3 ms·

>No one should pay back their student loan debt. Seriously, just stop. Sorry. But you took a debt, you pay it back. Integrity isn’t outdated. I agree that the

>No one should pay back their student loan debt. Seriously, just stop. Sorry. But you took a debt, you pay it back. Integrity isn’t outdated. I agree that the idea and industry behind “13th grade” is dumb. Obviously not every kid should be encouraged to take on debt to go to college. But “stop paying your debts” is a bad message imo.

wrong_variable 8y ago
> But “stop paying your debts” is a bad message imo. Not really. - Do you own a debt to your parents with a interest rate of 25% because they gave birth to you ? - Do you own rent to planet earth for living in it ? Debt can be unreasonable, just like wealth can be unreasonable. Its why governments intervene to destroy large amount of concentrated wealth and Egyptian pharaohs used to periodically clear everybody's debt. The culture of " Paying your debt " is created by the small number of creditors who historically have controlled information flow, because they understand that society in aggregate has strong bargaining power.
- Sir_Vival 8y ago
  You don't choose to be born. You choose to take out the loan. You sign forms telling you exactly how much it will cost you in the end. It's a decision. I can't imagine anyone saying "Let's all stop paying our Auto loans! They were unfair and predatory." You made the decision. Own up to it. If you can't do the math at 18 years old you shouldn't be going to university anyways.
arbitrary_name 8y ago
Let's take the morality out of it. It's been injected in there for the benefit of the lenders. They charge an interest rate to cover their risk. Right now, with the fact that debt holders cannot default, they are getting an unfair deal. Defaulting on the debt and refusing to pay effectively triggers the risk that they were charging interest on. Like strikers refusing to work until better working conditions are provided, so too are debtors withholding payment doing something noble.
- onetimemanytime 8y ago
  agreed. If you cannot default, you should be charged more or less cost as interest.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 8y ago
  > It's been injected in there for the benefit of the lenders. Whether that's true depends on your moral framework, doesn't it? > They charge an interest rate to cover their risk. That's not exactly correct. I mean, a portion of the interest rate is due to risk, but another portion of it is because lenders need a return on their investment, or they won't lend. Moreover, student loan debt is not totally risk free (as we can see by the fact that $150B of it is in serious default). > Like strikers refusing to work until better working conditions are provided, so too are debtors withholding payment doing something noble. There is a difference. A person's agreement to work must be continuously in effect. They can withdraw it at any time, with no consequences other than that the ongoing benefits of their employment should also terminate immediately. That is, most non-union workers are working without a prospective agreement in place that obligates them to provide future labor. And when union members strike, it's normally when they are without a contract. Not in the midst of an existing contract with management. The same is not true of an agreement to pay back a debt. It is prospective: "in the future, I will pay back such and such amount, on such and so terms." You can argue a lot of different things about these notes -- whether they're fair, whether the people agreeing to them are capable of understanding them, etc. Should the age of majority be raised? Should people be required to take a test to ensure they understand contracts before they are allowed to enter into them? And you can also argue about policy that might ameliorate the situation. But there is little contractual similarity between refusing to repay a loan and striking.
- will4274 8y ago
  Just because loans cannot be discharged in bankruptcy doesn't mean they are risk free. Some people die before repaying their debts, some people leave the country or otherwise become impossible to track down. In these cases, the bank eats the cost of the loan and has to make it up on other loans. risk is limited not eliminated.
Stanish 8y ago
Sorry, but that logic doesn't work after the 2008 rolling bailouts. It never actually worked, but especially now. Also, students don't get bankruptcy protection, which is another check on predatory lending that was removed specifically to inflate this bubble. Nobody should pay their loans if they can get away with it. Period. It's the only way to stop the cycle of predatory lending and fraudulent price inflation of what should be treated as a right for all.
indentured 8y ago
You should look up usury. “Sorry, you sold yourself into slavery. Integrity isn’t outdated.” Some forms of lending are predatory, and most developed nations have rightly outlawed them. Somehow, though, loaning tens of thousands at 14% (yes, I took on a loan like that at the ripe old age of 18) isn’t seen as an issue. People should absolutely refuse to pay unsustainable debts they can’t afford (but I have news for you: there are already people not paying... because they can’t). I’m glad you’re secure enough to dispense such wisdom like this, but I fail to see how it’s going to help anyone pay their rent or buy a house, because at the end of the day, people simply cannot afford these loans. And if you’re going to suggest that people just shouldn’t borrow, them prepare to have a steadily diminishing college-educated population as only the increasingly wealthy can afford to actually get an education.

