MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: jesmu84 on February 10, 2018, 03:06:31 PM
-
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/02/lets-cancel-everyones-student-debt-for-the-economys-sake.html
-
Well the tax cuts weren't really about stimulating the economy.
But outside of that, this is a much better idea than that was.
-
The concept is good, but with an already strong economy plus the little boost from the tax cuts, it would send inflation through the roof.
-
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/02/lets-cancel-everyones-student-debt-for-the-economys-sake.html
Taking loans is part of life, start canceling them and you do nothing but plant the seed that this is the new normal. What are you going to do for all those millions that paid their student loans? My one child has student loans at MU right now Another child elsewhere. Not a good idea in my opinion.
As much as I hate the tax cuts, I cannot deny the extra $380 we saw this month between our two paychecks was a nice benefit. For now.
-
Taking loans is part of life, start canceling them and you do nothing but plant the seed that this is the new normal. What are you going to do for all those millions that paid their student loans? My one child has student loans at MU right now Another child elsewhere. Not a good idea in my opinion.
As much as I hate the tax cuts, I cannot deny the extra $380 we saw this month between our two paychecks was a nice benefit. For now.
We've known as a society for years that the student loan crap was unstable. It's ridiculous the amounts people have to pay to go through college. Just look at the statistical difference between the 70s and now. It's criminal. Forgive student loan. Allow people in their 20s and 30s to have money to spend.
-
nm
-
As much as I hate the tax cuts, I cannot deny the extra $380 we saw this month between our two paychecks was a nice benefit. For now.
I keep seeing people state things like this. As I understood it, the tax tables for witholding didn't come until late January, and wouldn't be applied until the February paycheck.
So how are people seeing all this "extra money".
-
Taking loans is part of life, start canceling them and you do nothing but plant the seed that this is the new normal. What are you going to do for all those millions that paid their student loans? My one child has student loans at MU right now Another child elsewhere. Not a good idea in my opinion.
As much as I hate the tax cuts, I cannot deny the extra $380 we saw this month between our two paychecks was a nice benefit. For now.
Found Chicos!
-
Taking loans is part of life, start canceling them and you do nothing but plant the seed that this is the new normal. What are you going to do for all those millions that paid their student loans? My one child has student loans at MU right now Another child elsewhere. Not a good idea in my opinion.
As much as I hate the tax cuts, I cannot deny the extra $380 we saw this month between our two paychecks was a nice benefit. For now.
Be careful if you itemize. Withholding tables are based on the standard deduction. And if you itemize in a high tax state (Wisconsin, Illinois), considering the $10,000 cap that will be placed on the SALT deduction, you may find yourself with significant tax due next year.
-
Canceling student loans isn't fair to all the people who realized that getting deep into debt for their education was not a good idea and made other plans.
Why should someone who exhausted their savings and commuted from home to get a business degree at a state school subsidize someone who took out $200K in loans to get their PhD in Slavic Studies from an Ivy?
-
Canceling student loans isn't fair to all the people who realized that getting deep into debt for their education was not a good idea and made other plans.
Why should someone who exhausted their savings and commuted from home to get a business degree at a state school subsidize someone who took out $200K in loans to get their PhD in Slavic Studies from an Ivy?
Well because it would stimulate the economy. That's the reason we just gave tax cuts to the people who least need them right?
-
I have the same ambivalence that I have toward tax cuts, mortgage exemptions, and the like. My house is paid off. I managed my finances so that my daughter is finishing up her masters in Occupational Therapy with $5k in student loans. So...... meh.
A potential benefit would be the return of general practitioners in the medical field, perhaps even in rural and impoverished areas. And, I do believe in universal secondary education and this could be a step towards that. It would send inflation through the roof, especially with the increased demand for housing. So, good/bad.
-
Kids that pay for their own school with student loans, or paying their way through jobs perform better. This is backed up in the literature. A theory my parents ascribed to, and one we do with our kids. We help, but they are on the hook for some. When spending your own money they value it more, because they don't want to waste it knowing they have to pay it back. Great life lesson.
http://kahlerfinancial.com/financial-awakenings/weekly-column/give-kids-the-gift-of-college-success
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/01/14/study-finds-increased-parental-support-college-results-lower-grades
-
So, G.T.S.T., hey?
-
Hell, no.
-
I keep seeing people state things like this. As I understood it, the tax tables for witholding didn't come until late January, and wouldn't be applied until the February paycheck.
So how are people seeing all this "extra money".
We got paid yesterday, starting to hit people now. My concern is this helps the GOP in Nov to stem their tide. A blue wave is coming in Nov, but it may not be as blue because of this game they are playing, but I am not going to give the money back even if I disagree with it. I'm going off what my wife said her incremental was without reviewing the pay stub, so it is possible she is overstating based on something else. Her company also does bonuses around this time of year.
-
Nah, I’m down to my last $95 owed on my loans
-
.
-
We got paid yesterday, starting to hit people now. My concern is this helps the GOP in Nov to stem their tide. A blue wave is coming in Nov, but it may not be as blue because of this game they are playing, but I am not going to give the money back even if I disagree with it. I'm going off what my wife said her incremental was without reviewing the pay stub, so it is possible she is overstating based on something else. Her company also does bonuses around this time of year.
Your posts sound an awful lot like a conservative pretending to be a dem. Tone is totally off. Do better.
-
So, tax cuts for the top are okay because of the myth that it will stimulate the economy. But ridding loans to stimulate the economy - which it absolutely would accomplish do by increasing disposable income - is unfathomable. Crazy.
-
If we agree what student debt is holding back the economy ... then the cause is tuition is too high.
How about we forcibly cut everyone's salary at colleges and universities 30% in order to make it affordable and not require this much debt.
This is really the same thing as canceling student debt ... forcing someone other than the student to take a loss.
-
Canceling student loans will escalate the cost of education even further. Colleges will have zero incentive to do so.
There is free education out there...its called the military.
Connect free ed to more civic contribution. Never give something so valuable for nothing.
-
Well the tax cuts weren't really about stimulating the economy.
But outside of that, this is a much better idea than that was.
Let's cancel all credit card debt and mortgage debt while were at it! Moral hazard is a myth! Up the revolution, comrade!
Universities create phony, no job, no future disciplines, charge naive young people hundreds of thousands for useless degrees. All that's left to show for it is a pile of student debt that can't be repaid. God forbid we hold the schools or students responsible for the mess that's enriched the former at the expense of the latter - instead, let's just tear up the contracts and carry on.
Anyone who equates a competitive tax rate for our corporations or a slightly lower rate of confiscation of people's earned income with non payment of debts freely assumed is a total moron.
-
Those who benefit from the recent tax cuts also benefit from high tuition/student loans. I'm sure it's a total coincedince
Also.. the economy!!!!
-
Those who benefit from the recent tax cuts also benefit from high tuition/student loans. I'm sure it's a total coincedince
Also.. the economy!!!!
Please explain
-
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/02/lets-cancel-everyones-student-debt-for-the-economys-sake.html
Ideas like this drive me insane because why did we bother to do things right? My parents couldn't afford college so I worked multiple jobs and got students loans and upon graduation my wife and I paid both our loans back and planned for our son's education so he could graduate debt free, and insisted that he get a marketable degree (though we didn't need to do that, he would have done it for himself.) My wife and I made many sacrifices along the way to make those things happen. For instance I've never owned as my car a car that was built in the same decade I was driving it.
I consider the story above completely unremarkable and I'm sure that vast majority of you are the same.
And my reward for being a normal responsible person is to have my taxes raised so those who didn't plan ahead or voluntarily got unmarketable degrees can not repay their debt? No thank you.
-
If we agree what student debt is holding back the economy ... then the cause is tuition is too high.
How about we forcibly cut everyone's salary at colleges and universities 30% in order to make it affordable and not require this much debt.
This is really the same thing as canceling student debt ... forcing someone other than the student to take a loss.
Universities gouging students based on $$$ being available to anyone who can sign on the dotted line is every bit as pernicious as the mortgages predatory lenders were offering to un or under qualified folks before the real estate market crashed.
