5 ms·

> 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

> 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.
    - cyrksoft 7y ago
      > 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. That's why I wrote 'useless'. By that I mean degrees without real job prospects. > You can't even know others' motives, and yet you choose to assume the worst possible ones. That says more about you than them. I'm not judging anybody. I know people who took 30k loans without needing them just to pay for a new car, new computer and other non-necessities. They were studying art at a community college. There are many people like that. That's entirely their fault and their debt to pay.
      - notacoward 7y ago
        > I know people who took 30k loans without needing them just to pay for a new car, new computer and other non-necessities. It's interesting that you know multiple such people, but what matters is the statistical reality. Do such "frivolous" loan-takers represent anything even remotely approaching a majority of all who have loans, to justify a sweeping generalization or affect policy?
        cyrksoft 7y ago
        I never said everybody or a majority of people did that. I just wanted to point out that those cases existed. 83% of student loan debts are lower than 50k. I don't see a problem there. If you made a bad career decision or decided to go to a more expensive college it's your burden to carry.

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.
  - cyrksoft 7y ago
    > 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. That's why I wrote 'useless'. By that I mean degrees without real job prospects. > You can't even know others' motives, and yet you choose to assume the worst possible ones. That says more about you than them. I'm not judging anybody. I know people who took 30k loans without needing them just to pay for a new car, new computer and other non-necessities. They were studying art at a community college. There are many people like that. That's entirely their fault and their debt to pay.
    - notacoward 7y ago
      > I know people who took 30k loans without needing them just to pay for a new car, new computer and other non-necessities. It's interesting that you know multiple such people, but what matters is the statistical reality. Do such "frivolous" loan-takers represent anything even remotely approaching a majority of all who have loans, to justify a sweeping generalization or affect policy?
      - cyrksoft 7y ago
        I never said everybody or a majority of people did that. I just wanted to point out that those cases existed. 83% of student loan debts are lower than 50k. I don't see a problem there. If you made a bad career decision or decided to go to a more expensive college it's your burden to carry.