Yes…and my kid recognized the benefit of paying as much as possible anyway. It’s a nice bonus to be able to have all the payment go towards interest.
And for the record…our first kid loans were fully paid back…including interest.
And I appreciate it. And hopefully all of society does.
Your kids / family signed an agreement and fulfilled it….a great example for us all.
2 Likes
Most who take loans pay them back. It’s always been that way.
That doesn’t mean it’s wrong to adjust a system to make it better. Somewhere along the line those under the “old” system will feel left out (like my oldest who has paid his loans), but keeping a “lesser” system around simply because some will feel it’s unfair doesn’t make sense. TN started their system recently. I imagine those who paid for cc the year before felt it wasn’t fair.
Doing what’s best for the country is what makes sense. Helping students have less, or no, loans is in the country’s best interest.
This doesn’t mean I think everyone should have a free education to 200K per year private school (since prices would go up if it were free for all). I feel certain a system could work well through public colleges which would keep private costs lower to compete. Some can use cc. Some will need 4 year. Some will need med school. Regardless, help those who don’t have the financial means to reach their niche to get there and the country prospers from its investment.
If forgiving 10K now is a start on that, I’m still all for it. Then I think it needs to be continued, esp for those with financial need - though for fairness I could also see same “future” rules/money for all.
I’m in favor of helping with costs for trade schools too. A hairdresser doesn’t need to start with debt either.
The problem is that it doesn’t hold true for most graduate programs. The government limits the amount an undergrad student can borrow to roughly $27,000 yet freely disperses hundreds of thousands for masters degrees that “qualify” students for jobs making $35-$40,000. That’s not growing taxpayers. (Medical school and T10 law schools are somewhat outliers because of the financial upside a degree can confer.)
If you’re talking about parent plus loans that’s even worse because once again the feds are often lending hundreds of thousands of dollars to people who would never qualify for a secured loan much less an unsecured one but they can’t say no to their kids and the kids latch on to the idea that that one super expensive college is their “golden ticket”.
And those kids now want their loans forgiven. Sorry that’s not how borrowing money works.
Right now there are 10 million unfilled jobs. So how is the pandemic negatively affecting those borrowers and preventing them from finding jobs and making their monthly payments?
I’m not for free college because that’s the reason we are in this situation to begin with. It’s easy to spend other people’s money. It’s a PITA to have to repay it with your own.
2 Likes
So fix what is wrong rather than tossing it all.
We both agree that money should be for the students only, not parents.
The jobs available out there are the lower wage service industry jobs generally paying $20 or less per hour. I’ve yet to see any mass of openings among higher paid jobs. Instead, those are still very competitive with those I know hiring saying they are getting 10-160 applicants per job. I’m in an area where one can super easily get a job for $20 or less per hour. At $20/hour that’s 40K per year so is possibly sustainable since it’s not a HCOL area. I don’t know that it’s sustainable while still repaying loans, and, of course, most of the jobs are < $20/hour.
Which leads to another thing I’m in favor of being free - job retraining for folks who have degrees (or not) in fields that don’t have jobs. If someone is capable of and wants to go into nursing would be a prime example at this time.
Anything that takes someone from subsidies to tax paying is good IMO.
2 Likes
Many entry level corporate jobs pay around $20-25 an hour. How much an hour do you think recent college grads make? You have to start somewhere. $40,000 for one person is more than enough to live on. If you’re only expected to repay your loan if you make over $75,000 a year then the system rules absolutely need a makeover because that’s not rational or realistic.
Not to mention you have people making $175,000 a year complaining about student debt. So what salary is enough to expect people to repay their loans?
2 Likes
I do not understand why discussion of bankruptcy laws is considered off-topic by some in this thread that I started about student-debt loans. If student loans were dischargeable in bankruptcy, this thread would not exist. (Several bankruptcy court judges–these are federal judges–agree & have raised the same point.)
https://americanbar.org/groups/business_law/safeborrowing/student/bankruptcy/
Bankruptcy law proposed legislation that would affect student loans:
The Fresh Start Through Bankruptcy Act of 2021
H.R. 4907 Private Student Loan Bankruptcy Fairness Act of 2019
S.146 Medical Bankruptcy Fairness Act of 2021 (relates to dischargeability of student loans for those with hardship caused by medical bills)
1 Like
It’s not when it’s related to student debt. It is when, as was the case here, it was related to NYC in the stone age and to Puerto Rico.
And just because one can see a hidden post does not mean that one needs to respond, particularly if it gets us further OT.
1 Like
With all due respect I always spoke about student debt and why I don’t believe in it. I analogized Puerto Rico to it
That said my point was clear but then I was asked about bk and my belief.
That said my opinion was clear. And others may or may not think differently.
I’ll move on …
Which was the initial problem post, as that poster asked a too broad question that led to PR and NYC. Which gets back to there being no obligation to answer every question asked, particularly if the question and answer will only serve to spur debate. But as you said, moving on.
2 Likes
Even better if debt isn’t there, which is what I’m saying.
Why should one grad with wealthy or smarter parents be in a better position for life than one born into a lesser situation? Don’t we want all people to be able to be successful if they are capable?
I know that’s what I want. I see a lot of capable students hampered by money. It’s pure birth lottery. It’s anything but fair. Our country is losing out.
