|
From a legal perspective it's going to make it a lot harder for schools because parents are going to be expecting 'the Cadillac' of services when schools don't have the resources for that. Also there is probably going to be a challenge to what 'reasonably ambitious' means. We actually talked about this in my legal issues class last Sat.
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2017 12:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 08:53 |
|
|
Unfunded mandates are still unfunded even if you agree with the mandate in principle.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2017 15:38
|
|
|
Is it okay to talk about college-level education in this thread as well? Because, perhaps unsurprisingly, it has come out that a bunch of college loans were very predatory:The New York Times posted:Loans ‘Designed to Fail’: States Say Navient Preyed on Students
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 05:43
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:Is it okay to talk about college-level education in this thread as well? Because, perhaps unsurprisingly, it has come out that a bunch of college loans were very predatory: This is only a surprise to people who have known nothing about college loans for the last twenty or thirty years.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 12:38
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:Is it okay to talk about college-level education in this thread as well? Because, perhaps unsurprisingly, it has come out that a bunch of college loans were very predatory: On the one hand, private student loans are often a really bad idea and making loans you know most borrowers will never be able to repay is bad. On the other hand, "I borrowed $150,000 to make a hilariously bad decision and the lender didn't STOP me so it's their fault..." as an emotional hook doesn't really work for me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 13:28
|
|
|
Swindling people is immoral and (rightfully) illegal. Even if the victim is a dumb teenager who "should have known better".
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 13:47
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Swindling people is immoral and (rightfully) illegal. Even if the victim is a dumb teenager who "should have known better". Tell that to the used car and payday loan industries.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 13:48
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Swindling people is immoral and (rightfully) illegal. Even if the victim is a dumb teenager who "should have known better". Yeah but if you come to me and go "I need $150,000 to do X" where X is a really dumb idea and I go "OK" I haven't swindled you. You sort of swindled yourself. Or maybe the college did the swindling if they made representations about the value of the degree that were false.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 13:56
|
|
|
Part of the problem with holding the lender responsible when teens do stupid poo poo, is that it impairs the ability of teenagers to enter contracts -- some of which are basically necessary to live on one's own. This is also why, in my province, minors who live on their own have additional legal capacity to enter into contracts compared to someone the same age who lives with their parents. Either 18-year-olds are adults and can make their own financial decisions, and deal with the consequences, or they aren't, and they can't participate fully in adult society.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 14:06
|
|
|
It's wrong for a government-backed corporation to mislead customers into taking higher rate loans when they could qualify for something lower.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 14:59
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Part of the problem with holding the lender responsible when teens do stupid poo poo, is that it impairs the ability of teenagers to enter contracts -- some of which are basically necessary to live on one's own. This is also why, in my province, minors who live on their own have additional legal capacity to enter into contracts compared to someone the same age who lives with their parents. This isn't about some new legislation that blocks the ability of college freshmen to take out loans or enter into contracts. It's about this: quote:The private loans were — as Sallie Mae itself put it — a “baited hook” that the lender used to reel in more federally guaranteed loans, according to an internal strategy memo cited in the Illinois lawsuit. Part of Sallie Mae's participation in "adult society" is that they behave like a bank rather than a scam operation. One of a bank's fundamental jobs is to assess the ability of borrowers to repay loans, and only extend credit to people who can pay it back. If Sallie Mae identifies people who they know can't meet the terms of the loan, and extend credit to these people anyway because preferences embedded in the law might enable Sallie Mae to make a profit by squeezing the federal government or what remains of the borrowers' finances dry, then it's perfectly appropriate to seek legal remedies. Sallie Mae's actions here are more fiscally irresponsible than an eighteen year old signing a six-figure loan for a video game production degree at DeVry.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 15:04
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Part of the problem with holding the lender responsible when teens do stupid poo poo, is that it impairs the ability of teenagers to enter contracts -- some of which are basically necessary to live on one's own. This is also why, in my province, minors who live on their own have additional legal capacity to enter into contracts compared to someone the same age who lives with their parents. If said 18 year olds could file bankruptcy and discharge the loans, I'd call it fair. Making the loans non-dischargeable is pure bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