-
Ideas like this fdrive me insane because why did we bother to do things right? My parents couldn't afford college so I worked multiple jobs and got students loans and upon graduation my wife and I paid both our loans back and planned for our son's education so he could graduate debt free, and insisted that he get a marketable degree (though we didn't need to do that, he would have done it for himself.I My wife and I made many sacrifices along the way to make those things happen. For instance I've never owned as my car a car that was built in the same decade I was driving it.
I consider the story above completely unremarkable and I'm sure that vast majority of you are the same.
And my reward for being a normal responsible person is to have my taxes raised so those who didn't plan ahead or voluntarily got unmarketable degrees can not repay their debt? No thank you.
+1000.
-
Ideas like this fdrive me insane because why did we bother to do things right? My parents couldn't afford college so I worked multiple jobs and got students loans and upon graduation my wife and I paid both our loans back and planned for our son's education so he could graduate debt free, and insisted that he get a marketable degree (though we didn't need to do that, he would have done it for himself.I My wife and I made many sacrifices along the way to make those things happen. For instance I've never owned as my car a car that was built in the same decade I was driving it.
I consider the story above completely unremarkable and I'm sure that vast majority of you are the same.
And my reward for being a normal responsible person is to have my taxes raised so those who didn't plan ahead or voluntarily got unmarketable degrees can not repay their debt? No thank you.
I can't begin to imagine your age. Try working now and being able to afford tuition at a place like MU. Good luck.
Props to you for being able to support your son. The majority of those that went to college in the 2000s and later would be unable to do the same.
-
I can't begin to imagine your age. Try working now and being able to afford tuition at a place like MU. Good luck.
Props to you for being able to support your son. The majority of those that went to college in the 2000s and later would be unable to do the same.
so now college, or an education at MU is an entitlement? i can't afford the home i'd really really like or the black convertible Lamborghini up the road-life just ain't fair ?-(
-
Universities gouging students based on $$$ being available to anyone who can sign on the dotted line is every bit as pernicious as the mortgages predatory lenders were offering to un or under qualified folks before the real estate market crashed.
Exactly!
The kids demanding student debt should be canceled should instead be demanding that the criminals that run the University Industrial Complex should be locked up for forcing them to take out these loans.
That is what the did to the banksters.
The problem begins and ends with education. They charge way too much and since their are kids willing to take out massive loans to study poetry, this problem will never go away.
-
I can't begin to imagine your age. Try working now and being able to afford tuition at a place like MU. Good luck.
Props to you for being able to support your son. The majority of those that went to college in the 2000s and later would be unable to do the same.
Why is the answer debt cancellation? Why are you not demanding MU (or any other university) pay your loan and/or massively cut tuition so you can afford the debt load?
-
Let's cancel all credit card debt and mortgage debt while were at it! Moral hazard is a myth! Up the revolution, comrade!
Universities create phony, no job, no future disciplines, charge naive young people hundreds of thousands for useless degrees. All that's left to show for it is a pile of student debt that can't be repaid. God forbid we hold the schools or students responsible for the mess that's enriched the former at the expense of the latter - instead, let's just tear up the contracts and carry on.
Anyone who equates a competitive tax rate for our corporations or a slightly lower rate of confiscation of people's earned income with non payment of debts freely assumed is a total moron.
This sums it up perfectly.
-
Let's cancel all credit card debt and mortgage debt while were at it! Moral hazard is a myth! Up the revolution, comrade!
Universities create phony, no job, no future disciplines, charge naive young people hundreds of thousands for useless degrees. All that's left to show for it is a pile of student debt that can't be repaid. God forbid we hold the schools or students responsible for the mess that's enriched the former at the expense of the latter - instead, let's just tear up the contracts and carry on.
Anyone who equates a competitive tax rate for our corporations or a slightly lower rate of confiscation of people's earned income with non payment of debts freely assumed is a total moron.
Well I'm not advocating for the idea, but I don't think the people at the Levy Institute are "total morons." Frankly I would trust their macroeconomic takes more than I would yours.
It's interesting how we as a society decide to "hold people accountable." An 18 year old making a poor decision when choosing a college and major? Sorry...can't help you.
But a 40 year old making a poor investment? Sure ...we can provide you this legal way to cancel your debts and start over!
But I guess we pick and choose our "moral hazards" versus our "second chances" right? Whatever fits the narrative I guess.
-
Why is the answer debt cancellation? Why are you not demanding MU (or any other university) pay your loan and/or massively cut tuition so you can afford the debt load?
The only way this idea should be considered is if debt relief (short of cancellation) goes hand in hand with cost controls for schools who accept federal financial aid.
-
The only way this idea should be considered is if debt relief (short of cancellation) goes hand in hand with cost controls for schools who accept federal financial aid.
They don’t go hand-in-hand, the work against each other.
Cancel debt once, and you have to do it again and again. Show me where a one time “anything” by the government stayed only one time.
Canceling debt the the strongest motivation for universities to not cut tuition.
It is precisely because students are willing to pile on the debt that universities have no incentive to control costs. Debt relief now allows for more debt tomorrow and even higher tuition costs.
-
Right. The only way it goes hand in hand is when colleges and universities are forced to limit tuition and costs.
-
Right. The only way it goes hand in hand is when colleges and universities are forced to limit tuition and costs.
They will limit costs when the demand for their product falls.
That is what higher prices do .... except when one forgive debt to make it easier to continue to pay higher prices.
Otherwise how do you “force” universities to lower tuition and costs? Limit their budget? Walker tried that and all Hell broke loose?
-
They will limit costs when the demand for their product falls.
That is what higher prices do .... except when one forgive debt to make it easier to continue to pay higher prices.
Otherwise how do you “force” universities to lower tuition and costs? Limit their budget? Walker tried that and all Hell broke loose?
The federal government can require certain cost controls in return for access to federal aid, research dollars, etc.
It's not going to happen.
-
Canceling student loans isn't fair to all the people who realized that getting deep into debt for their education was not a good idea and made other plans.
Why should someone who exhausted their savings and commuted from home to get a business degree at a state school subsidize someone who took out $200K in loans to get their PhD in Slavic Studies from an Ivy?
I agree with this analysis.
-
The federal government can require certain cost controls in return for access to federal aid, research dollars, etc.
It's not going to happen.
I agree it never going to happen.
So make it harder to get a loan. Then only those that can pay them back will take them out. Schools will go begging for students and cut tuition.
Debt forgiveness makes everything worse.
-
I agree it never going to happen.
So make it harder to get a loan. Then only those that can pay them back will take them out. Schools will go begging for students and cut tuition.
Debt forgiveness makes everything worse.
Which is why I am not advocating for it unless it is part of a much larger solution regarding the cost and funding of higher education.
-
Your posts sound an awful lot like a conservative pretending to be a dem. Tone is totally off. Do better.
My tone hasn't changed in 40ish years of voting. Parties change. Not sure how old you are, but let me give some examples.
In the late 70's when my voting started, almost 50% of Democrats owned guns. Today that number is less than 25%. Back then there were numerous pro life Democrats in Congress, today there are three and one will likely be primaried out this Summer. Where I used to be on board with 90% of the platform, I'm now on board with about 65%. I still will vote Democrat, but my tone hasn't changed, the parties have changed. Democrats more liberal. Republicans more conservative. The middle is gone. Maybe it is you that needs to recognize tone and how through time parties change, but us old guys may not change with our parties but still belong to them.
-
My tone hasn't changed in 40ish years of voting. Parties change. Not sure how old you are, but let me give some examples.
In the late 70's when my voting started, almost 50% of Democrats owned guns. Today that number is less than 25%. Back then there were numerous pro life Democrats in Congress, today there are three and one will likely be primaried out this Summer. Where I used to be on board with 90% of the platform, I'm now on board with about 65%. I still will vote Democrat, but my tone hasn't changed, the parties have changed. Democrats more liberal. Republicans more conservative. The middle is gone. Maybe it is you that needs to recognize tone and how through time parties change, but us old guys may not change with our parties but still belong to them.
Political post of the year on scoop. I agree with what you say
-
I agree it never going to happen.
So make it harder to get a loan. Then only those that can pay them back will take them out. Schools will go begging for students and cut tuition.
There is no realistic way to cut tuition dramatically. You do what you propose and college will be a luxury for the rich.
