Bernie Sanders Proposal to Forgive $1.6 Trillion on All Student Loan Debt

[BC_89]

Bernie Sanders unveils plan to cancel all $1.6 trillion of student loan debt

Sen. Bernie Sanders unveiled a plan to cancel $1.6 trillion of student loan undergraduate and graduate debt for approximately 45 million people. His ambitious plan has no eligibility limitations and would be paid for with a new tax on Wall Street speculation.

www.wtva.com

No pre-qualification or limit cap. Anyone and everyone that has student debt will have it all forgiven. How? Taxing Wall Street on stock trades, bonds, and derivatives.

For those current pharmacists with current loan debt, do you feel possible relief? Will it go through? Would current students try to max out unsubsidized, grad plus loans to take advantage of a taxation that may affect your retirement funds?

Personally I don't agree with it nor think it'll work. But curious what current pharmacy investment traders and those with student debt think of the proposal.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[BMBiology]

Look up how many bills Bernie have proposed vs. how many actually passed

 

[beautifulrobot]

I would much rather strengthen and expand PSLF than just forgive loans with no strings attached. Especially with these bleak stories regarding rural health care in this country. Same thing with free tuition for higher ed - rather than blanket free tuition, create more public service scholarships, especially for folks who are disqualified from military service for medical reasons, but who otherwise are eligible for civil service jobs.

In terms of retirement accounts, getting rid of all student loan debt will probably stimulate the economy (more disposable income to spend on consumer goods, encourage taking out mortgages, etc.), so the ultimate effects on our retirement funds will be a bit unpredictable, and they won't necessarily irrevocably suffer. Although with all the doom and gloom around climate change, how student loan debt will impact our retirement funds in the long term (20-30 years from now) is probably the least of our worries. I'm more worried about how increasing natural disasters, shifts in infectious diseases, and rising sea levels and population displacement will impact our national safety, not to mention the strain on the economy and our retirement investments. But I digress.

 

[321931]

Bernie Sanders unveils plan to cancel all $1.6 trillion of student loan debt

Sen. Bernie Sanders unveiled a plan to cancel $1.6 trillion of student loan undergraduate and graduate debt for approximately 45 million people. His ambitious plan has no eligibility limitations and would be paid for with a new tax on Wall Street speculation.

www.wtva.com

No pre-qualification or limit cap. Anyone and everyone that has student debt will have it all forgiven. How? Taxing Wall Street on stock trades, bonds, and derivatives.

For those current pharmacists with current loan debt, do you feel possible relief? Will it go through? Would current students try to max out unsubsidized, grad plus loans to take advantage of a taxation that will affect your retirement funds?

Personally I don't agree with it nor think it'll work. But curious what current pharmacy investment traders and those with student debt think of the proposal.

It won't ever pass. Universal healthcare has a higher chance of passing....and that chance is like almost negligible. Just my two cents.

 

[BMBiology]

I would much rather strengthen and expand PSLF than just forgive loans with no strings attached. Especially with these bleak stories regarding rural health care in this country. Same thing with free tuition for higher ed - rather than blanket free tuition, create more public service scholarships, especially for folks who are disqualified from military service for medical reasons, but who otherwise are eligible for civil service jobs.

In terms of retirement accounts, getting rid of all student loan debt will probably stimulate the economy (more disposable income to spend on consumer goods, encourage taking out mortgages, etc.), so the ultimate effects on our retirement funds will be a bit unpredictable, and they won't necessarily irrevocably suffer. Although with all the doom and gloom around climate change, how student loan debt will impact our retirement funds in the long term (20-30 years from now) is probably the least of our worries. I'm more worried about how increasing natural disasters, shifts in infectious diseases, and rising sea levels and population displacement will impact our national safety, not to mention the strain on the economy and our retirement investments. But I digress.

The problem with loan forgiveness is it encourages colleges to keep on increasing tuition and for students to borrow to the max.

Whether you “borrowed” 150 k or 300 k, your monthly payment would be the same for the next 10 years so why not borrowed more?

We are overprescribing college and we believe everyone should go to college, even for degrees that don’t have market value. However, only 60% of college graduates actually use their degree:

Instead of telling everyone they should go to college, we need to provide high school graduates with an alternative like trade schools.

