7 ms·

Yes, yes it is

YetAnotherNick 3y ago
Having loan forgiveness policy is an investment in education. One time loan forgiving of people who already gotten education is not. A thought upon budget allotment and condition for loan forgiveness every year is significantly better than spending it in one go for publicity.
- oddtuple 3y ago
  Why not both?
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > One time loan forgiving of people who already gotten education is not. The one time forgiveness was adopted roughly simultaneously with reforms to lending and, particularly, repayment programs designed to ameliorate the creation of the same debt problem, it wasn’t a policy adopted by itself in a vacuum.
  - YetAnotherNick 3y ago
    I am not fully aware of the context and I couldn't even find it. Could you send some links for "reforms to lending and, particularly, repayment programs designed to ameliorate the creation of the same debt problem"?
robomartin 3y ago
>> Loan forgiveness is not an investment in education > Yes, yes it is No. It most definitely is not. It's paying off a bunch of loans that people freely agreed to accept in exchange for their chosen degree. It's the abdication of all responsibility. It's the creation of a society where commitments mean nothing. It is also rewarding behavior that isn't constructive and, devoid of consequences, is caustic. Plenty of us have taken-on these commitments and worked hard for decades making good on our agreement and paying off the loans. What entitles this generation to behave as children when they should behave as adults? How about we pay off half of everyone's mortgages then and call it an investment? I guarantee that would have far greater impact than the student loan bailout? And, BTW, after you pay off my mortgage, I get to keep living in my house forever. Because, well, if we pay off someone's student loan/s, they get to keep the degree and use it to make money. The whole thing is laughable. Want to fix student loans? Get government out of that business ASAP. The minute loans don't have that guarantee, the cost of education will drop precipitously. The other thing that is important is to remove non-degree coursework as graduation requirements. Someone going for an engineering degree has to spend about one full year on coursework having nothing to do with engineering. One way to look at this is that, in the US, 25% of your student loan is for shit that is not going to help get you hired. Or that 25% of your loan isn't for engineering coursework. Being that this is a requirement for graduation, this means that this unnecessary 25% of the cost of the degree is being imposed on every single student. That's wrong.
- Freedom2 3y ago
  > It's the creation of a society where commitments mean nothing. What about accepting risks? Should those who used SVB have been bailed out?
  - robomartin 3y ago
    > Should those who used SVB have been bailed out? No. Absolutely and most definitely not.
    - Freedom2 3y ago
      Appreciate the consistency, thanks.
- oddtuple 3y ago
  I’m sorry that you feel that way, but I’m happy to help these people
  - robomartin 3y ago
    > I’m happy to help these people Then do it. And show us how you do it. Nothing prevents you from setting the example, using some criteria to find a target for your charity and paying off some or all of their student loan. Maybe you can take over the payments? In fact, you could start a foundation of like-minded people and help hundreds, or thousands, of people. Here's the difference: You get to do whatever you want with your money. Including finding people who think like you and want to join you. The other approach is forcing everyone to jump on your bandwagon. And that is wrong. I paid every dime back. So did my wife. We did without lots of things for a very long time while meeting the obligations we entered into to go to school. We both worked full time jobs while we were in school. We didn't take vacations for a long time while we evolved financially and in our respective careers. That's what commitment and honoring responsibilities looks like. People with student loans whining about not being bailed out is the pinnacle of adults behaving as petulant children. Grow the fuck up! They bought something that will benefit them for the rest of their lives. The government facilitated that by guaranteeing that loan. No sane lender would have ever provided these loans without this guarantee. Time to behave as an adult and pay for it. Bullshit degree? Too bad. Not my problem. I am not responsible for someone paying $150K for a Masters in Underwater Basket Weaving. Tough shit. You fucked up. Want to blame someone for that expensive Ms in Basket Weaving that can only make you $35K/year? Blame yourself. Stop voting for snake oil salesmen who promise the world and end-up damaging everyone who voted for them. If government was out of the student loan business that degree would not be worth more than $15K to $30K, if that. Your voting decisions have consequences. You have to pay for those just as well. How about paying off everyone's cars? And then, we don't take them away. They keep using their car for free, just like a student loan bailout would allow someone to use their degree for profit forever. Of course, some will have bought sensibly-priced cars, while others will have spent $150K for a car to drive the kids to school. Lets force everyone in the nation who paid-off their vehicles through hard work and responsible behavior to pay for the cars bought by others who are now whining about their loans. Brilliant. If you want to pay-off people's cars, be my guest. Again, private money and private decisions, you are free to do this...and more. Let us know if you pay off someone's loan or start a private foundation to do just that. I'm sure many on HN who share your way of thinking will gladly donate tens of thousands of dollars (or more) to demonstrate these are not just empty words and the truly get behind what they say with non-trivial financial commitments for the benefit of others.
glimshe 3y ago
The courses were taken, the education was received. This would just transfer the cost of already provided services to the general taxpayer. It would make nobody more educated as a result.
- oddtuple 3y ago
  How would it cost the taxpayer more? Can you explain? The money has already been spent, and it’s already being collected in the form of taxes on those individuals whom are now earning more thanks to education. Why would we need more taxes?
  - glimshe 3y ago
    That's why I said "general taxpayer". It would be paid by people other than the ones receiving the education. You might argue this is how things should be, but it's still not an "investment in education". If you are trying to argue that the increased tax levied on the particular indebted people with a better education adds up to the exact amount they owed, someone would have to prove that. Additionally, this additional tax from better education was never intended by Congress, when the tax rate was calculated, to go to paying anyone's previous education debt. So other services (arguably benefitting the entire population) would have to be preempted to pay for it. Either way, you'd have someone else paying for the debt.
    - oddtuple 3y ago
      Reposting so others don’t feed into this propaganda. The talking point that loan forgiveness would “raise taxes” is at best dubious. Here is one, of many studies that dispute it https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/rpr_2_6.pdf https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/rpr_2_6.pdf
- oddtuple 3y ago
  This is a common attitude, and an understandable one, but it’s very much at odds with the research. There are more studies and discussions, but this is one of them highlighting how this is a nothing burger https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/rpr_2_6.pdf https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/rpr_2_6.pdf

