Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To bring this full circle, I agree that (i) inability to discharge loans in bankruptcy, (ii) loose (OK, nonexistent) lending standards, and (iii) consolidation of federal loans into a 30-year repayment program all conspire drive tuition increases at a rate that far exceeds inflation. Students don't care how much they take out because they can repay it for a fairly small monthly payment over 30 years and, let's face it, most of them are 18 years old and idiots, lenders don't care about even basic underwriting because there's no way for the students to avoid repayment absent death, and schools don't care about raising tuition because they KNOW lenders will lend the full amounts.

The income based repayment program is just another way to minimize the consequences of excessive borrowing. Now, the risk is all on the students - this shifts it onto the taxpayers. Now, NO one has an incentive to acr responsibly, even the borrowers.

I'm pretty liberal, but I also have a 5 yo daughter, and I'd like some rationality returned to the system in the next 12 years or so. This program doesn't do that - it exacerbates the problem.

You wouldn't need all the above changes if students would pick a major that had the ability to make money and pay their loan off.

I am the OP. I am sick of hearing about pick the 'right major'...and I am a Science Major! My dad suggested I go that route instead of my other love, English. I had an equal love for Biotech/Genetics and English- but he was correct in that was marketable and I have done really well for myself. But- what if English was my only interest? Aren't we in need of good English teachers? We really do need the Liberal Arts! There are tons of 'thankless' people that willingly enter into these majors knowing that they will not become rich and I think that is respectable. Maybe there should be an intelligence test and not everyone should be taking out loans to go to college in the first place, e..g, French system, other Euro countries, etc. Maybe we need more legit trade/vocational schools. There are many American kids that are partying at low-rate schools and doing nothing else and then come out with 'worthless' degrees and major debt. I think that is a student problem and not the major. I don't think we cut off all liberal arts and I get angry each time I read that. Where are we as a culture without the arts?

Truthfully, the loan/aid program stays the way it is and no matter what your major- you will not be able to pay back your loan!! FWIW, do we really need more lawyers for that matter? Many can't practice medicine due to the high cost of malpractice insurance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To bring this full circle, I agree that (i) inability to discharge loans in bankruptcy, (ii) loose (OK, nonexistent) lending standards, and (iii) consolidation of federal loans into a 30-year repayment program all conspire drive tuition increases at a rate that far exceeds inflation. Students don't care how much they take out because they can repay it for a fairly small monthly payment over 30 years and, let's face it, most of them are 18 years old and idiots, lenders don't care about even basic underwriting because there's no way for the students to avoid repayment absent death, and schools don't care about raising tuition because they KNOW lenders will lend the full amounts.

The income based repayment program is just another way to minimize the consequences of excessive borrowing. Now, the risk is all on the students - this shifts it onto the taxpayers. Now, NO one has an incentive to acr responsibly, even the borrowers.

I'm pretty liberal, but I also have a 5 yo daughter, and I'd like some rationality returned to the system in the next 12 years or so. This program doesn't do that - it exacerbates the problem.

You wouldn't need all the above changes if students would pick a major that had the ability to make money and pay their loan off.

create an incentive by mandating higher interest rates on degrees that don't pay well. I don't understand how you can charge the same amount of money for every major where as 3/4 of them are worthless and low paying.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To bring this full circle, I agree that (i) inability to discharge loans in bankruptcy, (ii) loose (OK, nonexistent) lending standards, and (iii) consolidation of federal loans into a 30-year repayment program all conspire drive tuition increases at a rate that far exceeds inflation. Students don't care how much they take out because they can repay it for a fairly small monthly payment over 30 years and, let's face it, most of them are 18 years old and idiots, lenders don't care about even basic underwriting because there's no way for the students to avoid repayment absent death, and schools don't care about raising tuition because they KNOW lenders will lend the full amounts.

The income based repayment program is just another way to minimize the consequences of excessive borrowing. Now, the risk is all on the students - this shifts it onto the taxpayers. Now, NO one has an incentive to acr responsibly, even the borrowers.

