Student Loan Reparations (Policy Talk)

[bad_teammate 13481]

14 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Yes I do understand how humans work. Not sure you do. 

Conservatives aren't the only ones who teach their kids personal responsibility. In fact, judging by Trump, I don't think conservatives teach it at all anymore. Personal responsibility is a liberal thing these days just like the golden rule is. 

Maybe your kids will be completely dysfunctional morons when they turn 18, but I try to be a better parent than that.  My mom raised me better than that too.

But maybe the disconnect is that you've had your own rich kid problems like Eric and Donald Jr and you don't understand money. 18 year old kids that grow up poor and attend college do understand it though.  Some of us had to work even in high school.  Actually, I think that may be your overall problem.  

I'm not angry either. Just trying to teach you how real people work. I'm even still optimistic that you will get it eventually. 

A hell of a thing to claim after a long personal rant of personal invective lol

Your misunderstanding of who I am aside, the reality of humanity is that 18-year-olds cannot accurately predict the future in such a way and any policy that relies on them being able to do so is stupid policy.

7 minutes ago, immamac said:

Wait, so you are saying we should just give stupid people free money because that's supposedly what the government is for? 

lol wut

18-year-olds are not broadly capable of making profoundly wise predictive decisions. That doesn't mean they're stupid, it means they're teenagers.

[bad_teammate 13481]

Fondren, how you feeling about Caban?

[immamac 44201]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

A hell of a thing to claim after a long personal rant of personal invective lol

Your misunderstanding of who I am aside, the reality of humanity is that 18-year-olds cannot accurately predict the future in such a way and any policy that relies on them being able to do so is stupid policy.

lol wut

18-year-olds are not broadly capable of making profoundly wise predictive decisions. That doesn't mean they're stupid, it means they're teenagers.

No dude that means they are stupid, by fucking definition. 

stu·pid

/ˈst(y)o͞opəd/

adjective

1. Having or showing a great lack of intelligence or common sense.

18 year olds are definitely BROADLY CAPABLE of making decisions that aren't just about what they are going to have for dinner that night.  

They can vote, if you think they can't make 4 year decisions then you are admitting that you don't think 18 year olds have the capacity to vote. That 18 year olds don't have the capacity to serve in the military on mandatory 6 year contracts. That 18 year olds are not able to make decisions about their own well being without a parental guardian. That 18 year olds are not able to marry someone because they can't commit for 4 years let alone the rest of their life.  

Want me to keep going? 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

10 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

A hell of a thing to claim after a long personal rant of personal invective lol

Your misunderstanding of who I am aside, the reality of humanity is that 18-year-olds cannot accurately predict the future in such a way and any policy that relies on them being able to do so is stupid policy.

lol wut

18-year-olds are not broadly capable of making profoundly wise predictive decisions. That doesn't mean they're stupid, it means they're teenagers.

Never said anything angrily at all. I think you're projecting. I do believe that you didn't understand the value of money at 18 though. I'm not sure you understand it now either. Most 18 year olds aren't so stupid, however. Especially the ones that actually grew up in poverty. 

And they don't have to predict the future. 5 year job market predictions are published and are nearly always accurate.  While you seem to think an 18 year old can't even tie his own shoes, most actually do quite a bit of research and study prior to the college application process.  The ones that don't research have daddy's money so they aren't a student loan problem anyway. 

Edited June 26, 2019 by FondrenRoad

[ChiTownDoc 21325]

Glad I didn’t grow up as BT’s kid.  Would be soft as babyshit.  

[bad_teammate 13481]

7 minutes ago, immamac said:

Want me to keep going? 

I didn't see anywhere in there that demonstrated that 18-year-olds could accurately predict job markets 4+ years into the future.

4 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Never said anything angrily at all.

lol yep

Quote

And they don't have to predict the future. 5 year job market predictions are published and are nearly always accurate.  While you seem to think an 18 year old can't even tie his own shoes, most actually do quite a bit of research and study prior to the college application process.  The ones that don't research have daddy's money so they aren't a student loan problem anyway. 

Then how do you explain the student loan situation we're in now?

[AeroHorn 793]

8 hours ago, Skipper said:

All I know is that the fact that an idea this fucking stupid has become a democratic discussion point is great news for Trump.   Democrats catering to woke twitter libs is exactly how you lose an election to a majority despised candidate.  Whoever wins the nomination going to have a tough time walking all this Bernie/AOC nonsense back.

Democrats need to learn to focus. If you, as a head of R&D, present a new roadmap/product line every six months, you will be out in 12 months. Republicans know how to take one item (abortion or "law and order") and generate party consensus. 

I would be very happy if Democrats work on delivering just Medicare for all over 2020-2024 timeframe. One line item MBO. Go for it. 

But every candidate has to take on everything imaginable right away, which I see as having no chance of getting through because that's not how you get an agenda through. You do one thing, you prove it works and more importantly that you can be trusted to make things work, and then you get a chance to do another thing.

Coming to college cost, this is a multi-faceted problem, just like Medicare for all. Just like Medicare for all is not about government taking on everyone's premiums, but actually pushing the drug companies and insurance companies to manage costs, the college problem should also be not just be about forgiving this or reparation that.

In the same way that we can think of many layered solutions, including high tech ones, to "border wall", there exist many layered solutions, including high tech ones, for higher education. Harping on trillion here and trillion there makes Democrats sound just like Trump and his wall.

