EPTThe American University system is completely broken in regards to cost, level of subsidy, and how the entire financial aid process works. Maybe it sucks for those people with debt, but they agreed to take that debt themselves. We should be prioritizing the needs of current and future students and stop the problem rather than just treat the symptoms.
Student Loan Forgiveness Act - Page 5
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Postman
United States269 Posts
The American University system is completely broken in regards to cost, level of subsidy, and how the entire financial aid process works. Maybe it sucks for those people with debt, but they agreed to take that debt themselves. We should be prioritizing the needs of current and future students and stop the problem rather than just treat the symptoms. | ||
|
Zariel
Australia1312 Posts
You only ever start paying back the loans when you earn more than $40,000(gross) per year and starts at 4% and is automatically deducted from your paycheck/tax-returns. It only goes up by the CPI (Consumer Price Index) instead of the actual interest/cash rate, so literally only goes up by the inflation. Any full time job will get you $40,000 a year here, so unless your a dole-bludger or some lazy mofo, then there is really no excuse that you can't find a job after you graduate. The government (or some agency) won't be behind your back chasing these loans, it's a very comfortable scheme to re-pay your loans and I really don't understand why the US government is so stupid in this regard. | ||
|
Kazeyonoma
United States2912 Posts
On April 18 2012 09:46 Sadist wrote: I agree completely. I feel like learning a trade, and learning it well, would be far more beneficial. I have my bachelors in Mechanical Engineering from MSU and felt like i learned nothing  (I wasnt the best student in the universities defense, but its not like anything in any of the classes I have taken has proven useful. At best it would be like reading a brochure on a topic and then having to actually learn it at work)Strangely enough, Mike Rowe went to congress and gave a speech about this, talking about how there's several hundreds of thousands of jobs, that are there, that companies NEED to be filled, but can't because people are all going off to 'college' to fulfill the 'proper education route' and in term having trouble getting a job outside fo it. Meanwhile companies that WANT and NEED to hire people, cannot, because no one is willing to take that route. It's not even about dirty work, unfulfilling work, or under paid work. Linemen for Electric companies, have to go through a vocational type education system that lasts 18 months, it is quite difficult to pass with high marks, but upon completion, have a very high job rate, and get paid STARTING over $95k here in California. Likewise the NURSING industry is a huge area where there are jobs, and a high demand for people, and vocational schools would probably fit a LOT of people who just want a job, to pay their bills, support their family, and live their life doing the same ole same ole with job security. "shit happens" to people is a sad reality, but just because "shit happens" to a few people, doesn't mean an entire ACT needs to be passed that will probably allow WAY more freeloaders get off, than those who actually need the help. That's the problem with a lot of these bills. They have GOOD intentions to help people who legitimately could USE it (look at welfare) but the problem is, they are rarely written well enough to properly be policed and governed and instead end up being ABUSED. | ||
|
DeepElemBlues
United States5080 Posts
No, you do not need to be on unemployment to be considered unemployed. Their methodology is extremely sound. The government's method of gauging unemployment is horribly unsound, even in the best of times it underestimates employment by 2-3% and right now it's underestimating it by around 5%. | ||
|
Kazeyonoma
United States2912 Posts
On April 18 2012 10:09 Zariel wrote: In australia. the government pays for all your student loans, we call it FEE HELP or HECS. Alternatively, you can pay the fees as they fall due at a 25% discount. You only ever start paying back the loans when you earn more than $40,000(gross) per year and starts at 4% and is automatically deducted from your paycheck/tax-returns. It only goes up by the CPI (Consumer Price Index) instead of the actual interest/cash rate, so literally only goes up by the inflation. Any full time job will get you $40,000 a year here, so unless your a dole-bludger or some lazy mofo, then there is really no excuse that you can't find a job after you graduate. The government (or some agency) won't be behind your back chasing these loans, it's a very comfortable scheme to re-pay your loans and I really don't understand why the US government is so stupid in this regard. Because a lot of people here in the states don't understand that MAYBE, just MAYBE, someone else might know how to handle your money better than you can, but instead like to blame the government for "TAKING MY MONEYZ" and "I SHOULD BE THE ONE WHO CONTROLS WHERE MY MONEY GOES". the moment the government steps in and tries to make things more balanced across the board, "SOCIALISM!" outcries pour out against it. | ||
|
Prplppleatr
United States1518 Posts
The bill would ensure low interest rates on federal student loans by capping them at 3.4%. They have to be joking...I know their not, so NO F(*%$'n way, my taxes will not go to something that has such little thought put into it. If they did put any thought to it, provisions like this would not be in. PS. the quote is from the summary provided in the OP link. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On April 18 2012 09:33 sc2superfan101 wrote: so me saying they shouldn't ask my parents, who paid their own loans, to pay for everyone elses loans, and that somehow makes me anti-women's suffrage? i would ask what the fudge you're talking about, but i'm not sure you even know the answer to that question. "i dont like it. no one forgave my parents student loans that they spent years working off, so why does anyone else deserve it?" is what you said dude. I think you're the one who doesn't know what he's talking about, and I don't say that because you don't understand the situation, I say that because I think you literally don't understand the sentences that you're writing. | ||
|
g.
