Another college scandal

[azucena]

www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2019/07/30/college-financial-aid-custody-transfer-guardianship-loophole-admissions-scandal/1868220001/

"...families near Chicago would give up legal guardianship of their children to relatives or friends. Students would then file for financial independence, which effectively opened the door to financial aid they wouldn’t have been able to access while under the legal care of their parents."

[finnime]

I like the phrase "opportunity hoarding" for this type of scam. The ones hurt by it are those who then lose all opportunities. These people have no scruples at all.

[Lizard Queen]

I agree that this is wrong, but this country is also really weird about the transition to adulthood. We keep parents responsible past the age of 18 for some things, yet not others. Perhaps parents should be able to get some benefit for that, instead of simply being expected to open their wallets with little say in the matter.

[Deleted]

Too complicated.  Just have them marry a high school friend.  Instant independent!  

 <bad MPL>

[bobosensei]

Aug 1, 2019 21:41:41 GMT -5 Lizard Queen said:

I agree that this is wrong, but this country is also really weird about the transition to adulthood. We keep parents responsible past the age of 18 for some things, yet not others. Perhaps parents should be able to get some benefit for that, instead of simply being expected to open their wallets with little say in the matter.

I remember reading about a girl who sued her parents over paying for college and won.  She was estranged from them, and the parents were counter suing saying she didn't apply for scholarships or other aid I think.  I think they were still ordered to pay.

I also find it wrong that in a divorce one parent may be forced to pay for something they don't agree to in terms of college.

I don't think there is an inherent right for a kid to go to college paid for by parents, but also think it is crappy of parent who can afford not to contribute.  If you get those kind of parents just remember it when they need a nursing home.

When i was in college I knew an LGBT student who filed for emancipation from parents for financial aid purposes stating that the parents were refusing to pay for school because they were gay.  I recall there was more to the story, that the parents just weren't willing to pay for private school but the kid did it because he wanted to go to the school but didn't want to take out loans.  It apparently worked, and because the student income was near zero he didn't have to contribute a penny.

[Deleted]

Aug 2, 2019 5:44:18 GMT -5 bobosensei said:

I also find it wrong that in a divorce one parent may be forced to pay for something they don't agree to in terms of college.

Same here.  I've had a lot of people tell me I should go back to court and have child support extended through college but I won't do that.  It just doesn't seem right to me.  Parents should be able to choose to help or not help an adult child.

Besides, since I believe in saving up for these things ahead of time, he technically did help pay for college since that's where the 529 money came from to begin with.

[Rukh O'Rorke]

Aug 2, 2019 6:13:04 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

Aug 2, 2019 5:44:18 GMT -5 bobosensei said:

I also find it wrong that in a divorce one parent may be forced to pay for something they don't agree to in terms of college.

Same here.  I've had a lot of people tell me I should go back to court and have child support extended through college but I won't do that.  It just doesn't seem right to me.  Parents should be able to choose to help or not help an adult child.

Besides, since I believe in saving up for these things ahead of time, he technically did help pay for college since that's where the 529 money came from to begin with.

In theory, I agree. Unfortunately - the current system "expects" the parent to pay based on income, and the student is penalized or rewarded with financial aid based on parent income.

Until age 24


Ridiculous!

[haapai]

Aug 2, 2019 5:44:18 GMT -5 bobosensei said:

Aug 1, 2019 21:41:41 GMT -5 Lizard Queen said:

I agree that this is wrong, but this country is also really weird about the transition to adulthood. We keep parents responsible past the age of 18 for some things, yet not others. Perhaps parents should be able to get some benefit for that, instead of simply being expected to open their wallets with little say in the matter.

I remember reading about a girl who sued her parents over paying for college and won.  She was estranged from them, and the parents were counter suing saying she didn't apply for scholarships or other aid I think.  I think they were still ordered to pay.

I also find it wrong that in a divorce one parent may be forced to pay for something they don't agree to in terms of college.

