall Street Journal was able to reach two parents who were coached by Destination College into transferring guardianship of their kids before they applied for financial aid. TWO. TWO. Even if we extrapolate that two out beyond our wildest dreams, it's still not symbolic of a pattern. Yes, this is a loophole and yes it should be closed but there does not appear to be any evidence that is being being abused widespread at the current time.
- CodeCube 7y ago
  This isn't exactly rocket science ... my daughter just started college, and as a tech industry employee let me tell you, she got no financial aid (some other academic things aside). When we started filling out the student loan paperwork, I had literally this idea (the whole legal separation thing) as a passing thought. Of course, because I'm not a monster, I laughed it off and kept on filling out the paperwork ... but one doesn't have to be a great student out of Wharton to figure out a scam like this, and you can bet your arse more people have actually pulled the trigger on it.
  - rdtwo 7y ago
    When I was 18 I asked my parents to look into doing that. They laughed it off but like you said it’s a pretty obvious loophole but you have plan ahead a bit to utilize it
    - Throw_Away_4825 7y ago
      What exactly would that look like? The article talks about guardianship, but with 18 they aren't your guardian anymore either way (at least in most states). Or is it about not listing you as a dependent? Doesn't that have negative tax implications for the parents?
      - CodeCube 7y ago
        minimal ... it's a few thousand dollars, and after a certain point in income, that deduction goes away entirely no matter how many children you have.
33MHz-i486 7y ago
In other news ... instead charging a transparent and fair price for a service, private colleges and government conspire to attain perfect price discrimination against their education consumers based on itemization of their income/property.
iguy 7y ago
Now that they know this may happen, what's to stop every university closing the loophole? Since they appear to be free to do whatever they please, they can simply ask for a list of anyone who was ever your parent, and a letter explaining any omissions (like you were adopted age 1). They needn't even write the rules for acceptance of excuses in advance, and can decide what to do about edge cases (like someone adopted by his less-wealthy uncle at age 15...) when one applies. Is there any reason they don't yet do this?
- moate 7y ago
  How do you know that closes the loophole? How can you prove someone is saying they're estranged and not actually estranged? Sad fact is a wide net for social programs are typically better, even if it allows scammers to skim off the system. Which feels like the greater social loss to you, closing the loop hole and finding that you're now harming people who need assistance or keeping it open and allowing some people to benefit unfairly from the system?
  - iguy 7y ago
    It would close this particular loophole, by treating legally disowned and merely estranged identically. I'm not saying they would accept letters stating that you are estranged (which they certainly don't do now). I'm saying they could refuse to believe recent legal changes to parenthood, and just demand the whole list since birth. Just as lots of documents need every name you've ever had, not just your current legal name. (Whether the actually estranged should be treated differently is another question. Judging by how they've run the system so far, the colleges don't seem inclined to do so. I don't mean to defend their behavior, only to ask what moves they may make.)
harshreality 7y ago
What are the downsides of this: Mandate that all (accredited, therefore regulated) schools charge a percentage of future earnings, rather than tuition. The market between employers and colleges will sort itself out. Every prospective student would know ahead of time what percentage of future earnings (up to some cap) they'd be giving up, per school, and would weigh the perceived value of the schools against the percentages they take.
- jb3689 7y ago
  There is some talk about something like this, and I believe Purdue was trying it out already
  - iguy 7y ago
    I believe the Australian & UK systems work a bit like this, too. Perhaps it's nominally a loan, but collected like income tax, with a threshold on how much you must earn to pay at all. However I don't think either is very flexible about different places charging very different fees, or different implied interest rates.
llacb47 7y ago
Source should be changed to https://propublica.org/article/university-of-illinois-financial-aid-fafsa-parents-guardianship-children-students https://propublica.org/article/university-of-illinois-financ...
chkaloon 7y ago
Same issue as wealthy elderly gifting all their assets to their kids ("pre-inheritance") so they can get on Medicaid to pay for their nursing home care.
Arete314159 7y ago
Meanwhile, poorer unfortunate kids whose parents kick them out get caught in the gap where their parents won't pay for college, but the college considers them dependents and won't give them financial aid. Source: Was one such kid. Took 2 years of paperwork and phone calls before I qualify for aid based on my own finances.
hendersoon 7y ago
This makes no sense to me. You have $250k/year income and you go to the trouble and risk possible unintended consequences of emancipating your child to save $20k/year for 4 years? Totally bizarre.

