10 ms·

The student loan forgiveness program is a terrible idea no matter what your political leanings. It's basically a very weird way to compensate people for certai

The student loan forgiveness program is a terrible idea no matter what your political leanings. It's basically a very weird way to compensate people for certain kinds of jobs. The accounting is a mess, it's a promise for the future so it doesn't show up as a budget problem tofay, but will later. It's very uneven -- some people take out huge loans and other borrow more modestly. The borrowed money can be used for lots of non-educational things, so it creates an incentive to borrow more than you really need. And then it's a big yes or no at the end, not gradual, so it sticks people to jobs and makes a big dramatic event after ten years.

Spooky23 9y ago
I strongly disagree. It’s one of the few tools available that ensures that qualified, well educated teachers are available everywhere. The program is a great example of the power of the federal government to lift all boats, even when the local governance doesn’t care at all. We see lots of examples of mostly red-state governance where passing costs off to other jurisdictions is essentially government policy. (Example: https://www.thedailybeast.com/nevada-sued-for-greyhound-therapy-for-mentally-ill-patients https://www.thedailybeast.com/nevada-sued-for-greyhound-ther... ) This doesn’t let them do that for several professions.
- beisner 9y ago
  Or, ya know, you could pay teachers more across the board and do away with the loan tomfuckery.
  - Spooky23 9y ago
    Good luck getting your local school-board to fund $90k starting salaries for teachers!
    - vkou 9y ago
      Well, they certainly find such salaries for administration. (Something about paying market rates.)
      - wavefunction 9y ago
        Fire one administrator and suddenly you have the budget to bring two teachers up to 90k.
        bittercynic 9y ago
        Not so easy to do when the administrators can influence which positions to keep.
      - forapurpose 9y ago
        > they certainly find such salaries for administration This is one of those claims that in a way has become 'common wisdom', but that I've seen no actual evidence of. I wonder if it's just one of those talking points of people who want to cut taxes that has never been challenged or at least defined, like "government waste". It's like an end-user saying 'my computer's software is buggy' - that doesn't tell me anything, and for all I know it's your power supply, monitor, or a million other possibilities, or even a matter of perception by a user in a bad mood or with a bias. Especially we don't know the problem definition: Which administrators are overpaid? How frequently? Is it certain administrative jobs? In certain size districts? Is it due to some other problem? And which administrators are underpaid? Finally, while we should pay attention to these issues, let's not catastrophize every problem into a organizational disaster. I know plenty of administrators in business who are overpaid; the perfect human institution doesn't exist.
        germinalphrase 9y ago
        I think it's a meme that has carried over to k12 from stories about massive administration growth in higher ed relative to teaching staff. It also is challenging to make apples:apples comparison between teacher and administrator salaries as the contracts are structured very diferently. That said - anecdotally, admin salaries are commonly 2x+ average teacher salaries in districts that I have had experience teaching within.
    - forapurpose 9y ago
      Local school boards are something you can influence much more effectively than national policy. Yes, you can convince your neighbors that they should pay teachers more; I would bet that the best place to start would be a district with a high proportion of families with school-age children, and with a high proportion of teachers living there. I'm not saying it's easy, but lots of progress in the world begins with things that are hard or nobody has done.
    - valuearb 9y ago
      The average cost of the average teacher has to be approaching $90k a year already. In Arizona, a state not known for education spending, spends close to $15k per teacher on pension contributions. Add in medical and other benefits, 3 months vacation, tenure, payroll taxes and the typical teacher is near there.
      - megaman22 9y ago
        You do NOT want to suggest to a teacher that their salary isn't that bad, for working 3/4 of the year. Especially if there are any throwable objects at hand... Whether they are or not, many firmly believe they are underpaid.
      - justin66 9y ago
        > The average cost of the average teacher has to be approaching $90k a year already. It would be interesting to know where you got that. This is an area where people feel free to spread disinformation so I'd be careful. > In Arizona, a state not known for education spending, spends close to $15k per teacher on pension contributions. Add in medical and other benefits, 3 months vacation, tenure, payroll taxes and the typical teacher is near there. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d16/tables/dt16_211.60.asp?current=yes https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d16/tables/dt16_211.60.a... The interesting thing about Arizona is that salaries - which aren't great - are trending downward.
  - megaman22 9y ago
    Everybody I know who isn't completely saddled with student loan debt burns out of teaching in five to ten years and moves on to something else. Almost all the rest of them are just as burned out, their options are just more limited, for one reason or another.
