Biden has won.....What do you think will happen to student loans debt

[owlegrad]

Until the defund the police movement came about I truly had no idea how much funding police departments get. I don’t know how much funding they should get or how that money could be better used but holy moly do they get a lot of money.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[mentos]

Until the defund the police movement came about I truly had no idea how much funding police departments get. I don’t know how much funding they should get or how that money could be better used but holy moly do they get a lot of money.

It's pretty obvious just looking at their fleet of constant new vehicles.

 

[Marzapan]

Until the defund the police movement came about I truly had no idea how much funding police departments get. I don’t know how much funding they should get or how that money could be better used but holy moly do they get a lot of money.

Until riots started happening I truly had no idea how many police officers there were. Actually I still don't understand how this works -- are riot police specially drafted PRN officers to handle surges (like flu shot pharmacists) or are they regular enlisted officers who were called in during their off hours? What do riot police do when there are no riots?

 

[Chrish]

I have never understood the logic behind loan forgiveness. Why should any loan be forgiven? You decided to take a risk and invest into your education. If it paid off, great. If not, it's still on you. It's like saying, I invested $100k into penny stocks and it all went $0, and now I expect government to recoup my money for me.

If you are stupid enough to go into dying career like pharmacy, you are responsible for the outcome. That's why I am against government subsidized student loans. Let the private companies handle student loan; convince them to offer you a loan and let them deal with the consequences of you paying/ not paying it. Biden is already being pressured to do "something" about student loans and I have a feeling Dems will just give in to popular demand. People who have loans are being portrayed as victim of some sort of scam when in reality, they knew exactly what they were getting into when they signed that contract.

That's why I voted for Trump. I don't have to like him as a person but I like conservative policies better; such as no loan forgiveness, no $15 minimum wages or no food-stamp hand-outs. And that's the reason why I will be voting for Republicans in senate election in January. Current Dems are a radical bunch and power separation is essential.

 

[DagS132]

I have never understood the logic behind loan forgiveness. Why should any loan be forgiven?...

Education benefits society. I think the idea is to try to get to free education

 

[confettiflyer]

I have never understood the logic behind loan forgiveness. Why should any loan be forgiven? You decided to take a risk and invest into your education. If it paid off, great. If not, it's still on you. It's like saying, I invested $100k into penny stocks and it all went $0, and now I expect government to recoup my money for me.

If you are stupid enough to go into dying career like pharmacy, you are responsible for the outcome. That's why I am against government subsidized student loans. Let the private companies handle student loan; convince them to offer you a loan and let them deal with the consequences of you paying/ not paying it. Biden is already being pressured to do "something" about student loans and I have a feeling Dems will just give in to popular demand. People who have loans are being portrayed as victim of some sort of scam when in reality, they knew exactly what they were getting into when they signed that contract.

That's why I voted for Trump. I don't have to like him as a person but I like conservative policies better; such as no loan forgiveness, no $15 minimum wages or no food-stamp hand-outs. And that's the reason why I will be voting for Republicans in senate election in January. Current Dems are a radical bunch and power separation is essential.

So... you do know Trump's plan was to forgive student loans at 15 and 20 years, right? Albeit at 12.5% of income, this isn't far off from Obama's 10% IDR, and is actually more generous than that based on length of time he proposed.

Florida passed a $15 minimum wage law after solidly voting for Trump +400,000 votes. Those republican votes passed a higher minimum wage law, that's mind boggling to me.

Loan forgiveness was signed into law by George W. Bush in 2007, so any borrowers who took out money after then (which is most people given that it's been 13 years) have had loan forgiveness baked into their decision-making for some time now. All contracts are negotiable, this is a fact of business, and so I don't knock the electorate for negotiating via the ballot box.

But I generally agree with you that student loans should be risk stratified. $400k student loan for a physician makes sense, $400k for anything else doesn't really make sense.

 

[WorthlessOxygen]

Apparently I'm a marriage counselor now in the job market subforum

It looked like a lot of great advice too. I think you missed your true calling

 

[owlegrad]

Florida passed a $15 minimum wage law after solidly voting for Trump +400,000 votes. Those republican votes passed a higher minimum wage law, that's mind boggling to me.

I was more surprised about the minimum wage increasing then I was about Florida voting for Trump. It’s truly shocking to me. I can’t even tell you how many times I’ve heard people that barely make above minimum-wage going on and on about how minimum wage increases destroy jobs or how bad it is for their company. The fact that it passed boggled me. I mean I was surprised it was even on the ballot at all.