I'm pretty liberal, but I also have a 5 yo daughter, and I'd like some rationality returned to the system in the next 12 years or so. This program doesn't do that - it exacerbates the problem.

You wouldn't need all the above changes if students would pick a major that had the ability to make money and pay their loan off.

Sure. If only all students picked a major that made it easy for them to pay off six figures of debt upon graduation, we'd be set. Never mind that at the current rate of increase, tuition at a private university will be over $100,000 in 15 years. Also, I'd like unicorns spewing fairy dust from their asses to show up at my daughter's next birthday. Absent wishing people would undergo a wholesale change in behavior with no incentive to do so, do you have any other suggestions?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To bring this full circle, I agree that (i) inability to discharge loans in bankruptcy, (ii) loose (OK, nonexistent) lending standards, and (iii) consolidation of federal loans into a 30-year repayment program all conspire drive tuition increases at a rate that far exceeds inflation. Students don't care how much they take out because they can repay it for a fairly small monthly payment over 30 years and, let's face it, most of them are 18 years old and idiots, lenders don't care about even basic underwriting because there's no way for the students to avoid repayment absent death, and schools don't care about raising tuition because they KNOW lenders will lend the full amounts.

The income based repayment program is just another way to minimize the consequences of excessive borrowing. Now, the risk is all on the students - this shifts it onto the taxpayers. Now, NO one has an incentive to acr responsibly, even the borrowers.

I'm pretty liberal, but I also have a 5 yo daughter, and I'd like some rationality returned to the system in the next 12 years or so. This program doesn't do that - it exacerbates the problem.

You wouldn't need all the above changes if students would pick a major that had the ability to make money and pay their loan off.

Anonymous wrote:To bring this full circle, I agree that (i) inability to discharge loans in bankruptcy, (ii) loose (OK, nonexistent) lending standards, and (iii) consolidation of federal loans into a 30-year repayment program all conspire drive tuition increases at a rate that far exceeds inflation. Students don't care how much they take out because they can repay it for a fairly small monthly payment over 30 years and, let's face it, most of them are 18 years old and idiots, lenders don't care about even basic underwriting because there's no way for the students to avoid repayment absent death, and schools don't care about raising tuition because they KNOW lenders will lend the full amounts.

The income based repayment program is just another way to minimize the consequences of excessive borrowing. Now, the risk is all on the students - this shifts it onto the taxpayers. Now, NO one has an incentive to acr responsibly, even the borrowers.

I'm pretty liberal, but I also have a 5 yo daughter, and I'd like some rationality returned to the system in the next 12 years or so. This program doesn't do that - it exacerbates the problem.

Anonymous wrote:How about we just let people be responsible? If you take out the loan, your repay the loan. Why is that so difficult for some people to stomach?

TheManWithAUsername wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like it or not, we're always going to have dumbasses who are unable to live within their means and/or do not have the drive to seek gainful employment. Either they ring up $50-$100k in debt to get a BA in Gay Chicano Studies, ring up $1mn of mortgage debt on $150k HHI, or whatever.

We can either: (1) pay to keep them quiet and get their less dumbass offspring into the productive class, (2) pay for the security apparatus to keep them away from us, or (3) jostle each other out of the way to get on the boats/planes that'll take us away from Madame Defarge.

We could just get out of the way and let those dumb enough to lend to dumbasses suffer the consequences. Stop guaranteeing student loans for Gay Chicano Studies and allow bankruptcy to protect against student loans.

Anonymous wrote:I will say this: anyone whose parents put them through college has ZERO right to make fun of the student loan slaves.

I didn't notice anyone doing that, but maybe I missed it. I did notice you calling them dumbasses and mockingly referring to Gay Chicano Studies. FWIW, I bought my liberal arts BA with tens of thousands in student loans.

Anonymous wrote:liberal art and liberals = FAIL at life