Student debt the new deal breaker for marriage?

[The_Worlds_finest]

She is Hot, but shes 100k in debt. Would you marry this or hotter knowing she is that much in debt? Also, whats going to happen when this obvious student loan bubble busts?
http://s3.amazonaws.com/data.tumblr.com/tumblr_lsvnchlgjt1r25y9yo1_1280.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId =AKIAJ6IHWSU3BX3X7X3Q&Expires=1318786999&Signature=eq82YrMcpGPcRGQnWWFCuB47RYg%3D

[Stringer_Bell]

Pre-nup or just do it in the butt

[TDMVPDPOY]

Pre-nup or just do it in the butt

prenup dont do shit man

lol student loan can be paid over the life time, why they crying...just that other things in life will have to take a back seat, whether its marriage or buying first home...


she looks hot, to hot for porn?

[Agloco]

She is Hot, but shes 100k in debt. Would you marry this or hotter knowing she is that much in debt? Also, whats going to happen when this obvious student loan bubble busts?
http://s3.amazonaws.com/data.tumblr.com/tumblr_lsvnchlgjt1r25y9yo1_1280.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId =AKIAJ6IHWSU3BX3X7X3Q&Expires=1318786999&Signature=eq82YrMcpGPcRGQnWWFCuB47RYg%3D

Depends on what shes studying tbh.

For instance, if she's in med school with 100k of debt it would also matter what specialty she wanted to go into.

In short, if shes a future Radiologist, Cardiologist, or CT surgeon, etc., it's all good.

[Wild Cobra]

Anyone have statistics on students graduating from college and not just having a hard time finding work, but picking a field with higher graduates than demand?

I made the mistake in the late 70's studying a field that went obsolete. Now it prepared me for other avenues of work, but the job I desired was paying $50k in 1978. As technology developed in electronics, by 1990, it was still just a $50k job. It went from a job requiring the best and brightest, to one any monkey can do. It used to be you had to do actual troubleshooting, but with technical advances, green light = good, red light = bad, replace board. Like I said. A monkey could do it.

I was partially lucky to break into what I do now, but I had the skill sets as well. Not a job any monkey can do, and far more than a "parts changer" that you guys use as a term of endearment.

Anyway, these people were either unlucky in how the fields now rapidly change, or made bad choices to begin with. Student loans are getting easier to get, and all this easy money for universities means they have a constant influx of students, and need not lower prices to attract them.

I also question some of this debt. Pell grants are also readily available as ling as you maintain a certain GPA and class load. I question the sanity of our lawmakers that guarantee such high student loans. I wonder what the default rates are and who picks up the tab.

Not to seem mean, but we cannot always give everyone an equal shot at things. Socialism is great, until you run out of other people's money. We did that decades ago, and are going deeper and deeper in debt.

[SnakeBoy]

Depends on what shes studying tbh.

For instance, if she's in med school with 100k of debt it would also matter what specialty she wanted to go into.

In short, if shes a future Radiologist, Cardiologist, or CT surgeon, etc., it's all good.

Why would it matter what specialty? It's less than a years salary for any type of doctor. $100k really isn't that much as long as it's not a worthless degree. It's less than 2 years salary for any type of engineering, computer science degree.

[TDMVPDPOY]

chargin students expensive fees, while on the other hand stealing from the govt

[mavs>spurs]

I also question some of this debt. Pell grants are also readily available as ling as you maintain a certain GPA and class load. I question the sanity of our lawmakers that guarantee such high student loans. I wonder what the default rates are and who picks up the tab.

Wrong. I am a full time student with a high GPA and I don't qualify for shit. Oh, did I mention we are not wealthy by any means. It's all loans for me (well besides the one semester I somehow qualifed for about 1500 in pell grants) and if not for me living at home all this time, working, and going to community college for 2 years I would be about 100k in debt instead of just 20k. The only thing my parents can afford to help me out with is books, they help pay for my books that's it.

[ElNono]

I was just reading that there's more outstanding debt in student loans than on credit cards. Can you believe that shit? I think Cuban got it right. Limit the loan amounts to $2K/year. Universities will have to adapt or disappear.

[Wild Cobra]

I was just reading that there's more outstanding debt in student loans than on credit cards. Can you believe that shit? I think Cuban got it right. Limit the loan amounts to $2K/year. Universities will have to adapt or disappear.
That's just it. The universities keep jacking their prices up, because there is always someone stupid enough to get these loans, and government socialist enough to back them. If they had to rely on real supply and demand economics, they would lower their prices.

[boutons_deux]

Is the Near-Trillion-Dollar Student Loan Bubble About to Pop?

A recent piece in the Atlantic noted that student debt has grown by 511 percent since 1999. At that time, only $90 billion in student loans were outstanding—by the second quarter of 2011, that balance was up to $550 billion, according to the New York Fed. And the Department of Education estimates that outstanding loans total closer to $805 billion—and that number will pass $1 trillion soon.

As student loans rise, so has delinquency. Phil Izzo at the Wall Street Journal reported that 11.2 percent of student loans were more than 90 days past due and that rate was steadily going up. “Only credit cards had a higher rate of delinquency — 12.2 percent — but those numbers have been on a steady decline for the past four quarters,” he noted.

It shouldn't be surprising to anyone that student loan defaults are going up as young workers especially are struggling in the current economy. Izzo reported, “Workers between 20 and 24 years old have a 14.6 percent unemployment rate, compared to the national average of 9.1 percent recorded in July. That comes even as the share of 20- to 24-year-olds who are working or looking for a job is at the lowest level since the 1970s, before women entered the labor force en masse.”

http://www.alternet.org/story/152477/is_the_near-trillion-dollar_student_loan_bubble_about_to_pop/?page=entire

[Agloco]

Why would it matter what specialty? It's less than a years salary for any type of doctor. $100k really isn't that much as long as it's not a worthless degree. It's less than 2 years salary for any type of engineering, computer science degree.

No it's not. Most internal medcine and fam med docs I know make around 80-95k right out of residency.

Try paying off 150k in debt with 80k in salary. Now do it with 300k in salary (a la radiologists, etc.) See?

[Agloco]

.



I also question some of this debt. Pell grants are also readily available as ling as you maintain a certain GPA and class load. I question the sanity of our lawmakers that guarantee such high student loans. I wonder what the default rates are and who picks up the tab.

Almost no one qualifies for a pell grant WC. You need to take a closer look at the requirements.

[Wild Cobra]

Almost no one qualifies for a pell grant WC. You need to take a closer look at the requirements.
Have they changed them that much in recent years?

[Drachen]

I also question some of this debt. Pell grants are also readily available as ling as you maintain a certain GPA and class load. I question the sanity of our lawmakers that guarantee such high student loans. I wonder what the default rates are and who picks up the tab.


