Anonymous wrote:Not only should loan forgiveness be means tested, it should also only be available for public institutions.

So, no one making over the median salary (around $52K right now) or median HHI (currently around $67K) should be eligible.

Yes, it is important for students to be able to go to college, but we should not giving loan forgiveness to students who chose to go to expensive private institutions. If you made that choice, and took out a loan to do it, you should pay that back.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been a Dem for 34 years. This loan forgiveness issue is what is starting to make me a one issue voter for the first time (like abortion for some). If a candidate says their goal is to forgive student loans, I’m voting for (and likely campaigning for) the other candidate.

You took on the loan. Pay it back.

That’s noble of you, and I respect that.

But for every one of “you” in your party, there are a hundred or more who want default+forgiveness for loans.

You’re fighting an Alamo.

nope. moderate dems will run as independents and split the dem vote and the GOP will win, win, win. Democrats, of which I am one, need to get on the same page.

You vastly overestimate how much independents care about a student loan pause. It's much more likely Millennial student loan debtors <40 yo either sit out the midterms or vote Republican if payments resume. Democrats have near zero political upside to resume student loan payments given the risks to the midterms. There are just too many student loan debtors now to be used as a solution to inflation or declining social responsibility, sorry!

Maybe. I'm an independent and the issue of student loan forgiveness irritates the heck out of me. I went to grad school part time at night and worked full time during the day to limit my student loan burden as much as possible.

Pay your debt.

I worked all through school and had taken biglaw jobs that sucked the life out of me so I could pay the loans back. I took out a life insurance policy I could barely afford to make sure my mom would be covered in the event I died, because she co-signed the loans but could never hope to afford them. I scrubbed the terms and conditions to see if it had a suicide clause, because I seriously considered ending it all. The policy did have such a clause, which is probably the reason why I’m still alive.

Eventually I did pay those six figures loans off, and I finally felt like I had a future again. A family, a home, rewarding work. I’m 10 years behind my peers on building up wealth, but I’m past a million now. I’m saving diligently for my own kids so they have better choices than I did.

And guess what? I support the proposals. Cap tuition, cap the loans, cut the interest, and give people a reason to live for the future again. Offer extremely generous forgiveness options for in demand professions. A nation should be investing in its people because that is investing in its future, not profiting off misery and failed dreams.

!00% agree. The "misery loves company" folks need to get over it. YES, I would have loooooooved loan forgiveness. But, it just wasn't in the cards at the time (no one was doing it). And that debt is crippling, even at the non-fancy, non-elite schools. I too worked multiple jobs and had to delay many things, including my own personal wealth, home ownership, etc. etc. I def support loan forgiveness with the caveat that the source of the problem be reformed.

Schools cost too much. Loans are predatory. It's ridiculous to say you need to go to college for most careers but you have to sacrifice your future (in some ways) and your personal wealth to do it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s hilarious all these Millennials who say stuff like “get used to it” and “it’s happening” as if by saying it forcefully enough will make it be so.

I’m a millennial who is a Democrat and is totally against student loan forgiveness. I think the Dems are totally miscalculating how much support this policy has.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been a Dem for 34 years. This loan forgiveness issue is what is starting to make me a one issue voter for the first time (like abortion for some). If a candidate says their goal is to forgive student loans, I’m voting for (and likely campaigning for) the other candidate.

You took on the loan. Pay it back.

That’s noble of you, and I respect that.

But for every one of “you” in your party, there are a hundred or more who want default+forgiveness for loans.

You’re fighting an Alamo.

nope. moderate dems will run as independents and split the dem vote and the GOP will win, win, win. Democrats, of which I am one, need to get on the same page.

You vastly overestimate how much independents care about a student loan pause. It's much more likely Millennial student loan debtors <40 yo either sit out the midterms or vote Republican if payments resume. Democrats have near zero political upside to resume student loan payments given the risks to the midterms. There are just too many student loan debtors now to be used as a solution to inflation or declining social responsibility, sorry!

Maybe. I'm an independent and the issue of student loan forgiveness irritates the heck out of me. I went to grad school part time at night and worked full time during the day to limit my student loan burden as much as possible.

Pay your debt.

I worked all through school and had taken biglaw jobs that sucked the life out of me so I could pay the loans back. I took out a life insurance policy I could barely afford to make sure my mom would be covered in the event I died, because she co-signed the loans but could never hope to afford them. I scrubbed the terms and conditions to see if it had a suicide clause, because I seriously considered ending it all. The policy did have such a clause, which is probably the reason why I’m still alive.