 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

I didn't see anywhere in there that demonstrated that 18-year-olds could accurately predict job markets 4+ years into the future.

lol yep

Then how do you explain the student loan situation we're in now?

Im not sure we have a "student loan situation."  I think the number that matters is remaining student loan debt for people in their 30s and 40s, but then I understand how long term debt repayment works.  When the average 50 year old is sitting on 100k in old student loan debt then we have a problem. 

The real world has always been scary after college. It's a system shock. But even millennials haven't stayed on an entry level salary for 10 years. AOC is what, 29 years old?  How much is she making now? 

Student loan bitching conceals the real problem. Rents are astronomical in cities where college grads need and want to go. 

 

[immamac 44201]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I didn't see anywhere in there that demonstrated that 18-year-olds could accurately predict job markets 4+ years into the future.

lol yep

Then how do you explain the student loan situation we're in now?

IDK man maybe it's because the government is backing insane loans that are only about 1/2 at best going towards actual education and the interest rates are insanely high for what they are. Combine that with the current climate or stigma that having a 4 year degree is required to work in any professional roles at major employers. (entry level job postings ask for 4 year degree or equivalent experience) 

No way anyone loans an 18 year old 200k for any degree without federal backing. That would be like giving ninja loans to people buying 250k houses. Oh and btw don't give me this shit about private non fed backed loans - those require a cosigner and if that cosigner isn't broadly capable of knowing the kid they are signing for is never going to get out of debt unless they both pay down the loan is a stupid stupid mother fucker.

Then Johnny snowflake realizes his 900/mo apartment and the 10 $100 bartabs he had a semester all need to get paid back somehow and he gets a job that pays whatever the going rate is, that is definitely better than McDonald's or picking packages for amazon, but still not enough to pay off the student loans that are nearly impossible to pay off due to the interest rate. That's the only way he could get through college though because he didn't have a rich Mommy and Daddy to pay and he didn't want to live off of ramen and be a fucking loser for 4 years. Do you understand now? 

We are in this situation because the federal government is loaning people money with no credit check and horrible terms to essentially pay bartabs and apartment complexes with a smidge of education mixed in. 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

13 minutes ago, immamac said:

IDK man maybe it's because the government is backing insane loans that are only about 1/2 at best going towards actual education and the interest rates are insanely high for what they are. Combine that with the current climate or stigma that having a 4 year degree is required to work in any professional roles at major employers. (entry level job postings ask for 4 year degree or equivalent experience) 

No way anyone loans an 18 year old 200k for any degree without federal backing. That would be like giving ninja loans to people buying 250k houses. Oh and btw don't give me this shit about private non fed backed loans - those require a cosigner and if that cosigner isn't broadly capable of knowing the kid they are signing for is never going to get out of debt unless they both pay down the loan is a stupid stupid mother fucker.

Then Johnny snowflake realizes his 900/mo apartment and the 10 $100 bartabs he had a semester all need to get paid back somehow and he gets a job that pays whatever the going rate is, that is definitely better than McDonald's or picking packages for amazon, but still not enough to pay off the student loans that are nearly impossible to pay off due to the interest rate. That's the only way he could get through college though because he didn't have a rich Mommy and Daddy to pay and he didn't want to live off of ramen and be a fucking loser for 4 years. Do you understand now? 

We are in this situation because the federal government is loaning people money with no credit check and horrible terms to essentially pay bartabs and apartment complexes with a smidge of education mixed in. 

The maximum total Stafford loan available for an independent student is $57500.  The maximum for a dependent student is $31000. If they owe more in co-signed PLUS loans then the cosigner is on the hook. And those are credit checked adults and not 18 year olds who can't tie their shoes. 

The most any student with an undergraduate degree with no parental backing can owe is 57.5k. The 100 and 200k only comes into play for grad and professional school.

Edited June 26, 2019 by FondrenRoad

[immamac 44201]

4 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

The maximum total Stafford loan available for an independent student is $57500.  The maximum for a dependent student is $31000. If they owe more in co-signed PLUS loans then the cosigner is on the hook. And those are credit checked adults and not 18 year olds who can't tie their shoes. 

The most any student with an undergraduate degree with no parental backing can owe is 57.5k. The 100 and 200k only comes into play for grad and professional school.

Well there you go - 60k @ 5.05% that won't take long to pay off lol

[bad_teammate 13481]

21 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Im not sure we have a "student loan situation." 

Over 10% of loan-holders are delinquent and 5+ million are in default/have defaulted. Fewer than 60% of people who start finish with a bachelor's in 6 years. Completion rates at 2-year institutions are below 1/3rd. ~45M people hold loan debt totalling ~$1.6T. The number of Americans over 60 with student loan debt has doubled. Student loan debt has passed auto loan and credit card debt in overall oustanding debts. 

I guess you can be unsure, but it doesn't really bear scrutiny.

16 minutes ago, immamac said:

IDK man maybe it's because the government is backing insane loans that are only about 1/2 at best going towards actual education and the interest rates are insanely high for what they are. Combine that with the current climate or stigma that having a 4 year degree is required to work in any professional roles at major employers.

What control do 18-year-olds have over any of this, especially given the bolded statement?

Quote

Then Johnny snowflake realizes his...

