What is going on with student loans?

[Anonymous]

The US is one of the few countries in the world where going to college means being saddled with debt. People need college educations, but it's a horrible system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Americans are vile people, in large numbers. Gloating over sticking crippling debt to regular people instead of being offended by predatory lending practices that keep the poors in check their entire lives.

You people are disgusting.

What? Those "regular people" are the ones who stuck themselves with "crippling debt."

We just don't want the local lawn service guy to have to pay off that debt since he chose to enter the workforce and not take out loans for college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Americans are vile people, in large numbers. Gloating over sticking crippling debt to regular people instead of being offended by predatory lending practices that keep the poors in check their entire lives.

You people are disgusting.

What? Those "regular people" are the ones who stuck themselves with "crippling debt."

We just don't want the local lawn service guy to have to pay off that debt since he chose to enter the workforce and not take out loans for college.

The local lawn service guy is low-earning, pays little in taxes and isn’t the one would be paying for this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The US is one of the few countries in the world where going to college means being saddled with debt. People need college educations, but it's a horrible system.

We send a lot of kids to 4-year colleges who don’t belong there.

The kids who would get into free public colleges in other countries tend to get either significant merit scholarships to big public universities, full need-based financial aid to elite private colleges and/or are savvy enough that they pay off any debt they have right after graduating. The traits that made those kids really good students show up in terms of hunting for internships, frugality, budgeted, being super organized or graduating early.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Americans are vile people, in large numbers. Gloating over sticking crippling debt to regular people instead of being offended by predatory lending practices that keep the poors in check their entire lives.

You people are disgusting.

What? Those "regular people" are the ones who stuck themselves with "crippling debt."

We just don't want the local lawn service guy to have to pay off that debt since he chose to enter the workforce and not take out loans for college.

He is probably on public assistance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Americans are vile people, in large numbers. Gloating over sticking crippling debt to regular people instead of being offended by predatory lending practices that keep the poors in check their entire lives.

You people are disgusting.

What? Those "regular people" are the ones who stuck themselves with "crippling debt."

We just don't want the local lawn service guy to have to pay off that debt since he chose to enter the workforce and not take out loans for college.

He is probably on public assistance.

Not my lawn guy.
These are some of the same people who had to take out loans to start their business. No way I want to foot the bill for people who took loans for college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Americans are vile people, in large numbers. Gloating over sticking crippling debt to regular people instead of being offended by predatory lending practices that keep the poors in check their entire lives.

You people are disgusting.

What? Those "regular people" are the ones who stuck themselves with "crippling debt."

We just don't want the local lawn service guy to have to pay off that debt since he chose to enter the workforce and not take out loans for college.

He is probably on public assistance.

Not my lawn guy.
These are some of the same people who had to take out loans to start their business. No way I want to foot the bill for people who took loans for college.

Yes, they got PPP loans forgiven for their businesses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why hasn’t Biden just modified his order to exclude anyone living in the 6 states that are suing. It will completely resolve the injury they allege.

Because then the same six a-hole states would sue because they are being treated differently. They will look for any excuse whatsoever to sue the Biden administration because they care more about scoring political points than they do about helping people.

I am thrilled they have filed this suit.
It is not fair to tax payers all over the country to have to foot the bills for those who chose to take a loan that they now want somebody else to pay.

Then why do I have to pay for the forgiveness of the business loans for some of the same greedy a$$holes who are fighting student loan forgiveness?

Those weren't real loans, but intended to be forgiven all along. They were to have people continue to be employed despite the government ordering their businesses closed.
This would be the equivalent of the government taking over all business loans from banks, and then forgiving the loans whenever they wanted.

[Anonymous]

If the government is footing the bill for college, what incentive do colleges have to keep costs down? What stops them from just putting everyone they want on payroll and giving themselves big raises?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the government is footing the bill for college, what incentive do colleges have to keep costs down? What stops them from just putting everyone they want on payroll and giving themselves big raises?

Well that’s been happening for 30 years without the government so it’s not like we can’t try a new approach based on that singular point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the government is footing the bill for college, what incentive do colleges have to keep costs down? What stops them from just putting everyone they want on payroll and giving themselves big raises?

Well that’s been happening for 30 years without the government so it’s not like we can’t try a new approach based on that singular point.

Ah, but the government IS involved. Thanks to Obama.
And, I would argue that once the government took over the student loan program, the colleges saw no reason to rein in costs since they knew students would have easy access to money since it was given out by the govt. and not private lenders.

My son had a college loan from a private lender. It was about 2.8%. This was back in 2005. Obama ruined that.

In 2010, Obama eliminated the federal guaranteed loan program, which let private lenders offer student loans at low interest rates. Now, the Department of Education is the only place to go for such loans.

Obama sold this government takeover as a way to save money — why bear the costs of guaranteeing private loans, he said, when the government could cut out the middleman and lend the money itself?

The cost savings didn't happen. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office just increased its 10-year forecast for the loan program's costs by $27 billion, or 30%.

What did happen was an explosive growth in the amount of federal student loan debt. President Clinton phased in direct federal lending in 1993 as an option, but over the next 15 years the amount of loans was fairly stable. The result of Obama's action is striking. In each of the past six years, federal direct student loan debt has climbed by more than $100 billion. (See chart.)

And since Obama keeps making it easier and easier to avoid repaying those loans, it's a problem that taxpayers will eventually have to shoulder.

Through words and actions, Obama has encouraged irresponsibility on the part of student borrowers. He constantly talks as if student debt were an unfair burden they unknowingly had foisted upon them.