 

[VA77]

All Joe Biden has do to is keep kissing babies and not say anything controversial and he has got the nomination.

 

[right500]

The military would lose a powerful recruiting tool if college debt (public or private, undergrad or grad) is wiped away. And, if college is "free" the GI Bill education benefits are worthless. The loan forgiveness for working at a not-for-profit would be gutted too. The unintended consequences seem pretty expensive.

 

[BMBiology]

I would let students, who simply can’t pay off their student loans, file for bankruptcy like any other debt.

 

[BC_89]

The problem with loan forgiveness is it encourages colleges to keep on increasing tuition and for students to borrow to the max.

Instead of telling everyone they should go to college, we need to provide high school graduates with an alternative like trade schools.

This is my line of thinking. It would introduce an enticing incentive for all universities to dramatically increase tuition because...why not? Only this time, more for the taking than perhaps ever before.

I also support the claim that college for a majority of jobs are overrated and trade schools are the way to go for most. I remember when I graduated high school over a decade ago I went straight into welding jobs (MIG specifically) with a contracting company, then a clock in / out blue collar job. Back when minimum wage in the Midwest was $5.15 to $5.50 an hour I remember getting upward to $15 / hr plus OT.

Of course, not long after the recessions of '08 hit the Midwest hard and closed down many of the jobs I had once worked at

 

[owlegrad]

I mean you can flip that statistic and say that 60% of college graduates take a job requiring a degree immediately after graduating and that almost 4 out of 5 college graduates are working in a position that require a degree within 10 years of earning one. Frankly ~80% sounds like a VERY reasonable number to me. What do we want the number to be? 95%? 100%? Frankly I am stunned that that many people go on to work in jobs that require a degree. Maybe college IS a good idea if so many graduates end up in jobs requiring a degree. If 0% of people without a degree end up in jobs that require a degree (I presume that is axiomatic) and 80ish% of people who get degrees end up in a job that requires one that doesn't seem like such a bad deal does it?

I don't know how I feel about forgiveness for all. I imagine the effects on the economy would be dramatic. I am more curious what we do next if that went through - would we just keep giving a blank check for all future graduates? I imagine colleges would love that I assume as they could increase tuition to "one million infinities" or whatever number they have the balls to settle on. I would be down for a system where state schools or some portion of tuition was covered but obviously a blank check is totally unreasonable/unsustainable.

 

[beautifulrobot]

The problem with loan forgiveness is it encourages colleges to keep on increasing tuition and for students to borrow to the max.

Whether you “borrowed” 150 k or 300 k, your monthly payment would be the same for the next 10 years so why not borrowed more?

We are overprescribing college and we believe everyone should go to college, even for degrees that don’t have market value. However, only 40% of college graduates actually use their degree:

Instead of telling everyone they should go to college, we need to provide high school graduates with an alternative like trade schools.

I agree about overprescribing college. I would even take it further and argue that 40% is an overestimate, as there are many jobs that state they require a college degree that actually don't really require a college degree. Either way, I am all for promoting trade schools (as well as military service, apprenticeships, and other alternatives to 4-year colleges) as a respectable way to gain skills for earning a living and contributing to society.

And although you're probably right that loan forgiveness in its current iteration can contribute to run-away tuition costs, it doesn't have to if we cap the amount of loans forgiven or cap the amount one can borrow to begin with. Plus, the fact that you still need to pay back a portion of those loans, and that you have to work in public service for an extended period of time, already provides some deterrence from frivolously going to college and taking out a whole bunch of loans.

 

[BMBiology]

I mean you can flip that statistic and say that 60% of college graduates take a job requiring a degree immediately after graduating and that almost 4 out of 5 college graduates are working in a position that require a degree within 10 years of earning one. Frankly ~80% sounds like a VERY reasonable number to me. What do we want the number to be? 95%? 100%? Frankly I am stunned that that many people go on to work in jobs that require a degree. Maybe college IS a good idea if so many graduates end up in jobs requiring a degree. If 0% of people without a degree end up in jobs that require a degree (I presume that is axiomatic) and 80ish% of people who get degrees end up in a job that requires one that doesn't seem like such a bad deal does it?