You will then be the first to say that it is poor people's fault for their situation, because they should have worked hard and got a college education, even though it was not remotely feasible for them.
-
There is no realistic way to cut tuition dramatically.
Why not? Schools found "realistic ways" to raise it dramatically.
-
There is no realistic way to cut tuition dramatically. You do what you propose and college will be a luxury for the rich.
You will then be the first to say that it is poor people's fault for their situation, because they should have worked hard and got a college education, even though it was not remotely feasible for them.
Sure they can ... right now they do not need to because we find ways to create artificial demand by making it easy to get a student loan.
How about different prices for different majors? Want to major in Computers or engineering? $50k/year. Want to major in English or history? $25k/year. Music or poetry? $10k/year.
Right not having the same price for all means the poetry majors are subidzing the engineers.
-
Sure they can ... right now they do not need to because we find ways to create artificial demand by making it easy to get a student loan.
How about different prices for different majors? Want to major in Computers or engineering? $50k/year. Want to major in English or history? $25k/year. Music or poetry? $10k/year.
Right not having the same price for all means the poetry majors are subidzing the engineers.
Many schools do this already.
At the University of Illinois, for example, the base undergrad in-state tuition is a bit over $12,000. For fine arts students it's $13,600, and for the engineering and business programs it's more than $17,000. Same with out-of-state tuition (though higher tuition).
Extreme differences like those proposed by you would be a terrible idea.
Do we really want to make STEM fields even less appealing to students, both here and those coming from abroad? Do we want to incentive majors like poetry?
-
This is how the problem gets fixed ....
For decades MBA programs were subsided by companies paying for their employees. So business schools expanded and spent money like drunken sailors. Then companies stopped paying, not they are closing and restructuring.
Same will apply to undergraduate program the second we stop creating artificial demand (making it too easy to take out huge loans that can never be paid back).
M.B.A. Program at University of Wisconsin May Be on the Chopping Block
Flagging student interest is prompting schools to take a hard look at their M.B.A. programs
October 20, 2017
https://www.wsj.com/articles/university-of-wisconsin-mulls-closing-m-b-a-program-amid-flagging-interest-1508491804
Once a must-have for careers in finance and management consulting, the M.B.A. has lost some appeal in recent years as fewer employers help workers cover costs and a generation of students saddled with student-loan debt opt to remain in the workforce rather than break for school. Though elite programs at Harvard and Stanford University continue to attract applicants, some schools outside the top tier are finding it harder to maintain interest in the two-year M.B.A.
Lately, the school has begun offering part-time and specialized programs in accounting and finance, feeding appetites for shorter, more niche credentials. About 100 students enrolled in the Wisconsin full-time M.B.A. program last month, steady with the class size two years prior.
(like I said in the post above, different prices for different majors.)
-
Many schools do this already.
At the University of Illinois, for example, the base undergrad in-state tuition is a bit over $12,000. For fine arts students it's $13,600, and for the engineering and business programs it's more than $17,000. Same with out-of-state tuition (though higher tuition).
Extreme differences like those proposed by you would be a terrible idea.
Do we really want to make STEM fields even less appealing to students, both here and those coming from abroad? Do we want to incentive majors like poetry?
Right now we are punishing the poetry majors for making them subsidize the engineers.
-
Canceling student loans isn't fair to all the people who realized that getting deep into debt for their education was not a good idea and made other plans.
Or parents who saved everything they could and sacrificed so their children could have the same benefits they had. Who knew that the best chance their kids had was their personal investment in their children's future.
The lesson you're sending on governmental cancelling of student debt is scary.
-
Right now we are punishing the poetry majors for making them subsidize the engineers.
What are you basing this on? Cause it sure sounds like something you're making up?
Clearly you're making some assumption that a poetry degree costs less than an engineering degree, and that gap is not filled by the additional tuition and fees engineering students pay (which, as I pointed out, is a $5,000 at one public school ... I'll find other examples if you wish).
Could you please provide some actual evidence that poetry students are subsidizing engineering students?
-
Or parents who saved everything they could and sacrificed so their children could have the same benefits they had. Who knew that the best chance their kids had was their personal investment in their children's future.
The lesson you're sending on governmental cancelling of student debt is scary.
My parents scraped hard to send me to Catholic grade and high schools.
Today, many states offer taxpayer-funded vouchers for this. Others, like Illinois, are using taxpayer funds to give families scholarships to attend religious schools.
Should my parents be scared and/or crying about how unfair it all is? They sacrificed to send their kids to private school, and now their tax dollars are going to let other families do it for free or much less? So unfair!
There are some solid arguments against canceling student debt. "Waahhh, it's unfair" is not one of them.
-
Or parents who saved everything they could and sacrificed so their children could have the same benefits they had. Who knew that the best chance their kids had was their personal investment in their children's future.
The lesson you're sending on governmental cancelling of student debt is scary.
Yet we have laws is place that allow cancellation of other debt. And what happens to those who take advantage of such laws? We elect them president.
It’s just interesting how the “moral hazard” argument always seems to be used with the poor and the young.
-
Sure they can ... right now they do not need to because we find ways to create artificial demand by making it easy to get a student loan.
How about different prices for different majors? Want to major in Computers or engineering? $50k/year. Want to major in English or history? $25k/year. Music or poetry? $10k/year.
Right not having the same price for all means the poetry majors are subidzing the engineers.
I've told you this many times. You do not understand anything about the education industry. You repeatedly state false information, make false assumptions, and not surprisingly, come up with false conclusions. I've tried to correct you in the past, but you refuse to actually listen.
Here is another one for you, that I've told you before:
At most universities, STEM departments are revenue generating. They make a substantial profit. Liberal arts departments operate at a loss.
They could remove all liberal arts departments and actually be able to lower tuition, but that comes at a cost of the students not getting as good of an education. It is known and has been shown that the liberal arts components of a degree improve the success and abilities of all disciplines.
-
I keep seeing people state things like this. As I understood it, the tax tables for witholding didn't come until late January, and wouldn't be applied until the February paycheck.
So how are people seeing all this "extra money".
Tax tables were completed January 11th. By law the implementation of the tables has to be completed by Feb 15th. Americans started seeing extra money as early as Feb 1st per CNN.
-
"Republicans more conservative. The middle is gone. "
not taking any positions here, but just my take-
i wish this were true, but today's republicans may not even meet the standards of the old kennedy democrats. i call today's republicans, democrat-lite. the middle is long and strong=the independents
the universities and the feds need each other-that's why you won't see any changes except the election time whiffing of debt relief. free education for everyone!! then everyone can do ha-vod ;)
-
Tax tables were completed January 11th. By law the implementation of the tables has to be completed by Feb 15th. Americans started seeing extra money as early as Feb 1st per CNN.
Where I work, the new tax tables were used on our January 31 paychecks.
-
"Republicans more conservative. The middle is gone. "
not taking any positions here, but just my take-
i wish this were true, but today's republicans may not even meet the standards of the old kennedy democrats. i call today's republicans, democrat-lite. the middle is long and strong=the independents
the universities and the feds need each other-that's why you won't see any changes except the election time whiffing of debt relief. free education for everyone!! then everyone can do ha-vod ;)
Ronald Reagan would be bounced from a GOP primary faster than Scott Walker these days for not being conservative enough.
-
Yet we have laws is place that allow cancellation of other debt. And what happens to those who take advantage of such laws? We elect them president.
It’s just interesting how the “moral hazard” argument always seems to be used with the poor and the young.
Yup.
-
Yet we have laws is place that allow cancellation of other debt. And what happens to those who take advantage of such laws? We elect them president.
It’s just interesting how the “moral hazard” argument always seems to be used with the poor and the young.
Were we not all poor and young at one point in time? I certainly was.
-
My parents scraped hard to send me to Catholic grade and high schools.
Today, many states offer taxpayer-funded vouchers for this. Others, like Illinois, are using taxpayer funds to give families scholarships to attend religious schools.
Should my parents be scared and/or crying about how unfair it all is? They sacrificed to send their kids to private school, and now their tax dollars are going to let other families do it for free or much less? So unfair!
There are some solid arguments against canceling student debt. "Waahhh, it's unfair" is not one of them.
