Marjorie Sener was still in her 20s when she took out a loan for about $5,000 to get some college credits she hoped would eventually add up to a bachelor’s degree. That goal was thwarted when her partner became ill. “The burden of our living expenses fell on me,” said Sener, who lives in the Dallas suburbs. “I devoted all of my resources to keeping our heads above water.” But while Sener never got her degree, that student loan kept growing, fattened by compounding interest.
Dear God this is saddening to read. What just system saddles people with a debt they have no choice but to take on in order to hopefully get a decent enough education to repay the loan, but then fails to account for situations where the borrower’s income is not sufficient to be able to afford more than the minimum payments? All the while applying compounding interest on the principal to make sure it’ll never be repaid?
And to make it truly evil, makes it so that they can garnish both your wages and pension in case of a default?
Seriously, student loans and medical debt should both be interest free and prorated to the person’s income in terms of minimum payments. It’s ridiculous to force people into a life of debt slavery just for the shot at a decent education or the right to be healthy.
Which is probably the most ridiculous thing ever. Bankruptcy should treat all debtors equally, and we should treat personal bankruptcy similar to corporate bankruptcy. Instead of creating classes of debt that survive a bankruptcy by default, how about we just include them all into the debt restructuring process? Figure out what the person can and can’t pay and make a plan based on that? It just feels exploitative to make some debts exempt from having to do that.
My theory: not only your points, but also, it’s Because it will one day affect inheritance… when a parent dies and has this debt, their assets will cover it, the medical debt and credit debt… with school loans on top of the pay back, the inheritance amount will be way lower, keeping the cycle of people staying poor and desperate… to keep low income people, low income…
parents from the 70-90s who bought houses also had school debt and when they die, and leave the house, their assets will first go to their medical debt, school loans, and other debts they had. Why? To keep the cycle of low income people which no chance of owning a home, desperate, poor and in a perpetual cycle.
Man, that’s even more depressing. I will never understand why (mostly conservative) governments try to keep people down like this. I thought the human experiment was about lifting people up out of poverty and misery, not invent arbitrary systems that keep them there. What does society stand to gain from creating effectively a class of outcasts at the bottom of the social ladder?
But at some point the upper class depends on more than just cheap labor. You need educated people to innovate, you need a well-paid middle class to support a consumption economy.
If everyone is uneducated and destitute the whole house of cards upon which the upper class is able to exist will collapse.
I just don’t understand how the concept of “a rising tide lifts all boats” is so lost on some policy makers.
The issue is youre trying to address this with care and empathy and logic.
Youll never understand if you dont think like a sociopath, people can be replaced, it’s about having more, future be damned we need to maximize the now, and if people die then they die.
The above statement is what they don’t understand. They don’t see more than three months ahead. All of the “eventually” is in a fantasy land that they won’t reach called “next quarter”.
For many the choice to not take loans mean they cannot go to school at all. For some reason, even the most mundane and menial office job requires a college degree. This means for a lot of people they are effectively stuck working minimum wage.
Student loans are only a part of our broken system. But its one that unfortunately is forced upon many people if they want to make a living wage.
That was me in 1996. My parents worked in factories when I was in elementary school, getting paid a piece rate for work. By the time I graduated from high school, their factory jobs had been sent overseas or to Mexico, and they were working as a handyman & selling shoes at Walmart. Combined, they made somewhere in the low to mid $30k per year range, and had 3 boys to raise. I had to take loans to go to college. I worked as much as I could to try and cover my bills while in college. I had the GI Bill from the national guard providing a couple hundred dollars per month.
I ended up dropping out of college after a few years because I couldn’t keep up. I went back after my daughter was born, and used the max federal Stafford loans (~10k/yr) to help pay living expenses because I was working 2-3 part time jobs to work around my schedule and helping to pay rent, utilities, and food for myself, my wife, and a baby while my wife went to school as well. I worked so much that I barely remember my kid before she was in 2nd or 3rd grade. I don’t think I could have worked more.
