Just another freebie for the Sons of Obama.
http://hechingerreport.org/billions-in-pell-dollars-go-to-students-who-never-graduate/
Just another freebie for the Sons of Obama.
http://hechingerreport.org/billions-in-pell-dollars-go-to-students-who-never-graduate/
Except that many many republican presidents have gone by BEFORE Obama that could have either cleaned it up or obliterated it. You might want to reflect on that
Seems like the universities are the ones getting the money for nothing.
Try to keep it real for a minute or two. Pell grants have been around long before Obama for cryn out loud. There are countless middle class students racking up billions in loan debt and graduating year after year after year. Hillary wants to throw millions more at the problem and most of the other candidates will eventually come up with some similar plan to try and win votes. These grants and plans somehow need to be tied to graduating and if you don't, you pay the grant back. (I know good luck collecting on that.) Kids with loans who graduate should be getting some sort of assistance as well. Free housing and free tuition to the bottom 20% doesn't solve the problem. 2 years of success at a community college would be a great indicator of potential ability and desire to complete degrees at colleges and universities. That's what more and more of the middle class kids are doing and it is why our universities are struggling with retention rates and basic enrollment management. But the same old ideas and billions of dollars will be thrown at the problem while ivory towers full of over-paid administrators will try to figure it out. And our equally clueless congresspersons will do the same.
$30 billion a year for Pell grants alone (30-40% is wasted on non-graduates). Federally guaranteed student debt is increasing by $100 billion a year. The taxpayers are going to be on the hook for a majority of the $2.5 TRILLION in debt that will be out there in ten years. Totally unsustainable.
Why don't we just require the colleges to refund any grant money back to Pell if a student does not graduate? Then the Administrators would have something to do to earn their pay. Keeping student retention numbers high.
Great idea but then they would have to eliminate all the special admissions programs where unprepared students are brought in to sink or swim. That would not go over well with the politically correct crowd who thinks everyone belongs at a 4 year institution. I sat my son down and said you can stay at home and commute and save $10,000 on housing or you can take out a loan and go live in a dorm - he's commuting and doing just fine and taking out $3K in loans to cover all his other needs. I think there is an advantage to the dorm living experience but I don't think it is worth the $10K in loans.
A few weeks ago the federal Reserve Bank of NY released a report that found a $0.60-0.70 increase in tuition for every $1.00 in federal aid. I'll do the math for you: if you have $30k in debt, ~$22.5k of that is thanks to asinine market intervention liberal policy. Think about that for a moment.
You liberals don't get it. You can have the best intentions in the world but when you throw money at a problem costs rise for everyone. We saw this in housing just last decade. We seen this in healthcare for decades. I argue subsidized housing in our most expensive cities also has this effect.
But keep your head buried in the sand - at least you're "doing something about it", right?
Ya Ya Ya wrote:
Why don't we just require the colleges to refund any grant money back to Pell if a student does not graduate? Then the Administrators would have something to do to earn their pay. Keeping student retention numbers high.
Yep. When the government wants to provide "strings attached" funding to a non-profit or other company, they often write a loan that is forgivable upon performance of the act upon which provision of the financing was predicated. For example, a loan for an affordable housing development might become payable if the property manager charges rents that are above the agreed upon maximums, but might be forgiven in its entirety after 30 years if the property has been operated under an agreed upon set of restrictions for the entire 30 year period.
Could do a similar thing for educational loans. Just write a loan at X% interest with Y term/am with repayment to begin upon exit from school, but to be forgiven upon receipt of a four-year degree. This would act like a grant for anyone who used it for its intended purpose, but would require repayment from those who did not use if for its intended purpose. To prevent an overly punitive situation, provisions could be written in to delay repayment for people who had to leave school temporarily due to unforeseen circumstances, but who returned to finish their degree in some reasonable timeframe.
oldcrowbar wrote:
Great idea but then they would have to eliminate all the special admissions programs where unprepared students are brought in to sink or swim. That would not go over well with the politically correct crowd who thinks everyone belongs at a 4 year institution. I sat my son down and said you can stay at home and commute and save $10,000 on housing or you can take out a loan and go live in a dorm - he's commuting and doing just fine and taking out $3K in loans to cover all his other needs. I think there is an advantage to the dorm living experience but I don't think it is worth the $10K in loans.
