Why should college loan debt be forgiven?

[OldJourno]

It's a nice soundbite on the campaign trail, but why should the loans willingly taken by students be forgiven?

 

[Porkwarrior]

It's a nice soundbite on the campaign trail, but why should the loans willingly taken by students be forgiven?

Because:

1) College is now pretty much mandatory. For a job at Walmart.

2) Tuition fees in the US are almost as insane as your healthcare.

Front end payments would be cheaper, but when has the US legislature passed a bill that impacts the real world in a responsible, meaningful way? So school debt forgiveness is going to be another half measure compromise that buries future generations while somehow making sure the SuperPAC piggy banks stay full.

 

[underguy1]

It's a nice soundbite on the campaign trail, but why should the loans willingly taken by students be forgiven?

Because they are a drain on the economy. They depress aggregate demand. They make the people paying them poorer for life and decrease their independence in later life.

'Repayment' of federal 'loans' serve no purpose anyway. The Feds issue the US$ at no cost.

 

[sharingfantasies]

I paid off my student loans myself. But I would rather have student loan forgiveness than tax forgiveness. I hate those commercials where so-and-so owes tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in tax debt because they chose not to pay their taxes for years. Then they get caught and end up paying a few hundred dollars. The rest of us pay thousands of dollars every year to cover for those that basically steal from the government.

 

[underguy1]

I paid off my student loans myself. But I would rather have student loan forgiveness than tax forgiveness. I hate those commercials where so-and-so owes tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in tax debt because they chose not to pay their taxes for years. Then they get caught and end up paying a few hundred dollars. The rest of us pay thousands of dollars every year to cover for those that basically steal from the government.

Student loan repayments are effectively a tax. The $ paid are $ cancelled.

 

[patient1]

It's a nice soundbite on the campaign trail, but why should the loans willingly taken by students be forgiven?

The reasoning goes that they were conned as 17 or 18 year olds into accepting a debt the size of a condo without anything to show for it. That it took 5 years instead of 4 because the course requirements weren't available. That for most there was no job placement or even instruction as to how to apply what they knew as entrepreneurs.

Unlike business loans, mortgaes, or other loans, banks and other lending institutions didn't seem to scrutinize the potential to repay the loans. No declining criminal justice or fine arts degrees as impractical. No declining certain institutions as over-priced, or pathetic at job placement. If there's a institution of higher learning, there's a credit source. Maybe not an affordable credit source, but there is one.

So, consequently the Millennials are financially crippled, hostages to a rise in interest rates. Destined to struggle without being able to get further credit, or invest in their own futures. They won't be able to buy homes until who knows when. This is a giant drag on the economy. Our economy is geared to having them marry, have children, buy homes, cars, appliances and furniture. Mutual funds and life insurance. But they can't even afford Affordable Care.

So the thinking goes that if we can bail out the banks, and the auto companies, etc. , we could bail out the generation we need to pay taxes, work service jobs and staff the nursing homes.

Now we have the business of ITT Tech going bankrupt, and the veterans who allocated their G.I. benefits there losing them.


Me I'm not eager to cancel debt, but I do think they have a case for Federal refinance at the negligible rates the gov gets.


As for student loans and higher education- it needs a whole lot of reform.

 

[Que]

Because they are a drain on the economy. They depress aggregate demand. They make the people paying them poorer for life and decrease their independence in later life.

'Repayment' of federal 'loans' serve no purpose anyway. The Feds issue the US$ at no cost.

You still haven't answered why if that is true and such a brilliant idea why don't they simply hit you twice as much or three times as much or better yet four times?

Why isn't every currency issuing country in the world incredibly wealthy from the ability to spend their way into prosperity?

 

[underguy1]

The reasoning goes that they were conned as 17 or 18 year olds into accepting a debt the size of a condo without anything to show for it. That it took 5 years instead of 4 because the course requirements weren't available. That for most there was no job placement or even instruction as to how to apply what they knew as entrepreneurs.

Unlike business loans, mortgaes, or other loans, banks and other lending institutions didn't seem to scrutinize the potential to repay the loans. No declining criminal justice or fine arts degrees as impractical. No declining certain institutions as over-priced, or pathetic at job placement. If there's a institution of higher learning, there's a credit source. Maybe not an affordable credit source, but there is one.

So, consequently the Millennials are financially crippled, hostages to a rise in interest rates. Destined to struggle without being able to get further credit, or invest in their own futures. They won't be able to buy homes until who knows when. This is a giant drag on the economy. Our economy is geared to having them marry, have children, buy homes, cars, appliances and furniture. Mutual funds and life insurance. But they can't even afford Affordable Care.

So the thinking goes that if we can bail out the banks, and the auto companies, etc. , we could bail out the generation we need to pay taxes, work service jobs and staff the nursing homes.

Now we have the business of ITT Tech going bankrupt, and the veterans who allocated their G.I. benefits there losing them.


Me I'm not eager to cancel debt, but I do think they have a case for Federal refinance at the negligible rates the gov gets.


As for student loans and higher education- it needs a whole lot of reform.

Dude the Federal government IS the $. It doesn't borrow what it issues.

 

[Que]

The reasoning goes that they were conned as 17 or 18 year olds into accepting a debt the size of a condo without anything to show for it. That it took 5 years instead of 4 because the course requirements weren't available. That for most there was no job placement or even instruction as to how to apply what they knew as entrepreneurs.

Unlike business loans, mortgaes, or other loans, banks and other lending institutions didn't seem to scrutinize the potential to repay the loans. No declining criminal justice or fine arts degrees as impractical. No declining certain institutions as over-priced, or pathetic at job placement. If there's a institution of higher learning, there's a credit source. Maybe not an affordable credit source, but there is one.

So, consequently the Millennials are financially crippled, hostages to a rise in interest rates. Destined to struggle without being able to get further credit, or invest in their own futures. They won't be able to buy homes until who knows when. This is a giant drag on the economy. Our economy is geared to having them marry, have children, buy homes, cars, appliances and furniture. Mutual funds and life insurance. But they can't even afford Affordable Care.

So the thinking goes that if we can bail out the banks, and the auto companies, etc. , we could bail out the generation we need to pay taxes, work service jobs and staff the nursing homes.

Now we have the business of ITT Tech going bankrupt, and the veterans who allocated their G.I. benefits there losing them.


Me I'm not eager to cancel debt, but I do think they have a case for Federal refinance at the negligible rates the gov gets.


As for student loans and higher education- it needs a whole lot of reform.

College costs what it does precisely because the government provided an unlimited pool of money that it knew was never going to actually be repaid. Had students not had Uncle Sam backing them for tens of thousands of dollars per year no one would have been able to afford tens of thousands per year and no colleges could stay in business charging those kinds of rates. The edifices would not be nearly as grand, there wouldn't have been nearly as much money spent on sports and the administration levels of college would be gutted to reasonable levels.

There also would not be the vibrant industry of churning out bullshit college degrees in every worthless subject imaginable, dumbed down for the masses so that everyone can claim to have a college degree when they have basically no education at all.

A college degree would have meaning if it was not a mass-produced, artuficially inflated product. Half of all college graduates are completely unemployed and a minuscule portion of graduates are employed in a field it in anyway should require the degree that they have.

What happened was HR department got tired of being sued for favoring this employee (who may have actually been the best fit for the job) over that employee. In the early days it was simple to demand a college degree when no college degree was actually necessary for the work performed. In theory that screened for having a better quality person so to speak which enabled them to continue would have been discriminatory practices in hiring and promotion. Initially this was a factor that kept women and minorities out of supervisory and management positions.

That strategy completely backfired though when colleges stepped up and began offering Advanced basket weaving degrees so that people "qualified" for all of those exclusive supervisory positions that really never needed a college degree in the first place.

 

[Ms_Ann]

Student loan repayments are effectively a tax. The $ paid are $ cancelled.

You don't consider an education as a commodity? Basically, you are borrowing money to buy an education. Why not auto loan forgiveness? Or home loan forgiveness?

There is no equivalency one can apply to taxes and student loans. What are you buying with your tax dollars? Who knows really. Paying taxes in not an option as buying an education is.

If anything, if you fail to gain employment after buying your education, the Institution should be required to reimburse you for failing to make you hireable. Of course, if you never paid in the first place...well...

 

[underguy1]

You still haven't answered why if that is true and such a brilliant idea why don't they simply hit you twice as much or three times as much or better yet four times?

Why isn't every currency issuing country in the world incredibly wealthy from the ability to spend their way into prosperity?

