Executive Order to forgive $50,000 in student debt

[Concerned American]

Democrats Plan $50,000 Of Student Loan Cancellation By Executive Order

Will your student loans get cancelled? It depends who you ask.

www.forbes.com

Congratulations US Taxpayer, looks like you will get to pick up the $50,000 tab of irresponsible college students and families who took on more debt than they could handle because they felt entitled to go to private elite colleges 3 time zones away and concentrate their studies in useless majors that have no demand in the job market. These students and families who feel entitled to this have the audacity to say they have been “enslaved” or victimized by student debt.

Moving forward, there needs to be more controls in place to qualify students and their families towards state and local institutions and concentrations of study that yield good paying jobs.

Check your race cards and class warfare bullshit at the door.

I think this is much ado about nothing. Contracts cannot be undone by EO. Courts can do it if the contract is shown to be invalid or illegal, but they are going to have to find another way. Lenders will not stand for it.

Did you bother to read the linked article? They're not talking about wiping out loans held by other institutions (yet); they're talking about wiping out loans held by the federal government.

Guaranteed Student Loans issued before 2011 were from banks. If those are off the table, I'd like to see it in writing.

The federal government cannot write off loans to private institutions. What part of that are you simply not getting?

I'm not getting why you're ignoring guaranteed student loans, issued before 2011, which were issued by banks and that the government will cover. If the proposal doesn't cover those, then it's not a concern, but I've seen no indication that it doesn't.

This discussion would be moot if everyone would just agree that when you commit to borrow AND pay back a sum with interest, you make the decision yourself with no coercion. The fact that after you receive the benefit you choose to default should land your parasite ass in prison or your wages should be garnished. The borrower signed their name and all other parties lived up to their commitments--now it is the borrower who must perform.

I do think there's a valid case for "predatory lending", on the part of the government and the schools that wanted the money (and were willing to throw students under the bus to get it). But that's not what this is about. This is being pursued by Democrats because it's one step away from their bigger soapbox issue of "free college".

To which I say, Nothing is FREE. If it doesn't come out of their pockets (they are the ones that benefit, after all) then it comes out of someone else's pockets--Yours, mine or some other taxpayer.

 

[dblack]

Democrats Plan $50,000 Of Student Loan Cancellation By Executive Order

Will your student loans get cancelled? It depends who you ask.

www.forbes.com

Congratulations US Taxpayer, looks like you will get to pick up the $50,000 tab of irresponsible college students and families who took on more debt than they could handle because they felt entitled to go to private elite colleges 3 time zones away and concentrate their studies in useless majors that have no demand in the job market. These students and families who feel entitled to this have the audacity to say they have been “enslaved” or victimized by student debt.

Moving forward, there needs to be more controls in place to qualify students and their families towards state and local institutions and concentrations of study that yield good paying jobs.

Check your race cards and class warfare bullshit at the door.

I think this is much ado about nothing. Contracts cannot be undone by EO. Courts can do it if the contract is shown to be invalid or illegal, but they are going to have to find another way. Lenders will not stand for it.

Did you bother to read the linked article? They're not talking about wiping out loans held by other institutions (yet); they're talking about wiping out loans held by the federal government.

Guaranteed Student Loans issued before 2011 were from banks. If those are off the table, I'd like to see it in writing.

The federal government cannot write off loans to private institutions. What part of that are you simply not getting?

I'm not getting why you're ignoring guaranteed student loans, issued before 2011, which were issued by banks and that the government will cover. If the proposal doesn't cover those, then it's not a concern, but I've seen no indication that it doesn't.

This discussion would be moot if everyone would just agree that when you commit to borrow AND pay back a sum with interest, you make the decision yourself with no coercion. The fact that after you receive the benefit you choose to default should land your parasite ass in prison or your wages should be garnished. The borrower signed their name and all other parties lived up to their commitments--now it is the borrower who must perform.

I do think there's a valid case for "predatory lending", on the part of the government and the schools that wanted the money (and were willing to throw students under the bus to get it). But that's not what this is about. This is being pursued by Democrats because it's one step away from their bigger soapbox issue of "free college".