144 points by HillaryBriss 7y ago

Wow lol. Some people will use every trick in the book. FAFSA must be seeing a lot of "orphans" with famous last names out there. The issue is that the system tries to force people to pay proportionally to their assets/income. Pricing in this way is messy. What is worse is that college already is inefficient at creating good employees-- rich people are going through private channels to get their kids in good jobs these days anyway.

NorthOf33rd 7y ago

It’s easy to be enraged by reports like this, but I just see it as proof that the system is too damned expensive. There’s opportunity cost here, along with actual cost, and risk, and even then the savings is justifiable.

scarface74 7y ago
It’s not that the “system is too damn expensive”, they think they need to go to a prestigious more expensive school whether or not the ROI on going to a less expensive school is worth it. On top of that, while middle class families see college more of a way to help getting a better job, wealthier families actually believe their kids are going to college to be “better citizens of the world” and to “gain new experiences”.
Aunche 7y ago
Stanford has an endowment of $26.46 billion. Even with just a fraction of the interest from that fund, universities like Stanford can easily pay everyone's tuition. Instead, they'd rather hoard money, hire unnecessary admins, and build new buildings with another billionaire's name on it.

sct202 7y ago

The sad thing is that kids who actually are cut off or estranged from their rich parents don't have lawyers and consultants helping them to legally sever ties, and they end up having to drop out of school because they can't get the forms needed to file the FAFSA or their parents make too much and won't help them.

codexon 7y ago
They don't even have to be cut off or estranged. I've known people who had rich 300k+ parents that were the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" kind of people who were able to pay for private college with a high school job back in the day. They feel that they were teaching their kid a valuable lesson. They didn't get any help for college and were disqualified from all financial aid.
- loganfrederick 7y ago
  I was in this situation. This post plus the grandparent post above it really strike a chord. On one hand, creating a sink or swim environment means I am probably a more resilient person having gone through college with limited family support compared to my peers. On the flip side, I am sure I'd be even more "successful" had I been able to focus more on improving my own skills or grades or academic research than working multiple jobs just to raise cash to pay bills. The above may sound a little like venting, but it's more to stress the point that financially stringent or irresponsible parents, or parents who just don't believe in investing in kids, is a negative drag on the economy and we are under-utilizing young people's intellectual potential by stressing them out over money. Related to the top-level post, I'd be angrier at rich families gaming the system except this is absolutely a whole system that needs re-worked from near-scratch.
  - TimTheTinker 7y ago
    I grew up in a lower-middle-class family, and my parents were only able to support me during college with a monthly $100 check. Not wanting to go into debt, I went to a Cal State school, lived and commuted with roommates, and worked 2 days/week to pay for rent. I paid tuition bills by working full-time during quarter breaks. I also volunteered significantly at church. All to say, my grades and ability to engage fully at school were strongly impacted by my financial situation. I wouldn’t wish my college situation on others. But I have no regrets. For me, it was character-shaping. That’s more important than economic opportunity and success.

neaden 7y ago

In general a problem is that wealthier people have the time, energy, and expertise to manipulate the system better than poorer people. Another place we see it is in the usage of IEPs and other accommodations for learning disabilities by wealthy families, in some areas more than 10% of students have accommodations like this. See this article for more: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/30/us/extra-time-504-sat-act.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/30/us/extra-time-504-sat-act...

jcims 7y ago
I doubt they have more time and energy, but they do have more resources to engage advisors and experts to act on their behalf.
- philipov 7y ago
  same thing, the point is that money buys time and energy.
- Ancalagon 7y ago
  When bus rides take 1 hour each way, you can be sure wealthier people have more time and energy
- UncleMeat 7y ago
  Wealthy people don't need to work a side gig. They get paid vacation. They can afford homes with shorter commutes. They can pay for services like cleaning to free up time for other stuff. They probably have parents with more free time (due to wealth) to take care of their kids. They can afford preschool. All that means more time.
- JustSomeNobody 7y ago
  > I doubt they have more time and energy You'd be wrong. The poor are working two jobs. The poor are begging their boss for a couple hours off to go stand in line to get their kids on medicaid. The poor are walking to the bus stop. The poor are rushing to the apartment manager to give them partial rent so they still have a roof over their head. Time is something the poor have very little of. Edit: I see some of you drive by disagree with me. I see this all the time as foster parents. The poor are much more likely to be in a situation where their children are removed and so talking with the bio parents, I hear their struggles. But keep drive by disagreeing with me if that makes you feel better.