Yup. It's also interesting, to me, how economic statistics and arguments can be used/supported for one thing (GOP/Trump tax cuts) but ignored and poo-poo'ed in another (eliminate student loans).
-
My tone hasn't changed in 40ish years of voting. Parties change. Not sure how old you are, but let me give some examples.
In the late 70's when my voting started, almost 50% of Democrats owned guns. Today that number is less than 25%. Back then there were numerous pro life Democrats in Congress, today there are three and one will likely be primaried out this Summer. Where I used to be on board with 90% of the platform, I'm now on board with about 65%. I still will vote Democrat, but my tone hasn't changed, the parties have changed. Democrats more liberal. Republicans more conservative. The middle is gone. Maybe it is you that needs to recognize tone and how through time parties change, but us old guys may not change with our parties but still belong to them.
Why are you pretending to be a Democrat. This is written 100% like our ol' buddy Chicos. Who can't stay away from here. God forbid this guy gets a hold of a cigarette or some opiods some day. He'd be dead before sunrise.
-
"Republicans more conservative. The middle is gone. "
not taking any positions here, but just my take-
i wish this were true, but today's republicans may not even meet the standards of the old kennedy democrats. i call today's republicans, democrat-lite. the middle is long and strong=the independents
the universities and the feds need each other-that's why you won't see any changes except the election time whiffing of debt relief. free education for everyone!! then everyone can do ha-vod ;)
Get out of the echo chamber you live in. It isn't reality. If anything the Democrats of today are centrists. In any other country, they'd be left leaning conservatives.
-
Yup. It's also interesting, to me, how economic statistics and arguments can be used/supported for one thing (GOP/Trump tax cuts) but ignored and poo-poo'ed in another (eliminate student loans).
What in the Wide World of Sports does a change in the tax code altering the
% of earnings the government confiscates from her citizens have to do with making contracts freely entered into resulting in trillions of dollars of obligation null and void?
Answer:nothing.
-
Where I work, the new tax tables were used on our January 31 paychecks.
Tax tables were completed January 11th. By law the implementation of the tables has to be completed by Feb 15th. Americans started seeing extra money as early as Feb 1st per CNN.
Thanks, I know the tables were completed in January, but figured most companies would not use them until the end of February check. Apparently some companies did so sooner.
Be careful with budgeting though. I've now seen what I will be paid for this month, and my take home will go up. I've also calculated what I will pay for the year in taxes and what i'm taking home extra now will be paid pack come tax time.
I'm taking a net loss. Take home pay is higher now, but I will pay more in taxes this year than before.
#taxincrease.
-
What in the Wide World of Sports does a change in the tax code altering the
% of earnings the government confiscates from her citizens have to do with making contracts freely entered into resulting in trillions of dollars of obligation null and void?
Answer:nothing.
If the concern is the economy and Act A allegedly increases said economy, and people support Act A because of its effect on the economy, then Act B, which also increases said economy, should be supported likewise.
-
What in the Wide World of Sports does a change in the tax code altering the
% of earnings the government confiscates from her citizens have to do with making contracts freely entered into resulting in trillions of dollars of obligation null and void?
Answer:nothing.
"Confiscates" ::)
Again, it's no different than bankruptcy law.
-
Thanks, I know the tables were completed in January, but figured most companies would not use them until the end of February check. Apparently some companies did so sooner.
Be careful with budgeting though. I've now seen what I will be paid for this month, and my take home will go up. I've also calculated what I will pay for the year in taxes and what i'm taking home extra now will be paid pack come tax time.
I'm taking a net loss. Take home pay is higher now, but I will pay more in taxes this year than before.
#taxincrease.
First thing I did after I calculated what my new take home pay would be was to submit a W-4 with fewer exemptions to bump my taxes back up.
#bluestateliving
-
Ronald Reagan would be bounced from a GOP primary faster than Scott Walker these days for not being conservative enough.
this is the best you can come up with? you know i would absolutely be pummeled for trying to make the parallel argument-nice one
-
First thing I did after I calculated what my new take home pay would be was to submit a W-4 with fewer exemptions to bump my taxes back up.
#bluestateliving
Yep. After I saw my first paycheck with the new tables, I bumped up my withholding considerably.
-
Get out of the echo chamber you live in. It isn't reality. If anything the Democrats of today are centrists. In any other country, they'd be left leaning conservatives.
ya see, this is what i mean about trying to voice opposition opinion-
first off, we can do without the vitriolic tone. yes, i am probably guilty of it from time to time as well, but as i've said before, i treat others as they treat me
secondly, i know for a fact, i would be called out on this as well-the statement you make is opinion, unless you have something to back it up. if it is your opinion-fine. i understand many feel the same as you and i'm not going to try to change yours or anyone else's opinion-peace hards
judging by how the dems have embraced some really left wing groups and this is where our media drops the ball- the media will vaguely if at all point these relationships out because they are in the same club
-
I've told you this many times. You do not understand anything about the education industry. You repeatedly state false information, make false assumptions, and not surprisingly, come up with false conclusions. I've tried to correct you in the past, but you refuse to actually listen.
Here is another one for you, that I've told you before:
At most universities, STEM departments are revenue generating. They make a substantial profit. Liberal arts departments operate at a loss.
They could remove all liberal arts departments and actually be able to lower tuition, but that comes at a cost of the students not getting as good of an education. It is known and has been shown that the liberal arts components of a degree improve the success and abilities of all disciplines.
Numbers please ... how much does MU's STEM departments make?
-
Why are you pretending to be a Democrat. This is written 100% like our ol' buddy Chicos. Who can't stay away from here. God forbid this guy gets a hold of a cigarette or some opiods some day. He'd be dead before sunrise.
I am not pretending to be anything. I am a registered Democrat and have voted Democrat for president in every election. The Democrat party today is not centrist, at least not by historical norms. The GOP is definitely not centrist as they move further right. In the 70's and 80's the parties were more closely aligned than they are today. That is when I began voting. The primaries and special interest groups are pulling the most extreme of each party to the forefront and moderates cannot win. Watch some videos of Schumer on immigration from less than 6 years ago vs today, they are two totally different people with completely different messages. Watch some videos of Republican Senators and Reps and it is the same thing. They pander to their extremes now because that is where the energy and voters are.
The other person is correct, Reagan would not survive a GOP primary. Nixon and Ike could not either. On our side, Mondale, Carter and Kennedy couldn't either. Mondale's father could, but not Mondale who abandoned the New Deal. That leaves us oldies either in a party that is dramatically different than when we joined, or the choice to leave and become an independent.
-
Yet we have laws is place that allow cancellation of other debt.
And if you are an individual who takes advantage of those laws, it ruins your credit for seven years. What is being proposed is basically saying "never mind".
I do think that allowing student loans to be discharged in bankruptcy is something worth considering.
-
And if you are an individual who takes advantage of those laws, it ruins your credit for seven years. What is being proposed is basically saying "never mind".
I do think that allowing student loans to be discharged in bankruptcy is something worth considering.
That's pretty much where I lean as well. I don't think that a massive cancellation is a good idea without a fundamental rethinking of how higher education is funded in the US. But that's not gonna happen.
-
What are you basing this on? Cause it sure sounds like something you're making up?
Clearly you're making some assumption that a poetry degree costs less than an engineering degree, and that gap is not filled by the additional tuition and fees engineering students pay (which, as I pointed out, is a $5,000 at one public school ... I'll find other examples if you wish).
Could you please provide some actual evidence that poetry students are subsidizing engineering students?
This is where I assume you are going to make the most basic of all economics mistakes ... thinking it is all about relative costs (how much it costs to run an engineering department versus a music department). It is never about costs. It is about the relative opportunity a degree affords one.
Georgetown tackled this exact subject
https://cew.georgetown.edu/cew-reports/whats-it-worth-the-economic-value-of-college-majors/
They find that college degrees have a wide variety of income potential. That is how tuition should be set. And yes, engineering and computer science will be multiples of poetry or music, not 20% like U of I does.
Forgetful, once the "value" of a degree is set, then you "force" the costs to fit in that constraint.
-
"Confiscates" ::)
Again, it's no different than bankruptcy law.
