Bernie wants to cancel all of student loan debt (1.6T).

[DrunkenSano]

Then you should be on the side of doing nothing. No debt relief for medical bills because some people in the past worked hard to pay their medical bills. No credit card debt relief and no mortgage debt relief, people spent the money after all, so why should they get anything? If you want to be a punative asshole, just be a punative asshole, don't be a fucking pussy about it, just do it.

This comment betrays your attitude that people that are drowning in student debt are doing so because of irresponsible behavior and that to help them would be unethical, so do nothing. Great, just own it.

Your suggestion doesn't solve the problem of student debt because it doesn't relieve people of their student debt. I also support consumer debt (credit card debt) and housing debt forgiveness.

If that's how you want to spin what I said to fit your narrative, that's on you, not me. I've already stated my position. I believe more people deserve to be included in debt relief, not just people with outstanding student loans.

And yes, my solution does solve the problem, or at least partly depending on how much debt relief is offered to everyone. If you are earning less than $100,000, you can receive X dollars from the government in debt relief. Whether it be student loan debt, mortgage debt, medical bill debt, whichever. So if you want it to go to your student loans, then the X dollars goes there. Your focus is on student loans, my question is, why is Bernie so focused on just student loans? Because he is courting the young vote. I believe he should focus on debts in general of people making less than $100,000.

 

[ImpulsE69]

I don't think there should be any debt relief for cc's. That's just idiots being idiots, and they'll continue to be idiots.

Medical is where I think we need the most help.

 

[Maxima1]

Eh, I kinda disagree here. With Universities/CCs shifting much of their teaching loads to adjuncts - who are often terribly underpaid without job security or basic benefits, it isn't nearly as attractive as it used to be.

Why should they get even more per hour simply because the colleges offer only about 6-12 hrs of work a week to some of them? The average per hour amount for adjunct instructors/professors is incredibly high even for the most basic of classes. That's one reason why sometimes there are adjuncts teaching part-time but with full-time jobs elsewhere paying a lot, since the money is good on the side, and they have flexibility with the time of classes. Others manage to get more if they teach at multiple cc's or uni's. Do you know what's helluva lot worse? The gig economy and temp agency bs.

 

[feralkid]

I don't think there should be any debt relief for cc's. That's just idiots being idiots, and they'll continue to be idiots.

Medical is where I think we need the most help.

Uhm...there are a lot of people who have paid their medical bills with credit cards.

 

[ImpulsE69]

Uhm...there are a lot of people who have paid their medical bills with credit cards.

I get that, but what's on it is trackable so I don't see that as an issue. There can always be exclusions based on circumstance. Not everything is black and white.

 

[dasherHampton]

If this does happen it should be the end of student loans as we currently know them.

You don't spend 1.5 trillion to keep the status quo.

 

[ch33zw1z]

I get that, but what's on it is trackable so I don't see that as an issue. There can always be exclusions based on circumstance. Not everything is black and white.

I don't think there should be any debt relief for cc's. That's just idiots being idiots, and they'll continue to be idiots.

Medical is where I think we need the most help.

Lol, gee, I wonder where the confusion was.

 

[ImpulsE69]

Lol, gee, I wonder where the confusion was.

Yea let me spell every little detail out. Do you have all day for the fine print?

 

[ch33zw1z]

Yea let me spell every little detail out. Do you have all day for the fine print?

It's two sentences, just words, no biggie. /s

 

[Blackjack200]

If that's how you want to spin what I said to fit your narrative, that's on you, not me. I've already stated my position. I believe more people deserve to be included in debt relief, not just people with outstanding student loans.

Bullshit. You've made it quite clear throughout your posts in this thread that you think that people struggling with student loans are paying the piper for their indulgent behavior and should continue to do so because you worked while you went to college. Have some fucking guts and just own it.

And yes, my solution does solve the problem, or at least partly depending on how much debt relief is offered to everyone. If you are earning less than $100,000, you can receive X dollars from the government in debt relief. Whether it be student loan debt, mortgage debt, medical bill debt, whichever. So if you want it to go to your student loans, then the X dollars goes there. Your focus is on student loans, my question is, why is Bernie so focused on just student loans? Because he is courting the young vote. I believe he should focus on debts in general of people making less than $100,000.

No, your solutions was "tax relief to people making under $100k" which doesn't solve anything since many of the people struggling with student loans don't pay enough in taxes and people making over $100k need loan relief too. I have one family member making $24k per year and has $50k of student loan debt. Tax relief does nothing for her. I have another family member that makes a little over $100k and has over $300k of student loan debt. Tax relief does nothing for him. Your solution is dumb and predicated on punitive attitudes about a systemic problem.

