• 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!

Trump to propose scrapping student loan forgiveness program

DA60 said:
Clearly you are not aware of some of the absolutely ridiculous things they teach in university.
Click to expand...

Why don't you enlighten us.

There are many degrees that teach you ABSOLUTELY NOTHING that will help you in the real world.
Click to expand...

This is simply an opinion devoid of any fact.

Just getting a degree in anything is no guarantee of anything.

I mean how the hell is majoring in Art History or Music or Elizabethan Poetry going to give you a 'higher level of critical thinking, reading comprehension, logic or proficiency in new technology,'?
Click to expand...

You will have to take and pass roughly 40 college level courses to obtain a bachelors degree, plus any additional college requirements for that specific field. Almost all major universities and all state-funded schools have core requirements in composition, college algebra, science, art, etc... that students must pass in order to obtain their degree. Students that receive college degrees are more informed, have better communication and logic skills, know how to use new technology, and make contacts. Unless of course you quit after year one.

It ain't....not in the slightest.
Click to expand...

You don't know what you're talking about.

But you want people to fork over their hard earned tax dollars so these wankers can go and spend four years and over $100K each so they can learn these useless degrees.
Click to expand...

Quote where i said this nonsense.
 
washunut said:
four years at a private university. If you want to use 150K I won't quibble.
Click to expand...

What percentage of students go to private universities? Furthermore, how much of the tuition costs are absorbed via the university in the form of scholarship, aid, etc...?

If you don't want to respond, i won't quibble. You're clearly attempting to use the highest figure possible because it is a weak point.
 
AlbqOwl said:
What Trump proposes is not important. He, unlike Obama, is less likely to ignore existing law. The law was passed by Congress and it will need to be Congress who rescinds it.

The devil is always in the details of these things. Is the program working as intended? Or is it being exploited while not providing the benefits it was intended to provide? These things I am not finding information on, and that would strongly affect my opinion as to whether the program needs to be phased out. So many one-size-fits-all federal initiatives are not as efficient, effective, or economical as grass roots efforts will be.

We fund so much stuff that really benefits nobody but those in government just because the program has a fancy, compassionate or noble sounding title on it. Those are what I hope the government will focus on and look to eliminate. That is one of the several reasons President Trump is in office as he is far more likely to do that than any of the establishment Republicans. And I doubt an establishment Democrat would do that at all.

I don't think any of us know enough about it to make an informed decision at this time. I'll reserve my opinion until after the debates and testimony that will affirm the value of the program one way or the other.
Click to expand...

I have a very low opinion of Betsy DeVos based on what i've read from her programs in Michigan. It seems that she focuses on her own profitability rather than on quality education.

I believe that education is perhaps the best investment a government can make toward the long-term prosperity of society. It is truly the rising tide that raises all boats.

This change in loan forgiveness will turn away prospective, but fiscally conscientious, college students. Those are the worst students to turn away. In their place, fiscally irresponsible or wealthy students, students with lower academic merits, will take those spots. That's a phenomenally bad filter to apply.

College education is important for many valuable career paths. We shouldn't, as a society, place a huge financial burden on a young, ambitious person just because they want a good education.
 
AlbqOwl said:
What Trump proposes is not important. He, unlike Obama, is less likely to ignore existing law. The law was passed by Congress and it will need to be Congress who rescinds it.

The devil is always in the details of these things. Is the program working as intended? Or is it being exploited while not providing the benefits it was intended to provide? These things I am not finding information on, and that would strongly affect my opinion as to whether the program needs to be phased out. So many one-size-fits-all federal initiatives are not as efficient, effective, or economical as grass roots efforts will be.

We fund so much stuff that really benefits nobody but those in government just because the program has a fancy, compassionate or noble sounding title on it. Those are what I hope the government will focus on and look to eliminate. That is one of the several reasons President Trump is in office as he is far more likely to do that than any of the establishment Republicans. And I doubt an establishment Democrat would do that at all.

I don't think any of us know enough about it to make an informed decision at this time. I'll reserve my opinion until after the debates and testimony that will affirm the value of the program one way or the other.
Click to expand...

It's a recruitment tool, an incentive to get the best and brightest to serve their country for a few years before they go into the private sector and make real money. Anything that makes the government operate better, even for a short period of time, and costs no more than these loan payments do, is okay with me as a fiscal conservative. A more efficient government is a less expensive government.
 
Absentglare said:
I have a very low opinion of Betsy DeVos based on what i've read from her programs in Michigan. It seems that she focuses on her own profitability rather than on quality education.

I believe that education is perhaps the best investment a government can make toward the long-term prosperity of society. It is truly the rising tide that raises all boats.

This change in loan forgiveness will turn away prospective, but fiscally conscientious, college students. Those are the worst students to turn away. In their place, fiscally irresponsible or wealthy students, students with lower academic merits, will take those spots. That's a phenomenally bad filter to apply.

