Student Loan Forgiveness

[Stuntmonkey]

As I mentioned above, I'm for some portion of it. Lets face it, the universities are profiting off the creation that you need even an arts degree to get somewhere in life, and most times you won't. On top of that, the gov and banks are profiting off helping sustain that system. If higher education IS mandatory to get ahead in life, and in a lot of cases it is, then it should be heavily subsidized in some form.

The problem is capitalism has invaded the schools and now the entire system is broken. All we do is fuck the next generation in some way or form because we didn't get as good of a deal so therefore they shouldn't.

[JimmyCarter]

given max loans you can take out in an enrollment period is cost of attendance (tuition+ room board+ fees+ some misc) this isn’t an accurate representation. It doesn’t go that far.

the students I saw living high were, prior to Covid, international students. Who also pay $$$$

IIRC, the scam back in my day was getting dorm board paid for @ 6k, finding a shithole apartment off campus for like 300 a month, and pocketing the difference

[dunfree]

Couple things. Room and board has skyrocketed over the last 20 years as schools have torn down the old dorms and cafeteria dinning halls to build single occupancy apartment style housing and food court and market style food services.

Using your part time job income to fund expensive extra curricular experiences while covering your entire education expense with loans is in essence paying for those experiences with your loan funds.

UW- Seattle annual instate cost of attendance is $31k. That’s not high. Observationally loans for lifestyle was a veteran thing. Attend on the gi bill to get school paid for, you can still take out loans for the attendance cost.

[schindlerpiste]

IDK, there are a lot of poor (maybe inner-city and/or minority) kids who did not reach their potential in HS and thus were not offered a huge scholarship, but who nevertheless deserve to have the opportunity to reach their potential in college. I would like to see debt forgiveness based upon GPA and yearly familial yearly income. No one who graduates with under say a 3.0 deserves debt forgiveness.
Also, I see no reason to offer student loans to any family whose income is greater than say $100K. Same philosophy applies to the dolling out of "Presidential Scholarships".
Personally, with my kids, I didn't waste the time to fill out a FAFSA. If you can afford full boat, you should pay it.

[XavierD]

IDK, there are a lot of poor (maybe inner-city and/or minority) kids who did not reach their potential in HS and thus were not offered a huge scholarship, but who nevertheless deserve to have the opportunity to reach their potential in college. I would like to see debt forgiveness based upon GPA and yearly familial yearly income. No one who graduates with under say a 3.0 deserves debt forgiveness.
Also, I see no reason to offer student loans to any family whose income is greater than say $100K. Same philosophy applies to the dolling out of "Presidential Scholarships".
Personally, with my kids, I didn't waste the time to fill out a FAFSA. If you can afford full boat, you should pay it.

Ok, but why should the taxpayers who didn’t qualify for college pay for this kid’s education? Wouldn’t it be better to use that money to improve the public K-12 education so a) kid in question was more likely to hit his/her potential, b) more of their peers hit the potential?

[J. Barron DeJong]

No one who graduates with under say a 3.0 deserves debt forgiveness.

Wouldn’t they be the ones most likely to NEED debt forgiveness?

Not necessarily ‘deserving’ (that’s more of a moral judgment), but they’d be the ones most likely to literally not be able to pay off their debts - or at least that the debt is causing an undue burden.

I would also expect that your inner-city/minority students you think should have an opportunity are more likely to end up in your ‘undeserving’ category, especially if they’re first in their family to go to college.

[J. Barron DeJong]

Ok, but why should the taxpayers who didn’t qualify for college pay for this kid’s education? Wouldn’t it be better to use that money to improve the public K-12 education so a) kid in question was more likely to hit his/her potential, b) more of their peers hit the potential?

Maybe it should be paid for by making the tax system slightly more progressive so that the upper- and highest-earners (who overwhelmingly went to college, and even if they didn’t personally, are likely benefitting financially from having a society where many do) pay for it.

-preparing to be torched-

[::: :::]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/29/o...loan-debt.html

President Biden says that he is taking a “hard look” at student debt relief, which probably means that some significant relief is coming. For one thing, Biden promised relief during the 2020 campaign. For another, it’s one progressive priority he can address by executive action, which is important given the extreme difficulty of getting anything through an evenly divided Senate.

How much relief will he offer? I have no idea. How much relief should he offer? I’m for going as big as political realities allow, but I understand that too generous a debt write-off might produce a backlash. And I have no confidence that I know where the line should be drawn.