"Also I'm not conservative, but thanks for playing."

lol

[FondrenRoad 4378]

11 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Over 10% of loan-holders are delinquent and 5+ million are in default/have defaulted. Fewer than 60% of people who start finish with a bachelor's in 6 years. Completion rates at 2-year institutions are below 1/3rd. ~45M people hold loan debt totalling ~$1.6T. The number of Americans over 60 with student loan debt has doubled. Student loan debt has passed auto loan and credit card debt in overall oustanding debts. 

I guess you can be unsure, but it doesn't really bear scrutiny.

What control do 18-year-olds have over any of this, especially given the bolded statement?

"Also I'm not conservative, but thanks for playing."

lol

So 10 to 25 year loan principal totals have passed high interest short term unsecured loans and short term secured loans?  Oh noes. 

A 10% delinquency rate is pretty damn low too. 

Sounds like most of the people who are scared now will get it paid off by their 30s. Especially since the max they can owe with no parents is 57500. And as a former independent student myself, I know that independent students are rare. Had to bring my mom's death certificate to the student aid office each time along with a judges order stating that my father, while still alive, was never around. Most people get maxed at 31000.  It isn't an insurmountable debt. 

But I do agree that the 60% completion rate is a problem. For the 40% who have loans, the school itself should have to repay their loan since they shouldn't have allowed those students in in the first place. 

Edited June 26, 2019 by FondrenRoad

[UTDD 362]

11 hours ago, immamac said:

When is the last time one of you guys/gals spent a substantial amount of time with a current undergraduate who is taking out student loans to pay for everything? (Sans parental assistance)

It's been nearly 10 years for me and even 10 years ago I can tell you that people weren't exactly frugal even when they didn't get help from their parents they pretty much kept the same lifestyle as the others maybe with an old paid off car or no car. 

I'm all for refunding tuition and fees (books, materials etc) as a retroactive thing to forgive in the loans, but don't give me this BS of forgiving loans that were used to pay for luxury midrise student housing close to campus or fucking beer money. 

Submit tuition receipts and give a % based on top of that for fees and receive a voucher as forgivable debt for that loan. That seems very very fair to me and much more doable than just saying oh fuck it forgive all student debt that exists currently and make college free. 

I feel where you are coming from here too.  I saw a lot of kids during college that I felt really overborrowed well and beyond their tuition and reasonable expenses just because they could and they did not have any handle on the reality of their future debt.  I would see very nice off campus private housing/apartments, very nice private purchases for items, and of course lots of beer and pizza and party money with no other income or any type of side work to offset anything.  (I mean a LOT of beer expenditures, lol)  But I also saw kids working at different jobs during school, waiting tables (I did this too), retail, campus jobs, and juggling everything with school.  I think I could be open minded to examining the utility of looking at some type of tuition plus reasonable educational expenses metric (a % is probably a reasonable attempt at just that) and how that would benefit our society on a macro level versus just allowing all loans entirely being forgiven.

I'd potentially personally benefit from this kind of policy in theory if it goes that far (I don't think it will ever will personally) as I borrowed well over six figures for seven years of school but I'm not sure how I feel about it as I feel it was a good investment for my life.  I was also very lucky to receive a tuition scholarship for my sixth and seventh years of school (2L/3L years or I might have hit close to 200k perhaps) but I still borrowed a little for living expenses and then the four years prior tuition plus, etc.  I chose UT versus other options like Rice/Duke type tuitions when starting college to be intelligent about my financial reality (parents are not well off at all), and also had to work at a giant corporate law firm longer than I would have liked to pay off debt.  If I saw others making much worse choices for their life given my same situation, how would I feel if I saw their debt forgiven and I had sacrificed at this kind of job to make sure to pay off my debt?  I'm not sure I'm feeling great about that at all, but I am the type that can often be dispassionate about my own reality if I see the positive utility of something on a larger scale, so maybe it's not a big deal to me.  Not sure...  

I actually wish there was much better counseling and information about the financial realities of debt for 18 year olds because my impression with so many of them was that they literally had no clue.   

Also, so much incentive to give out a loan (can't discharge them obviously so it's a great debt to hold) versus being more restrictive about handing out that money.  That's a big problem right there.  It's been a little while for me now since borrowing (over a decade) money, so not sure if loans are better at verifying say housing costs, etc.        

[UTDD 362]

7 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

The maximum total Stafford loan available for an independent student is $57500.  The maximum for a dependent student is $31000. If they owe more in co-signed PLUS loans then the cosigner is on the hook. And those are credit checked adults and not 18 year olds who can't tie their shoes. 

The most any student with an undergraduate degree with no parental backing can owe is 57.5k. The 100 and 200k only comes into play for grad and professional school.

These numbers sound right but it's been a bit for me.  I never really knew this, but if a student is needing a fifth or sixth year to get their undergraduate degree, does that come into play at all?  Or is it just a total cap overall period?

[Asithappens 978]

9 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

18-year-olds are not broadly capable of making profoundly wise predictive decisions. That doesn't mean they're stupid, it means they're teenagers.

21 year-olds fall into that category, too.

As do 30 year-olds.

And 40 year-olds.

And 50 year-olds.

And 60 year-olds.

[Cheeseweasel 26439]

2 hours ago, UTDD said:

I actually wish there was much better counseling and information about the financial realities of debt for 18 year olds because my impression with so many of them was that they literally had no clue.   

This is a great point. It was enforced in me from a pretty early age that I needed to save for college by working / saving birthday money from Grandparents /etc. Looking back, I had guidance from my parents that (perhaps) many are lacking.

