Well, the argument is that everyone uses those indirectly, it's just a matter of how much. I need a fire department just in case! We don't all go to college or hae kids that go to school.
But that's quite narrow minded. Say I don't have kids but I'd still want a good public school system so I don't have to hire a bunch of morons in 20 years.
There is a world of difference between having taxpayers fund public schools and having them pay for college student loan forgiveness.
Student loan forgiveness is a complete non-starter for me. It rewards a certain group of people who happened to graduate at the “right” time, it ignores the underlying structural issues and reasons of why there is so much student loan debt in the first place, and is a complete handout to mostly white, middle class, families.
Plus, let’s be selfishly honest. No one paid for my student loans other than me. Yeah, it kinda sucked, but there is absolutely no reason why others can’t do the same.
The Following User Says Thank You to HockeyIlliterate For This Useful Post:
Plus, let’s be selfishly honest. No one paid for my student loans other than me. Yeah, it kinda sucked, but there is absolutely no reason why others can’t do the same.
No one paid for my daycare and yet I still believe child care should be publicly funded.
There is a world of difference between having taxpayers fund public schools and having them pay for college student loan forgiveness.
Student loan forgiveness is a complete non-starter for me. It rewards a certain group of people who happened to graduate at the “right” time, it ignores the underlying structural issues and reasons of why there is so much student loan debt in the first place, and is a complete handout to mostly white, middle class, families.
Plus, let’s be selfishly honest. No one paid for my student loans other than me. Yeah, it kinda sucked, but there is absolutely no reason why others can’t do the same.
I dont think "right time" is a good argument. Nothing would ever progress. "I lost fingers in the factory, it would not be fair to put safety conditions in now"
However you are right, loan forgiveness doesn't solve the problem. In fact it would create more loopholes for the rich.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
No one paid for my daycare and yet I still believe child care should be publicly funded.
That’s nice.
Of course, some colleges are already publicly funded and students that attend those schools tend to have less student loan debt than those that go to private colleges.
Why should the student that spent $50k at a private university get their loans completely forgiven while the student who spent $20k at State U to get the same degree essentially get penalized for their more economical choice?
Or, more pointedly, why should society fund programs for people that are essentially lifestyle or personal decisions?
I get the arguments in favor of publicly funded education and day care and maternity leave and so on.
But I don’t appreciate the inherent inequality of that funding.
It would make more sense to me if the government just gave everyone $X amount of money and let them spend it as they desired, whether on child care (for those who wish to have kids) or, say, on wine and steak and vacations for those that are childless (or even by those who do have kids, if they so desired).
I dont think "right time" is a good argument. Nothing would ever progress. "I lost fingers in the factory, it would not be fair to put safety conditions in now"
However you are right, loan forgiveness doesn't solve the problem. In fact it would create more loopholes for the rich.
I’m not making a “it isn’t the right time” argument.
I’m arguing that any forgiveness, as it is currently proposed, would only benefit those who happen to currently have student loans and who graduated at a time that allowed them to benefit from the forgiveness program.
If student loan forgiveness were to happen, what do you say to the person who just finished paying off their loans? Sucks to be you? Or to the person who wanted to go to Really Expensive U but thought better of it and went instead to Cheaper College, potentially suffering lower job opportunities as a result? That they made the wrong decision and should have relied more on the government to bail them out?
Discharging student loans for a small segment of the population is really just a ploy to get votes. Why not give refunds to everyone still living who ever had and paid off their student loans, whenever they were incurred? It would only cost a couple trillion, right?
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to HockeyIlliterate For This Useful Post:
I agree. I think if there were to be a government funded grant, it has to be limited. We'll forgive 10K, half of the tuition of a State U to everyone to starts college. 10K should be the max and if you decide to rack of 100K in loans, that's on you.
But the progressives argument, and one Pelosi is trying to avoid, although she's treading on conservative talking points is that they want to make it about, fairness, the poor and race. Black kids are drowning in debt.
