Student loans and the party of no | TigerDroppings.com

Posted byMessage
Jbird
Iowa Fan
In Odramaville with EthanL
Member since Oct 2012
16972 posts

Student loans and the party of no



Hahaha this is too funny!


WASHINGTON — Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid says a bipartisan agreement being offered on student loan interest rates is not an acceptable deal.

That could block efforts to dodge a doubling of student loans’ interest rates.

.Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia on Wednesday said he would introduce legislation with Republican allies that would peg student loans’ interest rates to the financial markets. The proposal would set higher interest rates in future years if the economy improves as expected, but would allow students to avoid a July 1 rate hike on new loans.

A spokesman for Reid says the senator cannot support that proposal. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell’s spokesman says it is bizarre that Democrats are blocking a compromise.







Back to top
Share:
JohnnyKilroy
New Orleans Pelicans Fan
Member since Oct 2012
8481 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


I wish we could just overhaul the whole system.

Make them dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Allow lenders to set the rates.

Lenders should set rates and amounts on a case by case basis like any other loan.

Set higher rates/lower amounts for majors that typically don't yield high salaries. (History, english, Arts, etc...)

Lower rates/higher amounts for those that do (engineering, finance, biology, etc...)

Rates will likely go down, more math and science majors, cheaper tuition... Why the frick don't we have this now?






Back to top
Mootsman
Mississippi St. Fan
Charlotte, NC
Member since Oct 2012
2258 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


I agree with that completely but all you would hear after the fact is a incessant bitching from Art/English majors about how their rates are extortionate.

It would be comical.






Back to top
JohnnyKilroy
New Orleans Pelicans Fan
Member since Oct 2012
8481 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


quote:

It would be comical.



Yep. I'm sure they'll call all the people who are studying things that are desperately needed (Math and Science) selfish.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
Freauxzen
USA Fan
Utah
Member since Feb 2006
22249 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


quote:

Set higher rates/lower amounts for majors that typically don't yield high salaries. (History, english, Arts, etc...)

Lower rates/higher amounts for those that do (engineering, finance, biology, etc...)

Rates will likely go down, more math and science majors, cheaper tuition... Why the frick don't we have this now?


Because this is stupidity at its finest, and goes completely against the purpose of college, individuality, critical thinking, and diversity of opinion.

Now, that's not to say that post-secondary education, financial aid, and all relations to workforce improvement aren't broken, because they are (very very broken), but this is a completely misguided solution that does nothing but constrain people, business, colleges, and intellectual production. Anyone who promotes this is probably very narrow minded and completely devoid of critical thinking.

Do you really want to limit the way we approach learning and critical thinking, etc.? Because that's essentially what you would be doing, imposing market driven limitations on how we build knowledge.



This post was edited on 6/26 at 3:23 pm


Back to top
JohnnyKilroy
New Orleans Pelicans Fan
Member since Oct 2012
8481 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


quote:

Do you really want to limit the way we approach learning?



I'd say saddling people with six figures worth of debt is pretty limiting.

The system in my OP would lower tuition prices long term for everyone. The current system raises tuition prices for everyone.

quote:

misguided solution that does nothing but constrain people, business, colleges, and intellectual production.


People aren't forced to take out loans you know? No one would be constrained by this system.






Back to top
Freauxzen
USA Fan
Utah
Member since Feb 2006
22249 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


quote:

I'd say saddling people with six figures worth of debt is pretty limiting.


Of course, that doesn't answer the question.

quote:

The system in my OP would lower tuition prices long term for everyone. The current system raises tuition prices for everyone.


And your proof? Link?

And I hope you realize that the cost of a degree is rising, has been rising, and this has nothing to do with who offers what degree options. We don't have expensive degrees because people are majoring in English, that's ridiculous.

Sure, the first few things you mention would be a good PART of the solution, but your inclusion of limitations is extremely problematic.

quote:

People aren't forced to take out loans you know? No one would be constrained by this system.


Everyone is forced to take out loans, given the cost of college, already. That's problem number one. Tuition costs are too high, you can put out some line about not constraining because "they can still take out a loan," but what you are effectively doing is devaluing certain forms of knowledge, which is a Smart thing to do... If you're an idiot who doesn't value knowledge.

Problem #2: College costs will NEVER go down. We can slow their acceleration,, but without breaking many many eggs, we will never see college costs drop. Simply fixing the lending problem will do nothing to very little. And you seem to be putting a lot of emphasis on what people are majoring in, which, while we should be changing how we ALL view college, is just a narrow view of what college should be.



This post was edited on 6/26 at 3:32 pm


Back to top
tigeraddict
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2007
4824 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


his point is people have easy access to college loans which only look to see if you have a minimal GPA, and don't look to see where the money is actually going and they don't look to see if the money can be feasibly paid back.... like ALL other loans

because of the easy access to loan money, you create a artificially higher demand to educational services, and colleges/universities can continue to charge more. supply/demand is broken because of easy money, that the borrower doesn't care about at the time of borrowing the money

does it cost a university more to "train" and engineer, doctor, chemist, ect or does it cost more to train a English, history, social worker major...

also, with respect to they theory of subsidizing loans, does the government get a better rate of return "investing" in an engineer/doctor/lawyer or in a social sciences major?



