|
|
Post by DeadpanDoubter on Jul 23, 2009 22:51:54 GMT -5
Uhhh yeah. I figured this might fall under the "Government", but if not, I'm sorry and please move my butt. ):
Can anyone tell me WHY I'm not allowed to get financial aid for college based on only my own taxes until I'm 25?
|
|
|
|
Post by Tiger on Jul 23, 2009 22:57:45 GMT -5
Because before then, it's assumed that your parents will be supporting you in some way?
|
|
|
|
Post by Maryland Bear on Jul 24, 2009 5:57:41 GMT -5
Because before then, it's assumed that your parents will be supporting you in some way? I believe that's true; however, I also believe there are ways to become legally financially independent of one's parents. However, I also understand that means what it says -- you cannot get any financial assistance from Mom and Dad. Most colleges should have financial aid advisors that can answer such a question better than anyone on here can (unless someone on here is a financial aid advisor.) |
|
|
|
Post by skyfire on Jul 24, 2009 10:36:12 GMT -5
The long and short of it is that the government is anal retentive when it comes to giving out cash to people who might actually do something productive with it.
If this is the first time you're doing the FAFSA, then what they'll be doing to your finances is akin to a body cavity search. And since you're under 25, your parents can expect the same, too.
The idea is that if you can pay even one cent towards your own education, you should pay twenty-five.
I find it utterly ironic that honest college students are being held to a higher standard of federal scrutiny than multi-million dollar banks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maryland Bear on Jul 24, 2009 10:39:49 GMT -5
I find it utterly ironic that honest college students are being held to a higher standard of federal scrutiny than multi-million dollar banks. College students don't have lobbyists. |
|
|
|
Post by dantesvirgil on Jul 24, 2009 10:45:17 GMT -5
Skyfire's melodramatic assessment of financial aid aside, unless you are independent of your parents (in most cases that means proof that you've been living on your own and supporting yourself for at least one year) or you have a "qualifying event" (like the death of a parent/caretaker), you're considered dependent whether you filed taxes or not. The reason for this is not to somehow bilk everyone or give them a financial body cavity search.  It's to make sure that every family who could be participating in the financing of their child's education don't just throw their hands up and say, "He's independent of us." Because what that would mean, considering your average 18-19 year old makes wages that are consistent with poverty level if you think about how they would completely support themselves on those wages, is that they would all automatically qualify for Pell grants and other federal *FREE* money designed to help the most impoverished students go to college. Everybody would qualify for it if parents were allowed to just declare their children emancipated, and then that money would be gone super quick and there is a high chance that it wouldn't go to those demographics who really need it -- like first generation college students who may not really understand how to fill out their FAFSA. It's to keep richer people from bilking the system so that poorer students don't get screwed yet again. Does that make sense? |
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Jul 24, 2009 15:57:02 GMT -5
I don't see why the gov't can't provide aid to all students regardless of socio-economic background. Oh, wait, yes I do, that's socialism, which is evil. Nevermind that k-12 education is free (with private options), that extra 4 years is completely unsustainable.
|
|
|
|
Post by dantesvirgil on Jul 24, 2009 17:23:23 GMT -5
Actually, if you're really interested in the subject, you should look up the work of Jeffrey Williams. He has the most extensive research on tuition costs, etc. that I've ever seen. He's proven pretty conclusively that universities (certainly public ones anyway) could offer tuition *completely free* and still be "profitable." The thing in the way is the student loan companies. Kind of like the way health insurance companies get in the way of better health care. Same concept.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Jul 24, 2009 17:35:11 GMT -5
Somehow, this does not surprise me.
|
|
|
|
Post by dantesvirgil on Jul 24, 2009 17:38:54 GMT -5
Now that doesn't include room, board and books -- there's actually separate research on books that' s really interesting -- just tuition. But that's the bulk of the expense anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by MaybeNever on Jul 24, 2009 17:46:33 GMT -5
College textbooks are basically legalized robbery.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Jul 24, 2009 17:54:06 GMT -5
College textbooks are basically legalized robbery. You're telling me. And you're not even guaranteed a sell-back because they might have moved on to the next edition. I'd say Skyfire's melodramatic assessment is close to accurate. There's a reason I bought a laptop before submitting information for financial aid (that went in like several months later anyways), and it wasn't just because I needed one. |
|
|
|
Post by DeadpanDoubter on Jul 24, 2009 19:48:28 GMT -5
Skyfire's melodramatic assessment of financial aid aside, unless you are independent of your parents (in most cases that means proof that you've been living on your own and supporting yourself for at least one year) or you have a "qualifying event" (like the death of a parent/caretaker), you're considered dependent whether you filed taxes or not. The reason for this is not to somehow bilk everyone or give them a financial body cavity search. It's to make sure that every family who could be participating in the financing of their child's education don't just throw their hands up and say, "He's independent of us." Because what that would mean, considering your average 18-19 year old makes wages that are consistent with poverty level if you think about how they would completely support themselves on those wages, is that they would all automatically qualify for Pell grants and other federal *FREE* money designed to help the most impoverished students go to college. Everybody would qualify for it if parents were allowed to just declare their children emancipated, and then that money would be gone super quick and there is a high chance that it wouldn't go to those demographics who really need it -- like first generation college students who may not really understand how to fill out their FAFSA. It's to keep richer people from bilking the system so that poorer students don't get screwed yet again. Does that make sense? I believe I understand all that...I mean, it makes sense, but then I've talked to under-25ers who've been supporting themselves and have crappy parents, but aren't allowed to go to school without their parents' information. I'm mostly curious to know what I would have to do to make sure I'm no longer my parents' property in any way...looks like I'll be quitting for a few years. |
|
|
|
Post by dantesvirgil on Jul 25, 2009 9:22:18 GMT -5
Then they're just not filling out the forms right or talking to fin. aid about it. If all the above is true and they still don't get to be "independent" for tuition purposes, the only other thing I can think of is that their parents still claim them on their taxes -- if that's the case, then yeah, they'll have to put their parents' income on their fin. aid. People can't have it both ways when it comes to gov't money.
|
|
|
|
Post by DeadpanDoubter on Jul 25, 2009 10:15:29 GMT -5
Their parents may still be claiming them, then, because from the side that I've heard, these are some pretty dickish mothers...
|
|
It's to make sure that every family who could be participating in the financing of their child's education don't just throw their hands up and say, "He's independent of us." Because what that would mean, considering your average 18-19 year old makes wages that are consistent with poverty level if you think about how they would completely support themselves on those wages, is that they would all automatically qualify for Pell grants and other federal *FREE* money designed to help the most impoverished students go to college. Everybody would qualify for it if parents were allowed to just declare their children emancipated, and then that money would be gone super quick and there is a high chance that it wouldn't go to those demographics who really need it -- like first generation college students who may not really understand how to fill out their FAFSA. It's to keep richer people from bilking the system so that poorer students don't get screwed yet again. Does that make sense?