Black borrowers are among those who are most impacted by student debt. While white students make up the majority of college students and thus borrowers, Black college students often take on larger amounts of student debt and are more likely to struggle to repay their loans after graduation.
According to data from the National Center for Education Statistics, Black and African American college graduates owe an average of $25,000 more in student loan debt than white college graduates. Four years after graduation, 48% of Black students owe an average of 12.5% more than they borrowed and 29% face monthly student loan payments of $350 or more.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
The Following User Says Thank You to GirlySports For This Useful Post:
Of course, some colleges are already publicly funded and students that attend those schools tend to have less student loan debt than those that go to private colleges.
Why should the student that spent $50k at a private university get their loans completely forgiven while the student who spent $20k at State U to get the same degree essentially get penalized for their more economical choice?
Or, more pointedly, why should society fund programs for people that are essentially lifestyle or personal decisions?
You know the answer to this. I would 100% be in favour of loans that were only good for publicly-funded schools, but the best way to ensure a policy is unpopular is to not grant it to everyone (see: stimulus checks).
There is a world of difference between having taxpayers fund public schools and having them pay for college student loan forgiveness.
You're right, there is. The reality is there was a generation of students that caught in the escalation of costs that made education ridiculously expensive. The inflation that made it that way was driven by the private institutions and regulations were non-existent to check this loading of debt on students. There is a lot that has to change in education, but solving this problem is not just an education problem, but also an inhibitor to the economic health of the nation.
Quote:
Student loan forgiveness is a complete non-starter for me. It rewards a certain group of people who happened to graduate at the “right” time, it ignores the underlying structural issues and reasons of why there is so much student loan debt in the first place, and is a complete handout to mostly white, middle class, families.
You're correct to a certain extent, it does reward those who were in the system at a given time. It would focus on those who were unfairly targeted by not only predatory private loans, but also the unregulated practices of the feds who were forced to try and keep up with the spirally costs create by the private institutions.
Quote:
Plus, let’s be selfishly honest. No one paid for my student loans other than me. Yeah, it kinda sucked, but there is absolutely no reason why others can’t do the same.
Yeah, you got yours, so #### everyone else. Amiright?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyIlliterate
Of course, some colleges are already publicly funded and students that attend those schools tend to have less student loan debt than those that go to private colleges.
First, it would help if you would contrast the difference between colleges and universities, and then the public system and the private system. You're applying the same brush to them all, which is a failure in your discussion of the issue. The issue affects the various types of institutions differently.
Quote:
Why should the student that spent $50k at a private university get their loans completely forgiven while the student who spent $20k at State U to get the same degree essentially get penalized for their more economical choice?
Because they wouldn't. Loan forgiveness is not intended to help those with privately held loans, only those that are government backed would be forgiven. Those that made the choice to go to college or public universities, and only those that took advantage of qualified loan programs would gain any benefit. Even those that consolidated their private FFEL loans into government backed loans would not gain full benefit.
Quote:
Or, more pointedly, why should society fund programs for people that are essentially lifestyle or personal decisions?
I dunno. Why did we bailout the banks? Why did we bailout Wall Street? Why did we give $4 TRILLION to the top 1%? Why did society fund a massive transfer of wealth to people who do nothing but profiteer at society's expense? Explain away please.
Why should society fun student debt forgiveness? Because the vast majority of students who carry debt have a significant load caused by the shenanigans that took place as a result of the for-profit institutions and the rapid unchecked inflation that took place. It created a bubble that has yet to burst, and the only way to fix this problem is to do a massive reset of the system, similar to what happened to the market when the banks were bailed out. So why would this investment (and it is an investment) be worth it for the country?