Not sure what we do about this now. Seems like the noise is either "Fuck em, let 'em deal with it" or "Poor kids, we need to pay for all of their mistakes".

Hopefully the answer is somewhere in between-- examining the loan system and tying the amount of debt to payback ability (majors?), making community college a more viable option, "punishing" schools with a high rate of loan debt (Ie, kids aren't getting the bang for their buck). 

[bad_teammate 13481]

1 hour ago, Asithappens said:

21 year-olds fall into that category, too.

As do 30 year-olds.

And 40 year-olds.

And 50 year-olds.

And 60 year-olds.

Very true, and our policies should be designed around how humans actually are.

9 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

But I do agree that the 60% completion rate is a problem. For the 40% who have loans, the school itself should have to repay their loan since they shouldn't have allowed those students in in the first place. 

I agree, only children of wealth should be allowed to college. All these SNOWFLAKES need to learn to code. You've convinced me.

After all, the #1 reason students drop out/don't finish is being overwhelmed by work.

Among students in four-year schools,
- 45 percent work more than 20 hours a week.
- Among those attending community colleges, 6 in 10 work more than 20 hours a week, and more than a quarter work more than 35 hours a week.7
- Just 25 percent of students attend the sort of residential college we often envision.
- Twenty-three percent of college students have dependent children.

Sounds like a bunch of avocado-toast-eatin' SNOWFLAKES to me!

And 65% of those who didn't finish have thought about going back? LAZY IDIOT SCUM, is what I say.

LEARN TO TURN A WRENCH!

72% of those say family commitments keep them from going back?

CHOOSE A BETTER FAMILY, SOYBOY!

Never shoulda let these weak pieces of shit in in the first place, right my leftist friend? Hell yeah!

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

22 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Very true, and our policies should be designed around how humans actually are.

I agree, only children of wealth should be allowed to college. All these SNOWFLAKES need to learn to code. You've convinced me.

After all, the #1 reason students drop out/don't finish is being overwhelmed by work.

Among students in four-year schools,
- 45 percent work more than 20 hours a week.
- Among those attending community colleges, 6 in 10 work more than 20 hours a week, and more than a quarter work more than 35 hours a week.7
- Just 25 percent of students attend the sort of residential college we often envision.
- Twenty-three percent of college students have dependent children.

Sounds like a bunch of avocado-toast-eatin' SNOWFLAKES to me!

And 65% of those who didn't finish have thought about going back? LAZY IDIOT SCUM, is what I say.

LEARN TO TURN A WRENCH!

72% of those say family commitments keep them from going back?

CHOOSE A BETTER FAMILY, SOYBOY!

Never shoulda let these weak pieces of shit in in the first place, right my leftist friend? Hell yeah!

 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

13 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Very true, and our policies should be designed around how humans actually are.

I agree, only children of wealth should be allowed to college. All these SNOWFLAKES need to learn to code. You've convinced me.

After all, the #1 reason students drop out/don't finish is being overwhelmed by work.

Among students in four-year schools,
- 45 percent work more than 20 hours a week.
- Among those attending community colleges, 6 in 10 work more than 20 hours a week, and more than a quarter work more than 35 hours a week.7
- Just 25 percent of students attend the sort of residential college we often envision.
- Twenty-three percent of college students have dependent children.

Sounds like a bunch of avocado-toast-eatin' SNOWFLAKES to me!

And 65% of those who didn't finish have thought about going back? LAZY IDIOT SCUM, is what I say.

LEARN TO TURN A WRENCH!

72% of those say family commitments keep them from going back?

CHOOSE A BETTER FAMILY, SOYBOY!

Never shoulda let these weak pieces of shit in in the first place, right my leftist friend? Hell yeah!

Nice screed.  You're practically Hannity with your use of selective quoting.  You should read the part of the quote right before the part you bolded.

So again, the 40% should have their loan repaid by the school.  I'm not sure where "children of wealth" come into play either on a thread about student loans.  As a child of wealth yourself, I'm guessing you've never even seen a FAFSA.   "Children of wealth" can't demonstrate the financial need required to be eligible for a subsidized Stafford loan.  While they would qualify for an unsubsidized loan, its unlikely they would take one.

You should also look up the cost of tuition for community colleges and available financial aid.  It isn't community colleges that are saddling students with student loan debt.  In fact, many of the kids who fail to cut it at a 4 year "residential college" would have been better served by starting at their local community college where they can figure out how to excel and can gradually move towards personal independence before finishing at a 4 year college.

Also which of your opposing descriptions of these students do you truly believe is accurate?  Are these students "18-year-olds [that] are not broadly capable of making profoundly wise predictive decisions" or are they the hard-working hard-studying students you describe in this post?

I'm sure working students appreciate you looking down from your ivory tower and trying to help them, but some things are best understood and best left to the people that faced the same struggles they are facing.  Maybe just donate money to the cause instead.

[Revolution512 1512]

At some point it’s going to have to be paid for. To whom will that burden likely fall to? The generation you were trying to help in the first place. Address the issue, don’t offer free shit for votes. 

