Zero Interest College Loans - Page 3

Hundebolg · 01-28-08, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RightinNYC

If you knew much about higher education in the US, you'd know how hilarious that statement is.

I really do miss the point. Aren't there many schools in the US which teach the supremacy of religion over science ?

RightinNYC · 01-28-08, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hundebolg

I really do miss the point. Aren't there many schools in the US which teach the supremacy of religion over science ?

Of the 4,100 institutions of higher learning in the US, there's probably 3 or 4 at most that teach that religion is supreme over science.

Hundebolg · 01-28-08, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RightinNYC

Of the 4,100 institutions of higher learning in the US, there's probably 3 or 4 at most that teach that religion is supreme over science.

I presume 'higher learning' doesnt comprise high schools. Do you also have figures about the frightening tendency of religious zealotry in primary and secondary education ?

RightinNYC · 01-28-08, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hundebolg

I presume 'higher learning' doesnt comprise high schools.

No, given that this entire thread is about college.

Quote:

Do you also have figures about the frightening tendency of religious zealotry in primary and secondary education ?

Link? You obviously have only the most rudimentary knowledge of how the US educational system works, so I'd encourage you to do a little more research before assuming such absurd things.

Hundebolg · 01-28-08, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RightinNYC

Link? You obviously have only the most rudimentary knowledge of how the US educational system works, so I'd encourage you to do a little more research before assuming such absurd things.

Hell, there is even a presidential candidate in the US who is denying evolution, for example. Is it so far fetched to think that conservative schools would teach children about the 'seven days of creation' rather than biology ?

RightinNYC · 01-28-08, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hundebolg

Hell, there is even a presidential candidate in the US who is denying evolution, for example. Is it so far fetched to think that conservative schools would teach children about the 'seven days of creation' rather than biology ?

Yes.

You would know this if you had even the slightest understanding of how this works in the US, and the absence of even a flicker of curiosity indicates that you're not looking to be educated either.

Go ahead, say whatever it is that you need to get out of your system, and then move along so the rest of us can discuss the actual topic.

Monk-Eye · 01-28-08, 11:28 PM

"Prorate"

Quote:

Originally Posted by RightinNYC

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monk-Eye

Eventhough, my hope is to address a more germane issue, which is an on average +32% interest burden.

How exactly do you get this number?

8% for four years from final loan, possibly consolidated to 2% thereafter.

Hundebolg · 01-29-08, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RightinNYC

Yes.

You would know this if you had even the slightest understanding of how this works in the US, and the absence of even a flicker of curiosity indicates that you're not looking to be educated either.

Go ahead, say whatever it is that you need to get out of your system, and then move along so the rest of us can discuss the actual topic.

You yourself put up the subject of private education in the united states, which, of course, is related to the education economics. In my opinion, while acclaiming the achievements of some lighthouse institutions like Princeton or Harvard in the US, the frightening degree of obscurantism radiated from other types of schools should be noted as well.

Ikari · 01-29-08, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monk-Eye

"Modern Money Myths"
The idea ist that no interest would be paid on the loans, neither by the government nor the student.

A pool of taxes as a zero interest education fund would need to be accumulated.

Assuming that the education pool is not borrowed against by some dimented political entity, the volume of money, being reimbursed over time, could remain transparent, as a public keepsafe.

The reserve fund, being repaid in time, does not represent a financial loss or gain, except by those suits demanding that everyone bleed to their upper hand.

Those parents capable of funding college for their children out of pocket would find zero interest represents a major deferment of debt.

A second means of accumulating the pool of money, perhaps more controversial (a special exception), is to grab the federal reserve by the neck and direct it to print an interest free fund of fiat money earmarked for education loans.

My supposings are that the federal reserve was set up to keep the government from printing its own currency, charging interest, and thereby preventing it from forming a bureaucratic collective, more powerful than the private sector.

The federal reserve interest also holds the government fiscally responsible, as a corporation, for expenditures beyond its ability to collect taxes from its citizens.

Hopefully the spiteful laughter about the national debt did not harm anyone.

IMO an ineptitude to form such a fund follows an assumption that the public does not collectively posess a single thing to keep itself afloat, and could not help itself even if it tried.

Either higher education is an important investment that should be made affordable by as many as possible, or it isn't.

what bank would possibly make that loan then? Sorry, but loans are part of what is counted as asset to banks and they can only have a certain percentage based on how much they have in vaults and how much they have coming in. So in the end you're going to ask a bank to make a choice between a no-interest student loan and some other interest bearing loan. Which one do you think they'd take? By setting the student loan interest rate to zero, you will have effectively and dramatically cut the amount of money available to students by making the loans undesirable to banks.

Goldenboy219 · 01-29-08, 09:31 PM

While i believe that it would be really nice for students who need to borrow to pay for school to have 0 interest, it shouldnt just be expected or given. Let me explain.

Say you are going to an open admission university, are a B student at best, have a mini spot on your criminal record, and were involved in 0 extra cirricular activity, why on earth would you believe your entitled or even the slightest deserving of interest free loans? Especially if there are other students who come from much simpler beginnings, and really sacrifice to go to school.

Because lets be serious here for a second. How many private student loans go to pay for "living expenses"?

I know so many people who take the max, even though they are C students and are going for a major where the job outlook is highly competitive. These are the people who are going to be paying off their loans for 20 years +.

There is to much of a possibility of moral hazard, and therefore an idea such as this should be used as an incentive/reward for students who are going to very expensive schools, have good grades, are involved in things more so then themselves, and are going into high paying fields. That way, the probability of the loan being out for the entire duration of the note is low. Is it a good idea? Yes, but not something that should be solely based on need, race, or disability. Merit should have more then a little something to do with it. Its something that is a little more complicated then "paying for college"...