What I think I do know is that much of the backlash to proposals for student debt relief is based on a false premise: the belief that Americans who have gone to college are, in general, members of the economic elite.

The falsity of this proposition is obvious for those who were exploited by predatory for-profit institutions that encouraged them to go into debt to get more or less worthless credentials. The same applies to those who took on educational debt but never managed to get a degree — not a small group. In fact, around 40 percent of student loan borrowers never finish their education.

But even among those who make it through, a college degree is hardly a guarantee of economic success. And I’m not sure how widely that reality is understood.

What is widely understood is that America has become a far more unequal society over the past 40 years or so. The nature of rising inequality, however, isn’t as broadly known. I keep encountering seemingly well-informed people who believe that we’re mainly looking at a widening gap between the college-educated and everyone else.

This story had some truth to it in the 1980s and 1990s, although even then it didn’t account for the huge income gains at the top of the distribution — the rise of the 1 percent and even more among the 0.01 percent. Since 2000, however, most college graduates have actually seen their real incomes stagnate or even decline.

The Economic Policy Institute had a very useful analysis of this data just before the pandemic. Between 1979 and 2000, there was a rough match between growth in one measure of overall inequality — the gap between wages at the 95th percentile and those of the median worker — and its estimate of the average wage premium for college-educated workers. Since 2000, however, wage inequality has continued to rise, while the college premium has barely changed:



Furthermore, not all college graduates have had the same experience. Some have done pretty well, but many have seen no gains at all:



I have my own version of this observation, comparing growth of incomes of households at the 95th percentile with those of the median male college graduate:



Now, Americans at the 95th percentile don’t consider themselves rich, because they aren’t, surely as compared with C.E.O.s, hedge funders and so on. Nonetheless, they have seen substantial gains. On the other hand, the typical college graduate — who is, remember, someone who made it through and received an accredited degree — hasn’t.

So here’s how I see it: Much of the student debt weighing down millions of Americans can be attributed to false promises.

Some of these promises were scams pure and simple; think Trump University. Even those who weren’t outright cheated, however, were pulled in by elite messaging assuring them that a college degree was a ticket to financial success. Too many didn’t realize that their life circumstances might make it impossible to finish their education — it’s hard for comfortable, upper-middle-class Americans to realize how difficult staying in school can be for young people from poorer families with unstable incomes. Many of those who did manage to finish found that the financial rewards were far smaller than they expected.

And all too many of those who fell victim to these false promises ended up saddled with large debts.

Of course, there are many Americans who have suffered from rising inequality. I wouldn’t argue that college debtors are greater victims than, say, truck drivers who have seen their real wages plunge or families stuck in declining rural areas and small towns. And we should be helping all of these people.

Unfortunately, most things we could and should be doing for Americans in need — like extending the expanded child tax credit — can’t be done in the face of 50 Republican senators, plus Joe Manchin. Student debt relief, by contrast, is something President Biden can do. So he should.

[SumJongGuy]

As I mentioned above, I'm for some portion of it. Lets face it, the universities are profiting off the creation that you need even an arts degree to get somewhere in life, and most times you won't. On top of that, the gov and banks are profiting off helping sustain that system. If higher education IS mandatory to get ahead in life, and in a lot of cases it is, then it should be heavily subsidized in some form.

The problem is capitalism has invaded the schools and now the entire system is broken. All we do is fuck the next generation in some way or form because we didn't get as good of a deal so therefore they shouldn't.

What the colleges are raking in is nothing compared to what the loan sharks are raking in. Look at the difference between the end cost of the same 4 year degree paid cash by mom and dad versus that same education paid on credit afforded to someone whose parents have handed them shit credit..

[frorider]

“It’s a small business loan, and the business is You”.

I’ve shared my perspective on the rising cost of college, much of it due to endless ‘amenities’ and the associated middle mgmt overhead as colleges attempt to stay competitive on meaningless metrics. The availability of loans drove these inefficiencies.

[Cisco Kid]

Ok, but why should the taxpayers who didn’t qualify for college pay for this kid’s education? Wouldn’t it be better to use that money to improve the public K-12 education so a) kid in question was more likely to hit his/her potential, b) more of their peers hit the potential?

Ya know, you can use that argument for any tax expenditure. Why should I pay school tax with no kids in school? Because I benefit from an educated society. Education is a National Security issue too.

