• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are student loan interest rates to high?

Are student loan interest rates to high?

  • Total voters
    43
Helix said:
we shouldn't let them drop out of high school. that is a stupid decision, and it has no benefits for either the individual or for society.
Click to expand...

The easiest way to stop that nonsense is to make a HS (or a GED) diploma a prerequisite for ANY "safety net" assistance. We have tougher standards to adopt a pound puppy than we do get public assistance to raise children. Morons begetting morons is not something that is in the public interest yet gets more public funding than public education.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The easiest way to stop that nonsense is to make a HS (or a GED) diploma a prerequisite for ANY "safety net" assistance. We have tougher standards to adopt a pound puppy than we do get public assistance to raise children. Morons begetting morons is not something that is in the public interest yet gets more public funding than public education.
Click to expand...

While I agree everyone should get a diploma or a GED, not everyone who doesn't get one is a "moron". They may have made bad choices. They may have run away from home before finishing. They may have chosen an artistic path instead.

There are plenty of people who have finished high school - and even college - that I don't think should be raising children. But in our country, we haven't chosen to put any minimum standards in place to become a parent, and I doubt we ever will (which is probably for the best, given our past history in this area).

If you require a degree for public safety net, you're punishing the next generation as well, making it even less likely that THEY will do better in life.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The easiest way to stop that nonsense is to make a HS (or a GED) diploma a prerequisite for ANY "safety net" assistance. We have tougher standards to adopt a pound puppy than we do get public assistance to raise children. Morons begetting morons is not something that is in the public interest yet gets more public funding than public education.
Click to expand...

i don't know; that's a compromise point, but i'd rather just require everyone to complete high school. those who need extra help should get that help at special schools designed for that. we already require kids to go to school until they're at least 16 or 17.
 
paddymcdougall said:
While I agree everyone should get a diploma or a GED, not everyone who doesn't get one is a "moron". They may have made bad choices. They may have run away from home before finishing. They may have chosen an artistic path instead.

There are plenty of people who have finished high school - and even college - that I don't think should be raising children. But in our country, we haven't chosen to put any minimum standards in place to become a parent, and I doubt we ever will (which is probably for the best, given our past history in this area).

If you require a degree for public safety net, you're punishing the next generation as well, making it even less likely that THEY will do better in life.
Click to expand...

I am not advocating minimum standards to become a parent - I am advocating minimum standards to get public assistance. The mere ability to reproduce without means to support those offspring does not warrant a public reward.

As a first step toward college public funding reform I would advocate college tuition (and book) reimbursement at 90% for an A grade, 80% for a B grade and 70% for a C grade - with no reimbursement for any less achievement. Rewards for college attendance, regardless of outcome, make little sense and simply raise the cost of college for all by increasing demand of something in limited supply with no increase in the number of college graduates.
 
Helix said:
i don't know; that's a compromise point, but i'd rather just require everyone to complete high school. those who need extra help should get that help at special schools designed for that. we already require kids to go to school until they're at least 16 or 17.
Click to expand...

We also require folks to continue to age after that. ;)

Those that simply wish to act up and make it nearly impossible for others to learn in HS should not be permitted, must less required, to attend. The idea that society owes everyone a decent living is nonsense - we owe them only the opportunity to try do so but that does not eliminate their need for personal responsibility and effort to succeed.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
We also require folks to continue to age after that. ;)

Those that simply wish to act up and make it nearly impossible for others to learn in HS should not be permitted, must less required, to attend. The idea that society owes everyone a decent living is nonsense - we owe them only the opportunity to try do so but that does not eliminate their need for personal responsibility and effort to succeed.
Click to expand...

considering the personal and social costs of letting them quit, we should at least require completion of high school, vocational school, or alternative school.

my parents didn't give me the option of quitting. others aren't that lucky. quitting shouldn't be an option for them either. if that requires legislation and a restructuring of the way we approach secondary education, so be it.
 
Helix said:
considering the personal and social costs of letting them quit, we should at least require completion of high school, vocational school, or alternative school.

my parents didn't give me the option of quitting. others aren't that lucky. quitting shouldn't be an option for them either. if that requires legislation and a restructuring of the way we approach secondary education, so be it.
Click to expand...


