Ser Scot A Ellison Posted September 3, 2011 Author Share Posted September 3, 2011 Nukelvee,Most is tuition. But I was entitled to loans of up to $18,000 per year while in law school. I took out the max all three years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S John Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 So if it was forgiven as opposed to say federally insure mortgage debt the effect on the overall economy may be worth the ire of people like you and me. Oh, oh they wouldn't like me when I'm angry. :P Honestly though. Nobody helped me pay for school, and while I definitely like what I do, I may have gone into something else if I hadn't been planning to have to pay off debt. There is a good chance that I wouldn't have taken the job I have now if I hadn't been worried about getting out from under said debt. So basically, for the past 7 years or so, like a grown up, I've been making decisions at least partially based on a financial reality. If the fruits of all that planning and work, and the painful nature of writing a check that big while thinking 'there goes a down payment on a house!', were all for naught because - 'hey, guess what guys the government is gonna pick up the tab on this one!' Dude, I would be fucking irate. I would have written a huge check only to see the government wipe its ass with it the very next year. Its not just about the money but also about the time investment and the planning and the risk I took to get it done. But at the very least - I would want my fucking money back. Motherfuckers. And there's also a bit of what I like to call the 21 factor. Like how when I was 19 I was all irate about how much it sucked that you could vote or serve in the military at 18 but you couldn't have a beer until 21. Then I turned 21. Thats about the time you start to think - the drinking age probably should be lower but, eh, fuck 'em. I had to wait, so can they. Its kinda the same with this - I paid mine so everyone else should pay theirs too! And its not like I don't know where people are coming from on this. I mean I know what its like to have that extra expense. I know all too well - it sucked balls. And I'm very fortunate that I was able to get it done as quickly as I did. But I did make it a priority to do so and I did make decisions based on that - so I think I'd have a right to be pissed off about it if everyone else got a freebie and I just literally threw away forty fucking thousand dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The BlackWolf Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 Oh, oh they wouldn't like me when I'm angry. :P Honestly though. Nobody helped me pay for school, and while I definitely like what I do, I may have gone into something else if I hadn't been planning to have to pay off debt. There is a good chance that I wouldn't have taken the job I have now if I hadn't been worried about getting out from under said debt. So basically, for the past 7 years or so, like a grown up, I've been making decisions at least partially based on a financial reality. If the fruits of all that planning and work, and the painful nature of writing a check that big while thinking 'there goes a down payment on a house!', were all for naught because - 'hey, guess what guys the government is gonna pick up the tab on this one!' Dude, I would be fucking irate. I would have written a huge check only to see the government wipe its ass with it the very next year. Its not just about the money but also about the time investment and the planning and the risk I took to get it done. But at the very least - I would want my fucking money back. Motherfuckers. This. Have my first like of the new system :P Development of financial responsibility is a huge part of growing into adulthood, and I think in this scenario the government picking up the tab sends out completely the wrong message. Sure it may boost the economy short-term, but is this not facilitating the same situation arising with these people's mortgages in 10-15 years time? Are the government going to buy their houses for them? For me this is completely the wrong message to be sending out at a time when fiscal responsibility appears to be almost top of the US agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormund Ukrainesbane Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 MORAL HAZARD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arlingzen Bill Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 MORAL HAZARD :agree: If you think that student loan debt is the problem, find new funding streams to lower the cost of education. There are programs that will pay off student loans, think inner city schools and teacher loan repayments. Not the choice for everyone, but it is a choice. Personally I think that the US government backing the loans shouls have the right to the services of the defaulters... Lawyer defaults, minimum wage lawyer service until the debt is repaid... make the choice pay the loan one way or another... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Medieval Housefly Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 I wouldn't mind if they forgave the interest on student loans, because they already do on some when the student is still in school, but the forgiveness of the amount borrowed it irresponsible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 Shryke, If inflation were to be unleashed who's to say it would be easy to get under control once it is let out of the gates? Inflation isn't some sort of rabid animal. It is already "under control". Just at a very low amount. But student loans are guaranteed by the Feds anyway. If not forgiving student loans, why not have the Feds take them over and lower interest rates from 6-8% to 2-3%. Why let these banks make virtually risk free profits. Uh, didn't they already pass a bill to cut banks out of the student loan loop? http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/26/us/politics/26loans.html It was a stupid system before that just funnelled money to banks for no reason, at the expense of the students. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted September 3, 2011 Author Share Posted September 3, 2011 Shryke,How will a very low level of inflation be useful with regard to "overhanging debt"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Lord of Winterfell Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 Second, why should the money go to college-educated people with student loans? You can get the same short-term stimulative effect by giving that trillion to the poor and lower middle class. You can probably do better by putting it into infrastructure and R&D. College-educated people generally have much better economic prospects than do their counterparts. I cannot fathom why we'd want to do a wealth transfer in their favor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 I wouldn't mind if they forgave the interest on student loans, because they already do on some when the student is still in school, but the forgiveness of the amount borrowed it irresponsible. How? And who cares? This is a big personal gripe of mine, apologies if I threadjack slightly: In the UK, student loans are paid back automatically from your wages once you earn over £15k p.a., and 30yrs after your graduation date the debt is wiped, regardless of how much has been paid back. Whilst this does benefit many less-privileged individuals and provides them with otherwise unavailable opportunities, having just completed four years myself I heard an unbelievable amount of people discussing how they claimed the maximum amount the could every year - proud in the fact that they'd never have to pay back a penny. Many believed they'd only work part-time to support a family therefore wouldn't cross the 15k threshold, others knew they'd only pay back the minimum and a large percentage of the debt would be written off eventually. It's a similar situation to the one discussed because it feels like they're getting one over on those who worked damn hard (at least in my case) to minimise my debt for 4 years so I could benefit long-term. In both scenarios it's another example of many who made care-free or irresponsible decisions about their future needing to be bailed out. Whilst paying off the debt isn't a bad thing in itself, it effectively punishes those who made considered, responsible choices to avoid just such a situation, whereby they personally end up worse off; the majority who have worked hard to pay off their loans quite rightly should feel equally aggrieved if such a motion was put into effect. In my opinion you received an education you were not entitled to (further education is not a right), therefore you should pay for it. Having the slate wiped clean just because you haven't paid it back yet doesn't seem fair. So what? Like I said last page, it's understandable that it would irratate some people. But ... so what? Why is that relevant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 Shryke, How will a very low level of inflation be useful with regard to "overhanging debt"? It wouldn't, hence making it higher. Inflation devalues debt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 College-educated people generally have much better economic prospects than do their counterparts. I cannot fathom why we'd want to do a wealth transfer in their favor. Better economic prospects then who though? "Wealth Transfer" from who though? Cause it won't be from the people with lower economic prospects. That don't pay any Federal Income Taxes, remember? :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nukelavee Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 Something seems odd about this resentment towards the "potential" people benefiting from a change to student loans. What I'm getting from this is "Dear God, I've suffered under crushing debts, and fuck it! Damn new kids better suffer too!". Basically, it's a lot like sour grapes, folks. Parents, supposedly, want their offspring to have better lives than them - this isn't that much different: Why wouldn't you want the next wave of productive citizens to spend money on improving their lives, money that the rest of us would see in teh economy, rather than in the hoard of a massive bank? However - it would make far more sense to really look at the cost of tuition. Reduce that, and you reduce the need for, and size, of the loans. And, yes, I do believe education at that level should be a right, not just a privelege. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aemon Stark Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 Push that one step further - look at law or medical students, and their huge debts. How many times do we rationalize, say, lawyer or vet bills because "well, it costs them so much to get to the point where they are practising". I'm not saying doctors and lawyers WOULD reduce fees if their debts were lower...but it's more likely it could happen if the relationship between the schools and banks, loans and tuition and what it does to people's cash flow were re-thought. Thank you. I will have in the end about $60-70k in student loans and a somewhat smaller amount from my LOC. Tuition aside, I still have to pay rent and buy groceries, and as a result of paying 5-10 times the tuition of professional students 30-40 years ago in real terms, I am carrying much higher liabilities with essential no assets but "future" earning power. Frankly I don't see any problem with student loan forgiveness. It may be unfair to those who have paid them back previously, but you'd be hard pressed to show that ballooning tuition in the past 15-20 years is especially fair either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Lord of Winterfell Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 Something seems odd about this resentment towards the "potential" people benefiting from