Penn State is not raising in-state tuition

[rutgersdave]

As I have often said it's all about the Shop Rite line and how much $ you can advertise about spending. It's why I think RU has so many first generation Americans and first generation to go to college- the parents look at the costs and what's on offer and quickly realize RU makes so much more sense.

The parents that can afford the extra 30-40% tuition for out of state should be able to pay for the extra without taking out loans. However, too many situation where the kid said I have to go to THIS school even though the parent or kid can’t afford it.

In addition, kids want to live on campus and don’t want to commute to school. Yes, it’s a better environment but when you can’t afford it, you commute and most of Jersey you can commute to Rutgers. I still contend most kids can afford to go to college maybe not live on campus.

I noticed a friend I went to school with sold his consulting firm a few years ago and later came back to the purchasing firm,1,300 employees, to be their NYC managing director. I see he donated $160k last year to the Democratic Party and tend to donate $100k every year. His family lived in a small cape cod in Fair Lawn when he was growing up so he wasn’t rich. Rutgers can make you rich if you have the drive. Other friends I hung out with are as successful. Get your kids to hang out with the right crowd, the top 5% grade wise.

 

[RUSK97]

That's why I never understood why parents allowed kids to go to inferior colleges academically OOS like Temple or Delaware if they get into RU, or even schools on par with RU like PSU or Pitt unless their major was significantly better there than at RU. Is it a status thing? Putting your kids in debt twice as hard just to say you can?

It most certainly is a status symbol. It’s not so much a thing in working class towns, but in wealthy towns, going the sensible way is shameful.

 

[bigmatt718]

It most certainly is a status symbol. It’s not so much a thing in working class towns, but in wealthy towns, going the sensible way is shameful.

Yeah and those kids will be moving back home with Mommy and Daddy with a $100k plus anchor around their waist upon graduation. I'm 32 and I'm only about $10k in the hole. I'll be paid off within 3 or 4 years.

 

[e5fdny]

Any college out of state is about 30-40% higher than NJ.

What a lot of schools do now (depending the strength of your application) is give you enough aid to make it a wash with your local (RU, TCNJ, etc.).

That's why I never understood why parents allowed kids to go to inferior colleges academically OOS like Temple or Delaware if they get into RU, or even schools on par with RU like PSU or Pitt unless their major was significantly better there than at RU. Is it a status thing? Putting your kids in debt twice as hard just to say you can?

Sometimes it’s as simple as a location thing. And by that I mean it’s not like NB/Piscataway or Ewing Twp are bad it’s just the other place in competition is more what the student is looking for.

 

[T2Kplus10]

This is a decided contrast to Rutgers. The big reason this happened? The Pennsylvania legislature increased the state's aid to the university by 3%. When was the last time the NJ legislature did the same for Rutgers? Not recently, I know that!

http://www.philly.com/philly/education/its-official-penn-state-freezing-tuition-20180720.html

RU should go fully private and cut all ties to the wacko state government.

 

[T2Kplus10]

That’s what happens when the pols continue to increase the funding for kindergarten while slashing the budget for higher ed.

NJ pols have other priorities (i.e., it's politically more profitable to pander to parents with younger children).

 

[retired711]

RU should go fully private and cut all ties to the wacko state government.

The problem with that is M-O-N-E-Y. Rutgers would have to drastically cut enrollment and give up anything built since 1956, i.e. probably everything on the Busch and Livingston campuses. And the state would be sure to set up a new state university to compete with Rutgers.

 

[T2Kplus10]

You have now contradicted your original argument -- don't you see that? You started out blaming K and pre-K for the Rutgers budget. Now your argument is "there's only so much money to go around." But that argument applies to *all* items in the budget, not just K and pre-K. So this argument is counter to your original argument that K and pre-K funding are somehow particularly responsible. You have still presented not the slightest bit of evidence for that

Camden - it is a simple fact, the majority of the state's $37.4B budget can we used as the legislature sees fit (back out some items like debt service and Medicaid). They decided to increase the budget by 8% this year, but they just didn't see fit to give anything more to RU. Facts are clear, they just don't care about RU.

 

[T2Kplus10]

The problem with that is M-O-N-E-Y. Rutgers would have to drastically cut enrollment and give up anything built since 1956, i.e. probably everything on the Busch and Livingston campuses. And the state would be sure to set up a new state university to compete with Rutgers.

This is the most power argument against going private, not the money. Norcross would have Rowan declared the state university before the end of the day. But honestly, the state is doing more harm than good against RU. I would like to see a full developed plan for RU going private and see what it would take.

 

[retired711]

Camden - it is a simple fact, the majority of the state's $37.4B budget can we used as the legislature sees fit (back out some items like debt service and Medicaid). They decided to increase the budget by 8% this year, but they just didn't see fit to give anything more to RU. Facts are clear, they just don't care about RU.

I don't argue with that, but, as I explained above, it is a mistake to attribute the lack of support for Rutgers to pre-K programs. They were willing to increase taxes to support pre-K; they would never have done so for Rutgers. The problem is just as you say: "they just don't care about RU."

 

[retired711]

This is the most power argument against going private, not the money. Norcross would have Rowan declared the state university before the end of the day. But honestly, the state is doing more harm than good against RU. I would like to see a full developed plan for RU going private and see what it would take.

My guess is that Montclair and TCNJ would become the northern and central campuses of such a university. Making a plan for Rutgers going private would be the kind of waste of money that you are always complaining about: there is no way to do it that would not involve massive damage to Rutgers.