But now, conservatives say that I shouldn’t have taken loans. I shouldn’t have gone to school because I couldn’t afford it. What is the alternative? A life of raising a family making minimum wage delivering pizzas? Relying on public assistance and tax credits? Or working my ass off for a few years, taking some loans, paying them back slowly with maybe some forgiveness at some point, and now paying 13-15k per year in taxes?
Kind of weird to be told to “pull yourself up by your bootstraps”, do that, and then be told that you should have just stayed poor because your parents couldn’t afford to pay for college for you.
There are plenty of ways to go to college without significant loans. It often means not going to U of _ or _ state, you can easily save $20k+ over 4-5 years by just choosing a less expensive school. There’s need based scholarships, community colleges, tuition reimbursement plans, military service, academic scholarships, sports scholarships, and more. You do need a plan to get through in a reasonable time frame, just taking some classes and hoping to eventually wander into a degree is a recipe for crushing debt.
Career planning is just about the biggest scam we’re sold when selecting an education.
Nobody, and I mean absolutely nobody, can predict what the job market will look like 5-10-15 years into the future, and yet we’re asking people to gamble in the casino of life to get an education and take on debt (even if you are going to a less expensive school - the person you’re replying to had parents working minimum wage, nobody in that situation has the kind of spare capital to fund any education without a loan) in hopes that their chosen profession will a) still exist when they leave university b) remain viable long enough to repay their debt and c) the economy doesn’t contract significantly while they are in school, resulting in a “lost generation”.
You need to have a seriously high powered crystal ball to make a prediction that accurate, or just admit that we’re effectively forcing kids to gamble with their futures.
You don’t have to be a fortune teller to know a bachelor’s in psych is basically useless on it’s own, but no matter what you choose, getting in and out in 4-5 years is critical, 7+ years of even modest loans is going to crush you. That’s the bigger point.
That’s not the point I am trying to make. The point is that even those “common sense” judgements change over time, and even if you manage to get out in 5 years or less that career you picked based on common sense might be going through a recession, regression, is being replaced by foreign labor or technology, etc. etc.
Yes the employment market fluctuates, but it rarely dies. Lawyers probably had the worst of it recently, but very few majors end up with limited options rhat didn’t start that way. People that entered education knew the pay sucked well before they enrolled. Tech had layoffs at the beginning of the year, but places are already hiring again.
All of the things you mentioned require extra work from an individual that inevitably means others who don’t receive those things will be left without. No one should have to jump through those extra hoops and many just can’t for various reasons. And people should also be able to “wander into a degree”, lives and plans change. Sometimes people have to switch tracks or leave and return to college and there shouldn’t be repercussions for that.
I’m not sure the statistics agree with your assessment of it being “many to most”. For many people there simply is no choice. You either take out a loan, or you’ll be stuck working minimum wage for the rest of your life.
And even for those that do take on an amount of debt that seems reasonable based on their prospective career path - that’s still a BIG gamble that can spell financial ruination if, for whatever reason, said career fails to materialize.
42% graduate with no debt and 23% with less than $20k. It’s about 80% that have less than $30k in student loans. 30k is definitely expensive, but manageable.
I am sorry, but your proof invalidates your argument. Look at the story we’re responding to - she had 5k in debt that spawned into multitudes due to her inability to pay it back as a result of living paycheck to paycheck. 20k or 30k is not a small amount of money for people living a minimum wage existence.
If you don’t pay your loan it goes up that’s not surprising. What is surprising is that she could get that loan in the first place. She could have bought lottery tickets with that loan and it would have the same effect, but people actually recognize that as stupid.
Did you read the article? Unexpected health complications with her partner used up all their money. The only stupid thing here is that a person working a full time job to afford healthcare and education realistically can’t do so.
Dear God this is saddening to read. What just system saddles people with a debt they have no choice but to take on in order to hopefully get a decent enough education to repay the loan, but then fails to account for situations where the borrower’s income is not sufficient to be able to afford more than the minimum payments? All the while applying compounding interest on the principal to make sure it’ll never be repaid?
