Then why did you mention him, why not just say it was the industry? This isn't making sense.Hearsay is a legal term. But my in laws story wasn’t about him, it was about the industry. You’re welcome to look at the facts on that.
Because your outrage seems selective. I will repeat: we do not live in a libertarian society. We allocate trillions of taxpayer dollars already, and fairness is never a consideration. Why should it be in this case?I did not start a thread about those topics no. I only started this thread. But you knew that already right? Why are you asking me?
Ok my outrage seems selective? What in God's name is your point? I cant have an opinion on this if I don't post opinions on EVERYTHING ELSE? Give it a rest.Because your outrage seems selective. I will repeat: we do not live in a libertarian society. We allocate trillions of taxpayer dollars already, and fairness is never a consideration. Why should it be in this case?
Good point. Hasn't it been proven over and over that risky credit leads to more risky credit? We buy their loans, and they take on a car loan, or a business loan, or a mortgate, and fail on that again cause heck...they got bailed out once...so why not again?So, we want to break faith with the lender - the American taxpayer - so that people who made a bad leverage decision regarding their education be provided the ability to make an even worse leverage decision regarding real estate. Because it will be good for us? Bold plan, Cotton.
Those aren't fair. I would have no problem if Warren focused her efforts on eliminating government free stuff. But this type of pandering to win an election is borderline obscene.Are you in favor of eliminating all corporate subsides right now? How about tax write offs for big companies? Are those fair? Did you start a thread complaining about the money that big oil receives?
Perhaps that’s what it is but the US is a top 15 country in per capita GDP and there are plenty of countries lower on the list that make this system work very well. My worry is that if she was elected and moved forward with such a plan that it would be like Obamacare where after all the lobbyists and cross-party compromises are made, it’s ends up something that nobody really wanted.Those aren't fair. I would have no problem if Warren focused her efforts on eliminating government free stuff. But this type of pandering to win an election is borderline obscene.
Lol every single thread you participate in ends up with this same post almost word for word.Ok my outrage seems selective? What in God's name is your point? I cant have an opinion on this if I don't post opinions on EVERYTHING ELSE? Give it a rest.
By the way, not outraged, I said right from the top I'm not sure how I feel---I am off the cuff against it--and I would like pros and cons. Your cons didn't convince me and I feel they are wrong...That's OK with you right? Or are you going to continue to point out how I feel or think, or my selective postings?
Are you writing a book or something. Can you PLEASE just focus on yourself? Why are you so concerned with what I post? Let it go lady, you're creeping me out now.Lol every single thread you participate in ends up with this same post almost word for word.
Well then I'll take that theory and apply it to our debt...and say who cares how high it gets...we will just not pay it. Using that theory yeah, I think we should finance everyone;s college, or trade school and borrow to do it. Not like we are going to pay it back anyway.About 100 years ago there was a debate in this country about forgiving the war debts of England, France and Germany. A guy named John Maynard Keynes came up with an extraordinary idea: we should just forgive what’s owed- it would allow their economies to recover and that would make us richer in the long run. The American public couldn’t understand his argument and the idea was nixed by Calvin Coolidge who thought it was nuts: “they hired the money, didn’t they?” Coolidge said. To Coolidge and the vast majority, you borrow money and you have to pay what’s owed. Simple.
Except that historians now almost all agree that had we forgiven those loans there would have been no Great Depression, no Third Reich, no World War II. Keynes was a man way ahead of his time, and he had a different way of looking at debt: not in terms of what is owed but in terms of what benefits society. Yet even today most people don’t seem to understand this idea.
Ready. Fire. Aim.About 100 years ago there was a debate in this country about forgiving the war debts of England, France and Germany. A guy named John Maynard Keynes came up with an extraordinary idea: we should just forgive what’s owed- it would allow their economies to recover and that would make us richer in the long run. The American public couldn’t understand his argument and the idea was nixed by Calvin Coolidge who thought it was nuts: “they hired the money, didn’t they?” Coolidge said. To Coolidge and the vast majority, you borrow money and you have to pay what’s owed. Simple.
