Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-20-2012, 08:00 AM
 
4,255 posts, read 3,478,290 times
Reputation: 992

Advertisements

Well people who want it so bad can just sponser a kid thru school. Then when they graduate convince them to sponser others. Its a win win
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-20-2012, 08:02 AM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,717,462 times
Reputation: 14745
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
So who are you blaming here....government or the financial industry?
I'm not assigning blame, so much as I'm proposing a solution. If the goal was to assign blame, both of these entities would be included, as well as voters, legislators, regulators, lobbyists, lawyers, prospective students, students, parents... and probably some other cohorts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2012, 08:02 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,752,379 times
Reputation: 24862
I think the private sector banks should not be involved with paying for college education. The Federal government should set up a loan system for students and have the loans paid back by a permanent surcharge on the students’ income tax.

For instance:
a BS degree would cost you 5% of your gross income from all sources
a MS 10%
a PhD 15%

Thus those that make the most money from their education would pay the most for it. That sounds fair to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2012, 08:04 AM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,112,280 times
Reputation: 9409
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
I think the private sector banks should not be involved with paying for college education. The Federal government should set up a loan system for students and have the loans paid back by a permanent surcharge on the students’ income tax.

For instance:
a BS degree would cost you 5% of your gross income from all sources
a MS 10%
a PhD 15%

Thus those that make the most money from their education would pay the most for it. That sounds fair to me.
I believe I could support some variation of this plan Greg.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2012, 08:06 AM
 
4,255 posts, read 3,478,290 times
Reputation: 992
Problem with that is in a lot of cases those with a Masters actualy make more money in a lot of cases then those with a phd. As phd,s tend to get more into education and research. Aside from that, great plan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2012, 08:07 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,752,379 times
Reputation: 24862
Considering the financial industry, through a system of legal bribery, owns the government, I would blame the financial industry. They just bought their way into a system of guaranteed profits. The educational industry jumped on this gravy train and sucked it dry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2012, 08:09 AM
 
4,255 posts, read 3,478,290 times
Reputation: 992
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
Considering the financial industry, through a system of legal bribery, owns the government, I would blame the financial industry. They just bought their way into a system of guaranteed profits. The educational industry jumped on this gravy train and sucked it dry.

Show me a gvmt program , Ill show you a way to exploit it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2012, 08:25 AM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,717,462 times
Reputation: 14745
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
According to le roi.
Yup.

Quote:
I don't think there's many economists that agree wholesale absolution of debt is good for the country in real terms.
Special Report: A great haircut to kick-start growth | Reuters

Quote:
Renowned economist Stephen Roach, currently non-executive chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia, has gone a step further, calling for Wall Street to get behind what others have called a "Debt Jubilee" to forgive excess mortgage and credit card debt for some borrowers.
Quote:
"We've put this off for too long," said L. Randall Wray, a professor of economics at the University of Missouri-Kansas City. "We need debt relief and jobs and until we get these two things, I think recovery is impossible."
David Rosenberg, Steve Keen, and Gary Shilling have all suggested something like this , as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2012, 08:34 AM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,112,280 times
Reputation: 9409
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
Yup.



Special Report: A great haircut to kick-start growth | Reuters





David Rosenberg, Steve Keen, and Gary Shilling have all suggested something like this , as well.
There's no denying that the influx of discretionary spending will spill right into the economy. That's not the argument. The argument is that wholesale absolution of debt is not good fiscal policy. Deleveraging of household debt should be a personal solution, not government policy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2012, 08:40 AM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,717,462 times
Reputation: 14745
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
There's no denying that the influx of discretionary spending will spill right into the economy. That's not the argument. The argument is that wholesale absolution of debt is not good fiscal policy.
Well that's your argument --

a. how do you define "wholesale absolution of debt" ? Key word here being wholesale.

b. Why is it not good fiscal policy? You don't provide any rationale for that statement.


Quote:
Deleveraging of household debt should be a personal solution, not government policy.
That's just another way of saying that households should be forced to pay off all debts.

Meanwhile, corporate and financial debts are modified every day.

Would you support laws making executives legally responsible for their corporation's debt, and making all debt non-dischargable?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:37 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top