To which I say, Nothing is FREE. If it doesn't come out of their pockets (they are the ones that benefit, after all) then it comes out of someone else's pockets--Yours, mine or some other taxpayer.

Agreed. I think the schools should be held accountable. But mostly, the practice should be ended.

 

[Concerned American]

Democrats Plan $50,000 Of Student Loan Cancellation By Executive Order

Will your student loans get cancelled? It depends who you ask.

www.forbes.com

Congratulations US Taxpayer, looks like you will get to pick up the $50,000 tab of irresponsible college students and families who took on more debt than they could handle because they felt entitled to go to private elite colleges 3 time zones away and concentrate their studies in useless majors that have no demand in the job market. These students and families who feel entitled to this have the audacity to say they have been “enslaved” or victimized by student debt.

Moving forward, there needs to be more controls in place to qualify students and their families towards state and local institutions and concentrations of study that yield good paying jobs.

Check your race cards and class warfare bullshit at the door.

I think this is much ado about nothing. Contracts cannot be undone by EO. Courts can do it if the contract is shown to be invalid or illegal, but they are going to have to find another way. Lenders will not stand for it.

Did you bother to read the linked article? They're not talking about wiping out loans held by other institutions (yet); they're talking about wiping out loans held by the federal government.

Guaranteed Student Loans issued before 2011 were from banks. If those are off the table, I'd like to see it in writing.

The federal government cannot write off loans to private institutions. What part of that are you simply not getting?

I'm not getting why you're ignoring guaranteed student loans, issued before 2011, which were issued by banks and that the government will cover. If the proposal doesn't cover those, then it's not a concern, but I've seen no indication that it doesn't.

This discussion would be moot if everyone would just agree that when you commit to borrow AND pay back a sum with interest, you make the decision yourself with no coercion. The fact that after you receive the benefit you choose to default should land your parasite ass in prison or your wages should be garnished. The borrower signed their name and all other parties lived up to their commitments--now it is the borrower who must perform.

I do think there's a valid case for "predatory lending", on the part of the government and the schools that wanted the money (and were willing to throw students under the bus to get it). But that's not what this is about. This is being pursued by Democrats because it's one step away from their bigger soapbox issue of "free college".

Cannot agree with predatory lending either. These are people wanting a college education and as such are assumed to have completed 12 years of education successfully. They are supposed to be able to make informed decisions if they can pass an SAT. Additionally, they jumped at the idea of a low interest loan with extended terms. What is next--consumer credit card debt should be forgiven because they charge interest rates that are usuary while demanding minimum payments that are less than the interest--that happens too--talk about predatory lending.

 

[Cecilie1200]

learn a trade

we have immigrants for that
We have a higher calling.

Spoken like someone who's never contributed a damned thing to the world by his existence except more hot air.

By all means, tell us about this "higher calling" you think you have, and what tangible benefit it produces to anyone.

 

[Concerned American]

Democrats Plan $50,000 Of Student Loan Cancellation By Executive Order

Will your student loans get cancelled? It depends who you ask.

www.forbes.com

Congratulations US Taxpayer, looks like you will get to pick up the $50,000 tab of irresponsible college students and families who took on more debt than they could handle because they felt entitled to go to private elite colleges 3 time zones away and concentrate their studies in useless majors that have no demand in the job market. These students and families who feel entitled to this have the audacity to say they have been “enslaved” or victimized by student debt.

Moving forward, there needs to be more controls in place to qualify students and their families towards state and local institutions and concentrations of study that yield good paying jobs.

Check your race cards and class warfare bullshit at the door.

I think this is much ado about nothing. Contracts cannot be undone by EO. Courts can do it if the contract is shown to be invalid or illegal, but they are going to have to find another way. Lenders will not stand for it.

Did you bother to read the linked article? They're not talking about wiping out loans held by other institutions (yet); they're talking about wiping out loans held by the federal government.

Guaranteed Student Loans issued before 2011 were from banks. If those are off the table, I'd like to see it in writing.

The federal government cannot write off loans to private institutions. What part of that are you simply not getting?

I'm not getting why you're ignoring guaranteed student loans, issued before 2011, which were issued by banks and that the government will cover. If the proposal doesn't cover those, then it's not a concern, but I've seen no indication that it doesn't.

