While college sticker prices have risen dramatically, the net cost of attending college has actually been decreasing for most students. This is due to the significant increase in grant aid and tax benefits, which offset the rising tuition costs. For lower-income students, the net price is often dramatically lower than the advertised sticker price. Although concerns about student loan debt are valid, the article argues that the real cost of a college degree, when considering financial aid, is more affordable than perceived, and continues to decline.
The Atlantic article, "Despite sticker prices, the real cost of getting a degree has been going down," posits a counterintuitive argument: while the published tuition costs of higher education in the United States have indeed skyrocketed over recent decades, the actual net price that students and their families pay for a college degree has, in many instances, been declining. This seemingly paradoxical situation arises from the significant, and often overlooked, role of financial aid, specifically grants and tax benefits targeted at defraying college expenses.
The author meticulously elaborates on this phenomenon, explaining that the highly publicized "sticker price" of college represents the total cost of attendance before factoring in any financial assistance. This figure, often dramatically high, can be misleading and contribute to the prevalent narrative of college affordability becoming increasingly out of reach. However, the author contends that a more accurate metric for evaluating the financial burden of higher education is the "net price," which represents the cost remaining after grants, scholarships, and tax credits are applied. This net price, the article argues, has been trending downwards for many students, especially those from lower and middle-income families.
The author supports this claim by referencing data demonstrating the substantial growth of grant aid and tax benefits aimed at college affordability. These programs, including the Pell Grant and various state-level initiatives, have effectively offset the escalating sticker prices for a significant portion of the student population. Furthermore, the article points out that the increasing availability of these financial aid options has broadened access to higher education for students from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds.
The article also delves into the complex interplay between federal and institutional aid, highlighting how colleges and universities themselves often contribute substantial resources to financial aid packages. This institutional aid, combined with federal grants and tax benefits, creates a more nuanced and often more affordable reality than the sticker price might suggest.
However, the article acknowledges that this positive trend is not universal. It concedes that students from high-income families, who are less likely to qualify for need-based aid, may indeed be experiencing the full brunt of rising sticker prices. Additionally, the article acknowledges that even with increased grant aid, the cost of college can still represent a significant financial hurdle for many families, particularly those grappling with other economic challenges.
In conclusion, the article presents a compelling argument that the narrative of perpetually escalating college costs requires a more nuanced understanding. While sticker prices have undeniably risen, the expansion of grant aid and tax benefits has mitigated this increase for many students, resulting in a declining net price and making higher education more accessible than the headline-grabbing tuition figures might suggest. This does not negate the challenges that still exist regarding college affordability, but it does offer a more complete and arguably more optimistic perspective on the financial landscape of higher education.
Summary of Comments ( 106 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43149559
HN commenters largely agree with the article's premise that the net cost of college has decreased thanks to increased financial aid, but several point out that this primarily benefits lower-income students. Some argue that the focus should be on reducing the sticker price for everyone, as the current system creates confusion and deters potential applicants. Others discuss the administrative bloat contributing to high tuition costs, and the lack of transparency in pricing. One commenter suggests that the value proposition of a college degree is diminishing due to alternative credentialing and the rising cost relative to potential earnings. Several people share personal anecdotes about navigating the complex financial aid process.
The Hacker News thread discussing The Atlantic article "Despite sticker prices, the real cost of getting a degree has been going down" contains several insightful comments that delve into the nuances of college affordability and the value of a degree.
Several commenters challenge the premise of the article, arguing that the "real cost" hasn't decreased for many students. One commenter points out that while grant aid may have increased, the net cost after grants can still be substantial and represent a significant financial burden, particularly for low and middle-income families. They emphasize that looking solely at the average net cost obscures the struggles faced by those less fortunate. Another commenter builds on this by noting that the article's focus on average net cost doesn't account for the variability in costs between different institutions. They argue that prestigious, high-cost schools, even with generous financial aid, can still be significantly more expensive than less selective institutions, limiting access for many.
The discussion also touches on the increasing reliance on student loans. While some acknowledge the increased availability of grants, they counter that a significant portion of financial aid comes in the form of loans, which contribute to a growing mountain of student debt. One commenter highlights the psychological impact of this debt, arguing that even if graduates can eventually repay their loans, the burden of debt can influence their career choices and life decisions for years to come. They suggest this hidden cost isn't adequately reflected in discussions about the "real" cost of college.
Another perspective presented is that the value proposition of a college degree has changed. Some commenters question whether the increased cost, even after accounting for grants and financial aid, is justified by the potential return on investment. They highlight the rising costs of tuition relative to wage growth, suggesting that the economic benefits of a degree might be diminishing for some fields of study. Furthermore, they point out the emergence of alternative pathways to high-paying jobs, such as vocational training and coding bootcamps, which offer shorter, less expensive routes to employment.
Several commenters discuss the role of government policy in driving up tuition costs. One commenter suggests that the easy availability of federal student loans has enabled colleges to increase tuition without facing significant resistance from consumers. Another commenter advocates for increased government funding for higher education as a way to reduce reliance on loans and make college more affordable.
Finally, the thread also includes a discussion of the metrics used to measure the cost of college. Commenters debate the limitations of using average net cost as the primary indicator of affordability, arguing that it fails to capture the full range of expenses associated with attending college, such as living expenses, books, and fees. They suggest that a more comprehensive approach is needed to accurately assess the true cost of higher education.