    - vkou 9y ago
      And yet, the teachers that taught me while I was a child (In BC) spent anywhere between 2 and 30 years on the job. What has changed? Why is teaching in America such a terrible job?
      - stewartbutler 9y ago
        "No child left behind" and similar initiatives that lead to perverted incentives that the teachers bear the brunt of. Also low pay and no respect.
        valuearb 9y ago
        Teachers are doing fine. Three months off a year, government level medical benefits, and lucrative pensions after only 25 years (sometimes only 20). Not to mention tenure. Schools are paying enough to not have any lack of candidates for open positions. Their real problem is to equate “teaching certificates’ and credentials with teaching ability.
        vkou 9y ago
        > Teachers are doing fine. Great! > Three months off a year. This is like saying that ski instructors get nine months off a year. It's not paid leave.
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
- curun1r 9y ago
  I don't think he's quibbling with the intent of the program, which is what you're defending. He's objecting to the implementation. What if the program had provided an on-time payment bonus (say $500 per payment) on each payment made by people in a qualifying job? The financing of the program would have been continual, so no 10-year budget time bomb. The loan forgiveness would be fixed rather than 100%, encouraging borrowers to borrow responsibly. And it would still accomplish the goal of encouraging people to work in those kinds of jobs. And, more importantly to the man in the article, the loan balance would be front and center, so he would have realized there was a problem immediately when he didn't see it going down fast enough.
  - Spooky23 9y ago
    That’s not how I read that comment. There are 1000 different ways that you could improve this situation. Getting rid of the servicer middleman, or making said middleman accountable for mistakes made would be a good start. The current scenario is a breeding ground for problems — nobody is accountable.
- austenallred 9y ago
  “Took out too many loans to pay for your education? Become and indentured servant and we’ll forgive them after 10 years!” Sounds less than ideal to me.
- jeffdavis 9y ago
  Have you considered approaches that achieve your goal of qualified teachers without the downsides mentioned above?
  - Spooky23 9y ago
    These programs were cooked up in the 1980s where many districts were unable to hire and retain teachers. NYC was paying $10k bonuses iirc.
    - jeffdavis 9y ago
      If your only concern is teachers, then why does loan forgiveness apply to all kinds of government jobs, and not just teachers? Why is it all-or-nothing? All-or-nothing only makes sense because you can avoid accounting for the costs today, which is convenient for politicians. It's not convenient for teachers.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > It’s one of the few tools available that ensures that qualified, well educated teachers are available everywhere. No, it isn't, because it doesn't.
cperciva 9y ago
It's basically a very weird way to compensate people for certain kinds of jobs. Not just that; it's a way to encourage people with a specific set of traits to take certain jobs. If I were more cynical, I'd suggest that a group of bankers was looking for ways to create a generation of debt slaves, and someone came up with "how about we make sure that their high school teachers are all people who can't manage to effectively manage their money". I'm not quite that cynical, and I don't think this was deliberate -- but the fact remains that creating a strong financial incentive to become a teacher but only if you can't pay your debts is not exactly consistent with the idea that kids should gain some financial literacy while in school.
- wavefunction 9y ago
  That might make sense to me if the teachers were responsible for teaching financial literacy. It's been a decade or two since I've been in high-school but we didn't have 'home economics' or anything approaching education in financial literacy. American learn financial literacy from their parents and whatever they absorb through osmosis from their environments, which has led to the situation you describe.
- maxerickson 9y ago
  If the forgiveness program satisfies the debt then it isn't true that people working through it aren't paying their debts, they just aren't doing it exclusively with monthly payments.
- learc83 9y ago
  >If I were more cynical You'd need to be more than cynical to believe that. >"how about we make sure that their high school teachers are all people who can't manage to effectively manage their money" How does this follow? If I'm aware that becoming a high school teacher ensures that I can borrow money to go to college that will be repaid by the government after 10 years of working, and I take advantage of that, how exactly does that show that I can't effectively manage money? >creating a strong financial incentive to become a teacher but only if you can't pay your debts That doesn't follow either. It has nothing to do with whether you can pay your debts or not. Most of the people who qualify for this program would have paid their loans off had they not been aware this program existed. Instead they chose to make minimum payments and use the money saved for other purposes. Nothing about that demonstrates financial illiteracy. In fact taking advantage of a rather byzantine aid program demonstrates financial literacy.