So much for liberty, hmmmm?

I do agree everyone is better off with more education. But I also see that someone may have a perfectly valid reason for not finishing high school or getting a GED.
 
MildSteel said:
Banks are borrowing money at almost zero percent interest rates. However student loan customers are being gouged at interests rates ranging from 4.7 to 7.2 percent. Why is it that are elected representatives in the government are allowing the people to be robbed in this way?
Click to expand...

Gouged? Try putting that education on a credit card at 22% interest. :roll:
 
Helix said:
considering the personal and social costs of letting them quit, we should at least require completion of high school, vocational school, or alternative school.

my parents didn't give me the option of quitting. others aren't that lucky. quitting shouldn't be an option for them either. if that requires legislation and a restructuring of the way we approach secondary education, so be it.
Click to expand...

I am not so sure that we need more sticks when simply withholding carrots may well do the trick. That is why I favor no public assistance be given to households with non-disabled adults w/o HS educations. More households would then acquire your parent's common sense and good values.
 
paddymcdougall said:
So much for liberty, hmmmm?

I do agree everyone is better off with more education. But I also see that someone may have a perfectly valid reason for not finishing high school or getting a GED.
Click to expand...

i don't. letting them do that basically guarantees long term public assistance.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
I am not so sure that we need more sticks when simply withholding carrots may well do the trick. That is why I favor no public assistance be given to households with non-disabled adults w/o HS educations. More households would then acquire your parent's common sense and good values.
Click to expand...


here's the thing, though : we're a first world country, and we will never let people starve to death or go without healthcare. i'm fine with that. so let's fix the root of the problem.
 
Helix said:
here's the thing, though : we're a first world country, and we will never let people starve to death or go without healthcare. i'm fine with that. so let's fix the root of the problem.
Click to expand...

Why must all government solutions require more government force and more government expense to employ that force?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Why must all government solutions require more government force and more government expense to employ that force?
Click to expand...

Because government only has one tool to work with.
 
Helix said:
we shouldn't let them drop out of high school. that is a stupid decision, and it has no benefits for either the individual or for society.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant, at this point, though. Those people have a hard time finding a job not because they are unqualified for menial labor jobs (which are the most numerous these days), but because there are too few of them for the number of people that need them.


To put this another way, we had half the population in the 50s than we do now, and also half the automation in the 50s than we do now.

What does that spell?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
I am not so sure that we need more sticks when simply withholding carrots may well do the trick. That is why I favor no public assistance be given to households with non-disabled adults w/o HS educations. More households would then acquire your parent's common sense and good values.
Click to expand...

The only way that would work is to have FREE GED educational services post high school.


Someone who needs public assistance isn't exactly going to be able to fork over the cash and the time to get their GED.
 
This is getting way of track anyway, though. The majority of people on public assistance HAVE jobs. Welfare, food stamps? These are just corporate subsidies. Corporations are simply passing on a portion of their operating costs to John Q. Public.
 
KevinKohler said:
The only way that would work is to have FREE GED educational services post high school.


Someone who needs public assistance isn't exactly going to be able to fork over the cash and the time to get their GED.
Click to expand...

Why is that necessary? We don't offer free K-12 to adults now, we expect them to take advantage of that before they turn 21. Many folks, including my father, got their GED without any special "free" government programs. The idea that you are owed government assistance for your entire life because you wanted to live your life on a different schedule than most folks makes no sense. I would have liked to be "retired" (on public funds) until I was 65, then getting a free public education (including college) and working (for the government) the rest of my life but, somehow, most do not support offering me that choice. ;)
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Why is that necessary? We don't offer free K-12 to adults now, we expect them to take advantage of that before they turn 21. Many folks, including my father, got their GED without any special "free" government programs. The idea that you are owed government assistance for your entire life because you wanted to live your life on a different schedule than most folks makes no sense. I would have liked to be "retired" (on public funds) until I was 65, then getting a free public education (including college) and working (for the government) the rest of my life but, somehow, most do not support offering me that choice. ;)
Click to expand...

I don't think you're understanding me. Unless you, and we, as a society are willing to let people starve to death because they made a stupid decision when they were a teenager, and didn't have parents that were worth a hill of ****, then you HAVE to either keep giving them the food and assistance for free, no strings attached as we currently do, or give them the education they need to qualify for the free stuff as you would like.

Expecting someone who can't afford FOOD to be able to afford to spend a couple grand (and a decent amount of time) on getting a GED is unrealistic, unless, again, we are all OK with letting them starve to death due to poor decision making as a teenager.

Poor policy, won't ever fly.

And even so, having everyone have a GED won't change ****. You don't NEED a GED to flip burgers, run a cash register, stock shelves, or push carts.
 
KevinKohler said:
I don't think you're understanding me. Unless you, and we, as a society are willing to let people starve to death because they made a stupid decision when they were a teenager, and didn't have parents that were worth a hill of ****, then you HAVE to either keep giving them the food and assistance for free, no strings attached as we currently do, or give them the education they need to qualify for the free stuff as you would like.

Expecting someone who can't afford FOOD to be able to afford to spend a couple grand (and a decent amount of time) on getting a GED is unrealistic, unless, again, we are all OK with letting them starve to death due to poor decision making as a teenager.

Poor policy, won't ever fly.

And even so, having everyone have a GED won't change ****. You don't NEED a GED to flip burgers, run a cash register, stock shelves, or push carts.
Click to expand...

Plenty of people work those jobs (as well as the construction trades) without a GED and do not require public assistance - thus your alleged need for a "free" GED program first is BS. My point is that ANY job training is far harder if the trainee cannot read or do basic math and refuses to sit down, shut up and listen. To keep non-disabled, adult folks on the dole just because they cannot (or will not) get/keep a job is insane.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Plenty of people work those jobs (as well as the construction trades) without a GED and do not require public assistance - thus your alleged need for a "free" GED program first is BS. My point is that ANY job training is far harder if the trainee cannot read or do basic math and refuses to sit down, shut up and listen. To keep non-disabled, adult folks on the dole just because they cannot (or will not) get/keep a job is insane.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree, but again, are you willing, and do you think most everyone else, is willing to let those people starve as an alternative?

If the answer is no, then obviously your solution is not going to work without compromise.
 
KevinKohler said:
I don't disagree, but again, are you willing, and do you think most everyone else, is willing to let those people starve as an alternative?

If the answer is no, then obviously your solution is not going to work without compromise.
Click to expand...

Yes, I would let them find a way to live without a federal government handout. Perhaps they will all then move to states or cities that want to support them or maybe even start working.
 
MildSteel said:
Banks are borrowing money at almost zero percent interest rates. However student loan customers are being gouged at interests rates ranging from 4.7 to 7.2 percent. Why is it that are elected representatives in the government are allowing the people to be robbed in this way?
Click to expand...

How DARE you question the bankers' constitutional right to rip us off and keep us in debt for most of our adult lives??? What are you, some kind of socialist?????
 
KevinKohler said:
If by "entitlement" you mean, a reasonable expectation of a return on investment, then, yeah, sure, "entitlement" is high.
Click to expand...

No, I mean the number of kids taking loans and grants for an education that they are not prepared to work for, but go through the motions because the are trying to meet expectations of others, due to the easy access of money. I have witnessed a lot of kids who work hard and deserve a shot, yet there are nearly as many that squander their loans and grants and end up with a government paid for computer system that is used only for gaming.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
That is because a HS diploma (or GED) does not mean that an applicant is trainable or or even possesses a basic grasp of math or English. Our own government does this as well - college education (usually in ANY field) is required to be a commissioned military officer or to advance to the upper GS civilian ranks. Nobody wants to do thousands of interviews or to face dopey EEO lawsuits - so the herd of applicants is first thinned by using college as an essential requirement.
Click to expand...

Sad commentary on the value of public high school education, and we want more public involvement in universities? Truthfully, there was a fairly long period of time between my HS graduation and my college. By the time I began with my required core math classes, it seemed as though I was sitting in eighth grade all over again. Standards have slipped drastically. There should be no reason that the HS education shouldn't qualify young people for entry level positions in business.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom