The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Financial Planning / Paying For College


Subject:  Re: Parent vs Child Assets Date:  8/9/2001  1:36 PM
Author:  NellieD Number:  4176 of 8558

That's the crux of our disagreement -- you're saying that it's okay to qualify for aid for a limited subset of reasons you've defined as "ethical," while those of us who can quite legally qualify but don't meet your personal definition of "needy" are, in your own words, "lying, law-breaking, cheating scum."

No. I think you're a lying, law-breaking, cheating scum for manipulating financial aid rules AND taking Food Stamps. The Food Stamps is what earned you they "lying scum" title.

You lied at the Welfare office telling them that you weren't going to school when you were intending to (and probably had already enrolled). Just cause it's summer doesn't mean you're not a full time student. Or did your parents drop you from their health insurance every summer? Because you know they can only continue to cover dependent children if they are full time students. And you have the audacity to call the other people applying for Food Stamps as "bunch of smelly repugnant trashy type". Look in the mirror. You don't have to be poor to be repugnant and trashy.

And I have no problem with people doing things to maximize aid. Put all your money in retirement plans, pay down your debts, don't save for college if you don't want to. All of those are fine. But transferring money to relatives, under-reporting assets and using financial aid dollars for things other than college is unethical and illegal.


Copyright 1996-2020 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us