olliej 7y ago

As long as their former kids pay taxes on any resources given to them from their now non-relatives, and their parents don't claim their non-children as dependents, and they get taxed on any inheritance from non-relatives.

walshemj 7y ago
Yes is does seem silly to save a few thousands now when your going to get stung for a lot more when your parents die. Maybe some very good (but shady) lawyers are enrolling the parents in dodgy schemes. A bit like how some "self employed" people in the UK got suckered into tax avoidance schemes and are now facing tax bills of 500k plus

bcheung 7y ago

I'm supportive of this. Children should not be held accountable for "the sins of their parents". My parents started charging me rent when I was 18 and told me I had to pay for college entirely by myself. I don't see why their income should be held against me.

dmoy 7y ago
From reading the article, I think the point is that these kids aren't actually supporting themselves, they're just made to seem that way on paper.
- martin8412 7y ago
  Surely their income from their parents is taxable at normal income tax level then?
  - ohyeshedid 7y ago
    Only if they give/receive more than 11.1 million over the course of their lifetime.
    - dmoy 7y ago
      And that, only the amount over $30k/yr for a couple gifting their child.
  - jkdufair 7y ago
    Alas there are some pretty generous tax breaks on gifts.
cdmcmahon 7y ago
Yeah, that's not what's happening with the people in this story...

breck 7y ago

The solution is simple: make student loans dischargeable in bankruptcy, just like every other kind of loan. Otherwise there is no incentive for banks and colleges to not charge infinity for college. The current system is like a legal modern form of slavery or mafioso. It's mind boggling how people don't see this simple explanation.

harryh 7y ago
This is a possible solution, but it's not simple. If you do this, the current system of student loans we have will collapse completely. Now, maybe that would be good...but it's not simple.
- breck 7y ago
  It is simple. Not easy, but simple. This is the solution. It works for all other industries. If I loan you money to buy a house or buy a car, without doing due diligence to that loan, the courts tell me "tough luck" if you file for bankruptcy. But if I lend you $250,000 for an arts degree, the power of the state will force you to pay me. That's insane!!!
  - harryh 7y ago
    Yes, and home and car loans still exist because if people don't pay it back there is an asset to repossess. That's not the case with college loans. Which is why they are fundamentally different.
    - breck 7y ago
      > they are fundamentally different. Perhaps it's good there are some things that are different. Some things are property. Some are not. In history there always seems to be a trend for those in power to try and enslave those not in power, by putting property laws on people. This student loan bankruptcy exception is one example. Intellectual slavery laws like copyright and patents are another.

wcunning 7y ago

The issue here is that perfect price discrimination doesn't actually seem fair to the vast majority of "normal" people. I was the youngest child of old parents, so we looked fabulously wealthy to the FAFSA. In reality, my parents were only mildly better prepared for retirement, which they were entering, than the average local government employee (both of their careers). This meant that my family paid full cost for flagship state university, despite much much wealthier people paying less. Similarly, my out-of-state friends were given "scholarships" that put them down to in-state tuition rates, but no lower. People do not generally pay the "full" price of these things[0]. [0] https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/18/private-colleges-costs-35830-on-averagebut-students-may-pay-less.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/18/private-colleges-costs-35830...

non-entity 7y ago
I didn't go to school after HS, however at the time of my graduation, my parents had a large amount of dependants, was suffering the wrath or two mortgage payments and another monthly rent payment. Flash forward a few years later, he no longer has the mortgages, many of those dependants are now adults out on there own and he makes pretty good money. I wish I would have gone before, because from the calculations I've done, being under 24, I won't get hardly any aid, and school is now a financially impossibility (or financial suicide).
- learc83 7y ago
  School isn't financial suicide if you to an affordable state school and take out public loans unless you plan on getting a degree that will add no earning power. And even then, if you don't make much, you will qualify for income based repayment, which means you will never have to pay back more than 10% of your disposable income (any income over 1.5x the federal poverty limit). If you want to go even cheaper, try community college for the firs 2 years.
  - non-entity 7y ago
    But if I'm only receiving a couple thousand in aid, that's still a lot of money that has to resort to loans (from what I understand public loans are limited in the amount you can take no?) Community college would be much cheaper yes, but if you're a working adult,you'll likely only have a handful of times you can take classes, dragging it out more than 2 years.

uniformlyrandom 7y ago

'Rich' is a relative term. > living in a $1.2 million home and earning more than $250,000 a year. In other words, you make enough to not qualify for any aid, bit not enough to have $60k/yr disposable income. I see where the parents are coming from.

