4 ms·
The problem is, it also allows folks who would never qualify for a 100k loan otherwise get 100K into debt. I read an article about how artists are struggling i
by geebee 8y ago
The problem is, it also allows folks who would never qualify for a 100k loan otherwise get 100K into debt.
I read an article about how artists are struggling in the high cost San Francisco Bay Area (sorry no link, because it was really an eye-opening article). The article did mention student loans, but focused mainly on gentrification brought about by high tech.
However, they did profiles of various struggling artists, and I was frankly stunned by the debt levels. People with fine and performing arts degrees frequently had student debt levels of $70,000-$90,000. Holy crap.
Is it a good thing that we've created a non-dischargeable, federally guaranteed loan that allows people to go $90k in hock for a degree that they wouldn't otherwise be able to get?
I was very intrigued when I learned that libertarians often look askance on weakening bankruptcy laws. I always figured they were a "that's the bargain you made" soft of crowd. What I learned is that libertarians aren't especially keen on lending (pun intended) the government's monopoly on physical force in service as a collection agency for people who make stupid loans. I'd say that making a $90,000 loan to someone so they can (channeling David Sedaris here) take photographs of rotting produce spilling out of garbage cans is the height of stupidity.
Like, if you make that loan, don't come crying to me. We already have a fairly punitive bankruptcy system, but we are not interested in marshaling the power of government sponsored men with guns to pursue foolish borrowers who don't pay foolish debts to the ends of the earth so that foolish lenders can get their money back. That, to quote pornstache from orange is the new black, "sounds like a whole lot of your problem".
If you don't think ordinary bankruptcy, along with credit and a history of repaying debts, is enough to incentivize repayment, seriously, don't make the loan.
- JudgeWapner 8y ago> the government's monopoly on physical force in service as a collection agency for people who make stupid loans > the power of government sponsored men with guns to pursue foolish borrowers please correct me if I'm wrong, but I belive tax evasion is the only debt-related (but still requiring a criminal intent to avoid paying) situation that will result in arrest. If you don't pay your student loans, even gov't backed ones, it will be a thorn in your side forever and result in civil actions, but I don't believe you can be arrested or criminally charged for not paying.
- geebee 8y agoGood point. If I'm going to discuss use of government force, I should distinguish between civil and criminal action taken on the part of the government. This discussion does take me past my knowledge boundaries, though I believe failure to pay child support can also be "criminal". The main reason I'm not confident (and used quotes) in what I'm saying here is that there's a difference between criminalizing failure to pay a debt itself, and criminalizing various kinds of fraud that go into hiding money that would otherwise be garnished by court order. This difference can be complicated legally and I just don't know enough about it to have a meaningful discussion. Seizing someone's assets in response to a failure to pay debt does eventually require law enforcement, so I do stand behind my claim that government force is ultimately to collect money based on foolish lending and borrowing practices, under draconian non dischargeable conditions.
- tracker1 8y agoAre federally backed student loaners allowed to reject financing based on field of study?