You’re right cobrat… people who went to college in the 70s and early 80s had it easy compared to today’s students.
And I agree that asking young college grads to spend a “few years” working “for the government” at “modest intern” salaries to pay off their debt is, frankly, a bizarre idea.
I could really see (NOT!) Republicans growing the government enough to hire more than a MILLION people – a year!
It’s not about parents who can or not, it’s about kids who are punished because their parents won’t even if they can. We have many kids in family and friends who got into good colleges but couldn’t get financial help because of their parent’s income and those colleges don’t give merit money.
Those kids were devastated and one was so disheartened that instead of going to the low ranking state school parents wanted him to go to instead of Williams, he enrolled in community college as protest. Another one tried to commit suicide as he always wanted to go to Cornell, got in and then found out that his parents won’t pay, he can’t get loans and their is no financial aid for their income group. Many affluent parents use this string to control their children, keep them in town or pick majors they don’t like.
@ClaremontMom Sure. If student can pay it back then why not. If they can’t or don’t want to at that point, they should have a grace period to pay it back or to go to work for government later.
So perhaps I misunderstood your original proposition. You are not saying that all students MUST be part of this program that does “modest paying internships”, but rather you would like to see this as an option for those who cannot otherwise pay for college. Is that correct?
If that’s what you are saying then I can see our point. Your original OP made it sound like you don’t like colleges or parents paying for their kids and you wanted all kids to be required to do some internship to pay back for their education.
Equal educational opportunities, free education from pre-K to college and merit based admissions are ideal scenarios for all kids, poor, Middle or rich. All children should be treated equally by governmental programs regardless of who their parents are.
In current system, how is it fair that some parents can’t pay now and their children want education but don’t want to pay now or later. Others either have to make their parents pay and live poorly or say goodbye to their dream colleges. They can’t take loans without their parents as co-signers. Why can’t we at least give them opportunity to pick colleges they want and pay it later by work or by money? Why do they have to pay fine for success of their parents, without enjoying the fruit. Some who get some aid but still have to take loans that they have to pay back, they shouldn’t have to either if others aren’t paying.
And those who attended college from the 40’s till the late '60s had it even easier thanks to free/exceedingly nominal cost tuition for one’s in-state/local colleges and how one could feasibly work their way through private colleges through part-time jobs typically available to HS graduates/college undergrads.
It’s amazing how people can get tax breaks for thousands and thousands of dollars from government programs but then flip out when poor kids get a small Pell grant or people get $200/month in food stamps.
Good grief.
@ClaremontMom You got it right. I’m suggesting all kids should have same opportunities. I don’t care if they pay back from their inheritance or income or by serving for government. As long as every kid has options and pays forward so next batch can enjoy same oppurtunities, I’ll be a happy camper.
Very much so…given the combination of “make them do it” and “even group X will be made to do it,” and the derogatory reference to merit money as “handouts” that people should be proud if they do without. That’s why I responded the way I did. I still don’t see the connection between that first post and the new description of OP’s plan. You’re upset that there are students whose parents aren’t paying their way and who don’t get merit? Then why is merit a “handout” that they should be proud to not owe?
Not for the public service forgiveness programs. The amount forgiven because of hardship (disability, inability to pay, IBR with forgiveness) is taxed because it is plain old debt forgiveness, but the programs where you work it off have an exemption. No tax.
If 18 year olds are adults, parents can’t see their college grades or health records then it’s only fair if they take care of college expenses themselves. For that government has to give them ways to pay it back, not discriminate on basis of wether their parents can pay or not.
@twoinanddone I never said anything against merit money, only free financial aid discriminating based on parent’s info against student. I’m not asking to take it away from poor kids, I’m asking to make it available to all kids as none of the 18 year olds can afford it, they are all poor - and ask them all to return it as dollars or as work hours.
Okay…that is so different from what your OP sounded like. Originally it sounded more like “let’s stop giving handouts and make those kids work for their education”. Now it sounds more like, “let’s create a program where kids will know they will have a job that will allow them to pay off any debt so they can get an education”. I would imagine then that you would not be against the merit and FA already available (which again, it sounded like you were before), but rather in addition to that another opportunity to help the students pay off debt after college.
I don’t know how practical that is, and as some have mentioned there are some options like that (military for one). But at least I have a better understanding of what you are proposing. And frankly it sounds much more generous than your original statement.
That’s fine. It’s better to argue than assume. I’m sorry for not making it clear and assuming that others are following my thought process.
I don’t want to see a system where 18 year olds commit to hundreds of thousands in loans that they will pay back. They won’t. The current Stafford loan limit is just fine, IMO. No, it won’t let students go to any school they want, but that amount will let them go to some state schools, especially the community colleges or directional colleges. High performing kids can combine it with merit. Some can go part time and work full time.
The government HAS TO? It is not the government discriminating. The government lets all freshmen borrow the same $5500. It is the schools setting the tuition. It is the schools giving need based financial aid to those they deem worthy.
Even in the socialist countries with free tuition (maybe with the obligation to pay it forward), not everyone gets to go to college.
@twoinanddone Money that colleges give out comes from federal aid, income tax exemption, and endowment donations help out donors with their taxes. In the end all comes out of our collective pot of money. If students are taking from it then they should put it back.
In my opinion, they will put it back by paying taxes on their own increased income.
@HRSMom So will full pay students then why make their parents pay if out of pocket?
BC there is only a limited amount of aid. You either limit who gets aid or who gets to go to college. But you can give aid to everyone. It’s a societal choice. Each school decides where to draw the line.
I agree that it is unfair for 2 Harvard graduates to start their lives, one with 250 in debt and one who got full aid with nominal debt. But it is what it is. We don’t have better options. And there aren’t enough jobs to do the “forgiveness route”. One just hopes the kid that got the full aid at Harvard will repay it via their endowment.
I don’t understand the one I bolded.
You mean the tax deduction individuals get from donations to any non-profit?
Or the exemption from interest or investment income any non-profit (charities, churches, clubs) gets from their endowments?