They are indeed doing a graduation reduction:

> Another part of the program will help students whose family income surpasses the maximum: If their family's income is between $130,000 and $200,000, they can still get grants covering at least half of their tuition.

Presumably there're more nuanced factors to consider for families with incomes between $130k and $200k beyond what can be expressed by a simple equation.

I'm right. From their own website:

https://financialaid.rice.edu/thericeinvestment

I'm also skeptical a family (of let's say, four) ceases to be middle class at just 130k, even in Houston.

In the U.S., we have a very skewed definition of who the "middle class" is. In Germany, incomes above about $65,000 are taxed at almost the highest bracket (42%, highest is 45%).

Above $130,000 is squarely in the top quantile of incomes, and folks in that bracket (between top 20% and top 1%) have increased their incomes dramatically over the last four decades: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/social-mobility-memos/2017/07... (see the second chart).

I think it's not correct to directly compare on-paper salaries between regions. There's the simple fact that a lot of the personal benefits from a certain place can be derived from public services or benefits paid through by taxes.

For example, in the US you have to pay your own health insurance, but in many other places it may be covered by taxes. Therefore your US on-paper salary it may be higher due to this fact because you would have to pay for health insurance.

But those other places pay for those things by heavily taxing the folks that would be considered "middle class" here. In Germany, folks making $65,000 or so pay 7.3% of their income (with another 7.3% being paid by their employer) for health insurance, on top of their taxes.

What sort of lifestyle do people making $65000 have? In the US if you taxed $65,000 at 42% there would be almost no cities where you could live comfortably and securely. As a conservative estimate for a small city I would say: mortgage: $6,000 car payment: $2,400 gas: $1,560 food: $1,560 retirement: $10,000

That leaves about $11,500 for clothing, entertainment, emergency savings, vacation, education, etc.

Their tax system is progressive too, so just the money above $65,000 is taxed at 42%.

In this scenario, you're way overestimating with $10k for retirement. Put that figure at $5k or maybe even $3k. Long-term, is that ideal? Not really -- but as you say, you need to budget for clothing, entertainment, emergencies, vet bills, etc.

Regardless, people and families do it all the time and do it on less.

Most Americans making $130K (or even $65K) are not paying for health insurance -- at least not fully. Their employer is paying at least a large share of it.

You could argue that it is money that they could otherwise be paid as salary, but then they would either have to pay full cost for private insurance or be taxed more to pay for public health care.

What they are paying for that the average middle-class German may not be (at least not as much) is savings for educating their children and for their own retirement.

Because of they way your comment is worded, it sounds like your 2nd graph is still referring to German incomes where it's actually referring to US incomes.

Heh. I have a family of 13. The kids can get generic AA degrees at the local community college, because that is only $80 per credit hour and they don't need dorms or dining plans.

Scholarships do not exist for normal kids.

> Scholarships do not exist for normal kids

Honestly, this sounds harsh but in the US, if the scholarships don't exist (and are needed) then maybe those kids shouldn't go to (that? or any?) college. There is a perception that everyone needs to go to college that we clearly have to quash. There is nothing dishonorable or lowly about being a tradesma, the 'need to go to college' stigma needs to die.

Why'd you have so many kids?

No cable? :P

I'm not really sure. Many reasons seem to contribute to it. My wife is hard-core Catholic. Her uncle fell apart mentally after losing his only daughter, so having extras is sort of a backup plan. Kids can be fun. Having kids is pretty much the meaning of life.

Ha, awesome!

Kids are super neat--it's just interesting seeing if that was from marrying into additional kids (have seen this with second and third marriage couples) or if they come from the marriage directly.

You may not have intended to come across this way, but I have heard comments similar to yours made to my parents (I have quite a few siblings) and they are offensive.

Think about what it: you're asking about someone's love life. It is no business of yours. So if you're going to ask a question like that, please be respectful. For example, say "If you don't mind my asking, why did you have so many kids?"

> But if you make $130,001/year, you pay thousands?

No. From the article:

> Another part of the program will help students whose family income surpasses the maximum: If their family's income is between $130,000 and $200,000, they can still get grants covering at least half of their tuition.

I'm right. From their own website:

https://financialaid.rice.edu/thericeinvestment

You're wrong and misunderstanding the website. That is only the minimum they guarantee for each income bracket. Someone earning $65,001 will have substantially the same finaid package as someone making $65,000. Go try out the npc and see for yourself.

I'm not misunderstanding the website; I'm just reading what's written on it and there is no mention of an additional within-bracket gradient.

Based on the article, that may very well be what they're doing, and the equation hits 0 at an income below $130,000

If their family's income is between $130,000 and $200,000, they can still get grants covering at least half of their tuition.

Totally agree. It's incredible to me that people still do this in the design of all sorts of things. Welfare systems, insurance, etc.

Give $2 to non-profit or political campaign. Your income is $129,999. Better?

This sort of horse trading happens everyday in our tax system.

No, that's asinine and not better at all since it doesn't address the problem.

In the US, political donations are not deductible on personal income - which would likely mean they are not deductible here either.