5 ms·
I don't know if I'd say that people can afford schools when the debt mounds are so high for many people who are unable to pay. Strictly a hypothesis, but I woul
by core-utility 5y ago
I don't know if I'd say that people can afford schools when the debt mounds are so high for many people who are unable to pay. Strictly a hypothesis, but I would say that while more people are going to and completing school than before, the affordability is actually worse than it was previously because schools no longer have to compete for tuition.
- philliphaydon 5y agoWell from the schools perspective is that they can afford it. I was thinking of it from the schools perspective rather than the student.
- candiodari 5y agoThat's the problem with this entire article. The Department of education, of course, is "forgiving" uncollectible debt, and attempting to pass it off as a bailout for students. When, of course, it's a bailout for private lenders the government needs to keep lending. If some students are helped, that's at best a side effect.
- xracy 5y agoSo then... The correct way to do this would be to say legally the people who borrowed from you owe you nothing now. Debt gets erased, lenders get nothing. Everybody wins except the irresponsible lenders. I'm fine with this. But uhh, feels like people would complain about gov't overstepping it's bounds or picking winners/losers...
- powerslacker 5y agoExcept the lenders do get something. A massive tax write off.
- GauntletWizard 5y ago"The Producers" aside, not paying taxes on money you gave away but didn't get back is not exactly a compelling business case.
- xracy 5y agoAlright, you give me 70k. I can give you back 70k, or you can take the tax write-off for the loss... which one would you rather have? And if the answer is that you'd rather have the tax write-off I would love to take out a personal loan from you. And I don't imagine you'll be in the lending business for very long.