Except that historians now almost all agree that had we forgiven those loans there would have been no Great Depression, no Third Reich, no World War II. Keynes was a man way ahead of his time, and he had a different way of looking at debt: not in terms of what is owed but in terms of what benefits society. Yet even today most people don’t seem to understand this idea.
Sometimes I just think you say stuff so that people will waste time arguing with you.
I would agree that there shouldn't be a fairness litmus test. There are plenty of times governments should do things based on need that aren't necessarily fair to everyone.All government allocations of monies are inherently unfair. Yet we don’t live a libertarian society and for some reason this question of unfairness only arises when the recipient of the benefits are regular people.
I don’t think fairness or unfairness should come into consideration for this or any other benefit. The only question should be does it benefit society? In this case I think it does.
You're mischaracterizing the vast majority of students who are in debt. Many are business majors, teachers, medical technologists, nurses and even future doctors whose debt is a burden on their future economic choices. How do you expect a teacher in Kansas or Miami to pay student loans and buy a home on a low salary?Choice A: Study engineering and business...shut down the library on Saturday nights...graduate magna cum laude...design innovative new solar cell...put self on path to earning $250K+
Choice B: Study music...drink with your friends...study overseas for a semester...spend afternoons napping...lobby for a pass/fail grading system (and get it)...earn $60K with no debt...whine about climate change.
Thanks Liz.
Good point, but........there were also reparations after WW2 and I think the end result was better than most people expected.About 100 years ago there was a debate in this country about forgiving the war debts of England, France and Germany. A guy named John Maynard Keynes came up with an extraordinary idea: we should just forgive what’s owed- it would allow their economies to recover and that would make us richer in the long run. The American public couldn’t understand his argument and the idea was nixed by Calvin Coolidge who thought it was nuts: “they hired the money, didn’t they?” Coolidge said. To Coolidge and the vast majority, you borrow money and you have to pay what’s owed. Simple.
Except that historians now almost all agree that had we forgiven those loans there would have been no Great Depression, no Third Reich, no World War II. Keynes was a man way ahead of his time, and he had a different way of looking at debt: not in terms of what is owed but in terms of what benefits society. Yet even today most people don’t seem to understand this idea.
Last estimate I saw it would cost a little over 70 billion a year to just pay tuitions for everyone attending state college. We spend over 50 billion a year putting them in debt now. That debt then goes on to be a drag on our economy and hurt the working class. Which really seems like the better investment?Well then I'll take that theory and apply it to our debt...and say who cares how high it gets...we will just not pay it. Using that theory yeah, I think we should finance everyone;s college, or trade school and borrow to do it. Not like we are going to pay it back anyway.
I'm not sure I understand your question.Last estimate I saw it would cost a little over 70 billion a year to just pay tuitions for everyone attending state college. We spend over 50 billion a year putting them in debt now. That debt then goes on to be a drag on our economy and hurt the working class. Which really seems like the better investment?
Post WW2 finances are complex. The West took reparations in the form of German intellectual property and and massive forced labor camps. The US also pumped large amounts of money into Europe and Asia to rebuild it. Much of it was paid back but probably at least half of it was forgiven and much of it was delayed for 30 or 40 years.Good point, but........there were also reparations after WW2 and I think the end result was better than most people expected.
Maybe the key is to strike a balance between payment and punishment.
No. I am not.You're mischaracterizing the vast majority of students who are in debt. Many are business majors, teachers, medical technologists, nurses and even future doctors whose debt is a burden on their future economic choices. How do you expect a teacher in Kansas or Miami to pay student loans and buy a home on a low salary?
Person 3 goes to college...fails out because he partied to hard, gets employment at a smaller income level than he or she might have with a degree, and also gets his loans paidd for by the government.Person 1: Person goes to Tier B school that is cheaper because that's what they could afford. They make less money now than they could have if they had chosen a Tier A school. They have little to no debt though because they made a responsible decision.
Person 2: Person goes to Tier A school that costs a lot more than their Tier B choice. They rack up a ton of debt but now make more money because of their decision (won't call it irresponsible but less responsible?). They have a ton of debt.