pier25 7y ago
They could have not bought a 1.2M home...
- okmokmz 7y ago
  That's certainly not true. For those of you downvoting me, my parents home is currently valued at 1.134m and at the time of purchasing my Dad made less than 250k a year. It absolutely is possible to purchase a house worth 1.2m making 250k a year. Maybe not a great financial decision, but certainly possible. It's pretty incredible that a statement such as "They could have not bought a 1.2M home..." is upvoted, despite being obviously false as there absolutely are people that make 250kish and purchase homes worth over a million (such as my parents) but I get downvoted for stating that that statement was false, even though it is accurate. The upvotes/downvotes on this site are just as toxic as reddit; people use them as an agree/disagree button regardless of factuality or relevancy, and don't even comment to provide a counter point
  - pier25 7y ago
    > despite being obviously false as there absolutely are people that make 250kish and purchase homes worth over a million Yes, but my point is not whether they can but whether they should.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - okmokmz 7y ago
      My mistake, I read "they could not have" rather than "they could have not"

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

cdmcmahon 7y ago

This is the strongest argument that can be made for universal programs when it comes to designing progressive public policy. Rich people have the time and resources to aggresively take advantage of any system that tries to implement means testing or scaled benefits. The winning play is to design programs where benefits are given completely independently of time, money, access or power, even if it means some people who do not need it will get some assistance.

aantix 7y ago
As long as the system has rules, those rules can be optimized for. As long as conditions exist, someone can study or hire expertise in helping to meet those conditions.
- asdff 7y ago
  We can start by making these rules simple enough where you don't need a j.d. or accounting degree to parse them.
- cdmcmahon 7y ago
  The point of universal programs is that the "condition" for eligibility is existence [1] and thus there is nothing to optimize for, by definition. [1] This is obviously a simplification because of in reality the condition is citizenship/residency, but that's a whole other issue.
chongli 7y ago
The winning play is to design programs where benefits are given completely independently of time, money, access or power, even if it means some people who do not need it will get some assistance. But then doesn't it come down to grades, test scores, and extracurriculars etc? Rich parents are already paying for huge amounts of tutoring, coaching, and test prep, along with personally chauffeuring their kids all over the place in order to rack up the extracurricular and volunteering hours. Sure, you can mandate an "equity score" for admissions but at some point are you going to be admitting students who can't handle the coursework? Grades are more than just an arbitrary barrier.

daenz 7y ago

This must be today's daily "here's how rich people are ruining X" article that has become so predictably regular on HN.

devteambravo 7y ago
So this is just typical media hype? Just wanna make sure I understand your pov

testfoobar 7y ago

To some extent, Universities are inviting this kind of gaming. Stanford 2019-20 undergraduate tuition Pay in full: "The total charges for full-tuition-paying families will be $69,962, which includes $16,433 for room and board and $672 for a mandatory health fee." Four years is just under $280K. Free: "Under Stanford’s program, parents with annual incomes below $125,000 and assets typical of that income level pay no tuition. Parents with an income at or less than $65,000 and typical assets pay no tuition or room and board." https://news.stanford.edu/2018/12/04/stanford-expands-financial-aid-middle-income-families-trustees-set-2019-20-tuition/ https://news.stanford.edu/2018/12/04/stanford-expands-financ...

non-entity 7y ago
From what I've heard, California does well with schooling, especially for lower income families. An internet acquaintance of mine mentioned something about paying $46 a credit hour at a community college near him. Conversely, the per credit hour cost of a community college near me is over 5x that!
- wcunning 7y ago
  Several years ago, before it became unaffordable, California residents were entitled to education at any state school, including UC Berkeley, for free. Community colleges were very definitely part of that. The better question is what is the out of state or out of district cost of your friend's CC?
  - dhosek 7y ago
    In California, there is no out of district penalty for community college. Out of state tuition is expensive, but I think on par with out of state tuition for other states' community colleges.
  - non-entity 7y ago
    Hes actually a foreigner living in CA on a visa I believe, so I'm not sure.
  - 7y ago

ApolloFortyNine 7y ago

My parents made me pay for school, but because they're still my parents I have the 'bad' (high percentage) student loans, and of course paid full tuition. I think this is just a symptom of a broken system. And it's not only rich families that do this, unless we consider all middle class couples rich now. I personally know of a family where one of the spouses' suggested it, though the other ended up being so offended it eventually lead to a real divorce.

