Supreme Court considers Biden’s student loan debt relief plan

[Ultra Max Power 214]

I'm surprised liberals were for this as it is a textbook regressive policy that funnels money upwards. 

[supermike80 1,864]

11 minutes ago, Ultra Max Power said:

I don't trust the universities to self-regulate.  Any change today will devolve over time IMO.  College is too expensive, but that was in part because the govt backed student loans, so the schools could charge anything they wanted.  We need to pull that govt backing from the loan process and the rates will come back to normal.  

I feel like these kids signed up for the loan and lived the life.  They got the college experience and now have an education and higher earning potential.  Its not right to forgive the cost associated with those things, especially when many were denied those same opportunities because they couldn't afford it.  How do you make it right for those people?

Businesses get their bailouts because they ultimately provide a service to the community.  Likely a service we can't do without, but I can 110% due without some of the degrees and "education" these kids are bringing to the community. 

Where I get annoyed..and the media likes to play it up, is the loanees they find that have like 200K in student loans.  Heck even 100k.  They claim they cant pay them yadda yadda..they have 6 kids, are down on their luck...and so and so on.  The media loves to find these down trodden folks and parade them as victims...However, your 100k student loan balance aint gonna be helped much by a paltry 10 to 20k gift from the feds.   That never seems to be discussed.   

[Ultra Max Power 214]

4 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

Where I get annoyed..and the media likes to play it up, is the loanees they find that have like 200K in student loans.  Heck even 100k.  They claim they cant pay them yadda yadda..they have 6 kids, are down on their luck...and so and so on.  The media loves to find these down trodden folks and parade them as victims...However, your 100k student loan balance aint gonna be helped much by a paltry 10 to 20k gift from the feds.   That never seems to be discussed.   

Those are the people who go get advanced degrees and have some major long term earning potential, but after being in college for 8 years, you're going to have major debt as well as only get a starting salary for that income bracket.  If they make the right financial decisions over the long term, they will be fine, but yeah they love to parade them around "doing the right thing to get screwed by the system". 

[lod001 1,344]

At least scotus is able to stop these fucktards.

[lod001 1,344]

1 hour ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Down goes Biden! What a POS move to dangle this fantasy in front of young people.  

Right now they are in meetings working on their next scam to keep the low IQ voters. The reparations scam is also on the verge of blowing up in their faces.

[lod001 1,344]

55 minutes ago, RogerDodger said:

Borrowers will need to pay student loan bills starting in October

Obama: ' we need another delay, like a pandemic. Got to delay this until Oct. 2024. I need a 4th term'

[TBayXXXVII 2,500]

2 hours ago, dogcows said:

We could try what many other countries have done: make college a public service just like K-12. In Germany, if you meet the standard, you go to university, paid for by the state. If you don’t, you go to trade schools, or if you have money, you can pay for private school.

Other than maintaining the status quo, what is the reason for college to be a personal expense, when K-12 is a public one? Could it be that it reinforces the class system and keeps the wealth in the hands of those who already have it?

The US has 330M people and Germany has 83M, so we have 4x the population.  Meanwhile, the US has around 4700 colleges & universities where as Germany has around 350, so we have about 13x the number of schools.  That's partly why we shouldn't pay for all of the costs.

Another reason is that the government is already giving these schools money.  If you think the solution is 100% government funding, you're nuts.  All that's going to do is increase the cost.  Once the government is involved, costs go up.  It would be cheaper for us to pay off the debts that have already been incurred.

The solution is 0% government funding.  Force colleges to charge people what they can afford and compete against each other via lower tuition costs.

Right now, there are tons of kids (at least in NJ), that are getting college credits while in high school as well as going to the community colleges for their first two years for lower costs.  Also, there are schools such as Rutgers, Rowan, Fairleigh Dickenson, & Rider, who have agreements with the community colleges where students don't have to pay main campus prices for degrees from their university, just by staying at the community college.