I don't know how I feel about forgiveness for all. I imagine the effects on the economy would be dramatic. I am more curious what we do next if that went through - would we just keep giving a blank check for all future graduates? I imagine colleges would love that I assume as they could increase tuition to "one million infinities" or whatever number they have the balls to settle on. I would be down for a system where state schools or some portion of tuition was covered but obviously a blank check is totally unreasonable/unsustainable.

You are OK with spending 4 years and $100 k knowing you only have 60% probability of ever using your degree? Seems like pretty bad odds to me.

What is troubling is the % of graduates using their degree is actually getting smaller and smaller.

 

[BMBiology]

I agree about overprescribing college. I would even take it further and argue that 40% is an overestimate, as there are many jobs that state they require a college degree that actually don't really require a college degree. Either way, I am all for promoting trade schools (as well as military service, apprenticeships, and other alternatives to 4-year colleges) as a respectable way to gain skills for earning a living and contributing to society.

And although you're probably right that loan forgiveness in its current iteration can contribute to run-away tuition costs, it doesn't have to if we cap the amount of loans forgiven or cap the amount one can borrow to begin with. Plus, the fact that you still need to pay back a portion of those loans, and that you have to work in public service for an extended period of time, already provides some deterrence from frivolously going to college and taking out a whole bunch of loans.

We don’t need loan forgiveness if we control cost. There is no point of forgiving 10 k when tuition went up 50 k. We need to nip the problem at the source.

 

[owlegrad]

You are OK with spending 4 years and $100 k knowing you only have 60% probability of ever using your degree? Seems like pretty bad odds to me.

What is troubling is the % of graduates using their degree is actually getting smaller and smaller.

80% within 10 years. What do you think the number should be?

And how do we know it’s getting smaller? Facts not in evidence.

 

[BMBiology]

80% within 10 years. What do you think the number should be?

And how do we know it’s getting smaller? Facts not in evidence.

 

[owlegrad]

What's the "underemployment" rate for non-college grads? Again, what do you think these numbers *should* be? What were they historically?

I mean your screenshots are nice and all but without context they are basically meaningless. You are also moving the goal posts.

I agree with a lot of what I am reading in this thread. Trade schools are great. Alternatives to 4 year degrees are great. But what is the point of looking at the % of graduates who are not in a job that requires a degree or who are underemployed (do those things mean the same thing?) without looking at the same statistic for the general public or at least looking at the same statistic over time? What conclusions can we draw from it?

 

[BMBiology]

What's the "underemployment" rate for non-college grads? Again, what do you think these numbers *should* be? What were they historically?

I mean your screenshots are nice and all but without context they are basically meaningless. You are also moving the goal posts.

I agree with a lot of what I am reading in this thread. Trade schools are great. Alternatives to 4 year degrees are great. But what is the point of looking at the % of graduates who are not in a job that requires a degree or who are underemployed (do those things mean the same thing?) without looking at the same statistic for the general public or at least looking at the same statistic over time? What conclusions can we draw from it?

You want context? Use the internet. You are a college graduate ‍

 

[DrVader]

Bernie Sanders unveils plan to cancel all $1.6 trillion of student loan debt

Sen. Bernie Sanders unveiled a plan to cancel $1.6 trillion of student loan undergraduate and graduate debt for approximately 45 million people. His ambitious plan has no eligibility limitations and would be paid for with a new tax on Wall Street speculation.

www.wtva.com

No pre-qualification or limit cap. Anyone and everyone that has student debt will have it all forgiven. How? Taxing Wall Street on stock trades, bonds, and derivatives.

For those current pharmacists with current loan debt, do you feel possible relief? Will it go through? Would current students try to max out unsubsidized, grad plus loans to take advantage of a taxation that will affect your retirement funds?

Personally I don't agree with it nor think it'll work. But curious what current pharmacy investment traders and those with student debt think of the proposal.

