• 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!

Feds: New student loan repayment options set

Hatuey

Hatuey

Rule of Two
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
59,334
Reaction score
27,000
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Feds: New student loan repayment options set - Yahoo! Finance

The "Pay as You Earn" program will allow eligible student-loan borrowers to cap monthly payments to 10 percent of discretionary income, and have their loans forgiven after 20 years. An earlier version of the program capped payments at 15 percent and offered forgiveness after 25 years. Congress had scheduled the new program to phase in in 2014, but the Obama administration took regulatory measures to make those options available sooner. It's estimated 1.6 million borrowers could take advantage of the program.


To qualify, borrowers must have started taking out federal loans after October 1, 2007, and received at least one disbursement after October of last year. They also must qualify for partial financial hardship based on the portion of their income standard repayments would cost. The program applies only to certain direct federal loans, and not to private loans from banks and other non-federal lenders.


The program will set maximum monthly payments based on income and family size, which can adjust each year. Typically those monthly payments could be lower, though there are also possible downsides: By choosing a so-called Income-Based Repayment borrowers could end up paying more over the life of a loan, and they will have to submit documentation each year. Some critics have also argued the program could encourage students to borrow more than they should.
Click to expand...

I never went to university. My job could be pretty much be classified as a 'skilled trade'. I'm not worried about being replaced by somebody else. That said, I find this to be a good idea regardless of whether you're a Republican or Democrat. People work their asses off trying to repay off school loans from careers which simply don't pay what was invested in them while at the same time struggling to pay off house bills etc. Essentially, I think universities are OVERPRICED for the jobs which people acquire once out of them. As one musician put it:

You pay 150K just to earn 50K a year.
 
Last edited:
Hatuey said:
Feds: New student loan repayment options set - Yahoo! Finance



I never went to university. My job could be pretty much be classified as a 'skilled trade'. I'm not worried about being replaced by somebody else. That said, I find this to be a good idea regardless of whether you're a Republican or Democrat. People work their asses off trying to repay off school loans from careers which simply don't pay what was invested in them while at the same time struggling to pay off house bills etc. Essentially, I think universities are OVERPRICED for the jobs which people acquire once out of them. As one musician put it:

You pay 150K just earn 50K a year.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a good option for me.
 
Ah hell, I don't think I qualify. My disbursements of federal aid didn't come from last October....at least I don't remember so.
 
anything we can do to increase our nation's cognitive resources should be done. it's the best investment a nation can make.
 
Hatuey said:
You pay 150K just earn 50K a year.
Click to expand...
Maybe they could restructure such that if the graduate isn't able to repay the price of tuition after 20 years of employment, the school provides a refund to the government.
 
Helix said:
anything we can do to increase our nation's cognitive resources should be done. it's the best investment a nation can make.
Click to expand...
If the goal is to "increase our nation's cognitive resources" it seems that there's 100 better ways of going about it than voiding debt of low-income graduates.
 
Hatuey said:
Feds: New student loan repayment options set - Yahoo! Finance



I never went to university. My job could be pretty much be classified as a 'skilled trade'. I'm not worried about being replaced by somebody else. That said, I find this to be a good idea regardless of whether you're a Republican or Democrat. People work their asses off trying to repay off school loans from careers which simply don't pay what was invested in them while at the same time struggling to pay off house bills etc. Essentially, I think universities are OVERPRICED for the jobs which people acquire once out of them. As one musician put it:

You pay 150K just to earn 50K a year.
Click to expand...

I like it in theory, but suspect it could get very very expensive over time as lenders forgive lots and lots of outstanding debt.
 
I got Obama money!

OBAMA money!
 
Hatuey said:
People work their asses off trying to repay off school loans from careers which simply don't pay what was invested in them while at the same time struggling to pay off house bills etc.
Click to expand...