[Ultra Max Power 214]

28 minutes ago, lod001 said:

At least scotus is able to stop these fucktards.

Trump's election saved this country... for now 

[zsasz 366]

Meh....someone got a bunch of votes from a bunch of morons because he said he'd build a "beautiful, impenatrable wall" and because he'd "LOCKER UP!!!!'.  Another one got elected because he promised a bunch of Asian Dance Majors that they didn't have to pay their bill.  That's been politics since the beginning; promising BS.  

[Hardcore troubadour 15,114]

4 minutes ago, zsasz said:

Meh....someone got a bunch of votes from a bunch of morons because he said he'd build a "beautiful, impenatrable wall" and because he'd "LOCKER UP!!!!'.  Another one got elected because he promised a bunch of Asian Dance Majors that they didn't have to pay their bill.  That's been politics since the beginning; promising BS.  

Wall- 21 Billion

Student loans - 400 billion.  Not even close. HTH. 

[lod001 1,344]

Do I have this right, that the AOC retard just tweeted that since Judge Alito received gifts from a billionaire that  wanted student debt forgiveness, Alito should have voted for forgiveness? The retardation in that clown is off the charts. 

[TheNewGirl 1,413]

12 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

The US has 330M people and Germany has 83M, so we have 4x the population.  Meanwhile, the US has around 4700 colleges & universities where as Germany has around 350, so we have about 13x the number of schools.  That's partly why we shouldn't pay for all of the costs.

Another reason is that the government is already giving these schools money.  If you think the solution is 100% government funding, you're nuts.  All that's going to do is increase the cost.  Once the government is involved, costs go up.  It would be cheaper for us to pay off the debts that have already been incurred.

The solution is 0% government funding.  Force colleges to charge people what they can afford and compete against each other via lower tuition costs.

Right now, there are tons of kids (at least in NJ), that are getting college credits while in high school as well as going to the community colleges for their first two years for lower costs.  Also, there are schools such as Rutgers, Rowan, Fairleigh Dickenson, & Rider, who have agreements with the community colleges where students don't have to pay main campus prices for degrees from their university, just by staying at the community college.

I agree with this. 

My son and daughter both have had the opportunity to take AP classes (you earn college credit if you receive a higher grade), and their first two years of community college are now "free." They are both going this route and then will decide where to go after. 

I also have friends that are going to/going back to school and find that things like Nursing programs are much much lower in cost at community colleges than the larger schools. You have to take the same licensing tests, etc to get that RN or LVN. It's not like your badge will say, "Nurse educated at CC" vs "Nurse educated at Ivy League School." No one cares. 

[TheNewGirl 1,413]

1 minute ago, lod001 said:

Do I have this right, that the AOC retard just tweeted that since Judge Alito received gifts from a billionaire that  wanted student debt forgiveness, Alito should have voted for forgiveness? The retardation in that clown is off the charts. 

Someone needs to bribe her to STFU. 

[Mark Davis 364]

5 hours ago, Ultra Max Power said:

I'm surprised liberals were for this as it is a textbook regressive policy that funnels money upwards. 

But it's right in the wheelhouse of what might benefit the majority of the white guilt folks.

[League Champion 1,896]

 

[lickin_starfish 1,908]

https://files.catbox.moe/19sv0s.jpeg

[dogcows 1,030]

7 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

The US has 330M people and Germany has 83M, so we have 4x the population.  Meanwhile, the US has around 4700 colleges & universities where as Germany has around 350, so we have about 13x the number of schools.  That's partly why we shouldn't pay for all of the costs.

Another reason is that the government is already giving these schools money.  If you think the solution is 100% government funding, you're nuts.  All that's going to do is increase the cost.  Once the government is involved, costs go up.  It would be cheaper for us to pay off the debts that have already been incurred.

The solution is 0% government funding.  Force colleges to charge people what they can afford and compete against each other via lower tuition costs.