Right now I am working through Bankruptcy on my student loans. I wish that they would do something about that. They should eliminate 523 (a) (8). The student loan bubble is exactly the same as the mortgage crisis. The unlimited source of money has caused colleges to raise tuition, which requires even more money which requires even more tuition. The whole system will collapse. The problem with the college system is that 1. college has become a social good instead of a means of obtaining goods. 2. College is about signaling, employers don't trust High School Degree anymore. They want someone who is going to know how to do their job on day one. 3. Degree inflation

 

[owlegrad]

You want context? Use the internet. You are a college graduate ‍

Make your point for you? LOL ok sure.

 

[beautifulrobot]

We don’t need loan forgiveness if we control cost. There is no point of forgiving 10 k when tuition went up 50 k. We need to nip the problem at the source.

Yeah, that's true moving forward with stopping student loan debt from ballooning even more. Though in terms of the current $1.6 trillion in student loan debt, I would rather see a plan focusing on PSLF and developing other public service loan repayment programs rather than just straight up loan forgiveness without any strings attached.

 

[BMBiology]

Make your point for you? LOL ok sure.

I don’t want this to be a pissing match. If you are interested, then do some research and come to your own conclusion.

 

[DrVader]

Bernie Sanders unveils plan to cancel all $1.6 trillion of student loan debt

Sen. Bernie Sanders unveiled a plan to cancel $1.6 trillion of student loan undergraduate and graduate debt for approximately 45 million people. His ambitious plan has no eligibility limitations and would be paid for with a new tax on Wall Street speculation.

www.wtva.com

No pre-qualification or limit cap. Anyone and everyone that has student debt will have it all forgiven. How? Taxing Wall Street on stock trades, bonds, and derivatives.

For those current pharmacists with current loan debt, do you feel possible relief? Will it go through? Would current students try to max out unsubsidized, grad plus loans to take advantage of a taxation that will affect your retirement funds?

Personally I don't agree with it nor think it'll work. But curious what current pharmacy investment traders and those with student debt think of the proposal.

This is why democracy's die. Mob Rule and people voting themselves stuff. It is nothing but bread and Circuses. After they eat the 1%, then it will be 10%, then the middle class and so on till the whole system collapses.

 

[BMBiology]

Yeah, that's true moving forward with stopping student loan debt from ballooning even more. Though in terms of the current $1.6 trillion in student loan debt, I would rather see a plan focusing on PSLF and developing other public service loan repayment programs rather than just straight up loan forgiveness without any strings attached.

You would then need to create another government bureaucracy to see who would qualify or not qualify.

It is also a fairness question. If I worked for Kaiser (non profit), my loans would be forgiven but not if I salved away at CVS? How is that fair? Why should the government decide?

Let’s not even talk about people who will try to game the system.

There is really no one answer to this problem. I think letting people declare bankruptcy should be a start. Let them show they can’t possibly pay it off. Their credit would be destroyed like any other debt forgiveness.

 

[right500]

You would then need to create another government bureaucracy to see who would qualify or not qualify.

It is also a fairness question. If I worked for Kaiser (non profit), my loans would be forgiven but not if I salved away at CVS? How is that fair? Why should the government decide?

Let’s not even talk about people who will try to game the system.

There is really no one answer to this problem. I think letting people declare bankruptcy should be a start. Let them show they can’t possibly pay it off. Their credit would be destroyed like any other debt forgiveness.

My understanding is that not-for-profits underpay out of necessity and the government is essentially providing an added fringe benefit of loan forgiveness. The intended organizations are usually smaller and less financially secure than the Kaisers of the world. We think of healthcare not-for-profits which act like profit-driven corporations because that is our industry but the rules apply to everyone. For example, if someone works for a charity to protect black-footed ferret habitat they would have their loans forgiven because they are preventing the extinction of a keystone North American grasslands species. Those kinds of groups would go under without the additional subsidizing of skilled labor. CVS's specific contribution to the world is stock gains but the (fictional) Beneficent Black-Footed Ferret Foundation has an immaterial impact.