This discussion would be moot if everyone would just agree that when you commit to borrow AND pay back a sum with interest, you make the decision yourself with no coercion. The fact that after you receive the benefit you choose to default should land your parasite ass in prison or your wages should be garnished. The borrower signed their name and all other parties lived up to their commitments--now it is the borrower who must perform.

I do think there's a valid case for "predatory lending", on the part of the government and the schools that wanted the money (and were willing to throw students under the bus to get it). But that's not what this is about. This is being pursued by Democrats because it's one step away from their bigger soapbox issue of "free college".

To which I say, Nothing is FREE. If it doesn't come out of their pockets (they are the ones that benefit, after all) then it comes out of someone else's pockets--Yours, mine or some other taxpayer.

Agreed. I think the schools should be held accountable. But mostly, the practice should be ended.

I am not opposed to that. Maybe some sort of like-term compulsory service to the country to pay the bill is appropriate. Similar to our military academies providing education for officers.

 

[dblack]

Democrats Plan $50,000 Of Student Loan Cancellation By Executive Order

Will your student loans get cancelled? It depends who you ask.

www.forbes.com

Congratulations US Taxpayer, looks like you will get to pick up the $50,000 tab of irresponsible college students and families who took on more debt than they could handle because they felt entitled to go to private elite colleges 3 time zones away and concentrate their studies in useless majors that have no demand in the job market. These students and families who feel entitled to this have the audacity to say they have been “enslaved” or victimized by student debt.

Moving forward, there needs to be more controls in place to qualify students and their families towards state and local institutions and concentrations of study that yield good paying jobs.

Check your race cards and class warfare bullshit at the door.

I think this is much ado about nothing. Contracts cannot be undone by EO. Courts can do it if the contract is shown to be invalid or illegal, but they are going to have to find another way. Lenders will not stand for it.

Did you bother to read the linked article? They're not talking about wiping out loans held by other institutions (yet); they're talking about wiping out loans held by the federal government.

Guaranteed Student Loans issued before 2011 were from banks. If those are off the table, I'd like to see it in writing.

The federal government cannot write off loans to private institutions. What part of that are you simply not getting?

I'm not getting why you're ignoring guaranteed student loans, issued before 2011, which were issued by banks and that the government will cover. If the proposal doesn't cover those, then it's not a concern, but I've seen no indication that it doesn't.

This discussion would be moot if everyone would just agree that when you commit to borrow AND pay back a sum with interest, you make the decision yourself with no coercion. The fact that after you receive the benefit you choose to default should land your parasite ass in prison or your wages should be garnished. The borrower signed their name and all other parties lived up to their commitments--now it is the borrower who must perform.

I do think there's a valid case for "predatory lending", on the part of the government and the schools that wanted the money (and were willing to throw students under the bus to get it). But that's not what this is about. This is being pursued by Democrats because it's one step away from their bigger soapbox issue of "free college".

Cannot agree with predatory lending either. These are people wanting a college education and as such are assumed to have completed 12 years of education successfully. They are supposed to be able to make informed decisions if they can pass an SAT. Additionally, they jumped at the idea of a low interest loan with extended terms. What is next--consumer credit card debt should be forgiven because they charge interest rates that are usuary while demanding minimum payments that are less than the interest--that happens too--talk about predatory lending.

Often they're naive teenagers, with no one advising them outside of college recruiters - who want that money.

 

[Concerned American]

Democrats Plan $50,000 Of Student Loan Cancellation By Executive Order

Will your student loans get cancelled? It depends who you ask.

www.forbes.com

Congratulations US Taxpayer, looks like you will get to pick up the $50,000 tab of irresponsible college students and families who took on more debt than they could handle because they felt entitled to go to private elite colleges 3 time zones away and concentrate their studies in useless majors that have no demand in the job market. These students and families who feel entitled to this have the audacity to say they have been “enslaved” or victimized by student debt.

Moving forward, there needs to be more controls in place to qualify students and their families towards state and local institutions and concentrations of study that yield good paying jobs.

Check your race cards and class warfare bullshit at the door.

