|
potatoducks posted:Hahahaha gently caress academic medicine I guess. Do you make over $500k a year? If the answer is no, then congratulations your tax money has been specially chosen as the most patriotic of tax money and will be used for the most honorable and American thing possible - to make up the revenue lost due to tax cuts on the rich and corporations!
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 21:39 |
|
|
monster on a stick posted:You know this started under Obama, right? In any other developed country Obama would be considered a socially liberal right-winger so 
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 19:46
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:In any other developed country Obama would be considered a socially liberal right-winger so Well when you have law schools using loan forgiveness to get even more money from the Feds then maybe it needed a bit of reform: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/08/09/how-georgetown-law-gets-uncle-sam-to-pay-its-students-bills/?utm_term=.647f6e80f9b2 quote:Georgetown Law students who use LRAP use loans from Grad PLUS — the federal government's student loan program for grad students — to fund the entire cost of going to law school. That includes not only tuition and fees but living expenses like housing and food. Grad PLUS has no upper limit on the amount you can borrow, so there isn't any constraint on how much you take out. Summary: they jacked up tuition even more so Georgetown could cover "their part" of the payments. Bonus video with the article is them encouraging students to make sure their AGI doesn't go up because otherwise they may have to pay back students loans 
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
monster on a stick posted:You know this started under Obama, right? Yeah after looking more into this, it seems the issue is more specific than I had previously thought. It's a huge risk though. We'll see what happens this October after the articles come out about rich doctors and lawyers getting 300k+ forgiven.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 19:54
|
|
|
potatoducks posted:Yeah after looking more into this, it seems the issue is more specific than I had previously thought. It's a huge risk though. We'll see what happens this October after the articles come out about rich doctors and lawyers getting 300k+ forgiven. Yeah, when Brookings writes an article saying PSLF may not have been the best idea then you have to wonder. They point out cases like how a nurse who works at a non-profit hospital gets their loans forgiven but someone working at a for-profit hospital isn't illegible, and yes that's the guideline for whether you're covered by PSLF or not.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
monster on a stick posted:Well when you have law schools using loan forgiveness to get even more money from the Feds then maybe it needed a bit of reform: Well Georgetown once funded the school via slave auctions, so funding the school through a student loan Ponzi scheme suits them well
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
It's going to be great when everyone gets worked up about doctors and lawyers getting loans forgiven and we slash PSLF, and end up screwing a bunch of teachers/librarians/social workers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:If your parents loved you or wanted you to succeed they would have coughed up the money for private school, Timmy My parents were too busy trying to move to America. One step at a time, man.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 00:23
|
|
|
Disallowed; we don't need immigrants at our fancy school. Oh unless you are from western Europe and then you may get a pass.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
My coworker was telling me today that he had a huge chunk of his loans forgiven this past year by the government only to incur a 20000 tax bill because apparently the loan forgiveness was counted as income.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 01:22
|
|
|
El Mero Mero posted:My coworker was telling me today that he had a huge chunk of his loans forgiven this past year by the government only to incur a 20000 tax bill because apparently the loan forgiveness was counted as income. Yes it is, and surprises many people. Complaining about taxes on a huge debt forgiveness is still kind of looking a gift horse in the mouth, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
It's OK, somebody will surely introduce income tax forgiveness, and in another 20 years the tax will be forgiven, and then the tax bill will only be 5000 or so.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 01:26
|
|
|
El Mero Mero posted:My coworker was telling me today that he had a huge chunk of his loans forgiven this past year by the government only to incur a 20000 tax bill because apparently the loan forgiveness was counted as income. It is, but not if you do PSLF + IBR. Ugh, I knew it was too good to be true.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 01:27
|
|
|
Residency Evil posted:It is, but not if you do PSLF + IBR. Paying a few thousand instead of twenty thousand is indeed a terrible deal. What depths has our society fallen to.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 02:22
|
|
|
After I settled my private student loan debts I got that income thing. I then was able to declare as insolvent and presto no more tax bill. Default on student loans BWM. Settling for half the original principal and taking a 7 year hit on my credit when I'm not even considering buying a house. GWM.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 02:49
|
|
|
I hope none of you are depending on student loan forgiveness by working for the Government. It turns out only half a million people are supposed to be eligible. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/30/...k&ICID=ref_fark
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 04:13
|
|
|
Blinkman987 posted:My parents were too busy trying to move to America. One step at a time, man. Oh don't worry, I'm sure in the very near future immigrants won't even have to worry about trying to move to America anymore. Think of all the time we could save them by just not letting anyone in at all!
