MoveOn.Org Calls For The Wiping Of Student Load Debt

[CPA]

yeah not gonna happen. We need reform in this area though.

What reform would that be? Price controls? Means testing to determine which school you can attend? Wage controls (which is the main driving factor of school costs)? hmmmm....

I have an idea: Don't attend a f'in college you can't afford and stop getting stupid-ass liberal arts degrees that cost $100K but have a return on investment of a $30K/year salary!

 

[alphatarget1]

What reform would that be? Price controls? Means testing to determine which school you can attend? Wage controls (which is the main driving factor of school costs)? hmmmm....

I have an idea: Don't attend a f'in college you can't afford and stop getting stupid-ass liberal arts degrees that cost $100K but have a return on investment of a $30K/year salary!

Remove all federal government subsidizes on student loans and let lenders discriminate against majors.

 

[JSt0rm]

Remove all federal government subsidizes on student loans and let lenders discriminate against majors.

Then the schools would create zillions of in demand positions and then they would no longer be in demand.

Only wealthy people would go to school in liberal arts.

 

[Howard]

Then the schools would create zillions of in demand positions and then they would no longer be in demand.

Only wealthy people would go to school in liberal arts.

Do we need all these people with liberal arts degrees?

 

[Kanalua]

I would vote for Obama in 2012 if he wiped my student loan debt. He could buy my vote and the cost would be exactly what I owe for student loans.

 

[Lithium381]

if they forgive student debt. . . . basically at the expense of taxpayers(where do you guys think government money comes from anyway?) .. . i should receive the same amount in cash. because i wasn't a leech on society, i worked my way through university.... lets say everyone gets $60,000 reduced from their loans, and any remainder is paid in cash!!!!!

 

[Doppel]

i think the system is broken.

I think people as a whole would be better off without hyper inflated school degrees.

Its like with the housing thing. Everyone is like fuck those people they need to pay their home loans or get stuffed. Well when 5 of your neighbors all lose their homes and YOUR property values are now 250k in the hole who exactly is getting fucked?

If five of my neighbors were going to lose their home either we are really, reall fvcked or I live in the ghetto, in which case the houses are worth more like $25k to begin with.

It's near the point where it's impossible not to argue that college costs are a bubble and will pop and refactor the dynamics of the market, which will benefit kids, but with student debt now officially more than credit card debt in the US, who's going to pay for that? And it wouldn't change a damn thing anyway, since the next batch of kids would come out with the same debt, if not more since now the colleges will just jack tuition up and kids will happily pay with the sense that the debt will likely be wiped anyway. It's incredibly short-sighted and solves nothing but the problem for the immediate holders of debt who exist this very moment.

 

[Dman8777]

Why does everyone simply dismiss liberal arts degrees as useless? The public education system in the US does an awful job of educating children in things like history, philosophy, and the social sciences. The purpose of general eduction was originally that people needed to be knowledgeable in precisely these things to make informed voting decisions.

When people study in nothing but "marketable" fields, they make great "economic-employee entities" but are hardly the informed and educated populace envisioned by the framers.

With that said, I don't think a $100k 4-year degree in any field is worth it when there are so many cheaper options available. I also agree with those who said that community colleges/2-year programs need to be de-stigmatized.

 

[PeshakJang]

Why does everyone simply dismiss liberal arts degrees as useless? The public education system in the US does an awful job of educating children in things like history, philosophy, and the social sciences. The purpose of general eduction was originally that people needed to be knowledgeable in precisely these things to make informed voting decisions.

Ok, great. So all those people can get jobs as professional voters. Hope it allows them to pay back the $80,000 in debt they chose to finance it with.

... On second thought, that's basically exactly what they are trying to do, isn't it? Get a degree, then 'vote' away their debt. Brilliant minds.

When people study in nothing but "marketable" fields, they make great "economic-employee entities" but are hardly the informed and educated populace envisioned by the framers.

So you argue that people should study nothing but 'liberal arts' fields instead?

I'm going to assume that you would agree that people should seek a well-rounded education, with at least some time dedicated to the liberal arts. You seem to be arguing right now that it is more important for people to get degrees that allow them to be better informed in voting, and not to learn any skills that will benefit society in other ways.

Do you think the framers really envisioned a society without engineers, scientists, farmers, businessmen, and laborers?

 

[PeshakJang]

Then the schools would create zillions of in demand positions and then they would no longer be in demand.

Only wealthy people would go to school in liberal arts.

So the first generation goes to school and gets a well-paying degree, since they can afford that. This allows them to accumulate some wealth, and send their children to school to get a liberal arts degree.

That is how the world has always worked, when reality and common sense take precedence over government policies.

 

[Schadenfroh]

lets say everyone gets $60,000 reduced from their loans, and any remainder is paid in cash!!!!!