 

[Aikouka]

Trillions to disgustingly wealthy billionaires (that only got their off of your federal taxes, anyway) and their generations of worthless spawn, or trillions to middle class people and their education?

I see what you prefer.

I look at it kind of like my latest pool situation. (Yes, this sounds like a weird parallel, but it works!) I kept noticing a decreasing water level in the pool, and so the natural response is to just fill it back up. However, it would just get low again the next day. The knee-jerk, simplistic response is to just keep filling it up, but in reality, I needed to walk over, turn on the pool pump, see that it turned into a Super Soaker(tm), and fix the leak.

Overdrawn metaphor aside, my point is that what I'd want to see is a plan to fix the problem and not simply try to put a patch over it. I don't think it's just the debt, but also other factors like students going into college without a real career path or even an idea. It's not like I blame them... sometimes, it's just really hard to figure out the answer to "what do I want to do for the rest of my life?" I also want to see any financial support programs for colleges also go toward trade schools as well, and have people actually push trades.

One interesting thing that my high school did was they would allow students that were set to work in the trades to avoid taking electives to essentially shadow or apprentice with actual tradesmen. That kind of relates to another issue that I have with school is that it's so dead set on teaching for standardized tests that school fails to help prepare students for certain aspects of life. I'd be scared to find out how many students could answer this question: "If you bought an Xbox for $300 on a 24% APR with a minimum monthly payment of $30, how long would it take you to pay it off at the minimum payment and how much would it cost in the end?" (I even used simple numbers to make it easier.) I've also been wondering if they even do things like Home Economics anymore?

 

[Blackjack200]

If this does happen it should be the end of student loans as we currently know them.

You don't spend 1.5 trillion to keep the status quo.

The broader solution is to get rid of federal guarantees for student loans, make student loan dischargable in bankruptcy, and make public colleges and universities free.

 

[Mai72]

I look at it kind of like my latest pool situation. (Yes, this sounds like a weird parallel, but it works!) I kept noticing a decreasing water level in the pool, and so the natural response is to just fill it back up. However, it would just get low again the next day. The knee-jerk, simplistic response is to just keep filling it up, but in reality, I needed to walk over, turn on the pool pump, see that it turned into a Super Soaker(tm), and fix the leak.

Overdrawn metaphor aside, my point is that what I'd want to see is a plan to fix the problem and not simply try to put a patch over it. I don't think it's just the debt, but also other factors like students going into college without a real career path or even an idea. It's not like I blame them... sometimes, it's just really hard to figure out the answer to "what do I want to do for the rest of my life?" I also want to see any financial support programs for colleges also go toward trade schools as well, and have people actually push trades.

One interesting thing that my high school did was they would allow students that were set to work in the trades to avoid taking electives to essentially shadow or apprentice with actual tradesmen. That kind of relates to another issue that I have with school is that it's so dead set on teaching for standardized tests that school fails to help prepare students for certain aspects of life. I'd be scared to find out how many students could answer this question: "If you bought an Xbox for $300 on a 24% APR with a minimum monthly payment of $30, how long would it take you to pay it off at the minimum payment and how much would it cost in the end?" (I even used simple numbers to make it easier.) I've also been wondering if they even do things like Home Economics anymore?

This lady is $200k in student loan debt. Car payments, Home payment, plus student loans. Probably credit cards as well.

This poor lady is $200k in debt pursuing a degree in film. Dave asked her "How she plans on paying it back, and she's like I'll release my film and it willl be a HUGE hit and I'll use the money from that too pay off the loan. Some people are living in a fairy world. lol My point is NONE of these people should had gotten $200k plus unless they were going into medical.

 

[JSt0rm]

If this does happen it should be the end of student loans as we currently know them.

You don't spend 1.5 trillion to keep the status quo.

Free school as well. The toll is coming due for the mega rich. They are gonna pay one way or the other.

 

[brycejones]

This lady is $200k in student loan debt. Car payments, Home payment, plus student loans. Probably credit cards as well.

This poor lady is $200k in debt pursuing a degree in film. Dave asked her "How she plans on paying it back, and she's like I'll release my film and it willl be a HUGE hit and I'll use the money from that too pay off the loan. Some people are living in a fairy world. lol My point is NONE of these people should had gotten $200k plus unless they were going into medical.

For someone who claims to not always agree with Dave Ramsey you are certainly spamming the forum with his videos lately.

 

[TheVrolok]

This lady is $200k in student loan debt. Car payments, Home payment, plus student loans. Probably credit cards as well.