Pell grants have literally zero to do with GPA (other than if you were failing). You could make a D in every class and still receive your pell grant. It is a need based program using your income to determine that need (or your parents' if you fit certain criteria). Just to give you an example, the first year I went back to school to finish my undergrad, I qualified for just under a third of the full pell grant (came out to about 1400 for the year). It was based on my previous year's income.... I made 10,500 that year (I was an insurance salesman and was 100% commission, and I sucked at it - lol). What that means is that a single person making less than 1k a month makes too much to be eligible for the full (or even half) pell.

[Drachen]

Have they changed them that much in recent years?

No

[boutons_deux]

What's changed is the Repugs wanting to reduce the amount available for Pells, if not kill the program completely. Keeping the bubbas out of college and ignorant is a key Repug tactic.

[Drachen]

What's changed is the Repugs wanting to reduce the amount available for Pells, if not kill the program completely.

sooooooo, nothing's changed?

[DMX7]

That's just it. The universities keep jacking their prices up, because there is always someone stupid enough to get these loans, and government socialist enough to back them. If they had to rely on real supply and demand economics, they would lower their prices.

There was a time not too long ago when student loans were taken out from commercial banks - i.e., not from the government -, and that did little to nothing to slow down the rising cost of tuition. So they used to rely on "real" supply and demand economics, whatever the fuck that is, and they didn't lower their prices. As usual, don't look at the empircal evidence WC, just pull it straight out of your ass.

[Drachen]

There was a time not too long ago when student loans were taken out from commercial banks - i.e., not from the government -, and that did little to nothing to slow down the rising cost of tuition. So they used to rely on "real" supply and demand economics, whatever the fuck that is, and they didn't lower their prices. As usual, don't look at the empircal evidence WC, just pull it straight out of your ass.

What time were you talking about?

[DMX7]

What time were you talking about?

Look it up, the banks may have been subsidized but that wasn't forever.

[Drachen]

The Stafford loan program has been around since 1965 (though it wasn't called "stafford"). Under this program the loans are backed by the full faith and credit of the US (regardless of who actually disbursed the funds). This is what WC was talking about when he said "to back them."

Now, maybe it is my perspective as a 31 year old, but to me 46 years ago doesn't qualify for "not that long ago."

[DMX7]

Now, maybe it is my perspective

Maybe it is.

[Drachen]

Maybe it is.

Ok, was that what you were talking about?? I just want to make sure that I am not missing something.

[Agloco]

Have they changed them that much in recent years?

Not since the mid to late 80's at least......

Just for perspective, I made roughly 600/month and my father brought in 32k/year back then. I didn't qualify for a pell grant.

Most undergrads I've taught applied for but were rejected as well. That was circa 2000-2004.

[Agloco]

That's just it. The universities keep jacking their prices up, because there is always someone stupid enough to get these loans, and government socialist enough to back them. If they had to rely on real supply and demand economics, they would lower their prices.

There aren't more people attending college now than in the past?

[MannyIsGod]

Its obvious from tis thread not many people know much about student loans. Most of that girls debt is from private loans which are not provided in any way shape or form by the government. Undergrad stafford and Perkins loans cap out much lower than 100k. Off the top of my head the amount is near 50k but it might be a bit higher. There are also anual limits.


An annual limit of 2k is a complete non starter and simply foolish. Asking higher education - most of which is NON PROFIT,- to be so inexpensive is completely unrealistic and would serve to make higher ed for the rich only.

I doubt the girl is in Med school based off of her sign and I have to say that if you rack up that much debt for a profession that has poor on prospects then you are part of the problem.

[DMX7]

I don't know what WC means, but "real" supply and demand economics means if people are willing to take out the loans that they're responsible for (can't escape these new ones), then the demand is there even at these prices.

[Drachen]

There aren't more people attending college now than in the past?

WC is talking about the fact that there is no supply and demand economics in the funding for college (which is passed through to the actual attendance for college). Basically, if easy money wasn't available, then it would be harder to attract students, causing colleges to have to increase value or lower cost to attract more students.

[boutons_deux]

the dubya Repugs gave the banks $100Ms in guaranteed profits by having the banks make govt-guaranteed student loans instead of the govt, aka, "privatizing", that costs the students more in interest, aka, that's how privatizing always screws Human-Americans.

the dubya Repugs, regulation=haters!, also passed a regulation (!!!) that tatooed students for eternity with inescapable school debt. Bankruptcy would not remove obligation to repay.

also, the dubya Repugs forced personal bankruptcy people to go see financial counselors before going to court. Almost all bankrupted people were not helped by the financial counselors since they really were bankrupt (mostly due to medical bills), and they were $400 for the wasted time, yet another Repug gift to the financial sector.

[coyotes_geek]

I don't know what WC means, but "real" supply and demand economics means if people are willing to take out the loans that they're responsible for (can't escape these new ones), then the demand is there even at these prices.

I believe WC's point is that the government backing of student loans is artificially inflating demand by making more prospective students think that college loans are affordable. I think he's got a point to an extent.

[MannyIsGod]

Not since the mid to late 80's at least......

Just for perspective, I made roughly 600/month and my father brought in 32k/year back then. I didn't qualify for a pell grant.

Most undergrads I've taught applied for but were rejected as well. That was circa 2000-2004.

I am receiving one but I diddnt until I was a full time student for a full year and had a tax return that was very small. Last year I worked full timeand went to school full time and my very very modest tax return cut into my pell this year by a sizeable amount. This year I worked for the school for next to nothing so I THINK I'll see that amount come back.

[DMX7]

WC is talking about the fact that there is no supply and demand economics in the funding for college (which is passed through to the actual attendance for college). Basically, if easy money wasn't available, then it would be harder to attract students, causing colleges to have to increase value or lower cost to attract more students.

By that logic, going to a public school isn't real supply and demand econoimcs either since its subsidized.

[Drachen]

Its obvious from tis thread not many people know much about student loans. Most of that girls debt is from private loans which are not provided in any way shape or form by the government. Undergrad stafford and Perkins loans cap out much lower than 100k. Off the top of my head the amount is near 50k but it might be a bit higher. There are also anual limits.


An annual limit of 2k is a complete non starter and simply foolish. Asking higher education - most of which is NON PROFIT,- to be so inexpensive is completely unrealistic and would serve to make higher ed for the rich only.

I doubt the girl is in Med school based off of her sign and I have to say that if you rack up that much debt for a profession that has poor on prospects then you are part of the problem.

Didn't even think about the aggregate loan limits for stafford (57500 for undergrad and 138,500k for grad and terminal). For Perkins it is 27k for undergrad, so she could get close to 100k with student loans, but not all the way there. She would have to take about 16k out in private loans.

[Wild Cobra]

WC is talking about the fact that there is no supply and demand economics in the funding for college (which is passed through to the actual attendance for college). Basically, if easy money wasn't available, then it would be harder to attract students, causing colleges to have to increase value or lower cost to attract more students.


