<p>I may be dense but I’m still confused about how someone could have $150,000 in student loans and only be making payments of $69 a month on this debt. He seems to have a good job so how is he not obligated to pay more than that per month? My 09’ grad son had less than $20,000 in loans but had them paid off within a year of graduation. He felt it was important and an obligation to discharge this debt since he could do so since he had a good job . Most people would feel an obligation to repay their loans so I am unclear as to why someone would seem to do everything they could to delay paying off their loans. Who is supposed to pay off these loans if not the person who made the choice to take them out in the first place? I feel I must be missing something.</p>
<p>Which one of us is going to send the guy a breezy message inviting him to come back here and explain it to us. (smiley face, if I knew how)</p>
<p>plans
[Student</a> Aid on the
Web](<a href=“http://studentaid.ed.gov/PORTALSWebApp/students/english/repaying.jsp]Student”>http://studentaid.ed.gov/PORTALSWebApp/students/english/repaying.jsp)</p>
<p>repayment plans
[Student</a> Aid on the Web](<a href=“http://studentaid.ed.gov/PORTALSWebApp/students/english/OtherFormsOfRepay.jsp]Student”>http://studentaid.ed.gov/PORTALSWebApp/students/english/OtherFormsOfRepay.jsp)</p>
<p>JA and DS had student loans disbursed. during the period 1998-2006.</p>
<p>LongPrime, I’m still not getting what you are trying to get at with these links. I don’t think I’ve seen anything that clearly articluated your position on student loans for your son but maybe I missed it. My older son had loans disbursed during the 2005-2006 period that you reference. The loan still had to be paid back and it was. What am I missing?</p>
<p>I’m willing to bet this guy makes more than H & I make … judging by his bragging, anyway. We shelled out $700 a month for our D’s rent alone last year (tuition was covered by scholarships). We also paid for our son’s stay-away state school with no aid other than a small scholarship, our mortgage & property taxes, paid for repairs on our home (including a new septic field), replaced 2 used cars that finally bit it with high-mileage used cars, gave money to our church and to other charitable causes, etc. We live our life based on what we make. We take on expenses only to the extent we can afford them.</p>
<p>Dude, if you make a great salary, then structure your life to include paying off the loans before you get cool stuff (including a nice home in a fine neighborhood). If your wife doesn’t work, she might consider getting a job (staying home is great … IF you can make it work given your financial situation … and if you can only pay $69 a month toward your loans, clearly you cannot). Take responsiblity and pay what you owe. </p>
<p>Yes, I am old fashioned … proud of it … and raised kids with similar values.</p>
<p>sevmom,
I don’t know about JA but what we did was to follow the law and regulations as listed in the our government’s website,<a href=“http://www.ed.gov/fund/grants-college.html[/url]”>http://www.ed.gov/fund/grants-college.html</a> , and which were openly offered by the direct lenders, Citi; and administered by an agency of the State of Pennsylvania, [PHEAA</a> - Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency](<a href=“http://www.pheaa.org/]PHEAA”>http://www.pheaa.org/)</p>
<p>JA’s and our payment plans were legit, disclosed on the websites and mentioned in the exit interview for ALL loanees of government guaranteed loans. And for 2012, I would imagine that ALL initial loanees of government guaranteed loans, still must participate in the preliminary interview prior to taking the loan and participate in the exit interview at graduation. The repayment plans are still offered today but with 2 newer options.</p>
<p>sevmom,
What you are missing, rather misreading, is that JA and I, are making payment, per contract, and offered to everyone at the time of graduation or final disbursement. We are NOT in arrears but current and loans will be paid. </p>
<p>If your DS took a gov guaranteed loan (ggl) in 2005-2006 academic year, his interest rate was the last 6mn T-bill auction prior to July + margin 1.7%= 3.0 +1.7 =4.7%. **And **prior to July 1, 2006 your DS had an option to either consolidate his ggl loan(s) at a lower fixed rate for longer pay period OR continue with the contract which had a 10 year amortization, at a Variable rate (Tbill+1.7%), which today according to [U.S</a>. Department of Education](<a href=“http://www.ed.gov%5DU.S”>http://www.ed.gov) is 2.36% (ontime and autopay incentives could lower this rate to 2.125%) Heck-of-a-deal.</p>
<p>I do not know what the repayment interest was after luly 2006 other than my research on the current interest rate. Could be easily found. My interest in student loans ended on DS’s graduation in May 2006.</p>
<p>“Yes, the part I don´t get is why he is only paying back so little on his student loans.”</p>
<p>I’ve noticed many comments about the OP not making much of a dent on his student loans. But from what I read, right now he is on a program that is charging him 0% interest on his student loans. Amazing deal. Why would anyone pay down a loan that is charging him 0% interest? That is the last thing I would pay down. I would pay off every other single thing first, perhaps even invest my extra money in a secure investment. When the 0% deal goes away, then I would attack that loan. Of course, if it’s still cheaper than any other loan I have, I’m not paying any more on it than is required.</p>