[immamac 44201]

3 minutes ago, Axiom of Choice said:

I’m against this idea.  Honoring the contracts and agreements that one enters into willingly is a foundational aspect of any functioning society.  People enter into these agreements when they are adults and the agreements have clearly written rules which don’t change.  Some years later, people don’t like the agreements they accepted and now want society to fulfill their part.  Why should a young adult who made an assessment of the cost of college and determines they don’t want that deal now have to pay for the kids who went to private school at $30k a year only to prepare for a low wage job?  Lots of Americans took a bad deal.  They aren’t starving or deprived of any essentials. They just don’t have the free time and luxuries they think they should. That’s what happens when one takes a bad financial deal.  

I agree with this sentiment on the INDIVIDUAL level, but the argument is that as a collective the individuals that this burdens cause a strain to the larger economic machine because they don't make investments and/or they don't spend money the way that others without the debt are expected to spend it. Economics is a macro game based on productivity and efficiency.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

3 hours ago, UTDD said:

These numbers sound right but it's been a bit for me.  I never really knew this, but if a student is needing a fifth or sixth year to get their undergraduate degree, does that come into play at all?  Or is it just a total cap overall period?

Those are the total caps.  Per year maxes are below.  They allow for 5 years of study if you take the max every year.  What surprised me is that the limits aren't all that much higher than they were in the mid-90s even though tuition and cost of living has gone up significantly since then.  Interest rates are also much better now.  They were 8.25% when I was in school.  Really, the total possible debt load isn't that bad although it is scary for a new grad.  The solution is to eliminate interest altogether and have a phase in for payment based on income that you pay (or don't pay if your income is low) with your taxes.

Dependant
1st year 5500
2nd year 6500
3rd year 7500
4th year 7500

Independent
9500
10500
12500
12500

[bad_teammate 13481]

4 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

I'm not sure where "children of wealth" come into play either on a thread about student loans.

The #1 reason students don't finish is monetary. You said they shouldn't have even been allowed in. Guess which types of kids don't have monetary concerns.

And if we were to exclude those kids from admission, as you advocate, what would we use to make that determination?

Quote

  As a child of wealth yourself, I'm guessing you've never even seen a FAFSA.

 

When I was a kid, our <1000 town got a single blinking red light to replace a stop sign. So yeah, we were pretty fancy.

Quote

You should also look up the cost of tuition for community colleges and available financial aid.  It isn't community colleges that are saddling students with student loan debt.  In fact, many of the kids who fail to cut it at a 4 year "residential college" would have been better served by starting at their local community college where they can figure out how to excel and can gradually move towards personal independence before finishing at a 4 year college.

A separate path for kids without means, but equal.

Quote

Also which of your opposing descriptions of these students do you truly believe is accurate?  Are these students "18-year-olds [that] are not broadly capable of making profoundly wise predictive decisions" or are they the hard-working hard-studying students you describe in this post?

Those two things aren't contradictory in the least. An inability to accurately predict the future 4+ years from now doesn't indicate laziness.

We are inspired by the "I worked full-time and got myself through in 4 years" story, but the one who tried the same thing and failed shouldn't have even been allowed in?

[Cheeseweasel 26439]

14 minutes ago, immamac said:

I agree with this sentiment on the INDIVIDUAL level, but the argument is that as a collective the individuals that this burdens cause a strain to the larger economic machine because they don't make investments and/or they don't spend money the way that others without the debt are expected to spend it. Economics is a macro game based on productivity and efficiency.

I would agree with some level of "bailout" if the underlying issue was solved for future generations. My fear is that a "bailout" will only embolden Universities to accept more money from loaners and continue giving shitty ROI's for these kids. At some point, we need to hold the Universities responsible along with the loaners. 

During the recession, Universities were the only ones spending money to build/expand. Think about that. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

30 minutes ago, immamac said:

I agree with this sentiment on the INDIVIDUAL level, but the argument is that as a collective the individuals that this burdens cause a strain to the larger economic machine because they don't make investments and/or they don't spend money the way that others without the debt are expected to spend it. Economics is a macro game based on productivity and efficiency.

This is where we're at. Student debt load is creating an artificial brake on people investing in families, new homes, large purchases, etc.  

I'm opposed to wholesale debt forgiveness, but an interest rate reduction, longer payback at lower monthly payments, swaps of debt for work arrangements.  These, and other ideas could be a way to let some of the air out of the situation, and help everyone in the long term.

Edited June 26, 2019 by Onboard 2.0

[ChiTownDoc 21325]

8 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

I would agree with some level of "bailout" if the underlying issue was solved for future generations. My fear is that a "bailout" will only embolden Universities to accept more money from loaners and continue giving shitty ROI's for these kids. At some point, we need to hold the Universities responsible along with the loaners. 

During the recession, Universities were the only ones spending money to build/expand. Think about that. 

Im sure universities will act in good faith and not exploit this free for all.  Lol

[ChiTownDoc 21325]

1 minute ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

This is where we're at. Student debt load is creating an artificial brake on people investing in families, new homes, large purchases, etc.  

I'm opposed to wholesale debt forgiveness, but an interest rate reduction, longer payback at lower monthly payments, swaps of debt for work arrangements.  These and other ideas could be a way to let some of the air out of the situation and help everyone in the long term.

Of course.  Who is against this?   

But it’s not as sexy as ‘everyone of you gets free shit!’   

[Asithappens 978]

12 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Your misunderstanding of who I am....

Maybe it's just me, but when I read that I envisioned a large (fluffy?) black woman loudly proclaiming "You don't know me!!!".

[bad_teammate 13481]

Just now, Asithappens said:

Maybe it's just me, but when I read that I envisioned a large (fluffy?) black woman loudly proclaiming "You don't know me!!!".

It's fun when people tell on themselves.

[bad_teammate 13481]

12 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

I would agree with some level of "bailout" if the underlying issue was solved for future generations. My fear is that a "bailout" will only embolden Universities to accept more money from loaners and continue giving shitty ROI's for these kids. At some point, we need to hold the Universities responsible along with the loaners. 

Are you talking about public or private universities?

[ChiTownDoc 21325]

BT still hasn’t explained why some guy out there with 2% student loans, owing about 130k after paying them back as slowly as possible, while making millions a year, gets a free ride?  

Oh...

That’s right, it’s because Bernie told him it’s cool.  

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, ChiTownDoc said:

Of course.  Who is against this?   

But it’s not as sexy as ‘everyone of you gets free shit!’   

I'm sure lots of people are opposed to any debt forgiveness.  "I didn't need debt forgiveness, why should these little snowflakes need it ?!"  

[Asithappens 978]

36 minutes ago, Axiom of Choice said:

I’m against this idea.  Honoring the contracts and agreements that one enters into willingly is a foundational aspect of any functioning society.  People enter into these agreements when they are adults and the agreements have clearly written rules which don’t change.  Some years later, people don’t like the agreements they accepted and now want society to fulfill their part.  Why should a young adult who made an assessment of the cost of college and determines they don’t want that deal now have to pay for the kids who went to private school at $30k a year only to prepare for a low wage job?  Lots of Americans took a bad deal.  They aren’t starving or deprived of any essentials. They just don’t have the free time and luxuries they think they should. That’s what happens when one takes a bad financial deal.  

You are good at seeing the trees but seem to miss the forest.

[Asithappens 978]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

It's fun when people tell on themselves.

So you are a large black woman?

[ChiTownDoc 21325]

Just now, Onboard 2.0 said:

I'm sure lots of people are opposed to any debt forgiveness.  "I didn't need debt forgiveness, why should these little snowflakes need it ?!"  

I was exaggerating.  Meaning 75% or so can probably agree, which is as good as it gets.  We are on the same page.  

[Cheeseweasel 26439]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Are you talking about public or private universities?

Only the ones taking money...

[FondrenRoad 4378]

10 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

The #1 reason students don't finish is monetary. You said they shouldn't have even been allowed in. Guess which types of kids don't have monetary concerns.

Damn, Hannity, you really can't read an entire post, can you?  I also said the school should repay their loans.  That takes care of the monetary issue, does it not?

11 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

And if we were to exclude those kids from admission, as you advocate, what would we use to make that determination?

Not sure who you think "we" is here.  Schools set their admission standards.  Schools clearly extend admission to students that they don't expect to finish.  Its a money grab by the school at the expense of the student, plain and simple, and the school should be on the hook financially for it instead of the student.

13 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

When I was a kid, our <1000 town got a single blinking red light to replace a stop sign. So yeah, we were pretty fancy.

Not sure what the size of your hometown has to do with wealth.  Nearly every one of those types of towns has a business owner that practically owns and runs the town.  Maybe that was your father.  My grandma's town doesn't even have a blinking light.  Her next door neighbor owns an oilfield services company and, as far as I can tell, the local sheriff's department as well.

17 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

A separate path for kids without means, but equal.

Nope, its the same path for everyone.  While you have been trying to decide whether you think 18 year olds are incompetent and incapable of making decisions or whether they are all hardworking single mothers, the truth is they are both of these things and everything in between.  Some people are better suited to start at community college and it isn't solely a financial issue.  What matters is whether they are able to handle the academic workload at a 4 year "residential" college while also handling other things they may be dealing with whether its a baby, bad peers, or the need to work full time.  

21 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Those two things aren't contradictory in the least. An inability to accurately predict the future 4+ years from now doesn't indicate laziness.

Who said anything about laziness?  What you keep describing is incompetence.  Instead, these are 18 year olds that were able to apply and get accepted to a college.  I'm sure they can figure out how to google 4 and 5 year job projections.

22 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

We are inspired by the "I worked full-time and got myself through in 4 years" story, but the one who tried the same thing and failed shouldn't have even been allowed in?

 So you have Hannity'd three times in this post alone.  The schools need to be on the hook for it.  Try addressing that for once.  Next you'll be saying all Dems support completely open borders.

[ChiTownDoc 21325]

3 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Damn, Hannity, you really can't read an entire post, can you?  I also said the school should repay their loans.  That takes care of the monetary issue, does it not?

Not sure who you think "we" is here.  Schools set their admission standards.  Schools clearly extend admission to students that they don't expect to finish.  Its a money grab by the school at the expense of the student, plain and simple, and the school should be on the hook financially for it instead of the student.

Not sure what the size of your hometown has to do with wealth.  Nearly every one of those types of towns has a business owner that practically owns and runs the town.  Maybe that was your father.  My grandma's town doesn't even have a blinking light.  Her next door neighbor owns an oilfield services company and, as far as I can tell, the local sheriff's department as well.

Nope, its the same path for everyone.  While you have been trying to decide whether you think 18 year olds are incompetent and incapable of making decisions or whether they are all hardworking single mothers, the truth is they are both of these things and everything in between.  Some people are better suited to start at community college and it isn't solely a financial issue.  What matters is whether they are able to handle the academic workload at a 4 year "residential" college while also handling other things they may be dealing with whether its a baby, bad peers, or the need to work full time.  

