This came as a real shock; I think it's horrible, seemingly impossible. Current student debt exceeds the total combined U.S. debt of credit cards and auto loans! 1.6 Trillion Dollars; $1,600,000,000,000. That's ONE MILLION SIX-HUNDRED MILLIONS! Going to college has indeed become exceedingly expensive. The year I graduated from University of Nevada, 1976, my tuition cost was $15 per credit-hour. LOOK AT THIS:
One trillion six hundred billion, right? It is seen as the next bubble in the economy. What do you expect when the government took it over?
One of my daughters attended a private school, while her sister attend a public university. The cost of the private school was much more than the private, but the girl who went to the private graduated in 4 years, while her sister at the public university took six to complete a similar course of study. The daughter who went to the private discovered that anyone who graduated had the loans arranged through the school converted to grants. She came out owing much less than her sister. Of course, the Clinton Administration outlawed the system of grants shortly after she graduated, so that couldn't happen now.
We never recovered from the tax cuts of the 1980's. They are often blamed for the wealth inequality in the U.S., and the beginning of the middle-class squeeze. Education is a good investment, if you can get everyone to pay their fair share. There is no money in the budget for grants now, for the little guy and gal, like there were in the 60's and 70's.
The grants I was referring to were grants from the college, not the government. The private grants contingent on graduation were outlawed by the government for some reason, probably to keep control of the student loan system.
No mystery to me, when students have access to a generous line of credit, colleges will raise their prices because their students can easily borrow the money to pay them. Toss in the plus program "parent loans for undergraduate students" & the reason for the soaring amount of debt is easy for me to see. Not in the main stream media but happening is the increase in job opportunities for college grads prior & newly graduated. I think it's a little premature to want to forgive loans, but great strategy to try to get elected.
@Nancy Hart Can this be a part of the "plan", whereby the middle-class is being slowly wiped out, adding to the great disparity of "distribution of wealth"? This is thought by many to be the pre-cursor of extremely dire future consequences. Or it means little; I dunno for sure. Frank
When my daughter was in her early 20's, she and four of her friends were all on student loans. They did it for the money. It was right around $5600 every six months and a discounted laptop. They barely participated. None of them graduated. Once they drop out, It's supposed to be taken out of their earned income credit, but if they make a phone call, they only have to pay $1 a year or something stupid. I'm all for student loans for a serious student, but not for just handing them out to every single mother without any monitoring, Maybe the teachers could fill out a form as to who is serious and who isn't. Now, they want to write those loans off. It's really not fair to let them all skate thru like that.
If it's a plan, then it's pretty short-sighted, isn't it? . Although greedy people do tend to be that way sometimes.
Perhaps I am a hard-liner in that once one has supposedly achieved adulthood, then one is deemed to be responsible for their own actions. For an 18 year old fresh out of high school, it is a shame to start off one’s adult life in debt but it’s a choice THEY have to make and no one else. If they choose the proverbial carrot on a stick, so be it. It is a choice nonetheless and sets a standard by which all other negotiations dealing with money is set. If a person is old enough to step into a financial pile of manure, then that person is old enough to clean off their own shoes. Perhaps before allowing a student to take out a loan for their higher educational endeavors, taking a Dave Ramsey course dealing with student loans might be appropriate. And no, other than those who have served in the military and earned the scholastic benefits, I am not in any way for free college tuition.
It could all be laid down in the conditions for the loan. A serious student is one who can prove to authorities/ the financial institution that they have passed the exams required in a certain term upon which the next loan payout would then depend. In my country, a number of students just enrol for a course of studies without ever intending to attend a seminar or lecture because it entitles their parents to claim child benefit from the state for them. Sometimes it takes more than one year before they have to prove that they are serious students. It just helps them to bridge a time gap.
To me, if a student hasn’t shown their mettle whilst in their last couple of years of high school, then what makes folks think they will do better when they are free to do as they choose in a college environment? If a student shows a good work and study ethic in the later stages of high school and even if their grades are less than say, 3.5, I can see some hope for that student but to give a loan to someone who shows no real concern over their habits, I have a thumbs down attitude.
Many of those type of stories fail to state that the amount is the current loaned, not the amount the feds have collected. The fed is actually in the green with student loans. These reports look at the current year--example, X amount of students attending college this year x amount loaned. These students are in school 2 to 4 years = X x 2 or 4 years, per year. Since new students enroll every year, it is a constant turnover. In 2015, the fed showed a $66 billion profit from student loans. Think of it like when you buy a car--that company cannot say it truly made a profit until you start making payments. Students who do not repay loans will have wages garnished, lose tax refunds, and cannot apply for any type of federal program if they do not start making payments, and it goes on their credit score and employers look at that. It can count against them for banking jobs, management positions, etc. When I read stories like that, it bothers me how uninformed our Senators are about the things they attack and swear to change. Or... they attack an issue and then can say LOOK! I made a change and now we are making a profit!! It's like the claim Congress saying all Medicaid recipients will have to have a job to receive it--that has been the rule since the inception of Medicaid except for minors and people with disabilities. Unemployed people do not receive Medicaid otherwise. Stories that harp on loan forgiveness--those loans are for teachers and nurses, which we have a dire nursing shortage. Forbes is notorious for not doing the math. They look at one year's loan amount and say it will take ten years to recover it, while not saying, oh yeah, the fed did actually receive a bit of dough from previous students, but that's not the point. Do not look at the light... look at me.
The oxymoron connected to the student loan debacle is that it is the American taxpayer who makes the loan and the American taxpayer who has to pay the loan back should it go into default. Who makes the loan and who insures the payment of it? Does the treasury department cut a check directed at the loan maker and which bank is the initial loan drawn upon? Is the payment of the loan set aside for a period of time when a loan is made? (I call that a double clutch) If the government got out of the loan making business and left it up to the private sector then there would be no debate and nothing for the politicians to bilk. That said, I found a lot of answers to my questions and no matter the available answers, the taxpayer is still stuck with assuring the payment of student loans. Here’s an interesting read.......... https://www.newamerica.org/educatio...l-student-loans/federal-student-loan-history/