I believe WC's point is that the government backing of student loans is artificially inflating demand by making more prospective students think that college loans are affordable. I think he's got a point to an extent.
Yes, you are both correct as to my thinking on this.

[MannyIsGod]

Didn't even think about the aggregate loan limits for stafford (57500 for undergrad and 138,500k for grad and terminal). For Perkins it is 27k for undergrad, so she could get close to 100k with student loans, but not all the way there. She would have to take about 16k out in private loans.

I don't think Perkins and Stafford are separate in that way. I think the loan total limit for undergrad is the 57k INCLUDING Perkins loans but of that 27k can be Perkins. Good luck getting that much in Perkins loans, though.

[boutons_deux]

What's the diff in demand for loans coming directly from the govt (obviously backed by the govt) and for-profit banks offering the loans backed by the govt?

If the banks are making the loans on more expensive terms (esp the default terms. One article I read was about a lady with $75K in loans, she fell behind, the bank gave it to a collection agency that added on $50K for their fees), then that would suppress demand.

[Drachen]

I don't think Perkins and Stafford are separate in that way. I think the loan total limit for undergrad is the 57k INCLUDING Perkins loans but of that 27k can be Perkins. Good luck getting that much in Perkins loans, though.

No I looked it up, they are separate amounts, however you are correct, good luck getting that much in Perkins.

[Drachen]

What's the diff in demand for loans coming directly from the govt (obviously backed by the govt) and for-profit banks offering the loans backed by the govt?

If the banks are making the loans on more expensive terms (esp the default terms. One article I read was about a lady with $75K in loans, she fell behind, the bank gave it to a collection agency that added on $50K for their fees), then that would suppress demand.

WC is advocating the removal of government backing altogether.

Just to be clear, I think the government backing plays an important role in lowering the interest rates, so I am not against the continuance thereof, but I think that maybe the government should stop raising the yearly and aggregate limits (and announce that they are doing so), so that universities will have to slow their tuition growth.

[MannyIsGod]

Drachen, not to mention that if she's under 24 and her parents income is not incredibly low then her limit is actually much lower: 31k. Then her parents have access to a PLUS loan but thats not "her" debt.

[MannyIsGod]

No I looked it up, they are separate amounts, however you are correct, good luck getting that much in Perkins.

Are you sure? I know that my annual limit is the stafford amount but its reached by adding both together. Do you have a link?

[Drachen]

Are you sure? I know that my annual limit is the stafford amount but its reached by adding both together. Do you have a link?

http://www.finaid.org/loans/studentloan.phtml

I don't know for sure how your school presents it, but perhaps you are confusing the subsidized portion of your stafford loan for a perkins loan (they are very similar).

[boutons_deux]

I much prefer to keep the scumbag banks out of investment in education, and the govt to return to making the loans and pocketing 100% of the interest.

The govt loans to the financial sector at effectively 0%, then why not loan to students, moving the country forward with an educated populace rather than just pumping up the financial sector no-trickle-down profits?

[MannyIsGod]

http://www.finaid.org/loans/studentloan.phtml

I don't know for sure how your school presents it, but perhaps you are confusing the subsidized portion of your stafford loan for a perkins loan (they are very similar).

Oh no, my school presents it very clearly. I have a subsidized portion, an unsubsidized portion, and a Perkins loan which is very small. My first year here I had to borrow the max due to having to pay out of state tuition (hooray residency) and that max was the Stafford annual max even though it included the Perkins amount as well.

I looked at the link you provided and it provides both limits but it doesn't say that you can borrow the Perkins amount in addition to the Stafford amount. It doesn't say otherwise, but my experiences with the limits say that there isn't some larger limit - just the Stafford limits.

[Drachen]

Oh no, my school presents it very clearly. I have a subsidized portion, an unsubsidized portion, and a Perkins loan which is very small. My first year here I had to borrow the max due to having to pay out of state tuition (hooray residency) and that max was the Stafford annual max even though it included the Perkins amount as well.

I looked at the link you provided and it provides both limits but it doesn't say that you can borrow the Perkins amount in addition to the Stafford amount. It doesn't say otherwise, but my experiences with the limits say that there isn't some larger limit - just the Stafford limits.

the way it is presented there seems otherwise (to me), and since I cannot find anything that is more clear, I will defer to your experience.

[MannyIsGod]

:lol

I really could be wrong, but I've had to deal with so much financial aid stuff over the past few years that I really have tried to become an expert. I don't like leaving free money on the table and I like to limit the amount I have to pay back as much as possible.

Luckily - I've found myself a grant that might put me in a position to finish my last few semesters with very little in loans because of this.

[CosmicCowboy]

I'm OK with government backed student loan guarantees as long as the loans are inescapable and use the IRS as a collector of last resort.

[Drachen]

I'm OK with government backed student loan guarantees as long as the loans are inescapable and use the IRS as a collector of last resort.

This is pretty much how it is run now.

[MannyIsGod]

I think when people talk about the student debt bubble its the private loans. Getting those loans is really really easy (which makes them a lot like sub prime) and the amount of debt is getting quite high. Once again though, this is not the universities fault as they have nothing to do with these loans. This is all about bad loaning practices.

[coyotes_geek]

I'd rather just get the government out of the student loan business entirely.

[MannyIsGod]

Show me another away to ensure access and I'm all ears.

[DarrinS]

You can get a college education for less than 100K.

Also, you don't have to get a loan for all of your living expenses, too.

There is this thing, called a job...

[MannyIsGod]

You can get a college education for less than 100K.


Yes



Also, you don't have to get a loan for all of your living expenses, too.

There is this thing, called a job...

I would argue sometimes its better just to take out the loans for the extra amount then work a job for a shitty wage. In fact it may be cheaper just to take 6 extra hours from 12 to 18 and NOT work so that you can get done faster.

[DarrinS]

Fuck, just go to a community college like SAC for a couple of years and then transfer to a school like UTSA.

People getting 100K in debt better damn well have a medical degree. My sister had over 100K in debt, but that shit was paid off quick because she's a doctor. If you are 100K in debt and you have a degree in history, you are just a stupid fuck.

[MannyIsGod]

In fact, you really should get an education for far less than 100k. You really shouldn't go out of state for undergrad without a damn good reason or without money. Just go to a state school and pay far far less in most cases.

[MannyIsGod]

Fuck, just go to a community college like SAC for a couple of years and then transfer to a school like UTSA.

People getting 100K in debt better damn well have a medical degree. My sister had over 100K in debt, but that shit was paid off quick because she's a doctor. If you are 100K in debt and you have a degree in history, you are just a stupid fuck.

Agree 100%

[DarrinS]

I would argue sometimes its better just to take out the loans for the extra amount then work a job for a shitty wage. In fact it may be cheaper just to take 6 extra hours from 12 to 18 and NOT work so that you can get done faster.


Perhaps.

[Yonivore]

Fuck, just go to a community college like SAC for a couple of years and then transfer to a school like UTSA.

People getting 100K in debt better damn well have a medical degree. My sister had over 100K in debt, but that shit was paid off quick because she's a doctor. If you are 100K in debt and you have a degree in history, you are just a stupid fuck.
I'm not sure even a medical degree will guarantee an ability to repay the loans these days.

[DarrinS]

Or, get a job in the field you are studying (internship, etc.) and sometimes those companies are willing to reimburse some of those costs. I don't think enough people go this route. Plus, when you graduate, nine times out of ten, that same company hires you.

[coyotes_geek]

Show me another away to ensure access and I'm all ears.

Not the taxpayers problem. And given the number of kids graduating college with a shitload of debt and a worthless degree, I think it's more than fair to ask whether or not ensuring access to student loans is really in everyone's best interests.

[MannyIsGod]

Not the taxpayers problem. And given the number of kids graduating college with a shitload of debt and a worthless degree, I think it's more than fair to ask whether or not ensuring access to student loans is really in everyone's best interests.

Can you show me figures on the number of kids "who are graduating with a shitload of debt and a worthless degree" and how that is negatively impacting the taxpayer? You're assuming a problem here without actually showing one.

Its pretty much undeniable that ensuring access is in everyone's best interest if you believe that our entire society suffers when its education level drops (and in turn income disparity increases). However, later on today I'll do my part and back up this statement as well, CG.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm not sure even a medical degree will guarantee an ability to repay the loans these days.

God damn you really should read a thread before opening your mouth.

[CosmicCowboy]

Yes



I would argue sometimes its better just to take out the loans for the extra amount then work a job for a shitty wage. In fact it may be cheaper just to take 6 extra hours from 12 to 18 and NOT work so that you can get done faster.
Another new university scam I resent is getting so much of their income from "fees" and refusing to let kids take a lot of hours per semester. When my honor student son went to UT and they wouldn't allow him to take more than 13 hours I was shocked. That shit probably cost me $25,000 extra over the course of his education just because the school forces kids toi extend their time there now. When I went to college in '73 you could take up to 18 hours without special permission and 21 with permission. I placed out of 20 hours and then took 21 hours a semester my first four semesters so I could cruise through my upper level classes and still graduate in 4 years without going to summer school.

[baseline bum]

I have never heard of a school doing that except in a first semester. After 18 I'd have to see an advisor, but it was a 5 minute meeting to get his signature on the petition.

[coyotes_geek]

Can you show me figures on the number of kids "who are graduating with a shitload of debt and a worthless degree" and how that is negatively impacting the taxpayer? You're assuming a problem here without actually showing one.

CNBC: The dramatic rise in student debt—and in student loan defaults—could leave the American taxpayer on the hook for hundreds of billions of dollars. (http://www.cnbc.com/id/40492487)

WSJ: The default rate for federal student loans rose to 13.8% from 11.8% for students beginning repayment in fiscal 2008 compared with those starting a year earlier, according to new data released Friday by the Department of Education. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704709304576124280473684142.html)

The topic of student loan debt also seemed to be a pretty common theme at that little gathering on Wall Street.

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/student%20loans.png

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/375481/thumbs/s-OCCUPY-COLLEGES-OCCUPY-WALL-STREET-STUDENTS-COLLEG-large300.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ZlDGGHF4uEM/TopnaRQ9XZI/AAAAAAAAEyg/BrglGmYDmXc/s400/occupy%2Bwall%2Bstreet.jpg


Its pretty much undeniable that ensuring access is in everyone's best interest if you believe that our entire society suffers when its education level drops (and in turn income disparity increases). However, later on today I'll do my part and back up this statement as well, CG.

Disagree. There's plenty of people out there who would have been much better off not taking on a bunch of student debt that they can't repay.

[DarrinS]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ZlDGGHF4uEM/TopnaRQ9XZI/AAAAAAAAEyg/BrglGmYDmXc/s400/occupy%2Bwall%2Bstreet.jpg


So, if you can't get a job in your chosen field, your only choices are dealing drugs or becoming a prostitute?


Creative problem solver. :rolleyes


Newsflash: Most people probably end up in a field that is different from what they studied in college.

[Drachen]

So, if you can't get a job in your chosen field, your only choices are dealing drugs or becoming a prostitute?


Creative problem solver. :rolleyes


Newsflash: Most people probably end up in a field that is different from what they studied in college.

she is probably trying to find jobs that will allow her to live while paying the ~600/mo payment.

I do, however, agree about your "chosen field" comment. Plus, I can deal with misspellings most of the time, but when you are trying to convince someone of the fact that you SHOULD be employable, don't misspell the word "field"! (I feel the same way about people who post stuff like "You should Lissen to me I am so smrat!!!")

[boutons_deux]

Forgiving the student loan debt of all Americans will have an immediate stimulative effect on our economy. With the stroke of the President's pen, millions of Americans would suddenly have hundreds, or in some cases, thousands of extra dollars in their pockets each and every month with which to spend on ailing sectors of the economy. As consumer spending increases, businesses will begin to hire, jobs will be created and a new era of innovation, entrepreneurship and prosperity will be ushered in for all. A rising tide does, in fact, lift all boats - forgiving student loan debt, rather than tax cuts for corporations, millionaires and billionaires, has a MUCH greater chance of helping to rise that tide in a MUCH shorter time-frame. The future economic success of this country is wholly dependent upon a well-educated, prosperous middle class. Instead of saddling entire generations with debt from which there is no escape, let's empower the American people to grow this economy on their own!

http://signon.org/sign/want%2Da%2Dreal%2Deconomic?source=mo&id=32074-4330971-iDKyNkx

========

People take on debt, lenders take on borrowers, on the expected ablity to repay.

(except when you're a predatory lender and are looking to pocket only the mortgage writing fee, not expecting repayment you tricked the naive borrower into taking)


The Banksters Great Jobs Depression destroyed those expectations for 100Ks college grads.

[LnGrrrR]

I made the mistake in the late 70's studying a field that went obsolete. Now it prepared me for other avenues of work, but the job I desired was paying $50k in 1978. As technology developed in electronics, by 1990, it was still just a $50k job. It went from a job requiring the best and brightest, to one any monkey can do. It used to be you had to do actual troubleshooting, but with technical advances, green light = good, red light = bad, replace board. Like I said. A monkey could do it.

I was partially lucky to break into what I do now, but I had the skill sets as well. Not a job any monkey can do, and far more than a "parts changer" that you guys use as a term of endearment.

WC, what do you do now? Just curious. I'd like to think that my job (IT/network tech) won't go away, but I'm also studying network design and security as well.