That's a stupid question borne of your ignorance. A currency issuer can spend to maximise the use of existing resources.

The restraints are real. Not financial.

 

[underguy1]

You don't consider an education as a commodity? Basically, you are borrowing money to buy an education. Why not auto loan forgiveness? Or home loan forgiveness?

There is no equivalency one can apply to taxes and student loans. What are you buying with your tax dollars? Who knows really. Paying taxes in not an option as buying an education is.

If anything, if you fail to gain employment after buying your education, the Institution should be required to reimburse you for failing to make you hireable. Of course, if you never paid in the first place...well...

No I don't.

So the rest of your argument is moot.

Taxes pay for nothing. It is merely the government cancelling money they've spent into the private sector.

 

[Ms_Ann]

No I don't.

So the rest of your argument is moot.

Taxes pay for nothing. It is merely the government cancelling money they've spent into the private sector.

*blinks*

 

[underguy1]

*blinks*

The federal government is the monopoly issuer of US$. It creates those $ by spending them into the private sector by marking up numbers in private sector bank accounts.

It removes those $ from the private sector via taxation and other charges.

Money is virtual and infinite.

That may well sound crazy to you because you've been conditioned to think of money as a commodity.

But it simply isn't. It is created out of thin air by the act of extending credit.

 

[Que]

That's a stupid question borne of your ignorance. A currency issuer can spend to maximise the use of existing resources.

The restraints are real. Not financial.

Oh, I see they WOULD buy unlimited amounts of whatever, if unlimited amounts of products and services were available to buy. It's a shame that we can't simply ramp up production to match the amount of money we're able to print. It's a shame that we can't simply buy everything that ever gluts any market ever. What could ever go wrong with that?

 

[Ms_Ann]

The federal government is the monopoly issuer of US$. It creates those $ by spending them into the private sector by marking up numbers in private sector bank accounts.

It removes those $ from the private sector via taxation and other charges.

Money is virtual and infinite.

That may well sound crazy to you because you've been conditioned to think of money as a commodity.

But it simply isn't. It is created out of thin air by the act of extending credit.

Perhaps you should have borrowed some money to get an education.

 

[Que]

*blinks*

He does this.

All financial problems suffered on the individual level all the way up to government and World Markets can be solved by simply screwing around with the money supply even further than they already do. Tis a shame he's not in charge isn't it? Seems awfully simple.

If only world leaders would listen to him.

He says certain things that aren't necessarily false but in the process he essentially implies that the amount of currency issued and wealth are the same thing when of course they aren't.

 

[patient1]

College costs what it does precisely because the government provided an unlimited pool of money that it knew was never going to actually be repaid. Had students not had Uncle Sam backing them for tens of thousands of dollars per year no one would have been able to afford tens of thousands per year and no colleges could stay in business charging those kinds of rates. The edifices would not be nearly as grand, there wouldn't have been nearly as much money spent on sports and the administration levels of college would be gutted to reasonable levels.

There also would not be the vibrant industry of churning out bullshit college degrees in every worthless subject imaginable, dumbed down for the masses so that everyone can claim to have a college degree when they have basically no education at all.

A college degree would have meaning if it was not a mass-produced, artuficially inflated product. Half of all college graduates are completely unemployed and a minuscule portion of graduates are employed in a field it in anyway should require the degree that they have.

What happened was HR department got tired of being sued for favoring this employee (who may have actually been the best fit for the job) over that employee. In the early days it was simple to demand a college degree when no college degree was actually necessary for the work performed. In theory that screened for having a better quality person so to speak which enabled them to continue would have been discriminatory practices in hiring and promotion. Initially this was a factor that kept women and minorities out of supervisory and management positions.

That strategy completely backfired though when colleges stepped up and began offering Advanced basket weaving degrees so that people "qualified" for all of those exclusive supervisory positions that really never needed a college degree in the first place.

I agree. Of course federal involvement makes the feds responsible. Maybe that was the wrong word. Complicit ? Culpable?

 

[Ms_Ann]

He does this.

All financial problems suffered on the individual level all the way up to government and World Markets can be solved by simply screwing around with the money supply even further than they already do. Tis a shame he's not in charge isn't it? Seems awfully simple.

If only world leaders would listen to him.

