What is going on with student loans?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrats will never hold the (majority-Democrat) college lobby accountable for any reform that would lead to lower SL debt.

To the contrary, the Obama administration spent years battling Republicans to try to reign in the worst colleges selling useless degrees. They enacted a regulation called the gainful employment rule that would have disqualified colleges from eligibility for federal student aid if large numbers of their graduates fail to land good jobs that would allow them to repay their debts. Obama also revoked recognition of one of the worst accrediting bodies. The Trump administration then scrapped the regs and recognized that accrediting body, letting those colleges go right back to selling useless degrees funded by federal loans. But I don't want to confuse you with facts.

You are clueless.

College is not affordable BECAUSE of Obama.

A new report finds that 27.3% of student loans are delinquent. Why does this matter? Because thanks to President Obama, about $1 trillion dollars of student loan debt is owed to the federal government.

Obama keeps trying to portray the student loan crisis as a problem suffered by students burdened by a mountain of debt when they graduate, and who are unable to make enough money to pay it back.

But that's not the real crisis.

First, average student loan debt is only a little over $20,000. A student who gave up his $5-a-day Starbucks habit could pay off the principal in about a decade.

Second, despite the endless hue and cry about rising tuitions, the amount students actually pay to go to college — net of grants, aid, discounts, and what not — has barely budged, according to the College Board.

The problem isn't even that, at nearly $1.2 trillion, the total amount of student loan debt now exceeds that of auto loans or credit card debt.

The real crisis is one Obama himself manufactured since taking office.

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.

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

Last month President Obama, facing increasingly violent Occupy Wall Street protests nationwide, announced executive action to help alleviate the heavy burden of student debt faced by many of the young, unemployed protesters. Although many of the protesters are blaming private banks and corporate "fat cats" for the financial pickle they're in, the president thought he'd calm them down by easing the terms of repayment and forgiveness. What Obama didn't tell them is that it's really the federal government they should blame.

A year ago, the president signed legislation ending subsidies for private banks giving federally guaranteed student loans—making the federal government, not banks, the lender of choice for most students. You can still get private bank loans for your college education, but since they no longer are backed by the U.S. government, private loans aren't as good a deal anymore; most are variable rate loans that require a co-signer and are difficult to qualify for. So it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see why most kids take out federal student loans from the Department of Education now, and leave the bank loans as a last resort.

Back in the mid-1980s when I went to college, there was a $2,500 limit on the amount of federal student loans you could take out in a year. I graduated with $10,000 of debt and worked three jobs to pay it off. That's all changed. The limit on federal loans for most students is now $31,000 for four years. These days, the average college senior who had loans graduates with $25,250 in student debt, a new record, with some high-tuition colleges averaging double that, at over $55,000 per student. Unemployment has hit a new high among young people, and their median incomes are falling. Many of them are having trouble finding a job and making their loan payments. A whole generation of middle-class students is being crushed by student debt.

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2011/11/23/why-the-government-is-to-blame-for-high-college-costs

[Anonymous]

College costs should be regulated. You take lian, you pay it with your income. You should have option to work for government or your school at a small stipend for three years to get a waiver. Parents and tax payers shouldn't be held responsible. We have our retirement and healthcare to worry about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:College costs should be regulated. You take lian, you pay it with your income. You should have option to work for government or your school at a small stipend for three years to get a waiver. Parents and tax payers shouldn't be held responsible. We have our retirement and healthcare to worry about.

This already exists for STEM teachers in title 1 schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrats will never hold the (majority-Democrat) college lobby accountable for any reform that would lead to lower SL debt.

To the contrary, the Obama administration spent years battling Republicans to try to reign in the worst colleges selling useless degrees. They enacted a regulation called the gainful employment rule that would have disqualified colleges from eligibility for federal student aid if large numbers of their graduates fail to land good jobs that would allow them to repay their debts. Obama also revoked recognition of one of the worst accrediting bodies. The Trump administration then scrapped the regs and recognized that accrediting body, letting those colleges go right back to selling useless degrees funded by federal loans. But I don't want to confuse you with facts.

