Skip Navigation
Megan McArdle

Megan McArdle - Megan McArdle is a senior editor for The Atlantic who writes about business and economics. She has worked at three start-ups, a consulting firm, an investment bank, a disaster recovery firm at Ground Zero, and The Economist. More

Megan was born and raised on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, and yes, she does enjoy her lattes, as well as the occasional extra-dry skim-milk cappuccino. Her checkered work history includes three start-ups, four years as a technology project manager for a boutique consulting firm, a summer as an associate at an investment bank, and a year spent as sort of an executive copy girl for one of the disaster-recovery firms at Ground Zero … all before the age of 30.

While working at Ground Zero, Megan started Live From the WTC, a blog focused on economics, business, and cooking. She may or may not have been the first major economics blogger, depending on whether we are allowed to throw outlying variables such as Brad Delong out of the set. From there it was but a few steps down the slippery slope to freelance journalism. She has worked in various capacities for The Economist, where she wrote about economics and oversaw the founding of Free Exchange, the magazine's economics blog. She has also maintained her own blog, Asymmetrical Information, which moved to The Atlantic, along with its owner, in August 2007.

Megan holds a bachelor's degree in English literature from the University of Pennsylvania and an M.B.A. from the University of Chicago. After a lifetime as a New Yorker, she now resides in northwest Washington, D.C., where she is still trying to figure out what one does with an apartment larger than 400 square feet.

Give us your huddled masses . . .

By Megan McArdle
Dec 10 2007, 2:30 PM ET Comment

Harvard University is upping its financial aid for working and middle class students*. They are, as the Wall Street Journal puts it, "responding to criticism that elite colleges have become unaffordable for ordinary Americans."

Here are the bones of the plan:

The Ivy League school said undergraduates whose families earn up to $180,000 would be asked to pay 10% or less of their incomes annually for the cost of Harvard, which this year totals $45,456. The university said the initiative would reduce the cost of attending the college by one-third to one-half, making the price comparable to in-state tuition and fees at top public universities.

For example, the university said a family making $120,000 will be asked to pay about $12,000 for a child to attend Harvard College, compared with more than $19,000 under current student-aid policies. A family making $180,000 would pay $18,000, down from $30,000.

At lower income levels, families would pay a smaller percentage of income, declining to zero at $60,000 a year. Harvard said it would eliminate loans from all financial-aid packages and no longer consider home equity in calculating eligibility. (Read the text of the Harvard statement.)

"We want all students who might dream of a Harvard education to know that it is a realistic and affordable option," said Harvard President Drew Faust.


I find this fascinating for several reasons. First, it implies that the children whose parents only make $175,000 a year in joint income are among Harvard's underprivileged. And second, this seems grossly unlikely to make any actual difference in Harvard's enrollment, or indeed its costs. The actual discrimination comes from the fact that it is very hard to attend Harvard unless your parents have a great deal of money and social capital to pour into the task of turning you into "Harvard material".

When I was at Penn, a friend who actually qualified as a proletarian, and whose proletarian consciousness would have been rated "Exceeds expectations" by the Comintern Membership Committee, indignantly informed me that almost half our class was the product of private schools.

"So?" I asked innocently.

"So those schools are less than 2% of the total American school system," he said. As far as I can tell, that disparity has only grown in the intervening years; thanks to unfavorable demographics, getting into college now is much more competitive than it was in my day. As long as you're drawing half your student body from schools that charge tens of thousands of dollars a year in tuition, playing with your financial aid package is the poverty-fighting equivalent of sending a complementary fruit basket to the local orphanage at Christmas.


* Actual middle class students, not the children of corporate lawyers living in Manhattan who consider that an income of $500,000 a year puts them smack in the middle of the proletariat.

Presented by

More at The Atlantic

The Global Dangers of Syria's Looming Civil War The Dangers of Syria's Looming Civil War
Using the Internet as Matchmaker: The Drawbacks to Online Dating The Drawbacks to Online Dating
Government Employs 1 in 6 U.S. Workers—Where Are They? Government Employs 1 in 6 U.S. Workers—Where Are They?
Why Israel Might Believe Attacking Iran Is Worthwhile Why Israeli Leaders Might Believe Attacking Iran Is Worth the Effort
Occupy Kindergarten: The Rich-Poor Divide Starts With Education Why Rich Kids Do Better in School

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Special Report
Submit Your Photos of America at Work AP Submit Your Photos of America at Work
Send us your images of friends, family, and neighbors on the job. We'll publish the best. Read more ›

Just In

View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

Athens in Flames

Feb 13, 2012

Subscribe Now

SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY

Facebook

Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free newsletters

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

Megan McArdle
from the Magazine

Why Companies Fail

GM’s stock price has sunk by a third since its IPO. Why is corporate turnaround so difficult…

The Graduates

Busted banking careers, crashed consultants, and shrunken incomes: the author attends her 10-year…

Romney’s Business

The Republican contender touts his business experience—but does it really matter?