Huge difference ...
Bankruptcy law is set. The lender understands this is a possibility going into the loan.
Cancellation is changing the rules after the fact.
Also in bankruptcy, the lender gets the opportunity to take the assets or tell you how to manage them. Cancellation allows you to walk without consequences.
-
Huge difference ...
Bankruptcy law is set. The lender understands this is a possibility going into the loan.
Cancellation is changing the rules after the fact.
Also in bankruptcy, the lender gets the opportunity to take the assets or tell you how to manage them. Cancellation allows you to walk without consequences.
While agree there's a big difference, if those want to get out of student debt, allow a bankrupt option. Credit penalties apply, assets can be liquidated and cosigners are called to the floor as well.
With that, start cancelling student loan debt. However, writing off debt with no regard to the credit establishment is quite possibly the worst, most unamerican idealism ever.
-
While agree there's a big difference, if those want to get out of student debt, allow a bankrupt option. Credit penalties apply, assets can be liquidated and cosigners are called to the floor as well.
With that, start cancelling student loan debt. However, writing off debt with no regard to the credit establishment is quite possibly the worst, most unamerican idealism ever.
I think the point is that the federal government would cover the private debt and write off its own debt.
-
ya see, this is what i mean about trying to voice opposition opinion-
first off, we can do without the vitriolic tone. yes, i am probably guilty of it from time to time as well, but as i've said before, i treat others as they treat me
secondly, i know for a fact, i would be called out on this as well-the statement you make is opinion, unless you have something to back it up. if it is your opinion-fine. i understand many feel the same as you and i'm not going to try to change yours or anyone else's opinion-peace hards
judging by how the dems have embraced some really left wing groups and this is where our media drops the ball- the media will vaguely if at all point these relationships out because they are in the same club
In other countries Communism and Democratic Socialism are actual political parties. In the USA those words are used to describe 'the looney left' and are considered extreme. Simple ideas like our current ACA bill were REPUBLICAN IDEAS IN THE 70s... and now they're considered far left wing? That is the type of total insanity that I'm talking about. We don't have a viable left in the USA because they get berated and mocked as crazy people.
MEANWHILE, we have an actual white supremacist running for a seat in congress.
https://www.npr.org/2018/02/08/583993705/a-white-supremacist-may-be-the-only-republican-running-for-a-seat-in-congress
We have a president who sure does display a ton of far-right politics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politics)
-
A few quick thoughts
1. I don't buy the argument that it's "not fair" to those who paid their student loans. Sure it's not fair, but the article is making an economic argument not a moral one. Not doing something that would be good for the economy because others already paid their student loans seems like a sunk cost fallacy to me. And I say this as someone who worked three jobs at Marquette and spent most of my income on paying back my student loan debt as fast as possible. I was fortunate that my parents paid for most of tuition but still had loans to pay off after I graduated.
2. The article seems sounds in terms of the economy, but I don't think it properly takes into account the affect it would have on higher education. I think colleges and universities would suffer in the long run and it could create future problems.
3. Student loan debt is a huge problem. Arguably one of the largest facing Americans today. It needs to be addressed. The solution however won't be as simple as "cancel all student loan debt." It also won't be as simple as "cut university employee salaries by 30%". It's somewhere in the middle and will require cuts from both "sides." I think there is room for some student loan forgiveness as well as some restructuring by colleges and universities to lower the cost of tuition.
4. The real long term solution to this problem is education. 17 and 18 year olds are expected to pick colleges, decide majors, and sign loans without a true understanding of the debt they are taking on and what it will take to pay it back. Theoretically, the parents should be guiding them but the parents are often lacking the understanding as well. I was fortunate enough to have two parents who went to college and took out student loans to help me understand what I was signing up for. My wife? She was the first in her family to go to college. They had no idea what the implications were when she decided to go to a small liberal arts college that no one had ever heard of. High schools need to offer education on student loans in home ec and economic classes (and require them). Or at very least have college advisers who are trained on student loans. I know my high school didn't have anything like that.
-
this is the best you can come up with? you know i would absolutely be pummeled for trying to make the parallel argument-nice one
Sometimes I think you could just string together random words from a dictionary and make more coherent posts.
-
This is where I assume you are going to make the most basic of all economics mistakes ... thinking it is all about relative costs (how much it costs to run an engineering department versus a music department). It is never about costs. It is about the relative opportunity a degree affords one.
Georgetown tackled this exact subject
https://cew.georgetown.edu/cew-reports/whats-it-worth-the-economic-value-of-college-majors/
They find that college degrees have a wide variety of income potential. That is how tuition should be set. And yes, engineering and computer science will be multiples of poetry or music, not 20% like U of I does.
Forgetful, once the "value" of a degree is set, then you "force" the costs to fit in that constraint.
\
This is some elite level goalpost shifting.
You started this by (wrongly) claiming that poetry majors were subsidizing the tuition of engineering majors. Forgetful and I showed this not to be the case, and rather than actually support your claim, you've "pivoted" to making this about future earnings potential.
That's all well and good, but what does future earnings potential have to do with who's paying for the tuition today? Nothing, of course. You just can't ever admit you're wrong.
Though I'd be curious how you set the "value" of a degree. Some engineers make seven figures in Silicon Valley. Some make $60,000 working at the municipal sewage plant. Some fine arts majors work behind a coffee counter. Others makes $30 million a year in Hollywood or earn six figures a week by creating a Broadway hit. Some business majors become assistant managers at Kroger. Others become CEOs at Fortune 100 companies. Some law school grads become underpaid public defenders. Others become multimillionaires by suing tobacco companies.
-
This is where I assume you are going to make the most basic of all economics mistakes ... thinking it is all about relative costs (how much it costs to run an engineering department versus a music department). It is never about costs. It is about the relative opportunity a degree affords one.
Georgetown tackled this exact subject
https://cew.georgetown.edu/cew-reports/whats-it-worth-the-economic-value-of-college-majors/
They find that college degrees have a wide variety of income potential. That is how tuition should be set. And yes, engineering and computer science will be multiples of poetry or music, not 20% like U of I does.
Forgetful, once the "value" of a degree is set, then you "force" the costs to fit in that constraint.
Ok, now set the value. Do you use immediate employment values or long term earnings?
Long-term liberal arts majors make the same or more than professional or pre-professional degrees.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/good-news-liberal-arts-majors-your-peers-probably-wont-outearn-you-forever-1473645902 (https://www.wsj.com/articles/good-news-liberal-arts-majors-your-peers-probably-wont-outearn-you-forever-1473645902)
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/01/22/see-how-liberal-arts-grads-really-fare-report-examines-long-term-data (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/01/22/see-how-liberal-arts-grads-really-fare-report-examines-long-term-data)
And I cannot provide numbers for MU. I don't have those numbers. I do have numbers for other Universities, but I am not permitted to disclose them.
-
I've told you this many times. You do not understand anything about the education industry. You repeatedly state false information, make false assumptions, and not surprisingly, come up with false conclusions. I've tried to correct you in the past, but you refuse to actually listen.
Surprise!
-
"Republicans more conservative. The middle is gone. "
not taking any positions here, but just my take-
i wish this were true, but today's republicans may not even meet the standards of the old kennedy democrats. i call today's republicans, democrat-lite. the middle is long and strong=the independents
In your view today's Repubs are to the LEFT of Kennedy?
And you wonder why you are laughed at.
-
While agree there's a big difference, if those want to get out of student debt, allow a bankrupt option. Credit penalties apply, assets can be liquidated and cosigners are called to the floor as well.
With that, start cancelling student loan debt. However, writing off debt with no regard to the credit establishment is quite possibly the worst, most unamerican idealism ever.
+1. This should be obvious to anyone who gives it a scintilla of thought. Distressing that it's not.
-
Ok, now set the value. Do you use immediate employment values or long term earnings?
Long-term liberal arts majors make the same or more than professional or pre-professional degrees.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/good-news-liberal-arts-majors-your-peers-probably-wont-outearn-you-forever-1473645902 (https://www.wsj.com/articles/good-news-liberal-arts-majors-your-peers-probably-wont-outearn-you-forever-1473645902)
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/01/22/see-how-liberal-arts-grads-really-fare-report-examines-long-term-data (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/01/22/see-how-liberal-arts-grads-really-fare-report-examines-long-term-data)
And I cannot provide numbers for MU. I don't have those numbers. I do have numbers for other Universities, but I am not permitted to disclose them.