To hell with that, let's start a petition that states the government should pay everyone that owes money $100,000 in cash! You can put it towards paying your student loan debt, your credit card debt or simply stimulate the economy by buying a new set of rims for your car, big screen TV, gambling, etc. It is the ultimate Bush style Tax Rebate, except that it is fair since it is for every individual, regardless of age, tax status, etc.

If you have no debt, then you can pay your "fair share" via increased taxation to help cover the expenses. This makes it 100% more fair.

 

[HendrixFan]

Nobody forced them to take out 200k in loans to get a MA in Music. Fuck them.

What sane system allows someone to receive $200k in loans for a MA in Music? You think the problem is with the 18 year old, fresh out of high school, being offered $200k to "follow his dream"? These are the same kids who would get, at best, a $1000 credit line on a credit card.

I agree 100% that those that take out the loans should eat the cost, but to me the bigger issue is what LegendKiller mentioned, that the loans are so readily available. Risk isn't accurately priced, and the government backstopping the loans pushes too many people into college that shouldn't be there.

Some kids don't have the intellectual chops (bell curve), or the drive, or the career path in mind, that should push them into college. College institutions get their rankings based in large part on graduating people. When everyone goes to college, how can you graduate them without dumbing down the material? I don't know how many of you have seen the college coursework these days, but even at Tier 1 Universities much (but certainly not all) of the material is laughable. This is a huge contributor to kids graduating with useless degrees. A degree simply doesn't mean what it did 30 years ago as far as education level.

This problem becomes severely compounded when you see that plenty of better jobs require a degree to even apply, when honestly the work required doesn't need it (non-technical). This reinforces the mindset that you need a degree, any degree, to get your foot in the door. When you consider how useless many of the degrees are, such barriers are astoundingly stupid. But hey, when you have someone drowning in $50k worth of student loan debt, they are a much more submissive employee than one who is free, you know?

Edit: Another part of the problem is that loans are so easy costs have skyrocketed. You used to be able to pay your way through school on a low wage job, so if you had a "useless" degree you could graduate with no debt. Skyrocketing costs have made most any degree impossible to pay for by working through school. Debt or family money are necessary, so it changes the dynamic of getting a useless degree compared to decades ago.

 

[the DRIZZLE]

IMO the student loan situation is a classic case of well intentioned government program hurting the people it was designed to help. By guaranteeing student loans and making them nondischargable in bankruptcy we've created a system that encourages incredibly bad choices.

One my economics professors perfectly described the current situation as an arms race in which people are getting higher degrees not because they add any real value but just to keep up. IMO the two major causes of this are the government backstopping the system and not allowing price signals to work and also not educating kids early enough about how to make these kind of decisions.

I agree with LK's idea about more economics and personal finance education. I also think we need to allow price signals help steer people toward careers that will given them a higher chance of repaying their loans.

 

[alphatarget1]

Why does everyone simply dismiss liberal arts degrees as useless? The public education system in the US does an awful job of educating children in things like history, philosophy, and the social sciences. The purpose of general eduction was originally that people needed to be knowledgeable in precisely these things to make informed voting decisions.

When people study in nothing but "marketable" fields, they make great "economic-employee entities" but are hardly the informed and educated populace envisioned by the framers.

With that said, I don't think a $100k 4-year degree in any field is worth it when there are so many cheaper options available. I also agree with those who said that community colleges/2-year programs need to be de-stigmatized.

I don't think liberal arts degrees are useless. There are certainly a need for people in our society to study those subjects, but there is also opportunity costs involved. How much do I think one should go in debt for a liberal arts degree? No more than 15k.

 

[alphatarget1]

What sane system allows someone to receive $200k in loans for a MA in Music? You think the problem is with the 18 year old, fresh out of high school, being offered $200k to "follow his dream"? These are the same kids who would get, at best, a $1000 credit line on a credit card.

I agree 100% that those that take out the loans should eat the cost, but to me the bigger issue is what LegendKiller mentioned, that the loans are so readily available. Risk isn't accurately priced, and the government backstopping the loans pushes too many people into college that shouldn't be there.

Some kids don't have the intellectual chops (bell curve), or the drive, or the career path in mind, that should push them into college. College institutions get their rankings based in large part on graduating people. When everyone goes to college, how can you graduate them without dumbing down the material? I don't know how many of you have seen the college coursework these days, but even at Tier 1 Universities much (but certainly not all) of the material is laughable. This is a huge contributor to kids graduating with useless degrees. A degree simply doesn't mean what it did 30 years ago as far as education level.

This problem becomes severely compounded when you see that plenty of better jobs require a degree to even apply, when honestly the work required doesn't need it (non-technical). This reinforces the mindset that you need a degree, any degree, to get your foot in the door. When you consider how useless many of the degrees are, such barriers are astoundingly stupid. But hey, when you have someone drowning in $50k worth of student loan debt, they are a much more submissive employee than one who is free, you know?