beeschlenker 7y ago

Speaking of wealthy people manipulating the system, see these guys take it as far as they can: .\Soros child rape ring protected by Trump for $4 billion bribe, Pelosi $3b to "ensure safe passage over border". Rapists include Obama, Schumer, Cuomo, Buttgieg, DeBlasio, Theil, Dorsey, Bill Murray. Over 60+ deaths from rapes, billions in payoffs. Listen to them do it here: Listen! to previously unprocessed footage now available [Soros, 0bama child rapes 15Jan 4-6am], Obama around 524: "Why is there so much blood? Someone get me something to clean the blood off my dick..." footage gets censored in LA, NYC, CHI, SF, BOS, DC...why are these wealthy high profile child rapists, who are caught in the act with no action by the FBI? *note: -> groups of links are multiple ways to get the same file -> 15JanCh3_347-528.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Q8YeDzghf95FQrxBaMpXK4b-SfJYERs8/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Q8YeDzghf95FQrxBaMpXK4b-SfJ... https://mega.nz/#!bTQwDQDA!jolSOqGR2Zomhtn7zIG0lGmqXSqe3KG1mO_7nKLrqNo https://mega.nz/#!bTQwDQDA!jolSOqGR2Zomhtn7zIG0lGmqXSqe3KG1m... 15JanCh3_528-545.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavyRFWTRv4_teHYewpQMwMCq6LDzb6Y/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavyRFWTRv4_teHYewpQMwMCq6L... https://mega.nz/#!DfBywKKR!llMUzB8DLM2Rcvm0QkOKdiE3PpCY5YeR3yJwrm9R_4U https://mega.nz/#!DfBywKKR!llMUzB8DLM2Rcvm0QkOKdiE3PpCY5YeR3... 15JanCh4_400-600.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavnBCyhq_JRmST2QH5qlojUE6dr5IWS/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavnBCyhq_JRmST2QH5qlojUE6d... https://mega.nz/#!faZggSja!yF_QOcodvYXwk7qEO1N8eSaV90ZWUUaS18Surn8rnEU https://mega.nz/#!faZggSja!yF_QOcodvYXwk7qEO1N8eSaV90ZWUUaS1... See pgs 18-23,8,11,12,35,45,61,62, and update list at end of doc.. Having trouble getting traction. Getting censored/banned. Billions in bribes paid to Trump, Pelosi, Schumer, Harris to enable a Soros funded child raping ring to operate in the USA. Please listen to the links below. Turn up the volume and put headphones on. You will hear these people, and many other high profile people, incriminate themselves in unbelievable fashion. Full 80 page document [update 20Aug] filled with red handed evidence like this at the bottom. Go to pages 18 through 36 of this document and you will hear Dorsey and Thiel raping children. You will hear their screams. They both rape and kill three. Also at the "rape party" of note: Bill DeBlasio, Andrew Cuomo, Bill Murray, Peter Buttgieg, George Soros, Barack Obama. Please copy and paste this post and repost it, or save it for later because it will likely get removed sooner or later. I keep getting censored by these people. Bill DeBlasio's turn starts at 2100 (page 35): https://mega.nz/#!OCJwQSBC!AlER6vRRTKS8yvSxnVwAl3ha3kGDLqoouQe53zkGARg https://mega.nz/#!OCJwQSBC!AlER6vRRTKS8yvSxnVwAl3ha3kGDLqoou... Andrew Cuomo's starts at 2200 (pages 35-36): https://mega.nz/#!qKZChABY!zy-2jIHqEg4gWHNbiEym-YBdSs5Y9qzT2ARieV_eozA https://mega.nz/#!qKZChABY!zy-2jIHqEg4gWHNbiEym-YBdSs5Y9qzT2... Both files in one here: 14JanCh3_2100-2300.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yolCgVtY5b8d8YDcshwb-Yd3kS0Jg-Bk/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yolCgVtY5b8d8YDcshwb-Yd3kS0... Peter Thiel starts at 100, Jack Dorsey at 130 each raping and killing three boys. Turn the volume all the way up and put head phones on. Pages 19-20. https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv1/Overnight_14-17Jan/15JanCh3_100-200.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mzZrjobxhNIEf38M3xk-IeA5SeF4aUtB/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!qHhRiKLI!Tl1AnP0Lq6GIBH2MGitYNuXoe81uYeVQdxwSaZ8CY7o \0bama admits to raping and killing boys here at about 547, with commentary from Peter Thiel, George Soros, Matt Porter: https://s3.wasabisys.com/out2/Out2/15JanCh3_0545.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LCDoc1kT7cfSeKQ1vniP_sx32_bRsHau/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!veBk1KrL!zkO_keTyZAtNoTGEGsfRmXyuVIj9p8c3R8GtY-o_Nt8 DTrump demands $4 billion to "take a blind eye" at 1015++ (link missing from report, unsure how). Here's pieces of dialogue: 1018 Henry Porter: The child raping. 1018 Donald Trump: What the fuck are you talking about? 1018 Gigi Hadid: Mr. President we are child rapists. 1018 Donald Trump: You cannot be serious. 1018 Donald Trump: You're gonna need $4 billion for me to take a blind eye. 1019 Porter: People are laughing because they think four billion is too much. I think it's not a problem when you have $35 billion. 