Government wipes away the debt for Person 2 they are left in a great position. Debt free making a lot of money with a better degree. Person 1 stuck with a lesser degree, lower salary and nothing from the government. That's crap.
And I can cite ten where someone got a STEM degree and now works in restaurants. I know more than a few well educated waitstaff. We can trade I know a guys all day.No. I am not.
For every example you can find of an underpaid teacher in Miami doing good for society...I'm sure I can pull 10 of someone going to college, not picking a major until the middle of their junior year, eventually getting a liberal arts degree and then getting a job as a temp because they have no tangible skills.
If they have a STEM Degree and work in a restaurant there is probably something else going on. And most likely their fault.And I can cite ten where someone got a STEM degree and now works in restaurants. I know more than a few well educated waitstaff. We can trade I know a guys all day.
Not sure how to make it more plain.I'm not sure I understand your question.
Then they lost money on their education investment. Welcome to the real world. That's probably the best financial education they will get in their lives.And I can cite ten where someone got a STEM degree and now works in restaurants. I know more than a few well educated waitstaff. We can trade I know a guys all day.
No not really. The fields are very competitive. The fact is in many to make any money at all you need at least a master's, which means even more debt, and for the best a doctoral degree which put you six figures in debt. People get their BS find out it's not enough but don't want to go another 30-40k more in debt. So there you are.If they have a STEM Degree and work in a restaurant there is probably something else going on. And most likely their fault.
And the guy who works construction just lost money. And the guy who builds furniture just lost money. Car manufacturers just lost money. This isn't one person got screwed. We are at the point the whole economy is getting screwed.Then they lost money on their education investment. Welcome to the real world. That's probably the best financial education they will get in their lives.
What do you mean by "spend" over 50 billion? Do you mean "lend"?Last estimate I saw it would cost a little over 70 billion a year to just pay tuitions for everyone attending state college. We spend over 50 billion a year putting them in debt now. That debt then goes on to be a drag on our economy and hurt the working class. Which really seems like the better investment?
People and businesses lose money all the time. It helps them do it right the next time.And the guy who works construction just lost money. And the guy who builds furniture just lost money. Car manufacturers just lost money. This isn't one person got screwed. We are at the point the whole economy is getting screwed.
Agree. Some kind of post secondary stipend is a better idea imo. Use it for school, job training, business investment, home, etc. Base it on a few economic factors.Person 1: Person goes to Tier B school that is cheaper because that's what they could afford. They make less money now than they could have if they had chosen a Tier A school. They have little to no debt though because they made a responsible decision.
Person 2: Person goes to Tier A school that costs a lot more than their Tier B choice. They rack up a ton of debt but now make more money because of their decision (won't call it irresponsible but less responsible?). They have a ton of debt.
Government wipes away the debt for Person 2 they are left in a great position. Debt free making a lot of money with a better degree. Person 1 stuck with a lesser degree, lower salary and nothing from the government. That's crap.
To be fair this has always been her thing. Her polices overlap with Bernie quite a bit. Her area of expertise is economic oversight, bankruptcy and “Main Street” finance.Warren seems desperate to hang her hat on something to gain traction against the other Democrats.
Then they are silly for getting the initial degree in the first place. this is exactly the problem. People take on things that they either didn't understand or didn't look into enough. If the job market is that tough and it takes that much education, then maybe find another career path instead of asking me to pay for their failed educational choice.No not really. The fields are very competitive. The fact is in many to make any money at all you need at least a master's, which means even more debt, and for the best a doctoral degree which put you six figures in debt. People get their BS find out it's not enough but don't want to go another 30-40k more in debt. So there you are.