I think this is much ado about nothing. Contracts cannot be undone by EO. Courts can do it if the contract is shown to be invalid or illegal, but they are going to have to find another way. Lenders will not stand for it.

Did you bother to read the linked article? They're not talking about wiping out loans held by other institutions (yet); they're talking about wiping out loans held by the federal government.

Guaranteed Student Loans issued before 2011 were from banks. If those are off the table, I'd like to see it in writing.

The federal government cannot write off loans to private institutions. What part of that are you simply not getting?

I'm not getting why you're ignoring guaranteed student loans, issued before 2011, which were issued by banks and that the government will cover. If the proposal doesn't cover those, then it's not a concern, but I've seen no indication that it doesn't.

This discussion would be moot if everyone would just agree that when you commit to borrow AND pay back a sum with interest, you make the decision yourself with no coercion. The fact that after you receive the benefit you choose to default should land your parasite ass in prison or your wages should be garnished. The borrower signed their name and all other parties lived up to their commitments--now it is the borrower who must perform.

I do think there's a valid case for "predatory lending", on the part of the government and the schools that wanted the money (and were willing to throw students under the bus to get it). But that's not what this is about. This is being pursued by Democrats because it's one step away from their bigger soapbox issue of "free college".

Cannot agree with predatory lending either. These are people wanting a college education and as such are assumed to have completed 12 years of education successfully. They are supposed to be able to make informed decisions if they can pass an SAT. Additionally, they jumped at the idea of a low interest loan with extended terms. What is next--consumer credit card debt should be forgiven because they charge interest rates that are usuary while demanding minimum payments that are less than the interest--that happens too--talk about predatory lending.

Often they're naive teenagers, with no one advising them outside of college recruiters - who want that money.

There are also high school counselors and advisors that provide them with advice. If these "kids" are so naive, they would be up to their eyeballs in consumer or payday loan debt inside of a year after high school and there would be not relief from that either. Brings up 'payday loans'--talk about predatory/usury. 460%, but that is another story LOL Bottom line--Bad decisions have bad consequences.

 

[dblack]

Democrats Plan $50,000 Of Student Loan Cancellation By Executive Order

Will your student loans get cancelled? It depends who you ask.

www.forbes.com

Congratulations US Taxpayer, looks like you will get to pick up the $50,000 tab of irresponsible college students and families who took on more debt than they could handle because they felt entitled to go to private elite colleges 3 time zones away and concentrate their studies in useless majors that have no demand in the job market. These students and families who feel entitled to this have the audacity to say they have been “enslaved” or victimized by student debt.

Moving forward, there needs to be more controls in place to qualify students and their families towards state and local institutions and concentrations of study that yield good paying jobs.

Check your race cards and class warfare bullshit at the door.

I think this is much ado about nothing. Contracts cannot be undone by EO. Courts can do it if the contract is shown to be invalid or illegal, but they are going to have to find another way. Lenders will not stand for it.

Did you bother to read the linked article? They're not talking about wiping out loans held by other institutions (yet); they're talking about wiping out loans held by the federal government.

Guaranteed Student Loans issued before 2011 were from banks. If those are off the table, I'd like to see it in writing.

The federal government cannot write off loans to private institutions. What part of that are you simply not getting?

I'm not getting why you're ignoring guaranteed student loans, issued before 2011, which were issued by banks and that the government will cover. If the proposal doesn't cover those, then it's not a concern, but I've seen no indication that it doesn't.

This discussion would be moot if everyone would just agree that when you commit to borrow AND pay back a sum with interest, you make the decision yourself with no coercion. The fact that after you receive the benefit you choose to default should land your parasite ass in prison or your wages should be garnished. The borrower signed their name and all other parties lived up to their commitments--now it is the borrower who must perform.

I do think there's a valid case for "predatory lending", on the part of the government and the schools that wanted the money (and were willing to throw students under the bus to get it). But that's not what this is about. This is being pursued by Democrats because it's one step away from their bigger soapbox issue of "free college".

Cannot agree with predatory lending either. These are people wanting a college education and as such are assumed to have completed 12 years of education successfully. They are supposed to be able to make informed decisions if they can pass an SAT. Additionally, they jumped at the idea of a low interest loan with extended terms. What is next--consumer credit card debt should be forgiven because they charge interest rates that are usuary while demanding minimum payments that are less than the interest--that happens too--talk about predatory lending.