Right now, there are tons of kids (at least in NJ), that are getting college credits while in high school as well as going to the community colleges for their first two years for lower costs.  Also, there are schools such as Rutgers, Rowan, Fairleigh Dickenson, & Rider, who have agreements with the community colleges where students don't have to pay main campus prices for degrees from their university, just by staying at the community college.

There are substantial differences between Germany’s system and ours. They have a much more robust vocational education system that starts during high school. Yet another reason we should look more at their system. Many people here have mentioned that a typical American college degree is not for everybody.

As for costs? Surely government loans and grants play a part in higher tuition costs. But considering how small those are compared to overall costs these days? The effect isn’t as big as you think. If we went for 0% government funding, schools would still get students. But poor students would be left out. If the goal is to have a merit-based academic system where the top students are allowed to attend the best schools? That will absolutely NOT happen in the scenario you are suggesting.

Our society has decided that K-12 should be public and available to all regardless of their income. Why does that arbitrarily stop when it comes to universities?

[League Champion 1,896]

We should give Trannies and Blacks free everything. They deserve it. 

[BufordT 429]

Would any of youse be in favor of bufordt's solution to this problem?  Treat each loan as if there was 0% interest.  Take the number of payments already made with interest and multiply them by amount paid for each pay period, then subtract from principal amount and that is what is now owed.  That's my best english, so here's an example.  Original loan amount was $50,000 in 1990.  Over the last 33 years, total amount paid (including interest) is $40,000.  You now have $10,000 left on the loan to payoff interest free.  

I think this is a pretty fair solution and I probably should be running for office.

[Strike 5,327]

46 minutes ago, BufordT said:

Would any of youse be in favor of bufordt's solution to this problem?  Treat each loan as if there was 0% interest.  Take the number of payments already made with interest and multiply them by amount paid for each pay period, then subtract from principal amount and that is what is now owed.  That's my best english, so here's an example.  Original loan amount was $50,000 in 1990.  Over the last 33 years, total amount paid (including interest) is $40,000.  You now have $10,000 left on the loan to payoff interest free.  

I think this is a pretty fair solution and I probably should be running for office.

No. 

[BufordT 429]

31 minutes ago, Strike said:

No. 

Dammit.

[Mark Davis 364]

23 hours ago, dogcows said:

There are substantial differences between Germany’s system and ours. They have a much more robust vocational education system that starts during high school. Yet another reason we should look more at their system. Many people here have mentioned that a typical American college degree is not for everybody.

As for costs? Surely government loans and grants play a part in higher tuition costs. But considering how small those are compared to overall costs these days? The effect isn’t as big as you think. If we went for 0% government funding, schools would still get students. But poor students would be left out. If the goal is to have a merit-based academic system where the top students are allowed to attend the best schools? That will absolutely NOT happen in the scenario you are suggesting.

Our society has decided that K-12 should be public and available to all regardless of their income. Why does that arbitrarily stop when it comes to universities?

Our system didn't always even pay for books etc.  I'd contend that the reason is that one should choose the degree they want, but weigh the financial ability to pay for said degree based on future earnings.  The reason we are having this crisis is that so many people have taken loans for degrees that the free market has deemed do not have a high enough value to earn enough to pay those loans.  It's a mix of that and people making bad personal financial decisions.  Any solution from the federal level is trying to absolve people of those bad decisions.

[dogcows 1,030]

21 minutes ago, Mark Davis said:

Our system didn't always even pay for books etc.  I'd contend that the reason is that one should choose the degree they want, but weigh the financial ability to pay for said degree based on future earnings.  The reason we are having this crisis is that so many people have taken loans for degrees that the free market has deemed do not have a high enough value to earn enough to pay those loans.  It's a mix of that and people making bad personal financial decisions.  Any solution from the federal level is trying to absolve people of those bad decisions.