This poor lady is $200k in debt pursuing a degree in film. Dave asked her "How she plans on paying it back, and she's like I'll release my film and it willl be a HUGE hit and I'll use the money from that too pay off the loan. Some people are living in a fairy world. lol My point is NONE of these people should had gotten $200k plus unless they were going into medical.

So if they're going into "medical" is it then OK to be burdened with massive amounts of debt at predatory interest rates?

 

[UglyCasanova]

make public colleges and universities free.

Do you allow anyone in or set standards? Is it fair to those who wouldn’t get in or wanted to choose a different path in life to have to pay for those that did?

 

[Exterous]

Combine it with eliminating the bankruptcy exemption. You'll see education costs plummet overnight as schools compete for students without access to bottomless piles of cash.

I don't think you'd see that. I think with any sudden drop in funding you'd see a rapid closure of numerous schools. There has already been a persistent scaling back of programs and colleges are already closing at an accelerated rate. A sudden drop in college options means larger schools (who are already more easily able to absorb the changes due to prestige and endowments) are unaffected and have enough demand that they don't need to drop tuition. This means the available college slots decreases in a job market that would take years to adjust to a lower supply of college degreed students. And you end up with a distorted market where the middle is squeezed out even more as low incomes are subsidized and the rich can just shell out the cash. I mean maybe if colleges and universities adjusted quickly a distorted market wouldn't happen but 'nimble' or 'agile' policy changes are not exactly things higher ed is known for.

I'd rather see improved funding from a state and federal level combined with funding penalties for schools that rapidly increase tuition above a threshold that is set for a few (several?) years below inflation. Also, increased interest in taxing endowments above a certain amount. For some schools the size has become a prestige symbol and, why bother using it if you can just increase tuition? I think, culturally, a higher ed shift away from providing as much support to retirees and emeritus would help. It's not uncommon for them to receive almost the same benefits as employees (health care, parking, office space, computers, software) for questionable value given how widely those titles are now handed out. The uproar over suggesting that though....

Eh, I kinda disagree here. With Universities/CCs shifting much of their teaching loads to adjuncts - who are often terribly underpaid without job security or basic benefits, it isn't nearly as attractive as it used to be.

It's not so bad if you get tenure but getting there is the painful part. An adjunct or lecturer position is not an attractive job at a lot of places

The broader solution is to get rid of federal guarantees for student loans, make student loan dischargable in bankruptcy, and make public colleges and universities free.

While we do need to do something I don't think that we need to keep swinging the pendulum back and forth between 'dischargable in bankruptcy' and 'not dischargable in bankruptcy'. I'd prefer something tied more to certain amounts for certain job titles than either all or nothing policy.

 

[Maxima1]

It's not so bad if you get tenure but getting there is the painful part. An adjunct or lecturer position is not an attractive job at a lot of places

In multiple states, $100 per hour for adjunct is actually a possibility on the salary schedule. Even for non-credit and baby courses. Anyone trying to sell you the idea that they have significant prep time eroding that $ per hour is lying (some we just know like language). That's only sympathetic for the first few classes of teaching, but then prep should be almost nonexistent, and grading time is very little for the vast majority of instructors/professors and probably would all get done during office hours.

 

[Greenman]

Bullshit. You've made it quite clear throughout your posts in this thread that you think that people struggling with student loans are paying the piper for their indulgent behavior and should continue to do so because you worked while you went to college. Have some fucking guts and just own it.



No, your solutions was "tax relief to people making under $100k" which doesn't solve anything since many of the people struggling with student loans don't pay enough in taxes and people making over $100k need loan relief too. I have one family member making $24k per year and has $50k of student loan debt. Tax relief does nothing for her. I have another family member that makes a little over $100k and has over $300k of student loan debt. Tax relief does nothing for him. Your solution is dumb and predicated on punitive attitudes about a systemic problem.

Your family should have taken a class or two in economics.

 

[ivwshane]

Your family should have taken a class or two in economics.

Brilliant! And what was the cost of your education? What was your rent or mortgage at the time? What did your first job out of school pay?

Before you shit on others, maybe you can take a remedial economics class and learn about inflation and how it might affect people and the decisions they make in today's world.

 

[Bitek]

I'm not a fan of his idea. It ultimately doesn't do anything to control the ever rising costs of a college education or fix people's poor financial judgement. If anything costs will increase when colleges see that the government will step up and pay the costs.

I'd rather see financial help in the form of actual need. Eligibility should be based on the students academic rating, the family's financial need, and the likelihood of placement in the chosen profession. Got a smart kid from a poor family that wants to be an electrical engineer? He/she should be able to pursue that. Got an average kid that doesn't know what they want to study and would rather party? Walmart is hiring.