a change to student loans. Parents, supposedly, want their offspring to have better lives than them - this isn't that much different No, it's completely different. No offense, but I couldn't give a shit whether you do better than your parents or not. I care about my kids, not you. Why wouldn't you want the next wave of productive citizens to spend money on improving their lives, money that the rest of us would see in teh economy, rather than in the hoard of a massive bank? Because that money must come from someone else to pay for your education. If you can't see why that might bother some people, then you may already have too much education.. However - it would make far more sense to really look at the cost of tuition. Reduce that, and you reduce the need for, and size, of the loans. Very true. And, yes, I do believe education at that level should be a right, not just a privelege. Of course you do. Because getting summers off, drinking alcohol, and having no responsibility is just so damn much fun that you, at least, shouldn't be denied it. Sorry, but I have no desire to subsidize someone else's intellectual pursuits so they can engage in philosophical discussions on message boards. Which frankly, is about as useful as some of that shit gets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arlingzen Bill Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 Something seems odd about this resentment towards the "potential" people benefiting from a change to student loans. What I'm getting from this is "Dear God, I've suffered under crushing debts, and fuck it! Damn new kids better suffer too!". Basically, it's a lot like sour grapes, folks. Parents, supposedly, want their offspring to have better lives than them - this isn't that much different: Why wouldn't you want the next wave of productive citizens to spend money on improving their lives, money that the rest of us would see in teh economy, rather than in the hoard of a massive bank? However - it would make far more sense to really look at the cost of tuition. Reduce that, and you reduce the need for, and size, of the loans. And, yes, I do believe education at that level should be a right, not just a privelege. It is also about responsibility. The sense of entitlement that many current students and younger adults have already is practically unbelieveable, forgive their loans and it will be worse. We have had a couple of people fired (Federal Jobs) because they thought that the rules related to timesheets didn't apply to them. Another couple were fired because they didn't believe that plagarism is wrong... Do we really need to tell the younger generation that paying debts isn't important? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 It is also about responsibility. The sense of entitlement that many current students and younger adults have already is practically unbelieveable, forgive their loans and it will be worse. We have had a couple of people fired (Federal Jobs) because they thought that the rules related to timesheets didn't apply to them. Another couple were fired because they didn't believe that plagarism is wrong... Do we really need to tell the younger generation that paying debts isn't important? Ah yes, of course. The "Damn kids, Get Off My Lawn!" argument.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 No, it's completely different. No offense, but I couldn't give a shit whether you do better than your parents or not. I care about my kids, not you. "Fuck everyone who's not me and mine"Because that money must come from someone else to pay for your education. If you can't see why that might bother some people, then you may already have too much education.. Some delicious anti-intellectualism. Of course you do. Because getting summers off, drinking alcohol, and having no responsibility is just so damn much fun that you, at least, shouldn't be denied it. Sorry, but I have no desire to subsidize someone else's intellectual pursuits so they can engage in philosophical discussions on message boards. Which frankly, is about as useful as some of that shit gets. And more "damn lazy kids these days". This is like the Triple-Crown of dumb conservatism stereotypes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitestripe Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 Blanket forgiveness of student loans would irritate me. After all, I was responsible and paid back my loans. A federal program that forgave a portion of student loans for working in a service (generally speaking, low paying) environment would not. You should have to do something to get your loan paid. I don't believe it should be a free ride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Lord of Winterfell Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 "Fuck everyone who's not me and mine" Not fuck 'em. Just don't expect me to care about whether or not they go to college. Some delicious anti-intellectualism. Not at all. I'm just opposed to whiners expecting other people to subsidize their intellectual hobbies. The truth is that there is a whole lot of shit being taught in colleges that really doesn't do much to increase your earning potential. People take those courses because they are fun and interesting. There's not a damn thing wrong with studying philosophy, but when you can't pay off your loans because there's not a big market for the degree you got, you have nobody to blame but yourself. And more "damn lazy kids these days". Exactly. But see, all kids aren't lazy. Some are fantastically hard workers who don't expect shit handed to them. They tend to excel no matter the economy. But those kids who really do have a sense of entitlement? Oh yeah, fuck 'em. This is like the Triple-Crown of dumb conservatism stereotypes. The thing is that it's people who think like me who make an awful lot of the hiring/promotion decisions out there. Too bad for you, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.