3 ms·
This is kind of bullshit. The problem is assuming that borrowers are fiscally competent. We know this to be false, even among home buyers. 18 year olds, who ha
by lawnchair_larry 10y ago
This is kind of bullshit.
The problem is assuming that borrowers are fiscally competent. We know this to be false, even among home buyers. 18 year olds, who have every adult that they trust telling them they must go to college and take these loans, don't stand a chance.
The loan industry not only knows this, but they optimize the system to capitalize on it. I don't think the student was represented when laws were passed to prevent discharges in bankruptcy.
A professional loan officer just has to fool some kid one time, and closing that 15 minute deal often destroys that kid's entire adult life.
We provide Donald Fucking Trump more protections from financial disasters than well-meaning students who have never had a loan or investment in their life.
Coincidentally, he is one of the many who are exploiting this system, with Trump University existing for little other purpose than siphoning this taxpayer-guaranteed free money.
Then when the cards inevitably collapse, half of the population eats up the propaganda about "personal responsibility".
Personal Responsibility would be not taking idiotic risks and getting the government to pay for it.
I can assure you that approximately zero students took out loans thinking they wouldn't be able to repay them. But we know the lenders knew better, because they won't give out these loans without a cosigner and/or a government guarantee.
- logfromblammo 10y agoYou might also be able to argue that debts that cannot be discharged in bankruptcy represent a form of indentured servitude. And that is illegal now in the US, thanks to the 13th Amendment. In fact, indentures were a better deal, because the indenturee was guaranteed to have the job necessary to fulfill the contract. Student loan issuers don't have to accept work in lieu of cash.