 

[BMBiology]

My understanding is that not-for-profits underpay out of necessity and the government is essentially providing an added fringe benefit of loan forgiveness. The intended organizations are usually smaller and less financially secure than the Kaisers of the world. We think of healthcare not-for-profits which act like profit-driven corporations because that is our industry but the rules apply to everyone. For example, if someone works for a charity to protect black-footed ferret habitat they would have their loans forgiven because they are preventing the extinction of a keystone North American grasslands species. Those kinds of groups would go under without the additional subsidizing of skilled labor. CVS's specific contribution to the world is stock gains but the (fictional) Beneficent Black-Footed Ferret Foundation has an immaterial impact.

Do you know how much Kaiser is paying their pharmacists? It would blow you out of the water.

If someone is going to take a lower paying job at a non profit or government then most likely, there are other things that would offset it like better benefits, more PTO, more holidays, better locations.

Do you know how hard it is to land a government job? Nobody leaves.

We should avoid letting the government decide for us. The people should decide. We know what is best for us.

 

[BC_89]

Right now I am working through Bankruptcy on my student loans. I wish that they would do something about that. They should eliminate 523 (a) (8).

I’ve heard of 2 individuals trying to get a partial bankruptcy. Instead, they were offered a restructured pay-out which, to me, sounds like a glorified REPAYE system. I’ve heard courts using the “Brunner Test” to validate 3 main factors to prove undue hardship:

https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/repay-loans/forgiveness-cancellation/bankruptcy

Never actually knew a person to prove it though without a permanent severe handicap.

 

[owlegrad]

Pros And Cons Of Canceling Student Loan Debt

Student loan debt in the United States has risen to $1.6 trillion owed by tens of millions of people, leading to calls for it to be wiped out, although opponents are concerned about the economic and ethical consequences. The Onion evaluates the pros and cons of canceling student loan debt.

www.theonion.com

 

[beautifulrobot]

You would then need to create another government bureaucracy to see who would qualify or not qualify.

It is also a fairness question. If I worked for Kaiser (non profit), my loans would be forgiven but not if I salved away at CVS? How is that fair? Why should the government decide?

Let’s not even talk about people who will try to game the system.

There is really no one answer to this problem. I think letting people declare bankruptcy should be a start. Let them show they can’t possibly pay it off. Their credit would be destroyed like any other debt forgiveness.

Maybe declaring bankruptcy should be an option as well, but it could be concurrent with PSLF, and give people other options besides having to ruin their credit (which on a mass scale is probably not a great thing for society). PSLF also provides the benefit of providing an incentive to work in public service jobs that would otherwise have a harder time recruiting employees.

Just because it will be hard to figure out who qualifies and to ensure protections against fraud doesn't mean it's not worth doing. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

 

[beautifulrobot]

Do you know how hard it is to land a government job? Nobody leaves.

Not true. There are downsides to working for the government that not everyone is able to deal with long term.

 

[BMBiology]

Not true. There are downsides to working for the government that not everyone is able to deal with long term.

Same thing with CVS. Not everyone can handle it for 10 years so they leave.

They should stay because the job is a good fit for them, not because of loan forgiveness. If they are miserable, how is that good for the government if they stay?

 

[BenJammin]

It's a lot easier to have BMBiology, tikitorches, owlegrad, CetiAlphaFive, and myself pay for your student loans rather than acting like an adult by paying your goddamn bills. Is it any question how I feel about this?

 

[Transformer]

Bernie Sanders unveils plan to cancel all $1.6 trillion of student loan debt

Sen. Bernie Sanders unveiled a plan to cancel $1.6 trillion of student loan undergraduate and graduate debt for approximately 45 million people. His ambitious plan has no eligibility limitations and would be paid for with a new tax on Wall Street speculation.

www.wtva.com

No pre-qualification or limit cap. Anyone and everyone that has student debt will have it all forgiven. How? Taxing Wall Street on stock trades, bonds, and derivatives.

For those current pharmacists with current loan debt, do you feel possible relief? Will it go through? Would current students try to max out unsubsidized, grad plus loans to take advantage of a taxation that may affect your retirement funds?

Personally I don't agree with it nor think it'll work. But curious what current pharmacy investment traders and those with student debt think of the proposal.

I also don't think the act of forgiving alone is going to work.

The root of the issue are systematic problems with our student loan program. How do we try to fix the system so our children won't have to endure the same heavy student loan / unemployement dilemma we have today?

