Anonymous wrote:You student loan forgiveness program bashers are horrible. People are making sacrifices for public service work after years of school. Do you really think that the only people doing public interest work should be from rich families who paid for their education?

Yeah and ironic that they are likely trump voters. So much for standing up for the little guy/gal in middle america working in law enforcement, nursing, or teaching.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope so

So people that have been working at lower paying jobs than they could get in the private, for profit sector for YEARS in order to be eligible for loan forgiveness should just be told to kick rocks?

Big WSJ article not too long ago about how this program is used mostly by lawyers and doctors, and that costs are spiraling. There is not much sympathy for loan forgiveness for a bunch of highly paid professionals.

but are they using the same program or different ones that require particular service stipulations in underserved areas?

You student loan forgiveness program bashers are horrible. People are making sacrifices for public service work after years of school. Do you really think that the only people doing public interest work should be from rich families who paid for their education?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope so

So people that have been working at lower paying jobs than they could get in the private, for profit sector for YEARS in order to be eligible for loan forgiveness should just be told to kick rocks?

I dont believe workers claiming they could make so much more in the private sector. Why don't they and pay off their loans then?

Actually most of the younger people who work at my agency have done just that. About 2/3 of the people I was hired with, mostly younger, have jumped ship for private industry with pay raises of 50%+. I'm older, but once I receive enough experience I will be joining them.

I doubt anyone stays at a job for TEN YEARS out of some kind of deliberate calculation to get their loans repaid. If jobs are so plentiful, higher paid, and desirable in the private sector they would have moved much earlier. Even if that's the case, 10 years of public service is a lot - I have no problem with loan repayment being added to their compensation.

Maybe they are lazy govt workers and like the idea of having a do nothing job that also pays off their loans, has great benefits, 11 federal holidays, snow days, telework, etc., etc. Just ask the folks at the USPTO. All that, plus timesheet fraud.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope so

So people that have been working at lower paying jobs than they could get in the private, for profit sector for YEARS in order to be eligible for loan forgiveness should just be told to kick rocks?

Big WSJ article not too long ago about how this program is used mostly by lawyers and doctors, and that costs are spiraling. There is not much sympathy for loan forgiveness for a bunch of highly paid professionals.

So, to answer the question that was originally asked, so far Trump has said that he wants to cap student loans at 12.5%. There are a few articles saying that he plans to do away with Public Service Loan Forgiveness but they weren't quotes from him, just something stating he had said that. The main conclusion most articles are coming too is those who are in PSLF right now will probably be grandfathered in to having their entire amount forgiven after 120 on-time payments into a qualifying plan. The verbiage for PSLF is now listed in the promissory note used to sign up for financial aid. Due to that, it appears there would be a pretty good chance of legal recourse if PSLF was discontinued and those who are in the program are not allowed to be grandfathered in. Honestly, no one really knows at this point what is going to happen but if you are in enrolled in PSLF, stay enrolled and stay employed in a public service profession until we find out more.

Anonymous wrote:To answer the OP's question:

I was told Trump's plan is to increase payments to no more than 12.5% of take-home pay (up from 10%) and 20 years of service (instead of 10) or at least this is one he is considering.

Please, note I did not fact-check this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You clearly don't know many people who have gone the CC and state school route. They also accumulate student debt. My DD's nanny is currently doing just this in order to be a SW. She is also a single mom due to the fact that she adopted her DD out of an abusive situation (i.e. can you imagine a more selfless and deserving person?). Before working for us, she did accumulate student debt just through her CC classes. We are now paying the portion of her tuition for which she can't get grants...and I don't see why a public servant in her financial circumstance doesn't deserve the same.

No. I don't have any interest in paying for her college. She choose having a kid. You want to help her, fine. Don't spend my money doing it, I have charities I believe in. Like ones that help refugees, not some nanny making a good salary.

Did you even read what I wrote? She adopted the child from an abusive drug addict! Sure, she chose to do so. But trust me it benefits us all in the long run when children are raised in loving households.

Again, I don't care. Pay her a living wage that allows for her to go to school. Why on earth do you think others should subsidize your nanny?!?

Nobody is subsidizing the nanny, genius. They are subsidizing public service.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope so

So people that have been working at lower paying jobs than they could get in the private, for profit sector for YEARS in order to be eligible for loan forgiveness should just be told to kick rocks?

I dont believe workers claiming they could make so much more in the private sector. Why don't they and pay off their loans then?

Actually most of the younger people who work at my agency have done just that. About 2/3 of the people I was hired with, mostly younger, have jumped ship for private industry with pay raises of 50%+. I'm older, but once I receive enough experience I will be joining them.

I doubt anyone stays at a job for TEN YEARS out of some kind of deliberate calculation to get their loans repaid. If jobs are so plentiful, higher paid, and desirable in the private sector they would have moved much earlier. Even if that's the case, 10 years of public service is a lot - I have no problem with loan repayment being added to their compensation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope so

So people that have been working at lower paying jobs than they could get in the private, for profit sector for YEARS in order to be eligible for loan forgiveness should just be told to kick rocks?

I dont believe workers claiming they could make so much more in the private sector. Why don't they and pay off their loans then?

Actually most of the younger people who work at my agency have done just that. About 2/3 of the people I was hired with, mostly younger, have jumped ship for private industry with pay raises of 50%+. I'm older, but once I receive enough experience I will be joining them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You clearly don't know many people who have gone the CC and state school route. They also accumulate student debt. My DD's nanny is currently doing just this in order to be a SW. She is also a single mom due to the fact that she adopted her DD out of an abusive situation (i.e. can you imagine a more selfless and deserving person?). Before working for us, she did accumulate student debt just through her CC classes. We are now paying the portion of her tuition for which she can't get grants...and I don't see why a public servant in her financial circumstance doesn't deserve the same.

No. I don't have any interest in paying for her college. She choose having a kid. You want to help her, fine. Don't spend my money doing it, I have charities I believe in. Like ones that help refugees, not some nanny making a good salary.

Did you even read what I wrote? She adopted the child from an abusive drug addict! Sure, she chose to do so. But trust me it benefits us all in the long run when children are raised in loving households.

Again, I don't care. Pay her a living wage that allows for her to go to school. Why on earth do you think others should subsidize your nanny?!?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You clearly don't know many people who have gone the CC and state school route. They also accumulate student debt. My DD's nanny is currently doing just this in order to be a SW. She is also a single mom due to the fact that she adopted her DD out of an abusive situation (i.e. can you imagine a more selfless and deserving person?). Before working for us, she did accumulate student debt just through her CC classes. We are now paying the portion of her tuition for which she can't get grants...and I don't see why a public servant in her financial circumstance doesn't deserve the same.

No. I don't have any interest in paying for her college. She choose having a kid. You want to help her, fine. Don't spend my money doing it, I have charities I believe in. Like ones that help refugees, not some nanny making a good salary.

Did you even read what I wrote? She adopted the child from an abusive drug addict! Sure, she chose to do so. But trust me it benefits us all in the long run when children are raised in loving households.