At the same time, he's made it easier and easier to avoid paying back student loans in full. Earlier this year, for example, Obama expanded eligibility for his "pay as you earn" program, which limits loan payments to 10% of income, with any debt left after 20 years forgiven.

Students got the message. The St. Louis Fed reports that 27.3% of student loans in repayment are at least a month behind in payments. That's a far higher delinquency rate than any other kind of debt, and it's significantly higher than the delinquency rate 10 years ago.

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/obama-created-student-loan-crisis-with-1-trillion-in-loans/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the government is footing the bill for college, what incentive do colleges have to keep costs down? What stops them from just putting everyone they want on payroll and giving themselves big raises?

Well that’s been happening for 30 years without the government so it’s not like we can’t try a new approach based on that singular point.

Ah, but the government IS involved. Thanks to Obama.
And, I would argue that once the government took over the student loan program, the colleges saw no reason to rein in costs since they knew students would have easy access to money since it was given out by the govt. and not private lenders.

My son had a college loan from a private lender. It was about 2.8%. This was back in 2005. Obama ruined that.

In 2010, Obama eliminated the federal guaranteed loan program, which let private lenders offer student loans at low interest rates. Now, the Department of Education is the only place to go for such loans.

Obama sold this government takeover as a way to save money — why bear the costs of guaranteeing private loans, he said, when the government could cut out the middleman and lend the money itself?

The cost savings didn't happen. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office just increased its 10-year forecast for the loan program's costs by $27 billion, or 30%.

What did happen was an explosive growth in the amount of federal student loan debt. President Clinton phased in direct federal lending in 1993 as an option, but over the next 15 years the amount of loans was fairly stable. The result of Obama's action is striking. In each of the past six years, federal direct student loan debt has climbed by more than $100 billion. (See chart.)

And since Obama keeps making it easier and easier to avoid repaying those loans, it's a problem that taxpayers will eventually have to shoulder.

Through words and actions, Obama has encouraged irresponsibility on the part of student borrowers. He constantly talks as if student debt were an unfair burden they unknowingly had foisted upon them.

At the same time, he's made it easier and easier to avoid paying back student loans in full. Earlier this year, for example, Obama expanded eligibility for his "pay as you earn" program, which limits loan payments to 10% of income, with any debt left after 20 years forgiven.

Students got the message. The St. Louis Fed reports that 27.3% of student loans in repayment are at least a month behind in payments. That's a far higher delinquency rate than any other kind of debt, and it's significantly higher than the delinquency rate 10 years ago.

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/obama-created-student-loan-crisis-with-1-trillion-in-loans/

For borrowers who started undergrad in fall 2020, Stafford direct loan interest rates are fixed at about 3%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the government is footing the bill for college, what incentive do colleges have to keep costs down? What stops them from just putting everyone they want on payroll and giving themselves big raises?

Well that’s been happening for 30 years without the government so it’s not like we can’t try a new approach based on that singular point.

Ah, but the government IS involved. Thanks to Obama.
And, I would argue that once the government took over the student loan program, the colleges saw no reason to rein in costs since they knew students would have easy access to money since it was given out by the govt. and not private lenders.

My son had a college loan from a private lender. It was about 2.8%. This was back in 2005. Obama ruined that.

In 2010, Obama eliminated the federal guaranteed loan program, which let private lenders offer student loans at low interest rates. Now, the Department of Education is the only place to go for such loans.

Obama sold this government takeover as a way to save money — why bear the costs of guaranteeing private loans, he said, when the government could cut out the middleman and lend the money itself?

The cost savings didn't happen. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office just increased its 10-year forecast for the loan program's costs by $27 billion, or 30%.

What did happen was an explosive growth in the amount of federal student loan debt. President Clinton phased in direct federal lending in 1993 as an option, but over the next 15 years the amount of loans was fairly stable. The result of Obama's action is striking. In each of the past six years, federal direct student loan debt has climbed by more than $100 billion. (See chart.)

And since Obama keeps making it easier and easier to avoid repaying those loans, it's a problem that taxpayers will eventually have to shoulder.

Through words and actions, Obama has encouraged irresponsibility on the part of student borrowers. He constantly talks as if student debt were an unfair burden they unknowingly had foisted upon them.

At the same time, he's made it easier and easier to avoid paying back student loans in full. Earlier this year, for example, Obama expanded eligibility for his "pay as you earn" program, which limits loan payments to 10% of income, with any debt left after 20 years forgiven.

Students got the message. The St. Louis Fed reports that 27.3% of student loans in repayment are at least a month behind in payments. That's a far higher delinquency rate than any other kind of debt, and it's significantly higher than the delinquency rate 10 years ago.

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/obama-created-student-loan-crisis-with-1-trillion-in-loans/

Go back to your Soaps grandma.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The US is one of the few countries in the world where going to college means being saddled with debt. People need college educations, but it's a horrible system.

But the wealthy aren’t going to give it up. They give the poors the illusion of opportunity but we all know the cards are stacked against them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The US is one of the few countries in the world where going to college means being saddled with debt. People need college educations, but it's a horrible system.

But the wealthy aren’t going to give it up. They give the poors the illusion of opportunity but we all know the cards are stacked against them.

Funny how colleges are cheapest in Republican states. Florida has very low IS tuition and the bright futures program. Georgia has HOPE. Louisiana and Alabama have similar lottery-funded scholarships. Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas, New Mexico—all have great scholarship programs and low tuition for instate students.

Meanwhile, instate universities in Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Illinois, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Vermont are absurdly expensive and leave their students saddled with the highest debt loads.