We don’t need to change salaries. We need to change (eliminate) debt while still keeping people as educated as needed to fill their best niche in life whether that’s as a hairdresser, art historian, doctor, radiation tech, social worker, businessman, or fill in the blank. Let all of those who have finished their education start with no debt (from the education).
3 Likes
I don’t disagree but we make choices.
Why does one “have to” go to college A and take on debt when college B will give them the same degree for 30% of the cost, etc.
We may both want steak. Maybe I eat at Flemings but you can only go to Outback. If so, why would you go to Flemings ? But many do.
We all have choices. Many choose the one they can’t afford. Why should the rest of us be penalized.
Many kids find cheaper options….and graduate with less or little financial strain.
Why go to Duke or Emory or wherever if your local state, directional or city college can get you that same accounting or sociology degree?
We see this every day - right here on this website. It happens far more in real life. Yes, some schools give you access to better opprtunities. But anyone with hard work, persistence and a little luck can find success.
6 Likes
I think you’re missing that many people can’t afford the 30% less college either.
Out of curiosity, have you ever worked at an average public school and seen what students there choose? It’s rarely excess debt at my school. Very rarely. The debt they go into is to be able to go to college at all - even to the PASSHE schools.
Absolutely no one is penalized when a student has the opportunity to reach their best potential as a taxpaying worker rather than someone who could have gone “higher” but has to settle for a low paying job (often with subsidies) due to finances. No one is penalized when every student can do that without debt too (which is likely to be at a public college if free college or trade schools were available to all who are academically qualified and want to).
So many want to believe. Actually, it can happen with luck. It happens to wealthy kids all the time due to their luck in the birth lottery. It can happen to students who are able to get top of the class grades/scores. But the average student whose parents get average (or less) incomes? Not so much. They take on debt to try to get there, for sure, but why should they have to due to bad luck in the birth lottery? How is it fair for them to have to start three lengths behind in the “success” race?
5 Likes
I agree that’s the preferred scenario but in the current instance that ship has sailed. My position is if you’ve borrowed the money you need to repay it. Maybe the loan is reamortized over a longer time period? Maybe there’s debt forgiveness in exchange for public service or working in underserved areas? Generic debt forgiveness because we feel sorry that you borrowed $100,000 for a masters in _____________ and now you’re making $35,000 a year is not ok. Credentialism is definitely part of the problem. But when that student decides a masters in film, for example, if necessary for their career do they know that to be the case or they’re hoping it is. Same with kids who attend law school. Law school is a triple figure investment….easily $300,000. Do students know what the average non “Big law” lawyer makes? What a prosecutor or public defender makes? Do they bother to find out?
How many posters come on here talking about how their parents will make it work for the “right” school? Then they take the loans, the kid graduates and suddenly there’s buyer’s remorse because the bill is now due. As I said it’s easy to spend other people’s money but tougher when you have to pay it back with your own.
I think is great to try and “fix” the system but those in the current system should not get a pass when plenty of people have taken loans and repaid them.
3 Likes
I understand. Ok. Maybe I don’t. I was raised midddle class and am now probably upper middle class or wealthy.
I get it in this sense. There are community colleges. There are directionals. Anyone could apply to a Western Carolina or Dakota State or Alabama Huntsville. Yes they still cost real $$.and maybe are far from home.
So why do people choose high priced alternatives?
As I said earlier, I’m not against income based repayment plans. I’m not against pre established debt cancellation programs.
I am against a person going to college, getting a degree, and not paying it off yet they still go for their daily Starbucks.
So many kids have to go full pay to Harvard when they can go for 25k a year to Alabama. Or they must go pre med to Case Western but could have gone to Wooster for less. My kids aren’t the norm but one has tuition at $3k at Alabama and the other -$1100 at Charleston.Yes. Minus. BOTH oos.
If my kid went TO W&L at $81k a year and majored in a liberal art, why should the public suffer if she can’t get a job to pay debt. Ok, she’s have no debt. But still another kid could make that choice and might have chosen W&L over Charleston or a PA resident who chooses CMU over Pitt. My other could have gone to WUSTL vs Bama. Most would have even if they couldn’t afford it. Why ??
For the record, my comment is about the government continuing the moratorium. It’s not toward any student who is simply taking advantage of the governments good grace.
It’s a public example but it annoys that Pete buttigeg’s husband claims poverty and how terrible having the loans start again would be yet they made $800k each of the last two years.
Again I’m all for debt cancellation in pre established…someone teaches in a low income school or Dr in a low income area.
In your belief no one should have debt. I’m ok with that too. But our system isn’t set up like that.
So if you sign a contract, you should honor it.
We disagree and I get it. But I think we killed this one 
5 Likes
I believe, in general, that we’re talking about a potential for 10K in debt forgiveness.
Going forward, I’d like to see the system reworked so students can go debt free somewhere that works for their intended job. I can easily see restricting that to public colleges. There are probably other ways to make it a “better” system too.
What works is turning intelligent/capable students otherwise restricted to lower income (subsidized) jobs into taxpayers and doing it so the student can begin their life debt free. It’s not like we’re giving everyone a Ferrari. We’re trying to give a more equal start into adult life for those not lucky enough to be born into a wealthy family or at the super top of their class to get one of those free education slots at a Top U.
2 Likes