You are clueless.

College is not affordable BECAUSE of Obama.

A new report finds that 27.3% of student loans are delinquent. Why does this matter? Because thanks to President Obama, about $1 trillion dollars of student loan debt is owed to the federal government.

Obama keeps trying to portray the student loan crisis as a problem suffered by students burdened by a mountain of debt when they graduate, and who are unable to make enough money to pay it back.

But that's not the real crisis.

First, average student loan debt is only a little over $20,000. A student who gave up his $5-a-day Starbucks habit could pay off the principal in about a decade.

Second, despite the endless hue and cry about rising tuitions, the amount students actually pay to go to college — net of grants, aid, discounts, and what not — has barely budged, according to the College Board.

The problem isn't even that, at nearly $1.2 trillion, the total amount of student loan debt now exceeds that of auto loans or credit card debt.

The real crisis is one Obama himself manufactured since taking office.

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.

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

Last month President Obama, facing increasingly violent Occupy Wall Street protests nationwide, announced executive action to help alleviate the heavy burden of student debt faced by many of the young, unemployed protesters. Although many of the protesters are blaming private banks and corporate "fat cats" for the financial pickle they're in, the president thought he'd calm them down by easing the terms of repayment and forgiveness. What Obama didn't tell them is that it's really the federal government they should blame.

A year ago, the president signed legislation ending subsidies for private banks giving federally guaranteed student loans—making the federal government, not banks, the lender of choice for most students. You can still get private bank loans for your college education, but since they no longer are backed by the U.S. government, private loans aren't as good a deal anymore; most are variable rate loans that require a co-signer and are difficult to qualify for. So it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see why most kids take out federal student loans from the Department of Education now, and leave the bank loans as a last resort.

Back in the mid-1980s when I went to college, there was a $2,500 limit on the amount of federal student loans you could take out in a year. I graduated with $10,000 of debt and worked three jobs to pay it off. That's all changed. The limit on federal loans for most students is now $31,000 for four years. These days, the average college senior who had loans graduates with $25,250 in student debt, a new record, with some high-tuition colleges averaging double that, at over $55,000 per student. Unemployment has hit a new high among young people, and their median incomes are falling. Many of them are having trouble finding a job and making their loan payments. A whole generation of middle-class students is being crushed by student debt.

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2011/11/23/why-the-government-is-to-blame-for-high-college-costs

Ah yes, I remember those days before Obama when tuition was not rising at above-inflation rates for decades on end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrats will never hold the (majority-Democrat) college lobby accountable for any reform that would lead to lower SL debt.

To the contrary, the Obama administration spent years battling Republicans to try to reign in the worst colleges selling useless degrees. They enacted a regulation called the gainful employment rule that would have disqualified colleges from eligibility for federal student aid if large numbers of their graduates fail to land good jobs that would allow them to repay their debts. Obama also revoked recognition of one of the worst accrediting bodies. The Trump administration then scrapped the regs and recognized that accrediting body, letting those colleges go right back to selling useless degrees funded by federal loans. But I don't want to confuse you with facts.

You are clueless.

College is not affordable BECAUSE of Obama.

A new report finds that 27.3% of student loans are delinquent. Why does this matter? Because thanks to President Obama, about $1 trillion dollars of student loan debt is owed to the federal government.

Obama keeps trying to portray the student loan crisis as a problem suffered by students burdened by a mountain of debt when they graduate, and who are unable to make enough money to pay it back.

But that's not the real crisis.

First, average student loan debt is only a little over $20,000. A student who gave up his $5-a-day Starbucks habit could pay off the principal in about a decade.

Second, despite the endless hue and cry about rising tuitions, the amount students actually pay to go to college — net of grants, aid, discounts, and what not — has barely budged, according to the College Board.

The problem isn't even that, at nearly $1.2 trillion, the total amount of student loan debt now exceeds that of auto loans or credit card debt.

The real crisis is one Obama himself manufactured since taking office.

