Student (College) Loans

[woodzie264]

13 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

Sure it is, pending the situation. 

You have an 18 year old, who doesn't need an parent to co-sign on a loan, being lured into signing for an expensive student loan by a college because they make it seem like its the best thing for them.

So, they learn from their mistake, 10-15 years down the line when they realize the students loan debt was a bad idea?  The outcome of this decision isn't something you get instant return on as a learning situation. This isn't like placing your hand on a hot stove. 

Why should the biggest mistake 17-19 year olds make be getting hit with hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt? That is just asinine thinking really. 

Really, colleges are bad faith actors who are swindling people out of money with no regulatory control. 

It is even worse since you can not get rid of the student debt in bankruptcy. Guess what, in the end, bankruptcy is a form of loan forgiveness. You can file for bankruptcy, sell off your assets, and the courts decide to void out a good portion of the loan amount in a lot of cases. Except for students loan debt. Which is idiotic. What makes students loan debt so special? 

What about this, you get your students loan forgiven, but it hits your credit score like any other bankruptcy? You choose, to work off your students loans, or take a hit to your credit score. I think that is fair. 

No one is arguing they are entitled to a degree. How did you jump to that? 

I think it is because they can't be for-profit. Also, state governments can control tuition. 

 

1. It’s not asinine to think people should be held accountable for their decisions. Life isn’t fair. Again, people should seek wise council before making big decisions. 
 

2. agreed that colleges take advantage of people, but it doesn’t excuse people from the consequences of their choices. I don’t think adults of sound mind can play the victim because they didn’t do their due diligence in researching their options before signing the dotted line. 

3. It wasn’t a jump to make the inference from his comment. His comment was that if they would have to drop out if they didn’t have the loan. But his position was that they should be able to go anyway…to me, and I certainly could have misinterpreted his point, it seems he was saying they should be able to go regardless. To me, that sounds as if he was conveying  that people are entitled to go regardless of their ability to pay. 
 

I 100% agreed that the system needs reform, I just disagree that loans should be forgiven. I don’t think you or I will change our minds on that. We just fundamentally disagree on the extent of someone’s personal responsibility/accountability for their choices. 
 

 

[Shorty]

Do you have a system where the loan is paid back at a certain percentage of salary once it reaches a certain level?

This is how HECS (Higher Education Contribution Scheme) works in Australia.

HECS-HELP has two components - it is both a loan and a student discount. ... Loan repayments are then made through the Australian taxation system when your income reaches a certain threshold ($46,620 for the 2020-21 financial year). It is possible to make voluntary repayments at any time regardless of income.

Edited December 5, 2021 by Shorty

[woodzie264]

2 minutes ago, Shorty said:

Do you have a system where the loan is paid back at a certain percentage of salary once it reaches a certain level?

This is how HECS (Higher Education Contribution Scheme) works in Australia.

HECS-HELP has two components - it is both a loan and a student discount. ... Loan repayments are then made through the Australian taxation system when your income reaches a certain threshold ($46,620 for the 2020-21 financial year). It is possible to make voluntary repayments at any time regardless of income.

Interesting. It sounds like the loan is getting repaid incrementally over time based on income, and is not forgiven. Is that correct? 

[Denny Bang Bang]

22 minutes ago, saevel25 said: 

I think it is because they can't be for-profit. Also, state governments can control tuition. 

 

The point is choosing a more affordable school (state schools generally costing less than private schools).  It revolves around making a good personal financial decision.

State governments can control private school tuition?  If they can, that’s news to me

[Double Mocha Man]

33 minutes ago, Shorty said:

Loan repayments are then made through the Australian taxation system when your income reaches a certain threshold...

Sounds like the Australians are getting it right.

[Denny Bang Bang]

@Shorty @woodzie264

That is interesting.  Not sure how I’d feel about the IRS administering student loan payments though, they would certainly need more resources.

It makes me think though, we have a graduated tax system… why not graduated loan rates based on income?

[Double Mocha Man]

48 minutes ago, woodzie264 said:

It’s not asinine to think people should be held accountable for their decisions. Life isn’t fair.

I think you're looking at it on the micro level.  I'm looking at it on the macro level.  If college debt keeps more students from attending or continuing college I think that is a bad thing.  We need to be a highly educated country.  Something needs to replace loans... maybe more grants, scholarships or, heaven forbid, government funded education.  But only for those who don't see college as an excuse for partying.

Edited December 6, 2021 by Double Mocha Man

[SoCal Hack]

I fully support all greens fees to be forgiven and canceled 

[woodzie264]

1 minute ago, Denny Bang Bang said:

@Shorty @woodzie264

That is interesting.  Not sure how I’d feel about the IRS administering student loan payments though, they would certainly need more resources.

It makes me think though, we have a graduated tax system… why not graduated loan rates based on income?

Agreed, as long as the loans get repaid. 

 

Just now, Double Mocha Man said:

I think you're looking at it on the micro level.  I'm looking at it on the macro level.  If college debt keeps more students from attending or continuing college I think that is a bad thing.  We need to be a highly educated country.  Something needs to replace loans... maybe more grants, scholarships or government funded education.  But only for those who don't see college as an excuse for partying.

I would argue Im looking at it from a practical point of view…but I would agree with everything else you just said.