I view the 2 year technical degrees as being vitally important as jobs require more technical knowledge in the future. I'd support making these degrees achievable by simply letting the student continue after high school right into these fields without cost to them if they meet the same requirements.

Other European countries offer a better model for college than what we have here, but the kids are expected to buckle down and git er done.

I agree there needs to be a serious reform/realignment of the higher education system as part of any govt subsidy system.

It does need to be done tho. The current system is unsustainable and expensive.

If prefer to see more focus on technical education and apprenticeships for STEM degrees rather than all the liberal arts electives.

Those are all well and good, but they take up considerable time and expense and aren't necessarily preparing students to be ready for the workforce.

When you start spending taxpayer money, you really need to focus on value.

 

[Bitek]

Personally I don't see why we need to cancel student debt at all. Why not just give ~$15,000 to every household in the US instead and they can spend it on whatever they want?

Because POCs might get some white ppl money, and Rs would rather die in poverty first.

 

[Maxima1]

I agree there needs to be a serious reform/realignment of the higher education system as part of any govt subsidy system.

It does need to be done tho. The current system is unsustainable and expensive.

If prefer to see more focus on technical education and apprenticeships for STEM degrees rather than all the liberal arts electives.

Those are all well and good, but they take up considerable time and expense and aren't necessarily preparing students to be ready for the workforce.

When you start spending taxpayer money, you really need to focus on value.

STEM doesn't necessarily either. Mediocre engineers are a dime a dozen. It's already the case that getting an engineering degree isn't a guarantee to a job once graduation comes. And engineering is one of the better paths. Biology, chemistry, etc.? Good fucking luck. Chemistry is dead here with fierce competition for the scarce amount of jobs worth anything. The rest? Employers will insult you with minimum wage to $12 per hour jobs that require either a BS or MS in chem because they can. Not to mention post-doc being absolute shit....

Edit:

https://www.bbc.com/news/education-14823042

Engineering graduates 'taking unskilled jobs'

Nearly a quarter of UK engineering graduates are working in non-graduate jobs or unskilled work such as waiting and shop work, a report suggests.

The study says it is "not easy or automatic" for qualified engineers to find related employment in the UK.

Employers and industry leaders have repeatedly raised concerns about a lack of good quality science and engineering graduates.

But research from Birmingham University research challenges this viewpoint.

 

[1prophet]

So if they're going into "medical" is it then OK to be burdened with massive amounts of debt at predatory interest rates?

Ironic that the bankruptcy laws for secondary education loan debt were changed because of the fear of high price student loans, like medical , being discharged through the bankruptcy courts by a Democrat congress and a Democrat president, and now that their student loan chickens have come home to roost all the Democrats in 2019 running for president are trying to outdo each other by running on the just forgive their debt platform.

https://info.legalzoom.com/did-laws-effect-preventing-bankruptcy-student-loans-26426.html

Bankruptcy was governed by the Federal Bankruptcy Act until 1976. However, Congress established a commission to look into the bankruptcy system during the 1970s and suggest reforms. In 1976, Congress adopted the commission's recommendations, which resulted in the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978, known as the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. The Bankruptcy Code replaced the preexisting Bankruptcy Act and limited the dischargeability of student loans. At first, the new law excluded student loans made by the government, colleges and universities from discharge; however, other student loans remained dischargeable as long as you were repaying for five years, or they represented undue hardship. Over a period of approximately 25 years, additional limitations were enacted further eliminating the dischargeability of student loans. One notable one was the Bankruptcy Amendments and Federal Judgeship Act of 1984, which also made private student loans from nonprofit lenders non-dischargeable.

liberal democrats used their social justice precept of helping minorities and other disadvantaged students have easier access to higher education as a reason to guaranty loans, the real reason was the lending institutions and the colleges/universities needed to be guaranteed income with very little risk and pushed for it behind the scenes by having their lobbied representatives change the bankruptcy laws in their favor.

If you want a real solution how about going back to pre 1978 bankruptcy laws for student loan debts instead of finger pointing and using the nondischargeable student loans as a political football, but that also means you will have to tighten up the restrictions on who can or can't get a loan,

But there is as much a chance of that happening as Democrats admitting they created this student loan debt monster to begin with,
and now that student loans are taking a toll on the country they want to blame somebody else and pass the cost of their egregious error onto the taxpayer, because putting the responsibility and blame for some real or perceived injustice on somebody else has become the de facto standard for the Democrats and their supporters lately.