[LnGrrrR]

That's just it. The universities keep jacking their prices up, because there is always someone stupid enough to get these loans, and government socialist enough to back them. If they had to rely on real supply and demand economics, they would lower their prices.

Agreed. Universities are really shooting themselves in the foot though; they're killing the goose to get the golden egg now.

[LnGrrrR]

So, if you can't get a job in your chosen field, your only choices are dealing drugs or becoming a prostitute?


Creative problem solver. :rolleyes


Newsflash: Most people probably end up in a field that is different from what they studied in college.

All the burns you could possibly have said...

and you don't point out that she spelled the word "Field" incorrectly? :lmao

Also, given her looks, I feel pretty safe saying she should go the drugs route.

[CosmicCowboy]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ZlDGGHF4uEM/TopnaRQ9XZI/AAAAAAAAEyg/BrglGmYDmXc/s400/occupy%2Bwall%2Bstreet.jpg
Uhhh...If that's her only two choices I recommend going the drug route unless she's talking about selling a kidney.

[MannyIsGod]

CNBC: The dramatic rise in student debt—and in student loan defaults—could leave the American taxpayer on the hook for hundreds of billions of dollars. (http://www.cnbc.com/id/40492487)

WSJ: The default rate for federal student loans rose to 13.8% from 11.8% for students beginning repayment in fiscal 2008 compared with those starting a year earlier, according to new data released Friday by the Department of Education. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704709304576124280473684142.html)


The first article has one of the worst head lines ever written considering it never at any point decides to tell you exactly how this would impact tax payers negatively. It basically says that private loans are bad for students. I agree with that but taxpayers are not on the hook for private loans.

The second article also does not really push your point, either. Yes, defaults on student loans have gone up in recent years but considering the levels of unemployment and general economic malaise this should not be a shock to anyone. Furthermore, the article points out that much of this increase is purely on the shoulders of for profit schools and that schools that are contributing to this will soon be cut out of being eligible for the loan programs because of their failure to graduate students that can actually pay off these loans. I've railed against for profit higher ed on this board before and this is why.

The figures in both of the articles are really very small. Default rates under 10% for private and public institutions strike me as manageable and that shows that 9 out of 10 students are graduating and are able to make due. That certainly seems to be a point in favor of these loans being effective.

None of this info helps an assertion that students are graduating with "worthless" degrees and actually makes the case for the opposite.



The topic of student loan debt also seemed to be a pretty common theme at that little gathering on Wall Street.

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/student%20loans.png

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/375481/thumbs/s-OCCUPY-COLLEGES-OCCUPY-WALL-STREET-STUDENTS-COLLEG-large300.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ZlDGGHF4uEM/TopnaRQ9XZI/AAAAAAAAEyg/BrglGmYDmXc/s400/occupy%2Bwall%2Bstreet.jpg

Irrelevant. I'm not sure anyone is happy about having to pay back large amounts of money for anything. That doesn't mean its not worth it. Anecdotal evidence of this sort is meaningless. Its not like me posting the bank account of a doctor and pointing out how student loans helped them is going to prove my point.

[quote]
Disagree. There's plenty of people out there who would have been much better off not taking on a bunch of student debt that they can't repay.

I never said otherwise. My point is that having open access that loans and general financial aid provide is important to a society. Of course there are going to be people who go into debt and would have been better off having never attended college. Considering the level of private lending to people who don't even need private loans (see your first article) that isn't a byproduct of our current system by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, considering the predatory lending practices that go on with private student loans this would only increase in the absence of government backed aid.

But more importantly, while there are people who come out worse I would argue that there are far more people who come out better because they had access to a college education that they would not have had otherwise. In the end the that is the point. I don't think its a stretch to argue that our countries education level would be lower were it not for federal aid and I do not think it is a stretch to argue that would have an incredibly bad impact. The way forward is not going to be through unskilled jobs. Thats been apparent for a couple of decades now. As it is, we're already suffering when it comes to graduating people in various professions (IE Engineers) when compared to other countries and falling further.

And really, its a tough case to make that the US doesn't reap the benefit from financial aid in tax dollars when you consider that a college graduate will make almost twice as much more as a high school graduate. Thats quite a bit more future tax revenue you see from the investment a country makes in order to get there. Not to mention that the investment gets paid back in nearly every case (even the defaults).

[CosmicCowboy]

I have never heard of a school doing that except in a first semester. After 18 I'd have to see an advisor, but it was a 5 minute meeting to get his signature on the petition.

Baseline, as I remember it, it was the full freshman year and they capped it at 15 without special permission after that.

[MannyIsGod]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ZlDGGHF4uEM/TopnaRQ9XZI/AAAAAAAAEyg/BrglGmYDmXc/s400/occupy%2Bwall%2Bstreet.jpg
Uhhh...If that's her only two choices I recommend going the drug route unless she's talking about selling a kidney.

:lmao

I'm gonna go ahead and say I thought the same.

And really, bitching about 40k in debt is pretty worthless, IMO. Its a lot of money but the fact of the matter is that 40k in debt is not going to ruin your life unless you're an idiot.

Then again picking up 40k in debt with a worthless major does tend to signify that you're an idiot. Its about time we stopped telling people that they can do anything they want to do if they put their mind to it and start telling them that somethings are out of reach. You may really fucking love basket weaving but you're never going to make much money off of it. You'd better make sure that whatever you're going into debt for will make you employable so that you can repay those loans.

[MannyIsGod]

Baseline, as I remember it, it was the full freshman year and they capped it at 15 without special permission after that.

I'm capped at 18 before I have to see an adviser. I had to talk to a bunch of incoming freshman and look at their schedules to hand out vouchers for a program I'm a part of here at school and I can say the vast majority of them were enrolled in 15+ hours.

Schools are trying to get people out the door faster - they certainly aren't trying to slow it down. I know that the Texas leg actually passed some good overhauls that charge people more when they exceed a certain amount of hours without graduating and if they drop a class and take it more than once. People taking a long time are a big deal and there has been a concerted effort system wide in order to get them out the door.

I know here at UNM they constantly remind you it costs the same to take 12 hours as it does to take 18. After 18 they do start charging you a bit more by the hour but they definitely do not want people taking the minimum.

[MannyIsGod]

Agreed. Universities are really shooting themselves in the foot though; they're killing the goose to get the golden egg now.

Schools are raising prices because the cost of educating people is not cheap and there are a lot more people enrolling now than ever before. Its actually picture perfect supply and demand.

Its damn important to remember that the vast majority of schools are NONPROFIT. They're certainly not raising prices in some effort to make money.

[boutons_deux]

"Schools are raising prices because ..."

... because they can. Universities are run like for-profit business with very expensive mid/upper employees grabbing of salaries/perks, rather than as non-profit educational institutions.

[coyotes_geek]

Forgiving the student loan debt of all Americans will have an immediate stimulative effect on our economy. With the stroke of the President's pen, millions of Americans would suddenly have hundreds, or in some cases, thousands of extra dollars in their pockets each and every month with which to spend on ailing sectors of the economy. As consumer spending increases, businesses will begin to hire, jobs will be created and a new era of innovation, entrepreneurship and prosperity will be ushered in for all. A rising tide does, in fact, lift all boats - forgiving student loan debt, rather than tax cuts for corporations, millionaires and billionaires, has a MUCH greater chance of helping to rise that tide in a MUCH shorter time-frame. The future economic success of this country is wholly dependent upon a well-educated, prosperous middle class. Instead of saddling entire generations with debt from which there is no escape, let's empower the American people to grow this economy on their own!

http://signon.org/sign/want%2Da%2Dreal%2Deconomic?source=mo&id=32074-4330971-iDKyNkx

:lol

What an absolutely shitty idea. There's $1 trillion of student loan debt out there. Care to take a guess who ends up getting to eat that shit sandwich when we "forgive" it?

[MannyIsGod]

People should just pay their damn debt. I don't see it as a huge problem but the idea that you're somehow entitled to walk through life without having to pay for anything really pisses me off.

[LnGrrrR]

Schools are raising prices because the cost of educating people is not cheap and there are a lot more people enrolling now than ever before. Its actually picture perfect supply and demand.

Its damn important to remember that the vast majority of schools are NONPROFIT. They're certainly not raising prices in some effort to make money.

They may be "non-profit" in the sense that people aren't pocketing more money, but I'm sure that extra money is being put to use to purchase more facility space, hire better teachers, etc etc.

My point is that eventually, people won't be able to afford these schools, and then the schools that kept raising tuition in order to fund these bigger/better facilities in order to attract better students are going to be screwed.

Sure, some schools raise prices in order to compete with inflation. But the inflation of a college degree has seemingly raised far more than average inflation. Where's all that extra money going, and what will happen when that extra money isn't there?

[CosmicCowboy]

The ones that blow me away are these idiots that go to ITT Tech for a "computer" degree (because it is quick and easy and uhhh I like to play video games) and end up after two years with a totally worthless piece of paper and $30,000 in debt.

[Drachen]

The ones that blow me away are these idiots that go to ITT Tech for a "computer" degree (because it is quick and easy and uhhh I like to play video games) and end up after two years with a totally worthless piece of paper and $30,000 in debt.

(pssst. it's more than that.)

[MannyIsGod]

They may be "non-profit" in the sense that people aren't pocketing more money, but I'm sure that extra money is being put to use to purchase more facility space, hire better teachers, etc etc.

My point is that eventually, people won't be able to afford these schools, and then the schools that kept raising tuition in order to fund these bigger/better facilities in order to attract better students are going to be screwed.

Sure, some schools raise prices in order to compete with inflation. But the inflation of a college degree has seemingly raised far more than average inflation. Where's all that extra money going, and what will happen when that extra money isn't there?

So, before the 70s less than half of HS graduates went to college. Now its closer to 70%. With 70%, you also have an increase in population to factor in. We've added about 100,000 million people since then. Now obviously not all of those are going to be of the age to go to school but I think you get the point I"m trying to make.

I think you're seeing now a point where people will start getting priced out. Thats not a good thing, though. I don't see why that is a desirable outcome. The reality is that higher ed as a business that relies on profitability to stay viable is going to be available for a much smaller segment of our population than the current system and there is no way that is a better outcome for our country.

[MannyIsGod]

The ones that blow me away are these idiots that go to ITT Tech for a "computer" degree (because it is quick and easy and uhhh I like to play video games) and end up after two years with a totally worthless piece of paper and $30,000 in debt.

For profit schools. Its not different than the UofPheonix, Devry etc etc. People who do that are making huge mistakes - for the most part. I know there are exceptions and we've gone over that in the past here.

[MannyIsGod]

LNG, even if you look at a no frills school like SAC you will see that tuition rates have skyrocketed. And that isn't because SAC is somehow splurging on things. For the most part new facilities are typically not paid for by tuition but through bonds. Secondly, parts of SAC are falling apart.

Providing an education - like everything else - has seen its price go up incredibly.

[LnGrrrR]

So, before the 70s less than half of HS graduates went to college. Now its closer to 70%. With 70%, you also have an increase in population to factor in. We've added about 100,000 million people since then. Now obviously not all of those are going to be of the age to go to school but I think you get the point I"m trying to make.

I don't think that quite explains the rapid inflation though. If they have more people going, they should have more funds to build new buildings, hire more people, etc etc. I could understand some inflation, but not at the pace it is.


I think you're seeing now a point where people will start getting priced out. Thats not a good thing, though. I don't see why that is a desirable outcome. The reality is that higher ed as a business that relies on profitability to stay viable is going to be available for a much smaller segment of our population than the current system and there is no way that is a better outcome for our country.

I don't think it's desirable either; but the way it's going, there's no alternatives. Something will break along the way, we just don't know what yet.

[boutons_deux]

"has seen its price go up incredibly."

with inflation insignificant for many years, what costs have skyrocketed?

[MannyIsGod]

Whats changed? Well for one tax payers provide a lot less per student now than they did in the past. Take a look at the increases for private institutions. They're much higher than that of public schools.

[CosmicCowboy]

I was talking to my sister this weekend about the glut of over educated people in the job market. She does hiring for a big hospital chain and will get as many as 800 resumes (many with batchelor and even masters in various liberal arts degree plans) for jobs posted at $9 an hour.

[DarrinS]

People should just pay their damn debt. I don't see it as a huge problem but the idea that you're somehow entitled to walk through life without having to pay for anything really pisses me off.


OK, who has hijacked Manny's account?

[coyotes_geek]

The first article has one of the worst head lines ever written considering it never at any point decides to tell you exactly how this would impact tax payers negatively. It basically says that private loans are bad for students. I agree with that but taxpayers are not on the hook for private loans.

The second article also does not really push your point, either. Yes, defaults on student loans have gone up in recent years but considering the levels of unemployment and general economic malaise this should not be a shock to anyone. Furthermore, the article points out that much of this increase is purely on the shoulders of for profit schools and that schools that are contributing to this will soon be cut out of being eligible for the loan programs because of their failure to graduate students that can actually pay off these loans. I've railed against for profit higher ed on this board before and this is why.

The figures in both of the articles are really very small. Default rates under 10% for private and public institutions strike me as manageable and that shows that 9 out of 10 students are graduating and are able to make due. That certainly seems to be a point in favor of these loans being effective.

None of this info helps an assertion that students are graduating with "worthless" degrees and actually makes the case for the opposite.
irrelevant. I'm not sure anyone is happy about having to pay back large amounts of money for anything. That doesn't mean its not worth it. Anecdotal evidence of this sort is meaningless. Its not like me posting the bank account of a doctor and pointing out how student loans helped them is going to prove my point.



