Two questions about Biden's student loan plan

Quasi-Boom wrote:

Just make the loans illegal then! Nanny state is always good. But why stick the taxpayers with someone else's gullible decision?

Because politicians created this travesty outside the bounds of the normal bankruptcy process and they (us voters, by extension) are responsible for fixing it. And we will fix it.

Alternatively, yes, let's make the loans dischargeable and watch the credit system fail as way more than 3% of people write off their $78,000 philosophy degree and are no longer eligible for auto or home loans and thus retracting the economy. I'm okay with that, too.

CarbonFiberJoe wrote:

2. I paid off my remaining student loan debts a few months ago (total of about $60K). How much of that will I be refunded?

You'd rather not be refunded and others not get assistance than not be refunded while others do get help.

So, your situation wouldn't change but you prefer others not benefit.

Why?

This is about attaching another group of young Americans to the democratic party. These are going to be a lot of people with worthless liberal arts degrees who got marxists indoctrination at our universities getting a handout from Uncle Sam.

My other major problem is the government's total failure to recognize the problem they created so this will just lead to the same problem again. There should be no federally backed loans anywhere. Universities should pay since they knowingly gouged for worthless degrees because of these loans. But of course there will be no discussion around that. The mob will scream about how heartless people like us are that do not want to pay for their bad decisions.

Beeak it down to a simple example. You and your deadbeat brother went to college. You worked during the summers while he partied. You took out only 1/2 as many loans as him because of the money you made. You then paid off your loans within 5 years while he continued to party after college and purchase a new car and rent an expensive apartment. You did none of these things because you were responsible and took care of your debt. If the Government pays off his debt, the taxpayer takes care of it so you now are stuck paying off his debt through taxes also.

Primo Numero Uno wrote:

This is about attaching another group of young Americans to the democratic party.

Trump had 4 years to help with this and Bush had 8. Do you not see how the Republican party is driving themselves out of office by not recognizing the needs of "young Americans"? The "old American" vote is dying and the Republicans are refusing to fix the problems old Americans caused.

And I voted for Trump. In this case, I am on the side of anybody who is going to fix this travesty.

Ncaa ruler wrote:

Beeak it down to a simple example. You and your deadbeat brother went to college. You worked during the summers while he partied. You took out only 1/2 as many loans as him because of the money you made. You then paid off your loans within 5 years while he continued to party after college and purchase a new car and rent an expensive apartment. You did none of these things because you were responsible and took care of your debt. If the Government pays off his debt, the taxpayer takes care of it so you now are stuck paying off his debt through taxes also.

Doesn't matter. This is why the new Republican party will never win another election. You would rather saddle young people with lifelong debt than fix the issue.

If the entire pile of student loan debt were to be paid off in a single year, at worst you're raising federal taxes by $1000 for every worker. Big deal. And it's GONE. In reality, the wealthy Americans will pay the lion's share of that, and poorer Americans probably none, and it will be spread out over time. A terrible scourge on our society, fixed by very little money.

And then once it is gone, then what? The emotional and economical burden these loans cause will be gone as well. Discretionary spending for all Americans will go up. More money will be pumped back into the economy in the form of goods (helping businesses and workers) instead of loan servicers and the federal government collecting interest off the mistakes of youth.

100% needs to happen. Will happen. And because Republicans are so obtuse and out of touch, the Democrats will get credit for it.

Ncaa ruler wrote:

Beeak it down to a simple example. You and your deadbeat brother went to college. You worked during the summers while he partied. You took out only 1/2 as many loans as him because of the money you made. You then paid off your loans within 5 years while he continued to party after college and purchase a new car and rent an expensive apartment. You did none of these things because you were responsible and took care of your debt. If the Government pays off his debt, the taxpayer takes care of it so you now are stuck paying off his debt through taxes also.

This situation would not change what taxes I pay in any way. They wouldn't rewrite the tax code for this.

What it would do is free up money for my deadbeat brother so he has less reason to try to hit me up for money.

Ncaa ruler wrote:

Democrats should be disgusted that he would take money from the working class to give it to doctors and lawyers and accountants and engineers.

Or maybe they want working-class doctors, lawyers and accountants instead of upper middle-class ones.

Imagine being daft enough to think these are clever questions.

CarbonFiberJoe wrote:

1. What fraction of the loan forgiveness will be paid by colleges, being the ones who overcharged for a defective product?

2. I paid off my remaining student loan debts a few months ago (total of about $60K). How much of that will I be refunded?

I think there is a certain unfairness in this concept. For the students who busted their a$$es, made smart decisions regarding college selection and graduated with minimum debt to tell them that that was all unnecessary because the government would forgive their loans doesn't seem right. Let's reinforce good behavior, not encourage less responsible behavior.

That said, loan rates should be drastically reduced. Some of the rates these kids had to pay was just not right.

I just don't understand why some people think student loans are more worthy of being forgiven than any other debt. Or for that matter, if the least frugal are given money, why should the most frugal not also be given money? If my twin brother and I went to the same college and graduated with $50k of debt and then got the same paying job and bought identical condos, why should my brother be given $50k because he chose to pay off his condo while I paid off my student loans? So I am then in the same job and condo as him but I owe $50k while he is debt free.

students voice wrote:

It will be paid for through society as a collective helping educate our young. Why do you oppose this??

So many people go to college for completely useless things, and then these people complain when they can't get a job or can't find a job that pays worth doing that job. I don't want tax money going to pay Kyle to take 5 years to finish his English degree and then realize that he's not going to find much of a job and go back for another few years to finally learn something useful.

The only thing I could understand is if there was more government funding to technical community colleges. Pretty much all of those programs are for very high demand technical jobs. Not all four year degrees are useful, many of them are not useful at all.

And tons of people have high loan debt because they chose to go to a school that wasn't the best financial option for them. That's their own problem as well. Don't go to complain when you're spending $60k per year on a private school when you could spend $20k at the public school. Mine personally in the midwest was $9k tuition each year in about 5 years ago. I worked jobs in the summers of high school and college to pay off most of my rent. Then my entire loans were paid off less than two years after I graduated. Make good decisions, people. Quit making everyone bail you out.

Ncaa ruler wrote:

I just don't understand why some people think student loans are more worthy of being forgiven than any other debt. Or for that matter, if the least frugal are given money, why should the most frugal not also be given money? If my twin brother and I went to the same college and graduated with $50k of debt and then got the same paying job and bought identical condos, why should my brother be given $50k because he chose to pay off his condo while I paid off my student loans? So I am then in the same job and condo as him but I owe $50k while he is debt free.

Because there is no other consumer debt that is not dischargeable through bankruptcy. This is, essentially, indentured servitude. It's not right. That anyone thought this was a good idea in the first place is really pathetic.

It's not a matter of frugality or who is the most responsible. I paid off 100% of my wife's loans and $44k of mine so far. I don't care about money I potentially lost. I care that we're sacking kids with this debt by lying to them. Then, we don't give them the option to discharge it, as they can with any other debt.

Make the debt dischargeable. I am for that, too. It's going to mess up the economy more though, than just paying off all the debt.

None of what you said mattered at all even though I recognize you feel strongly about your position to have no empathy.

A regular lender would evaluate the borrower, their intentions, collateral, and means to pay back the loan.

The fact that anyone can be loaned $60k for a five year English degree is an example of the problem. You are allowing schools to spend taxpayers money to lend to people they know will never have the means to pay it back and can never be discharged. These are the worst predatory lending practices. This is 100% the fault of the school administrators and politicians. But we're blaming it on "irresponsible youths."

It will be fixed.

ryan evans wrote:

otter wrote:

I paid my way through college, I am almost finished paying my kids through college, and now through my taxes I get to pay for your college also. Seems fair.

Be happy your kids and grandkids won't be saddled with insurmountable college debt for useless degrees. It's a small price to pay.

I'm sorry you repaid what was probably a whole $3500 in students loans for yourself when you finished school in 1978, but the tuition system *must* be reformed. The government can't subsidize loans and make them non-dischargable any longer. Education prices skyrocketed and gullible kids were tricked into thinking they needed to borrow money for useless degrees. It has shackled a generation into lifelong debt. It should have never been possible.

Did you not know the price tag before attending your useless degree college? Your problem is not mine and I will find ways not to pay the taxes represented in bailing out your poor decisions. Nobody tricked you into going to college. And, we don’t owe you anything.

I also paid for my kids who have recently graduated. The price was steep but they were focused on a major that they would be employed when they graduated. I’m not now looking for you (not that you could) to pay the bill. It’s hard to get through to you narcissistic views but does this somehow make sense to you?

By the way, look up what people were making in 1978 (when I was 6 and going to college according to you). 4K was a steep price back then.

Get on the right side of history, old man.

Since this is a penis measuring contest I have my bachelor's in engineering and my masters from a top 10 university in computer science. Guess what? It cost me a lot of money. I don't care about that. Guess what? Neither does my millennial generation. I care about people and future people and making sure we have good policy to protect them. What we have now protects university wages and frivolous spending.

Be happy your grandkids aren't going to skewered with debt at the hands of university profiteers.

I'm glad I have the opportunity to fix the issues that you caused and refuse to fix for your future progeny. You're welcome.

Dan Kahneman wrote:

I think there is a certain unfairness in this concept.

Life isn't fair.

There are tons of subsidies and tax deals made that aren't fair to everyone.

But they are usually designed to help the public as a whole.

Millionaire POTUS pays less than $1000 in taxes and conservatives laud him as being a smart man.

College students gets an education that will allow them to become educated members of the workforce without being burdened by debt for the rest of their lives, and conservatives say, "That's so not fair!"

Continued tax cuts by the Bush and Trump administration have starved universities of federal money they used to get. Coupled with state income tax cuts in red states, public schools have been forced to greatly increase tuition to cover the loses. For example, Republican Scott Walker cut $250 million per year from the budget of the University of Wisconsin. They only raised in state tuition $2k since then, but out of state tuition has gone from $40k to $54k.

Maybe taxpapers as a whole should chip in more, maybe not. I haven't decided.

In some states, loan forgiveness is tied to employment. Get a job with the state (or the schools, libraries, police, whatever), and work for 5-10 years, and your debt is wiped. I would support a plan that has recent grads doing something to benefit society and getting loan forgiveness for that.