Often they're naive teenagers, with no one advising them outside of college recruiters - who want that money.

There are also high school counselors and advisors that provide them with advice. If these "kids" are so naive, they would be up to their eyeballs in consumer or payday loan debt inside of a year after high school and there would be not relief from that either. Brings up 'payday loans'--talk about predatory/usury. 460%, but that is another story LOL Bottom line--Bad decisions have bad consequences.

Yeah, I hear ya. All of this kind of sidesteps the issue that most of the folks this will help aren't poor - they're lower middle class at worst. If we're going to drop a trillion dollars on "free shit", I'd rather it go to the people who are hurting the worst, people who can't feed their kids, etc..

 

[Cecilie1200]

professors are progs

Of course they are, they are educated! WTF?

College costs are fine, who pays teh costs is not.

This is clearly a cost that should be on business not on the student nor government.

Um, no, the business isn't getting the education; the student is. The business pays for the part of the student's education that it uses by way of the salary they pay him as an employee. Since the student can - and most likely will - pick up and take that education to some other business and use it for THEIR benefit at some point in his career, I think it's logical to any sane person who has actually worked that it's HIS property and he should be the one to pay for it.

 

[Lesh]

For almost all college students there is no alternative BUT loans. And for them to be Federally guaranteed (which they should be) they should be super low interest. They are anything but that

 

[Concerned American]

Democrats Plan $50,000 Of Student Loan Cancellation By Executive Order

Will your student loans get cancelled? It depends who you ask.

www.forbes.com

Congratulations US Taxpayer, looks like you will get to pick up the $50,000 tab of irresponsible college students and families who took on more debt than they could handle because they felt entitled to go to private elite colleges 3 time zones away and concentrate their studies in useless majors that have no demand in the job market. These students and families who feel entitled to this have the audacity to say they have been “enslaved” or victimized by student debt.

Moving forward, there needs to be more controls in place to qualify students and their families towards state and local institutions and concentrations of study that yield good paying jobs.

Check your race cards and class warfare bullshit at the door.

I think this is much ado about nothing. Contracts cannot be undone by EO. Courts can do it if the contract is shown to be invalid or illegal, but they are going to have to find another way. Lenders will not stand for it.

Did you bother to read the linked article? They're not talking about wiping out loans held by other institutions (yet); they're talking about wiping out loans held by the federal government.

Guaranteed Student Loans issued before 2011 were from banks. If those are off the table, I'd like to see it in writing.

The federal government cannot write off loans to private institutions. What part of that are you simply not getting?

I'm not getting why you're ignoring guaranteed student loans, issued before 2011, which were issued by banks and that the government will cover. If the proposal doesn't cover those, then it's not a concern, but I've seen no indication that it doesn't.

This discussion would be moot if everyone would just agree that when you commit to borrow AND pay back a sum with interest, you make the decision yourself with no coercion. The fact that after you receive the benefit you choose to default should land your parasite ass in prison or your wages should be garnished. The borrower signed their name and all other parties lived up to their commitments--now it is the borrower who must perform.

I do think there's a valid case for "predatory lending", on the part of the government and the schools that wanted the money (and were willing to throw students under the bus to get it). But that's not what this is about. This is being pursued by Democrats because it's one step away from their bigger soapbox issue of "free college".

Cannot agree with predatory lending either. These are people wanting a college education and as such are assumed to have completed 12 years of education successfully. They are supposed to be able to make informed decisions if they can pass an SAT. Additionally, they jumped at the idea of a low interest loan with extended terms. What is next--consumer credit card debt should be forgiven because they charge interest rates that are usuary while demanding minimum payments that are less than the interest--that happens too--talk about predatory lending.

Often they're naive teenagers, with no one advising them outside of college recruiters - who want that money.

There are also high school counselors and advisors that provide them with advice. If these "kids" are so naive, they would be up to their eyeballs in consumer or payday loan debt inside of a year after high school and there would be not relief from that either. Brings up 'payday loans'--talk about predatory/usury. 460%, but that is another story LOL Bottom line--Bad decisions have bad consequences.