Read the link, it answers your questions
And I love the “I would like to tell you but I would have to kill you” answer.
But it does not matter, how much STEM makes for a school irrelevant to this discussion, you ignorance to economics is why you think it matters. What matters is the readings potential of a major, not how much it costs to pay professors and heat the buildings.
-
\
This is some elite level goalpost shifting.
You started this by (wrongly) claiming that poetry majors were subsidizing the tuition of engineering majors. Forgetful and I showed this not to be the case, and rather than actually support your claim, you've "pivoted" to making this about future earnings potential.
That's all well and good, but what does future earnings potential have to do with who's paying for the tuition today? Nothing, of course. You just can't ever admit you're wrong.
Though I'd be curious how you set the "value" of a degree. Some engineers make seven figures in Silicon Valley. Some make $60,000 working at the municipal sewage plant. Some fine arts majors work behind a coffee counter. Others makes $30 million a year in Hollywood or earn six figures a week by creating a Broadway hit. Some business majors become assistant managers at Kroger. Others become CEOs at Fortune 100 companies. Some law school grads become underpaid public defenders. Others become multimillionaires by suing tobacco companies.
You use goal shifting when you lose an argument.
The link answers all your question if you would bother reading it. It breaks down majors hundreds of ways and assigns value to them. That value is not reflected in how schools set tuition. So yes, it exactly shows that some majors have less earnings capabilities than others. So yes poetry is overcharged for tuition while engineers are undercharged. Hence, poetry majors are subsidizing engineers.
-
Read the link, it answers your questions
And I love the “I would like to tell you but I would have to kill you” answer.
But it does not matter, how much STEM makes for a school irrelevant to this discussion, you ignorance to economics is why you think it matters. What matters is the readings potential of a major, not how much it costs to pay professors and heat the buildings.
Well, you could decide to believe people that actually work in a field, and have seen the numbers, or continue to spout uninformed nonsense. Don't worry, I know which one you like to pick.
Now, for your other tidbit. You assume I don't know economics, you are wrong. You also assume that the people making decisions in academia do not know economics, you are wrong. Universities have been being run by economists for quite some time.
Now, your idea on earnings potential. There are so many reasons that will not work.
For instance, How do you deal with people changing majors? What about students who enroll as undecided?
There are ways around these issues (and others), but dealing with them (right now), would increase costs more than they would affect profits. Meaning it would lead to a net increase in tuition across the board.
-
A few quick thoughts
1. I don't buy the argument that it's "not fair" to those who paid their student loans. Sure it's not fair, but the article is making an economic argument not a moral one. Not doing something that would be good for the economy because others already paid their student loans seems like a sunk cost fallacy to me. And I say this as someone who worked three jobs at Marquette and spent most of my income on paying back my student loan debt as fast as possible. I was fortunate that my parents paid for most of tuition but still had loans to pay off after I graduated.
2. The article seems sounds in terms of the economy, but I don't think it properly takes into account the affect it would have on higher education. I think colleges and universities would suffer in the long run and it could create future problems.
3. Student loan debt is a huge problem. Arguably one of the largest facing Americans today. It needs to be addressed. The solution however won't be as simple as "cancel all student loan debt." It also won't be as simple as "cut university employee salaries by 30%". It's somewhere in the middle and will require cuts from both "sides." I think there is room for some student loan forgiveness as well as some restructuring by colleges and universities to lower the cost of tuition.
4. The real long term solution to this problem is education. 17 and 18 year olds are expected to pick colleges, decide majors, and sign loans without a true understanding of the debt they are taking on and what it will take to pay it back. Theoretically, the parents should be guiding them but the parents are often lacking the understanding as well. I was fortunate enough to have two parents who went to college and took out student loans to help me understand what I was signing up for. My wife? She was the first in her family to go to college. They had no idea what the implications were when she decided to go to a small liberal arts college that no one had ever heard of. High schools need to offer education on student loans in home ec and economic classes (and require them). Or at very least have college advisers who are trained on student loans. I know my high school didn't have anything like that.
Kids (if you want to term them that) have to go from asking permission to use the bathroom to making (for some) the biggest decision of their lives. Bananas
-
I am not pretending to be anything. I am a registered Democrat and have voted Democrat for president in every election. The Democrat party today is not centrist, at least not by historical norms. The GOP is definitely not centrist as they move further right. In the 70's and 80's the parties were more closely aligned than they are today. That is when I began voting. The primaries and special interest groups are pulling the most extreme of each party to the forefront and moderates cannot win. Watch some videos of Schumer on immigration from less than 6 years ago vs today, they are two totally different people with completely different messages. Watch some videos of Republican Senators and Reps and it is the same thing. They pander to their extremes now because that is where the energy and voters are.
The other person is correct, Reagan would not survive a GOP primary. Nixon and Ike could not either. On our side, Mondale, Carter and Kennedy couldn't either. Mondale's father could, but not Mondale who abandoned the New Deal. That leaves us oldies either in a party that is dramatically different than when we joined, or the choice to leave and become an independent.
False equivalence, commonly invoked by modern conservatives as justification for their hard move to the right. But you're a dem... lolz.
-
Kids (if you want to term them that) have to go from asking permission to use the bathroom to making (for some) the biggest decision of their lives. Bananas
Yep. That's where responsible parents need to step in and give advice, whether it's wanted or not. At the very least when they're looking at different schools and majors, run a few numbers, talk to them about the difference between $30,000 of debt and $100,000 in terms of the monthly bite out of their paychecks, etc. And talk about frugal living habits, like actually using that stove in their apartment instead of getting fast food every day. We had some difficult talks with our daughters, and while they didn't like it at the time, they both thanked us later.
I loved the slogan the U of Minnesota financial aid office used when my daughter started school there: "Live like a student now, so you won't have to live like a student later."
-
False equivalence, commonly invoked by modern conservatives as justification for their hard move to the right. But you're a dem... lolz.
He's clearly Chicos. Dude is fit for a straight jacket. Even pretending to be a Democrat to try to move people to the right.
-
He's clearly Chicos. Dude is fit for a straight jacket. Even pretending to be a Democrat to try to move people to the right.
What? You don't buy the "I'm part of the Democrat party, and the Democrat party is just too crazy lefty for me" shtick?
-
He's clearly Chicos. Dude is fit for a straight jacket. Even pretending to be a Democrat to try to move people to the right.
Ah, didn't realize that but makes sense. I guess it's an improvement from the time(s) he pretended to be black.
-
Ah, didn't realize that but makes sense. I guess it's an improvement from the time(s) he pretended to be black.
Nothing will ever top the time he pretended to be two guys who kind of knew one another (and may or may not have held a beer summit).
-
Congrats to Chicos' kid for getting into MU.
-
Nothing will ever top the time he pretended to be two guys who kind of knew one another (and may or may not have held a beer summit).
give him time
-
In your view today's Repubs are to the LEFT of Kennedy?
And you wonder why you are laughed at.
"but today's republicans MAY not even meet the standards of the old kennedy democrats. i call today's republicans, democrat-lite. the middle is long and strong=the independents
your attempts to twist my comment into something you can turn around and then try to humiliate me with is so damn shallow-
this message board has been absolutely hijacked by the good ole boys club. listen smith, if it's you and your ilk that are laughing at me, that makes me smile. you guys are so alinsky-like. personalize, polarize and attack. i've tried to have some decent, civil conversations and anytime a mistake is made, a different opinion is had, some light hearted comment is made that is misunderstood, you guys(and you know who you are) attack. with the exception of a few still here, you guys are accomplishing what you set out to do-own this board. congratulations on creating your little circle jerk
-
A few quick thoughts
3. Student loan debt is a huge problem. Arguably one of the largest facing Americans today. It needs to be addressed. The solution however won't be as simple as "cancel all student loan debt." It also won't be as simple as "cut university employee salaries by 30%". It's somewhere in the middle and will require cuts from both "sides." I think there is room for some student loan forgiveness as well as some restructuring by colleges and universities to lower the cost of tuition.