It’s been reparations, impeachment and now this. She sees the handwriting on the wall that her campaign is circling the drain and needs to get some attention fast.To be fair this has always been her thing. Her polices overlap with Bernie quite a bit. Her area of expertise is economic oversight, bankruptcy and “Main Street” finance.
which means that will be passed straight down to the consumers through increases in good and services - nobody believes in free Warren, people are not fooled anymore by believing taxation isn't ultimately passed down to consumersThe revenue from Warren's wealth tax proposal -- a 2% tax on wealth above $50 million and a 3% tax on wealth above $1 billion -- would pay for her newest proposal, her campaign said.
no, she means the PARENTS of the students ..... students rarely earn anything.Warren's new plan would forgive $50,000 in student loans for Americans in households earning less than $100,000 a year. According to analysis provided by her campaign, that would provide immediate relief to more than 95% of the 45 million Americans with student debt
that's racist - stop judging people on their skin color - for the love of God PLEASE STOPWarren's plan would also create a fund with a "minimum of $50 billion" intended to keep per-student spending at historically black colleges and universities and minority-serving institutions comparable to other area colleges.
No one is being judged. This is a way to give a hand up to people who need it. Which in turn will make them more successful, which will in turn make their kids more successful. Which in turn will make all of us more successful.which means that will be passed straight down to the consumers through increases in good and services - nobody believes in free Warren, people are not fooled anymore by believing taxation isn't ultimately passed down to consumers
no, she means the PARENTS of the students ..... students rarely earn anything.
what is the incentives to excel in school anymore if everyone gets free college? why try for scholarships? what's to help drive these kids ?
they won't give $5 billion to border security, but she's asking for A MINIMUM 50 Billion for black skin only colleges?
that's racist - stop judging people on their skin color - for the love of God PLEASE STOP
So what are you saying...One time wash all debts, install some sort of protections against it further, then go back to business as usual?My PSA for this thread.....this last post by SC has been addressed ad nauseum in various other threads on this board. That he continues with it should tell you he's not listening to other perspectives....it's ok to move on.
As to the topic, it's unfortunate that we need to hit the "reset" button on education, but it seems we do. When we hit that button there is going to be some people who normally would be required to get out of their bad choices on their own that end up being bailed out. Hopefully there is something in the legislation that prevents it from being done again and accountability assigned moving forward. This isn't all that dissimilar from the financial "reset" in 2008 that was required. We did that for corporations and even put controls in place to minimize the chances of it happening again. Hopefully, they don't all get rolled back before 2020 allowing for that same toxic environment. I say that as any employee who's being sold to someone else as a direct result of those policies. Just because the industry doesn't like them doesn't mean they aren't good for them. Those regulations help minimize the possibility of a 2008 happening again. Hopefully Warren puts measures into her plan to help minimize the possibility of what's happening right now from happening again once things are reset.
SC refuses to acknowledge that we all don't start at the same place in life and thinks we all have the same obstacles to overcome in the race of life. It's not worth your time.NCCommish said:No one is being judged. This is a way to give a hand up to people who need it. Which in turn will make them more successful, which will in turn make their kids more successful. Which in turn will make all of us more successful.
Some people know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
I think the point is fair however. Why only BLACK colleges......There are millions of non blacks who are facing HUGE obstacles..Do we just forget about them?SC refuses to acknowledge that we all don't start at the same place in life and thinks we all have the same obstacles to overcome in the race of life. It's not worth your time.
Personally, I'd remove the special protections of student loans when it comes to filing bankruptcy and let the reconciliation happen that way. It requires the individual to make a decision to either figure out how to pay the loans or file bankruptcy to get out from under the loans. That way, they are "penalized" to some extent for washing their hands of their obligation. This special protection is a significant part of the problem.So what are you saying...One time wash all debts, install some sort of protections against it further, then go back to business as usual?
Agree - I opened 529 plans the day both my kids were born and had it automatic withdrawal that I estimated would save 75% of college costs. Both my kids will graduate with no student debt.Juxtatarot said:One reason I don't like it is the inherent unfairness. There are people that saved and sacrificed to pay for college (arguably "doing the right thing") and they get nothing. Those that decided to borrow get rewarded.
Was that Oscar Wilde or Olivia, I can never remember.NCCommish said:No one is being judged. This is a way to give a hand up to people who need it. Which in turn will make them more successful, which will in turn make their kids more successful. Which in turn will make all of us more successful.
Some people know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
I agree with her campaign circling the drain but I think was always going to be part of her platform.knowledge dropper said:It’s been reparations, impeachment and now this. She sees the handwriting on the wall that her campaign is circling the drain and needs to get some attention fast.