Who said anything about laziness?  What you keep describing is incompetence.  Instead, these are 18 year olds that were able to apply and get accepted to a college.  I'm sure they can figure out how to google 4 and 5 year job projections.

 So you have Hannity'd three times in this post alone.  The schools need to be on the hook for it.  Try addressing that for once.  Next you'll be saying all Dems support completely open borders.

Roasted.  

[Asithappens 978]

29 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

The #1 reason students don't finish is monetary. You said they shouldn't have even been allowed in. Guess which types of kids don't have monetary concerns.

Is it? Is it really? The #1? Not one of the top 5, but the absolute #1 reason?

I guess you may have some data on that, but even so, why are they running out of money? Immaturity? Poor financial acumen? Not going to a less expensive school? Even a juco?

Yeah, the student loan debt issue is bad, but give me a break. The whiny victim mentality gets old. 

I bet about half of those kids (and their parents) just plain made some bad choices. 

Like, you know that billionaire who paid off those student loans? (Robert Smith/Morehouse). There was one of those students on an NPR show and the he had about $200k in student loans for an undergrad major in Finance. Let that sink in.  Has it sunk in?  Now, my point is just how in the blue fuck does it make any sense to go into that amount of debt from a school like Morehouse? Nothing against Morehouse, but it ain't Harvard. 

To me, and it's just my opinion, but anybody who thinks it's ok to go $200k in debt like that does not have good financial sense. 

[immamac 44201]

@bad_teammate I'm honestly at the point where I think you are trolling now - there is no way with logical arguments from all sides coming at you that you are so steadfast in a non-logical position and repeating the same circular arguments over and over. Agree to disagree and move on or actually give people a way to compromise with your viewpoint. 

If you think kids are too stupid and helpless and need to get bailed out - that's totally a fine position to have, however it's not falling in line with ANYONE ELSES PREMISE of what is going on - so stop trying to pound the "kids are idiots" drum in our faces and move on.

[TwiceHorn 31994]

20 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

Im sure universities will act in good faith and not exploit this free for all.  Lol

To this end, I looked up UT's housing costs.  It's about 1200/month for the shittiest shared dorm room with community bath.  Up to 2000/month for a single room with suite bath.  That does include $1000 dining hall credit for the year, so cut it to 1100/month or 1900/month.

That is, I'm sure, adjusted for the economics of living in Austin.  But with two exceptions, we're talking about dorms that are 40-plus years old.  I have looked, they aren't any nicer than they were in the 80s and I'm sure Jester still has that funky smell.

And, scanning some leasing sites, one can pretty easily find a one-bedroom apartment (there seem to be a lot of these now) for about $1400/month at a recently constructed luxury apartment in West Campus.  Five hundred dollars a month less than single occupancy suite bath on campus.  If you go to shared multi-bedroom, you can get the actual cost down further, probably considerably below $1000/month.

That's ridiculous.  That's price gouging by the University.  Shame on you , UT, shame.

[bad_teammate 13481]

Just now, ChiTownDoc said:

BT still hasn’t explained why some guy out there with 2% student loans, owing about 130k after paying them back as slowly as possible, while making millions a year, gets a free ride?

There are a lot of premises built into your question that I don't agree with. I'm not a means-testing advocate and I don't think the rich should be excluded from universal programs unless there's some kind of very good reason. A billionaire's kid should be able to attend a public university tuition-free, and go to the library, and the park, and call the fire department, and get health insurance.

Built into your question is the assumption that I'm against rich people benefiting from universal programs; I'm not.

The argument to forgive the $1.8M/year guy's student loan debt is the same as the one for forgiving the $400k/year family's or $80k/year family's. It's a stimulus that gets debt off a consumer's back. We can afford to do it, and it will be stimulative, so I'm fine with it.

I don't see a deep moral quandry about what it means for the moral and ethical fabric of humanity, I think that's hysterical nonsense.

14 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

I also said the school should repay their loans.  That takes care of the monetary issue, does it not?

"For the 40% who have loans, the school itself should have to repay their loan since they shouldn't have allowed those students in in the first place."

How would the schools make this admissions determination? What would be their criteria?

Quote

Not sure what the size of your hometown has to do with wealth.  Nearly every one of those types of towns has a business owner that practically owns and runs the town.  Maybe that was your father.  My grandma's town doesn't even have a blinking light.  Her next door neighbor owns an oilfield services company and, as far as I can tell, the local sheriff's department as well.

Since you don't know what you're talking about with all of this personal stuff, perhaps it might be a good idea to stick to the topic instead of looking for high-fives from people who hate your beliefs and political worldview like the Dave Rubin to their Dennis Prager.

I'd be happy to share my life story with you, but I don't warm to the Ben Shaprio "DEBATE ME!" attitude about my personal life.

Quote

Who said anything about laziness? 

"Are these students "18-year-olds [that] are not broadly capable of making profoundly wise predictive decisions" or are they the hard-working hard-studying students you describe in this post?"

They are hard-working, well-intentioned, and unable to accurately predict the future. They bet on themselves and hope it works out. Sometimes it doesn't. You think we shouldn't have even given them the chance. (Well, maybe you don't, but you said it and you're not the type of person to admit being wrong so you're going to dance and wriggle as hard as you can.)

Just now, Cheeseweasel said:

Only the ones taking money...