 

[owlegrad]

Isn’t loan forgiveness another tax break for the upper class tho? I read the majority of student loans belong to a household with a graduate degree.

I think the idea of “households with a graduate degree” also being “the upper class” should probably be re-examined. It’s possible that I am wildly out of touch but I suspect that most graduate degrees belong to middle class families. The upper class is probably dominated by businessman and investors, not graduate degree holders.

 

[owlegrad]

Well, 70% of the general public have just a high school degree. I think it is fair to say one’s income is highly correlated with one’s degree (graduate > undergrad > high school). I don’t have the time to look it up but I am sure that is accurate.

Like I am sure someone with an MBA is generally doing better financially than someone with a bachelor in business.

In general you are right. Considering how many pharmacy graduates have 200k+ in loans and no job, I think the "new" reality may surprise you though. I guess it depends on where you draw the line for "upper class". How many billionaires have graduate degrees?

According to Forbes: "While there are billionaires from all education backgrounds, most of the 400 got nothing more than an undergraduate degree."

 

[vm26]

When they say Defund the Police, what they are talking about is:

#1 - Getting rid of police unions. The police unions are the #1 reason why police departments are unable to get rid of problematic officers, violent officers, etc. They just move them around to ****tier precincts or demote them when they do something bad. The unions also promote a culture of not ratting out your fellow officer.

The officers that do rat out the bad officers get blacklisted, no one wants to work with them, they are made out to be cowards who won't back you up, etc. The unions promote an attitude of Us Vs Them. The police don't see the public as citizens who they serve but as potential threats.

#2 - Getting rid of military surplus equipment. There is no need for the police to be rolling around in APCs, BDRMs, carrying fully automatic rifles. They give them all the cool "operator" equipment but without the training that the "operators" go through. (Operator meaning Navy Seals, Special Forces, etc).

#3 - Reallocating money from equipment to training.

#4 - Disarming the majority of officers.

It is already known that the police have no obligation to protect you. You have to protect yourself (I support the 2nd amendment FYI). The police are only there to gather the evidence and take notes afterwards.

Black Lives Matter started around the time of Eric Gardner. Defund the Police was a catchphrase that started now because these killings are still happening. Yeah, there are some pretty violent perps out there who the police sometimes have to use force to bring under control. However, this was not the case with Eric Gardner and George Floyd. Then the issue with the Breonna Taylor case was the decision to use bad tactics for some petty narcotics activity. And there comes the big thing that needs to be defunded, the DEA and the War on Drugs.

That leads to the issue of mass incarceration as a result of Broken Windows Policing, and enforcing drug laws. Oregon has taken the correct step by decriminalizing all drug possession and use. It's fine to continue go after high level dealers and cartels, but leave the addicts alone. The police don't want this because they want to be able to arrest users and then use jail time as leverage for them to rat out who they bought their drugs from. Addiction is a disease not a criminal offense.

Why is it that when it comes to the legalization of marijuana and psychadelic mushrooms, the #1 opposition are the police unions, the prison guard unions, the private prison corporations? Answer, there is money to be made in locking people up.

Thx for the clarification. I guess we see things differently. It rubs me/many the wrong way when someone like Alyssa Milano wants to defund the police yet has the audacity to call 911 when she thinks she is in danger. I also think violent rioting does little to advance one's agenda-regardless of whether or not it is a legit cause. Systemic racism clearly exists but I don't think the Police department are the root cause, more like a symptom. Maybe I am naive but I truly think that 99% of cops would rather not have a violent confrontation during a shift. These guys/gals are working class blue collar and its hard not to respect the good work the vast majority of them due. These larger issues with policing and policy have to do with leadership and bureaucracy (police commissioners/mayors/governors etc). Not sure how to solve systemic racism, it's complex and there are a multitude of reasons/issues. Clearly the underlying issue is poverty and lack of opportunity for advancement.

 

[WorthlessOxygen]

Maybe I am naive but I truly think that 99% of cops would rather not have a violent confrontation during a shift. These guys/gals are working class blue collar and its hard not to respect the good work the vast majority of them due.

I keep hearing this type of response and it always confuses me. Reallocating funding to training instead of unnecessary equipment and holding the minority of bad officers accountable hardly seems like it's as anti-cop as a lot of people seem to think.

Then again, "defund the police" as a slogan might not have been the best choice since it just sounds fairly radical. I've heard so many people claim that the Democrats and BLM are calling for completely abolishing the police.

 

[rph3664]

Until riots started happening I truly had no idea how many police officers there were. Actually I still don't understand how this works -- are riot police specially drafted PRN officers to handle surges (like flu shot pharmacists) or are they regular enlisted officers who were called in during their off hours? What do riot police do when there are no riots?

(My mother was a police department secretary for many years)

Riot officers are specially trained to deal with these situations, and if it isn't their regular shift, they're getting overtime. Otherwise, they're just doing their "regular" jobs, whatever they may be.

My mother was still working for them in the early 1990s when Metallica was scheduled to play in their city, just a few weeks after one of their concerts had kicked off a 3-day riot. (In Jakarta, Indonesia!) Anyway, the riot squad was at the venue on standby, and the place also decided not to sell alcohol that night, and the riot squad's services turned out not to be needed. Not long after that, they played in the city where I was living (and attending pharmacy school) and one band member was spotted at a local movie theater catching a matinee after taking a cab, another was seen at a bookstore near campus, and as one could probably imagine, all the crazy stories were about Lars.

 

[vm26]

I keep hearing this type of response and it always confuses me. Reallocating funding to training instead of unnecessary equipment and holding the minority of bad officers accountable hardly seems like it's as anti-cop as a lot of people seem to think.

Then again, "defund the police" as a slogan might not have been the best choice since it just sounds fairly radical. I've heard so many people claim that the Democrats and BLM are calling for completely abolishing the police.

Agree. Big difference between reforming and defunding/abolishing

 

[mentos]

Until riots started happening I truly had no idea how many police officers there were. Actually I still don't understand how this works -- are riot police specially drafted PRN officers to handle surges (like flu shot pharmacists) or are they regular enlisted officers who were called in during their off hours? What do riot police do when there are no riots?

I would like to know this as well. My state university would routinely have riots every time their professional sports teams won or lost a championship. The police would be dropped off by the busloads with riot gear, just another day at work for them.

 

[Emmet2301]

Thx for the clarification. I guess we see things differently. It rubs me/many the wrong way when someone like Alyssa Milano wants to defund the police yet has the audacity to call 911 when she thinks she is in danger. I also think violent rioting does little to advance one's agenda-regardless of whether or not it is a legit cause. Systemic racism clearly exists but I don't think the Police department are the root cause, more like a symptom. Maybe I am naive but I truly think that 99% of cops would rather not have a violent confrontation during a shift. These guys/gals are working class blue collar and its hard not to respect the good work the vast majority of them due. These larger issues with policing and policy have to do with leadership and bureaucracy (police commissioners/mayors/governors etc). Not sure how to solve systemic racism, it's complex and there are a multitude of reasons/issues. Clearly the underlying issue is poverty and lack of opportunity for advancement.

I think it's the other way around.

 

[Farmgurl20]

Apparently I'm a marriage counselor now in the job market subforum

lol

 

[deleted769052]

I have never understood the logic behind loan forgiveness. Why should any loan be forgiven? You decided to take a risk and invest into your education. If it paid off, great. If not, it's still on you. It's like saying, I invested $100k into penny stocks and it all went $0, and now I expect government to recoup my money for me.

If you are stupid enough to go into dying career like pharmacy, you are responsible for the outcome. That's why I am against government subsidized student loans. Let the private companies handle student loan; convince them to offer you a loan and let them deal with the consequences of you paying/ not paying it. Biden is already being pressured to do "something" about student loans and I have a feeling Dems will just give in to popular demand. People who have loans are being portrayed as victim of some sort of scam when in reality, they knew exactly what they were getting into when they signed that contract.

That's why I voted for Trump. I don't have to like him as a person but I like conservative policies better; such as no loan forgiveness, no $15 minimum wages or no food-stamp hand-outs. And that's the reason why I will be voting for Republicans in senate election in January. Current Dems are a radical bunch and power separation is essential.

So you're okay with multi-billion/trillion-dollar corporations who have all skyrocketed to net revenues/profits during the pandemic (target, Walmart, home depot, apple, you name it) getting tax cuts of over 2 trillion and the bailout of over 2.5 trillion (which would equal more than 30k per taxpayer). If you help people instead of companies, they will reinvest that money directly back into the economy (car repairs, rent, debt, etc) and possibly become entrepreneurs themselves since they'll be free to invest and invent - which benefits everyone in the long run.

The children of those making 200k+ (most med/dental/pharmacy students tend to come from these families) will not suffer as much as those who come from nothing and go into debt while trying to figure out the education system for themselves.

Yes, there are those going 200k into debt studying the arts/underwater basket weaving but those people are a minority - and I do think loans should be limited for these programs or explicitly make it obvious that these degrees usually end up making 30k/year (the DOE could make them take a quiz and show them all the data - required for such schools) and sign an agreement that these loans will not be forgivable. - again, these people are a minority

The government spends 15 billion a year on school lunches - and you still have kids going hungry and eating ****ty food. Do you know what that does to children? It will impact their growth (physically and mentally) and that translates to a greater chance of being less/underproductive members of society. If we just doubled that number it would still be less than 0.7% of the national budget and pales in comparison to the 700+ billion we spend annually on military. - You will hear all about how some military department will literally destroy furniture/equipment so that their budget can be reset/raised.

Food stamps cost 60 billion - and yes there are some people who commit fraud but its the minority. COVID alone is costing the US economy $16 TRILLION
- if we had more educated people - more would wear masks and take other safety measures
- more people would figure out ways to work from home or work as safely as possible in occupations that require physical presence
- don't you think if we have spent 10% of that on educating and empowering our people - that the economic impact would have been much less
- when that janitor with underlying conditions catches covid and goes to the hospital - the taxpayers will be paying the 500k+ in health costs
- when that drug addict damages their liver and kidneys - they're automatically enrolled in Medicare and we're footing the bill as the taxpayer
- each inmate can cost 50-250k (in NYC) - we can definitely have some reform there

---- I'm not saying you're wrong but I welcome you to have a broader perspective. Just like you I work very hard for my money and I do not want it to be "taken away" but we're all being fooled by Trump and his goons - who pander to religious people to earn their vote while they go behind their backs and give tax cuts to their billionaire friends.

 

[Sparda29]

Thx for the clarification. I guess we see things differently. It rubs me/many the wrong way when someone like Alyssa Milano wants to defund the police yet has the audacity to call 911 when she thinks she is in danger. I also think violent rioting does little to advance one's agenda-regardless of whether or not it is a legit cause. Systemic racism clearly exists but I don't think the Police department are the root cause, more like a symptom. Maybe I am naive but I truly think that 99% of cops would rather not have a violent confrontation during a shift. These guys/gals are working class blue collar and its hard not to respect the good work the vast majority of them due. These larger issues with policing and policy have to do with leadership and bureaucracy (police commissioners/mayors/governors etc). Not sure how to solve systemic racism, it's complex and there are a multitude of reasons/issues. Clearly the underlying issue is poverty and lack of opportunity for advancement.

Another issue with the police, especially in places like New York is, police aren't assigned to patrol the neighborhoods where they live. Often times, a lot of the cops live in suburban areas like Suffolk County, Nassau County, Staten Island, but work in urban areas or the projects in NYC. This makes zero sense. The cops have no sense of what it is like to be from those communities and what daily life is like in those communities.

So you get fear of the unknown among the cops and the populace being patrolled. It's quite easy how to solve this issue. Make it a requirement that cops live in the same neighborhood that they are patrolling (this means not hiring cops from certain neighborhoods if there already are plenty of cops in that precinct).

 

[deleted769052]

They are not mutually exclusive. You can be against corporate give out and student loan forgiveness.

Besides, there is income based repayment. If you make less then you pay less.

In that case vote for neither

 

[PharmtoCS]

I have never understood the logic behind loan forgiveness. Why should any loan be forgiven? You decided to take a risk and invest into your education. If it paid off, great. If not, it's still on you. It's like saying, I invested $100k into penny stocks and it all went $0, and now I expect government to recoup my money for me.

If you are stupid enough to go into dying career like pharmacy, you are responsible for the outcome. That's why I am against government subsidized student loans. Let the private companies handle student loan; convince them to offer you a loan and let them deal with the consequences of you paying/ not paying it. Biden is already being pressured to do "something" about student loans and I have a feeling Dems will just give in to popular demand. People who have loans are being portrayed as victim of some sort of scam when in reality, they knew exactly what they were getting into when they signed that contract.

I would also add that academia is partially responsible by misleading students into pursuing any expensive degree that offer poor returns on investment. But those advocating for loan forgiveness are not targeting those who are responsible for, and/or profited from the student loan crisis. They want to make the rest of society pay for academia's fraud and the borrowers' mistakes.

We pretend like forgiving loans is a victimless act and how we're somehow getting something for nothing. Reality is that it's the same idea as dropping money onto these borrowers from a helicopter. A higher supply of money means higher prices of goods and services for everyone.

 

[vm26]

Meanwhile violent crime in NYC is going thru the roof:

View attachment 323631

Large increase in people leaving NYC compared to prior years, obviously Covid is a major reason but I would imagine the increase in crime is an
issue as well

 

[vm26]

So you're okay with multi-billion/trillion-dollar corporations who have all skyrocketed to net revenues/profits during the pandemic (target, Walmart, home depot, apple, you name it) getting tax cuts of over 2 trillion and the bailout of over 2.5 trillion (which would equal more than 30k per taxpayer). If you help people instead of companies, they will reinvest that money directly back into the economy (car repairs, rent, debt, etc) and possibly become entrepreneurs themselves since they'll be free to invest and invent - which benefits everyone in the long run.

The children of those making 200k+ (most med/dental/pharmacy students tend to come from these families) will not suffer as much as those who come from nothing and go into debt while trying to figure out the education system for themselves.

Yes, there are those going 200k into debt studying the arts/underwater basket weaving but those people are a minority - and I do think loans should be limited for these programs or explicitly make it obvious that these degrees usually end up making 30k/year (the DOE could make them take a quiz and show them all the data - required for such schools) and sign an agreement that these loans will not be forgivable. - again, these people are a minority

The government spends 15 billion a year on school lunches - and you still have kids going hungry and eating ****ty food. Do you know what that does to children? It will impact their growth (physically and mentally) and that translates to a greater chance of being less/underproductive members of society. If we just doubled that number it would still be less than 0.7% of the national budget and pales in comparison to the 700+ billion we spend annually on military. - You will hear all about how some military department will literally destroy furniture/equipment so that their budget can be reset/raised.

Food stamps cost 60 billion - and yes there are some people who commit fraud but its the minority. COVID alone is costing the US economy $16 TRILLION
- if we had more educated people - more would wear masks and take other safety measures
- more people would figure out ways to work from home or work as safely as possible in occupations that require physical presence
- don't you think if we have spent 10% of that on educating and empowering our people - that the economic impact would have been much less
- when that janitor with underlying conditions catches covid and goes to the hospital - the taxpayers will be paying the 500k+ in health costs
- when that drug addict damages their liver and kidneys - they're automatically enrolled in Medicare and we're footing the bill as the taxpayer
- each inmate can cost 50-250k (in NYC) - we can definitely have some reform there

---- I'm not saying you're wrong but I welcome you to have a broader perspective. Just like you I work very hard for my money and I do not want it to be "taken away" but we're all being fooled by Trump and his goons - who pander to religious people to earn their vote while they go behind their backs and give tax cuts to their billionaire friends.

I think the whole student loan/sky-rocketing tuition fiasco occurred well before Trump. Regardless, when I applied to med school I was told that my total loan amount should not exceed my anticipated 1st year earnings as an attending. I think thats a good rule of thumb to follow. Problem is than 10 years later the cost to attend the same in-state med school is like 100-150K more, and clearly most physicians have not received a similar raise.

Though our higher educational system is clearly broken, an individual has to take some responsibility in deciding to take out these types of loans...The field of pharmacy also got screwed several ways simultaneously. They changed to a doctorate degree with hopes of expanding scope of practice while simultaneously jacking up tuition and increasing class size while the field was being taken over by corporations like CVS. Obviously a total cluster for new grads. Not sure who should take the hit, prob a combo of pharm schools/Corporations but thats not going to happen in the real world

 

[deleted769052]

I think the whole student loan/sky-rocketing tuition fiasco occurred well before Trump. Regardless, when I applied to med school I was told that my total loan amount should not exceed my anticipated 1st year earnings as an attending. I think thats a good rule of thumb to follow. Problem is than 10 years later the cost to attend the same in-state med school is like 100-150K more, and clearly most physicians have not received a similar raise.

Though our higher educational system is clearly broken, an individual has to take some responsibility in deciding to take out these types of loans...The field of pharmacy also got screwed several ways simultaneously. They changed to a doctorate degree with hopes of expanding scope of practice while simultaneously jacking up tuition and increasing class size while the field was being taken over by corporations like CVS. Obviously a total cluster for new grads. Not sure who should take the hit, prob a combo of pharm schools/Corporations but thats not going to happen in the real world

I agree with what you're saying. My alma mater (undergrad) has a table showing the history of tuition over the last 30 years and it's crazy to think that one credit cost 40% as much in 2006 as it does now, while salaries certainly have not doubled for the average joe. What exactly is all this money going towards? More deans, dean's assistants, and assistants to the dean's assistants - you get the point. Not to mention an MD cost 120k at my school (including COL which was much lower 15 years ago) whereas it easily costs 300k now with the official class avg being 240k (since scholarships/some paying cash) - salaries have definitely not kept up.

Technology has made everything more efficient now and humans are more productive. We're doing more work in less time in industries, students in every discipline are learning more and doing more, but the fruits are going to those at the top.

 

[Sparda29]

Meanwhile violent crime in NYC is going thru the roof:

View attachment 323631

Easy answer for this.

People out of work and without money are gonna assault, burglarize, and kill for money.

The state did bungle the bail reform situation though. Pretty much people were getting arrested, processed, and then released on recognizance for most crimes when this bail reform was only to apply to non-violent offenders and drug possession/use offenders.

Also: three riders assaulted over three days? That's good. I believe over 1.5 million people ride the NYC subways daily. So 3 people out of 4.5 million assaulted? Pretty damn safe. There is a problem of how the police are utilized on the subways.

They should be patrolling trains, the platforms, not just standing by the entrance/exit to enforce people paying for the subway.

 

[wagrxm2000]

Can I just say that Amazon has hired over a million people with a minimum wage of $15/hour.

A couple could work for Amazon full time and live off a very respectful $62.4k a year and that's assuming they are only at minimum.

Large corporations are helping people.

 

[confettiflyer]

We pretend like forgiving loans is a victimless act and how we're somehow getting something for nothing. Reality is that it's the same idea as dropping money onto these borrowers from a helicopter. A higher supply of money means higher prices of goods and services for everyone.

Good! We’ve been missing inflation for like a decade now. This is a good way to bring us back to normal...helicopter money!

 

[confettiflyer]

Can I just say that Amazon has hired over a million people with a minimum wage of $15/hour.

A couple could work for Amazon full time and live off a very respectful $62.4k a year and that's assuming they are only at minimum.

Large corporations are helping people.

They have more than a token # of FT workers at that rate? I thought their warehouse employee schedules were algorithmically optimized to dynamically staff down with package volume.

Not sure if this has changed, but it’s almost mathematically impossible to achieve 40hrs/week in those jobs.

 

[Farmgurl20]

Can I just say that Amazon has hired over a million people with a minimum wage of $15/hour.

A couple could work for Amazon full time and live off a very respectful $62.4k a year and that's assuming they are only at minimum.

Large corporations are helping people.

Not many people stick around in those jobs. The working conditions aren’t good thats why they are always hiring. I heard same for their engineering jobs.

 

[wagrxm2000]

They have more than a token # of FT workers at that rate? I thought their warehouse employee schedules were algorithmically optimized to dynamically staff down with package volume.

Not sure if this has changed, but it’s almost mathematically impossible to achieve 40hrs/week in those jobs.

Even if so it's a better paying job then most mom and pop stores offer.

 

[confettiflyer]

Even if so it's a better paying job then most mom and pop stores offer.

I bet you it’s because they know it’s temporary, it’ll be all automated out in a few years, so why not score a few political/PR points for a few short years?

Genius move, it’ll keep people off their backs for a bit.

 

[awval999]

Again -- politically it makes the most sense to reduce the income based repayment and increase the term.

It keeps voters on the "dole". Actually forgiving principle balance pisses voters off (people who do *not* have student loans are by far the voting majority) and risks the citizens (student loan holders) freeing themselves of the shackles of debt bondage. Plus, you can continue to dangle the carrot in front of the student loan holder voters.

For example; lets say Biden proposes/executive orders 5% income-based payment for 25 years. He and the Democrats can continue to run on "If the GOP get in, they will raise the income-based payment and take away BidenLoans". If you actually forgive principle balance, for example some of the most exotic plans have forgiving $50k or so, then what keeps that voter from changing to GOP next time, you already cancelled their debt. They might vote on guns, or freedom of speech, racist immigration policy, or something else next time.

No, need to keep the voters on the "dole". Keeps 'em voting.

Confetti already explained it anyway. Just close the thread.

 

[confettiflyer]

Again -- politically it makes the most sense to reduce the income based repayment and increase the term.

It keeps voters on the "dole". Actually forgiving principle balance pisses voters off (people who do *not* have student loans are by far the voting majority) and risks the citizens (student loan holders) freeing themselves of the shackles of debt bondage. Plus, you can continue to dangle the carrot in front of the student loan holder voters.

For example; lets say Biden proposes/executive orders 5% income-based payment for 25 years. He and the Democrats can continue to run on "If the GOP get in, they will raise the income-based payment and take away BidenLoans". If you actually forgive principle balance, for example some of the most exotic plans have forgiving $50k or so, then what keeps that voter from changing to GOP next time, you already cancelled their debt. They might vote on guns, or freedom of speech, racist immigration policy, or something else next time.

No, need to keep the voters on the "dole". Keeps 'em voting.

Confetti already explained it anyway. Just close the thread.

I didn’t even think of this, lol... student loans to keep voters on the dole. I was thinking short term deal, you were thinking long term strategy.

Mind blown. Hahah.

 

[confettiflyer]

I don’t think Biden can reduce IBR to 5% without congressional approval.

So...how did Obama do it (10% REPAYE)

And how did Trump do it (0% through 12/31/20)


*your point is valid though, executive power on this point is untested by the courts. It’s like a tax deduction...it’s legal until the IRS tells you it isn’t, lol.

 

[confettiflyer]

It was included in Obamacare bill.

No, that was PAYE. I’m talking about REPAYE in 2014.

FACTSHEET: Making Student Loans More Affordable

President Obama declared 2014 a year of action – vowing to use the power of his pen and phone to help ensure that hardworking Americans have the opportunity to succeed.

obamawhitehouse.archives.gov

 

[confettiflyer]

REPAYE is still 10% like PAYE with minor changes.

If Obama could have dropped it to 1%, he would have done so during his presidency.

So your argument is, the IDR % must be approved by Congress, but once it exists, the affected individuals is at the discretion of the executive branch?

What about Trump dropping all payments to 0%/0% interest via executive order?

 

[PharmtoCS]

Good! We’ve been missing inflation for like a decade now. This is a good way to bring us back to normal...helicopter money!

QE benefited primarily the most wealthy so we have not seen in inflation in consumer goods and services. However, we have seen hyperinflation in housing, equities, higher education, and healthcare.

Student loan borrowers complain that they cannot afford houses, cars, vacations, dining out, etc. and how this will dampen the economy. Truth is that the economy was booming and unemployment was at a record low prior to the pandemic. These goods and services were already being bought, just not by the low earners with tons of debt. What is going to happen when said borrowers have their monthly payment eliminated for good?

 

[confettiflyer]

If Biden dropped it to 5% then expect a court challenge from gop.

Probably true, but you didn’t answer my question re: Trump EO.

 

[confettiflyer]

What is there to answer? It was an election year.

If Obama expanding an existing law’s provisions to new people by EO is allowable, but promulgating new terms (like 1% IDR) to existing borrowers is not...how do you apply that to the de novo Trump EO that had no law to extend?

 

[confettiflyer]

Forgiving student loan debt is like giving a tax credit to the most educated people in our society (the people who need the least help):

Same with mortgage interest tax deduction.
Same with SALT.
Same with long term capital gains.
Same with solar panels and electric cars.
Same with virtually every tax credit that exists save for EITC.

It’s just the lobbying for this one is much more public and less discreet than who works on K Street.

 

[confettiflyer]

Here’s an idea for a room:

Let people choose. 10% IDR for 20 years, 5% IDR for 30 years. 2.5% for 40 years. 0% but you waive social security benefits (you still pay in, though).

 

[Sparda29]

Simply put, people against it just want others to be miserable. No one says a peep when the government announces they are buying a new set of fighter jets or investing into the military. We don't need to have such a dominant military. Just go back to defensive, withdraw all troops and bases outside our borders and international water line/airspace.

 

[owlegrad]

Simply put, people against it just want others to be miserable. No one says a peep when the government announces they are buying a new set of fighter jets or investing into the military. We don't need to have such a dominant military. Just go back to defensive, withdraw all troops and bases outside our borders and international water line/airspace.

This is correct. It’s like bailing out the banks instead of bailing out the borrowers. For some reason people can tolerate the ultrarich or huge businesses getting extravagant handouts but the idea of helping out individuals is unthinkable. The answer is always giving money to the rich and hoping it trickles down to everyone else.

 

[Sparda29]

This is correct. It’s like bailing out the banks instead of bailing out the borrowers. For some reason people can tolerate the ultrarich or huge businesses getting extravagant handouts but the idea of helping out individuals is unthinkable. The answer is always giving money to the rich and hoping it trickles down to everyone else.

I know. They get us into these stupid endless wars. There are US troops fighting in Afghanistan who had fathers fight there as well. For what? Osama is dead. We shouldn't have even responded to 9/11 asides from carpet bombing known Al-Qaeda positions or using Special Forces to hunt down Osama.

 

[Sparda29]

It is not mutually exclusive. You can be against endless wars and loan forgiveness.

Income based repayment is not reasonable?

It is reasonable, as long as there is no tax bomb at the end. 5% IDR for 10-15 years, with less than 1% interest with no tax bomb at the end would be perfect. It would also be good if they could make student loans excluded from credit histories/credit scores so it doesn't hurt your chance of taking out a mortgage or car loan.

Eg: if someone is paying $1k a month for 15 years, that's $180,000. But say they have a $400k balance. They are gonna get hit with a tax bomb on that 220k forgiven at the end.

 

[PharmtoCS]

Don’t forget that higher education institutions, real estate developers in college towns, etc. have received a massive windfall from the student loan crisis.

Instead of clawing back the money that has gone to the above it’s far easier to claw it from the taxpayers.

 

[Sine Cura]

This is correct. It’s like bailing out the banks instead of bailing out the borrowers. For some reason people can tolerate the ultrarich or huge businesses getting extravagant handouts but the idea of helping out individuals is unthinkable. The answer is always giving money to the rich and hoping it trickles down to everyone else.

People just pick and choose the suffering of others they will enjoy.

NAFTA was a job destroyer. Neoliberals' wet dream

Anarcho-primitivists, ISIS and Kim Jong Un would enjoy massive bank failures in the West and EMPs destroying American infrastructure

 

[deleted769052]

It is not mutually exclusive. You can be against endless wars and loan forgiveness. Income based repayment is not reasonable?

I respect your stance but the reality is that our country will continue to spend money regardless - that's simply the American way. Student loans are ~$100billion/year while our military budget is 7x that. Both democrats and republicans will continue to increase our defense budget no matter what they preach.

Everyone likes to tell some 18 year old kid who ends up 60k in debt by 25 "well you should have known what you were signing up for"
but nobody seems to want to tell a group of highly educated and trained military leaders not to literally burn taxpayer money (you can look up how some departments have to destroy their equipment in order to get an increased budget the following year) - nor does anyone tell our representatives to stop increasing the defense budget and/or to find ways to make it more efficient and cut costs while maintaining our strength.

The same can be said with healthcare, more than 60% goes to administration and not actual healthcare.

It's much easier to hate or be envious of one's neighbor when they get a new car or if their loan was forgiven, but no one says a peep or even follows up on how billions and trillions are spent in defense contracts or unnecessary administrative bloat.

 

[awval999]

The government wants you to be a debt slave. That's what you don't understand.

 

[footfairy]

It is reasonable, as long as there is no tax bomb at the end. 5% IDR for 10-15 years, with less than 1% interest with no tax bomb at the end would be perfect. It would also be good if they could make student loans excluded from credit histories/credit scores so it doesn't hurt your chance of taking out a mortgage or car loan.

Eg: if someone is paying $1k a month for 15 years, that's $180,000. But say they have a $400k balance. They are gonna get hit with a tax bomb on that 220k forgiven at the end.

A 5% IBR for only 15 years with no tax bomb on the forgiven amount? Even eith a loe six figure salary your payments wouldn't even cover the interest on pretty much any loan amount above $100k!

This kind of nonsense is why no one takes loan forgiveness seriously. I can't imagine society every stomaching this. I'm pretty liberal on providing an achievable forgiveness program and retooling the entire studeny loan system (lower the interest rate, force public universities to cap tuition hikes if they want federal money, ect) but that's way over the top.

If this existed when I was in school I would have pulled out the max loan amount every semester and just invested anything above my tuition and living costs. Literal free money that I never have to worry about paying back while it grows 10% a year.