Yes, yes it is

Having loan forgiveness policy is an investment in education. One time loan forgiving of people who already gotten education is not. A thought upon budget allotment and condition for loan forgiveness every year is significantly better than spending it in one go for publicity.

oddtuple 3y ago
Why not both?
dragonwriter 3y ago
> One time loan forgiving of people who already gotten education is not. The one time forgiveness was adopted roughly simultaneously with reforms to lending and, particularly, repayment programs designed to ameliorate the creation of the same debt problem, it wasn’t a policy adopted by itself in a vacuum.
- YetAnotherNick 3y ago
  I am not fully aware of the context and I couldn't even find it. Could you send some links for "reforms to lending and, particularly, repayment programs designed to ameliorate the creation of the same debt problem"?

robomartin 3y ago

>> Loan forgiveness is not an investment in education > Yes, yes it is No. It most definitely is not. It's paying off a bunch of loans that people freely agreed to accept in exchange for their chosen degree. It's the abdication of all responsibility. It's the creation of a society where commitments mean nothing. It is also rewarding behavior that isn't constructive and, devoid of consequences, is caustic. Plenty of us have taken-on these commitments and worked hard for decades making good on our agreement and paying off the loans. What entitles this generation to behave as children when they should behave as adults? How about we pay off half of everyone's mortgages then and call it an investment? I guarantee that would have far greater impact than the student loan bailout? And, BTW, after you pay off my mortgage, I get to keep living in my house forever. Because, well, if we pay off someone's student loan/s, they get to keep the degree and use it to make money. The whole thing is laughable. Want to fix student loans? Get government out of that business ASAP. The minute loans don't have that guarantee, the cost of education will drop precipitously. The other thing that is important is to remove non-degree coursework as graduation requirements. Someone going for an engineering degree has to spend about one full year on coursework having nothing to do with engineering. One way to look at this is that, in the US, 25% of your student loan is for shit that is not going to help get you hired. Or that 25% of your loan isn't for engineering coursework. Being that this is a requirement for graduation, this means that this unnecessary 25% of the cost of the degree is being imposed on every single student. That's wrong.

Freedom2 3y ago
> It's the creation of a society where commitments mean nothing. What about accepting risks? Should those who used SVB have been bailed out?
- robomartin 3y ago
  > Should those who used SVB have been bailed out? No. Absolutely and most definitely not.
  - Freedom2 3y ago
    Appreciate the consistency, thanks.
oddtuple 3y ago
I’m sorry that you feel that way, but I’m happy to help these people
- robomartin 3y ago
  > I’m happy to help these people Then do it. And show us how you do it. Nothing prevents you from setting the example, using some criteria to find a target for your charity and paying off some or all of their student loan. Maybe you can take over the payments? In fact, you could start a foundation of like-minded people and help hundreds, or thousands, of people. Here's the difference: You get to do whatever you want with your money. Including finding people who think like you and want to join you. The other approach is forcing everyone to jump on your bandwagon. And that is wrong. I paid every dime back. So did my wife. We did without lots of things for a very long time while meeting the obligations we entered into to go to school. We both worked full time jobs while we were in school. We didn't take vacations for a long time while we evolved financially and in our respective careers. That's what commitment and honoring responsibilities looks like. People with student loans whining about not being bailed out is the pinnacle of adults behaving as petulant children. Grow the fuck up! They bought something that will benefit them for the rest of their lives. The government facilitated that by guaranteeing that loan. No sane lender would have ever provided these loans without this guarantee. Time to behave as an adult and pay for it. Bullshit degree? Too bad. Not my problem. I am not responsible for someone paying $150K for a Masters in Underwater Basket Weaving. Tough shit. You fucked up. Want to blame someone for that expensive Ms in Basket Weaving that can only make you $35K/year? Blame yourself. Stop voting for snake oil salesmen who promise the world and end-up damaging everyone who voted for them. If government was out of the student loan business that degree would not be worth more than $15K to $30K, if that. Your voting decisions have consequences. You have to pay for those just as well. How about paying off everyone's cars? And then, we don't take them away. They keep using their car for free, just like a student loan bailout would allow someone to use their degree for profit forever. Of course, some will have bought sensibly-priced cars, while others will have spent $150K for a car to drive the kids to school. Lets force everyone in the nation who paid-off their vehicles through hard work and responsible behavior to pay for the cars bought by others who are now whining about their loans. Brilliant. If you want to pay-off people's cars, be my guest. Again, private money and private decisions, you are free to do this...and more. Let us know if you pay off someone's loan or start a private foundation to do just that. I'm sure many on HN who share your way of thinking will gladly donate tens of thousands of dollars (or more) to demonstrate these are not just empty words and the truly get behind what they say with non-trivial financial commitments for the benefit of others.

glimshe 3y ago

The courses were taken, the education was received. This would just transfer the cost of already provided services to the general taxpayer. It would make nobody more educated as a result.

oddtuple 3y ago
How would it cost the taxpayer more? Can you explain? The money has already been spent, and it’s already being collected in the form of taxes on those individuals whom are now earning more thanks to education. Why would we need more taxes?
- glimshe 3y ago
  That's why I said "general taxpayer". It would be paid by people other than the ones receiving the education. You might argue this is how things should be, but it's still not an "investment in education". If you are trying to argue that the increased tax levied on the particular indebted people with a better education adds up to the exact amount they owed, someone would have to prove that. Additionally, this additional tax from better education was never intended by Congress, when the tax rate was calculated, to go to paying anyone's previous education debt. So other services (arguably benefitting the entire population) would have to be preempted to pay for it. Either way, you'd have someone else paying for the debt.
  - oddtuple 3y ago
    Reposting so others don’t feed into this propaganda. The talking point that loan forgiveness would “raise taxes” is at best dubious. Here is one, of many studies that dispute it https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/rpr_2_6.pdf https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/rpr_2_6.pdf
oddtuple 3y ago
This is a common attitude, and an understandable one, but it’s very much at odds with the research. There are more studies and discussions, but this is one of them highlighting how this is a nothing burger https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/rpr_2_6.pdf https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/rpr_2_6.pdf