I have nothing against forgiveness as long as we come up with a plan to hold all the players in the student loan system accountable! (lenders/banks, colleges, loan servicing companies, and government/ dept of education)

Example: If only 60% pharm D. graduates were able to find a full time job within x years or months after graduation, then this college of pharmacy must disclose to newest entering class that they can only provide a reduced amount of federal student loans. This may give pharmacy students the opportunity to choose a school with a high percentage of graduates with full time jobs.

 

[Pharmd = Phake Doctor]

Same thing with CVS. Not everyone can handle it for 10 years so they leave.

They should stay because the job is a good fit for them, not because of loan forgiveness. If they are miserable, how is that good for the government if they stay?

You've never worked for the government have you?

 

[lord999]

You've never worked for the government have you?

"When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators, then the people."

Government has its own inscrutable motives to most outside, but extremely twisted and morbidly hilarious to internal servants. "Everyone has a purpose" in the same way that "problem employees will take care of themselves."

As for my take on welfare, someone's gotta pay sometime. I already pay for two programs that are actuarially doomed: FICA to CMS and SS. What would another one mean to me?

It's a lot easier to have BMBiology, tikitorches, owlegrad, CetiAlphaFive, and myself pay for your student loans rather than acting like an adult by paying your goddamn bills. Is it any question how I feel about this?

Personally, I don't mind paying it for one ugly reason, since when did most of the young make reasonable decisions on their college majors in the first place, just like high school? Because the way that will end up working, it will devalue the effect of postsecondary education just like every other country. We'll be fine either way, most of us are practical enough that regardless of the rules, we'll find a way to win. As well, the same people who are in poverty will remain in poverty as it's a vicious cycle and stupidity breeds itself. All of those people you mentioned including yourself already have better than what these new grads are ever going to get in terms of any decency in their careers. There is a marginal limit to offering opportunity, just like car loans, just like home mortgages. It does not matter in the end if you extend great terms to unworthy people, they will manage to sink anything you offer.

I do think that this expansion is a conspiracy to make the citizen even more dependent on the government and will result in some kind of dependency or enslavement to some government objectives, which is their endpoint anyway. All organizations inherently want to survive irrespective of the other. The question that the majority of Americans want in this ochlocracy is what's in it for me? And considering how this last thirty years has been, why not?

 

[mentos]

So for those of us who worked our butts off to pay off our student loans aggressively, cause you know we intended to pay back what we borrowed, do we get a refund? Didn't think so. I don't see how anyone who paid off their loans would vote for this guy.

Free college for all would just create more pharmacy schools and doom our profession even more.

 

[Stagg737]

I mean you can flip that statistic and say that 60% of college graduates take a job requiring a degree immediately after graduating and that almost 4 out of 5 college graduates are working in a position that require a degree within 10 years of earning one. Frankly ~80% sounds like a VERY reasonable number to me. What do we want the number to be? 95%? 100%? Frankly I am stunned that that many people go on to work in jobs that require a degree. Maybe college IS a good idea if so many graduates end up in jobs requiring a degree. If 0% of people without a degree end up in jobs that require a degree (I presume that is axiomatic) and 80ish% of people who get degrees end up in a job that requires one that doesn't seem like such a bad deal does it?

I don't know how I feel about forgiveness for all. I imagine the effects on the economy would be dramatic. I am more curious what we do next if that went through - would we just keep giving a blank check for all future graduates? I imagine colleges would love that I assume as they could increase tuition to "one million infinities" or whatever number they have the balls to settle on. I would be down for a system where state schools or some portion of tuition was covered but obviously a blank check is totally unreasonable/unsustainable.

The problem is that most jobs that "require" a degree are jobs that someone can do without one. Before med school I worked as a delivery driver and one of the first questions I was asked was if I had a college degree. I actually asked my interviewer if he was serious because I was so shocked. College is the new high school in terms of required education which is completely ridiculous.