<p>Much as I hate to say it, longprime is right. I just read the entire thread, wow, this got long. But it is interesting how judgmental it has become with very little knowledge of actual numbers. If the OP is making a big paycheck, then it makes sense for him to buy a house instead of renting an apartment, especially if he can refinance for the next to nothing rates going on right now. The student loan may be the only debt in his life besides his mortgage, and at 0%, why pay it down now? I bought my first house at 23, how long is he expected to wait to buy a house? The only right answer to that is when it makes financial sense for him to do so. It has nothing to do with his age. Honestly, 150K of student loan debt is nothing, at a low interest rate, if one has a high salary and spends it wisely. If he was to accrue many other debts and live at a high lifestyle, that would be a different story.</p>
<p>LongPrime, Thanks for the explanation.</p>
<p>You’ll never make me think carrying a ton of debt is a good idea. Put interest rates aside, you aren’t talking that much money with these low rates, it takes away your choices. You can’t take that cool job that doesn’t pay as much, you can’t suffer unemployment as long, you have to make choices based on this payment for the rest of the life of the loan. There is no way someone straddled with that amount of student debt is as free as someone without it.</p>
<p>When I look at the links about replayment plans, they note extended times to pay off up to 10 or 25 years. I get that. What I’m still not getting is how 150000 dollars in loans are going to be paid off,even in 25 years, if you’re only paying $69 a month?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>The loans will be paid? When? Paying $69/month on a debt of $150,000, even at 0% interest, will take 181 years to pay off. If even very modest interest is charged (anything over about 0.6% annual rate), the loan will never get paid off.</p>
<p>A 0% loan will always be the lowest priority. And rightly so. But to me it allows the mindset that it isn’t important, and devalues the importance of the loans having been made to help the student get where he is in life. I do hope JA makes paying back this loan a responsibility and ethical committment he will honor, sooner rather than later, JMO.</p>
<p>One would hope that they finally fix the student loan system. Not giving out huge loads of cash to anyone who asks for it, but a reasonable amount for those who show they can pay it back. At the least, the govt loans should be charging a fair interest rate. Enough that the taxpayers aren’t carrying the load, but not so much that it’s impossible to pay off. Right now I’m getting a mortgage at 3%, and my niece is paying almost 7% for her student loans. Seems like a mismatch.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, this is why I questioned how it is possible that the interest rate could be set at 0% indefinitely. It almost ensures that the debt will never be paid off. There must be a term limit on the interest rate break.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think that is because the thread started with JA’s public testimony to Congress about how hardshipped he was by his loans, when in reality it looks like he essentially received a $78K education for next-to-free (if he never pays down his loans) and it has virtually not impacted his life at all (except for $69/month). It makes him look like an entitled ingrate.</p>
<p>Also, people are rightfully upset about the prospect of JA and LP’s DS never paying down their loans. Even if they are complying with their contractual obligations, if everyone who took out loans that large ($78K-100K !!) during that period never pays them back, you can be assured that they will not be available for others in the future.</p>
<p>Bay,
LP’s DS and LP’s PLUS are being paid. We even had a rate reduction at the end of 5th year ontime payments for the Stafford, and 3rd year on the PLUS. What you should be indignant about is what the banks get and got during the Contract years of 2001-2006 and who fought for and against the banks. </p>
<p>you ABSOLUTELY need to go to finaid.com and ed.gov websites and review the current interest rates, payment rates, and terms, which are much better now than between 2006-2008 and further improvements in 2008 and 2010. Improvements were to both the taxpayer and to the loanee. Banks got cutoff in 2006 and the last remaining ties in 2010, except to contracts between 1998-2006. </p>
<p>I do not know what JA is doing other than his Fed loan, educated guess based on the then law. I can not guess on his private loans.</p>
<p>Agree with Bay. I’m judgmental about the original Senate testimony. At this point, the guy’s college loans are less burdensome than my monthly expenditures at Starbucks.</p>
<p>Gas on the issue.
You should be paying me an incentive to accelerate the loans-Taxpayers would be money ahead.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Yeah, the tone comes across as “I played the system for all it was worth. And my life has turned out great. I got a great education and, except for this trivial monthly spare change that I toss them, I don’t have to pay the loan back. (You taxpayers probably do, but that’s of no concern to me.) Isn’t it all great?”</p>