3 ms·

I agree with this reasoning, wondering if you think it'd also apply to the current student loan situation in the US - I've had similar thoughts about how the le

I agree with this reasoning, wondering if you think it'd also apply to the current student loan situation in the US - I've had similar thoughts about how the lenders should be held responsible for giving a loan to a child when the chances of them being able to pay it back aren't very high - that's due diligence they should be doing and be held responsible for. Additionally, the loans are largely given to people under 25 who's brains aren't fully developed.

vineyardmike 4y ago
I think there’s an easier solution: allow the loans to be broken in bankruptcy. If you can default on a loan, you force loan writers to only provide payable loans. $200k loan for an English major? Low chance for a good enough job to pay it back. Comp Sci major at state school who had a 2.0 in high school? High chance of drop out, low chance of payback. We should just give loan companies the kick they need to stop writing bad loans just because it’s protected. Let the free market do it’s thing. I think the same argument applies to cigarettes. Require those companies to underwrite medical care for cigarette related illness, but let people make any decisions they want. Build the externalities into the product price. Doing this would raise cost of cigarettes since you’d essentially have to self-insure with every pack.
- e_i_pi_2 4y ago
  Haha yeah I guess I'm operating under the assumption that bankruptcy isn't an option because it's been that way for a while, but that does seem like a much better solution that still leaves a good amount of responsibility and risk on both sides
- dolni 4y ago
  Looking at this through the devil's advocate lens, it's easy to see how that kind of policy prevents a lot of people from going to college. That could be a bad thing. On the other hand, it could also be a good thing since it would push more people towards the trades, which we sorely need. And maybe it would provide downward pressure on the cost of an education.
  - e_i_pi_2 4y ago
    This is my biggest concern - I see the motivation behind the law of "lets make sure banks give loans to a lot of people if it's for education so they can do it", but we don't need to also remove the risk for them in giving those loans. For example you could have a law saying banks need to accept 20% of applications regardless and then accept whatever losses there may be. This might make a law that puts a lot of banks out of business, but it accomplishes the same goal without putting all the risk on the individuals
yucky 4y ago
I was about to correct you regarding your claim that children can get loans, because that is of course not possible. Except it is possible and there are specific carve outs in lending law to enable it. TIL Holy shit.

vineyardmike 4y ago

I think there’s an easier solution: allow the loans to be broken in bankruptcy. If you can default on a loan, you force loan writers to only provide payable loans. $200k loan for an English major? Low chance for a good enough job to pay it back. Comp Sci major at state school who had a 2.0 in high school? High chance of drop out, low chance of payback. We should just give loan companies the kick they need to stop writing bad loans just because it’s protected. Let the free market do it’s thing. I think the same argument applies to cigarettes. Require those companies to underwrite medical care for cigarette related illness, but let people make any decisions they want. Build the externalities into the product price. Doing this would raise cost of cigarettes since you’d essentially have to self-insure with every pack.

e_i_pi_2 4y ago
Haha yeah I guess I'm operating under the assumption that bankruptcy isn't an option because it's been that way for a while, but that does seem like a much better solution that still leaves a good amount of responsibility and risk on both sides
dolni 4y ago
Looking at this through the devil's advocate lens, it's easy to see how that kind of policy prevents a lot of people from going to college. That could be a bad thing. On the other hand, it could also be a good thing since it would push more people towards the trades, which we sorely need. And maybe it would provide downward pressure on the cost of an education.
- e_i_pi_2 4y ago
  This is my biggest concern - I see the motivation behind the law of "lets make sure banks give loans to a lot of people if it's for education so they can do it", but we don't need to also remove the risk for them in giving those loans. For example you could have a law saying banks need to accept 20% of applications regardless and then accept whatever losses there may be. This might make a law that puts a lot of banks out of business, but it accomplishes the same goal without putting all the risk on the individuals

yucky 4y ago

I was about to correct you regarding your claim that children can get loans, because that is of course not possible. Except it is possible and there are specific carve outs in lending law to enable it. TIL Holy shit.