Edit: Another part of the problem is that loans are so easy costs have skyrocketed. You used to be able to pay your way through school on a low wage job, so if you had a "useless" degree you could graduate with no debt. Skyrocketing costs have made most any degree impossible to pay for by working through school. Debt or family money are necessary, so it changes the dynamic of getting a useless degree compared to decades ago.

At least at my current institution, the goal is to admit as many students as possible. That's what the STATE wants them to do. They keep building new buildings and admitting more students.

College should be affordable to those who deserve to be in it. Make it more exclusive and competitive. Anyone with lower than a 3.0 after one year should be kicked out of college and not allowed to apply to any others for 4 years. Fix K-12 first so that high school graduates get a real education that prepares them for jobs/vocational school/university (if they are cut out for it).

 

[Zebo]

I half agree. Needs to absolvable like any other debt but at price of wrecked credit for 10 years. I don't know how banksters got congress to go along with student loan exemption to bankruptcy laws. These are the most naive borrowers being 18-22.

 

[Zebo]

IMO the student loan situation is a classic case of well intentioned government program hurting the people it was designed to help. By guaranteeing student loans and making them nondischargable in bankruptcy we've created a system that encourages incredibly bad choices.

One my economics professors perfectly described the current situation as an arms race in which people are getting higher degrees not because they add any real value but just to keep up. IMO the two major causes of this are the government backstopping the system and not allowing price signals to work and also not educating kids early enough about how to make these kind of decisions.

I agree with LK's idea about more economics and personal finance education. I also think we need to allow price signals help steer people toward careers that will given them a higher chance of repaying their loans.

Not to mention raises price of education through the roof. Supply and demand. A university professor (my mom was one) used to be middle class. Today they push 200K and administrators 500K-2M because they have virtually unlimited supply of students and charge accordingly.

 

[Wreckem]

Not to mention raises price of education through the roof. Supply and demand. A university professor (my mom was one) used to be middle class. Today they push 200K and administrators 500K-2M because they have virtually unlimited supply of students and charge accordingly.

The average tenured track faculty member in the US does NOT make $200k, most are between $60k-90k(~$60k is starting out, $90k is full professorship), unless they are business/medicial/law professors, and the occassional engineering prof. The median salary is around there too. Theres no point of saying some professors make $200-300k when the vast vast majority of them make less than $100k.

For the most part, the only people making millions at state schools are ball coaches and medical profs(depending on Medical school). The majorty of Channcellors and Presidents make less than $500k.

The administrative overheard is way to high, but its not because individual salaries, its because there are way to many administrators. Schools create way to many administrative positions. There seems to be more upper/middle managers at an academinc insitution than in a private firm.

 

[Zebo]

The average tenured track faculty member in the US does NOT make $200k, most are between $60k-90k(~$60k is starting out, $90k is full professorship), unless they are business/medicial/law professors, and the occassional engineering prof. The median salary is around there too. Theres no point of saying some professors make $200-300k when the vast vast majority of them make less than $100k.

For the most part, the only people making millions at state schools are ball coaches. And most of their salary is not paid for by the state/school.

Have a look here. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/news/casalary/uc?Submit=Page&agency=UC&otmax=&o=0&term=&sort=&ord= There are no full professors under 120K. I've been around a lot not to mention it's public info. Look up Ronald Busuttil [rofessor @ UCLA he makes over 2M a year.

 

[child of wonder]

And you expect an 18 year old to know this how? Kids are told throughout high school that if they want a good paying job, they HAVE to go to college. Regardless of the truth of that statement, that's our societal expectation of kids in high school these days. Hell, high schools are even judged based on the number of kids they succeed in sending off to 4 year universities. Yet, you somehow think that 18 year olds should be smart enough to ignore this constant pressure on them (which ultimately has resulted in tons of debt for useless majors.)

If the parents also buy into this philosophy and pressure their children to go to college just because then they're just as much at fault.

Ultimately it's the kid's decision and we're not likely to see great choices coming from 18 year olds, but when the parents are also a source of this pressure we've got an even bigger problem.

 

[Zebo]

And regardless, if we did not financialize education it would be far less. Educators used to be squarely middle class not live in 2 million dollar houses in Costa Mesa like my mom's UCI colleagues. Home builders and contractors too now that I think about it, but easy money shifted them into the upper crust too in the 90's and 2000s.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...calling-for-wiping-out-all-student-loan-debt/LOL - These guys become a bigger joke every day. Its not like anyone held a gun to the head of these ass clowns and made them take out student loans and choose a field that had/has no future.

No, it's just that they've been indoctrinated with the notion that a college degree guarantees a solid middle class job since preschool. Almost every politician and pundit says that. The very same free market dogmatist types who condemn the discharge of student loan debt would probably also stress the value of a higher education in another soundbite.

Also, note that many of those unemployed and underemployed people have degrees in "useful fields" including STEM fields. Did you know that we have thousands of unemployed and underemployed PhD. scientists in this country? (Ever heard of a postdoctoral researcher--aka low-paid and overworked gypsy scientist?)

I don't see any reason why student loan debt shouldn't be dischargeable in bankruptcy just like any other debt. You can get a cash advance with your credit card, blow it on gambling, and then discharge your credit card debt in bankruptcy. You can use your credit card to rack up bills at strip joints and bars and then declare bankruptcy. We allow people to walk away from their mortgages. We've even bailed out banks and other businesses for their reckless investments. So why not allow people who actually made what society regards as a good investment (higher education) to declare bankruptcy when it doesn't work out?

One economic benefit is that it would make it easier for many people to purchase various goods and services and even houses.

Ultimately, we need to restore free market forces to the field of higher education. Let's get the government out of the student loan business and allow all student loans to be discharged in bankruptcy. That would be the end of the women's studies degrees and college graduate overproduction. We also need to give colleges some sort of skin in the game--if a loan gets defaulted on--make the college pay back some of the tuition money to the lender. Far fewer people would be able to go to college, but credential inflation would eventually end and our society would enjoy having far less economic waste (in the form of unneeded excess education).

 

[Wreckem]

Have a look here. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/news/casalary/uc?Submit=Page&agency=UC&otmax=&o=0&term=&sort=&ord= There are no full professors under 120K. I've been around a lot not to mention it's public info. Look up Ronald Busuttil [rofessor @ UCLA he makes over 2M a year.

So you are implying the UC system is representative of what professors make? LOL.

And the guy you listed works at UCLA Mecical Center and is

Department of Surgery Chair
Chief of Liver/Pancreas Transplantation
Director of Liver Cancer Center
Director of Liver Transplantation
Physician of hand, liver, pancreas, intestinal transplantation

Just googleing most of those on the SFChron list are Dr's as its not a list of all faculty at UC schools, just the highest paid.

 

[child of wonder]

No, it's just that they've been indoctrinated with the notion that a college degree guarantees a solid middle class job since preschool. Almost every politician and pundit says that. The very same free market dogmatist types who condemn the discharge of student loan debt would probably also stress the value of a higher education in another soundbite.

Also, note that many of those unemployed and underemployed people have degrees in "useful fields" including STEM fields. Did you know that we have thousands of unemployed and underemployed PhD. scientists in this country? (Ever heard of a postdoctoral researcher--aka low-paid and overworked gypsy scientist?)

I don't see any reason why student loan debt shouldn't be dischargeable in bankruptcy just like any other debt. You can get a cash advance with your credit card, blow it on gambling, and then discharge your credit card debt in bankruptcy. You can use your credit card to rack up bills at strip joints and bars and then declare bankruptcy. We allow people to walk away from their mortgages. We've even bailed out banks and other businesses for their reckless investments. So why not allow people who actually made what society regards as a good investment (higher education) to declare bankruptcy when it doesn't work out?

One economic benefit is that it would make it easier for many people to purchase various goods and services and even houses.

Ultimately, we need to restore free market forces to the field of higher education. Let's get the government out of the student loan business and allow all student loans to be discharged in bankruptcy. That would be the end of the women's studies degrees and college graduate overproduction. We also need to give colleges some sort of skin in the game--if a loan gets defaulted on--make the college pay back some of the tuition money to the lender. Far fewer people would be able to go to college, but credential inflation would eventually end and our society would enjoy having far less economic waste (in the form of unneeded excess education).

I agree. In fact, I'd like to see lenders deny kids student loans if they're out of high school with a 2.5 GPA and want $50k a year for college. Lenders could even fluctuate interest rates based on the student's academic history, what degree they plan on acquiring, and where they want to go to school.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I'm torn on the issue... on the one hand, it seems only fair that you should have the bankruptcy option if you're truly desperate.

but on the other hand, I can think of many, many, many people who would take 5-6 years to graduate from a $50,000/year school with a useless major, declare bankruptcy, and just live at home for a couple years waiting for their credit to improve.

Here's what would happen if the federal government got out of the student loan business and if we allowed student loans to be discharged in bankruptcy. There would be far fewer student loans, they would be smaller, and they would only be for students who are majoring in fields where the economy needs the graduates. Thousands of colleges would have to close, getting into college would become much more competitive, and the value of a college degree would increase.

Also, over time credential inflation would dissipate--businesses would have to decide whether possession of a college degree is really necessary to get the job done and if it is, then they'll have to pay for it in the form of higher wages for college graduates. They would no longer be able to use possession of a college degree as a proxy for IQ (on someone else's dime).