College education is important for many valuable career paths. We shouldn't, as a society, place a huge financial burden on a young, ambitious person just because they want a good education.
Click to expand...

From what I've read about Betsy Devos is that some things she has tried haven't worked and some things she has tried have worked. I don't condemn people for getting it wrong so long as they back up, regroup, and try something else that does work. She deplores the state of public education in the USA as do I. Almost anything has to be an improvement over what we now have. So how about judging her on what she actually does instead of the negative press heaped on her by a biased and left leaning press?
 
Beaudreaux said:
It's a recruitment tool, an incentive to get the best and brightest to serve their country for a few years before they go into the private sector and make real money. Anything that makes the government operate better, even for a short period of time, and costs no more than these loan payments do, is okay with me as a fiscal conservative. A more efficient government is a less expensive government.
Click to expand...

i understand the concept and I don't necessarily disagree with it. I just have a really dubious opinion of government to do anything as competently, effectively, and efficiently as that done by a competent private sector or local government that allows for their own unique situations. And I have an aversion to what gets glowing press but doesn't deliver as advertised.
 
CriticalThought said:
Trump to propose scrapping beleaguered student loan forgiveness program ? report - MarketWatch

Well that royally sucks. This is a program that was contractually included in every loan promissory note I signed. I made major financial decisions based on the federal government's promise with this program. I could have refinanced my student loans at a lower interest rate through a private lender. I could have gone into a more lucrative field in the private sector. I could have put off buying a house until I paid down my balance. And now two billionaires are going to make the federal government renege on its contracts with people who made the apparent mistake of believing in going into the poorly paid public sector.

I am not saying the program isn't flawed and that caps should not have been put in place a long time ago but when you are talking about a program that people made huge life altering decisions about and it looks like you aren't even going to grandfather in those who have been doing their part, well...I think I have reached my limit. I am going to find Maggie's old post about things I can be doing and I am fully joining the resistance.
Click to expand...

They borrowed the money

Why not make them pay it back?
 
AlbqOwl said:
From what I've read about Betsy Devos is that some things she has tried haven't worked and some things she has tried have worked. I don't condemn people for getting it wrong so long as they back up, regroup, and try something else that does work. She deplores the state of public education in the USA as do I. Almost anything has to be an improvement over what we now have. So how about judging her on what she actually does instead of the negative press heaped on her by a biased and left leaning press?
Click to expand...

I'm trying to remain reasonably objective but it's hard for me to consider this specific proposal, to increase the financial burdens on college students, as anything other than a step backwards.

This: "Almost anything has to be an improvement over what we now have." I adamantly disagree with. I went to one of the top 10 high schools in all of California, it was an absolutely amazing school, and then i went on to San Jose State University where i got a BS in EE for ~$3,200/year in fees/tuition thanks to my state subsidized education.

The public education system in California works amazingly well for those fortunate enough to live in the good neighborhoods. Houses in the neighborhood i grew up in sell for about $2,000,000, and a lot of that is because of how good the schools are. The corresponding property taxes ensure that those local schools are well-funded.

Make no mistake, if the government doesn't spend on education, we will spend more to do it less efficiently ourselves. Walmart saves money through consolidation, why would we willingly abandon our fellow Americans in terms of public education?
 
washunut said:
That is what parents are for. My son has zero debt as he should. He also could have gone to the honor program at our state university free if we could not afford a private school.
Click to expand...

what if your parents don't have the means or refuse? It sounds like you are encouraging a perpetuation of socioeconomic class through family generations. Besides, regulating costs and extending borrowing isn't a hand out. You still have to pay it back. Its just done in a way that doesn't result in 15% default rates.
 
Mac77 said:
They borrowed the money

Why not make them pay it back?
Click to expand...

Its a reward for accepting lowering paying jobs in public service. Don't you want well qualified people staffing our government agencies without having to match what they could make in the private sector?
 
AlbqOwl said:
i understand the concept and I don't necessarily disagree with it. I just have a really dubious opinion of government to do anything as competently, effectively, and efficiently as that done by a competent private sector or local government that allows for their own unique situations. And I have an aversion to what gets glowing press but doesn't deliver as advertised.
Click to expand...

We're in complete agreement on that.
 
ocean515 said:
Perhaps the argument could have more teeth if it were backed by some facts showing that teachers, public defenders, social workers, and primary care doctors receive lower pay and long term benefits than they would have received in the private sector.

Average salaries of teachers in California is in the $60's. And what of the pensions and healthcare?

Average salaries for a Public Defender in California are over $100k.

Average salaries for primary care doctors is reported to be close to $200k.

Average salaries for social workers is all across the board, but is reported to be $65k/yr in California.

It's reported a person holding a degree in Engineering has a starting salary of @ $65k, if they can find a job.

Your argument needs more data support in order for me, at least, to be moved by a deal to incubate more government employees by having tax payers foot a big portion of the bill to provide the education.
Click to expand...

Isn't the cost of living in parts of California so absurd that in some cases a family of 4 making 100k are considered barely above poverty? Maybe you could use a less weird state with less convoluted averages to make your argument.
 