4. The real long term solution to this problem is education. 17 and 18 year olds are expected to pick colleges, decide majors, and sign loans without a true understanding of the debt they are taking on and what it will take to pay it back. Theoretically, the parents should be guiding them but the parents are often lacking the understanding as well. I was fortunate enough to have two parents who went to college and took out student loans to help me understand what I was signing up for. My wife? She was the first in her family to go to college. They had no idea what the implications were when she decided to go to a small liberal arts college that no one had ever heard of. High schools need to offer education on student loans in home ec and economic classes (and require them). Or at very least have college advisers who are trained on student loans. I know my high school didn't have anything like that.
Brother TAMU, a couple of points:
1) I was on the Dad (and Mom) consignment plan to Marquette. I was fortunate, not just that my parents could afford college for us but also that my parents understood the value of what they gave me and my brothers and sisters -- all while maintaining a strong giving commitment to Marquette and other agencies. They knew that for their children to be successful, college was essential. Marquette was selected because my Dad went to MU and had an incredible experience.
2) I'm not a big fan of cancelling student debt. But if you're going to do it, think about a social service commitment, such as the Peace Corps or VISTA, as a requirement. Yeah, affluent clowns could avoid this but doing the social service thing for many would expose them to things many haven't seen and make dent in some of America's social and political problems.
3) The world needs poets, philosophers, writers, sociologists, artists, musicians and whole lot of people who don't know the difference between software in their linen closets and software in their iPhones. But going into debt big enough to equal what one incurs to own a home is absurd. I don't care what your major is, taking on 50% of your probable first year salary in debt payments is not reasonable economic behavior and it means you're not going to be part of the middle class until you are 40. I agree, Brother TAMU, that counseling needs to address this.
4) I have an undergraduate Journalism major. Before I went off to try to be the next Woodward or Bernstein (Catholic style, of course), my father pulled me into our study and told me what a noble profession Journalism was. He then pointed to his and Mom's house, which was pretty nice (he did reasonably well) and asked, "do you want this?" He made it clear that while I would never want for day-to-day expenses (obviously, he had no clue what was coming in journalism), he also made it clear that I wasn't going to be rich. Six years after I was graduated Marquette, I enrolled in an MBA program and 11 years after I was graduated from Marquette, I left Journalism forever. Dad was right on the money and I'd rather eat than, as one Journalism professor called it, "pursue the truth!" Too many people don't have a Dad as wise as mine, though in fairness, my Dad never understood that Journalism could be a platform into something else.
-
"but today's republicans MAY not even meet the standards of the old kennedy democrats. i call today's republicans, democrat-lite. the middle is long and strong=the independents
your attempts to twist my comment into something you can turn around and then try to humiliate me with is so damn shallow-
Then what ARE you trying to say if not that? I'll admit, I have a difficult time trying to understand your posts 90% of the time.
-
Workhouse for those who do not pay their debts!
-
Political post of the year on scoop. I agree with what you say
Thank you. Apparently my comments touched a nerve with some here, which is surprising. Anyone that is my age knows the GOP has gone far right and our party to the left, especially in the last few years.
The Washington Post, perhaps no better paper on US politics, wrote of this late last year using Pew data compiled since the mid 1990's. The charts show the pull to the right and left by both parties, what is there to argue? Shrug.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/10/05/the-remarkably-fast-liberalization-of-the-democratic-party/?utm_term=.3ba814bad8e6
Nate Silver led a discussion on this last month on five thirty eight. Neither party holds the same tolerance for the positions they held in the 70's when I began to vote. It used to be both parties were very closely aligned, now they are as polarized as they have been in nearly 100 years as each has moved further from the center. I didn't realize this was a controversial statement, let alone anything short of what political experts appear to agree on. I will remain a Democrat until I die, but it isn't the same party I registered for and that isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it is different. My Rockefeller Republican friends say the same of their party. At Christmas my daughter upon her return from school explained some of today's issues, times have changed more than I can ever remember.
-
Thank you. Apparently my comments touched a nerve with some here, which is surprising. Anyone that is my age knows the GOP has gone far right and our party to the left, especially in the last few years.
The Washington Post, perhaps no better paper on US politics, wrote of this late last year using Pew data compiled since the mid 1990's. The charts show the pull to the right and left by both parties, what is there to argue? Shrug.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/10/05/the-remarkably-fast-liberalization-of-the-democratic-party/?utm_term=.3ba814bad8e6
Nate Silver led a discussion on this last month on five thirty eight. Neither party holds the same tolerance for the positions they held in the 70's when I began to vote. It used to be both parties were very closely aligned, now they are as polarized as they have been in nearly 100 years as each has moved further from the center. I didn't realize this was a controversial statement, let alone anything short of what political experts appear to agree on. I will remain a Democrat until I die, but it isn't the same party I registered for and that isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it is different. My Rockefeller Republican friends say the same of their party. At Christmas my daughter upon her return from school explained some of today's issues, times have changed more than I can ever remember.
I wish there was more of a middle then a Libertarian. If I vote rep now I have to not believe in birthcontrol or health care. If I vote Dem I have to be for PC safe spaces and gun control.
-
Thank you. Apparently my comments touched a nerve with some here, which is surprising. Anyone that is my age knows the GOP has gone far right and our party to the left, especially in the last few years.
The Washington Post, perhaps no better paper on US politics, wrote of this late last year using Pew data compiled since the mid 1990's. The charts show the pull to the right and left by both parties, what is there to argue? Shrug.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/10/05/the-remarkably-fast-liberalization-of-the-democratic-party/?utm_term=.3ba814bad8e6
Nate Silver led a discussion on this last month on five thirty eight. Neither party holds the same tolerance for the positions they held in the 70's when I began to vote. It used to be both parties were very closely aligned, now they are as polarized as they have been in nearly 100 years as each has moved further from the center. I didn't realize this was a controversial statement, let alone anything short of what political experts appear to agree on. I will remain a Democrat until I die, but it isn't the same party I registered for and that isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it is different. My Rockefeller Republican friends say the same of their party. At Christmas my daughter upon her return from school explained some of today's issues, times have changed more than I can ever remember.
Do you have any qualms with the fact that it's your generation that led our nation to this political climate?
-
Do you have any qualms with the fact that it's your generation that led our nation to this political climate?
The generation after mine eats tide pods, mine created safe spaces and SJW. Am I to blame?
-
Thank you. Apparently my comments touched a nerve with some here, which is surprising. Anyone that is my age knows the GOP has gone far right and our party to the left, especially in the last few years.
The Washington Post, perhaps no better paper on US politics, wrote of this late last year using Pew data compiled since the mid 1990's. The charts show the pull to the right and left by both parties, what is there to argue? Shrug.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/10/05/the-remarkably-fast-liberalization-of-the-democratic-party/?utm_term=.3ba814bad8e6
Nate Silver led a discussion on this last month on five thirty eight. Neither party holds the same tolerance for the positions they held in the 70's when I began to vote. It used to be both parties were very closely aligned, now they are as polarized as they have been in nearly 100 years as each has moved further from the center. I didn't realize this was a controversial statement, let alone anything short of what political experts appear to agree on. I will remain a Democrat until I die, but it isn't the same party I registered for and that isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it is different. My Rockefeller Republican friends say the same of their party. At Christmas my daughter upon her return from school explained some of today's issues, times have changed more than I can ever remember.
You're Chicos. Why won't you address this you sociopath?
You could not be more obvious.
-
The generation after mine eats tide pods, mine created safe spaces and SJW. Am I to blame?
Mature, "professional", career-politicians vs teenagers or coming-of-age young adults. Seems like a solid comparison.
Though, I will grant that perhaps I am making statements too early. Should wait to judge generations vs each other at the same time in their lives.
However, I didn't make any such comparisons. I simply asked about the results as we know them for the group in charge who has actually led to this situation. Thanks for the "whataboutism" though
-
The generation after mine eats tide pods, mine created safe spaces and SJW. Am I to blame?
What's wrong with safe spaces and SJWs?
-
What's wrong with safe spaces and SJWs?
It's overdone and used as a crutch or disability instead of it's intended goal.