I never said otherwise. My point is that having open access that loans and general financial aid provide is important to a society. Of course there are going to be people who go into debt and would have been better off having never attended college. Considering the level of private lending to people who don't even need private loans (see your first article) that isn't a byproduct of our current system by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, considering the predatory lending practices that go on with private student loans this would only increase in the absence of government backed aid.

But more importantly, while there are people who come out worse I would argue that there are far more people who come out better because they had access to a college education that they would not have had otherwise. In the end the that is the point. I don't think its a stretch to argue that our countries education level would be lower were it not for federal aid and I do not think it is a stretch to argue that would have an incredibly bad impact. The way forward is not going to be through unskilled jobs. Thats been apparent for a couple of decades now. As it is, we're already suffering when it comes to graduating people in various professions (IE Engineers) when compared to other countries and falling further.

And really, its a tough case to make that the US doesn't reap the benefit from financial aid in tax dollars when you consider that a college graduate will make almost twice as much more as a high school graduate. Thats quite a bit more future tax revenue you see from the investment a country makes in order to get there. Not to mention that the investment gets paid back in nearly every case (even the defaults).

I agree with you about the perils of the for-profit colleges. My tolerance level of default rates differs than yours. But those are pretty much tangential points to my main concern about the taxpayers needing to be on the hook for backing all these loans. If the loans are performing then there's no need for the taxpayers to be backing them.

[DarrinS]

All the burns you could possibly have said...

and you don't point out that she spelled the word "Field" incorrectly? :lmao



lol. I didn't see that.

[MannyIsGod]

I was talking to my sister this weekend about the glut of over educated people in the job market. She does hiring for a big hospital chain and will get as many as 800 resumes (many with batchelor and even masters in various liberal arts degree plans) for jobs posted at $9 an hour.

When I was doing the hiring to fill my previous position I had lots of masters degrees in for a job that paid 13-16 dollars an hour. But, for the most part (with one or two exceptions) they were not degrees I thought were in huge demand. Think, Psych.

[DarrinS]

The good news: Baby Boomers are starting to retire and there should be a large demand to fill the jobs left in their wake. Not to mention the jobs needed to take care of that aging demographic.

The bad news: Baby Boomers are starting to retire and we'll be eaten alive by their medicare, medicaid, and SS payments.

[MannyIsGod]

I agree with you about the perils of the for-profit colleges. My tolerance level of default rates differs than yours. But those are pretty much tangential points to my main concern about the taxpayers needing to be on the hook for backing all these loans. If the loans are performing then there's no need for the taxpayers to be backing them.

I think your last point has some serious merit but considering the current situation regarding private student loans I'd rather puke before I see that happen.

I think even with loan performance being fairly good (AFAIK - maybe those default rates are considered super high? I'm no loan officer) I think there is reason for the government to be involved which boils down to student protection and open access. Maybe in the future that won't be the case.

[MannyIsGod]

The good news: Baby Boomers are starting to retire and there should be a large demand to fill the jobs left in their wake. Not to mention the jobs needed to take care of that aging demographic.

The bad news: Baby Boomers are starting to retire and we'll be eaten alive by their medicare, medicaid, and SS payments.

Yeah - lots of people are being sold degrees on the premise that retirees will open up a lot of new jobs. The economy is putting the brakes on that, though. For now, anyway.

[CosmicCowboy]

The good news: Baby Boomers are starting to retire and there should be a large demand to fill the jobs left in their wake. Not to mention the jobs needed to take care of that aging demographic.

The bad news: Baby Boomers are starting to retire and we'll be eaten alive by their medicare, medicaid, and SS payments.

The even worse news...a lot of baby boomers aren't financially able to retire and those jobs aren't going to open up, plus a lot of companies are downsizing by attrition as older BBoomers retire without filling those positions.

[boutons_deux]

Blame students for loan debt? Not so fast.

The Full Picture
The minimum wage in the United States has gone up 353% since 1970, and average incomes have gone up approximately 500%. In that same span, however, the cost of basic household goods has gone up 482%, the cost of a four year education has gone up 994%, and the cost of an average home has gone up 917%.

In other words, in the eyes of an average worker from 1970 compered to today, the prices at the grocery store have remained largely unchanged, but the cost of an education has roughly doubled (and it’s now required if you want to earn significant money, where it wasn’t in 1970) and the cost of a home has roughly doubled as well.

If you look at it through the eyes of a minimum wage earner from 1970 compared to today, the prices at the grocery store have gone up about 30%, the cost of education has roughly tripled, and the cost of a home has roughly tripled.

Is There A Solution?
Like it or not, students of today, you’re likely not going to be able to follow the path of your parents – and especially not the path of your grandparents. If you want to have a financially healthy life, you’re going to need to keep an eye on every dollar much more than they had to. The ability to sensibly manage your money and make smart buying choices is much more of a requirement than ever before.

Parents and grandparents of today, give those kids a break. They’ve got a much worse financial reality than you did when you walked out of school. They’re facing bigger housing costs, bigger education costs, and a bigger requirement to have that education than you ever did. Don’t compare the path they’re following to the one you’re following. It’s an unfair comparison all around.

http://www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/print/content/view/print/415730

[ploto]

I would argue sometimes its better just to take out the loans for the extra amount then work a job for a shitty wage. In fact it may be cheaper just to take 6 extra hours from 12 to 18 and NOT work so that you can get done faster.
Some universities have even gone to a set tuition rate per semester (usually for 12 to 18 hours) instead of by-the-hour charges to encourage students to take a full load and graduate.

You also have to figure that each additional year you are there, tuition will go up.

[Wild Cobra]

Blame students for loan debt? Not so fast.

The Full Picture
The minimum wage in the United States has gone up 353% since 1970, and average incomes have gone up approximately 500%. In that same span, however, the cost of basic household goods has gone up 482%, the cost of a four year education has gone up 994%, and the cost of an average home has gone up 917%.

In other words, in the eyes of an average worker from 1970 compered to today, the prices at the grocery store have remained largely unchanged, but the cost of an education has roughly doubled (and it’s now required if you want to earn significant money, where it wasn’t in 1970) and the cost of a home has roughly doubled as well.

If you look at it through the eyes of a minimum wage earner from 1970 compared to today, the prices at the grocery store have gone up about 30%, the cost of education has roughly tripled, and the cost of a home has roughly tripled.

Is There A Solution?
Like it or not, students of today, you’re likely not going to be able to follow the path of your parents – and especially not the path of your grandparents. If you want to have a financially healthy life, you’re going to need to keep an eye on every dollar much more than they had to. The ability to sensibly manage your money and make smart buying choices is much more of a requirement than ever before.