There is no way to guarantee future earnings. It’s a guessing game. In the late 80s/ early 90s, lots of people thought aerospace engineering was going to be the ticket; instead it was comp sci or comp-e. “Data Scientist” is highly lucrative right now; will it be in 10 years? What jobs will be replaced by AI? Do you know? I don’t.

We can argue about who picked “the wrong” degree, or who didn’t manage their money well. But I would argue that putting people into poverty over college loans is a net negative for society.

I think we can all agree on one thing: college costs are out of control in America. My friend recently had a son and we were talking about how when he goes to school, the cost won’t be in the tens or hundreds of thousands - it will be in the millions.

This article shows how college costs (and debt) work in a number of other countries. There are lots of great things about America - but college costs here are absurd. 

International College costs and debt

 

[Mark Davis 364]

8 minutes ago, dogcows said:

There is no way to guarantee future earnings. It’s a guessing game. In the late 80s/ early 90s, lots of people thought aerospace engineering was going to be the ticket; instead it was comp sci or comp-e. “Data Scientist” is highly lucrative right now; will it be in 10 years? What jobs will be replaced by AI? Do you know? I don’t.

We can argue about who picked “the wrong” degree, or who didn’t manage their money well. But I would argue that putting people into poverty over college loans is a net negative for society.

I think we can all agree on one thing: college costs are out of control in America. My friend recently had a son and we were talking about how when he goes to school, the cost won’t be in the tens or hundreds of thousands - it will be in the millions.

This article shows how college costs (and debt) work in a number of other countries. There are lots of great things about America - but college costs here are absurd. 

International College costs and debt

 

I do know a lot of degrees that don't guarantee great future earnings.  We can list some of them if we truly need to, but I suspect we both could name some.  That's a separate discussion from the degree we expect to be a top 5% earner that ends up being a top 25% earner instead.  Nobody is falling into poverty or behind on payments based on that variance..  However, many of these degrees have no upside to them in earnings.  Why would someone take out debt to get such a degree?  Why would we bail them out to encourage more folks to do the same?

You can get me to agree that poverty is bad for anyone in society.  But why are we willing to subsidize someone who had the intelligence to qualify for college admission but isn't responsible enough to make a rational financial decision?  Some folks in our social safety net aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer and may not can do any better.  Let's not sugar coat that.  Those folks I have empathy for.  I don't have empathy for the former.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,114]

26 minutes ago, dogcows said:

There is no way to guarantee future earnings. It’s a guessing game. In the late 80s/ early 90s, lots of people thought aerospace engineering was going to be the ticket; instead it was comp sci or comp-e. “Data Scientist” is highly lucrative right now; will it be in 10 years? What jobs will be replaced by AI? Do you know? I don’t.

We can argue about who picked “the wrong” degree, or who didn’t manage their money well. But I would argue that putting people into poverty over college loans is a net negative for society.

I think we can all agree on one thing: college costs are out of control in America. My friend recently had a son and we were talking about how when he goes to school, the cost won’t be in the tens or hundreds of thousands - it will be in the millions.

This article shows how college costs (and debt) work in a number of other countries. There are lots of great things about America - but college costs here are absurd. 

International College costs and debt

 

“Poverty”.  Stfu 

[dogcows 1,030]

28 minutes ago, Mark Davis said:

I do know a lot of degrees that don't guarantee great future earnings.  We can list some of them if we truly need to, but I suspect we both could name some.  That's a separate discussion from the degree we expect to be a top 5% earner that ends up being a top 25% earner instead.  Nobody is falling into poverty or behind on payments based on that variance..  However, many of these degrees have no upside to them in earnings.  Why would someone take out debt to get such a degree?  Why would we bail them out to encourage more folks to do the same?

You can get me to agree that poverty is bad for anyone in society.  But why are we willing to subsidize someone who had the intelligence to qualify for college admission but isn't responsible enough to make a rational financial decision?  Some folks in our social safety net aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer and may not can do any better.  Let's not sugar coat that.  Those folks I have empathy for.  I don't have empathy for the former.