wrong_variable 8y ago

> But “stop paying your debts” is a bad message imo. Not really. - Do you own a debt to your parents with a interest rate of 25% because they gave birth to you ? - Do you own rent to planet earth for living in it ? Debt can be unreasonable, just like wealth can be unreasonable. Its why governments intervene to destroy large amount of concentrated wealth and Egyptian pharaohs used to periodically clear everybody's debt. The culture of " Paying your debt " is created by the small number of creditors who historically have controlled information flow, because they understand that society in aggregate has strong bargaining power.

Sir_Vival 8y ago
You don't choose to be born. You choose to take out the loan. You sign forms telling you exactly how much it will cost you in the end. It's a decision. I can't imagine anyone saying "Let's all stop paying our Auto loans! They were unfair and predatory." You made the decision. Own up to it. If you can't do the math at 18 years old you shouldn't be going to university anyways.

arbitrary_name 8y ago

Let's take the morality out of it. It's been injected in there for the benefit of the lenders. They charge an interest rate to cover their risk. Right now, with the fact that debt holders cannot default, they are getting an unfair deal. Defaulting on the debt and refusing to pay effectively triggers the risk that they were charging interest on. Like strikers refusing to work until better working conditions are provided, so too are debtors withholding payment doing something noble.

onetimemanytime 8y ago
agreed. If you cannot default, you should be charged more or less cost as interest.
asdfasgasdgasdg 8y ago
> It's been injected in there for the benefit of the lenders. Whether that's true depends on your moral framework, doesn't it? > They charge an interest rate to cover their risk. That's not exactly correct. I mean, a portion of the interest rate is due to risk, but another portion of it is because lenders need a return on their investment, or they won't lend. Moreover, student loan debt is not totally risk free (as we can see by the fact that $150B of it is in serious default). > Like strikers refusing to work until better working conditions are provided, so too are debtors withholding payment doing something noble. There is a difference. A person's agreement to work must be continuously in effect. They can withdraw it at any time, with no consequences other than that the ongoing benefits of their employment should also terminate immediately. That is, most non-union workers are working without a prospective agreement in place that obligates them to provide future labor. And when union members strike, it's normally when they are without a contract. Not in the midst of an existing contract with management. The same is not true of an agreement to pay back a debt. It is prospective: "in the future, I will pay back such and such amount, on such and so terms." You can argue a lot of different things about these notes -- whether they're fair, whether the people agreeing to them are capable of understanding them, etc. Should the age of majority be raised? Should people be required to take a test to ensure they understand contracts before they are allowed to enter into them? And you can also argue about policy that might ameliorate the situation. But there is little contractual similarity between refusing to repay a loan and striking.
will4274 8y ago
Just because loans cannot be discharged in bankruptcy doesn't mean they are risk free. Some people die before repaying their debts, some people leave the country or otherwise become impossible to track down. In these cases, the bank eats the cost of the loan and has to make it up on other loans. risk is limited not eliminated.

Stanish 8y ago

Sorry, but that logic doesn't work after the 2008 rolling bailouts. It never actually worked, but especially now. Also, students don't get bankruptcy protection, which is another check on predatory lending that was removed specifically to inflate this bubble. Nobody should pay their loans if they can get away with it. Period. It's the only way to stop the cycle of predatory lending and fraudulent price inflation of what should be treated as a right for all.

indentured 8y ago

You should look up usury. “Sorry, you sold yourself into slavery. Integrity isn’t outdated.” Some forms of lending are predatory, and most developed nations have rightly outlawed them. Somehow, though, loaning tens of thousands at 14% (yes, I took on a loan like that at the ripe old age of 18) isn’t seen as an issue. People should absolutely refuse to pay unsustainable debts they can’t afford (but I have news for you: there are already people not paying... because they can’t). I’m glad you’re secure enough to dispense such wisdom like this, but I fail to see how it’s going to help anyone pay their rent or buy a house, because at the end of the day, people simply cannot afford these loans. And if you’re going to suggest that people just shouldn’t borrow, them prepare to have a steadily diminishing college-educated population as only the increasingly wealthy can afford to actually get an education.