Parents and grandparents of today, give those kids a break. They’ve got a much worse financial reality than you did when you walked out of school. They’re facing bigger housing costs, bigger education costs, and a bigger requirement to have that education than you ever did. Don’t compare the path they’re following to the one you’re following. It’s an unfair comparison all around.

http://www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/print/content/view/print/415730
It's very simple Boutons.

The more government involvement, the more expensive things get.

[boutons_deux]

Student Loan Debt Will Exceed $1 Trillion This Year For The First Time Ever

USA Today reports that for the first time ever, outstanding student loans will exceed $1 trillion this year. The amount of student loans taken out last year also set a record, crossing the $100 billion mark. Students have been struggling in the face of rising tuition costs and reduced financial aid, and are borrowing twice what they did a decade ago, according to College Board. Unpaid student debt has also doubled in the past five years. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York reports that Americans now owe more on student loans than on credit cards. This emerging trend is expected to have far-reaching consequences, as unpaid loans hang over young adults when they start their careers and delay investments like buying a car, buying a home, getting married, and having children.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/10/19/347958/student-loan-debt-trillion/

[boutons_deux]

It's very simple Boutons.


The more government involvement, the more expensive things get.

What's simple is your ideological blindness.

Look a SS/Medicare/VA efficiency/overheads vs private pension plans and for-profit insurance.

banks and their hyena/vulture collection agencies pocket more on student loans than the govt.

[boutons_deux]

The $1 Trillion Student Loan Rip-Off: How an Entire Generation Was Tricked into Taking on Crushing Debt That Just Enriches Banks

Thanks to the horrific 2005 (REPUG) bankruptcy bill, one of the most nakedly venal modern examples of Congress serving the interests of the rentiers and creditors over the vast majority, debtors cannot discharge student loans through bankruptcy. The government is shielded from the risk, and creditors are licensed to collect by almost any means they deem necessary, giving no one in charge any real incentive (beyond basic human decency) to fix the situation.

The impossibility of escaping student loan debt is why an industry sprang upto foist useless, overpriced degrees on vulnerable people. It’s a scam, but a profitable one, and respectable enough for major establishment players to feel comfortable making a killing on it.

employees recounted a distinct culture shift once the company went private under Goldman Sachs and the other private equity investors, as day-to-day operations warped from a commitment to students and their success into an environment laser-focused on hitting mandated enrollment targets. New recruits were viewed simply as a conduit for federal student assistance dollars, the employees said, and pressure mounted from management to enroll anyone at any cost.

So we have incredibly rich and powerful elite institutions joining forces to bleed youths and minorities and poor people dry. And people wonder why there’s marching in the streets.

http://www.alternet.org/story/152809/the_$1_trillion_student_loan_rip-off:_how_an_entire_generation_was_tricked_into_tak ing_on_crushing_debt_that_just_enriches_banks?utm_ source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzRss&utm_campaign=alternet

[boutons_deux]

You know the 1% shitbags like Murdoch aren't interested in public schools to improve students' education.

The 1% is only interrested in sucking (taxpayer/school) $$$ out of Human-Americans.

1% Find Creative Ways to Profit from Our Schools -- At What Cost to Our Kids?

Murdoch was there, he admitted upfront, as “a businessman” ready to move into the education market. Murdoch’s News Corp. has been quietly developing virtual-learning and technology-driven products for K through 12 schools, and with his address Murdoch made his first large public splash into an arena he’s valued at $500 billion. For entrepreneurs big and small, American public school reform has become a prime business opportunity.

http://www.alternet.org/education/152807/1_find_creative_ways_to_profit_from_our_schools_--_at_what_cost_to_our_kids?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzRss&utm_campaign=alternet

[coyotes_geek]

:lol at the idea that banks are tricking people into taking on student loan debt.

[boutons_deux]

tricking the same way predatory lenders tricked unqualified borrowers into taking out mortgages and 2nd, 3rd mortgages they couldn't afford, by accepting "stated income", aka, "liar's loans", and by ignoring/violating federal rules for govt-guaranteed mortgages.

Lending money to (usually poor, lower class) kids to attend crap like for-profit crap like Phoenix, Kaplan, etc. Even if you gradaute (50% don't), employers laugh at your "diploma" but the lenders remain deadly serious about your debt, guaranteed by the govt and not dischargeable through bankruptcy, thank you Repug assholes.

[CosmicCowboy]

:lol at the idea that banks are tricking people into taking on student loan debt.

No shit...

And by definition most students are not credit worthy when the loans are made and without the bankruptcy protection would not get the money for school
. Without that protection what is to keep someone from racking up $100,000 in student loans, getting their education but intentionally not getting a job and declaring bankruptcy? With no money and no assets there is nothing to get in a bankruptcy and the debt could be discharged.

[CosmicCowboy]

Naturally there are irresponsible fuckups that piss their money away on worthless degrees from ITT Tech, etc., but for every one of those there are ten Mannys that use their loans responsibly to get an education for a career that they otherwise wouldn't have been able to afford.

[coyotes_geek]

tricking the same way predatory lenders tricked unqualified borrowers into taking out mortgages and 2nd, 3rd mortgages they couldn't afford, by accepting "stated income", aka, "liar's loans", and by ignoring/violating federal rules for govt-guaranteed mortgages.

Lending money to (usually poor, lower class) kids to attend crap like for-profit crap like Phoenix, Kaplan, etc. Even if you gradaute (50% don't), employers laugh at your "diploma" but the lenders remain deadly serious about your debt, guaranteed by the govt and not dischargeable through bankruptcy, thank you Repug assholes.

Precisely why government has no business getting involved in mortgages or student loans. Let the ramifications of bad decisions made by banks and individuals stay between those banks and those individuals.

[boutons_deux]

"And by definition most students are not credit worthy when the loans are made"

so by "normal" standards, the lenders should have never made the loans, so the lenders are guilty, but, according to you people, the borrowers are exclusively at fault/criminalized.

btw, a lot of mortgage holders (like yourselves) would not have gotten a mortgage had the mortgage not been govt-guaranteed.

That's why so many lenders/borrowers did deals up to the limit of "jumbo loans".

Govt-guaranteed loans are nothing but subsidy to the lenders and homebuilders.

And why is the govt involved in financing mortgages with IRS mortgage deductions (aka tax expenditures) that not one of you govt-haters would ever give up?

Without the mortgage deduction a lot of you would be renting or living in a smaller house in shittier neighborhood.

[CosmicCowboy]

We are talking about student loans, shit for brains, not mortgages. And yeah, as far as I'm concerned, if they borrow the money to go to school and get an education they should be held responsible for paying it back.

[boutons_deux]

cc, take your bitch-slapping like a bitch.

[CosmicCowboy]

cc, take your bitch-slapping like a bitch.

http://www.stepmania.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=1902&d=1302801400

[ididnotnothat]

My nephew graduated college last year with over 25K in debt.