$1.5 trillion in debt is not just a few idiots getting degrees in basketweaving. 

But it’s not about empathy or any other feelings to me. Out of control college costs and massive debt loads hurt the country as a whole. We can’t fix the college cost problem overnight, but we can forgive a modest amount of debt, which will definitely increase economic activity. If we want to compare it to PPP loans, there were definitely some people who didn’t really need the money. But I can’t argue with the overall effectiveness of the program to keep businesses afloat. The vast majority of those who’d get college debt relief acted in good faith throughout the process. The fact that some idiots will also benefit? Not worth throwing out the baby with the bath water.

[Mark Davis 364]

1 hour ago, dogcows said:

$1.5 trillion in debt is not just a few idiots getting degrees in basketweaving. 

But it’s not about empathy or any other feelings to me. Out of control college costs and massive debt loads hurt the country as a whole. We can’t fix the college cost problem overnight, but we can forgive a modest amount of debt, which will definitely increase economic activity. If we want to compare it to PPP loans, there were definitely some people who didn’t really need the money. But I can’t argue with the overall effectiveness of the program to keep businesses afloat. The vast majority of those who’d get college debt relief acted in good faith throughout the process. The fact that some idiots will also benefit? Not worth throwing out the baby with the bath water.

It's not just a few.  We have many large universities churning out squadrons of these folks every semester.  I don't have an issue with them offering the degree, if someone has the means to pay for it then they should be allowed to do so.  But I don't feel sorry for anyone who chooses to take debt and go that path.  That's their choice, it shouldn't be on the rest of us to pay for that.  It's also important we don't reward those who haven't paid their debt and then pass that burden on to the taxpayers, including those who did pay their debt.   In my opinion, it's unconscionable.

PPP is a completely separate issue.  If you think PPP was abused then two wrongs don't make a right.  If you think PPP was needed, then you agreed with keeping people employed vs them likely going on government unemployment.  I have my own issues with that program, and feel there was some good and some bad.  But at the end of the day it's a totally unrelated issue.

[seafoam1 2,858]

9 minutes ago, Mark Davis said:

It's not just a few.  We have many large universities churning out squadrons of these folks every semester.  I don't have an issue with them offering the degree, if someone has the means to pay for it then they should be allowed to do so.  But I don't feel sorry for anyone who chooses to take debt and go that path.  That's their choice, it shouldn't be on the rest of us to pay for that.  It's also important we don't reward those who haven't paid their debt and then pass that burden on to the taxpayers, including those who did pay their debt.   In my opinion, it's unconscionable.

PPP is a completely separate issue.  If you think PPP was abused then two wrongs don't make a right.  If you think PPP was needed, then you agreed with keeping people employed vs them likely going on government unemployment.  I have my own issues with that program, and feel there was some good and some bad.  But at the end of the day it's a totally unrelated issue.

So true. How difficult is it to understand the definition of the word 'loan'?

Did these idiots not learn that word and concept in high school? It's the same jagoffs at school that ask to borrow $5 and don't pay it back and then when they ask later to borrow another $5 they don't understand when you tell them "no".

 

[League Champion 1,896]

 

[RogerDodger 797]

30 minutes ago, League Champion said:

 

[dogcows 1,030]

1 hour ago, Mark Davis said:

It's not just a few.  We have many large universities churning out squadrons of these folks every semester.  I don't have an issue with them offering the degree, if someone has the means to pay for it then they should be allowed to do so.  But I don't feel sorry for anyone who chooses to take debt and go that path.  That's their choice, it shouldn't be on the rest of us to pay for that.  It's also important we don't reward those who haven't paid their debt and then pass that burden on to the taxpayers, including those who did pay their debt.   In my opinion, it's unconscionable.

PPP is a completely separate issue.  If you think PPP was abused then two wrongs don't make a right.  If you think PPP was needed, then you agreed with keeping people employed vs them likely going on government unemployment.  I have my own issues with that program, and feel there was some good and some bad.  But at the end of the day it's a totally unrelated issue.