Elimination of this debt will inject vast amounts of money back into the economy. The proof is in the unexpected rebound in the economy, a large part of caused by the suspension of student loan payments. Those suspended payments weren't weaseled away into savings or investments, like what happened with the $4 TRILLION gift to the top 1%, this money went right back into the economy to keep families afloat and buy things these people could not normally afford as a result of the money dedicated to student loan payments. The United States is driven on spending. The only way to play for programs now is through taxes on spending, so the primary goal is to keep that spending going. Since most people with student debt have said they would take that money and turn it into a major purchase, like a house or car, that is significant money going back into the economy. That increases demand for products and services and in turn generates new jobs, new tax revenues, and and new funds for programs like medicare and social security. The benefit from giving 42 million Americans a leg up great outweighs the gift we gave to a couple million rich pricks.
Quote:
I get the arguments in favor of publicly funded education and day care and maternity leave and so on.
But I don’t appreciate the inherent inequality of that funding.
Inequity in funding? I don't understand this line of thinking. Our goal is to lift society and our country up. You do that by making big investments that improve the lot for the most people. You're not gifting money to individuals, you're investing in the future of the country. Those people who went to school and got educated are going to be the future leaders of the institutions (private and public) that make America what it is. Their success will make our future successful. We hold them back, we hold ourselves back. You can't be myopic and look at this from the perspective of helping individuals. You have to look at this as a massive lift that will improve the lives of communities, states, and the country as a whole. Get this huge block of 42 million Americans spending and really watch the economy take off. Trickledown economics was a massive failure, now try investing in the middle class and see the power of the spending block in action.
Quote:
It would make more sense to me if the government just gave everyone $X amount of money and let them spend it as they desired, whether on child care (for those who wish to have kids) or, say, on wine and steak and vacations for those that are childless (or even by those who do have kids, if they so desired).
That would be one way to look at it. It's bad fiscal policy and doesn't solve a problem, but it is one way to look at it. I get it though. You want yours. You're lucky you went to school when a Pell Grant paid for the majority of a year's schooling, and not a fraction of a semester. For those who went to school during the for-profiteering that took place over the past 15-20 years, its a different story, especially those who have recent debt. Something needs to be done for mainstreet in the country, and student debt is a great place to start.
The Following User Says Thank You to Lanny_McDonald For This Useful Post:
You're right, there is. The reality is there was a generation of students that caught in the escalation of costs that made education ridiculously expensive. The inflation that made it that way was driven by the private institutions and regulations were non-existent to check this loading of debt on students. There is a lot that has to change in education, but solving this problem is not just an education problem, but also an inhibitor to the economic health of the nation.
Those who took out the loans share in the blame too.
They could have chosen to go to a cheaper school, or pick a major that offered decent career prospects that would likely support the repayment of the loan, or so on.
Curious that you don’t mention their role in the matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald
It would focus on those who were unfairly targeted by not only predatory private loans. . .
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald
Because they wouldn't. Loan forgiveness is not intended to help those with privately held loans, only those that are government backed would be forgiven.
Which is it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald
Yeah, you got yours, so #### everyone else. Amiright?
No.
I paid my loans. It wasn’t easy. But I did it. And pretty much everyone else can, and should, do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald
First, it would help if you would contrast the difference between colleges and universities, and then the public system and the private system. You're applying the same brush to them all, which is a failure in your discussion of the issue. The issue affects the various types of institutions differently.
Not really, except to the extent of loans generally taken out by the students.
But, again, students voluntarily choose which school to attend, the amount of debt that would have be taken on to attend said school, and which subject to major in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald
I dunno. Why did we bailout the banks? Why did we bailout Wall Street? Why did we give $4 TRILLION to the top 1%? Why did society fund a massive transfer of wealth to people who do nothing but profiteer at society's expense? Explain away please.
This is just whataboutism from a different perspective and is similarly pointless. A bad political decision should not be the basis for allowing another bad political decision.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald
Why should society fun student debt forgiveness? Because the vast majority of students who carry debt have a significant load caused by the shenanigans that took place as a result of the for-profit institutions and the rapid unchecked inflation that took place.