And to make it truly evil, makes it so that they can garnish both your wages and pension in case of a default?
Seriously, student loans and medical debt should both be interest free and prorated to the person’s income in terms of minimum payments. It’s ridiculous to force people into a life of debt slavery just for the shot at a decent education or the right to be healthy.
You have been banned from c/Conservative.
I take that as a badge of honour.
Please don’t tell me that exists.
In my opinion health care should be free. But I am just European
College should be free too. An educated populace improves the economy, as does a healthy one.
But an educated populace could ask questions…
Wr forgive you 😭
At least medical debt can be discharged through bankruptcy. You can’t even escape from student loans by going bankrupt.
Which is probably the most ridiculous thing ever. Bankruptcy should treat all debtors equally, and we should treat personal bankruptcy similar to corporate bankruptcy. Instead of creating classes of debt that survive a bankruptcy by default, how about we just include them all into the debt restructuring process? Figure out what the person can and can’t pay and make a plan based on that? It just feels exploitative to make some debts exempt from having to do that.
My theory: not only your points, but also, it’s Because it will one day affect inheritance… when a parent dies and has this debt, their assets will cover it, the medical debt and credit debt… with school loans on top of the pay back, the inheritance amount will be way lower, keeping the cycle of people staying poor and desperate… to keep low income people, low income…
parents from the 70-90s who bought houses also had school debt and when they die, and leave the house, their assets will first go to their medical debt, school loans, and other debts they had. Why? To keep the cycle of low income people which no chance of owning a home, desperate, poor and in a perpetual cycle.
Man, that’s even more depressing. I will never understand why (mostly conservative) governments try to keep people down like this. I thought the human experiment was about lifting people up out of poverty and misery, not invent arbitrary systems that keep them there. What does society stand to gain from creating effectively a class of outcasts at the bottom of the social ladder?
Cheap labor to further enrich the upper class.
If they are merely surviving then they wont have the resources to fight it.
But at some point the upper class depends on more than just cheap labor. You need educated people to innovate, you need a well-paid middle class to support a consumption economy. If everyone is uneducated and destitute the whole house of cards upon which the upper class is able to exist will collapse.
I just don’t understand how the concept of “a rising tide lifts all boats” is so lost on some policy makers.
The issue is youre trying to address this with care and empathy and logic.
Youll never understand if you dont think like a sociopath, people can be replaced, it’s about having more, future be damned we need to maximize the now, and if people die then they die.
The above statement is what they don’t understand. They don’t see more than three months ahead. All of the “eventually” is in a fantasy land that they won’t reach called “next quarter”.
You have a choice to not take student loans or take an amount you can pay back. Many to most people actually do this.
For many the choice to not take loans mean they cannot go to school at all. For some reason, even the most mundane and menial office job requires a college degree. This means for a lot of people they are effectively stuck working minimum wage.
Student loans are only a part of our broken system. But its one that unfortunately is forced upon many people if they want to make a living wage.
That was me in 1996. My parents worked in factories when I was in elementary school, getting paid a piece rate for work. By the time I graduated from high school, their factory jobs had been sent overseas or to Mexico, and they were working as a handyman & selling shoes at Walmart. Combined, they made somewhere in the low to mid $30k per year range, and had 3 boys to raise. I had to take loans to go to college. I worked as much as I could to try and cover my bills while in college. I had the GI Bill from the national guard providing a couple hundred dollars per month.
I ended up dropping out of college after a few years because I couldn’t keep up. I went back after my daughter was born, and used the max federal Stafford loans (~10k/yr) to help pay living expenses because I was working 2-3 part time jobs to work around my schedule and helping to pay rent, utilities, and food for myself, my wife, and a baby while my wife went to school as well. I worked so much that I barely remember my kid before she was in 2nd or 3rd grade. I don’t think I could have worked more.