It’s all about feelings, not really thinking about the common good. You’re convinced too many people took worthless (in your opinion) degrees and that’s the problem. So you’re having feelings about how they are bad and you are good. So why should you, a good person, have to help these bad people?

Fact is: this is a real problem with negative consequences affecting the country. Limited debt forgiveness, while a stopgap solution, will increase economic activity beyond the amount spent to forgive the loans. It’s a net positive for the economy, so we all benefit.

Business Insider talked to some experts about possible negative impacts from the SCOTUS decision. A lot of people will not be able to pay everything back. Which negatively affects lenders. Which raises borrowing costs for everybody else. So, like it or not, the costs get passed to everybody anyway. At least with loan forgiveness, the impact would be lessened.

https://www.businessinsider.com/economic-impact-supreme-court-student-loan-forgiveness-ruling-what-means-2023-6

Bottom-line? Regardless of anybody’s hurt feelings, the economy would have been better off if SCOTUS didn’t intervene.

[Mark Davis 364]

13 minutes ago, dogcows said:

It’s all about feelings, not really thinking about the common good. You’re convinced too many people took worthless (in your opinion) degrees and that’s the problem. So you’re having feelings about how they are bad and you are good. So why should you, a good person, have to help these bad people?

Fact is: this is a real problem with negative consequences affecting the country. Limited debt forgiveness, while a stopgap solution, will increase economic activity beyond the amount spent to forgive the loans. It’s a net positive for the economy, so we all benefit.

Business Insider talked to some experts about possible negative impacts from the SCOTUS decision.

https://www.businessinsider.com/economic-impact-supreme-court-student-loan-forgiveness-ruling-what-means-2023-6

Bottom-line? Regardless of anybody’s hurt feelings, the economy would have been better off if SCOTUS didn’t intervene.

It's not my opinion if the open market proves it to be true.  The truth is if they can't make enough to repay the loan, their degrees were economically worth less in relation to what they can make.  Now, if they have enough family money or personal wealth to engage in those studies, no problem here.  But it shouldn't be up to the taxpayers to subsidize their choice, and let's remember these are choices of their free will.  This isn't about bad or good people, I never said that.  Let's keep focused on the facts and not shift the argument to some arbitrary words or characterizations I didn't make.

Since you stated the bolded above as fact, let's be honest that is an opinion.  It's not a proven quantifiable reality such as the issue where they are pursuing degrees that do not allow them to make enough income to repay their loans.  I've got a Master's in business and more importantly worked in financial analysis and later ran my own company.  You need to understand a slanted article when you read it.  By the logic used in this article, stimulation of spending is all that matters.  By that logic, we could simply send everyone $5,000 this year.  That too would stimulate spending.  It also would cause inflation.  Whenever the government borrows more money and chooses someone to give it to, it does stimulate spending but also results in inflation.  So whether that is a net positive for the economy as a whole is an opinion.  Is it worth the inflation to give purchasing power to a chosen class?  That's the question we are really answering here.  I say it isn't.  But even if you believe that it is, you should recognize that economically there are always trade-offs and results to stimulus spending, which this is.

And let me add, yes that was true of PPP as well, which again is a totally separate issue.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,956]

4 minutes ago, Mark Davis said:

It's not my opinion if the open market proves it to be true.  The truth is if they can't make enough to repay the loan, their degrees were economically worth less in relation to what they can make.  Now, if they have enough family money or personal wealth to engage in those studies, no problem here.  But it shouldn't be up to the taxpayers to subsidize their choice, and let's remember these are choices of their free will.  This isn't about bad or good people, I never said that.  Let's keep focused on the facts and not shift the argument to some arbitrary words or characterizations I didn't make.