Yeah, I hear ya. All of this kind of sidesteps the issue that most of the folks this will help aren't poor - they're lower middle class at worst. If we're going to drop a trillion dollars on "free shit", I'd rather it go to the people who are hurting the worst, people who can't feed their kids, etc..

Agreed. I knew an MIT graduate that parried her $250K engineering degree into a mediocre-paying graveyard HR position in a factory. Good use of a prestigious engineering degree, eh?

 

[dblack]

For almost all college students there is no alternative BUT loans. And for them to be Federally guaranteed (which they should be) they should be super low interest. They are anything but that

Yeah, that's what I was saying - you just want free college. This isn't really about that.

 

[Lesh]

Yeah, that's what I was saying - you just want free college. This isn't really about that.

First off that's NOT what I said nor what you quoted. A low interest loan is NOT free.

Second there SHOULD be more free secondary education ...this is the richest country in the world and an educated work force is essential.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

View attachment 455169

Exactly. You're supposed to work all your life, pay taxes so somebody can be a doctor or a lawyer. Then after you're done funding their education and you need a lawyer, he or she charges you $200.00 an hour. I'm sorry, but I don't think that's equitable.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

This discussion would be moot if everyone would just agree that when you commit to borrow AND pay back a sum with interest, you make the decision yourself with no coercion. The fact that after you receive the benefit you choose to default should land your parasite ass in prison or your wages should be garnished. The borrower signed their name and all other parties lived up to their commitments--now it is the borrower who must perform.

This is true but remember a lot of high school kids are ignorant when it comes to finances. They don't understand how long it will take them to repay the loan, how much it's going to take out of their paychecks for X amount of years, and how much in actual dollars they will be paying to have that loan. This is where high school should come in; a class to teach them the fundamentals of borrowing money for school, the benefits of considering a trade instead, and how much further ahead they'd be.

 

[Orangecat]

Exactly. You're supposed to work all your life, pay taxes so somebody can be a doctor or a lawyer. Then after you're done funding their education and you need a lawyer, he or she charges you $200.00 an hour. I'm sorry, but I don't think that's equitable.

It's really quite simple: If you borrow money, you pay it back.
That's what adults who were raised right do.
Liberals hate that kind of integrity.

 

[Orangecat]

For almost all college students there is no alternative BUT loans.

How about the alternative of not purchasing something you can't afford? Everyone has that option.

 

[Concerned American]

This discussion would be moot if everyone would just agree that when you commit to borrow AND pay back a sum with interest, you make the decision yourself with no coercion. The fact that after you receive the benefit you choose to default should land your parasite ass in prison or your wages should be garnished. The borrower signed their name and all other parties lived up to their commitments--now it is the borrower who must perform.

This is true but remember a lot of high school kids are ignorant when it comes to finances. They don't understand how long it will take them to repay the loan, how much it's going to take out of their paychecks for X amount of years, and how much in actual dollars they will be paying to have that loan. This is where high school should come in; a class to teach them the fundamentals of borrowing money for school, the benefits of considering a trade instead, and how much further ahead they'd be.

What are they teaching in high school these days? I was a freshman in 1965 and they offered a class in business--taught about basic finance, check writing, interest rates, what constituted usury etc. But all of that being said, these college loans are not payday loans and they are far from being usury. Low interest rates with liberal terms in regard to repayment. Also, they are HS kids when they enter the school, after the first they are college students and shouldn't have to have their hands held. Sorry for my lack of empathy, I come from a military family that lived on the financial edge, I and my three siblings scrimped and saved and paid for our educations and worked long careers, retiring with no debts. It takes ambition and perseverance. Things that are seriously lacking in today's world.

 

[Lesh]

For almost all college students there is no alternative BUT loans.

How about the alternative of not purchasing something you can't afford? Everyone has that option.

Which would mean that only the rich have college educations. I don't think you'd actually like that country

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Second there SHOULD be more free secondary education ...this is the richest country in the world and an educated work force is essential.

And educated and non-educated workforce is essential, however we don't buy the carpenter a van so he can haul his tools to work every morning.