[Stuntmonkey]

What the colleges are raking in is nothing compared to what the loan sharks are raking in. Look at the difference between the end cost of the same 4 year degree paid cash by mom and dad versus that same education paid on credit afforded to someone whose parents have handed them shit credit..

You're totally correct. I was more alluding to the rising cost of education and the lack of actual improvements for that cost. My graduate cost me $100k and the professors were using 2 decade old case studies. The cost of the degree 2 decades ago? $32,000.

[schindlerpiste]

I think that it just has a lot to do with the signs of the times. There are people who believe that like healthcare, education is almost a [fundamental] right that everyone in this country should enjoy regardless of means to pay. This seems to be popular 21st century thinking. There is a very complicated scale regarding who has to pay based upon so many things (i.e. income, race, gender, private vs. public, interests, activities, etc.)
I'm not sure what you mean by "qualify for college", but if you mean test scores and grades, well college is NOT for everyone. If you mean funds/loans/means of paying, then they either grew up at a different time when paying for others education was not even part of the conversation. or they were lacking some other "quality".

[DeepHelmet]

If we're going along the path that educated people are good for a society as a whole, which I think is true, then I'd rather pay trade school tuition for some kid to go learn how to be a plumber or electrician than pay for someone's $200k degree in Underwater BB Stacking or Lithuanian Yak Hair Weaving. More plumbers, electricians, and skilled builders would be nice. Let's pay off the debt for people who can do things that are useful to society. Although I admit coming up with that list would be a monumental undertaking.

[XavierD]

Ya know, you can use that argument for any tax expenditure. Why should I pay school tax with no kids in school? Because I benefit from an educated society. Education is a National Security issue too.

The education spending out of my property taxes to cover K-12 spending doesn’t inherently give those families an advantage over me in the economy.

I think that it just has a lot to do with the signs of the times. There are people who believe that like healthcare, education is almost a [fundamental] right that everyone in this country should enjoy regardless of means to pay. This seems to be popular 21st century thinking. There is a very complicated scale regarding who has to pay based upon so many things (i.e. income, race, gender, private vs. public, interests, activities, etc.)
I'm not sure what you mean by "qualify for college", but if you mean test scores and grades, well college is NOT for everyone. If you mean funds/loans/means of paying, then they either grew up at a different time when paying for others education was not even part of the conversation. or they were lacking some other "quality".

I mean the former. Even if taxpayers covered the cost of all higher education there are many Americans who are not smart enough to academically qualify. This basically becomes a tax on them to give everyone else a step up on them in the economy.

FWIW, forgiving all federal student loan debt would increase federal debt by ~$11,000 per tax payer. The person who didn’t finish college holding $6000 in student loans just took on an additional $5000 of obligation to hook up those who took out more loans or haven’t been as aggressive paying them back. Obviously this is really simplistic and doesn’t take into account that high wage earners pay more in taxes but yeah, overall this would be the public spending money to further inequality.

[schuss]

The education spending out of my property taxes to cover K-12 spending doesn’t inherently give those families an advantage over me in the economy.


I mean the former. Even if taxpayers covered the cost of all higher education there are many Americans who are not smart enough to academically qualify. This basically becomes a tax on them to give everyone else a step up on them in the economy.

FWIW, forgiving all federal student loan debt would increase federal debt by ~$11,000 per tax payer. The person who didn’t finish college holding $6000 in student loans just took on an additional $5000 of obligation to hook up those who took out more loans or haven’t been as aggressive paying them back. Obviously this is really simplistic and doesn’t take into account that high wage earners pay more in taxes but yeah, overall this would be the public spending money to further inequality.

So you advocate for returning funding to community, vocational and trade programs? The reality is we need a strong, flexible workforce including all types. You either pay for it, or it doesn't happen. It's money well spent compared to other tax reductions and discounts as it's a long term growth driver.

[summit]

$200k degree in Underwater BB Stacking or Lithuanian Yak Hair Weaving.

Stacking BBs underwater is an amazingly difficult art and Lithuanians are not traditional yak hair weavers which you would know if you had a degree in in either of these topics, you anti-intellectual Philistine

[XavierD]

So you advocate for returning funding to community, vocational and trade programs? The reality is we need a strong, flexible workforce including all types. You either pay for it, or it doesn't happen. It's money well spent compared to other tax reductions and discounts as it's a long term growth driver.

