5 ms·

So, why should the rest of us care that the author's kid made poor life choices? Working two jobs to pay for college might have been smart in the 1960s, but tod

So, why should the rest of us care that the author's kid made poor life choices? Working two jobs to pay for college might have been smart in the 1960s, but today? Yeah, that does make him a chump.

crhulls 4y ago
By saying working hard and not getting in debt is a poor life choice you are proving the author’s point. There is extreme moral hazard in a blanket loan forgiveness.
- kcrx 4y ago
  There’s extreme moral hazard in allowing institutions to lend money on this scale while protecting them from the risk of a borrower’s default as well.
  - yellowapple 4y ago
    There's extreme moral hazard, on that note, in an education system which requires those seeking better opportunities to pay out of pocket - and thus necessitates such predatory loans in the first place.
  - crhulls 4y ago
    Yes, for sure. If we do forgive loans it is pointless if we don’t fix the underlying issue.
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    That institution that lent the money was the US government.
    - kcrx 4y ago
      yes
  - quantified 4y ago
    What's the hazard? For the worthless schools that took loan money and didn't deliver education (for-profit scam schools), those could be forgiven. For all the expensive degrees that have led to jobs that can't pay the loans back, this all shows how inadequately prepared the students were to do basic arithmetic and cost/benefit analysis. That's on their parents.
- FollowingTheDao 4y ago
  What about the moral hazard of making the loans in the first place? These banks take all these risks, and well, you know what happened in 2008 right? They got bailed out by the government. But the minute people start talking about bailing out people? Woah, that’s way too far! It’s going into debt is such a bad thing then why do we have it at all?
  - Gibbon1 4y ago
    The banks don't take any risk since taxpayers are underwriting the loans for free. This is all really about ending the banks risk free gravy train.
cableshaft 4y ago
I dropped out of college after my scholarship ran out instead of taking out loans because I knew I had terrible debt habits (credit cards at the time proved it) and didn't want to have any debt. I eventually did three more semesters at a half-load while paying each one while working full time (I couldn't afford more than that, and I was living with my parents to keep costs down). I dropped out again, then eventually decided to go back full time on student loans several years later. Tuition was meanwhile shooting up like crazy the entire time and more than doubled when I went back. I ended up taking out more than twice as much in student loans than I would have if I had just done it in the first place right after my scholarship ran out eight years prior. I would agree I was a chump for trying to stay debt free to get my degree, although I'm also glad I didn't go nuts with my loans like some people did, even the amount I had was a quarter as much as some people I know that also chose less lucrative majors (but more expensive schools, or out of state). That being said, I have since paid off my student loans, but would still approve some fairly generous student loan forgiveness. I don't have a "well I struggled so you should to" attitude. These people were convinced by their parents, teachers, counselors, family, etc that they could do whatever they want, take whatever loans out, and not have to worry about it, and ended up making a poor decision with lifelong consequences based on bad information. Some of these people have been paying their student loans for 5-10 years and their loans have only gotten bigger because of how large they are and how much interest accrues. I know a couple people that have just given up on paying their loans off ever, and are only going to pay the minimum required the rest of their lives. Those loans are going to effectively be "forgiven" whenever they end up dying, at a much higher amount than what forgiveness now would amount to. Yes, the root of the problem should be addressed, but attacking only the root doesn't help the people who have been screwed over by the system.

So, why should the rest of us care that the author's kid made poor life choices? Working two jobs to pay for college might have been smart in the 1960s, but today? Yeah, that does make him a chump.

crhulls 4y ago

By saying working hard and not getting in debt is a poor life choice you are proving the author’s point. There is extreme moral hazard in a blanket loan forgiveness.

kcrx 4y ago
There’s extreme moral hazard in allowing institutions to lend money on this scale while protecting them from the risk of a borrower’s default as well.
- yellowapple 4y ago
  There's extreme moral hazard, on that note, in an education system which requires those seeking better opportunities to pay out of pocket - and thus necessitates such predatory loans in the first place.
- crhulls 4y ago
  Yes, for sure. If we do forgive loans it is pointless if we don’t fix the underlying issue.
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  That institution that lent the money was the US government.
  - kcrx 4y ago
    yes
- quantified 4y ago
  What's the hazard? For the worthless schools that took loan money and didn't deliver education (for-profit scam schools), those could be forgiven. For all the expensive degrees that have led to jobs that can't pay the loans back, this all shows how inadequately prepared the students were to do basic arithmetic and cost/benefit analysis. That's on their parents.
FollowingTheDao 4y ago
What about the moral hazard of making the loans in the first place? These banks take all these risks, and well, you know what happened in 2008 right? They got bailed out by the government. But the minute people start talking about bailing out people? Woah, that’s way too far! It’s going into debt is such a bad thing then why do we have it at all?
- Gibbon1 4y ago
  The banks don't take any risk since taxpayers are underwriting the loans for free. This is all really about ending the banks risk free gravy train.

cableshaft 4y ago

I dropped out of college after my scholarship ran out instead of taking out loans because I knew I had terrible debt habits (credit cards at the time proved it) and didn't want to have any debt. I eventually did three more semesters at a half-load while paying each one while working full time (I couldn't afford more than that, and I was living with my parents to keep costs down). I dropped out again, then eventually decided to go back full time on student loans several years later. Tuition was meanwhile shooting up like crazy the entire time and more than doubled when I went back. I ended up taking out more than twice as much in student loans than I would have if I had just done it in the first place right after my scholarship ran out eight years prior. I would agree I was a chump for trying to stay debt free to get my degree, although I'm also glad I didn't go nuts with my loans like some people did, even the amount I had was a quarter as much as some people I know that also chose less lucrative majors (but more expensive schools, or out of state). That being said, I have since paid off my student loans, but would still approve some fairly generous student loan forgiveness. I don't have a "well I struggled so you should to" attitude. These people were convinced by their parents, teachers, counselors, family, etc that they could do whatever they want, take whatever loans out, and not have to worry about it, and ended up making a poor decision with lifelong consequences based on bad information. Some of these people have been paying their student loans for 5-10 years and their loans have only gotten bigger because of how large they are and how much interest accrues. I know a couple people that have just given up on paying their loans off ever, and are only going to pay the minimum required the rest of their lives. Those loans are going to effectively be "forgiven" whenever they end up dying, at a much higher amount than what forgiveness now would amount to. Yes, the root of the problem should be addressed, but attacking only the root doesn't help the people who have been screwed over by the system.