This post was edited on 6/26 at 3:37 pm


Back to top
WikiTiger
LSU Fan
Member since Sep 2007
40721 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


quote:

Do you really want to limit the way we approach learning and critical thinking, etc.? Because that's essentially what you would be doing, imposing market driven limitations on how we build knowledge.


Freaux, you're a smart dude, but your attitude towards a market based education system makes you look like a retard.

There is nothing better than the free market in allocating resources.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
JohnnyKilroy
New Orleans Pelicans Fan
Member since Oct 2012
8481 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


quote:

And your proof? Link?

And I hope you realize that the cost of a degree is rising, has been rising, and this has nothing to do with who offers what degree options. We don't have expensive degrees because people are majoring in English, that's ridiculous.



I never said people majoring in liberal arts are the reason for high tuition prices. The guaranteed non-dischargeable loans are the single biggest contributor to rising tuition prices. When the supply of money is infinite, the prices with rise infinitely.

The rate difference/borrowing limits would just be a natural occurrence in a more free market lending market. That's not something I am saying should be imposed by mandate.

Private lenders will naturally give better terms to people who are more likely to pay them back. It may have come off in my OP that we should "punish" softer majors, but that's not at all what I am trying to say.

In my "plan", lenders can do what they please. If some lender is willing to offer attractive terms to those who want to study english lit, or theater, more power to them. Nothing should stop them.

quote:

Simply fixing the lending problem will do nothing to very little
Ever heard of the Quantity Theory of Money?






Back to top
WikiTiger
LSU Fan
Member since Sep 2007
40721 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


quote:

College costs will NEVER go down.


Why do you think college costs rose so quickly in the first place?


Easy access to money, via government guaranteed loans that aren't grounded in any sense of market needs, leads to an increase in student supply.

More students are competing for a finite amount of education resources. Sure, some expansion has occurred (much of it in bad way - i.e. the rise of 'for profit' schools), but not enough to keep prices from rising.

Without effective market mechanisms to keep all this in check, you're going to see what we are seeing.



This post was edited on 6/26 at 3:50 pm


Back to top
HempHead
Alabama Fan
Appalachia
Member since Mar 2011
16531 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


quote:

Without effective market mechanisms to keep all this in check, you're going to see what we are seeing.


Obviously, the government needs to do something about this.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
Freauxzen
USA Fan
Utah
Member since Feb 2006
22249 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


quote:

his point is people have easy access to college loans which only look to see if you have a minimal GPA, and don't look to see where the money is actually going and they don't look to see if the money can be feasibly paid back.... like ALL other loans

because of the easy access to loan money, you create a artificially higher demand to educational services, and colleges/universities can continue to charge more. supply/demand is broken because of easy money, that the borrower doesn't care about at the time of borrowing the money

does it cost a university more to "train" and engineer, doctor, chemist, ect or does it cost more to train a English, history, social worker major...


Right. But attaching this to some impossible to calculate output is a big problem, that's all I'm saying. I'm not saying the idea, or direction, is bad, but rates and amounts should not be tied to degrees, THAT can be detrimental and is a poor place to go, because that will continue to further link college to job training, which is already at the crux of the problem.

It's a cultural problem, not strictly a financial one.






Back to top
WikiTiger
LSU Fan
Member since Sep 2007
40721 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


quote:

because that will continue to further link college to job training, which is already at the crux of the problem.


ugh. I see where you're going now, and I hate it.

The concept of a "well rounded liberal arts" education simply for the sake of learning is an antiquated notion, and it wasn't even a good idea back then.

It sounds going to the touchy-feely types, but it is the ultimate in inefficiency.

If people want to pursue that, then they should surely be free to do so. The market should also be able to price it accurately, which can't be done in today's system.



This post was edited on 6/26 at 3:54 pm


Back to top
Scruffy
USA Fan
Member since Jul 2011
32687 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


quote:

The concept of a "well rounded liberal arts" education simply for the sake of learning is an antiquated notion, and it wasn't even a good idea back then.
Well stated.
quote:

If people want to pursue that, then they should surely be free to do so. The market should also be able to price it accurately, which can't be done in today's system.
I agree with this as well.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
JohnnyKilroy
New Orleans Pelicans Fan
Member since Oct 2012
8481 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


quote:

ugh. I see where you're going now, and I hate it.

The concept of a "well rounded liberal arts" education simply for the sake of learning is an antiquated notion, and it wasn't even a good idea back then.

It sounds going to the touchy-feely types, but it is the ultimate in inefficiency.

If people want to pursue that, then they should surely be free to do so. The market should also be able to price it accurately, which can't be done in today's system.


This.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
Freauxzen
USA Fan
Utah
Member since Feb 2006
22249 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


quote:

I never said people majoring in liberal arts are the reason for high tuition prices. The guaranteed non-dischargeable loans are the single biggest contributor to rising tuition prices. When the supply of money is infinite, the prices with rise infinitely.

The rate difference/borrowing limits would just be a natural occurrence in a more free market lending market. That's not something I am saying should be imposed by mandate.