Triangle Shirt Factotum posted:If said 18 year olds could file bankruptcy and discharge the loans, I'd call it fair. Making the loans non-dischargeable is pure bullshit. Aren't private student loans dischargeable in bankruptcy, and it's only government-backed student loans that aren't?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 17:19
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Aren't private student loans dischargeable in bankruptcy, and it's only government-backed student loans that aren't? Other way around.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 18:05
|
|
|
Well and the other angle on this is that there is an entire profit industry centered around taking advantage of people trying to get an education. What I think really needs to happen is a government loan system that is indexed to major and region of the country where a certain amount of loan is guaranteed at a low rate (1-3%) but not to exceed what the typical earning capacity of that degree is. Anything beyond that, you have to go seeking a private loan that is not government backed and then you have to deal with all the risk of the market and lenders would have to be more discriminating as to lending those amounts out to high risks. It promotes accountability for all while still not screwing over students who are trying to better their situations. I've never liked that much of this seems to be about making money off of students as opposed to providing a public good for the whole country. Personally I graduated with $24k in loan debt 12 years ago and I'm still paying on about 8k of it. But I was one of the luckier ones in that my undergrad loan was only 2.8% at the time. But my grad loans are at 6.8% and I've already paid down 9k from my masters and I'll have about 15k from my Ed.S. once it's done. I started teaching making 28k seven years ago and currently make 51k as a part time admin/part time teacher... add to that a car loan, mortgage, and basic living expenses and I'm living within my means...but I don't go anywhere, I don't party, I work like 6-7 days a week, cook mostly at home, and I'm responsible with my money. Is it a rock star life? No, of course not...but there's a misperception out there like that photography student example of expecting no trade-offs or consequences to life choices. It's very frustrating to watch people expecting life to just hand them an awesome career on a platter and then bitch to the ends of the earth when it doesn't turn out that way. Statistically people are better off going into accounting than almost anything else, but businesses are always looking for finance people because so few people go into it. I went into education because I really do care about it, but I do find myself wondering if it was the right choice. That's part of the reason I started getting into administration because the cost/reward of teaching in many cases isn't really worth it unless you can get into a nice well funded district that isn't dealing with meltdowns all the time. If I transition to working as a business manager for a district I could be making 60-110k and not dealing with any of the headaches of the classroom...
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
So, should I pull the trigger the next time I stuff a gun in my mouth or not because my undergrad was in comp/rhet?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
The Obama administration was actually off to a pretty good start by cracking down on for-profit schools like ITT tech and basically forcing them out of business. Don't expect that to continue.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
Not sure where to post this -- WI legislature is taking up a measure to make the UW system expel students who heckle unpopular (read right-wing) speakers on campuses. This is of course being dressed up as pro-free speech.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 17:05
|
|
|
Triangle Shirt Factotum posted:If said 18 year olds could file bankruptcy and discharge the loans, I'd call it fair. Making the loans non-dischargeable is pure bullshit. If people could go bankrupt at 22 and keep the degree they just earned, they all would do it. The bankruptcy would be discharged just about when they were thinking of settling down and buying a house. Perhaps for people who realize their degree is useless, they could have the degree voided and lose the debt. The same for people who didn't finish.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:If people could go bankrupt at 22 and keep the degree they just earned, they all would do it. The bankruptcy would be discharged just about when they were thinking of settling down and buying a house. this is just openly acknowledging that degree requirements exist chiefly to keep poor people from improving their station in life
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 17:24
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:If people could go bankrupt at 22 and keep the degree they just earned, they all would do it. The bankruptcy would be discharged just about when they were thinking of settling down and buying a house. Define "useless degree," please.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:Perhaps for people who realize their degree is useless, they could have the degree voided and lose the debt. The same for people who didn't finish. You can't "void a degree", like it's fun to jerk off that education is just a worthless piece of paper and learning is for chumps or whatever but if you took the classes you can't untake them.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
Sure, you could void a degree. You can't make people unlearn what they've learned, but you can certainly make it so that they do not officially hold a degree. This is like saying you can't suspend a drivers' license because the person will still know how to drive a car. It's a horrible idea to void a degree for non-payment of student loans, and it would further hamstring class mobility, but it's technically possible.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