Since you stated the bolded above as fact, let's be honest that is an opinion.  It's not a proven quantifiable reality such as the issue where they are pursuing degrees that do not allow them to make enough income to repay their loans.  I've got a Master's in business and more importantly worked in financial analysis and later ran my own company.  You need to understand a slanted article when you read it.  By the logic used in this article, stimulation of spending is all that matters.  By that logic, we could simply send everyone $5,000 this year.  That too would stimulate spending.  It also would cause inflation.  Whenever the government borrows more money and chooses someone to give it to, it does stimulate spending but also results in inflation.  So whether that is a net positive for the economy as a whole is an opinion.  Is it worth the inflation to give purchasing power to a chosen class?  That's the question we are really answering here.  I say it isn't.  But even if you believe that it is, you should recognize that economically there are always trade-offs and results to stimulus spending, which this is.

I love this Mark Davis poster! 

[dogcows 1,030]

28 minutes ago, Mark Davis said:

It's not my opinion if the open market proves it to be true.  The truth is if they can't make enough to repay the loan, their degrees were economically worth less in relation to what they can make.  Now, if they have enough family money or personal wealth to engage in those studies, no problem here.  But it shouldn't be up to the taxpayers to subsidize their choice, and let's remember these are choices of their free will.  This isn't about bad or good people, I never said that.  Let's keep focused on the facts and not shift the argument to some arbitrary words or characterizations I didn't make.

Since you stated the bolded above as fact, let's be honest that is an opinion.  It's not a proven quantifiable reality such as the issue where they are pursuing degrees that do not allow them to make enough income to repay their loans.  I've got a Master's in business and more importantly worked in financial analysis and later ran my own company.  You need to understand a slanted article when you read it.  By the logic used in this article, stimulation of spending is all that matters.  By that logic, we could simply send everyone $5,000 this year.  That too would stimulate spending.  It also would cause inflation.  Whenever the government borrows more money and chooses someone to give it to, it does stimulate spending but also results in inflation.  So whether that is a net positive for the economy as a whole is an opinion.  Is it worth the inflation to give purchasing power to a chosen class?  That's the question we are really answering here.  I say it isn't.  But even if you believe that it is, you should recognize that economically there are always trade-offs and results to stimulus spending, which this is.

And let me add, yes that was true of PPP as well, which again is a totally separate issue.

You said empathy, feel sorry for, etc.multiple times in your posts. That’s all about feelings. But glad we now agree -  let’s forget about feelings… just talk about the economics.

If this loan forgiveness only stimulated spending, it would be a good thing, although - as you said - we can’t just infinitely hand out free money. But it has an additional benefit: there are many lenders who are going to have problems with these loans within the next year if there isn’t some kind of forgiveness program. What we will end up seeing instead is delays in repayment, since the Sec of Education can do that still. Which means banks still won’t get their money back, and the value of their loans degrades more.

In the long-term, we can’t have a cycle of occasional loan forgiveness actions: we need to come up with a better way to make sure we are #1 in higher education. With costs this high, we will fall behind. I think they should have allowed this as a one-time, post-pandemic action. And then find solutions to lower costs so the most gifted people can attend college regardless of their parents’ economic status.

Thanks for the discussion

[Mark Davis 364]

2 minutes ago, dogcows said:

You said empathy, feel sorry for, etc.multiple times in your posts. That’s all about feelings. But glad we now agree -  let’s forget about feelings… just talk about the economics.

If this loan forgiveness only stimulated spending, it would be a good thing, although - as you said - we can’t just infinitely hand out free money. But it has an additional benefit: there are many lenders who are going to have problems with these loans within the next year if there isn’t some kind of forgiveness program. What we will end up seeing instead is delays in repayment, since the Sec of Education can do that still. Which means banks still won’t get their money back, and the value of their loans degrades more.

In the long-term, we can’t have a cycle of occasional loan forgiveness actions: we need to come up with a better way to make sure we are #1 in higher education. With costs this high, we will fall behind. I think they should have allowed this as a one-time, post-pandemic action. And then find solutions to lower costs so the most gifted people can attend college regardless of their parents’ economic status.

