Biden does not have the Authority to cancel student debt

[RDKirk]

The problem is that most people don't want to work service/retail - in large part because it doesn't pay enough to do more than live paycheck-to-paycheck, if that. They pursue a college degree in the hope that they can land a job that pays a living wage and allows them to be able to buy a house and save for retirement, because, as you said, they're taught that a college degree is the only path that leads there. And because so many jobs demand a college degree, even if one isn't actually necessary to do the work.

The third thing the government and industry must do is roll back the degree requirements for jobs that don't require them. They've already started doing that in a small way, although the Education and Human Resources/DEI industries will fight that rollback...because promoting those soft degrees is in their interest.

You're right that most people don't want to work service/retail, but that's where most people who don't get advanced vocational or technology training are going to end up. Society doesn't need that many soft bachelor degree holders. That doesn't mean people should never get those degrees, but as my mother asked, "What are you going to do for a living?"

What, exactly, do these sociology majors see themselves doing for a living? The engineering students have an idea. The pre-med students have an idea.

And then, some degrees are clearly just money-grabs. I have a niece who spent ten years getting a "General Studies" degree. That was nothing but a money-grab. The university should be ashamed of itself for even offering such a thing. Every "Studies" degree is just a money grab.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

You're right that most people don't want to work service/retail, but that's where most people who don't get advanced vocational or technology training are going to end up. Society doesn't need that many soft bachelor degree holders. That doesn't mean people should never get those degrees, but as my mother asked, "What are you going to do for a living?"

Sure - my point was that those service/retail jobs need to pay more. If they did, there would be less demand for "soft" bachelors degrees, as those are seen as the only way out of a dead-end job. I actually quite liked my service/retail job - it just didn't pay enough for me to be able to afford to rent an apartment and pay my monthly expenses, let alone save up to buy a house or put anything aside for retirement. I tried to make it work for about a year, but eventually I had to find something else just so I could afford to pay my rent.

 

[RDKirk]

Sure - my point was that those service/retail jobs need to pay more. If they did, there would be less demand for "soft" bachelors degrees, as those are seen as the only way out of a dead-end job. I actually quite liked my service/retail job - it just didn't pay enough for me to be able to afford to rent an apartment and pay my monthly expenses, let alone save up to buy a house or put anything aside for retirement. I tried to make it work for about a year, but eventually I had to find something else just so I could afford to pay my rent.

Maybe they would pay more if reduced the supply by pointing kids to other options.

The great majority of kids don't go to college at all, not even for the soft degrees. The government and education industry does nothing to point them to vocational and technology training, so most of them end up in service/retail and such fields requiring no training.

Then a huge proportion who do go to college (and don't really belong there) wind up in soft majors that they can muddle through...and also suffer in jobs that don't pay off what they're paying in student loans. The ticking time bomb there is that many of those jobs will soon be done by AI automation because they don't require enough human touch or human ingenuity.

The thrust of my point is that society and individuals would do well if the government and education industry spent more time marketing to the majority: Those who are not going to college and should not be going to college for their mortgage-paying occupations.

 

[PsaltiChrysostom]

Maybe they would pay more if reduced the supply by pointing kids to other options.

The great majority of kids don't go to college at all, not even for the soft degrees. The government and education industry does nothing to point them to vocational and technology training, so most of them end up in service/retail and such fields requiring no training.

I'm with you on that. The other problem is that its difficult to get government loans for vocational training which lets private loan companies rope people in on high interest loans for vocational training at for-profit schools.

I used to teach at Lincoln Technical (2000-2004), which is one of many that is being sued for misleading students about jobs.

 

[FredVB]

For sure, the level of student debt has been a conspiracy racket between government, banks (until recently), and schools. Inasmuch as it's been a con game, government bears responsibility.

The best way I can see to resolve it is, first, to stop the con: Stop teaching students and parents that kids will benefit from any bachelor's degree in any kind of subject. Most students need training in vocations and technologies, not degrees in sociology.

Second, look at current debts case-by-case and determine whether the borrowed amount plus a reasonable amount of interest (say, 6%) has already been paid...if so, call it "paid in full" and cancel it. The government has no business being in the business of usury.

From personal experience my perspective is that this is true, at least that there is little benefit to see from years of education toward that. Yet I see people slanted toward support of institutions like that while yet with this background and for the government and state that consists of corrupted individuals just like any that are being governed because many say those ones need to be governed, not seeing all the inconsistency.

 

[FredVB]

I am sure that those supporting Trump to be in office are still holding out for things to get better. It has been almost a month with him back. We're waiting.

Hmm. Not holding my breath though.

 

[Fantine]

Wise move!

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

I am sure that those supporting Trump to be in office are still holding out for things to get better. It has been almost a month with him back. We're waiting.

Hmm. Not holding my breath though.

Anyone who believed that President Trump could decrease inflation should reconsider voting, as they may not understand how inflation works or the extent of the President's influence over it.

Similarly, anyone who thinks the President can change the US economy in one month should not discuss economics, as they lack basic understanding.

However, President Trump appears to be undermining his own economy. He is actively damaging the US economy and straining relationships with US allies. Unless President Trump changes his approach, the outlook does not appear optimistic.

 

[RileyG]

Go to college? Great!

I paid back my student loans in less than 6 years after graduating.

It took sacrifices, but that was my choice.

