5 ms·

What are you really trying to say? That black and Hispanics families are disproportionally a higher risk of defaulting but should still get loans they cannot af

What are you really trying to say? That black and Hispanics families are disproportionally a higher risk of defaulting but should still get loans they cannot afford? Is that your argument? Loans are not grants nor gifts. You're not doing anyone a favour by giving them a loan they cannot afford to repay. There are other ways to subsidize education rather than distorting the lending market.

ak217 7y ago
- The others are trying to tell you, in good faith, why they think such a move would be politically intractable. Grandstanding rhetoric doesn't help your argument. - Not requiring your parents to be rich is otherwise known as intergenerational upward mobility. If the effect of the current system is to externalize the costs of upward mobility on the rest of the society, then that's probably worth paying (to a point). The bigger problem is that government-issued loans suppress market pressure on colleges to operate efficiently.
scarface74 7y ago
You are expected to pay student loans based on future income not based on whether your parents are affluent enough to pay them.
- sokoloff 7y ago
  Agreed. So I assume you’d be opposed to a policy that has the effect of requiring parental co-signing and discriminates in part based on the income and affluence of the parents?
  - scarface74 7y ago
    Of course I’m opposed to that.
    - sokoloff 7y ago
      My apologies. I crossed your upthread content with another poster’s.
- macspoofing 7y ago
  >You are expected to pay student loans based on future income Sure. Let's go with that. Even under that assumption, there are multitudes of reasons why a bank would require cosigners, all coming down to you being a risk factor. For example, your grades may be low (risk of not graduating), you may be choosing an expensive art college with high tuition, or a degree wit no guarantee of reasonable income. Again, loans are not gifts. You do not do anyone a favour by giving them a loan they cannot afford.

ak217 7y ago

- The others are trying to tell you, in good faith, why they think such a move would be politically intractable. Grandstanding rhetoric doesn't help your argument. - Not requiring your parents to be rich is otherwise known as intergenerational upward mobility. If the effect of the current system is to externalize the costs of upward mobility on the rest of the society, then that's probably worth paying (to a point). The bigger problem is that government-issued loans suppress market pressure on colleges to operate efficiently.

scarface74 7y ago

You are expected to pay student loans based on future income not based on whether your parents are affluent enough to pay them.

sokoloff 7y ago
Agreed. So I assume you’d be opposed to a policy that has the effect of requiring parental co-signing and discriminates in part based on the income and affluence of the parents?
- scarface74 7y ago
  Of course I’m opposed to that.
  - sokoloff 7y ago
    My apologies. I crossed your upthread content with another poster’s.
macspoofing 7y ago
>You are expected to pay student loans based on future income Sure. Let's go with that. Even under that assumption, there are multitudes of reasons why a bank would require cosigners, all coming down to you being a risk factor. For example, your grades may be low (risk of not graduating), you may be choosing an expensive art college with high tuition, or a degree wit no guarantee of reasonable income. Again, loans are not gifts. You do not do anyone a favour by giving them a loan they cannot afford.