Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, but to be fair, for these borrowers, it was made clear that you wouldn’t be eligible for forgiveness relief without consolidating. I knew a lot of people who did not want to consolidate and they were aware that meant they could not get forgiveness. Since the last of these loans was taken out 12 years ago, there aren’t many of those people left in the overall scheme of things. The standard repayment terms without consolidation is 10 years. The people who still have outstanding loans are the people who took advantage of IBR or otherwise had deferrals due to job loss.
Again, feeling sorry for people who lost a job and wanting to help them is an American trait. But if we don't help all Americans equally or we force some Americans to help, who maybe can't afford to, that's not fair.
This can get pretty complicated, apparently. My only experience with student loans is my sons, who both graduated within the last 5 years and are paying back their Stafford loans. They don't need other Americans to bail them out, even $10k worth.
I'm glad to see the lawsuits. Keep us posted on them. I'll be shocked if these refunds ever come through. I think it's wishful thinking and not legal. I think he should do an interest reset for everyone where the interest is 1% instead of whatever it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MKTwet
It's done to buy votes for the current administration which is ridiculous. It needs to be done more uniformly than only to help current borrowers. And there's no legislation to help reduce tuition costs going forward.
What about people that just paid off their student loans?
How about students that boldly sign up for higher loans because they expect to get money back.
Never make promises that are poorly conceived.
The only paid off loans being refunded are ones who paid it during the pause, they can ask for a refund in order to get their forgiveness. The whole thing sucks a$$ because it will not even address the main problem, how the government gets rich by being paid three times a loan amount that was signed when someone was still a young, dumb kid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasLawyer2000
You're right. It would be good to "fix" the higher education system for future students as well.
That's what they should have been doing during the pause, reworking the whole out of date, debt multiplying system
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtab4994
Again, feeling sorry for people who lost a job and wanting to help them is an American trait. But if we don't help all Americans equally or we force some Americans to help, who maybe can't afford to, that's not fair.
This can get pretty complicated, apparently. My only experience with student loans is my sons, who both graduated within the last 5 years and are paying back their Stafford loans. They don't need other Americans to bail them out, even $10k worth.
Good for your son's, I'm not being a wise a$$ either.
We (my son, husband, ex and I) paid my son's student loan from 20 years ago, $20k for one year, paid in about 3 years. It can be done, people these days don't realize the right and wrong way to pay these loans. We started paying on them while he was in school because we knew that the minute he stopped, it would get real, real fast.
We always put more money towards it then the minimum payment. Even my son's loan, he was working at BK after he quit, he was always at least doubling the payment amount. The final payment he did came from his income tax refund which he always put towards the loan.
The parent plus loan was a killer, at about $600 per month which was a lot of money 20 years ago, but we did it, often paying more too.
Perhaps, but there's a precedent set to buy votes in this manner by the previous administration.
There's a real economic impact, however.
There's an economic consequence, it will cause the academic system to increase their prices. They figure the administration is willing to "sponsor" the academic system with tax money they will gladly increase prices.
The real fix to the whole tuition inflation problem is to reduce government funding. Without government support, enrollment will drop significantly at private schools. Then it will cause the prices of tuition to drop.
These private schools are making a huge profit yearly, they are not short of money. They are immensely profitable. Many schools can afford to have $100mil athletic programs and they can afford to pay sports coaches millions even better than professional sports. Yet they can't give back to the community and charge less.
Greed is the problem, government can't keep funding their greed.
Ivy league schools are some of the wealthiest school because they can legally accept donations, they are not short of money.
Non-student loan borrowers are also nervous about their futures, and they are being asked to subsidize their neighbors and former high school classmates.
Many of these people have children and receive tax breaks, while their child-free neighbors, and former classmates pay higher taxes to fund public schools, head start programs, and free 'well baby' visits. Why should the child-free be forced to fund someone else's lifestyle choice?
I'd be more than happy to see all child dependent tax deductions repealed entirely. Allow only dependent deductions for caring for foster children, adoptees, and elderly parents. In fact, any household with more than two children should be assessed a subsidy, to fund the environmental cleanup associated with the overpopulation of the earth.
Likewise there are a lot of bicyclists who do not pay taxes but benefit from the roads they ride on. Roads that would not exist at all if it were not for car taxes. And likewise, there are a lot of renters and tourists who walk on sidewalks that are paid for by the property owners.
What is conveniently forgotten in this student loan debate is that an education isn't simply given to some people by random luck of the draw. People earned these degrees. The same cannot be said for any of these other demographic groups who benefit from the taxes of others.
Quote:
Ivy league schools are some of the wealthiest school because they can legally accept donations, they are not short of money
It's true the ivy leagues are not short of money. Last time I checked, most of their wealth came from property. Owning skyscrapers in downtown Manhattan and so forth. They don't really rely on alumni donations.
IMO, the real questions need to be asked of state universities. These were set up to be for the public gain, but in the last thirty years, most have taken off on a quest to better the ivies in research fields--and tuition followed. There needs to be a 'reset' of the purpose of these institutions. While there is public good in attracting the best possible students to your school, the primary benefit of a public school should be to improve opportunities for residents/taxpayers of the state--that means solid education at a good value. Not prestigious awards, not sports trophies.
Last edited by MarianRavenwood; 10-01-2022 at 10:00 PM..
Many of these people have children and receive tax breaks, while their child-free neighbors, and former classmates pay higher taxes to fund public schools, head start programs, and free 'well baby' visits. Why should the child-free be forced to fund someone else's lifestyle choice?
I'd be more than happy to see all child dependent tax deductions repealed entirely. Allow only dependent deductions for caring for foster children, adoptees, and elderly parents. In fact, any household with more than two children should be assessed a subsidy, to fund the environmental cleanup associated with the overpopulation of the earth.
Likewise there are a lot of bicyclists who do not pay taxes but benefit from the roads they ride on. Roads that would not exist at all if it were not for car taxes. And likewise, there are a lot of renters and tourists who walk on sidewalks that are paid for by the property owners.
What is conveniently forgotten in this student loan debate is that an education isn't simply given to some people by random luck of the draw. People earned these degrees. The same cannot be said for any of these other demographic groups who benefit from the taxes of others.
Not sure where you're going with this radical libertarian rant. Do you want to repeal tax-funded primary education, too? That takes us back to the Middle Ages, and good luck sneaking that legislation past the teachers' unions.
Yes, some people do earn college degrees. Often they earn them from taxpayer-subsidized state colleges and universities. Do you want to withdraw all tax money from higher education? You radical libertarians really kill me with these half-baked arguments where you get to keep the tax breaks you like, and poo-poo the ones you can't take advantage of.
Not true. Several reports are as high as 4-10 million who no longer qualify.
And that's not even the only lawsuit.
This was always going to be challenged in the courts, there's only billions in interest at stake.
I think it's incredible that "experts" can't agree on whether there are 4 million or 10 million people who are no longer eligible for the forgiveness. When does the whole house of cards come down?
When did this country turn into a dictatorship with policies determined by royal decree?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