Debt that they voluntarily took out. Again, you completely ignore the students’ own role in this matter. Why is that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald
Elimination of this debt will inject vast amounts of money back into the economy. The proof is in the unexpected rebound in the economy, a large part of caused by the suspension of student loan payments.
First, increased inflation is not a good thing.
Second, you are confusing Main Street with Wall Street.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald
Those suspended payments weren't weaseled away into savings or investments, like what happened with the $4 TRILLION gift to the top 1%, this money went right back into the economy . . .
Investment is spending.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald
Since most people with student debt have said they would take that money and turn it into a major purchase, like a house or car . . .
So they can go into more, or other, debt?
Which they will then presumably ask to be bailed out of too?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald
Inequity in funding? I don't understand this line of thinking.
The argument is that funding tends to assist only certain groups or segments of the population. You don’t see much government money directed towards single childless adults who rent, for example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald
You're lucky you went to school when a Pell Grant paid for the majority of a year's schooling, and not a fraction of a semester.
Ha, I wish. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
When I went to college, as I recall the maximum Pell Grant amount was $2000 a semester (or maybe a year, but I think it was per semester). But that is irrelevant.
When I graduated and started paying back the student loans, my monthly amount was around $470 a month (I consolidated all of my loans and so I had a 30 year repayment schedule). Adjusted for inflation, that is around $720 a month today. Or about the same as rent for a one bedroom apartment in a medium to low cost of living area (which, at the time, it really was for me, as the monthly loan payment was roughly the same as my monthly rent). It kept me from buying a new car, new furniture, definitely a house, and a lot of other stuff. But that is just how it went, and I paid off the loans in a bit under 9 years.
Do people have higher monthly student loan payments today? Undoubtedly so. But they voluntarily took out they debt. And they can pay it back too. Sure, it will suck. But that is the deal that they made.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald
Something needs to be done for mainstreet in the country, and student debt is a great place to start.
I agree with the former, but not the latter.
Start with health care, which definitely affects everyone.
Last edited by HockeyIlliterate; 07-29-2021 at 11:31 PM.
Bro, I agree with most (if not all) of what you're saying but you gotta learn how to condense your content. Very few of us actually read that term paper.
Gotta keep in mind that there's a diverse audience here, including a bunch of neurodivergents like myself. Well you don't have to keep it in mind, but don't expect a tonne of engagement if you're posting essays.
A little unsolicited advice from the resident lunatic. Take it as you will.
Those who took out the loans share in the blame too.
They could have chosen to go to a cheaper school, or pick a major that offered decent career prospects that would likely support the repayment of the loan, or so on.
Curious that you don’t mention their role in the matter.
Which is it?
No.
I paid my loans. It wasn’t easy. But I did it. And pretty much everyone else can, and should, do so.
Not really, except to the extent of loans generally taken out by the students.
But, again, students voluntarily choose which school to attend, the amount of debt that would have be taken on to attend said school, and which subject to major in.
This is just whataboutism from a different perspective and is similarly pointless. A bad political decision should not be the basis for allowing another bad political decision.
Debt that they voluntarily took out. Again, you completely ignore the students’ own role in this matter. Why is that?
First, increased inflation is not a good thing.
Second, you are confusing Main Street with Wall Street.
Investment is spending.
So they can go into more, or other, debt?
Which they will then presumably ask to be bailed out of too?
The argument is that funding tends to assist only certain groups or segments of the population. You don’t see much government money directed towards single childless adults who rent, for example.
Ha, I wish. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
When I went to college, as I recall the maximum Pell Grant amount was $2000 a semester (or maybe a year, but I think it was per semester). But that is irrelevant.
When I graduated and started paying back the student loans, my monthly amount was around $470 a month (I consolidated all of my loans and so I had a 30 year repayment schedule). Adjusted for inflation, that is around $720 a month today. Or about the same as rent for a one bedroom apartment in a medium to low cost of living area (which, at the time, it really was for me, as the monthly loan payment was roughly the same as my monthly rent). It kept me from buying a new car, new furniture, definitely a house, and a lot of other stuff. But that is just how it went, and I paid off the loans in a bit under 9 years.
Do people have higher monthly student loan payments today? Undoubtedly so. But they voluntarily took out they debt. And they can pay it back too. Sure, it will suck. But that is the deal that they made.
I agree with the former, but not the latter.
Start with health care, which definitely affects everyone.
Jesus Christ, you're both insane.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to rubecube For This Useful Post:
Maybe education shouldn't cost so much? Maybe there is a reason the wage gap and the economic gap is getting larger in America every year.
"I paid my student loans, I pulled myself up by my bootstraps, so should you!"
Is exactly what politicians want you to think and feel as they fund multi-trillion dollar payouts to corporations who couldn't give two ####s about how fiscally responsible you are.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poe969
It's the Law of E=NG. If there was an Edmonton on Mars, it would stink like Uranus.
Maybe education shouldn't cost so much? Maybe there is a reason the wage gap and the economic gap is getting larger in America every year.
"I paid my student loans, I pulled myself up by my bootstraps, so should you!"
Is exactly what politicians want you to think and feel as they fund multi-trillion dollar payouts to corporations who couldn't give two ####s about how fiscally responsible you are.
Post-Secondary Education is expensive simply because of the demand for 4-year degrees. Society, class, racial equity is being measured by how many college graduates there are. The 4-year degree trap.
You may not have the money to go to University but the push for the 4-year degree is real. And we all know, it's rare you finish a 4-year degree in 4 years, it may take 5 or 6. Also, the States is different than Canada where the school matters more in getting a job than in Canada. For example, when hiring, I treat a degree from U of C, U of L and Mount Royal equally. But in the States, going to a great school improves your job prospect. So that's more pressure to go to an expensive, prestigious school. And the schools know this and charge through the nose.
And then there are international students on top of that who pay double or triple, in cash! They want that prestigious degree to take back home, or in some cases stay and enter the US workforce.
Lots of things to factor in here. It's not as simplistic as wiping out loans to give relief and even the field.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
Post-Secondary Education is expensive simply because of the demand for 4-year degrees. Society, class, racial equity is being measured by how many college graduates there are. The 4-year degree trap.
You may not have the money to go to University but the push for the 4-year degree is real. And we all know, it's rare you finish a 4-year degree in 4 years, it may take 5 or 6. Also, the States is different than Canada where the school matters more in getting a job than in Canada. For example, when hiring, I treat a degree from U of C, U of L and Mount Royal equally. But in the States, going to a great school improves your job prospect. So that's more pressure to go to an expensive, prestigious school. And the schools know this and charge through the nose.
And then there are international students on top of that who pay double or triple, in cash! They want that prestigious degree to take back home, or in some cases stay and enter the US workforce.
Lots of things to factor in here. It's not as simplistic as wiping out loans to give relief and even the field.
I agree with the first part, and to be honest, it's the true problem.
Treating schools like symbols of success instead of tools for that success. It's garbage and truly American (and i supposed British).
It's not what you know, it's where you went. It's killing American progress and it's totally artificial.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poe969
It's the Law of E=NG. If there was an Edmonton on Mars, it would stink like Uranus.
President Donald J. Trump pressed top Justice Department officials late last year to declare that the election was corrupt even though they had found no instances of widespread fraud, so that he and his allies in Congress could use the assertion to try to overturn the results, according to new documents provided to lawmakers and obtained by The New York Times.
Quote:
The exchange unfolded during a phone call on Dec. 27 in which Mr. Trump pressed the acting attorney general at the time, Jeffrey A. Rosen, and his deputy, Richard P. Donoghue, on voter fraud claims that the department had disproved.