Eventually I did pay those six figures loans off, and I finally felt like I had a future again. A family, a home, rewarding work. I’m 10 years behind my peers on building up wealth, but I’m past a million now. I’m saving diligently for my own kids so they have better choices than I did.

And guess what? I support the proposals. Cap tuition, cap the loans, cut the interest, and give people a reason to live for the future again. Offer extremely generous forgiveness options for in demand professions. A nation should be investing in its people because that is investing in its future, not profiting off misery and failed dreams.

!00% agree. The "misery loves company" folks need to get over it. YES, I would have loooooooved loan forgiveness. But, it just wasn't in the cards at the time (no one was doing it). And that debt is crippling, even at the non-fancy, non-elite schools. I too worked multiple jobs and had to delay many things, including my own personal wealth, home ownership, etc. etc. I def support loan forgiveness with the caveat that the source of the problem be reformed.

Schools cost too much. Loans are predatory. It's ridiculous to say you need to go to college for most careers but you have to sacrifice your future (in some ways) and your personal wealth to do it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not only should loan forgiveness be means tested, it should also only be available for public institutions.

So, no one making over the median salary (around $52K right now) or median HHI (currently around $67K) should be eligible.

Yes, it is important for students to be able to go to college, but we should not giving loan forgiveness to students who chose to go to expensive private institutions. If you made that choice, and took out a loan to do it, you should pay that back.

COL adjustments need to made otherwise blue state residents will be left out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been a Dem for 34 years. This loan forgiveness issue is what is starting to make me a one issue voter for the first time (like abortion for some). If a candidate says their goal is to forgive student loans, I’m voting for (and likely campaigning for) the other candidate.

You took on the loan. Pay it back.

That’s noble of you, and I respect that.

But for every one of “you” in your party, there are a hundred or more who want default+forgiveness for loans.

You’re fighting an Alamo.

nope. moderate dems will run as independents and split the dem vote and the GOP will win, win, win. Democrats, of which I am one, need to get on the same page.

You vastly overestimate how much independents care about a student loan pause. It's much more likely Millennial student loan debtors <40 yo either sit out the midterms or vote Republican if payments resume. Democrats have near zero political upside to resume student loan payments given the risks to the midterms. There are just too many student loan debtors now to be used as a solution to inflation or declining social responsibility, sorry!

Maybe. I'm an independent and the issue of student loan forgiveness irritates the heck out of me. I went to grad school part time at night and worked full time during the day to limit my student loan burden as much as possible.

Pay your debt.

I worked all through school and had taken biglaw jobs that sucked the life out of me so I could pay the loans back. I took out a life insurance policy I could barely afford to make sure my mom would be covered in the event I died, because she co-signed the loans but could never hope to afford them. I scrubbed the terms and conditions to see if it had a suicide clause, because I seriously considered ending it all. The policy did have such a clause, which is probably the reason why I’m still alive.

Eventually I did pay those six figures loans off, and I finally felt like I had a future again. A family, a home, rewarding work. I’m 10 years behind my peers on building up wealth, but I’m past a million now. I’m saving diligently for my own kids so they have better choices than I did.

And guess what? I support the proposals. Cap tuition, cap the loans, cut the interest, and give people a reason to live for the future again. Offer extremely generous forgiveness options for in demand professions. A nation should be investing in its people because that is investing in its future, not profiting off misery and failed dreams.

Anonymous wrote:Not only should loan forgiveness be means tested, it should also only be available for public institutions.

So, no one making over the median salary (around $52K right now) or median HHI (currently around $67K) should be eligible.

Yes, it is important for students to be able to go to college, but we should not giving loan forgiveness to students who chose to go to expensive private institutions. If you made that choice, and took out a loan to do it, you should pay that back.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find amazing we have all this talk about forgiving the loans but none whatsoever about the Democrats' sacred cow: higher education.

There's no point forgiving loans if you don't reform the source of the problem: the high cost of higher education.

American higher education is incredibly bloated, incredibly inefficient, and stacked with too many programs and too many administrators all looking to cash in on the easily available loans. Somehow other countries manage to provide universities at a much lower cost, or even free, but these places are also much more bare bones compared to the US. Back to the basics.

The government should firmly cap the limit of student loans to a specific sum tied to the value of the degree. That would drive most master's programs underwater and bankrupt, to which I say good riddance. Most master's are not needed. It would, of course, directly hit a key Democratic target, which is why they don't talk about it at all, despite that any reform to student loans must include reform of the higher education funding model.