Private lenders will naturally give better terms to people who are more likely to pay them back. It may have come off in my OP that we should "punish" softer majors, but that's not at all what I am trying to say.

In my "plan", lenders can do what they please. If some lender is willing to offer attractive terms to those who want to study english lit, or theater, more power to them. Nothing should stop them.


That's exactly how it came off, so if you didn't mean it, my apologies for jumping on it that way.



I completely understand the issue, but I don't think the aid and lending issue is the only issue.

As I said above, its a cultural one. The lending issue is a problem because, now, everyone has to go to college. We created infinite money because we wanted to support everyone going to college, so in order to fix this we have to start with the idea of college in the first place, not he money piece, because honestly we can't. Government Entities rarely shrink, right? Especially those built to support a "right."

Because, while I think fixing the lending cycle is the right thing, I can't see it making an extreme impact on the individual. Maybe over a large course of time, but it won't fix the millions buried in debt, and it will barely save the future. What's a 10% reduction on a six figure loan for a secretary? Really not that much.

But attaching value, and estimations of value, to specific knowledge sets can be a big problem, primarily because you are further entrenching private expectations on a (mostly) public enterprise. We should be distancing the connection between business and colleges, not treating them like job training. (Colleges are guilty of letting this happen as well, and while they need a significant overall, particularly the humanities, it should not be due to concerns on cost).



This post was edited on 6/26 at 4:05 pm


Back to top
JohnnyKilroy
New Orleans Pelicans Fan
Member since Oct 2012
8481 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


quote:

Because, while I think fixing the lending cycle is the right thing, I can't see it making an extreme impact on the individual. Maybe over a large course of time, but it won't fix the millions buried in debt, and it will barely save the future. What's a 10% reduction on a six figure loan for a secretary? Really not that much.



Of course it won't do much for those currently saddled with debt, but it would make a huge difference for the next generation, and every generation to follow. Tuition rates are currently outpacing healthcare rates. Ending the infinite money supply will deal a massive blow to these infinitely increasing prices.

quote:

But attaching value, and estimations of value, to specific knowledge sets can be a big problem, primarily because you are further entrenching private expectations on a (mostly) public enterprise. We should be distancing the connection between business and colleges, not treating them like job training. (Colleges are guilty of letting this happen as well, and while they need a significant overall, particularly the humanities, it should not be due to concerns on cost).



But not everyone is going to college for the same reason. There's nothing wrong with going to college for "the experience" or to be a well-rounded individual. But again, that's not the only reason people go to college.







Back to top
Ace Midnight
LSU Fan
Currently asymptomatic
Member since Dec 2006
32570 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


quote:

The concept of a "well rounded liberal arts" education simply for the sake of learning is an antiquated notion, and it wasn't even a good idea back then.


I respectfully disagree. That is precisely the type of education the Founding Fathers had.

quote:

If people want to pursue that, then they should surely be free to do so. The market should also be able to price it accurately, which can't be done in today's system.


I agree with this.






Back to top
Freauxzen
USA Fan
Utah
Member since Feb 2006
22249 posts

re: Student loans and the party of no


quote:

ugh. I see where you're going now, and I hate it.




quote:

The concept of a "well rounded liberal arts" education simply for the sake of learning is an antiquated notion, and it wasn't even a good idea back then.


You obviously don't see where I'm going, because yeah, a "well-rounded liberal arts education" is difficult to determine and measure anyways. No point to talk about it.

quote:

It sounds going to the touchy-feely types, but it is the ultimate in inefficiency.


Agreed. Hmm, so maybe you don't know where I'm going.

quote:

If people want to pursue that, then they should surely be free to do so.


What people should be allowed to do is form their critical thinking skills through a process and subject matter that aligns with the way they think, or that they are interested in.

If that's Language and the Arts or History, then the PURSUIT of that knowledge shouldn't be limited by financial preference, because those perspectives ARE important. The market devalues those because it isn't easy to calculate their effect, fine, that's a reason, but...

That is on the colleges to create that atmosphere. On the front end this means changing our discourse about college and how we view it. But it could also mean things like SIMPLIFYING what colleges do. Making it more efficient and cutting out the fat (everything that makes college more expensive than it should be).

What businesses SHOULD be doing is not taking the easy out on colleges as job training and investing in better mechanisms to assess candidates and supplying better training programs to employees. College can't do what they want it to do, yet they fall back on it because it saves costs. This puts unfair pressures on colleges to make students hireable (thereby decreasing their options) and makes students less flexible in how they develop their skill-set. And it also produces worse employees (which is directly related to career mobility data).

It ALSO creates a false sense of security for students in that, "They went through the training why don't they get a job or promotion."

What People SHOULD be doing is respecting that pursuit and being responsible for what they are doing. This is probably the biggest and hardest problem to solve and starts at home really. Fix K-12? Tough proposition.

Can we change financial aid structures and save a little bit of money? Probably so. Will that, by itself, build a better pathway to employment or better results from education systems and private employers? Probably not.



This post was edited on 6/26 at 4:22 pm


Back to top
  Replies (0)


Back to top