Help me understand, which lenders specifically are you referring to for this added benefit?  Since student debt is not dischargeable, I'm failing to follow the logic on how lenders suffer if we do not step in with taxpayer funds to bail out those with this debt.  I'm not advocating for bailouts, but wouldn't something like home mortgage debt forgiveness back in the crisis of '08 been more productive?  In that case we wouldn't have restricted the relief to those who could qualify for college and we would have been helping pay debt that could be discharged if helping lenders is what you truly value.  I personally wouldn't agree with that either, but just pointing out the flaw from a purely financial perspective on why student loan debt forgiveness would be less beneficial than some other forms of subsidized debt relief.  

I'm all for lowering costs, that is a worthwhile goal.  So would be improving our education standards and results, we should all want that.  But if anything, debt forgiveness will be inflationary in that it only is going to encourage even more spending in a college education, specifically in those degrees that we've discussed that do not yield enough future income streams to pay for that debt.  There isn't an easy fix to the cost side problem.  My personal opinion is we've done ourselves a great disservice in trying to shoehorn too many people into colleges versus other fields that we also need and would provide good standards of living.  Just think about the last time you called your HVAC person or a plumber, how much you paid them to come.  That is, if you can even find a qualified person you trust to work on your property.  

 

[seafoam1 2,858]

All I seem to be hearing from Dogshlt is "let's pay off other's loans so they can go spend money". 

Holy crap. Liberals are so stupid.

This is what is really being said, "Let's pay off other's loans so they can go spend more money errantly that they don't have and get themselves in debt all over again".

These people who don't pay off their loans have PROVEN they can't handle the responsibility that comes along with money management. It's like giving an alcoholic a bottle of Old Rip Van Winkle 25 year old bourbon to start off their night. 

[League Champion 1,896]

7 hours ago, Mark Davis said:

It's not my opinion if the open market proves it to be true.  The truth is if they can't make enough to repay the loan, their degrees were economically worth less in relation to what they can make. 

Like paying 45,000 a year for a useless Liberal Arts degree that isn't worth the paper it's printed on. 

[GutterBoy 2,898]

We need to stop repeating the lie that student loans are primarily held by baristas with liberal arts degrees.  The data shows this is incorrect.

https://educationdata.org/student-loan-debt-by-major#:~:text=The majority of student debt,student loan debt at 8%.

 The majority of student debt in the nation is accrued by graduate degree students. Business Administration as a Bachelor’s degree and as a Master’s degree accounts for a large majority of the country’s total student loan debt at 8%.

The major with the most amount of debt at the Master’s level is Advanced/Graduate Dentistry and Oral Sciences at $158,160.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,114]

5 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

We need to stop repeating the lie that student loans are primarily held by baristas with liberal arts degrees.  The data shows this is incorrect.

https://educationdata.org/student-loan-debt-by-major#:~:text=The majority of student debt,student loan debt at 8%.

 The majority of student debt in the nation is accrued by graduate degree students. Business Administration as a Bachelor’s degree and as a Master’s degree accounts for a large majority of the country’s total student loan debt at 8%.

The major with the most amount of debt at the Master’s level is Advanced/Graduate Dentistry and Oral Sciences at $158,160.

Most of the holders of student loan debt are white. And as you told us in the affirmative action thread, white people are doing fine. They can pay their debts then.  

[GutterBoy 2,898]

5 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Most of the holders of student loan debt are white. And as you told us in the affirmative action thread, white people are doing fine. They can pay their debts then.  

Another lie.  Again, we need to use data and facts, not racist tropes from social media.

https://educationdata.org/student-loan-debt-by-race

Black and African American college graduates owe an average of $25,000 more in student loan debt than White college graduates.

Four years after graduation, Black students owe an average of 188% more than White students borrowed.

Black and African American student borrowers are the most likely to struggle financially due to student loan debt making monthly payments of $250.