This tells me there is an imbalance in the market. Too many people getting too many degrees in things that don't have a great enough need. If there was a greater need for those degree holders, the market would bear a higher salary for them. In theory, anyway.

Essentially, I think universities are OVERPRICED for the jobs which people acquire once out of them.
Click to expand...

The ability to leverage the entirety of one's future is how universities get away with such exorbitant fees. Coupled with government subsidizing pretty much ANYONE who wants to go to college, and the idea that literally "everyone should have a degree", we have ended up with a fairly stupid system of higher education. The simple fact of the matter is that not every job requires "skilled" laborers (skilled implying training one can only receive through college). In turn, we dumbed down our regular public education system just so as not to blackball anyone who wants to try at a degree, regardless if they have the intelligence or wherewithall to actually earn one.

Want to make college cheaper? Get the government out of the game and let the market take over. Make the system competitive. If schools had to compete for students (and their money), the fees could not be so ridiculous.
 
Taylor said:
If the goal is to "increase our nation's cognitive resources" it seems that there's 100 better ways of going about it than voiding debt of low-income graduates.
Click to expand...

i agree. we should educate everyone who wants a college education, and those who can't afford it could go to public universities for a minimal tuition.
 
Gonzo Rodeo said:
Want to make college cheaper? Get the government out of the game and let the market take over. Make the system competitive. If schools had to compete for students (and their money), the fees could not be so ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Except of course, students would still have to compete for schools. That's what allows them to get away with higher fees. Not the government. Harvard doesn't have to compete with USC because they know that name recognition alone will make people want to enroll there and that by itself will justify increases in tuition fees.
 
Last edited:
Hatuey said:
Feds: New student loan repayment options set - Yahoo! Finance



I never went to university. My job could be pretty much be classified as a 'skilled trade'. I'm not worried about being replaced by somebody else. That said, I find this to be a good idea regardless of whether you're a Republican or Democrat. People work their asses off trying to repay off school loans from careers which simply don't pay what was invested in them while at the same time struggling to pay off house bills etc. Essentially, I think universities are OVERPRICED for the jobs which people acquire once out of them. As one musician put it:

You pay 150K just to earn 50K a year.
Click to expand...

this is so confusing. I was talking about this program when i first got here and alot of people said that this had been in existence forever. I never had it and my neice didnt (1995 grad). I knew I was right. Clinton mentioned this in his DNC speech. This will help my daughter alot.

Its not partisan its for the kids/
 
Taylor said:
Maybe they could restructure such that if the graduate isn't able to repay the price of tuition after 20 years of employment, the school provides a refund to the government.
Click to expand...

Thats interesting.
 
Hatuey said:
Except of course, students would still have to compete for schools. That's what allows them to get away with higher fees. Not the government. Harvard doesn't have to compete with USC because they know that name recognition alone will make people want to enroll there and that by itself will justify increases in tuition hikes.
Click to expand...

And there is nothing spelled out anywhere (except maybe a children's book) that says every single person on the planet has the right to attend Harvard. I've known poor people who went to Harvard on their merit alone, full ride scholarship, which was essentially funded by rich kids and their parents endowments who agree to pay ridiculous fees and give ridiculous grants so their average kid can get in.
 
Taylor said:
If the goal is to "increase our nation's cognitive resources" it seems that there's 100 better ways of going about it than voiding debt of low-income graduates.
Click to expand...

The point is to allow low income people to attend college not just the middle or upper class. And if you read the law you would know there are still penalties for defaulting for the student.

Sour grapes.
 
Gonzo Rodeo said:
And there is nothing spelled out anywhere (except maybe a children's book) that says every single person on the planet has the right to attend Harvard.
Click to expand...

Harvard is just an example. The overwhelming majority of universities in this country are simply out of financial reach.

I've known poor people who went to Harvard on their merit alone, full ride scholarship, which was essentially funded by rich kids and their parents endowments who agree to pay ridiculous fees and give ridiculous grants so their average kid can get in.
Click to expand...