I’d think we could benefit from changing the K-12 public education model to K-16. The extra 2 could be a choose your own adventure of trade school or community college. Additionally we raise the voting age to 20 or back to 21 as we acknowledge the additional knowledge required to be a functional adult in the 21st century.

I’m also happy to expand and simplify the process for federal student loan payment in exchange for years of time spent teaching at whatever school your state needs you at.

[::: :::]

I’d think we could benefit from changing the K-12 public education model to K-16. The extra 2 could be

ummm

[XavierD]

lol. K-14

Had several thoughts and didn’t edit them all down correctly. Fuck it. K-16. 4 more years of education/ structured development but you don’t get to vote until 22 either

[4matic]

Make education accountable. Huge salaries and unionized job security is out of control. Community College coach is a friend of mine. His total compensation was $196k dollars with $40k of overtime. It’s outrageous and the accepted mediocrity is criminal.

[MyNameIsAugustWest]

I’d think we could benefit from changing the K-12 public education model to K-16. The extra 2 could be a choose your own adventure of trade school or community college. Additionally we raise the voting age to 20 or back to 21 as we acknowledge the additional knowledge required to be a functional adult in the 21st century.

I’m also happy to expand and simplify the process for federal student loan payment in exchange for years of time spent teaching at whatever school your state needs you at.

Shoulda taken more math in college the difference between K-12 and K-16 is more than 2 years....

A lot of people like to point to the Euro model where college is free. But is it really? I had a pretty good exposure to how things work in Germany and I can tell you that only about the top 20% of Gymnasium (high school) students actually qualified for a 4-year degree. The rest went to trade schools (if they qualified) or went straight into the unskilled workforce. And those 20% that went to Universitat didn't get to pick underwater bb stacking...their subsidized education was in a skill that benefitted society (chemistry, engineering were the 2 strong field in Germany at the time). Only the rich kids whose parents paid the full freight for a college degree could study the arts. Is this the answer? I don't know but when people start pointing out that the Euro model would be preferable, they need to know what that model actually is.

Every raise I ever got went straight into our 4 kids' college funds. My son worked his ass off and basically paid his own way so his college fund turned into a brand new pickup truck upon graduation. Daughter #2 is a PA and her doctors pay off most of her loans; she got scholarships to cover most of her undergrad and used her college fund for grad school. Daughters 1 and 3 had modest debt and we helped both pay the loans off because we could. All 4 picked degrees with earning potential although there was quite a bit of prodding necessary to keep one of them from majoring in Theater.

So back to the fundamental question: should college debt be erased? Not sure how you manage that with so much debt coming from the private sector. Federal loans are easy to erase but somebody has to make the private sector providers whole even though they may have used predatory tactics. How does this make them any different from the mortgage companies that led to the 2008 crisis? While the option to zero out interest and only pay the principle is fine in principle, it ignores the losses that many of the lenders suffer when people default on those loans. The interest that the people actually paying their loans brings in offsets those losses.

In the end, I think our national mindset is off. Not everybody needs to go to college. My mother barely finished HS and she makes a shit-ton of money through hard work and learning her business so she is a regional expert in her craft. We need more electricians, plumbers, construction managers in this part of the country for sure. Trade schools are throwing money at students just to keep the pipeline of new trade people flowing. And the ROI is just as high if not higher than a 4-year degree...it certainly shows earlier returns than a college degree in most disciplines.

[BC.]

Make education accountable. Huge salaries and unionized job security is out of control. Community College coach is a friend of mine. His total compensation was $196k dollars with $40k of overtime. It’s outrageous and the accepted mediocrity is criminal.

Community College coach making 250,000 a year? Where the hell is that?

[stalefish3169]

I took two years off after my freshman year to get in-state tuition. Made it all the way until senior year without taking out student loans. One day my buddy who happened to work in the student loan office told me to come by and he could get me some loans I didn't need no problem. Seemed like a good idea at the time. Spent that shit on partying and pow turns. Took me a long time to pay it off. Finally got it down to zero with Bitcoin profits in early 2021.

To all the people whining that rich kids are going to have their loans paid off, most rich kids don't have loans to begin with. I'd much rather the government spend money on education than the war machine.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

[schuss]

Make education accountable. Huge salaries and unionized job security is out of control. Community College coach is a friend of mine. His total compensation was $196k dollars with $40k of overtime. It’s outrageous and the accepted mediocrity is criminal.

The outrageous salaries are usually in admin and sports, not in teaching. I agree they're out of control, but good luck convincing people they don't need college football.