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 06:50
|
|
|
Devian666 posted:I hope none of you are depending on student loan forgiveness by working for the Government. It turns out only half a million people are supposed to be eligible. Thank you for posting a link to the article we were literally just discussing on this page. Now let's do the rest: Poster 1: "This is all Trump's fault!" Poster 2: "But the government pulling back these promises started under Obama." Poster 1: "Obama is just like Trump only socially liberal!" There we are done.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 07:25
|
|
|
Regarding the pension + working thing discussed previously, this happens a ton in FedGov as well. Retire in the mid 50s, go straight back to work as an AD, getting paid some really good wages for hourly work whilst keeping pension and SS bridge.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 08:17
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:Oh don't worry, I'm sure in the very near future immigrants won't even have to worry about trying to move to America anymore. Think of all the time we could save them by just not letting anyone in at all! Yeah, it's terrible. I would trade every anti-immigration waste of flesh for a random immigrant sight unseen. We already know what a bunch of low skill opioid addicts on disability have to offer. The trade is all upside.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 09:11
|
|
|
potatoducks posted:Yeah after looking more into this, it seems the issue is more specific than I had previously thought. It's a huge risk though. We'll see what happens this October after the articles come out about rich doctors and lawyers getting 300k+ forgiven. The answer is nothing. The terms of this forgiveness are written into the promissory notes, and those of us in academic medicine are about as clearly defined as qualifying as possible, sorry to rain on your parade.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
Posted not once but twice! Believe me when I say those of us who are eligible for this have been watching it closely. I'm sure there will be plenty of hoops to jump through. If you have your paperwork scheduled appropriately there's not even a tax liability on the money forgiven. Much ado about nothing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 19:46
|
|
|
EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:The answer is nothing. The terms of this forgiveness are written into the promissory notes, and those of us in academic medicine are about as clearly defined as qualifying as possible, sorry to rain on your parade. lol I'm totally against this. Do you even read the posts?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:The answer is nothing. The terms of this forgiveness are written into the promissory notes, and those of us in academic medicine are about as clearly defined as qualifying as possible, sorry to rain on your parade. Well, no. The exact wording from the MPN states: "This program provides for the cancellation of the remaining balance due on eligible Direct Loan Program loans after the borrower has made 120 payments (after October 1, 2007) on those Direct Loans under certain repayment plans while the borrower is employed in certain public service jobs." The text is clearly vague about what 'certain public service jobs' are. What the dept of ed is saying by their most recent action is that they can define that however they choose. It'll depend on how a judge interprets it when it goes to trial. So the outcome of this is far from certain.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
potatoducks posted:lol I'm totally against this. Do you even read the posts? Yeah, and I saw where you didn't comprehend what had happened before tearing in here to hammer "post." I'm going to reiterate that the loans we signed starting in 2008 contain language that states the terms and conditions for this forgiveness quite specifically and if the government decides to retroactively nullify said contract it they're still going to be on the hook for the balance of loan debt when they get hammered in a class action suit for breach. Since you're not a party to that contract on either side, a lawyer or a judge, I'm going to feel comfortable disregarding your opinion on this matter.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
The DOE and every student loan servicer has counseled thousands of borrowers about the scope of organizations which should qualify and, in fact you can see quite clearly on their webpage that they've indicated to those of us who've borrowed that our employment qualifies. https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/repay-loans/forgiveness-cancellation/public-service Even if they change this text or their policy, such a change would certainly be seen as retroactive, and there would be significant financial damages to be claimed by those of us who've "qualified."