Australia123 Posts
On April 18 2012 10:08 acerockolla wrote: That is indeed a good system. There's more to it than that though. Australia has a tiny population of 20 something million. Also, your defense costs are mostly underwritten by the US. The list goes on and on. Things that work well for small countries in Europe or places like AUS/NZ won't necessarily work for a country like the US. I'm not exactly saying that the US is spending its money efficiently (which it obviously isn't), but the US cannot afford the luxuries of small and relatively worry-free countries. Insightful post, and I totally agree. I think that the way your government spends its money is extremely inefficient, and your taxes are lower, but its cruel to do this to students with the life ahead of them trying to pay of some menial debt because a few people want to earn big bucks by charging you as such. Even though your schooling is more expensive (compared to a lot of countries), the interest you have to pay is stupid, by having interest that high there is a profit margin, and no one (except for the universities/colleges) should be profiting from your education. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
Ordinarily loans are an investment, and as such, a risk. Lenders risk the money on people they think can pay them. They take a risk just as much as the borrower does. The lender risks the capital, and the borrower risks having to go into bankruptcy. That's capitalism. But when the borrower can't even declare bankruptcy, it becomes free money for the lender, who is encouraged to loan as much money to as many people as possible. So when 2008 happens, and the finance industry fucks over everyone, the borrowers, who were promised nothing but growth and jobs for anyone who got educated at college, are left holding the bag, while the lenders still get to collect all the free money they offered. All of the conservative/libertarians here need to get a grip and come back to reality. Student default hurts everyone and the lenders are just as culpable, if not more culpable than some naive college students who were just doing what everyone else told them to do. | ||
|
Doraemon
Australia14949 Posts
On April 18 2012 10:09 Zariel wrote: In australia. the government pays for all your student loans, we call it FEE HELP or HECS. Alternatively, you can pay the fees as they fall due at a 25% discount.. they don't pay all your loans, they subsidise the course so you only have to pay a minor portion. the 25% discount is if you pay upfront on the minor portion. this is getting negated by the implementation of the so called "Melbourne Model", which funnily enough Monash is going to do as well. not sure about the States, but when you repay your uni fees, it's tax deductable | ||
|
Xanbatou
United States805 Posts
IMO, the problem is people spending exorbitant sums of money on degrees in areas that are relatively worthless to society. There is a huge demand for engineers, so go get an engineering degree. You have no right to complain about student loans when you paid 30k a year at a private school getting a degree in Latin. We don't bail out people who waste all their money investing in some shitty startup, why should we bail out people who waste on their money on a useless degree? | ||
|
Kazeyonoma
United States2912 Posts
On April 18 2012 10:16 IgnE wrote: Except that you can't discharge your student loans through bankruptcy in the United States thanks to George Bush and his financial industry lobbyists. You are stuck with them for life. Ordinarily loans are an investment, and as such, a risk. Lenders risk the money on people they think can pay them. They take a risk just as much as the borrower does. The lender risks the capital, and the borrower risks having to go into bankruptcy. That's capitalism. But when the borrower can't even declare bankruptcy, it becomes free money for the lender, who is encouraged to loan as much money to as many people as possible. So when 2008 happens, and the finance industry fucks over everyone, the borrowers, who were promised nothing but growth and jobs for anyone who got educated at college, are left holding the bag, while the lenders still get to collect all the free money they offered. All of the conservative/libertarians here need to get a grip and come back to reality. Student default hurts everyone and the lenders are just as culpable, if not more culpable than some naive college students who were just doing what everyone else told them to do. And we're saying you need to FIX the system, that puts these lenders in the power they are, as well as the societal obligation for everyone to go to college (not true!) just to get a job, rather than do this which will likely help a lot of people, but be ABUSED by everyone else. | ||