Another issue isn't just the requirements or number of people that would be forgiven, it's that 4 year graduation rates are abysmal. Only 40% of college students in 4 year programs graduate in 4 years and only ~60% graduate in 8 years. So not only are large numbers of them not graduating at all, but about 1/3 of them take over 4 years to graduate. If college suddenly becomes free or debts are forgiven, what's stopping people from going and just taking more than 4 years or just not taking it seriously at all because it's just a free ride?

Imo if they want to pull something like this, make it like an HPSP scholarship. You go get your degree for free, work for the gov for a few years, and then you're free to do whatever. If you fail out, drop out, or just don't want to work for the gov after, then you get to pay it all back like anyone else who took out fed loans. There's got to be an incentive to actually do something or give something back with that free education. Free rides don't work.

 

[owlegrad]

The problem is that most jobs that "require" a degree are jobs that someone can do without one. Before med school I worked as a delivery driver and one of the first questions I was asked was if I had a college degree. I actually asked my interviewer if he was serious because I was so shocked. College is the new high school in terms of required education which is completely ridiculous.

it is ridiculous, but doesn't that make it even more crucial for anyone who wants a decent job to go to college? Talk about a vicious cycle.

I bet a lot of these "college shouldn't be free" arguments were made for high school (and probably even elementary school) back in the day as well. Other than a vague since of "If I paid so should other people" is there really a reason to think that primary-high school school should be tax payer funded but college shouldn't be? Or I guess a mix of private-public would be more accurate.

 

[Stagg737]

it is ridiculous, but doesn't that make it even more crucial for anyone who wants a decent job to go to college? Talk about a vicious cycle.

I bet a lot of these "college shouldn't be free" arguments were made for high school (and probably even elementary school) back in the day as well. Other than a vague since of "If I paid so should other people" is there really a reason to think that primary-high school school should be tax payer funded but college shouldn't be? Or I guess a mix of private-public would be more accurate.

I personally think there needs to be a hard reset on education in this country. College is no longer about being an educational institution, it's a business and this can be seen through the rec centers, campus groups, food courts, etc that are advertised to incoming students. Get the country back to a point where you don't need a college degree just to be a secretary or a sales person. It will hurt in the short run, but potentially save things long-term.

As for free primary education, our society has deemed it a right that everyone have access to a foundational education which will allow them to be contributing members of society. Idk the historical specifics, but at some point we decided that high school was that baseline level required to get a decent job that provided a living wage. By pushing more people going into college, we've essentially made a smaller work-force caring for a greater number of people who need to be accounted for by making typical working ages from 18-65 to 22+-65. So if we want to extend the number of free/subsidized education years then we need to change the retirement age or find another way to make major changes.

 

[owlegrad]

So if we want to extend the number of free/subsidized education years then we need to change the retirement age or find another way to make major changes.

Perhaps the major change we need is to realize that with automation/increases in productivity we don't need to work people to death to have a functional economy? We will certainly need an even deeper paradigm shift once robots replace us all after all.

 

[Stagg737]

Perhaps the major change we need is to realize that with automation/increases in productivity we don't need to work people to death to have a functional economy? We will certainly need an even deeper paradigm shift once robots replace us all after all.

Which is great, but then how do we plan on paying and supporting all those people whose jobs will be lost to automation? I can think of some very effective and relatively easy solutions, but they're not really the most ethical or humane ideas...

 

[Subvisual]

I've paid off my loans but I still support this 100%. It would do an enormous amount of moral good in relieving the soul crushing anxiety of entering the workforce already enormously in debt - something young adults absolutely do not need. The modern world has stress plenty enough

It would also free young adults to actually move forward with having families, buying homes etc. without a massive Sword of Damocles following them everywhere. This relief of debt would free them to spend and just reinvest in growing our economy.

The system as it stands is basically the most hellishly idiotic system possible. Either a fully private system or a fully public system would be preferable to the neo-liberal government subsidized monster we have currently (kind of similar to healthcare in that regard). The loan providers get free money which is guaranteed by the federal government. Universities are encouraged to raise tuition and enroll as many students as possible to maximize $, as the government securing all these loans makes the demand curve perfectly inelastic relative to of cost. Students are left holding the bag with no real alternatives to higher education if they want a secure job, and as the final screw you the system makes it virtually impossible for them to declare bankruptcy and start anew.

