Right-- and while I probably would argue that in a perfect world, some of that kind of thinking is probably justified, the ultimate problem here is that it has created a gap that is moved UP the income scale-- so yes, poorer families still face a lot of barriers-- BUT-- if they can overcome them, there is great financial support for higher ed...
that is NOT true any longer for middle class children. If you are in the 70th~98th percentile in income, you can expect absolutely NOTHING "need-based" whatsoever. All that you can qualify for is merit-based aid.
You can also expect that you'll be competing for dollar amounts which are unchanged since the 80's with children whose SES means that THEY are the pampered, primped, and hothoused (not to mention 'whipped') children of Tiger Parents, and are therefore far more well-suited to the task of out-competing in this particular game.
Sucks to be you, (or your parents) basically. Because your family can't afford to build orphanages in Algeria or wherever, but you also don't need food stamps.
When your EFC is estimated to be 60-70% of your household's annual gross income, and when YOU know that your household expenses actually consume something like 85-90% of it... what CAN you do with that but laugh? It's madness, but good luck telling anyone in higher ed that particular fact. Tell it to the hand.
This is why our strategy was to consider what we could actually write checks for, and then go from there. (And no, don't be silly-- that value is nowhere near what colleges seem to think that it is.)
NO aid was assumed, because mostly that's going to be correct. It certainly would be after the first year.