I don't think there is an inherent right for a kid to go to college paid for by parents, but also think it is crappy of parent who can afford not to contribute.  If you get those kind of parents just remember it when they need a nursing home.

When i was in college I knew an LGBT student who filed for emancipation from parents for financial aid purposes stating that the parents were refusing to pay for school because they were gay.  I recall there was more to the story, that the parents just weren't willing to pay for private school but the kid did it because he wanted to go to the school but didn't want to take out loans.  It apparently worked, and because the student income was near zero he didn't have to contribute a penny.

I'd  like to know how long ago you went to college and how old the student was when he filed for emancipation.  I spent a good chunk of the early nineties hanging out the room that our university set aside for the LGB (it was a long time ago) student organization and I heard a lot of stories of parents who were refusing to pay anything towards their children's college costs and/or refusing to provide income data for the FAFSA. 

The kids whose parents would not give them income data for the FAFSA were pretty much iced out of any realistic chance of attending college, including community college, until they aged into independence.  (Even in the early nineties when community college tuition was much cheaper in this state, very few of these students had the resources and earning power to feed, house and educate themselves even by working full time and taking one class at a time.)  Needless to say, marriage, military service, or having a kid were not attractive work-arounds for this bunch. 

There is absolutely no law that compels parents to provide income data for the purpose of completing the FAFSA.  OTOH, I do remember that at least one student managed to get parental cooperation after someone who sounded an awful lot like a lawyer contacted her parents. 

There were constantly rumors of how a few years earlier, proving financial independence, especially if there was evidence of deep estrangement, had been possible but the kids that I talked to never had stories like that.  Most of them had been told that there was absolutely nothing that anyone at the college could do for them and this was probably the truth.  There were some great allies and a lot of family in the financial aid office.

FWIW, most of the stories of spiteful parents came from students who had recently aged into independence.  The kids that had been cut off from financial support while already matriculated were strangely absent.  They may have been too shell-shocked and broke to be spending any time at the queer students' office.  

I ask how old the student was because current FAFSA guidelines allow students who have been legally emancipated prior to turning 18, or had been in the foster care system when they turned 18, independent status. 

[seriousthistime]

Our kids were either in college or about to start, so it became part of the divorce negotiation.  We split the college expenses according to the percentage of income earned.  We totaled our income, and I made somewhat less than he did so he had to pay a somewhat higher share of the college costs.  

It took a lot of time and money to hammer that out, though.  If our kids had been preschool age I doubt the college years would have been a big focus of the divorce negotiations. 

I read a few versions of the story linked in the first post.  My guess is there was a ripple effect affecting admissions as well as financial aid.  Schools give a hard look to kids who've succeeded despite hard knocks.  The kids involved in the guardianship scam were likely given a leg up in the admissions game.  They went from being just another kid from a wealthy Chicago suburb to a disadvantaged kid. If their perceived disadvantage tipped the scales toward admission, another student down the line suffered the consequences.

[haapai]

From what I have read so far, this scandal had nothing to do with getting in, just paying for it.  It does not appear that "places" were stolen here.  This particular scandal seems to be entirely about paying less, a whole lot less, at the expense of folks with very little. 

[Deleted]

Aug 4, 2019 9:58:40 GMT -5 haapai said:

Aug 2, 2019 5:44:18 GMT -5 bobosensei said:

I'd  like to know how long ago you went to college and how old the student was when he filed for emancipation. 

I started school in the late 80's and back then you were considered independent if your parents didn't claim you on their taxes.   It took some fighting with them, but after the first year they stopped claiming me (I was working full-time as well) and was independent from that point on.  

College was super cheap back then though.  I paid only $35/credit for school and was making $6.50/hour.  Now it's more like $350/credit.  

[Deleted]

Aug 4, 2019 9:07:55 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

Aug 2, 2019 6:13:04 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

Same here.  I've had a lot of people tell me I should go back to court and have child support extended through college but I won't do that.  It just doesn't seem right to me.  Parents should be able to choose to help or not help an adult child.

Besides, since I believe in saving up for these things ahead of time, he technically did help pay for college since that's where the 529 money came from to begin with.

In theory, I agree. Unfortunately - the current system "expects" the parent to pay based on income, and the student is penalized or rewarded with financial aid based on parent income.

Until age 24


Ridiculous!

That's when you marry a friend in the same situation!  My cousin actually did this.  Not so that she could go to school, but so her friend could.  Their "fake" marriage lasted longer than either one of my real ones! 

[haapai]

Aug 4, 2019 12:29:42 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

Aug 4, 2019 9:58:40 GMT -5 haapai said:

I'd  like to know how long ago you went to college and how old the student was when he filed for emancipation. 

I started school in the late 80's and back then you were considered independent if your parents didn't claim you on their taxes.   It took some fighting with them, but after the first year they stopped claiming me (I was working full-time as well) and was independent from that point on.  

College was super cheap back then though.  I paid only $35/credit for school and was making $6.50/hour.  Now it's more like $350/credit.  

Yes, school was super cheap back then.  I was making something like $3.15 to $3.35 an hour while taking a class that cost me something between $80 and $200 including books and fees.  It provided lots of entertainment and exposure to other young people who also occasionally opened books for a fraction of what filling those hours with Tetris and draft beers would have cost me.   I should mention that I biked, walked or rode the bus to classes.  Parking might have doubled the cost of taking classes. 

I really wish that I could talk truthfully about what those times were like without someone even less current than myself asserting that things are still similar.  I saw things change quite dramatically between 1990 and 1999 when I got my final degree and a lot of the things that I saw folks do in order to get a degree, or even just to stay out of trouble, don't work anymore. 

Living with four roommates in a hole-in-the-wall apartment that is approved for two occupants doesn't really change the math when the tuition and fees associated with attending college have doubled or tripled.  Ditto for jokes about ramen noodles.  Back in 1990, you could pick up ramen (mix and match) eight for a dollar and the cheapness of this meal contributed quite significantly to you getting through the semester.  Today you can buy ramen noodles six for a dollar (all one flavor) but eating these sodium bombs doesn't save nearly as much money for rent or tuition as it used to. 

[Deleted]

Aug 4, 2019 12:13:21 GMT -5 haapai said:

From what I have read so far, this scandal had nothing to do with getting in, just paying for it.  It does not appear that "places" were stolen here.  This particular scandal seems to be entirely about paying less, a whole lot less, at the expense of folks with very little. 

Well, financial aid places were stolen.

Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker said he has directed his staff to investigate the practice. The state has a limited pool of money to give low-income students. Last year, more than 80,000 students who were eligible for the Illinois Monetary Award Program, or MAP, grant did not receive it because there wasn’t enough money. The grant, up to $5,000, is awarded on a first-come, first-served basis.

www.propublica.org/article/illinois-lawmakers-call-hearing-college-financial-aid-scandal-guardianship-loophole


Higher education is such a cluster here.  I really think it should be free to those that meet certain criteria.  

[bobosensei]

Aug 4, 2019 9:58:40 GMT -5 haapai said:

Aug 2, 2019 5:44:18 GMT -5 bobosensei said:

I remember reading about a girl who sued her parents over paying for college and won.  She was estranged from them, and the parents were counter suing saying she didn't apply for scholarships or other aid I think.  I think they were still ordered to pay.

I also find it wrong that in a divorce one parent may be forced to pay for something they don't agree to in terms of college.

I don't think there is an inherent right for a kid to go to college paid for by parents, but also think it is crappy of parent who can afford not to contribute.  If you get those kind of parents just remember it when they need a nursing home.

When i was in college I knew an LGBT student who filed for emancipation from parents for financial aid purposes stating that the parents were refusing to pay for school because they were gay.  I recall there was more to the story, that the parents just weren't willing to pay for private school but the kid did it because he wanted to go to the school but didn't want to take out loans.  It apparently worked, and because the student income was near zero he didn't have to contribute a penny.

I'd  like to know how long ago you went to college and how old the student was when he filed for emancipation.  I spent a good chunk of the early nineties hanging out the room that our university set aside for the LGB (it was a long time ago) student organization and I heard a lot of stories of parents who were refusing to pay anything towards their children's college costs and/or refusing to provide income data for the FAFSA. 

The kids whose parents would not give them income data for the FAFSA were pretty much iced out of any realistic chance of attending college, including community college, until they aged into independence.  (Even in the early nineties when community college tuition was much cheaper in this state, very few of these students had the resources and earning power to feed, house and educate themselves even by working full time and taking one class at a time.)  Needless to say, marriage, military service, or having a kid were not attractive work-arounds for this bunch. 

There is absolutely no law that compels parents to provide income data for the purpose of completing the FAFSA.  OTOH, I do remember that at least one student managed to get parental cooperation after someone who sounded an awful lot like a lawyer contacted her parents. 

There were constantly rumors of how a few years earlier, proving financial independence, especially if there was evidence of deep estrangement, had been possible but the kids that I talked to never had stories like that.  Most of them had been told that there was absolutely nothing that anyone at the college could do for them and this was probably the truth.  There were some great allies and a lot of family in the financial aid office.

FWIW, most of the stories of spiteful parents came from students who had recently aged into independence.  The kids that had been cut off from financial support while already matriculated were strangely absent.  They may have been too shell-shocked and broke to be spending any time at the queer students office.  

I ask how old the student was because current FAFSA guidelines allow students who have been legally emancipated prior to turning 18, or had been in the foster care system when they turned 18, independent status. 

I was in college from 2000-2004.  I went to a private school and suspect it was a private endowment that paid those expenses for the student.

[seriousthistime]

Aug 4, 2019 12:13:21 GMT -5 haapai said:

From what I have read so far, this scandal had nothing to do with getting in, just paying for it.  It does not appear that "places" were stolen here.  This particular scandal seems to be entirely about paying less, a whole lot less, at the expense of folks with very little. 

The articles I've read don't explicitly state it. But it is not a secret that schools are under some pressure to consider disadvantaged background as a factor.

www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2018/05/college-admissions-gpa-sat-act/561167/

"These days, applicants and their parents demand “absoluteness” in admissions, said Furda, who every April answers complaints from rejected applicants who compare their academic backgrounds to those of accepted students they know. The issue for Penn and other top colleges is that as applicants’ test scores and grades rise, the ability to distinguish among them becomes ever more difficult, if not impossible.

This challenge comes as Penn and other selective colleges are under pressure to increase their enrollment of low-income and first-generation students."

[haapai]

Aug 5, 2019 20:48:49 GMT -5 seriousthistime said:

Aug 4, 2019 12:13:21 GMT -5 haapai said:

From what I have read so far, this scandal had nothing to do with getting in, just paying for it.  It does not appear that "places" were stolen here.  This particular scandal seems to be entirely about paying less, a whole lot less, at the expense of folks with very little. 

The articles I've read don't explicitly state it. But it is not a secret that schools are under some pressure to consider disadvantaged background as a factor.

www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2018/05/college-admissions-gpa-sat-act/561167/

"These days, applicants and their parents demand “absoluteness” in admissions, said Furda, who every April answers complaints from rejected applicants who compare their academic backgrounds to those of accepted students they know. The issue for Penn and other top colleges is that as applicants’ test scores and grades rise, the ability to distinguish among them becomes ever more difficult, if not impossible.

This challenge comes as Penn and other selective colleges are under pressure to increase their enrollment of low-income and first-generation students."

I've read your May 2018 article and come to the curt conclusion that it is pretty tangential to the current kerfluffle at U of Illinois.  