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
Here's the relevant policy, again from the Department of Education: Qualifying employment for the PSLF Program is not about the specific job that you do for your employer. Rather, it is about who your employer is. Employment with the following types of organizations qualifies for PSLF: - Government organizations at any level (federal, state, local, or tribal) - Not-for-profit organizations that are tax-exempt under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code - Other types of not-for-profit organizations that provide certain types of qualifying public services - Serving in a full-time AmeriCorps or Peace Corps position also counts as qualifying employment for the PSLF Program. The following types of employers do not qualify for PSLF: - Labor unions - Partisan political organizations - For-profit organizations - Non-profit organizations that are not tax-exempt under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and that do not provide a qualifying service
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
Will they abolish PSLF moving forward? Almost certainly! It's a crazy use of money and it's a system primed for exploitation. But to try to do so retroactively would expose them to huge amounts of liability from an entire generation of student borrowers for breach.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
Ok, so to be fair, the organization referenced in the article (Vietnam Veterans of America) is actually a 501(c)19 organization, so in theory the dept of ed is correct about it not qualifying. So hopefully you're right. It'll be a few months before we know for sure though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
Chu020 posted:Ok, so to be fair, the organization referenced in the article (Vietnam Veterans of America) is actually a 501(c)19 organization, so in theory the dept of ed is correct about it not qualifying. So hopefully you're right. It'll be a few months before we know for sure though. I really don't understand how you feel that there's any ambiguity about this whatsoever, considering what the DoE states so openly in their supplemental materials on this contract. Contract: do X, and we will provide Y. X described in appendix A. Appendix A: terms 1, 2 or 3. Party Borrower: fulfills term 1. Counter Party: lol we decided to retroactively alter Appendix A, will not be providing Y. Judge: breach Damages: Y
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:I really don't understand how you feel that there's any ambiguity about this whatsoever, considering what the DoE states so openly in their supplemental materials on this contract. You seem really worked up about this, and to be clear I think you are probably right, but you also really underestimate the capacity of the government to do arbitrary or unfair things, the complexity of suing the federal government, and the public rancor that will likely exist when there is finally numerical data to show that doctors are far and away the top beneficiaries of PSLF
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:Yeah, and I saw where you didn't comprehend what had happened before tearing in here to hammer "post." I'm going to reiterate that the loans we signed starting in 2008 contain language that states the terms and conditions for this forgiveness quite specifically and if the government decides to retroactively nullify said contract it they're still going to be on the hook for the balance of loan debt when they get hammered in a class action suit for breach. Since you're not a party to that contract on either side, a lawyer or a judge, I'm going to feel comfortable disregarding your opinion on this matter. Yes I wrong and admitted it like two posts later. Big fat deal. But I certainly would not be for it so exactly whose parade are you raining upon? I hope you're right and I think you probably are. No need to post 5 essays in 30 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
BEHOLD: MY CAPE posted:You seem really worked up about this, and to be clear I think you are probably right, but you also really underestimate the capacity of the government to do arbitrary or unfair things, the complexity of suing the federal government, and the public rancor that will likely exist when there is finally numerical data to show that doctors are far and away the top beneficiaries of PSLF lol because it's hundreds of thousands of dollars I was promised, and it would represent the single most significant financial hardship I would be likely to encounter as an individual? potatoducks posted:Yes I wrong and admitted it like two posts later. Big fat deal. But I certainly would not be for it so exactly whose parade are you raining upon? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 21:20
|
|
|
EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:Will they abolish PSLF moving forward? Almost certainly! It's a crazy use of money and it's a system primed for exploitation. But to try to do so retroactively would expose them to huge amounts of liability from an entire generation of student borrowers for breach. If everything was as open from the gov that you say, then I would lay blame on employers who thought they counted and told potential job seekers this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2017 00:09
|
|
|
you sure do trust the government and the legal system not to gently caress you over. must be nice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
I know that when I think of the current government, I think 'reasonable and considered and not likely to implement hate-gently caress policy that ends in a lovely lawsuit'. Just because the law is clear doesn't prevent it being a complete clown show when this comes due.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
Contracts matter. At the least the ones between White people. And it doesn't matter what the Feds say as they've been learning when it comes to the Judiciary.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2017 01:35
|
|
|
KingSlime posted:
Idk what your job is where you go to school for people or whatever, but my wife and I both got masters from UT austin and it worked out really well, me in computer engineering and her an MBA. Both programs paid for themselves after the first year after graduation. I have no idea about the journalism school, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2017 01:40
|
|
|
C.H.O.M.E posted:Idk what your job is where you go to school for people or whatever, but my wife and I both got masters from UT austin and it worked out really well, me in computer engineering and her an MBA. Both programs paid for themselves after the first year after graduation. Just to add to this ... it also depends on how people apply the skills they picked up in grad school, what projects they worked on, their interviewing skills, how in touch their are with the field ... . If people go to grad school just to land a well-paying job, the odds may not be in their favor. But if they are actually interested in the field, even a mediocre program can produce a successful professional, assuming that that student is willing to put in extra work where the program is lacking (by attending conferences, doing internships, reading relevant literature, ...). I know people who went to schools with a mediocre reputation and landed an amazing (well-paying and fun) job. I also know people who went to good schools only to drop out with 6 months left in their phd work because they realized that they just "didn't give a flying gently caress about any of this bullshit." Leaving an excellent EE Phd program with 6 months left to completion, to go work at an animal shelter: BWM? theHUNGERian fucked around with this message at 03:07 on Apr 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2017 02:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 21:39 |
|
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/comments/62x4n8/on_paper_it_looks_like_we_are_well_off_but_we/ These are always fun. 170k income in Kentucky, some monster student debt but almost zero details about monthly spending until asked directly (why does that always slip their minds). Digging into the comments we learn that OP can't remember how many dogs they have, it's 3 not 2, and grooming alone is $80 per dog every 2 months. That's $1,440 on dog haircuts and baths, out of the annual $2,400 grooming and dog food budget... Damn Bananas fucked around with this message at 23:08 on Apr 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2017 23:05
|
|