|
acerockolla
United States219 Posts
On April 18 2012 10:15 g. wrote: Insightful post, and I totally agree. I think that the way your government spends its money is extremely inefficient, and your taxes are lower, but its cruel to do this to students with the life ahead of them trying to pay of some menial debt because a few people want to earn big bucks by charging you as such. Even though your schooling is more expensive (compared to a lot of countries), the interest you have to pay is stupid, by having interest that high there is a profit margin, and no one (except for the universities/colleges) should be profiting from your education. I agree. Rather than forgiving these loans, the interest rates should be much lower. Obviously, the money cannot be simply handed out, but making the interest rates much lower to where the government is simply getting its money back rather than profitting would be ideal. There are many really good solutions out there, but getting our government to focus on real issues rather than pointless polarizing ones seems to be impossible these days. Perhaps after the election and one party gains total control, things may progress. | ||
|
Classysaurus
United States78 Posts
On April 18 2012 10:16 IgnE wrote: Except that you can't discharge your student loans through bankruptcy in the United States thanks George Bush and his financial industry lobbyists. You are stuck with them for life. Ordinarily loans are an investment, and as such, a risk. Lenders risk the money on people they think can pay them. They take a risk just as much as the borrower does. The lender risks the capital, and the borrower risks having to go into bankruptcy. That's capitalism. But when the borrower can't even declare bankruptcy, it becomes free money for the lender, who is encouraged to loan as much money to as many people as possible. So when 2008 happens, and the finance industry fucks over everyone, the borrowers, who were promised nothing but growth and jobs for anyone who got educated at college, are left holding the bag, while the lenders still get to collect all the free money they offered. All of the conservative/libertarians here need to get a grip and come back to reality. Student default hurts everyone and the lenders are just as culpable, if not more culpable than some naive college students who were just doing what everyone else told them to do. They don't want to look at the bigger problem, because they think they are a victim due to their success, and therefore only see the bill as an unfair proposition instead of what it's actually trying to do - get things on the right track. Or at least that's what it seems like. Edit: I'm not suggesting this is the best solution. | ||
|
Silidons
United States2813 Posts
| ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On April 18 2012 10:19 Xanbatou wrote: There is a student debt problem? I wasn't aware of it. I have a student loan for about 25k and I'm almost finished with my bachelor's in CS. I already have a couple jobs lined up for after I graduate that will pay quite well. I expect to be able to pay off all my loans within the first couple years. IMO, the problem is people spending exorbitant sums of money on degrees in areas that are relatively worthless to society. There is a huge demand for engineers, so go get an engineering degree. You have no right to complain about student loans when you paid 30k a year at a private school getting a degree in Latin. We don't bail out people who waste all their money investing in some shitty startup, why should we bail out people who waste on their money on a useless degree? Getting a job in engineering would make many, many people incredibly miserable. It's a pretty dreadful 9 to 5 job, really. | ||
|
Man with a Plan
United States401 Posts
| ||
|
DeepElemBlues
United States5080 Posts
Getting a job in engineering would make many, many people incredibly miserable. It's a pretty dreadful 9 to 5 job, really. Well so what? What causes more misery, a job you dislike or not having a job? | ||
|
Elegance
Canada917 Posts
On April 18 2012 10:21 Djzapz wrote: Getting a job in engineering would make many, many people incredibly miserable. It's a pretty dreadful 9 to 5 job, really. And because having a dreadful 9 to 5 job is well.... dreadful, you would choose a useless degree over it and waste a shit ton of money and probably end up unemployed? | ||
|
acerockolla
United States219 Posts
| ||
| ||