Much like healthcare, the system will require the government to intervene at both ends. Its not enough to just subsidize the consumer as that just encourages the suppliers to endlessly inflate prices. The government needs to get involved in negotiating down the costs too. Still, relieving the millions suffering under a ridiculous burden of debt would be an excellent first start at fixing the system.

 

[Pharmacy is a Scam]

So for those of us who worked our butts off to pay off our student loans aggressively, cause you know we intended to pay back what we borrowed, do we get a refund? Didn't think so. I don't see how anyone who paid off their loans would vote for this guy.

Free college for all would just create more pharmacy schools and doom our profession even more.

Yeah if this bill passes, then pharmacy school would cost $500,000 to attend and pharmacists would be making $15/hr by 2030. Then again, the profession has already been trending this way independent of the student debt bubble...

 

[PharmtoCS]

It would also free young adults to actually move forward with having families, buying homes etc. without a massive Sword of Damocles following them everywhere. This relief of debt would free them to spend and just reinvest in growing our economy.

So what about those of us who went to less expensive schools, minimized living expenses, worked during school, avoided frivolous purchases (i.e. vacations, expensive gadgets, etc), and paid down debt as quickly as possible after getting licensed? Can we receive a handout as well? Because that would help us invest in growing our economy too.

 

[disgonbgud]

I am relatively progressive compared to most on this forum, but this is ridiculous and hopefully will never pass.
This punishes investors for participating in the economy, including the every day people Bernie wants to support. Wouldn't this affect basic retirement ETFs? What about graduates who chose schools that they could afford rather than the expensive school that would have given them more connections and opportunities? It is unfair to people who sacrificed opportunities to make sound financial decisions. Elizabeth Warren's version is much more reasonable. I understand student loan debt is getting out of control, but just cancelling it unconditionally is incredibly short-sighted.

 

[GypsyHummus]

I’m fine with people picking up the tab for college loan debt. Have the colleges pay for it. They have the endowments to do so and they are the ones raising the price.

You could pay off the college debt without transferring it to the taxpayers.

 

[Sparda29]

All Joe Biden has do to is keep kissing babies and not say anything controversial and he has got the nomination.

Biden is trash. 'I would put the son of a gun in jail': Joe Biden said in a 2001 hearing that he wanted to criminalize raves and 'lock up' rave promoters

 

[BMBiology]

College is the new high school.

 

[DrVader]

I’ve heard of 2 individuals trying to get a partial bankruptcy. Instead, they were offered a restructured pay-out which, to me, sounds like a glorified REPAYE system. I’ve heard courts using the “Brunner Test” to validate 3 main factors to prove undue hardship:

https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/repay-loans/forgiveness-cancellation/bankruptcy

Never actually knew a person to prove it though without a permanent severe handicap.

You use bankruptcy to negotiate your loans down. I got Sallie Mae to go from 43k to 12k for 15 years no interest. Lenders won't negotiate with you unless you are doing bankruptcy. The Brunner test is commonly used but it depends on your circuit. Also your judge and your story. Student loan bankruptcy is more akin to a lawsuit than bankruptcy.

 

[confettiflyer]

There is really no one answer to this problem. I think letting people declare bankruptcy should be a start. Let them show they can’t possibly pay it off. Their credit would be destroyed like any other debt forgiveness.

Bankruptcy really just wrecks your credit for 3 years from a functional perspective. Lenders are dying to give my old post-bk clients loans and credit cards. It just falls off at 7 years entirely.

But I doubt any of this legislation will pass. Remember when Trump promised coal jobs would come back? Same thing, Bernie bros.

 

[BMBiology]

Bankruptcy really just wrecks your credit for 3 years from a functional perspective. Lenders are dying to give my old post-bk clients loans and credit cards. It just falls off at 7 years entirely.

But I doubt any of this legislation will pass. Remember when Trump promised coal jobs would come back? Same thing, Bernie bros.

Hurting their credit score is one thing but I also think it is fair for them to prove they can’t pay off the loans they had agreed to pay back.

Yes, this won’t pass. Bernie can’t even convince one single senator to cosponsor his bill!