Did this Excelsior Admissions Counselor just lie to me?

[SteveFoerster]

I'd say that anyone who's served in the military particularly in unsafe environments are entitled to use as much as they need and have earned them.

That's a great appeal to patriotism, but I wasn't arguing against that. The issue isn't whether veterans are entitled to education benefits, it's why they would want to spend more money than it takes to reach their educational goals.

There are benefits for going into more expensive programs since they tend (not always) offer a better known degree, or something a particular major/subject, etc. which particularly matters at the graduate level imo.

You're greatly, greatly overstating the relationship in higher education between price and quality.

It's good economic policy in general towards maximizing value out of something. Why burn up future benefits that are worth a lot of money ($100,000+) for a few grand?

Value isn't derived from what you pay for something, it's derived from what you get out of something. If you would get the same result from a $15,000 program that you wouldn't from a $75,000 program, why would you prefer the latter even if you're not the one footing the bill?

And this is not a hypothetical. I liked the PhD in Leadership and Change from Antioch University, I met some of their admissions people and was impressed. But their program was $75,000. When I discovered that Cumberlands would meet my needs just as well at 1/5 the cost, it would have been crazy for me to still consider Antioch. And I would have felt that way even if I were spending someone else's money.

If a combat veteran wants to work on Wall Street and gets into Wharton's MBA program, sure, I get that. In that case it's expensive but it's the best, and it's necessary to reach specific career goals. But I don't agree that in most cases we draw that straight a line to connect career goals, program quality, and tuition fees.