• 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!

Warren’s proposal: Offer college students the same interest rates as banks

Give me a statistic for this? Student loans is unforgivable debt. Also, the rates are high because the government set them that way. I think you should know by now that the government doesn't typically do things at a market rate.

The market rates aren't high for student loans. They are as LOW as they are because the government is subsidizing them.

Just because student loans are unforgiveable does not make them risk free. The default rate overall is about 11-15% (depending on which study you use), but if you isolate the sample size to only individuals who are eligible to default, it is more like 35% default rate. If a student can't pay a loan back, even if the loan is nondischargeable, there is nothing the creditor can really do. In this case, because it is the federal government, that default will fall on the taxpayer.

Additionally, there is still interest rate and liquidity risk. If I give you a 5-year loan at 6% interest, and it takes you 10 years to pay me back, I have lost out even though the principal and interest were originally repaid. The extra 5 years was cash that I didn't have available to pursue other avenues of profit, and I held extra risk on my balance sheet if interest rates were to all of a sudden shoot up, which increases the opportunity cost of me giving you the loan. This is the fundamental reason why 10-year treasures are not the risk free rate--even though the government can't default, you still stand to lose if interest rates were to go up because now your money is tied to a low-yielding product that you can only sell at a discount.

Without government subsidies, private sector loans for students, even if non-dischargeable, would most likely be higher for these reasons, ESPECIALLY since even though loans are nondischargeable, they might take decades to repay back. You also will take on policy risk now because everyone sees the student loan bubble and "student loan debt forgiveness" is not as crazy as it once sounded.
 
Read more and video @: [/FONT][/COLOR]Warren’s proposal: Offer college students the same interest rates as banks | The Raw Story


[FONT=georgia, palatino linotype, palatino, times new roman, times, serif]Will any other congress man or woman please follow Senator Warren with common sense, morality, and here understanding of fairness? I hope so but i doubt anyone else comes forward.
[/FONT]I love this woman!

well, if one wants to get banks to stop handing out student loans, making it a money losing venture is surely a step in that direction.
 
i am arguing the point, when anyone talks of rights of the group or collectivist way, they are wrong.....rights are individual rights, and the founders say this over and over.



again.....my rights are not part of your thoughts, desires and what you want to do,





not correct, what she was saying is, no one got rich on their own"you created a company, you made money, good for you, but you used the roads, police, fire and other services the rest of us paid for paid for, as if the company is some how getting free road service, police, fire on the backs of the people,that's incorrect.

companies pay taxes like citizens for construction of roads, and services offered by the local government companies are not getting away paying nothing, they pay also.

i am not against taxes, i against people being collective to take money from other people or business, becuase they think they have "more than enough", government is supposed to work for all of the people, its suppose to treat every one equal.





when it comes to rights ...yes, i oppose collectivism......becuase that is democracy, and america is not a democracy, ......their is no majority rule on rights...we have republican government..not democratic government

Is there some right in particular you think was being threatened by suggesting that someone else built roads and that this benefits you? You keep discussing this as if it were black and white, some kind of binary "take my money" or "don't take my money" issue.

But then you agree that taxes aren't inherently wrong. So aren't you really just quibbling over marginal tax rates? Why all the discussion of "rights" then? All taxes are "collective" in nature, so I don't get what you mean when you say you are against people "being collective" and taking money from you. What's the difference between "taking" and "taxing"? Where do you draw that line?

What exactly is your objection?
 
Last edited:
Is there some right in particular you think was being threatened by suggesting that someone else built roads and that this benefits you? You keep discussing this as if it were black and white, some kind of binary "take my money" or "don't take my money" issue.

But then you agree that taxes aren't inherently wrong. So aren't you really just quibbling over marginal tax rates? Why all the discussion of "rights" then? All taxes are "collective" in nature, so I don't get what you mean when you say you are against people "being collective" and taking money from you. What's the difference between "taking" and "taxing"? Where do you draw that line?

What exactly is your objection?

when people come together, and act as a collective over natural rights, and when that collective wants the use of the power of government, to conduct class warfare..i have a problem with that.

we as a society can pull our tax money to build things, however people dont have the power to interject any power on another person or ......comapny........they are not community property, they are not "commons"

"The true distinction between these and the American governments, lies in the total exclusion of the people, in their collective capacity, from any share in the latter, and not in the total exclusion of the representatives of the people from the administration of the former"-james madison
 
Back
Top Bottom