<p>According to Howard Kurtz, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor proposed ending subsidies for Stafford Loans as part of the "deficit reduction" package.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The House majority leader, who did most of the talking for the Republican side, said those taking out student loans should start paying interest right away, rather than being able to defer payments until after graduation.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>**
UNALLOWED LINK TO BLOG REMOVED BY MODERATOR**</p>
<p>I guess college isn't unaffordable enough yet.</p>
<p>What’s the best way to solve our debt crisis? Oh yes, screw over students and push them into MORE debt and make them struggle even more so that when they get out of college they can pay back their loans rather than putting that money towards a house or car- you know things that stimulate the economy. </p>
<p>However, I can’t seem to find this anywhere other than TDB. I would like to hear more about it…</p>
<p>TDB is known for bias… but this should not happen. they should cut their pay before cutting aid to student. colleges are already expensive. i hope this doesnt happen</p>
<p>This the gist of the problem. Everyone wants the deficit reduced, but every program that is mentioned for elimination has host of adherents who think it should be untouchable.</p>
<p>^ There has to be a balance. Why does there have to be elimination? Why can’t there just be moderation? Or go after bloated programs and redistribute the funding to education. Maybe eliminate subsidized loans to for-profit colleges. The debt that we are forcing students to be strapped with (if they want any kind of decent job) is going to severely impact the economy if it hasn’t already. Doing anything to further increase their debt is going to slow down the recovery even more. Graduates aren’t going to be spending money to stimulate the economy if they’re living at home and just paying off loans. It just seems like common sense to me…</p>
<p>But the thing is, students have been consistently getting screwed over for a while now. California can’t even afford to pay its teachers properly, and in my 8th grade the teachers were on the verge of a strike. 10% hikes in tuition for UCs, lack of financial aid, and now a lack of subsidized loans; that’s a great combo.</p>
<p>The only programs we need to eliminate to fix the deficit are the Bush wars and the Bush tax cuts for the rich. But that’s getting off the subject and down the road to this thread being locked, so I’ll stop now.</p>
<p>I am furious with the amount of student loans that go to poor kids in for-profit schools, many of whom will never graduate. Where the hedoublehockey sticks have the accreditation agencies been? How do these schools get accredited? There are many reputable public unis that offer on line degrees and classes.</p>
<p>Wow. Pathetic that the link was deleted. Howard Kurtz is a respected Washington journalist, and the fact that he writes for The Daily Beast is of no consequence whatever. It’s a news organization. “Blog” is meaningless.</p>
<p>Kurtz writes for Newsweek, which has been bought by The Daily Beast, so they are now the same company. Old media ideas about some difference between “blogs” and “real media” are utterly without merit today. They are one and the same. Have been for years.</p>
<p>I think they could target some of this better. I would not be adverse to limiting federal aid such as subsidized loans and PELL to COA of a commuting student. I also think PELL should be reduced accordingly by other awards instead of having its special status. Exceptions to the commuter rule would be if there are no schools within a specified commutable range for the student to get his/her degree in a given field of study after 2 years of general studies.</p>
<p>I agree with Kayf on this matter, by the way. There is an entire industry that has been built around government loans to just keep the money pouring in.</p>
<p>Sigh, how long are some folks gonna keep blaming the other guy? What about the Libya war? Is that all the former guy too? :rolleyes:</p>
<p>But so we keep this non-political (for the TOS), note in the Higher Ed article that this recommendation was made by Obama’s hand-picked deficit reduction committee. And the White House - no longer occupied by a Bush – apparently concurs. Hmmmmm</p>
<p>Also agree with Kayf, but I would go even farther. Eliminate subsidies for private colleges, period. Do we really need to be subsidizing students who attend HYP? (They have enough money to eliminate all loans if they chose to do so.)</p>
<p>CA can only blame themselves. they had to raise UC tuition by 10% because of “budget shortfalls”. right. where did they get the money got give financial aid and instate tuition to undocumented students? funny math those people at UC do…</p>
<p>there are plenty of programs that can be cut to help pay for the subsidized loans. one of them is the free cell phone/plan you can get if you qualify for food stamps or any gov welfare. last time i checked, cell phones are not a need to survive.
they can eliminate the department of education too. since the creation of that department, students didnt improve that much only like 2%. that saves hundreds of billions a year. use that money to help college financial aid and NASA.</p>
<p>Defense Bloat, Pork projects, Redundant government jobs. Tax breaks for the rich. At least half of the 30 or so intelligence agencies, All of our useless wars. Social Security… </p>
<p>I agree with you, Bluebayou, the part about eliminating the government subsidies to private schools. However, that requires a lot more time and analysis to do. For right now, I am willing to get rid of the subsidized interest on the Staffords and the double counting of the PELL. I’d also put some limits on how much in loan one can get as educational loans. There are some folks that are getting long in tooth that have been taking courses forever it seems to delay repaying the loans, getting grandma to sign for student loans since the word “education” gets her excited enough to not look at the ramifications closely enough, and the education is going nowhere. Enter some half sham schools that collect on those funds and you have some shady dealings. I live in a mecca of these deals and it bothers me terribly as those least informed and able to afford this racket are the ones being taken in. </p>
<p>What am I willing to give up? Seems to me I’ve given it all up. We get nothing other than the full interest loans. With the prime rate so low, the government makes money off of us in terms of any loans we might take since we repay them. PLUS and non sub Staffords are no deals to us other than the convenience. What’s left to give up?</p>