Education is great, degrees are worthless pieces of paper.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
PT6A posted:It's a horrible idea to void a degree for non-payment of student loans, and it would further hamstring class mobility, but it's technically possible. My idea is that it would be a voluntary thing - you chose to give up the degree so that the student loan agreements become dischargeable in bankruptcy. I've heard from plenty of people who got a degree because it was the thing to do, but couldn't find work in their field, and are working in a job that doesn't require a degree, but the payments are a millstone around their neck. If they didn't have the degree, their career would be fine to support themselves, but with the payments, they are never going to earn enough to buy a house or have a family. This is not a healthy situation. This was what bankruptcy was designed to prevent. If you would rather not give up the degree, you just keep on making the payments like you would today, and it wouldn't be taken away from you even if you weren't keeping up (just the normal penalties.) This would discourage lenders from lending too much and hopefully slow the rate of tuition increases. It *would* hinder class mobility - grants would be needed for talented young people who don't have any money.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:My idea is that it would be a voluntary thing - you chose to give up the degree so that the student loan agreements become dischargeable in bankruptcy. edit: I guess at a bankruptcy hearing you could agree to not mention your degree as a condition of some debt being discharged, but that seems like a really weird thing for a judge to care about, and I don't see anyway for the judge to enforce it even if they cared. twodot fucked around with this message at 18:24 on May 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
The idea of voiding a degree because the degree holder doesn't make enough money is horrifying. They worked for that degree for years, they earned it, it's theirs. If they get injured and can't earn enough money, or if their industry collapses, or if they don't get the job they wanted, or if they were led to believe their industry was much more lucrative than it turned out to be, and as a result they can't pay off their loans, the solution is not to take away the degree; it's to take away the loans. We do this for every other kind of loan, and the banks find a way to deal with the increased risk. So why not student loans? Of course, the real solution here is free collegiate education. Hopefully the Democrats keep that in their platform and run on it again in 2020.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
Folks, it's a stealth jab at people who didn't major in subjects that are lucrative and that studying humanities or other fields that don't pay a bunch out of school should be only for a select few talented individuals.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 18:33
|
|
|
Star Man posted:Define "useless degree," please. Ba in economics.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Sure, you could void a degree. You can't make people unlearn what they've learned, but you can certainly make it so that they do not officially hold a degree. This is like saying you can't suspend a drivers' license because the person will still know how to drive a car. Voiding someone's degrees in the first few years of someone's career would be devastating. After that who even cares? Before my first job trying to get by with a voided degree would be a huge problem, but now? Who even cares. If someone called me up to tell my my degree was "voided" it would have near zero impact on my current life. "your degree gets your first job, your first job gets your second job" is a saying and it's true. After you have a work history your degree is less and less important every single year. As long as you muddle a couple years out with a degree it's gonna be a pretty abstract threat to anyone that isn't a doctor or something with a legal requirement for a degree.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
karthun posted:Ba in economics. I got one better. BA in Education.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:The idea of voiding a degree because the degree holder doesn't make enough money is horrifying. They worked for that degree for years, they earned it, it's theirs. If they get injured and can't earn enough money, or if their industry collapses, or if they don't get the job they wanted, or if they were led to believe their industry was much more lucrative than it turned out to be, and as a result they can't pay off their loans, the solution is not to take away the degree; it's to take away the loans. We do this for every other kind of loan, and the banks find a way to deal with the increased risk. So why not student loans? My point was not that the degree should be taken away for non-payment (that would indeed be horrifying), but that people who decide they don't want the degree anymore should be able to VOLUNTARILY give it up when they go bankrupt to have the student loans discharged as well in the bankruptcy. Student loans currently can't be included in a bankruptcy which traps people in hopeless debt - there have been suicides. Just got to the BFC forum to see the problem. A lot of people are like "I have $10,000 in credit card debt, and $90,000 in student loans from my degree 10 years ago that I didn't finish. I work as a waiter, but I can't afford to eat. Can I go bankrupt?" and the answer is always NO, which is ridiculous. A person $100k in debt on a low wage should absolutely be allowed to go bankrupt and get out from under their situation. Sure, it'd be infinitely better to have free education, but America collectively loathes that sort of thing. Harm reduction, you know. Compare to Obamacare - Obamacare is not UHC but it's better than what went before and what the Republicans plan to replace it with. My idea wouldn't be of any use at all to most students, just those trapped in absolutely hopeless debt - the very situation bankruptcy was designed to prevent. Excluding student loans from bankruptcy is cruel and pointless.