I'm a Democrat and I completely agree. I don't know about capping all of the masters programs because if you think about social work many jobs require masters of social work because it's a lot of internship so I mean maybe you'd have to change the model but a masters of social work doesn't get you much in the pay realm but it is necessary for public good

+1 Social work is a great example because it’s a growing field, we need more of them because this country is in a mental health crisis that’s going to get worse, but the salaries - often paid by the taxpayers - don’t support the cost of the required degrees.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find amazing we have all this talk about forgiving the loans but none whatsoever about the Democrats' sacred cow: higher education.

There's no point forgiving loans if you don't reform the source of the problem: the high cost of higher education.

American higher education is incredibly bloated, incredibly inefficient, and stacked with too many programs and too many administrators all looking to cash in on the easily available loans. Somehow other countries manage to provide universities at a much lower cost, or even free, but these places are also much more bare bones compared to the US. Back to the basics.

The government should firmly cap the limit of student loans to a specific sum tied to the value of the degree. That would drive most master's programs underwater and bankrupt, to which I say good riddance. Most master's are not needed. It would, of course, directly hit a key Democratic target, which is why they don't talk about it at all, despite that any reform to student loans must include reform of the higher education funding model.

I'm a Democrat and I completely agree. I don't know about capping all of the masters programs because if you think about social work many jobs require masters of social work because it's a lot of internship so I mean maybe you'd have to change the model but a masters of social work doesn't get you much in the pay realm but it is necessary for public good

+1 Social work is a great example because it’s a growing field, we need more of them because this country is in a mental health crisis that’s going to get worse, but the salaries - often paid by the taxpayers - don’t support the cost of the required degrees.

PP. I'm all for helping people in targeted ways, especially as a way to subsidize their low wages. I just prefer we take forgiveness $ earmarked for, say, surgeons and give it to those who need it more, like social workers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find amazing we have all this talk about forgiving the loans but none whatsoever about the Democrats' sacred cow: higher education.

There's no point forgiving loans if you don't reform the source of the problem: the high cost of higher education.

American higher education is incredibly bloated, incredibly inefficient, and stacked with too many programs and too many administrators all looking to cash in on the easily available loans. Somehow other countries manage to provide universities at a much lower cost, or even free, but these places are also much more bare bones compared to the US. Back to the basics.

The government should firmly cap the limit of student loans to a specific sum tied to the value of the degree. That would drive most master's programs underwater and bankrupt, to which I say good riddance. Most master's are not needed. It would, of course, directly hit a key Democratic target, which is why they don't talk about it at all, despite that any reform to student loans must include reform of the higher education funding model.

I'm a Democrat and I completely agree. I don't know about capping all of the masters programs because if you think about social work many jobs require masters of social work because it's a lot of internship so I mean maybe you'd have to change the model but a masters of social work doesn't get you much in the pay realm but it is necessary for public good

+1 Social work is a great example because it’s a growing field, we need more of them because this country is in a mental health crisis that’s going to get worse, but the salaries - often paid by the taxpayers - don’t support the cost of the required degrees.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find amazing we have all this talk about forgiving the loans but none whatsoever about the Democrats' sacred cow: higher education.

There's no point forgiving loans if you don't reform the source of the problem: the high cost of higher education.

American higher education is incredibly bloated, incredibly inefficient, and stacked with too many programs and too many administrators all looking to cash in on the easily available loans. Somehow other countries manage to provide universities at a much lower cost, or even free, but these places are also much more bare bones compared to the US. Back to the basics.

The government should firmly cap the limit of student loans to a specific sum tied to the value of the degree. That would drive most master's programs underwater and bankrupt, to which I say good riddance. Most master's are not needed. It would, of course, directly hit a key Democratic target, which is why they don't talk about it at all, despite that any reform to student loans must include reform of the higher education funding model.

I'm a Democrat and I completely agree. I don't know about capping all of the masters programs because if you think about social work many jobs require masters of social work because it's a lot of internship so I mean maybe you'd have to change the model but a masters of social work doesn't get you much in the pay realm but it is necessary for public good

Anonymous wrote:It’s hilarious all these Millennials who say stuff like “get used to it” and “it’s happening” as if by saying it forcefully enough will make it be so.

Anonymous wrote:I don't think anyone - ANYONE should be able to borrow more than the cost of their state flagship school in debt. If you choose private, you need to be able to afford it.