I still think that in this case it was about the money, not any admissions boost.  I really don't see how appearing disadvantaged boosted the admissions odds at this university. 

An article speculating how much could be netted from this gambit is quite overdue.  Pell grants might not cover what they used to, but they are still grants.  PerKins loans are still capped at 5% and getting subsidized Staffords instead of unsubsidized Staffords can be a big deal. 

[hoops902]

I get that it's a "scandal", but this is really nothing new.  People have been trying to figure out ways around this completely stupid system for a long time.  People get emancipated by getting married, etc.  There's no reason to treat 2 18-year olds who are unmarried any differently than 2 who get married specifically to get financial aid money.  I don't REALLY see anything wrong here...the article says "ethically questionable"...I say if you can find a legal route to circumvent a completely stupid and arbitrary system, then go for it (we talk about estate planning here...estate planning primarily revolves around finding legal ways to circumvent a stupid and arbitrary system of probate).  Does it take money away from a targeted group of people?  Absolutely, and it redistributes that money in a more equal manner.

If the government says "anyone with a last name that starts with A-L can drive a max of 50 mph, anyone with M-Z can drive 60 mph" it's their own stupid fault when people go and change their names.  

The government loves to create stupid/nonsensical systems...then double down on that system by implementing tons of clauses and details.  If people can find completely legal ways of getting through that system to their own advantage...that's the fault of the person who built the rules.  Build better rules!  And it's hard for me to come down on people who circumvent all of that just to get equal treatment that others already get.

I thought it was interesting they talked about "getting your child diagnosed with a disability to give them an advantage" (as in, more time on a test, not having someone else take tests for them)...that's not just a college "scandal", that's par for the course now.  Kid has a lot of energy...ADHD/Hyperactivity.  Kid doesn't pay attention in school...ADHD.  It's super common with guidance counselors in schools now...kid isn't doing well?  Find a reason to give them extra time so they'll improve perhaps.  

ETA:  Curious what people would think if a job based on pay scale (like lots of government work) had a higher pay scale for people with poor parents, and a lower pay scale for people with rich parents, based on the idea that the employee could just get subsidized by their parents and therefore needs less money in their job.  Or paid single people more because they aren't sharing expenses with a spouse?  Or paid married people with low-earning spouses more than married people with high-earning spouses?  

[NastyWoman]

Aug 6, 2019 11:08:40 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

...

ETA:  Curious what people would think if a job based on pay scale (like lots of government work) had a higher pay scale for people with poor parents, and a lower pay scale for people with rich parents, based on the idea that the employee could just get subsidized by their parents and therefore needs less money in their job.  Or paid single people more because they aren't sharing expenses with a spouse?  Or paid married people with low-earning spouses more than married people with high-earning spouses?  

There is statistical evidence that married men earn more than unmarried ones and women with children get paid less than anyone - the "mommy penalty" all for similar jobs. This has been talked about for years and years and it still has not been fixed or even gotten close to a fix, so discussing something theoretical about pay rates before we fix actual existing problems seems to be an exercise in futility to me

[TheOtherMe]

As one of the feminists in the 70's who fought for equal pay and I'm now retired, I agree.  

Let's worry about pay equality.  Yes, some of it is due to having children.

[hoops902]

Aug 6, 2019 13:28:03 GMT -5 NastyWoman said:

Aug 6, 2019 11:08:40 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

...

ETA:  Curious what people would think if a job based on pay scale (like lots of government work) had a higher pay scale for people with poor parents, and a lower pay scale for people with rich parents, based on the idea that the employee could just get subsidized by their parents and therefore needs less money in their job.  Or paid single people more because they aren't sharing expenses with a spouse?  Or paid married people with low-earning spouses more than married people with high-earning spouses?  

There is statistical evidence that married men earn more than unmarried ones and women with children get paid less than anyone - the "mommy penalty" all for similar jobs. This has been talked about for years and years and it still has not been fixed or even gotten close to a fix, so discussing something theoretical about pay rates before we fix actual existing problems seems to be an exercise in futility to me

But we're not talking about "this happens", we're talking about a government designed system.  Lots of things "happen".  Tall people make more money than short people on average given the same jobs and qualifications.  I care (and others should too) a lot less about things that "happen" but do not have government backing, and things that happen because the government has written it into code.

There's a big difference between fixing people's individual perceptions and biases...and fixing a system of rules and regulations determined and administered by our government.  There are something like 17,000 murder/manslaughters per year.  Should we fix that?  Of course!  But it would be a much bigger deal if our government were simply holding a lottery to decide they were going to murder 17,000 people per year based on some horrible logic, and that anyone with half a brain could find a way to opt out of the lottery if they wanted to, leaving only people who were too ignorant, lazy, or idealistic about the system to be included.

And you can call it futile if you like.  The quite obvious point is that it is analogous to the college aid system we're discussing...but once it actually hits the people talking about it (rather than only impacting "other people" since most of us are not considered dependents looking for financial aid at the moment), it becomes pretty clear how insanely ridiculous it is to have a government system designed to give unequal money to different groups of adults based on 1.  Other people in your life who have no ethical and mostly no legal obligation to give you money.  2.  The fact that you've chosen not to take a fairly simple legal maneuver to get around the illogical rules.  If it were need-based, that would be one thing...but it's not...it's this faux-need system where need is determined based on the idea that other people in your life will give you money if you really need it and assumes they even have it to begin with.  It doesn't get fixed in large part because the people who will benefit are not the people who makes the rules...by the time you're old enough to impact anything, you've already been through the stupid system and there's a great (not great) mindset of many people that if they got screwed the only fair thing is to screw everyone else after them.

It's like saying "the 10 of you are paralyzed in the legs and need wheelchairs.  We're going to take the 10 wheelchairs we have, and we'll give 5 of you 2 chairs each.  The other 5 don't need them, because your relatives have big strong arms, they could just carry you.  The 5 in need have scrawny-armed relatives.

[formerroomate99]

Aug 6, 2019 14:09:04 GMT -5 TheOtherMe said:

As one of the feminists in the 70's who fought for equal pay and I'm now retired, I agree.  

Let's worry about pay equality.  Yes, some of it is due to having children.

But how much of that is due to career choices and different preferences for working conditions? And the bigger question is why do women flock towards careers the pay diddly squat knowing full well that there’s a better than average chance that they’re going to end up on their own with kids to support? That choice baffles me.

[formerroomate99]

Hoops does make a good point. I knew a girl in high school, whose very wealthy father decided he was going to buy a boat instead of helping her with college. I thought it was kind of a dick move, since he knew that his income guaranteed that she wouldn’t get a penny of financial aid.

[adela76]

Aug 6, 2019 14:24:46 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

"It's like saying "the 10 of you are paralyzed in the legs and need wheelchairs. We're going to take the 10 wheelchairs we have, and we'll give 5 of you 2 chairs each. The other 5 don't need them, because your relatives have big strong arms, they could just carry you. The 5 in need have scrawny-armed relatives."


While I agree with you that the financial aid system is a flawed, this analogy is bad.  There aren't 10 wheelchairs, there are 5.*  Not everybody gets a wheelchair and someone tried to come up with a fair way to decide who gets a wheelchair and who doesn't.  So, yeah, a person with parents who can buy them a wheelchair (or who own a wheelchair factory) doesn't get one provided by the government at taxpayer expense, even if her parents can't or won't give her a wheelchair.  It sucks for her and it's not fair, but life is not fair.


*Yes, maybe the government could just build more wheelchairs (i.e. offer more grants and subsidized loans).  Do we raise taxes to pay for that?  Is that fair to the childless people who have no interest in subsidizing everyone else's kids' college educations?  Oh wait, life is not fair!

[hoops902]

Aug 7, 2019 20:21:55 GMT -5 adela76 said:

Aug 6, 2019 14:24:46 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

"It's like saying "the 10 of you are paralyzed in the legs and need wheelchairs. We're going to take the 10 wheelchairs we have, and we'll give 5 of you 2 chairs each. The other 5 don't need them, because your relatives have big strong arms, they could just carry you. The 5 in need have scrawny-armed relatives."


While I agree with you that the financial aid system is a flawed, this analogy is bad.  There aren't 10 wheelchairs, there are 5.*  Not everybody gets a wheelchair and someone tried to come up with a fair way to decide who gets a wheelchair and who doesn't.  So, yeah, a person with parents who can buy them a wheelchair (or who own a wheelchair factory) doesn't get one provided by the government at taxpayer expense, even if her parents can't or won't give her a wheelchair.  It sucks for her and it's not fair, but life is not fair.


*Yes, maybe the government could just build more wheelchairs (i.e. offer more grants and subsidized loans).  Do we raise taxes to pay for that?  Is that fair to the childless people who have no interest in subsidizing everyone else's kids' college educations?  Oh wait, life is not fair!

Ok, think of it a different way if you like.  We can give out 5 power wheelchairs, or 10 manual wheelchairs.  5 power wheelchairs would certainly be very nice for the 5 who get them.  But that leaves 5 people SOL.  Or we could recognize they all have the same needs and give them 10 manual wheelchairs which will help everyone but not be quite as nice for the 5 we were going to selectively target to get even more while some had none.

[OldCoyote]

Fifty years of Affirmative Action, nothing has been fixed.

[hoops902]

Aug 8, 2019 9:04:03 GMT -5 OldCoyote said:

Fifty years of Affirmative Action, nothing has been fixed.

It's kind of shocking that combatting racism with more racism isn't working.  

[bean29]

Aug 7, 2019 16:29:41 GMT -5 formerroomate99 said:

Aug 6, 2019 14:09:04 GMT -5 TheOtherMe said:

As one of the feminists in the 70's who fought for equal pay and I'm now retired, I agree.  

Let's worry about pay equality.  Yes, some of it is due to having children.

But how much of that is due to career choices and different preferences for working conditions? And the bigger question is why do women flock towards careers the pay diddly squat knowing full well that there’s a better than average chance that they’re going to end up on their own with kids to support? That choice baffles me.

Yes, you can get married to be eligible for more financial aid.  If you or your partner is in the military, you can get more income if you get married.  Both of these could result in financial repercussions down the road.  Military people often get married young, have children young, and then the relationship falls apart and they you are left with poor job skills and no education to get a good job.  Yes, there are education benefits but that requires time, ability, and determination.  If you have kids, it will also require someone to watch the kids while you got to school/work/study.  I advised my DD not to go down that road.

Getting married to circumvent the current financial aid rules has similar issues to getting married to get more military pay, but I think this issue of have a family member assume responsibility for your nearly adult kid "on paper only", is just wrong, and the loophole should be closed.

I do agree that the current system is broken/wrong.  Personally I think we should go back to subsidizing the cost of college attendance more heavily to make it more affordable, but it should not be "free".

[bean29]

Aug 8, 2019 9:12:17 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

Aug 8, 2019 9:04:03 GMT -5 OldCoyote said:

Fifty years of Affirmative Action, nothing has been fixed.

It's kind of shocking that combatting racism with more racism isn't working.  

Where did this come from? What does it have to do with the op?

[hoops902]

Aug 8, 2019 9:35:23 GMT -5 bean29 said:

Aug 8, 2019 9:12:17 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

It's kind of shocking that combatting racism with more racism isn't working.  

Where did this come from? What does it have to do with the op?

I was commenting on affirmative action, if you're asking what affirmative action has to do with the OP you'd have to ask the person who mentioned it.