Let me guess: Atlas Shrugged? :roll: The case is that there are literally thousands of people who even with great academic scores don't get scholarships. What are they to do?
 
Last edited:
Hatuey said:
Harvard is just an example. The overwhelming majority of universities in this country are simply out of financial reach.
Click to expand...

You were the one who made the assertion that Harvard can command a higher price based on name-brand recognition alone. So let's set them aside for the moment.

How is it even possible that every university in the system is able to charge such a ridiculous amount for tuition? It's fairly simple. When the government stepped in with money, the schools didn't lower tuition - they raised it, so as to justify the money the government was giving them. Further, it is now possible to leverage your entire future to attend school, and not only that, there are now programs that go on the student's credit and their parents' credit. Up to three people can now be leveraged for one person's education.

If there is money available, through whatever means, and coupled with the insane idea that college is not only possible for everyone but necessary, the schools have absolutely nothing to keep their tuition in check. They can charge whatever they want because the service is seen as necessary for all people, and there is a bottomless bucket of money from which to pay for it.

If student loans became either nonexistent or short term loans (paid back by the end of the semester), tuition would have to fall because nobody would be able to afford it. It would come down to affordable levels as a necessary consequence. And we would see roughly the same percentage of people with college degrees as we always have, right around 25% of those who start.

Let me guess: Atlas Shrugged? :roll: The case is that there are literally thousands of people who even with great academic scores don't get scholarships. What are they to do?
Click to expand...

They go to a different school. If there are literally thousands of people who have awesome academic marks, impressive extracurricular activities, and tons of volunteer hours on their applications, they will find another school that will take them full-ride. Ivy league schools are for those with the most potential (and, sadly, for those with the most money... but that money is used to subsidize those with the potential, so a necessary evil it is). There is no reason why someone who was passed over for a Harvard full-ride by the barest margin wouldn't be picked up at UofM. And that is also a good school. It is a false dichotomy to infer that if someone doesn't get into Harvard that the entire system is unfair by default.

I have enjoyed this debate so far and I wish to continue it. But before we do, I think we should go about setting our definitions so we can be on the same page of argumentation. I have one quick question:

What does "competition" mean to you?
 
Hatuey said:
Feds: New student loan repayment options set - Yahoo! Finance



I never went to university. My job could be pretty much be classified as a 'skilled trade'. I'm not worried about being replaced by somebody else. That said, I find this to be a good idea regardless of whether you're a Republican or Democrat. People work their asses off trying to repay off school loans from careers which simply don't pay what was invested in them while at the same time struggling to pay off house bills etc. Essentially, I think universities are OVERPRICED for the jobs which people acquire once out of them. As one musician put it:

You pay 150K just to earn 50K a year.
Click to expand...

Oh and where would you be without the labor union?? oh yea replaced by someone who will do a better job than you do for less...

Union members are hardly skilled...
 
Mr.Nick said:
Oh and where would you be without the labor union?? oh yea replaced by someone who will do a better job than you do for less...

Union members are hardly skilled...
Click to expand...

Unions can't replace talent. You can't train to do what I do. You're either born with it or you're not.
 
Hatuey said:
Unions can't replace talent. You can't train to do what I do. You're either born with it or you're not.
Click to expand...

Non-union workers are far more talented and work way harder just because they have more to lose. Union workers are protected by the unions so they can make crap and do a crappy job and they have absolutely nothing to worry about...

I can do anything you can do, I probably can do more -- way more.
 
Mr.Nick said:
Non-union workers are far more talented and work way harder just because they have more to lose.
Click to expand...

What utter nonsense. I suppose you have some way to verify that? Maybe putting a union worker beside a non-union worker?
 
Hatuey said:
What utter nonsense. I suppose you have some way to verify that? Maybe putting a union worker beside a non-union worker?
Click to expand...

Gather evidence instead of assuming? HAH! Liberal nonsense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom