WARNING: Student Load Forgiveness is Very Unlikely to Pay for Your Next Elk Tag

That's what everyone says, as quickly as you can name 2-3 that you personally know of that graduated college with no debt that were smart and poor.

I know a fair few people that are well below middle income...and I can't name one that went to college.

Even if what you're saying is in fact a true(ish) statement, how many people from a poor background, with iffy or single parents, actually even know the hoops to jump through to attend?

Unless things have really changed since I went, the College system isn't exactly what I would call user friendly.
Dozens. I do a lot of inner city mentoring.
 
I'm pretty certain we were making that point indirectly. Early in the thread I copped a plea that my generation has incrementally defunded higher education, leaving the individual student and parents to make up the difference.
I confess to not reading most of this thread. The topic is just yet another to have political battles over, unfortunately. I don't have a strong yeah or nay opinion, but given that current and recent students are paying a lot more of their full costs and that we, as a society, benefit from a well educated public, especially when we become dodderingly old and need someone to wipe the spittle off our chins, maybe a little more tuition support in the form of debt forgiveness is not a bad thing.

My apologies for the convoluted sentence structure. I probably need to review my basic English coursework.
 
I confess to not reading most of this thread. The topic is just yet another to have political battles over, unfortunately. I don't have a strong yeah or nay opinion, but given that current and recent students are paying a lot more of their full costs and that we, as a society, benefit from a well educated public, especially when we become dodderingly old and need someone to wipe the spittle off our chins, maybe a little more tuition support in the form of debt forgiveness is not a bad thing.

My apologies for the convoluted sentence structure. I probably need to review my basic English coursework.
The employer a college or even a tech school graduate ends up working for is the real winner in this whole deal.

They get educated people to work for them and never paid much for that qualified person they hire that ends up making them tons of money.

Probably lots of ways to help fund tuition...maybe business/government positions that require a college or technical degree should pitch in.

Just sayin'...
 
The employer a college or even a tech school graduate ends up working for is the real winner in this whole deal.

They get educated people to work for them and never paid much for that qualified person they hire that ends up making them tons of money.

Probably lots of ways to help fund tuition...maybe business/government positions that require a college or technical degree should pitch in.

Just sayin'...
Given that many businesses have to do extensive training of new hires for their specific positions, and that they will be paying the employees a "good" wage (which will, in turn, be where the loan gets paid from if not forgiven), I don't think we need to lean on business too much, if at all. They have their job, the University has their own.

I do, however, think we should get back on top of subsidizing higher ed at a much greater rate, and for a whole bunch of reasons (not including football or basketball).
 
Fact of the matter is Federal student loans were a bad idea IMO. University's are allowed to inflate their prices knowing money was coming. Making courses un affordable for most people forcing them into a loan situation. Its really not fair for anybody and it makes life incredibly difficult to get started.

Government just seems oblivious to the fact that federal loans created most of this problem. Force feed the idea of college into peoples minds in grade school. You have to have a degree otherwise you are a loser.

You lose the skilled trades labor creating a vacuum of trades being incredibly expensive. Which is good for the folks in the fields but there is a shrinking number of people with skilled trades.

You end up with a lot of poor people with degrees that dont have any skills to pay those loans off that they used for their degree.

Then you get people showing their buttholes online boom problem solved.🤦‍♂️

Its really a sad situation. I experienced a lot of people in my military days that simply joined so they could pay for school. Granted I took advantage of the free college with the GI bill. But holy smokes I had to get creative to get all the schooling payed for even with that.

Out of curiosity. How much in debt is the person who created this 1677710821013.png Funzies people calm DOWN!
 
Government just seems oblivious to the fact that federal loans created most of this problem. Force feed the idea of college into peoples minds in grade school. You have to have a degree otherwise you are a loser.


Not oblivious.
Not oblivious. There is an effort to double down with guaranteed monthly income. It worked so well in higher education, take the concept on the road.
 
Given that many businesses have to do extensive training of new hires for their specific positions, and that they will be paying the employees a "good" wage (which will, in turn, be where the loan gets paid from if not forgiven), I don't think we need to lean on business too much, if at all. They have their job, the University has their own.

I do, however, think we should get back on top of subsidizing higher ed at a much greater rate, and for a whole bunch of reasons (not including football or basketball).
In theory, I would agree we need to subsidize a college degree more than today, but the system has lost social trust by the proliferation of worthless degrees, consistent costs beyond inflation, and a seeming need to rush headlong into bigger political issues. They need to fix this before they get much more support frankly.

I gladly will subsidize my next doctor, lawyer, nurse, teacher, banker, real estate agent, restaurant manager, construction manager, arc welder, plumber, high power electrician, engineer, pharmacist, etc. etc etc. I have no interest in subsidizing art history majors, Scandinavian poetry majors, a spa level of amenities, spring break shenanigans, or non-academic messing around in broader political activities. These are minimal expectations of paying for my own kids' tuition, why shouldn't I have at least the same standard when paying for some other person's kid?
 
