......."Third, the rising price of college tends to erase the potential returns of a college education for students of only average ability. In effect, like homeowners who refinance their homes only to squander the increased equity, many students are spending more (and borrowing more) of whatever future extra earnings their college educations will bring."............
Hmmm... An opinion piece from "americanthinker"....
Nah, I'll pass...
But guess what---The students are still getting their loans at half the rate they would be paying if Mitt-Flop and the GOTP had won. Why? Because they eliminated the "middle men" (Banks) from jacking up the rates so they could skim off the top....And then used the savings to make MORE student-loan money available to more students.
LJ's idea of a good deal: buy a jalopy that doesn't run for twice the price but it is a bargain because the interest rate is only 3%. Instead they really need to look at a major overhaul of the college system. As the Internet has made knowledge cheaper than ever before the institutions remain locked in a 19th century model of classrooms and chalkboards at record high prices. And don't expect Obama to push for major changes. He will just preside over continuing high tuition price increases.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
If you hold something up and put nothing underneath it and walk away, it's Lmoney turn to argue against it falling.
There is no need to discuss this, because we will be posting about nothing else soon.
But then one of Lmoney's idols will tell her that we can solve this by requiring a masters to pump gas with a min wage of $20 with all benefits. And she will proclaim the problem solved and everyone stupid for not paying up and loving it.
Sounds more like the blues than jazz. Sounds more like jizz than jazz.
on that note wrote: If you hold something up and put nothing underneath it and walk away, it's Lmoney turn to argue against it falling.
There is no need to discuss this, because we will be posting about nothing else soon.
But then one of Lmoney's idols will tell her that we can solve this by requiring a masters to pump gas with a min wage of $20 with all benefits. And she will proclaim the problem solved and everyone stupid for not paying up and loving it.
Sounds more like the blues than jazz. Sounds more like jizz than jazz.
rofllol :thumbsup: Great last line!
Our children are screwed due to the "adult" decisions our leaders are making. Not only will they not be able to pay off their own loans, there's no way they'll ever pay off the debt these same adults keep piling on. Our kids will be paying for all the entitlements we keep pumping up for ourselves even though they won't have the same when they retire. That's ok, as long as we have an easy life, who cares about what happens when we're all dead.
The left is angry because they are now being judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
LadyJazzer wrote: Hmmm... An opinion piece from "americanthinker"....
Nah, I'll pass...
But guess what---The students are still getting their loans at half the rate they would be paying if Mitt-Flop and the GOTP had won. Why? Because they eliminated the "middle men" (Banks) from jacking up the rates so they could skim off the top....And then used the savings to make MORE student-loan money available to more students.
The author suggests the smoking gun here is rising default rates.
I'm an optimist - so I look at the fact that 85 percent of student loans are NOT defaulting - which is a fairly good "success" rate.
Overall, student loans are a reasonably good gamble. Considered in the context that they're unsecured, I think they perform remarkably well.
There is one thing about federally subsidized student loans that does not make sense --- interest subsidies.
The federal subsidy saved the average borrower the equivalent of about one night out to the movies (including popcorn - but not dinner) per month. However, it cost the federal government billions, since interest rates are not commensurate with risk.
The subsidy doesn't really keep low income students in College (most borrowers are middle and upper income students).
I'd argue that the subsidy is not necessary.
All these points are moot, though ---- the Higher Education Act has been reauthorized, and the subsidized interest rates are part of the package.
BB, as LJ demonstrates the interest rate subsidy is there for political grandstanding. Irony? It is really a pay me a little now versus pay me a lot more later. Those graduates who were lucky enough to find good jobs will be paying much more than a lunch to pay down the federal debt years later, especially if interest rates rise up to 10%.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
No, actually the interest rate is so that more people can get an education... But thanks for playing...
Of course, the U.S. is 31st in the world in Education... And the GOTP thinks it can whine about the fact that 5.2 million non-government jobs have been created in 4 years--in SPITE of the GOTP...(while Bush only created 3 million in 8 years)... And when the R&D suddenly finds itself in need of educated folks, well, I guess then they'll be okay with trying to educate a few folks to try to catch up with the need. But only those who are part of the 2%....
And we don' need no steenkin' infrastructure repair... Bridges are for the "job-creators", and the rest can go to hell...
God, I'm feeling better about my voting for the right party already...
"Taking Back The Country From Those Who Think It Needs Taking Back."
Fred - we agree that the interest rate cap was political grandstanding.
No, actually the interest rate is so that more people can get an education
Go watch students go through loan entrance counseling, some time.
Unlike shopping for a home (when you set a budget, and your loan officer keeps you to it),
student loan interest rates don't impact attendance decisions. Nor do they impact borrowing amounts.
I've never seen a student gawk at unsubsidized loan rates, saying "oh, I can't afford that interest rate."
Interest rates do not really influence affordability - which is the key factor for college attendance.
rofllol :thumbsup: Great last line!