Spooky23 9y ago

I strongly disagree. It’s one of the few tools available that ensures that qualified, well educated teachers are available everywhere. The program is a great example of the power of the federal government to lift all boats, even when the local governance doesn’t care at all. We see lots of examples of mostly red-state governance where passing costs off to other jurisdictions is essentially government policy. (Example: https://www.thedailybeast.com/nevada-sued-for-greyhound-therapy-for-mentally-ill-patients https://www.thedailybeast.com/nevada-sued-for-greyhound-ther... ) This doesn’t let them do that for several professions.

beisner 9y ago
Or, ya know, you could pay teachers more across the board and do away with the loan tomfuckery.
- Spooky23 9y ago
  Good luck getting your local school-board to fund $90k starting salaries for teachers!
  - vkou 9y ago
    Well, they certainly find such salaries for administration. (Something about paying market rates.)
    - wavefunction 9y ago
      Fire one administrator and suddenly you have the budget to bring two teachers up to 90k.
      - bittercynic 9y ago
        Not so easy to do when the administrators can influence which positions to keep.
    - forapurpose 9y ago
      > they certainly find such salaries for administration This is one of those claims that in a way has become 'common wisdom', but that I've seen no actual evidence of. I wonder if it's just one of those talking points of people who want to cut taxes that has never been challenged or at least defined, like "government waste". It's like an end-user saying 'my computer's software is buggy' - that doesn't tell me anything, and for all I know it's your power supply, monitor, or a million other possibilities, or even a matter of perception by a user in a bad mood or with a bias. Especially we don't know the problem definition: Which administrators are overpaid? How frequently? Is it certain administrative jobs? In certain size districts? Is it due to some other problem? And which administrators are underpaid? Finally, while we should pay attention to these issues, let's not catastrophize every problem into a organizational disaster. I know plenty of administrators in business who are overpaid; the perfect human institution doesn't exist.
      - germinalphrase 9y ago
        I think it's a meme that has carried over to k12 from stories about massive administration growth in higher ed relative to teaching staff. It also is challenging to make apples:apples comparison between teacher and administrator salaries as the contracts are structured very diferently. That said - anecdotally, admin salaries are commonly 2x+ average teacher salaries in districts that I have had experience teaching within.
  - forapurpose 9y ago
    Local school boards are something you can influence much more effectively than national policy. Yes, you can convince your neighbors that they should pay teachers more; I would bet that the best place to start would be a district with a high proportion of families with school-age children, and with a high proportion of teachers living there. I'm not saying it's easy, but lots of progress in the world begins with things that are hard or nobody has done.
  - valuearb 9y ago
    The average cost of the average teacher has to be approaching $90k a year already. In Arizona, a state not known for education spending, spends close to $15k per teacher on pension contributions. Add in medical and other benefits, 3 months vacation, tenure, payroll taxes and the typical teacher is near there.
    - megaman22 9y ago
      You do NOT want to suggest to a teacher that their salary isn't that bad, for working 3/4 of the year. Especially if there are any throwable objects at hand... Whether they are or not, many firmly believe they are underpaid.
    - justin66 9y ago
      > The average cost of the average teacher has to be approaching $90k a year already. It would be interesting to know where you got that. This is an area where people feel free to spread disinformation so I'd be careful. > In Arizona, a state not known for education spending, spends close to $15k per teacher on pension contributions. Add in medical and other benefits, 3 months vacation, tenure, payroll taxes and the typical teacher is near there. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d16/tables/dt16_211.60.asp?current=yes https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d16/tables/dt16_211.60.a... The interesting thing about Arizona is that salaries - which aren't great - are trending downward.
- megaman22 9y ago
  Everybody I know who isn't completely saddled with student loan debt burns out of teaching in five to ten years and moves on to something else. Almost all the rest of them are just as burned out, their options are just more limited, for one reason or another.
  - vkou 9y ago
    And yet, the teachers that taught me while I was a child (In BC) spent anywhere between 2 and 30 years on the job. What has changed? Why is teaching in America such a terrible job?
    - stewartbutler 9y ago
      "No child left behind" and similar initiatives that lead to perverted incentives that the teachers bear the brunt of. Also low pay and no respect.
      - valuearb 9y ago
        Teachers are doing fine. Three months off a year, government level medical benefits, and lucrative pensions after only 25 years (sometimes only 20). Not to mention tenure. Schools are paying enough to not have any lack of candidates for open positions. Their real problem is to equate “teaching certificates’ and credentials with teaching ability.
        vkou 9y ago
        > Teachers are doing fine. Great! > Three months off a year. This is like saying that ski instructors get nine months off a year. It's not paid leave.
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
curun1r 9y ago
I don't think he's quibbling with the intent of the program, which is what you're defending. He's objecting to the implementation. What if the program had provided an on-time payment bonus (say $500 per payment) on each payment made by people in a qualifying job? The financing of the program would have been continual, so no 10-year budget time bomb. The loan forgiveness would be fixed rather than 100%, encouraging borrowers to borrow responsibly. And it would still accomplish the goal of encouraging people to work in those kinds of jobs. And, more importantly to the man in the article, the loan balance would be front and center, so he would have realized there was a problem immediately when he didn't see it going down fast enough.
- Spooky23 9y ago
  That’s not how I read that comment. There are 1000 different ways that you could improve this situation. Getting rid of the servicer middleman, or making said middleman accountable for mistakes made would be a good start. The current scenario is a breeding ground for problems — nobody is accountable.
austenallred 9y ago
“Took out too many loans to pay for your education? Become and indentured servant and we’ll forgive them after 10 years!” Sounds less than ideal to me.
jeffdavis 9y ago
Have you considered approaches that achieve your goal of qualified teachers without the downsides mentioned above?
- Spooky23 9y ago
  These programs were cooked up in the 1980s where many districts were unable to hire and retain teachers. NYC was paying $10k bonuses iirc.
  - jeffdavis 9y ago
    If your only concern is teachers, then why does loan forgiveness apply to all kinds of government jobs, and not just teachers? Why is it all-or-nothing? All-or-nothing only makes sense because you can avoid accounting for the costs today, which is convenient for politicians. It's not convenient for teachers.
dragonwriter 9y ago
> It’s one of the few tools available that ensures that qualified, well educated teachers are available everywhere. No, it isn't, because it doesn't.

cperciva 9y ago

It's basically a very weird way to compensate people for certain kinds of jobs. Not just that; it's a way to encourage people with a specific set of traits to take certain jobs. If I were more cynical, I'd suggest that a group of bankers was looking for ways to create a generation of debt slaves, and someone came up with "how about we make sure that their high school teachers are all people who can't manage to effectively manage their money". I'm not quite that cynical, and I don't think this was deliberate -- but the fact remains that creating a strong financial incentive to become a teacher but only if you can't pay your debts is not exactly consistent with the idea that kids should gain some financial literacy while in school.

wavefunction 9y ago
That might make sense to me if the teachers were responsible for teaching financial literacy. It's been a decade or two since I've been in high-school but we didn't have 'home economics' or anything approaching education in financial literacy. American learn financial literacy from their parents and whatever they absorb through osmosis from their environments, which has led to the situation you describe.
maxerickson 9y ago
If the forgiveness program satisfies the debt then it isn't true that people working through it aren't paying their debts, they just aren't doing it exclusively with monthly payments.
learc83 9y ago
>If I were more cynical You'd need to be more than cynical to believe that. >"how about we make sure that their high school teachers are all people who can't manage to effectively manage their money" How does this follow? If I'm aware that becoming a high school teacher ensures that I can borrow money to go to college that will be repaid by the government after 10 years of working, and I take advantage of that, how exactly does that show that I can't effectively manage money? >creating a strong financial incentive to become a teacher but only if you can't pay your debts That doesn't follow either. It has nothing to do with whether you can pay your debts or not. Most of the people who qualify for this program would have paid their loans off had they not been aware this program existed. Instead they chose to make minimum payments and use the money saved for other purposes. Nothing about that demonstrates financial illiteracy. In fact taking advantage of a rather byzantine aid program demonstrates financial literacy.