Last edited:
Not oblivious. There is an effort to double down with guaranteed monthly income. It worked so well in higher education, take the concept on the road.
If we had any fiscal discipline, a universal basic income actually has a lot of merits (and also some problems) vs the current myriad of overlapping needs-based programs. But we lack the discipline so best we not try.
 
Given that many businesses have to do extensive training of new hires for their specific positions, and that they will be paying the employees a "good" wage (which will, in turn, be where the loan gets paid from if not forgiven), I don't think we need to lean on business too much, if at all. They have their job, the University has their own.

I do, however, think we should get back on top of subsidizing higher ed at a much greater rate, and for a whole bunch of reasons (not including football or basketball).
Yeah, lets just keep giving corporatists more and more and more for nothing. I guess the countless tax breaks, free land to build their businesses on, and a mountain of other incentives just aren't enough.

Funny how they have the money to hire lobbyists, buy off politicians, etc. but asking them to help pay for the education of their employees...bridge too far!

Giving them educated employees is just another on the long list of corporate welfare I suppose.
 
In theory, I would agree we need to subsidize a college degree more than today, but the system has lost social trust by the proliferation of worthless degrees, consistent costs beyond inflation, and a seeming need to rush headlong into bigger political issues. They need to fix this before they get much more support frankly.

I gladly will subsidize my next doctor, lawyer, nurse, teacher, banker, real estate agent, restaurant manager, construction manager, arc welder, plumber, high power electron, engineer, pharmacist, etc. etc etc. I have no interest in subsidizing art history majors, Scandinavian poetry majors, a spa level of amenities, spring break shenanigans, or non-academic messing around in broader political activities. These are minimal expectations of paying for my own kids' tuition, why shouldn't I have at least the same standard when paying for some other person's kid?

Can't' say I agree about the worthless degrees. Your real estate agent, insurance agent, and what not probably majored in English, Psychology, Wildlife Biology, Art History, etc.

Keep in mind that "liberal" education is not a political designation. It is a "widespread" education where students learn about a whole bunch of things that, along the way, teach them the fundamentals of thinking, problem solving, working with others, etc.

For what it's worth, both my real estate agent and my insurance guy got degrees in one form or another of animal/plant ecology One was in my first-ever class as a prof. They are both highly successful and great to work with. But their degrees would be labeled by you as worthless. I think not. I could show you hundreds if not thousands that passed through that way that I personally interacted with like these two.

If you want to turn universities into vo-tech schools, you will not find me supporting that. Though I fully support vo-tech for being what it is.


Let's see what else... Spring break shenanigans - those were around when I was an undergrad. I'm sure when you were too. You may have participated even. I did one year. It was an education all of itself. And non-academic messing around in politics is older than the universities themselves. Personally, I think it is a good thing, even if I don't agree with the politics. Some interest in the broader world and a sense of responsibility that goes with it, is not a bad thing. We have some generations that haven't done a damn thing that way between my day and today. That's not good, in my opinion.

Some of the "amenities" are a bit much, but so it goes. Everyone wants only the best for their kid and universities compete like cats and dogs for those bodies. That is how they do it.

Anyway, the "worthless" degrees are not really worthless in my opinion. Not at all. I've known some good stock brokers/financial folks that got degrees in wildlife biology. It's not a linear process for most folks - you and I are probably exceptions, not the rule.
 
Yeah, lets just keep giving corporatists more and more and more for nothing. I guess the countless tax breaks, free land to build their businesses on, and a mountain of other incentives just aren't enough.

Funny how they have the money to hire lobbyists, buy off politicians, etc. but asking them to help pay for the education of their employees...bridge too far!

Giving them educated employees is just another on the long list of corporate welfare I suppose.
Now there ya go again, Buzz. No one said that, nor would I agree to that. Especially here in Iowa where corporatists are served on sliver platters. In fact, 5 minutes ago, I learned that our governor will be paying a private corporation to manage the doling out of state tax money for students (k-12) that want to go to private school. Yes, the state will pay you to put your student through private school. Apparently, this corporation is operates in AZ and ID as well. This is a hyper-red state with vast majorities in both houses and the gov's office. We shine at taking from the public and gifting to the private.

Anyway, quit assuming or implying anything beyond what I actually say. You suck at it.
 
Yeah, lets just keep giving corporatists more and more and more for nothing. I guess the countless tax breaks, free land to build their businesses on, and a mountain of other incentives just aren't enough.

Funny how they have the money to hire lobbyists, buy off politicians, etc. but asking them to help pay for the education of their employees...bridge too far!

Giving them educated employees is just another on the long list of corporate welfare I suppose.
Good god. Corporations are not without their problems, but they have 1000% more accountability than any government agency. Frankly, it is time we start demanding the largest corporation on the planet (US.gv) start cleaning up its own mess.
 
^^^
Dude 100% only skis on Presidents day weekend.-L
Drops a rack at the cafeteria for him and his kids at lunch.-L
Pays for parking.-L
Pays $5 for a pbr.-L
$12 for a Bloody Mary.-L
Says things like “your lifts seem to stop frequently”.-L
Is a known member of “Montec nation”-L
Wllm ruined this movie for me.
He’s not Matt Damon!
Has a fast tracks sticker on his Tesla-L
 
And for the record, I never implied I was against a liberal education; I went to St. John's College, for goodness sake. Mostly scholarship, kind of a short-term deal as the Santa Fe campus was new.

And, certainly, critical thinking, organization, and communication skills can transfer to environments other than the majors studied, as @BrentD said.

Nevertheless, the original topic was kids who couldn't (or wouldn't, here's looking at you, Tesla owners with student loans; they still sell Toyotas) pay their student loans, so haven't used their degrees meaningfully in a financial sense.
 
Can't' say I agree about the worthless degrees. Your real estate agent, insurance agent, and what not probably majored in English, Psychology, Wildlife Biology, Art History, etc.

Keep in mind that "liberal" education is not a political designation. It is a "widespread" education where students learn about a whole bunch of things that, along the way, teach them the fundamentals of thinking, problem solving, working with others, etc.

For what it's worth, both my real estate agent and my insurance guy got degrees in one form or another of animal/plant ecology One was in my first-ever class as a prof. They are both highly successful and great to work with. But their degrees would be labeled by you as worthless. I think not. I could show you hundreds if not thousands that passed through that way that I personally interacted with like these two.

If you want to turn universities into vo-tech schools, you will not find me supporting that. Though I fully support vo-tech for being what it is.


Let's see what else... Spring break shenanigans - those were around when I was an undergrad. I'm sure when you were too. You may have participated even. I did one year. It was an education all of itself. And non-academic messing around in politics is older than the universities themselves. Personally, I think it is a good thing, even if I don't agree with the politics. Some interest in the broader world and a sense of responsibility that goes with it, is not a bad thing. We have some generations that haven't done a damn thing that way between my day and today. That's not good, in my opinion.

Some of the "amenities" are a bit much, but so it goes. Everyone wants only the best for their kid and universities compete like cats and dogs for those bodies. That is how they do it.

Anyway, the "worthless" degrees are not really worthless in my opinion. Not at all. I've known some good stock brokers/financial folks that got degrees in wildlife biology. It's not a linear process for most folks - you and I are probably exceptions, not the rule.
Good piece of work there^^^ @BrentD
 
I concur that the majority of SCOTUS has an agenda to burn this m’fer down. However, the plaintiffs have total shitass claims. SCOTUS will have to do some real judiciary word jumble to establish standing. I figure they’ll punt it back to a lower court if possible. If not then seriatim addressing some but not all.
 
I did not have a chance to read all 10 pages before i commented. I will use my own personal experience. My entire upbringing i had adults tell me i needed to get a 4-year degree in order to be successful. Family, teachers, coaches, counselors and so on. So, what did most of us do? Got that nice piece of paper. My degree took longer than 4 i was in school for 6 years. Degree change and some personal matter extended my stay. Walked away with $95,000 in debt. Had a job lined up a few months before i graduated working for the Govt. My college consoler told me to consolidate all my loans into one through our state bank, the bank of ND. That means i do not qualify for any forgiveness since i do not have any federal loans anymore "was never aware of that when i consolidated them". The remaining balance would have been gone in 2 years from the bill for being a public servant but again mine are now private.

Do i think anyone should have to pay my loans back for me? No that was my choice to go to college. Do i think paying over $10/day in interest is highway robbery? You bet your ass it is. I remember paying over $1,500 for one semester worth of books. 8 full years of paying never missing a payment i still have $74,000 left. 31 years old renting a room from my father. Do i need to stay at home? No but rather than pay some slum lord money id rather pay my father. Took what little extra i had saved those years started a small business and finally will be in a position to hopefully buy a house this summer.

Rather than forgiveness we need to fix the issue. I am sure its talked about in these 10 pages but i haven't had a chance to read them. If our govt truly wants an educated workforce, then it needs to be obtainable. It takes all types of jobs to make this country run, 2-year trades, 4-year degrees, masters etc all of it. The cost of higher education has financially crippled the younger generation. Now i agree there are a lot of degrees that really offer no benefit and that's on those kids who decide to take that route.

What can we do to fix the issue? Make the degrees affordable. Fix the interest so people are not paying for years upon years and the principle balance never changes because of the compounded interest. I had one idea to fix it it may not be the best way but i think it offers an easy solution.

For example, if a student has $100,000 in loans the maximum interest, they pay is based on the principal amount. Whatever % they want to compromise on 30,40,50 whatever that's it. If its 40% then after they pay $40,000 in interest the rest goes to the principle. There would be no more paying for over a decade just to not have your principal balance change. Lenders still make money students eventually get out of debt. The country will have more educated people. I will eventually get out of my debt but thats me working over 3,000 hours every year just to try and get ahead.
 
Back
Top