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.

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

Last month President Obama, facing increasingly violent Occupy Wall Street protests nationwide, announced executive action to help alleviate the heavy burden of student debt faced by many of the young, unemployed protesters. Although many of the protesters are blaming private banks and corporate "fat cats" for the financial pickle they're in, the president thought he'd calm them down by easing the terms of repayment and forgiveness. What Obama didn't tell them is that it's really the federal government they should blame.

A year ago, the president signed legislation ending subsidies for private banks giving federally guaranteed student loans—making the federal government, not banks, the lender of choice for most students. You can still get private bank loans for your college education, but since they no longer are backed by the U.S. government, private loans aren't as good a deal anymore; most are variable rate loans that require a co-signer and are difficult to qualify for. So it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see why most kids take out federal student loans from the Department of Education now, and leave the bank loans as a last resort.

Back in the mid-1980s when I went to college, there was a $2,500 limit on the amount of federal student loans you could take out in a year. I graduated with $10,000 of debt and worked three jobs to pay it off. That's all changed. The limit on federal loans for most students is now $31,000 for four years. These days, the average college senior who had loans graduates with $25,250 in student debt, a new record, with some high-tuition colleges averaging double that, at over $55,000 per student. Unemployment has hit a new high among young people, and their median incomes are falling. Many of them are having trouble finding a job and making their loan payments. A whole generation of middle-class students is being crushed by student debt.

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2011/11/23/why-the-government-is-to-blame-for-high-college-costs

If that's the argument you lead with, then you aren't very serious or you think your audience is financially illiterate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:College costs should be regulated. You take lian, you pay it with your income. You should have option to work for government or your school at a small stipend for three years to get a waiver. Parents and tax payers shouldn't be held responsible. We have our retirement and healthcare to worry about.

This already exists for STEM teachers in title 1 schools.

Everyone should have this option. Taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for student's choices or college's greed.

[Anonymous]

Obamas, Trumps, Bushes or Bidens don't understand dilemma of middle class families.

[Anonymous]

They would rather tax them to death so they can give out freebies to get votes. Why not regulate college costs and offer students a path to serve government and get debt forgiveness?

[Anonymous]

There should be a voice for donut hole families, who pay for their kids and with income tax/property/sales/other taxes for kids whose parents wont pay and kids themselves won't pay. There should be civil options like going to military to get GI bill for education.

[Anonymous]

There should be free community college for all, free state uni for top 20% performers but other than that, you want a fancy college, you work for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There should be a voice for donut hole families, who pay for their kids and with income tax/property/sales/other taxes for kids whose parents wont pay and kids themselves won't pay. There should be civil options like going to military to get GI bill for education.

There will never be a civilian version of the GI bill. Bipartisan support for the military is just a given, but support for civilians employed by the government is very much a partisan thing. We also don't have a civil service designed to absorb massive numbers of new graduates or massive numbers of high school graduates putting in a few year before they qualify. On the other hand, the military is designed so that high school graduates can regularly enlist and then leave once their enlistment is up and so that young officers can serve for a few tours and then leave.

[Anonymous]

This would help kids who can't get aid because of their parents and can't force parents to pay.

[Anonymous]

What other solutions do you suggest for not shifting burden of college's greed and student's personal preferences to tax payers.

[Anonymous]

I'd like to see a system where colleges that opt to accept federal support are subject to tuition caps. Each year the government would decide what the minimum cost is to educate an undergraduate. Colleges that opt in would not be allowed to charge any student more than that amount. Students going to those colleges would be eligible for federal aid. Students that go to colleges that do not agree to the tuition cap would not be eligible for federal aid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to see a system where colleges that opt to accept federal support are subject to tuition caps. Each year the government would decide what the minimum cost is to educate an undergraduate. Colleges that opt in would not be allowed to charge any student more than that amount. Students going to those colleges would be eligible for federal aid. Students that go to colleges that do not agree to the tuition cap would not be eligible for federal aid.

... or student loan forgiveness for their personal choice