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Voiding someone's degrees in the first few years of someone's career would be devastating. After that who even cares? Before my first job trying to get by with a voided degree would be a huge problem, but now? Who even cares. If someone called me up to tell my my degree was "voided" it would have near zero impact on my current life. Yes, I agree. So why did you say: Owlofcreamcheese posted:You can't "void a degree", like it's fun to jerk off that education is just a worthless piece of paper and learning is for chumps or whatever but if you took the classes you can't untake them. ? Voiding a degree would be a huge problem for people just starting their careers, which are also the people who are most likely to be unable to pay for their student loans.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Voiding someone's degrees in the first few years of someone's career would be devastating. After that who even cares? Before my first job trying to get by with a voided degree would be a huge problem, but now? Who even cares. If someone called me up to tell my my degree was "voided" it would have near zero impact on my current life. Yeah, older folks well established in their career would be able to do this no problem, but bankruptcy is the kind of thing that is more of a problem to older folk than younger, because they tend to have stuff that they don't want to give up. Otherwise it would be optimal for just about everyone to declare bankruptcy on the way home from getting their degree certificate, because the negatives (losing your stuff, not being able to get home loans) are immaterial to a student that owns nothing but debt and would be crazy to buy a house any time soon. And please note that I'm not considering this a "threat" that would be done TO you, just an optional part of a voluntary bankruptcy.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:If people could go bankrupt at 22 and keep the degree they just earned, they all would do it. The bankruptcy would be discharged just about when they were thinking of settling down and buying a house. You say that like a bankruptcy at 22 wouldn't get in the way of them getting a good loan term for buying a house. Also, this whole non-dischargeable student loan debt is a new thing, and it's not like there was a massive repudiation of education debt before it happened back in 1976.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:My idea is that it would be a voluntary thing - you chose to give up the degree so that the student loan agreements become dischargeable in bankruptcy. I've heard from plenty of people who got a degree because it was the thing to do, but couldn't find work in their field, and are working in a job that doesn't require a degree, but the payments are a millstone around their neck. If they didn't have the degree, their career would be fine to support themselves, but with the payments, they are never going to earn enough to buy a house or have a family. This is not a healthy situation. This was what bankruptcy was designed to prevent. Other than this being a terrible idea that places responsibility on former students instead of the loan companies that actually gouging people, you forget that virtually all American jobs require a degree. It does not matter what kind, just that you have obtained a degree. Voiding a degree could end up leading to job termination for many people since they could no longer legally be considered qualified for their positions. Even if their current job does not require a degree, nulling the degree takes away what makes them competitive to bosses.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
Triangle Shirt Factotum posted:Also, this whole non-dischargeable student loan debt is a new thing, and it's not like there was a massive repudiation of education debt before it happened back in 1976. Suggests they are correlated, no?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
In a world where a bachelor's degree is the new high school diploma, there are no useless degrees, just relatively less useful ones. There really aren't any jobs out there that list "BA in philosophy" as the requirement, but there are a lot of jobs that just won't consider anyone without an undergraduate degree and who would be fine with a candidate they liked who studied philosophy,.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
Hastings posted:Other than this being a terrible idea that places responsibility on former students instead of the loan companies that actually gouging people, you forget that virtually all American jobs require a degree. It does not matter what kind, just that you have obtained a degree. Voiding a degree could end up leading to job termination for many people since they could no longer legally be considered qualified for their positions. Even if their current job does not require a degree, nulling the degree takes away what makes them competitive to bosses. It would be useless to people who are benefiting from their degree - it's for the situation where the student didn't finish, or got a degree that did not benefit them. Happens more than you'd think.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 08:53 |
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:Suggests they are correlated, no? What? That people by and large did pay off their student loan debt even before bankruptcy laws were changed to exclude them, yes. But I don't see a defense of making bankruptcy laws giving special consideration in what you said. What point are you trying to make? Like, here is where I stand: gently caress the banks, they should not be allowed to make no-risk profits that are protected by law. Take a chance like everybody else does. Where are you?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 19:05
|
|