Category: Let's talk
Apologies if this has already been posted before, but thought this Washington
Post article from a couple of weeks ago may be of interest to some.
http://wapo.st/1Wmaffu
I hadn't seen this, thanks. That's super interesting.
Vary interesting.
I wonder if this means disabled people will be stopped from borrowing money in this way?
It was deemed not fair, but if they are going to be forgiven the debts, I feel it is fair to disqualify some that can't prove they will have a chance at repaying it.
This might also bite others for regular credit as well.
be careful though. this has a katch. if you are going into work, or are already working, you can't do it. if you start working 5 years after you enter into this program, you have to payt everything back, including intrest accumulated during that time.
That seems reasonable on one hand.
The problem with this is students aren’t given education, or a class on borrowing, and their potential earning ability.
An 18-year-old is told you can borrow 3 thousand dollars or more per semester, or quarter.
I’m speaking both able and disable people.
That student sees that new car or stereo, or whatever they want, and borrow the money to get it.
This need for money, or want of easy money can and often does become a circle that is difficult to get out of.
If you add a disability to that equation, that students earning ability is even less, or null depending on the field they’ve chosen, and where they live.
Lots of other factors too.
You graduate and find your education bill amounts to around 50 thousand, but you are disable and all ways were and the job, if you happen to find one doesn’t pay enough for you to afford a bill of that size.
You struggle, get in this program, but down the line, find a low wage job, and you want to work.
What do you do?
Many times, about 80% or more a disable person’s problem finding work is not because they are disable, but that companies and such won’t hire them or the job can’t be made accessible.
This problem won’t go away no matter what laws are passed.
So, this program is really good for some, but the issue needs to be attacked at the start when the students are borrowing.
It needs to be handled just like any other credit service. In order to borrow more, you have to show you are able to pay it back.
In a student’s case, I don’t have a plan, but it needs to be thought out.
I know one person that is disable and knows it that signed up for a few classes, borrowed a pile of money, then dropped the classes and went on a fabulous trip.
Is it fair for this person to get a debt waver?
I'm not knocking this, it is good, it is just a little hindsighted maybe?
If you take out student loans when your disabled why should it be forgiven? If there isn't a way for non-disabled people to get help for taking out loans for degrees they should never have gotten then being disabled shouldn't be a get out of jail free card. If you were disabled at the time you took out the loans you should not get special treatment. If you got a disability after you took out the loan then forgiveness should be an option, after all if you went to trade school to become an electrition and lose your vision it will be impossible to do that job.
I think there's a larger move afoot to grant many groups of college kids debt forgiveness.
However, I think more care needs to be taken going in. I remember going to the blind commission when I was 18, and I was told there were degrees they'd support and those they would not. Not because you could or couldn't do the job, probably so in some cases, but they weren't going to make an investment that wouldn't have a return on it -- a taxpayer.
I'm actually in favor of our taxes paying for your education where your education will result in a degree that puts you in good standing for employment. That does include trades.
That doesn't include a degree in religion or furries' studies, or anything else that you can pay for if you want it.
Perhaps demonstrated competency in the area would be warranted also.
I'm trying to manage some of this on the home front right now. And I understand it's totally beyond a lot of young people to consider this as an investment with a return, or even consider that the pot may not be endlessly full of money. After all, people in the 40s thought the Pacific Northwest would never run out of timber, with or without management. We're looking at a similar reality deficit here.
How it's lost on many now and wasn't lost on us 25 30 years ago, I don't know. But the other side of the equation is how student loans are managed. Rather not managed, at least in the U.S. There's no reason a college kid should be paying 20% on student loans. I think the best cost control against that is some better regulation, much as that goes against every fiber of my anti-state being, and we need truth in advertising for many of these fluff degrees. Largely anything that ends in studies, perhaps.
Well, we don't gtet the say. Smile.
It is a wonderful way to go out of office for Obama however.
The person in my example I learned did get his loans forgiven. 45 grand worth.
I would say this measure will open some eyes to the problems of loans, but I am hopeful we don't experience a backlash.
Some of us can, and do pay our credit, and need it to succeed.
Last, this is sort of the same as bankruptcy.
Many use this method, and get back on their feet and remain so.
It is truly a blessing for some, so a good deal.
I actually think a form of debt settlement, where the applicant pays some back, can be very helpful here also.
Also, for people who got frivolous degrees and weren't informed of the consequences, the educational institution who issued the degree should be liable. Most degrees ending in "studies" fall into this category.
Full disclosure would be a fantastic idea. And the degree's worth should be financially measured based on the person's future ability to contribute financially first to themselves, and second to society.
These frivolous degrees, the Tumblr / gender / furries studies degrees, for people who identify as attack helicopters and so forth, still can. They merely need to admit what they are is humanities and not science, and do like religious education does; make their own schools and have their own scholarships. Knock themselves out, if they want. After all, some fundamentalist college can, if they want, give the biggest scholarship to the person who denies the most science. If they wish. And these new ones could do the same: let people in and give them scholarships based on number of identieis, how properly people adhere to the doctrines(TM) or how many hard sciences they claim are just social constructs. Do whatever they want; it's a free market. But raise their own money, from their own successful kind if in fact they are successful.
Save public money for degrees that can result in real jobs.
Frankly, I don't blame the kids. I don't believe they're sufficiently warned about what happens on the other end of such a degree.
We have done some of this before: This is how we got the aeronautics and space engineers who ultimately got the space program off the ground. China's doing it. South Korea's doing it. And guess what? They're outcompeting us where it actually matters.
I see that.
But, Leo, some preachers make more annually then CEO's of 500 companies.
Smile.
If you can prove a religious degree will get you one of these places, well?
Had to tease you on that.
I do think a person should only be allowed to borrow according to the type of success they might have repaying.
I've said that, so agree.
Better minds will need to sit down and figure that out however.
Should, I should say.
Fair enough, my man. Fair enough. Look at Creflo Dollar for instance.
I got a long list of em.
Smile.