Mr. Donoghue warned that the department had no power to change the outcome of the election. Mr. Trump replied that he did not expect that, according to notes Mr. Donoghue took memorializing the conversation.
“Just say that the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me” and to congressional allies, Mr. Donoghue wrote in summarizing Mr. Trump’s response.
Mr. Trump did not name the lawmakers, but at other points during the call, he mentioned Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio, whom he described as a “fighter”; Representative Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, who at the time promoted the idea that the election was stolen from Mr. Trump; and Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, whom Mr. Trump praised for “getting to bottom of things.”
Those who took out the loans share in the blame too.
Not necessarily. When someone is down the rabbit hole it is impossible to turn their back on completion of the degree and the cost that goes along with it. Personally speaking, I ate $50K because my institution dragged their heals on getting the process completed for me to finish my terminal degree. They had me by the nuts and knew I was not going to bail on completion of the program, because I was on the hook for the loans regardless of outcome. So yes, I had to take the debt on to complete the degree or be left with a ridiculous debt and no value from the investment of time and money.
Since this is all about you, why didn't you quit law school after two years? The debt was piling up and you could have just walked away from it? Hmmmmm? Because you wanted the terminal degree that you could later piss away and do nothing with? You still took the hit and finished. Because the other alternaltive would have been mind numbingly ####ing stupid to consider.
Quote:
They could have chosen to go to a cheaper school, or pick a major that offered decent career prospects that would likely support the repayment of the loan, or so on.
How about those of us that did? I had two options to complete my Masters and PhD, from two prestigious schools, but I chose the cheapest option, because of cost. Many students do the same. Most people are responsible individuals and have got caught up in the changes in the system.
Quote:
Curious that you don’t mention their role in the matter.
Because the system is set up against the student. As someone who spend half a decade as an executive officer in higher education I got to see the #### show up close, and it was appalling. Students and schools were manipulated, and the whole system adjusted to follow the for-profit model and pricing structure.
Quote:
I paid my loans. It wasn’t easy. But I did it. And pretty much everyone else can, and should, do so.
Actually many can't. You're lucky. You completed a degree in an area where people actually think you provide value and would pay for those services. Frankly, I think Shakespeare had it right when it came to lawyers, and most other vocations should be held in a much high level of respect and more value placed on what they provide to society. But for some reasons lawyers make a lot of money and can generate money that a lot of other professions can't, even though those other professions provide much greater value to society as whole.
Quote:
But, again, students voluntarily choose which school to attend, the amount of debt that would have be taken on to attend said school, and which subject to major in.
In some regards, yes, in other regards no. Certain degrees are only acceptable or hold sway from certain institutions. When I chose my terminal degree I made sure that I was going top ten for that particular degree. But I dis so with cost in mind. But the system worked against me and heaped an extra $50K of debt on me because of the process of completing an advanced degree. Not my choice. I finished my work in time where I could have completed in three years, instead of five, but the process comes into play. The school mandated that I eat that extra cost. NOT my choice. NOT how I wanted it to play out. It was FORCED on me if I wanted to complete the degree. That's the way the system works. Just like lawyers have to pass the bar exam to practice law, there are certain constraints in place that you are forced to meet for certain degrees, and you have to pay that price.
Quote:
This is just whataboutism from a different perspective and is similarly pointless. A bad political decision should not be the basis for allowing another bad political decision.
No, it isn't. It's the reality. Both parties are responsible for the #### show higher education is, so take your whataboutism and stick it. That is the weakest #### I heard to date.
Quote:
Debt that they voluntarily took out. Again, you completely ignore the students’ own role in this matter. Why is that?
Because student have no say many times. Unless they want to drop out of school and carry the debt with no benefit, they are forced to chase the paper.
Quote:
A whole bunch of misguided and misinformed #### about higher education...
Which they will then presumably ask to be bailed out of too?
Yet we bailout those who intentionally wreck the system and punish those who have no say and are just forced to follow the rules put in play?
Quote:
The argument is that funding tends to assist only certain groups or segments of the population. You don’t see much government money directed towards single childless adults who rent, for example.
This is so stupid I'm surprised you wrote these words. Yes, there are many programs that help the group you singled out. What is scary is that the group you singled out, the very ones we should be helping and lifting them up from the state the are forced into, are considered last resort recipients of funding because they don't have much political power. Conversely, those #######s in the 1% get gift-after-gift-after-gift to make their lives much easier. Where's your outrage to that?
Quote:
Ha, I wish. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
I have a really good idea because I've been on all sides of this fence. I've seen it from the borrower perspective, the lender perspective, and the institutional perspective. This is a complex issue, but one where the vast majority of students got ####ed. The system got broke, and it needs to be fixed.
Quote:
When I went to college, as I recall the maximum Pell Grant amount was $2000 a semester (or maybe a year, but I think it was per semester). But that is irrelevant.
No, its not irrelevant. A lot of students survive off those Pell Grants and the fact that the cost of education has surpassed those Pell Grants is telling. You can buy your head in the sand, but when the cost of an education has escalated by a factor of five, and Pell Grants by a factor of two, it tells you how for behind the eight ball students are. I'm glad you graduated during the period where education was cost effective, but you have to understand and acknowledge that this is no longer the case. The cost of education has skyrocketed out of control because of lack of regulation.
[/QUOTE]When I graduated and started paying back the student loans, my monthly amount was around $470 a month (I consolidated all of my loans and so I had a 30 year repayment schedule). Adjusted for inflation, that is around $720 a month today. Or about the same as rent for a one bedroom apartment in a medium to low cost of living area (which, at the time, it really was for me, as the monthly loan payment was roughly the same as my monthly rent). It kept me from buying a new car, new furniture, definitely a house, and a lot of other stuff. But that is just how it went, and I paid off the loans in a bit under 9 years. [/QUOTE]
That's nothing. I pay more than twice that. Yeah, my student loans are about the same as a lot of people's mortgage payments. Do I complain? Nope. I'm responsible for that. Where I complain is where the government doesn't hold up their end of bargains (PSLF). But being a good tax payer who has a very good job, I pay my bill and don't whine about it. I apply pressure where I can and work the system. But I recognize the situation many others find themselves in, and that they got screwed over, and I'm willing to support their efforts to see the system fixed, and that includes forgiveness of loans forced on people.
Quote:
Do people have higher monthly student loan payments today? Undoubtedly so. But they voluntarily took out they debt. And they can pay it back too. Sure, it will suck. But that is the deal that they made.
That's the deal that people were forced into. This is the part you refuse to understand, that people can be close the the terminus of a degree and it would be stupid for them not to complete that degree. Schools recognize this and leverage it to make money and keep enrollments up, because that is how they are judged.
Quote:
Start with health care, which definitely affects everyone.
Completely different issue. Completely different argument that is even more complex than higher education.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rubecube
Bro, I agree with most (if not all) of what you're saying but you gotta learn how to condense your content. Very few of us actually read that term paper.
Complex issues require complex answers. You can't distill a complex issue like student debt or health care down to a single paragraph or single line answer. There is some education that needs to happen here.
Quote:
Gotta keep in mind that there's a diverse audience here, including a bunch of neurodivergents like myself. Well you don't have to keep it in mind, but don't expect a tonne of engagement if you're posting essays.
Education on complex issues is not always easy, is not always quick, and definitely is not always stated in a simple sentence. While Einstein may have expressed relativity in E=MC squared, he required a pretty substantial paper for the masses to understand the complexity of the equation. This subject matter is far from Einstein level mathematics, but it is still complex and requires significant discussion.
Quote:
A little unsolicited advice from the resident lunatic. Take it as you will.
I appreciate it and try to keep things as succinct as possible.
The Following User Says Thank You to Lanny_McDonald For This Useful Post:
