5 ms·

This kind of populist pandering makes me upset. What about people who didn’t go to college? Or people who killed themselves to pay off their student loans? This

by mruts 7y ago

This kind of populist pandering makes me upset. What about people who didn’t go to college? Or people who killed themselves to pay off their student loans? This is nothing more than wealth transfer to a specific demographic (young, educated) to buy off voters. This isn’t how a democracy should function.

notacoward 7y ago
> What about people who didn’t go to college? Or people who killed themselves to pay off their student loans? I think you're misunderstanding the goal here. It's not to create equal outcomes. It's to stop the ongoing harm to students and to society from these abusive practices. Personally I think it would be better if these debts were capped at some non-zero number instead of being erased entirely, with the difference directed toward some of the other groups you mention, but at least this starts the conversation. Negotiation 101: start with an offer that's more favorable to you than where you expect to end up. > This isn’t how a democracy should function. This is exactly how a democracy should function - with proposals, then discussion, then votes. What about the back-room deals that have inflated college costs and created special regulatory exemptions for student loans? Anyone who complains about "populist pandering" without at least acknowledging the anti-populist pandering that led to this is being a bit disingenuous.
- woah 7y ago
  It’s not “back room deals” that have made tuition prices balloon, it’s the government loans themselves.
  - notacoward 7y ago
    It's both. The availability of both grants and loans has been a huge factor, to be sure, but so have the direct subsidies to schools, and the special rules that make such loans more appealing to lenders, and all the "little ways" that regulation drives up either demand or cost for a college education. But it doesn't even matter, really. Whether they were made in the front room or the back room, many of the deals contributing to the debt crisis were made to benefit a few at the expense of the public. Decrying one kind of pandering while denying another never leads to good policy.
- cyrksoft 7y ago
  > I think you're misunderstanding the goal here. It's not to create equal outcomes. It's to stop the ongoing harm to students and to society from these abusive practices. Personally I think it would be better if these debts were capped at some non-zero number instead of being erased entirely, with the difference directed toward some of the other groups you mention, but at least this starts the conversation. Negotiation 101: start with an offer that's more favorable to you than where you expect to end up. Which abusive practices are you referring to?
  - notacoward 7y ago
    Oh, where to begin? It's a complicated racket. Here are a couple of quick hits illustrating the way that the government has made special rules for student loans that make them unusually attractive to lenders. http://www.collegescholarships.org/research/student-loans/ http://www.collegescholarships.org/research/student-loans/ http://www.healthcareadministration.com/college/ http://www.healthcareadministration.com/college/ For a longer treatment, covering the schools' role as well, it would be hard to beat Matt Taibbi's expose. https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/the-great-college-loan-swindle-124484/ https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/the-... My original comment was primarily directed at the lenders, but the other parties deserve their share of calumny as well.
    - cyrksoft 7y ago
      The main problem here is people taking these loans. Why would anybody take out 150k to study something 'useless'? It's entirely their fault. Of course the loans made education more expensive, nobody argues that. But the main focus should be on people taking the money for the sake of taking it and then realizing they screwed up.
      - notacoward 7y ago
        > Why would anybody take out 150k to study something 'useless'? Who are you to say it's useless? Such hubris. They do it because they've been led to believe it's necessary, and in some cases it actually is. Kind of hard to become a doctor or lawyer without a degree. Even if that weren't the case, that doesn't absolve the people who take advantage of them. Victims of fraud are acting voluntarily, but that doesn't make it OK to defraud someone else. > people taking the money for the sake of taking it You can't even know others' motives, and yet you choose to assume the worst possible ones. That says more about you than them.

by mruts 7y ago

notacoward 7y ago

> What about people who didn’t go to college? Or people who killed themselves to pay off their student loans? I think you're misunderstanding the goal here. It's not to create equal outcomes. It's to stop the ongoing harm to students and to society from these abusive practices. Personally I think it would be better if these debts were capped at some non-zero number instead of being erased entirely, with the difference directed toward some of the other groups you mention, but at least this starts the conversation. Negotiation 101: start with an offer that's more favorable to you than where you expect to end up. > This isn’t how a democracy should function. This is exactly how a democracy should function - with proposals, then discussion, then votes. What about the back-room deals that have inflated college costs and created special regulatory exemptions for student loans? Anyone who complains about "populist pandering" without at least acknowledging the anti-populist pandering that led to this is being a bit disingenuous.

woah 7y ago
It’s not “back room deals” that have made tuition prices balloon, it’s the government loans themselves.
- notacoward 7y ago
  It's both. The availability of both grants and loans has been a huge factor, to be sure, but so have the direct subsidies to schools, and the special rules that make such loans more appealing to lenders, and all the "little ways" that regulation drives up either demand or cost for a college education. But it doesn't even matter, really. Whether they were made in the front room or the back room, many of the deals contributing to the debt crisis were made to benefit a few at the expense of the public. Decrying one kind of pandering while denying another never leads to good policy.
cyrksoft 7y ago
> I think you're misunderstanding the goal here. It's not to create equal outcomes. It's to stop the ongoing harm to students and to society from these abusive practices. Personally I think it would be better if these debts were capped at some non-zero number instead of being erased entirely, with the difference directed toward some of the other groups you mention, but at least this starts the conversation. Negotiation 101: start with an offer that's more favorable to you than where you expect to end up. Which abusive practices are you referring to?
- notacoward 7y ago
  Oh, where to begin? It's a complicated racket. Here are a couple of quick hits illustrating the way that the government has made special rules for student loans that make them unusually attractive to lenders. http://www.collegescholarships.org/research/student-loans/ http://www.collegescholarships.org/research/student-loans/ http://www.healthcareadministration.com/college/ http://www.healthcareadministration.com/college/ For a longer treatment, covering the schools' role as well, it would be hard to beat Matt Taibbi's expose. https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/the-great-college-loan-swindle-124484/ https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/the-... My original comment was primarily directed at the lenders, but the other parties deserve their share of calumny as well.
  - cyrksoft 7y ago
    The main problem here is people taking these loans. Why would anybody take out 150k to study something 'useless'? It's entirely their fault. Of course the loans made education more expensive, nobody argues that. But the main focus should be on people taking the money for the sake of taking it and then realizing they screwed up.
    - notacoward 7y ago
      > Why would anybody take out 150k to study something 'useless'? Who are you to say it's useless? Such hubris. They do it because they've been led to believe it's necessary, and in some cases it actually is. Kind of hard to become a doctor or lawyer without a degree. Even if that weren't the case, that doesn't absolve the people who take advantage of them. Victims of fraud are acting voluntarily, but that doesn't make it OK to defraud someone else. > people taking the money for the sake of taking it You can't even know others' motives, and yet you choose to assume the worst possible ones. That says more about you than them.