So are you concerned that, if this bill passes (full loan forgiveness + tuition/fee-free public university) ... public universities will charge students for... what?

Or are you just talking about

[GSU&UT 1799]

38 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

BT still hasn’t explained why some guy out there with 2% student loans, owing about 130k after paying them back as slowly as possible, while making millions a year, gets a free ride?  

Oh...

That’s right, it’s because Bernie told him it’s cool.  

How many people do this? There have been numerous stats posted before, but it needs to be shown again. Just because some wealthy may benefit doesn't meant they're the vast majority of who this is targeted for.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/06/student-loan-debt-charts/

And before you do your stupid shtick of painting a popular idea (that is inevitable btw unless we federally mandate college tuition) as the utmost impossible thing our county of quitters can't achieve , I'm not taking a position of all student loan debt should be forgiven. However I'm sick of assholes like yourself that constantly worry about the ones with the most wealth, means, and privilege. I can't count how many people I've met who now have a successful professional career and are now just making enough to pay off hundreds of thousands of dollars in loans (law school, med school, etc.).

Edited June 26, 2019 by GSU&UT

[TwiceHorn 31994]

13 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

Is it? Is it really? The #1? Not one of the top 5, but the absolute #1 reason?

I guess you may have some data on that, but even so, why are they running out of money? Immaturity? Poor financial acumen? Not going to a less expensive school? Even a juco?

Yeah, the student loan debt issue is bad, but give me a break. The whiny victim mentality gets old. 

I bet about half of those kids (and their parents) just plain made some bad choices. 

Like, you know that billionaire who paid off those student loans? (Robert Smith/Morehouse). There was one of those students on an NPR show and the he had about $200k in student loans for an undergrad major in Finance. Let that sink in.  Has it sunk in?  Now, my point is just how in the blue fuck does it make any sense to go into that amount of debt from a school like Morehouse? Nothing against Morehouse, but it ain't Harvard. 

To me, and it's just my opinion, but anybody who thinks it's ok to go $200k in debt like that does not have good financial sense. 

Not to mention, the only way to accumulate this data is self-reporting, and how many are going to flat admit that they didn't apply themselves?  Oh, I was working too much!  Oh, I ran out of money (neglecting the lost scholarship or grant because of shitty GPA).

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

16 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

Is it? Is it really? The #1? Not one of the top 5, but the absolute #1 reason?

I guess you may have some data on that, but even so, why are they running out of money? Immaturity? Poor financial acumen? Not going to a less expensive school? Even a juco?

Yeah, the student loan debt issue is bad, but give me a break. The whiny victim mentality gets old. 

I bet about half of those kids (and their parents) just plain made some bad choices. 

Like, you know that billionaire who paid off those student loans? (Robert Smith/Morehouse). There was one of those students on an NPR show and the he had about $200k in student loans for an undergrad major in Finance. Let that sink in.  Has it sunk in?  Now, my point is just how in the blue fuck does it make any sense to go into that amount of debt from a school like Morehouse? Nothing against Morehouse, but it ain't Harvard. 

To me, and it's just my opinion, but anybody who thinks it's ok to go $200k in debt like that does not have good financial sense. 

Not unless the projected salary range covers life, and the debt incurred.  It's still a bit of a gamble though.  Having a spouse with an income certainly helps, unless they've got big college debt as well.  I'd also be looking at any way to offset that total debt w/ some serious summer work.

[Cheeseweasel 26439]

15 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

So are you concerned that, if this bill passes (full loan forgiveness + tuition/fee-free public university) ... public universities will charge students for... what?

Or are you just talking about

If you are trying to get someone to quit drugs, you don't keep giving them drugs.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

4 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

If you are trying to get someone to quit drugs, you don't keep giving them drugs.

"Pleazz ohh pleazzz don't gimme that weed" 

Briar Rabbit

Edited June 26, 2019 by Onboard 2.0

[David Dennison 19441]

6 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

If you are trying to get someone to quit drugs, you don't keep giving them drugs.

Unless it's heroin, in which case you do.

[bad_teammate 13481]

2 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

If you are trying to get someone to quit drugs, you don't keep giving them drugs.

What a terribly inept metaphor.

26 minutes ago, immamac said:

@bad_teammate I'm honestly at the point where I think you are trolling now - there is no way with logical arguments from all sides coming at you that you are so steadfast in a non-logical position and repeating the same circular arguments over and over. Agree to disagree and move on or actually give people a way to compromise with your viewpoint. 

If you think kids are too stupid and helpless and need to get bailed out - that's totally a fine position to have, however it's not falling in line with ANYONE ELSES PREMISE of what is going on - so stop trying to pound the "kids are idiots" drum in our faces and move on.

When did I call the kids "idiots" or "stupid" or "helpless" or anything like it? And you call me a troll? Have a shred of self-awareness.

Here is a non-inclusive list of things an 18-year-old cannot be expected to accurately predict...
- How the job market will pan out for their degree 4+ years into the future.
- How the job market will operate during their 4+ years of education (they need to work, after all).
- How their family's employment will change.
- How their family's health will change.
- How their own health will change.
- How they will be able to cope with the stress of the given situation.
- How they will actually do in college-level courses.
- How they will cope with the new social situation.
- How they will cope with being away from home, family, and friends.

This isn't them being stupid or lazy, this is them being normal humans. Our institutions and programs should be designed to accommodate normal humans.