2 minutes ago, SoCal Hack said:

I fully support all greens fees to be forgiven and canceled 

Hahahahahaa

[SoCal Hack]

And if that can’t be done, then I fully support everyone simply paying their bills and debts…

[Double Mocha Man]

1 hour ago, woodzie264 said:

If you don’t think cost should be an issue, then are you willing to pay for others to go? Things cost money.

Yes.  I am fine with increasing my property taxes or income taxes.  That is a good value.  Hell, I've already paid for a lot of K-12 education for my kid and other kids.  Let's extend it to the university level (more so than it is now for state institutions).

[woodzie264]

7 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

Yes.  I am fine with increasing my property taxes or income taxes.  That is a good value.  Hell, I've already paid for a lot of K-12 education for my kid and other kids.  Let's extend it to the university level (more so than it is now for state institutions).

And therein lies our differences. I don’t want my taxes raised to pay for someone’s luxury; they are not entitled to higher education. They can pay for it themselves. We are taxed enough already. The government takes enough of my money. Again, personal responsibility. 

[Shorty]

21 minutes ago, Denny Bang Bang said:

@Shorty @woodzie264

That is interesting.  Not sure how I’d feel about the IRS administering student loan payments though, they would certainly need more resources.

It makes me think though, we have a graduated tax system… why not graduated loan rates based on income?

Essentially, if you do your University course and never reach the income threshold to start making repayments, you owe nothing. Not that that's a great thing, becuase you're clearly going to be poor, but at least people don't have to borrow money themselves or have parents going without to pay for their children's education. 

Most graduates who end up in decent paying jobs still have their HECS hanging over their heads 7 or 8 years after they commence employment. But... it is probably a better system than one where a scholarship is the only path to certain degrees if your family isn't wealthy. 

Up until the 80s (I think) all university courses were free and you'd meet 40 year olds who were known as "perpetual students" who were doing courses over long periods of time with no perceivable benefit to anyone, including themselves, all on the government's dime. But.....if you got the marks a t school, you could enrol in any course and it was all free. But expensive for the taxpayer. HECS is a compromise of sorts.

Edited December 6, 2021 by Shorty

[woodzie264]

14 minutes ago, SoCal Hack said:

And if that can’t be done, then I fully support everyone simply paying their bills and debts…

Amen

[Double Mocha Man]

6 minutes ago, woodzie264 said:

And therein lies our differences. I don’t want my taxes raised to pay for someone’s luxury...

And therein lies our differences.  I don't see a college degree as a luxury.  I see it as a necessity for our country to keep up with the rest of the world.  And to keep our economy (minus the pandemic) strong and growing.

[woodzie264]

Just now, Double Mocha Man said:

And therein lies our differences.  I don't see a college degree as a luxury.  I see it as a necessity for our country to keep up with the rest of the world.  And to keep our economy (minus the pandemic) strong and growing.

And therein lies our difference. I don’t see people as being entitled to college.  It’s ok, clearly we have irreconcilable opinions. Life goes on. 

[saevel25]

2 minutes ago, woodzie264 said:

And therein lies our differences. I don’t want my taxes raised to pay for someone’s luxury; they are not entitled to higher education. They can pay for it themselves. We are taxed enough already. The government takes enough of my money. Again, personal responsibility. 

There is the big difference. I think any level of eduction under a PHD should be a provided service to people for the overall advancement of our society. A society needs as many educated people as possible. Hiding it behind a wall of debt is honestly a disservice to everyone. 

You classify it as a luxury, I classify it as a utility. 

Heck, if you want to even tie students loan debt forgiveness to certain jobs we need good people in (i.e. Police Officers, Fireman, EMS, National Guard), I would be OK with that concession.

There is a reason why the printing press was the primary reason for knowledge advancement that raised the overall level of society greatly. Books were no longer expensive and being held by the wealthy. 

To me, debt will soon be a wall that people will not want to take on. It will cause a decrease in knowledge in this country that will overall hurt everyone. To me, higher eduction is not a luxury, but a utility. It should be highly affordable. When you define it as a luxury, you are saying it should not be affordable, and only those lucky enough to be wealthy enough should get access to higher education. 

 

[woodzie264]

10 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

There is the big difference. I think any level of eduction under a PHD should be a provided service to people for the overall advancement of our society. A society needs as many educated people as possible. Hiding it behind a wall of debt is honestly a disservice to everyone. 

You classify it as a luxury, I classify it as a utility. 

Heck, if you want to even tie students loan debt forgiveness to certain jobs we need good people in (i.e. Police Officers, Fireman, EMS, National Guard), I would be OK with that concession.

There is a reason why the printing press was the primary reason for knowledge advancement that raised the overall level of society greatly. Books were no longer expensive and being held by the wealthy. 

To me, debt will soon be a wall that people will not want to take on. It will cause a decrease in knowledge in this country that will overall hurt everyone. To me, higher eduction is not a luxury, but a utility. It should be highly affordable. When you define it as a luxury, you are saying it should not be affordable, and only those lucky enough to be wealthy enough should get access to higher education. 

 

By using the term luxury, I’m saying you should pay for it. It’s not something everyone is entitled to.  If you can’t pay the loan, don’t take it out.

I do like your idea of tying repayment of debt to service related position of Law Enforcement, the military, etc. I’d support that 100% as a repayment  method.