1022 Donald Trump: You better have that $4 billion or you can kiss this shit goodbye. https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv2/3Jan/3JanCh3_900-1100.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Grdr8xF2psKNsuYlEnl9dIRV-77YG0Vr/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!TKgxzS5J!i-nWn3HaOAJPU7rju83B4qcwSzun4Dl2B29FEZxtMSU Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi agreeing to $3 billion for safe passage at "Monterrey" (page 11): 1033 Nancy Pelosi: We want to make sure you have safe passage at Monterrey. 1033 Matthew Porter: We appreciate that Speaker Pelosi. 1033 Gigi Hadid: I think we may have to scale back a little bit though. 1033 Nancy Pelosi: Gigi I think we'll be just fine. ... 1035 Nancy Pelosi: God damn it! I want Kamala to get a billion out of yours, not out of mine. 1035 Gigi Hadid: I think we can accommodate you but we need to find out if Monterrey will be open on the 30th of January. 1036 Nancy Pelosi: Of course it will Gigi. 1036 Nancy Pelosi: $3 billion goes a long way Peter [Theil]. 17JanCh3_949-1100.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eodHu4o5Cm3xEWhDqipSuTj-M1CZUvmE/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eodHu4o5Cm3xEWhDqipSuTj-M1C... https://mega.nz/#!uXJUTYrI!-6eJXCWHSKhbHRv5p3df1a9k2-hHr9bxd5bkjxvgguY https://mega.nz/#!uXJUTYrI!-6eJXCWHSKhbHRv5p3df1a9k2-hHr9bxd... Trump wants $138 million to ensure smooth outcome for false judgment, as in no trial or hearing, simlpy entering in a judgement into the system thus bypassing the fifth amendment right of due process: https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv1/10JanCh3/10JanCh3_951-1033.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iSeGHDToFRoRdIht50Wii0i30mlw9INp/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!jSwzFYLY!RFQvL8KIyFZf1WfC6tGoPFgJ4aREeGE_pe3i2fwshy8 Obama explains the Illuminati with Jack Dorsey...At 230 a conversation is occurring on the embedded Porter camera system with Jack Dorsey, Peter Thiel, Barack Obama, Bill Murray, and the Porter's. Jack Dorsey provides a statement defining who their group is: "The Illuminati is an underground organization of child rapists and homosexuals." Matthew Porter: "We have to thin the herd, so Barack is going to explain a few things." At 232 Barack Obama says the following: "You people have to realize we are child rapists. The Illuminati are child rapists. As soon as you figure that out, you can decide what to do. Everybody is freaking out about what just happened [child raping event still going on]. This is who we are.": https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv1/Overnight_14-17Jan/15JanCh3_200-347.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ok1-9IvANULzKBOwADFgaiYCFi6yszfj/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!nbhTwALA!qmf_0Lq0jApSwxRj1KRS_Q7QYbg4aJc4JMU9rDjR_yo Full 80 page document [updated 20Aug]: three ways to get it: https://s3.wasabisys.com/aviewmefirst/FBI_FinalDraft_26Jul2019_BSchlenker.pdf https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sj9EN_pHmicKS6rFQlmk67knMdJc9cGk/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!OKYwES6A!zPGcRSg5de1XALI3FtUH3FCNCuLUzQbZN0l5iNCQqmU \Please post this anywhere you can! Each google drive link is a backup to the wasabi link just in case one is "down". Getting blocked, censored, "downvoted" etc. These people are extremely wealthy and throw money to anyone who will help them cover up their child rapes & murders, corruption. Ironically, this is usually done through a receivership transfer, where you receive the funds after four or more day, and it can be pulled at the last second, whch is usually the case, after you've done them the "service". A word about the "f@\&&ot" usage: it was a necessary tool. It showed three things: they were not in control, if they were the usage would have be stopped. Everyone out there needed to see t%his. Two, it made it unpleasant for them to be in the headspace, which has obvious advantages. Three, it pointed out impersonators of BS because they would not call each other f@%%ot, thus helping to mitigate the spread of false information. Apologies for those unintentionally offended. On that notey,, I give you Barack Obama in a foursome with Peter Thiel, Jack Dorsey, and Matthew Porter. It is on page 12 of the document where you can download the video containing audio footage of the "event". Link for the doc is just above under "Full 80 page document".

nickbauman 7y ago

This has been going on for a looong time.

0xcafecafe 7y ago

I always genuinely wonder where does the high cost of college tuition come from? Ok, if you doing some highly technical major (medicine or technology) which involves you working with cutting edge equipment with maintenance cost but does it really have to be that much? (~$50k pa). Doesn't scale up reduce cost? Also, what about majors like liberal arts? What are the students paying for? The only other thing that comes to mind is faculty cost but are teachers that highly paid to warrant such high tuition?

Ancalagon 7y ago
The cost comes from running the facilities, paying the likely bloated administration, and expanding campus programs and offerings to attract smarter/wealthier student tuition dollars. All of this is perpetuated by the endless mountain of cash that are Federally-backed, impossible-to-bankrupt student loans.
teddyh 7y ago
Never look to the back-end costs to explain the price of anything. The price is always set to what the market can barely tolerate. This is capitalism. If you think that margins are too high, then this could indicate a lack of competition. That’s what you should look to for a possible explanation. Why is there apparently a lack of competition between colleges?
- rdtwo 7y ago
  In a true free for all anti competitive system like college and medicine the list price is some extreme number that is discounted based on each individual ability to pay. In both cases individual discounts should not be allowed because otherwise prices cannot be competitive
- tomatotomato37 7y ago
  Margins being high isn't just caused lack of competition, it can also be caused by unwarranted prestige e.g. De Beers diamonds. You could go to an affordable community college with professors who attend because they enjoy teaching, but then you wouldn't have a sexy expensive degree from MIT/Berkely/Stanford college where the world's most esteemed professors send their TA's to teach you so they can focus on more cutting-edge research.

viburnum 7y ago

It’s insane that college finance has anything to do with parents. Probably a mistake to even have expensive colleges, unless you’re deliberately trying to reproduce inequality.

Kneecaps07 7y ago
Because you're an adult legally. Well except when it comes to paying for college. Then you're a child dependent on your parents.
- asdff 7y ago
  You are a child dependent on your parents until you are 25 and have to pay for your own health insurance.

rdtwo 7y ago

I don’t see anything wrong with this. Colleges are priced for maximum wealth extraction by charging people as much as they can possibly pay so smart families are working the system to outplay them at their own game. This is exactly the same as the medical system where prices are set based on ability to pay and not service provided.

seanmcdirmid 7y ago

It’s almost like this problem should be handled via progressive income/wealth taxation that makes tuition free/affordable to everyone. That way, the rich still pay more, just not in direct tuition.

kazinator 7y ago

What if a kid is actually disowned by their rich parents, and isn't getting anything from them? No aid for you?

zaccus 7y ago
Assuming they're not legally separated and the kid is under 24, yes. Happens a lot actually.

qwerty456127 7y ago

Not surprising when education is so ridiculously expensive, next only to healthcare. Who wouldn't evade prices so high when possible? I'm amazed about how the US insist on regulating everything and fail to leverage free market in these areas letting fair competition to drive the prices down.

supersharklaser 7y ago

I think it’s worth pointing out that universities only care so much as it’s a PR matter and preserving the view of “fairness”. They don’t care in the sense they are getting paid. Overall, the increase in government funding and the effective use of university as the expected next level of education, along with the very mixed financial incentives schools have are the primary causes of the ballooning of cost of education. Wouldn’t this just play more into this problem? I’m in favor of more professional schooling, trade schools and apprenticeships. There are very few reasons why everyone needs full liberal arts degree—especially at the quality it is now. Oddly, I think Europe is more effective in some regards. I don’t agree with free educations—psychologically I think it devalues education. But there is a lot more emphasis on trades, professional and other sorts of schooling, overall a lot more variety in tracks of education. And while I don’t agree with free education, I think the education system is much more aligned with the public benefit.

zaccus 7y ago
>I don’t agree with free educations—psychologically I think it devalues education. There are good reasons to be against free college, but this is not one of them.

jimbob45 7y ago

>The Wall Street Journal was able to reach two parents who were coached by Destination College into transferring guardianship of their kids before they applied for financial aid. TWO. TWO. Even if we extrapolate that two out beyond our wildest dreams, it's still not symbolic of a pattern. Yes, this is a loophole and yes it should be closed but there does not appear to be any evidence that is being being abused widespread at the current time.