College is a choice, not an entitlement.

 

[RileyG]

It’s definitely not moral and something Christians should oppose.

Years later, I completely agree with you!

 

[Danthemailman]

I am sure that those supporting Trump to be in office are still holding out for things to get better. It has been almost a month with him back. We're waiting.

Hmm. Not holding my breath though.

It's going to take longer than a month to clean up the Biden administration's mess.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

Go to college? Great!

I paid back my student loans in less than 6 years after graduating.

It took sacrifices, but that was my choice.

College is a choice, not an entitlement.

As the world progresses into the 21st century, many industrial nations are supporting their citizens in obtaining college education. However, some Americans view college education as a personal choice, believing that the government has no responsibility to provide education. This perspective may have significant implications.

I do not support a universal education system where everyone enrolls in higher education funded by the government. However, I strongly advocate for merit-based scholarships or similar programs, such as the G.I. Bill, which can assist American youth in enrolling in college and obtaining higher education. This approach is essential for enabling us to compete effectively in the 21st-century global landscape.

 

[RileyG]

As the world progresses into the 21st century, many industrial nations are supporting their citizens in obtaining college education. However, some Americans view college education as a personal choice, believing that the government has no responsibility to provide education. This perspective may have significant implications.

I do not support a universal education system where everyone enrolls in higher education funded by the government. However, I strongly advocate for merit-based scholarships or similar programs, such as the G.I. Bill, which can assist American youth in enrolling in college and obtaining higher education. This approach is essential for enabling us to compete effectively in the 21st-century global landscape.

That’s entirely fair. Higher education is a choice. Period. No one owes college graduates anything. They should pay back their own bills.

 

[RDKirk]

Anyone who believed that President Trump could decrease inflation should reconsider voting, as they may not understand how inflation works or the extent of the President's influence over it.

Similarly, anyone who thinks the President can change the US economy in one month should not discuss economics, as they lack basic understanding.

However, President Trump appears to be undermining his own economy. He is actively damaging the US economy and straining relationships with US allies. Unless President Trump changes his approach, the outlook does not appear optimistic.

If improving the economy were simple, every president would do it and get two terms and their party would stay in power forever.

But it is simple for a president to knacker the economy.

 

[RDKirk]

As the world progresses into the 21st century, many industrial nations are supporting their citizens in obtaining college education. However, some Americans view college education as a personal choice, believing that the government has no responsibility to provide education. This perspective may have significant implications.

I do not support a universal education system where everyone enrolls in higher education funded by the government. However, I strongly advocate for merit-based scholarships or similar programs, such as the G.I. Bill, which can assist American youth in enrolling in college and obtaining higher education. This approach is essential for enabling us to compete effectively in the 21st-century global landscape.

If I'm not mistaken, every country that provides free college also quite closely determines who goes to college on the nation's dime.

 

[RDKirk]

That’s entirely fair. Higher education is a choice. Period. No one owes college graduates anything. They should pay back their own bills.

My issue with the current situation is that the government acting pretty much like a loan shark in how the loans are managed. It's absurd that someone could pay for years and owe more than they borrowed.

I don't advocate "forgiving" loans, but I do think, first, the interest formula should be rewritten....the government should not make a profit on student loans. And for each current loan, they should take the amount originally borrowed, add a reasonable interest to that (to partially pay the cost of administering the loan...say 6%) and if the borrower has already paid that total amount, then cancel the loan.

 

[Always in His Presence]

My issue with the current situation is that the government acting pretty much like a loan shark in how the loans are managed. It's absurd that someone could pay for years and owe more than they borrowed.

Uh..... have you ever had a loan?

My car - I paid for years and owed more than I borrowed.
My home - I paid for years and owed more than I borrowed
My line of credit - I pay for years and owed more than I borrowed -

Guess what - all those credit cards - we pay for year and owe more than what we borrow (charge).

 

[Pommer]

Go to college? Great!

I paid back my student loans in less than 6 years after graduating.

It took sacrifices, but that was my choice.

College is a choice, not an entitlement.

Okay Why is K-12 normal?
What if it were K-16?

 

[RDKirk]

Uh..... have you ever had a loan?

My car - I paid for years and owed more than I borrowed.
My home - I paid for years and owed more than I borrowed

You got loansharked, then, on your car and you got a predatory loan on your home. The government should not be making predatory loans.

My line of credit - I pay for years and owed more than I borrowed -

Obviously that's going to happen on a line of credit if you keep borrowing on it.

I've bought houses and cars over the last 50 years, and I've never paid for years and owed more than I borrowed. Now, there are cases that an item might depreciate rapidly and you owe more than its current market worth. But if you paid for years according to the loan agreement and owed more than you borrowed, you got scammed. You got loansharked.

 

[probinson]

You got loansharked, then, on your car and you got a predatory loan on your home. The government should not be making predatory loans.

I'm going to have to strongly disagree.

When you take out a loan, there is a truth-in-lending disclosure that tells you what you will pay over the life of the loan if you make all payments as scheduled. Unless you secured a 0% interest loan, this amount will ALWAYS be far more than you are borrowing.

I bought my current house in 2015 for $125,000 when interest rates were around 4%. If I make all payments as scheduled, I will pay back well over $208,000 for my $125,000 house over 30 years.

This isn't "predatory lending". It is how pretty much all lending works.