Mac77 said:
They borrowed the money

Why not make them pay it back?
Click to expand...

Well...if the federal government can renege on the loan promissory note terms, why should I be bound by them?
 
Absentglare said:
I'm trying to remain reasonably objective but it's hard for me to consider this specific proposal, to increase the financial burdens on college students, as anything other than a step backwards.

This: "Almost anything has to be an improvement over what we now have." I adamantly disagree with. I went to one of the top 10 high schools in all of California, it was an absolutely amazing school, and then i went on to San Jose State University where i got a BS in EE for ~$3,200/year in fees/tuition thanks to my state subsidized education.

The public education system in California works amazingly well for those fortunate enough to live in the good neighborhoods. Houses in the neighborhood i grew up in sell for about $2,000,000, and a lot of that is because of how good the schools are. The corresponding property taxes ensure that those local schools are well-funded.

Make no mistake, if the government doesn't spend on education, we will spend more to do it less efficiently ourselves. Walmart saves money through consolidation, why would we willingly abandon our fellow Americans in terms of public education?
Click to expand...

And I was educated in very modest schools in small towns with very few amenities. No federal funding of any kind went to either and I was in one of the poorest states in the union. If you were one of the affluent in coastal California , I don't begrudge you that and I don't dispute you probably got a good education. I got an education through highschool that prepared me to compete with anybody anywhere, but because I was putting myself through school I chose a small country college with affordable tuition and amazing professors that I remember with deep gratitude to this day for what they taught me.

It's all relative. But if I had school age children in my city despite massive federal and state funding per capita, and I couldn't afford a good private school, I would home school. It is that bad. Betsy Devos in my opinion has the right idea of what education should be. I hope she is able to offer some good influence in that direction.
 
I might be mistaken, but are some people actually advocating that it's acceptable for the government to not honor an agreement that they freely took part in?

Changing the terms going forward is fine, but breaking a past agreement is not.
 
CriticalThought said:
Well...if the federal government can renege on the loan promissory note terms, why should I be bound by them?
Click to expand...

Because we are bigger than you.

When Uncle Sugar speaks you have to listen
 
CriticalThought said:
Trump to propose scrapping beleaguered student loan forgiveness program ? report - MarketWatch

Well that royally sucks. This is a program that was contractually included in every loan promissory note I signed. I made major financial decisions based on the federal government's promise with this program. I could have refinanced my student loans at a lower interest rate through a private lender. I could have gone into a more lucrative field in the private sector. I could have put off buying a house until I paid down my balance. And now two billionaires are going to make the federal government renege on its contracts with people who made the apparent mistake of believing in going into the poorly paid public sector.

I am not saying the program isn't flawed and that caps should not have been put in place a long time ago but when you are talking about a program that people made huge life altering decisions about and it looks like you aren't even going to grandfather in those who have been doing their part, well...I think I have reached my limit. I am going to find Maggie's old post about things I can be doing and I am fully joining the resistance.
Click to expand...

To me it would make more sense to scrap the loan program itself. Not an appropriate goal for government.
 
CriticalThought said:
Isn't the cost of living in parts of California so absurd that in some cases a family of 4 making 100k are considered barely above poverty? Maybe you could use a less weird state with less convoluted averages to make your argument.
Click to expand...


1 out of 8 people living in the United States live in California. That's a rather big sample set. That it doesn't support your argument is not my problem but yours.

I asked if you could back your argument with more teeth, but it appears you'd rather question the information I provided.
 
CriticalThought said:
Trump to propose scrapping beleaguered student loan forgiveness program ? report - MarketWatch

Well that royally sucks. This is a program that was contractually included in every loan promissory note I signed. I made major financial decisions based on the federal government's promise with this program. I could have refinanced my student loans at a lower interest rate through a private lender. I could have gone into a more lucrative field in the private sector. I could have put off buying a house until I paid down my balance. And now two billionaires are going to make the federal government renege on its contracts with people who made the apparent mistake of believing in going into the poorly paid public sector.

I am not saying the program isn't flawed and that caps should not have been put in place a long time ago but when you are talking about a program that people made huge life altering decisions about and it looks like you aren't even going to grandfather in those who have been doing their part, well...I think I have reached my limit. I am going to find Maggie's old post about things I can be doing and I am fully joining the resistance.
Click to expand...

Try this on for size... Buy your own stuff! The federal government pays for nothing!!! A taxpayer does and we/ they were or are paying for you!! Fair?? I think not..

Sent from my SM-G920R4 using Tapatalk
 
radcen said:
I might be mistaken, but are some people actually advocating that it's acceptable for the government to not honor an agreement that they freely took part in?

Changing the terms going forward is fine, but breaking a past agreement is not.
Click to expand...

I assume the decision is not retroactive

Meaning we are not going to wake up the teachers and social workers at their jobs and make them pay

But going forward no new nelfare candidates will be accepted
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom