52 ms·

In one case, people that went to college but were not able to take advantage of the degree would still not have a crippling debt to pay.

imgabe 8y ago
The loans are a problem, but we could fix that by making them dischargeable in bankruptcy and having the government stop subsidizing them. Then banks would have to make a realistic assessment of a student's ability to repay, loan rates and college prices would adjust accordingly. But, if I go to college and dick around and fail out, why should taxpayers have to pay my tuition?
- fifnir 8y ago
  If I plant wheat and some of the plants don't produce fruit, should I stop watering all of them and demand that they each find its own water source ? If I try breeding chickens and some of them stop laying eggs, should I abandon the whole endeavor and start buying my chickens from the local supermarket because some chicken are dicking around? All national efforts are going to have some waste, it's inevitable and I think we can more than comfortably afford it. Our job should not be to scrutinize every detail in order to minimize waste (of course we should be doing that as well) but rather to make sure that every wheat seed and every chicken have all they need in order to fully develop themselves to the best of their abilities.
  - imgabe 8y ago
    Are you saying humans are basically farm animals to be tended to by the government? Personally I would prefer to be considered a sentient being in my own right with my own rights and responsibilities. There is a reason we expend so much energy and care in looking after wheat and chickens. It's so we can eat them.
    - fifnir 8y ago
      It's called a metaphor, typically children start distinguishing them in written speech at about 4yo.
      - imgabe 8y ago
        It is a very telling metaphor in terms of attitudes regarding relative roles of individuals and government. I'm not sure if you're American or not, but many Americans would recoil at the idea that they should be treated like a farm animal. An animal on a farm might be treated well (at the discretion of the farmer) (until they are slaughtered), but they aren't free. An animal in the wild has freedom, but not security. America heavily favors the latter, or at least it used to, times may be a'changing.
        dsfyu404ed 8y ago
        >An animal in the wild has freedom, but not security. An animal that gives up its freedom for security deserves neither. I agree that the original metaphor was inappropriate because it compares people to domesticated animals and crops that have no free will and would not exist without the farm, not to mention the personal freedom implications of equating citizens to domesticated animals.
        fifnir 8y ago
        You're grasping at the words trying to force an irrelevant and unsubstantiated point. No, I'm not saying to treat people like animals, on the contrary, I was arguing for allowing people the dignity to study without debts.
        imgabe 8y ago
        And what I'm trying to tell you is that living as a ward of the state is not something many people would consider to be dignified.
- harryh 8y ago
  If you make student loans dischargeable via bankruptcy you will basically eliminate lending for college. The issue is that the vast majority of people have ~0 assets when they graduate from college. There would be a huge incentive for all of these people to declare bankruptcy, discharge the debt, and then wait around the ~7 years for the bankruptcy to disappear from their credit report. As long as they don't want to buy a house during that period it wouldn't even be much of an inconvenience.
  - imgabe 8y ago
    7 years is a long time and credit is necessary for many more things than just buying a house. People will also need cars, many apartments will do credit checks, as will many jobs. If what you say is true, why don't people graduate college, live large on credit cards for a few years, and then just declare bankruptcy? There's zero consequence to it right? Edit: This would also put further pressure on banks to make sure the loans are not so burdensome that this becomes an attractive option. Theoretically, anyone could do this with any loan (although taking out a loan with the intention of declaring bankruptcy is fraud and would go badly), but most people don't, because it's easier to just repay the loan than deal with 7 years of hassles b/c of bankruptcy.
    - tptacek 8y ago
      In reality, credit is not essential for maintaining a pretty standard US lifestyle. I've had what I assume is terrible credit my whole life (judging from the fact that I get turned down for things like checking accounts, and had to debate my bank to get a secured credit card months after depositing the proceeds of selling a company) and I've been pretty much just fine. I rented apartments no problem (pay your rent, get reference letters from landlords), managed to rent cars when I needed them, and simply didn't use credit cards (I still don't understand what the purpose of a credit card is). I got 3 mortgages (in 3 different places) during that time frame too. Maybe it's harder to get one now? Who cares? You're 25, wait a couple years to buy a house. (Preemptively: for almost that entire time, my family was living basically paycheck-to-paycheck, and our largest expenses were rent and food). People do leave college and rack up enormous credit card debt. The reason everyone doesn't BK is that there's a social stigma to it, and also, in general, the average American consumer does not have a good idea how the credit system works. Read Patrick McKenzie about this sometime. If more people understood how generous our creditor/debitor laws were to consumers, or how clownshoes disorganized consumer finance was (why would they give a shit? they're judged almost entirely on growth), people would take much more ruthless advantage of it. But there's also a difference between accumulating $50,000 of revolving credit debt over a span of 5-10 years and six figures based on a decision you make when you are eighteen years old.

imgabe 8y ago

The loans are a problem, but we could fix that by making them dischargeable in bankruptcy and having the government stop subsidizing them. Then banks would have to make a realistic assessment of a student's ability to repay, loan rates and college prices would adjust accordingly. But, if I go to college and dick around and fail out, why should taxpayers have to pay my tuition?

fifnir 8y ago
If I plant wheat and some of the plants don't produce fruit, should I stop watering all of them and demand that they each find its own water source ? If I try breeding chickens and some of them stop laying eggs, should I abandon the whole endeavor and start buying my chickens from the local supermarket because some chicken are dicking around? All national efforts are going to have some waste, it's inevitable and I think we can more than comfortably afford it. Our job should not be to scrutinize every detail in order to minimize waste (of course we should be doing that as well) but rather to make sure that every wheat seed and every chicken have all they need in order to fully develop themselves to the best of their abilities.
- imgabe 8y ago
  Are you saying humans are basically farm animals to be tended to by the government? Personally I would prefer to be considered a sentient being in my own right with my own rights and responsibilities. There is a reason we expend so much energy and care in looking after wheat and chickens. It's so we can eat them.
  - fifnir 8y ago
    It's called a metaphor, typically children start distinguishing them in written speech at about 4yo.
    - imgabe 8y ago
      It is a very telling metaphor in terms of attitudes regarding relative roles of individuals and government. I'm not sure if you're American or not, but many Americans would recoil at the idea that they should be treated like a farm animal. An animal on a farm might be treated well (at the discretion of the farmer) (until they are slaughtered), but they aren't free. An animal in the wild has freedom, but not security. America heavily favors the latter, or at least it used to, times may be a'changing.
      - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
        >An animal in the wild has freedom, but not security. An animal that gives up its freedom for security deserves neither. I agree that the original metaphor was inappropriate because it compares people to domesticated animals and crops that have no free will and would not exist without the farm, not to mention the personal freedom implications of equating citizens to domesticated animals.
      - fifnir 8y ago
        You're grasping at the words trying to force an irrelevant and unsubstantiated point. No, I'm not saying to treat people like animals, on the contrary, I was arguing for allowing people the dignity to study without debts.
        imgabe 8y ago
        And what I'm trying to tell you is that living as a ward of the state is not something many people would consider to be dignified.
harryh 8y ago
If you make student loans dischargeable via bankruptcy you will basically eliminate lending for college. The issue is that the vast majority of people have ~0 assets when they graduate from college. There would be a huge incentive for all of these people to declare bankruptcy, discharge the debt, and then wait around the ~7 years for the bankruptcy to disappear from their credit report. As long as they don't want to buy a house during that period it wouldn't even be much of an inconvenience.
- imgabe 8y ago
  7 years is a long time and credit is necessary for many more things than just buying a house. People will also need cars, many apartments will do credit checks, as will many jobs. If what you say is true, why don't people graduate college, live large on credit cards for a few years, and then just declare bankruptcy? There's zero consequence to it right? Edit: This would also put further pressure on banks to make sure the loans are not so burdensome that this becomes an attractive option. Theoretically, anyone could do this with any loan (although taking out a loan with the intention of declaring bankruptcy is fraud and would go badly), but most people don't, because it's easier to just repay the loan than deal with 7 years of hassles b/c of bankruptcy.
  - tptacek 8y ago
    In reality, credit is not essential for maintaining a pretty standard US lifestyle. I've had what I assume is terrible credit my whole life (judging from the fact that I get turned down for things like checking accounts, and had to debate my bank to get a secured credit card months after depositing the proceeds of selling a company) and I've been pretty much just fine. I rented apartments no problem (pay your rent, get reference letters from landlords), managed to rent cars when I needed them, and simply didn't use credit cards (I still don't understand what the purpose of a credit card is). I got 3 mortgages (in 3 different places) during that time frame too. Maybe it's harder to get one now? Who cares? You're 25, wait a couple years to buy a house. (Preemptively: for almost that entire time, my family was living basically paycheck-to-paycheck, and our largest expenses were rent and food). People do leave college and rack up enormous credit card debt. The reason everyone doesn't BK is that there's a social stigma to it, and also, in general, the average American consumer does not have a good idea how the credit system works. Read Patrick McKenzie about this sometime. If more people understood how generous our creditor/debitor laws were to consumers, or how clownshoes disorganized consumer finance was (why would they give a shit? they're judged almost entirely on growth), people would take much more ruthless advantage of it. But there's also a difference between accumulating $50,000 of revolving credit debt over a span of 5-10 years and six figures based on a decision you make when you are eighteen years old.