I would love to have my son at home for four more years, but the drive to Harvard would mean 20 hours in the car every day.
What's the problem? Just because these kids aren't finishing their degrees doesn't mean they're not getting at least some education. These are kids from poor families, so even a year or two of college is better than nothing. And most are still graduating. This is a non-story.
As much as I do not care for our current president the amount is a bipartisan problem. Now I can toss the loan forgiveness mess at his feet though.
The rush to make college more affordable has merely turned it into a welfare-type system. Colleges know they can keep increasing tuition to cover amenities like beautiful rec centers (some of these built in the past decade are amazing) and increase non-academic spending. They can increase the tuition because they know Congress will increase the amounts of grants and loans to cover it. Colleges have little incentive to contain costs.
Wow, another I-know-it-all liberal solution who's unintended consequences are going to have to be cleaned up years from now or go on infinitum in our society without repair.Does the school get the money regardless of graduation? If so costs wont be contained.If the student must graduate for the funds to go to the school then schools will make sure *every* student graduates, further eroding the value of the degree. What about the student that drops out with only 1 credit to go to avoid the loan but have the classes/college experience picked up by the tax payer?Liberals, you have clever little ideas that satiate your ridiculous need to always "do something" but the unintended consequences are disastrous - I just listed three issues but there would no doubt be more.Conservative might appear to "not have a solution" because the solution is more times than not to do nothing and let the incredible system we have here in america work itself out.
forgivable loan > grant wrote:
Could do a similar thing for educational loans. Just write a loan at X% interest with Y term/am with repayment to begin upon exit from school, but to be forgiven upon receipt of a four-year degree. This would act like a grant for anyone who used it for its intended purpose, but would require repayment from those who did not use if for its intended purpose. To prevent an overly punitive situation, provisions could be written in to delay repayment for people who had to leave school temporarily due to unforeseen circumstances, but who returned to finish their degree in some reasonable timeframe.
krispy kremlin_ wrote:
A few weeks ago the federal Reserve Bank of NY released a report that found a $0.60-0.70 increase in tuition for every $1.00 in federal aid. I'll do the math for you: if you have $30k in debt, ~$22.5k of that is thanks to asinine market intervention liberal policy. Think about that for a moment.
You liberals don't get it. You can have the best intentions in the world but when you throw money at a problem costs rise for everyone. We saw this in housing just last decade. We seen this in healthcare for decades. I argue subsidized housing in our most expensive cities also has this effect.
But keep your head buried in the sand - at least you're "doing something about it", right?
Source?
Of course the money would go to the school at the time the bill is due. A student who can't afford college can't carry the cost until the loan funds come in sometime later. What is the point of sending them to college if you don't want them all to graduate? The repayment provides the incentive to only go if you are going to follow through.
How would dropping out "avoid the loan"? A student who used the grant/loan to finance their education but dropped out with one credit left would have to repay. That's the whole point of what I'm saying. If they finished, it would be forgiven. If they left without finishing, they would have to repay. What you're saying makes no sense.
I have to say it used to make me a little ill that a friend of mine received what amounted to a full scholarship in the Pell Grant, while I was scraping by on a partial track scholarship, student loans, and working during the off season.
All he had to do was keep a 2.0 and maintain 12 hrs a semester.
Do you also feel ill that your friend is from a poor family?
Des Linden: "The entire sport" has changed since she first started running Boston.
Ryan Eiler, 3rd American man at Boston, almost out of nowhere
Am I living in the twilight zone? The Boston Marathon weather was terrible!
Matt Choi was drinking beer halfway through the Boston Marathon
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion