I follow a different plan.Its called the "pay as I promised"
planIts more difficult, but its about integrity to me and doing what
I promised to do.No one forced loans upon me. In fact, I requested
one. I signed and promised to fulfill the payment terms and my integrity will
not be compromised.Ya, its tough.I don't ever go
out to eat, my clothes are all a few years old. I don't have cable. I
don't go out and party with friends at places that cost money. I
don't go on vacation.Instead, I sav and pay back as I promised
I would do.But hey, not everyone values doing what you promised.
Kudos to Chris B.
Chris' plan works for me although I did it a little differently. I worked
hard when out of school and I worked hard while in school. I graduated debt
free. I rode a bicycle, walked or doubled on dates and shared gasoline costs,
ate macaroni, pot pies and spaghetti ran my own handyman business because I
could make more working for myself. But, hey, we live in the Entitlement Era
which will bring us all down to just above the poverty level.
While I endorse Chris B's plan over Barack Obama's plan, I want to
deviate a little from the ideal.If Barack Obama wants to help those
struggling to pay, he'll take steps to open up student loans for bankruptcy
discharge. Fed Loans are a whole different animal. Regular businesses
don't get the same perks the government gets. You can't discharge
student loans without an adversary proceeding, which is a very expensive
process. So, if I get cancer, lose all my money, savings, and ability to repay
and then file for bankruptcy, I still have to hire a lawyer and pay him/her
thousands and thousands of dollars just to attempt to discharge my student
loans. You promise to repay all loans. But student loans are the
ones that you actually don't get to discharge in a bankruptcy unless you
can afford the best lawyers and want to endure hell (the government).But, I like Chris B's plan. Actually, I prefer the "no debt"
plan. And the plan that restores the value of the dollar so people in this
country can remember what it is like to pay 50 cents for a gallon of gas.
BO has no concept of fiscal matters, let alone fiscal responsibility.You sign a note that say you will pay, abide by the agreement and pay.The taxpayer should not be on the hook for someone racking up $200k in
debt to get a masters decgree in pop culture, or even $5k for a BA in social
work.Of course, with a misadministration as morally bankrupt as this
one, they see no problem defaulting on an agreement. Rules obviously mean
nothing to them.
oddman, "But, hey, we live in the Entitlement Era which will
bring us all down to just above the poverty level."Remember
though oddman, that's a "success" if we're all there together.
Instead of doubling down on government support for students, we should accept
that this is another failure of the welfare state and privatize education
funding. The more money people can borrow at subsidized rates that will never
have to be repaid except by taxpayers, the higher tuition will go. The winners
are those who profit from the business of education and the losers are students
and taxpayers.If private money was involved we would have a tough
adjustment period of falling demand for the less useful degrees and contraction
of the education industry to an appropriate size.
After paying for 20 years, the remaining debt is paid for by taxpayers. Do the
Democrats have any credibility left?
Obama's answer to every problem. More government intervention! That's the reason why America is struggling the way it is. There is way
too much government involvement. Government has a strong hold on almost every
aspect of our lives and controls a large portion of our economy. The feds need
to butt out of our business and let the free market correct itself and get
people back to work. "Government is not the solution to our
problem, government is the problem."-Ronald Reagan (1/20/1981)
@ invisible handWell said.
I think many of us knew this was coming. "These mid-term elections could be
kind of dicey with all that's going on. Let's use taxpayer dollars to
buy some more votes from the young people. We made 'college' so
available to them (even without corresponding jobs or a sustainable economy),
but the next step is to write off/pass off most of that debt, and that will keep
'em loyal for hopefully a couple more election cycles." Uh huh. I think
we saw this one. Get all the young people in "college" (even phony
"colleges" where the student is little more than a conduit to funnel
Federally backed student aid into the "educators" pockets) so they
won't blame the lack of economic growth on government taxation and
regulation, and now make it much less painful for them by sticking it to the
taxpayers once again. Brilliant? No, just political.
Excellent comments by readers. I think most of us know when we're being
"had," and I think we're being had once again. You can fool all
the people some of the time, but I don't think any of those posting here
have been fooled by this political move.
Without a doubt the most economically illiterate and irresponsible president we
have ever had. What will this guy do next???
Does anyone REALLY believe these student loans are ever going to be paid back in
full, including interest?Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?.....
Another violation of law by our president as his only answer continues to be
spending others money. I suggest that next he works on car loans as cars are
unfairly priced way to high by these unscrupulous car dealers. The president
should void all those loans immediately.
This is just bribery for votes. It also promotes universities increasing the
Keeping citizens in debt, and dependent on government is a way of tightening
control on the people.
@lost in DC"The taxpayer should not be on the hook for someone racking
up $200k in debt to get a masters decgree in pop culture, or even $5k for a BA
in social work."A restructuring of loan repayment doesn't
put anyone else on the hook for it.
To "steamroller" you know what happened, but do you know why?If you look into the history of Reagan's Presidency, you will find
something odd that liberals don't like to talk about.Reagan
made deals with the Democrats that ran Congress. He compromised with the
democrat controlled congress. The Democrats promised to follow his plan in
exchange for delaying spending cuts. The Democrats never enacted the spending
cuts as promised, but continued to spend as much as they wanted.What
we learn from Reagan is to not compromise with the Democrat party.
Schnee,reducing the payment and forgiving debt at the end of a set term
DOES leave the taxpayer on the hook for it. reducing the payment
when the interest rate is subsidized DOES leave the taxpayer on the hook for it.
"Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the
problem." -Ronald Reagan (1/20/1981)No, Ronald Reagan was the
problem.And Reaganomics is still the problem.Redshirt -
Your claims are pure fantasy.
Perhaps Obama could send relief to extend mortgage, and car loan payments.