But now, conservatives say that I shouldn’t have taken loans. I shouldn’t have gone to school because I couldn’t afford it. What is the alternative? A life of raising a family making minimum wage delivering pizzas? Relying on public assistance and tax credits? Or working my ass off for a few years, taking some loans, paying them back slowly with maybe some forgiveness at some point, and now paying 13-15k per year in taxes?
Kind of weird to be told to “pull yourself up by your bootstraps”, do that, and then be told that you should have just stayed poor because your parents couldn’t afford to pay for college for you.
There are plenty of ways to go to college without significant loans. It often means not going to U of _ or _ state, you can easily save $20k+ over 4-5 years by just choosing a less expensive school. There’s need based scholarships, community colleges, tuition reimbursement plans, military service, academic scholarships, sports scholarships, and more. You do need a plan to get through in a reasonable time frame, just taking some classes and hoping to eventually wander into a degree is a recipe for crushing debt.
Career planning is just about the biggest scam we’re sold when selecting an education.
Nobody, and I mean absolutely nobody, can predict what the job market will look like 5-10-15 years into the future, and yet we’re asking people to gamble in the casino of life to get an education and take on debt (even if you are going to a less expensive school - the person you’re replying to had parents working minimum wage, nobody in that situation has the kind of spare capital to fund any education without a loan) in hopes that their chosen profession will a) still exist when they leave university b) remain viable long enough to repay their debt and c) the economy doesn’t contract significantly while they are in school, resulting in a “lost generation”.
You need to have a seriously high powered crystal ball to make a prediction that accurate, or just admit that we’re effectively forcing kids to gamble with their futures.
Not just people, we are asking TEENAGERS to gamble on what they even like ornare interested in doing in 4+ years. These are kids!
And let’s not forget that the majority of college grads are not even working in the same field as their degree.
You don’t have to be a fortune teller to know a bachelor’s in psych is basically useless on it’s own, but no matter what you choose, getting in and out in 4-5 years is critical, 7+ years of even modest loans is going to crush you. That’s the bigger point.
That’s not the point I am trying to make. The point is that even those “common sense” judgements change over time, and even if you manage to get out in 5 years or less that career you picked based on common sense might be going through a recession, regression, is being replaced by foreign labor or technology, etc. etc.
Yes the employment market fluctuates, but it rarely dies. Lawyers probably had the worst of it recently, but very few majors end up with limited options rhat didn’t start that way. People that entered education knew the pay sucked well before they enrolled. Tech had layoffs at the beginning of the year, but places are already hiring again.
All of the things you mentioned require extra work from an individual that inevitably means others who don’t receive those things will be left without. No one should have to jump through those extra hoops and many just can’t for various reasons. And people should also be able to “wander into a degree”, lives and plans change. Sometimes people have to switch tracks or leave and return to college and there shouldn’t be repercussions for that.
I’m not sure the statistics agree with your assessment of it being “many to most”. For many people there simply is no choice. You either take out a loan, or you’ll be stuck working minimum wage for the rest of your life. And even for those that do take on an amount of debt that seems reasonable based on their prospective career path - that’s still a BIG gamble that can spell financial ruination if, for whatever reason, said career fails to materialize.
https://www.aplu.org/our-work/4-policy-and-advocacy/publicuvalues/student-debt/
42% graduate with no debt and 23% with less than $20k. It’s about 80% that have less than $30k in student loans. 30k is definitely expensive, but manageable.
I am sorry, but your proof invalidates your argument. Look at the story we’re responding to - she had 5k in debt that spawned into multitudes due to her inability to pay it back as a result of living paycheck to paycheck. 20k or 30k is not a small amount of money for people living a minimum wage existence.
If you don’t pay your loan it goes up that’s not surprising. What is surprising is that she could get that loan in the first place. She could have bought lottery tickets with that loan and it would have the same effect, but people actually recognize that as stupid.
Did you read the article? Unexpected health complications with her partner used up all their money. The only stupid thing here is that a person working a full time job to afford healthcare and education realistically can’t do so.