He says certain things that aren't necessarily false but in the process he essentially implies that the amount of currency issued and wealth are the same thing when of course they aren't.

It's like playing poker with someone else's money.

 

[underguy1]

Oh, I see they WOULD buy unlimited amounts of whatever, if unlimited amounts of products and services were available to buy. It's a shame that we can't simply ramp up production to match the amount of money we're able to print. It's a shame that we can't simply buy everything that ever gluts any market ever. What could ever go wrong with that?

Completely back arsewards.

As expected.

As I said, you're too stupid to learn.

 

[underguy1]

Perhaps you should have borrowed some money to get an education.

I went to university pretty much for free.I studied economics which clearly you haven't.

My parents taught me manners and civility. Which clearly your parents didn't teach you.

 

[Que]

I agree. Of course federal involvement makes the feds responsible. Maybe that was the wrong word. Complicit ? Culpable?

Oh, absolutely.

There is a concept in law called lender liability. If you go out and lend money to someone that you know or should have known can't possibly repay it, the courts take a dim view of that. That's exactly what the federal government has done and it's in collusion with ever-increasing tuitions at all of these colleges and universities.

The entire thing is a huge circular reasoning scam. They graduate people like underguy with degrees in economics where they teach Keynesian theory about how the more money government spends, especially on great things like education the wealthier we will all be when really the entire thing as a giant Ponzi scheme dependent upon new students coming in all the time to fund all those exorbitant professors salaries. Why on Earth should a few hours a week in a classroom pay a quarter of a million dollars a year when you figure in overly generous benefits and pension plans?

 

[underguy1]

He does this.

All financial problems suffered on the individual level all the way up to government and World Markets can be solved by simply screwing around with the money supply even further than they already do. Tis a shame he's not in charge isn't it? Seems awfully simple.

If only world leaders would listen to him.

He says certain things that aren't necessarily false but in the process he essentially implies that the amount of currency issued and wealth are the same thing when of course they aren't.

This is the usual bunch of strawmen that you use to avoid arguing rationally.

I do no such thing and you sir, are a bald faced liar.

 

[Que]

Completely back arsewards.

As expected.

As I said, you're too stupid to learn.

Is that^^^the sort of civility and good manners that your parents and you communist-bloc "education" instilled in you?

What, in your view, is the stumbling block to universal prosperity, given that money, according to you, is infinently available to fund anything needed for a society to prosper?

 

[Porkwarrior]

Dude the Federal government IS the $. It doesn't borrow what it issues.

The gov't is NOT the Fed. The Federal Reserve is allegedly overseen by a board appointed by the president...but really it's owned & run by private banks.

College costs what it does precisely because the government provided an unlimited pool of money that it knew was never going to actually be repaid. Had students not had Uncle Sam backing them for tens of thousands of dollars per year no one would have been able to afford tens of thousands per year and no colleges could stay in business charging those kinds of rates. The edifices would not be nearly as grand, there wouldn't have been nearly as much money spent on sports and the administration levels of college would be gutted to reasonable levels.

There also would not be the vibrant industry of churning out bullshit college degrees in every worthless subject imaginable, dumbed down for the masses so that everyone can claim to have a college degree when they have basically no education at all.

A college degree would have meaning if it was not a mass-produced, artuficially inflated product. Half of all college graduates are completely unemployed and a minuscule portion of graduates are employed in a field it in anyway should require the degree that they have.

What happened was HR department got tired of being sued for favoring this employee (who may have actually been the best fit for the job) over that employee. In the early days it was simple to demand a college degree when no college degree was actually necessary for the work performed. In theory that screened for having a better quality person so to speak which enabled them to continue would have been discriminatory practices in hiring and promotion. Initially this was a factor that kept women and minorities out of supervisory and management positions.

That strategy completely backfired though when colleges stepped up and began offering Advanced basket weaving degrees so that people "qualified" for all of those exclusive supervisory positions that really never needed a college degree in the first place.

Y'know, occasionally, you say something insightful that really hits the nail on the head.

*blinks*

See Advanced Ethnic Women's Studies Basket Weaving in above post. 3/4 of US college grads are not working in their major 5yrs out. They only have another 5yrs before that student loan debt is paid off.
When this 43yr old high school dropout but still better at Algebra, Calculus & Trig than any university grad I've met in the last decade blinks at the numbers. I have to add them up again, then blink harder.