CodeCube 7y ago
This isn't exactly rocket science ... my daughter just started college, and as a tech industry employee let me tell you, she got no financial aid (some other academic things aside). When we started filling out the student loan paperwork, I had literally this idea (the whole legal separation thing) as a passing thought. Of course, because I'm not a monster, I laughed it off and kept on filling out the paperwork ... but one doesn't have to be a great student out of Wharton to figure out a scam like this, and you can bet your arse more people have actually pulled the trigger on it.
- rdtwo 7y ago
  When I was 18 I asked my parents to look into doing that. They laughed it off but like you said it’s a pretty obvious loophole but you have plan ahead a bit to utilize it
  - Throw_Away_4825 7y ago
    What exactly would that look like? The article talks about guardianship, but with 18 they aren't your guardian anymore either way (at least in most states). Or is it about not listing you as a dependent? Doesn't that have negative tax implications for the parents?
    - CodeCube 7y ago
      minimal ... it's a few thousand dollars, and after a certain point in income, that deduction goes away entirely no matter how many children you have.

33MHz-i486 7y ago

In other news ... instead charging a transparent and fair price for a service, private colleges and government conspire to attain perfect price discrimination against their education consumers based on itemization of their income/property.

iguy 7y ago

Now that they know this may happen, what's to stop every university closing the loophole? Since they appear to be free to do whatever they please, they can simply ask for a list of anyone who was ever your parent, and a letter explaining any omissions (like you were adopted age 1). They needn't even write the rules for acceptance of excuses in advance, and can decide what to do about edge cases (like someone adopted by his less-wealthy uncle at age 15...) when one applies. Is there any reason they don't yet do this?

moate 7y ago
How do you know that closes the loophole? How can you prove someone is saying they're estranged and not actually estranged? Sad fact is a wide net for social programs are typically better, even if it allows scammers to skim off the system. Which feels like the greater social loss to you, closing the loop hole and finding that you're now harming people who need assistance or keeping it open and allowing some people to benefit unfairly from the system?
- iguy 7y ago
  It would close this particular loophole, by treating legally disowned and merely estranged identically. I'm not saying they would accept letters stating that you are estranged (which they certainly don't do now). I'm saying they could refuse to believe recent legal changes to parenthood, and just demand the whole list since birth. Just as lots of documents need every name you've ever had, not just your current legal name. (Whether the actually estranged should be treated differently is another question. Judging by how they've run the system so far, the colleges don't seem inclined to do so. I don't mean to defend their behavior, only to ask what moves they may make.)

harshreality 7y ago

What are the downsides of this: Mandate that all (accredited, therefore regulated) schools charge a percentage of future earnings, rather than tuition. The market between employers and colleges will sort itself out. Every prospective student would know ahead of time what percentage of future earnings (up to some cap) they'd be giving up, per school, and would weigh the perceived value of the schools against the percentages they take.

jb3689 7y ago
There is some talk about something like this, and I believe Purdue was trying it out already
- iguy 7y ago
  I believe the Australian & UK systems work a bit like this, too. Perhaps it's nominally a loan, but collected like income tax, with a threshold on how much you must earn to pay at all. However I don't think either is very flexible about different places charging very different fees, or different implied interest rates.

llacb47 7y ago

Source should be changed to https://propublica.org/article/university-of-illinois-financial-aid-fafsa-parents-guardianship-children-students https://propublica.org/article/university-of-illinois-financ...

chkaloon 7y ago

Same issue as wealthy elderly gifting all their assets to their kids ("pre-inheritance") so they can get on Medicaid to pay for their nursing home care.

Arete314159 7y ago

Meanwhile, poorer unfortunate kids whose parents kick them out get caught in the gap where their parents won't pay for college, but the college considers them dependents and won't give them financial aid. Source: Was one such kid. Took 2 years of paperwork and phone calls before I qualify for aid based on my own finances.

hendersoon 7y ago

This makes no sense to me. You have $250k/year income and you go to the trouble and risk possible unintended consequences of emancipating your child to save $20k/year for 4 years? Totally bizarre.