-
Brother TAMU, a couple of points:
1) I was on the Dad (and Mom) consignment plan to Marquette. I was fortunate, not just that my parents could afford college for us but also that my parents understood the value of what they gave me and my brothers and sisters -- all while maintaining a strong giving commitment to Marquette and other agencies. They knew that for their children to be successful, college was essential. Marquette was selected because my Dad went to MU and had an incredible experience.
2) I'm not a big fan of cancelling student debt. But if you're going to do it, think about a social service commitment, such as the Peace Corps or VISTA, as a requirement. Yeah, affluent clowns could avoid this but doing the social service thing for many would expose them to things many haven't seen and make dent in some of America's social and political problems.
3) The world needs poets, philosophers, writers, sociologists, artists, musicians and whole lot of people who don't know the difference between software in their linen closets and software in their iPhones. But going into debt big enough to equal what one incurs to own a home is absurd. I don't care what your major is, taking on 50% of your probable first year salary in debt payments is not reasonable economic behavior and it means you're not going to be part of the middle class until you are 40. I agree, Brother TAMU, that counseling needs to address this.
4) I have an undergraduate Journalism major. Before I went off to try to be the next Woodward or Bernstein (Catholic style, of course), my father pulled me into our study and told me what a noble profession Journalism was. He then pointed to his and Mom's house, which was pretty nice (he did reasonably well) and asked, "do you want this?" He made it clear that while I would never want for day-to-day expenses (obviously, he had no clue what was coming in journalism), he also made it clear that I wasn't going to be rich. Six years after I was graduated Marquette, I enrolled in an MBA program and 11 years after I was graduated from Marquette, I left Journalism forever. Dad was right on the money and I'd rather eat than, as one Journalism professor called it, "pursue the truth!" Too many people don't have a Dad as wise as mine, though in fairness, my Dad never understood that Journalism could be a platform into something else.
I really like this post, dg (not that you were polling for opinions).
I very much like the idea of public service in exchange for canceling student debt.
Less fond of Deferment Don's plan to pay for his 9-figure tax cuts for billionaires, fortification of the Military Industrial Complex, wall (that Mexico was supposed to pay for), weak-arse infrastructure package and other schemes on the backs of college students, poor people and local municipalities.
-
What's wrong with safe spaces and SJWs?
I don't know how much your in the field compared to office on the Title 9 stuff, but safe spaces and SJW are becoming huge hindrances in young college students ability to perform.
An antedote: In Whitewater last semester a group of 27 students who protested for 3 days because not enough black professors taught in Whitewater asked for an extension on their exams because they didn't have enough time to study. It was granted.
Try that in the real world.
-
An antedote: In Whitewater last semester a group of 27 students who protested for 3 days because not enough black professors taught in Whitewater asked for an extension on their exams because they didn't have enough time to study. It was granted.
That didn't happen.
-
Huge difference ...
Bankruptcy law is set. The lender understands this is a possibility going into the loan.
Cancellation is changing the rules after the fact.
Also in bankruptcy, the lender gets the opportunity to take the assets or tell you how to manage them. Cancellation allows you to walk without consequences.
Nailed it. This possibility is priced into the interest rate on the loan. If we allow the possibility to walk away from a student loan, don't be surprised when student loan interest rates increase.
-
Do you have any qualms with the fact that it's your generation that led our nation to this political climate?
I always have concern when people try to blame something on a "generation" because every generation is a heterogeneous mix of different people, with different income and education levels, political and social beliefs, ethnic backgrounds and the like. I might strongly disagree with something that happened during my "generation," and may have done everything in my power to oppose it. Should I feel guilty because my "generation" allowed it to occur?
And even though researchers like to put "generations" in handy boxes like Baby Boomers, Gen X, Gen Y, a society is really just a continuous mix of people being born, dying, immigrating and emigrating, with no bright line demarcations.
-
Brother TAMU, a couple of points:
1) I was on the Dad (and Mom) consignment plan to Marquette. I was fortunate, not just that my parents could afford college for us but also that my parents understood the value of what they gave me and my brothers and sisters -- all while maintaining a strong giving commitment to Marquette and other agencies. They knew that for their children to be successful, college was essential. Marquette was selected because my Dad went to MU and had an incredible experience.
2) I'm not a big fan of cancelling student debt. But if you're going to do it, think about a social service commitment, such as the Peace Corps or VISTA, as a requirement. Yeah, affluent clowns could avoid this but doing the social service thing for many would expose them to things many haven't seen and make dent in some of America's social and political problems.
3) The world needs poets, philosophers, writers, sociologists, artists, musicians and whole lot of people who don't know the difference between software in their linen closets and software in their iPhones. But going into debt big enough to equal what one incurs to own a home is absurd. I don't care what your major is, taking on 50% of your probable first year salary in debt payments is not reasonable economic behavior and it means you're not going to be part of the middle class until you are 40. I agree, Brother TAMU, that counseling needs to address this.
4) I have an undergraduate Journalism major. Before I went off to try to be the next Woodward or Bernstein (Catholic style, of course), my father pulled me into our study and told me what a noble profession Journalism was. He then pointed to his and Mom's house, which was pretty nice (he did reasonably well) and asked, "do you want this?" He made it clear that while I would never want for day-to-day expenses (obviously, he had no clue what was coming in journalism), he also made it clear that I wasn't going to be rich. Six years after I was graduated Marquette, I enrolled in an MBA program and 11 years after I was graduated from Marquette, I left Journalism forever. Dad was right on the money and I'd rather eat than, as one Journalism professor called it, "pursue the truth!" Too many people don't have a Dad as wise as mine, though in fairness, my Dad never understood that Journalism could be a platform into something else.
I am a big fan of the Public Service requirement for loan forgiveness. In fact, my wife and I have been planning on taking advantage of PSLF (Public Service Loan Forgiveness program). It requires 10 years of public service and on time payments of student loans in exchange for complete debt forgiveness. Unfortunately, it has been in DeVos' crosshairs since she got the job and Trump's current proposal for the 2019 budget eliminates it entirely. This is is the first year that people are set to become eligible to apply for the forgiveness and now after 10 years of working towards this it may be pulled out from under them.
-
Don't buy stuff you can't afford, hey?
-
I am a big fan of the Public Service requirement for loan forgiveness. In fact, my wife and I have been planning on taking advantage of PSLF (Public Service Loan Forgiveness program). It requires 10 years of public service and on time payments of student loans in exchange for complete debt forgiveness. Unfortunately, it has been in DeVos' crosshairs since she got the job and Trump's current proposal for the 2019 budget eliminates it entirely. This is is the first year that people are set to become eligible to apply for the forgiveness and now after 10 years of working towards this it may be pulled out from under them.
Would they not all be grandfathered in?
-
I am a big fan of the Public Service requirement for loan forgiveness. In fact, my wife and I have been planning on taking advantage of PSLF (Public Service Loan Forgiveness program). It requires 10 years of public service and on time payments of student loans in exchange for complete debt forgiveness. Unfortunately, it has been in DeVos' crosshairs since she got the job and Trump's current proposal for the 2019 budget eliminates it entirely. This is is the first year that people are set to become eligible to apply for the forgiveness and now after 10 years of working towards this it may be pulled out from under them.
I hope that you haven't made too many plans around this.
Even before DeVos came to power, people were having problems with the program, e.g., the loan servicer saying "oh, you didn't fill out Document X, it turns out that you have to start all over, i.e., your past three years of payments don't count toward the PSLF."
If I have time later today, I will try to post a link or two (though they should be toward the top of a simple Google search)
-
I hope that you haven't made too many plans around this.
Even before DeVos came to power, people were having problems with the program, e.g., the loan servicer saying "oh, you didn't fill out Document X, it turns out that you have to start all over, i.e., your past three years of payments don't count toward the PSLF."
If I have time later today, I will try to post a link or two (though they should be toward the top of a simple Google search)
Of course. Just like I'm sure the work welfare requirements ( or other work related assistance programs) will function. Free labor and no cost.
-
Question.... how many of you can explain the concept of "moral hazard" without a Google?
-
Would they not all be grandfathered in?
Nope. You can only apply after you have completed the 10 years. It was created 10 years ago so this is the first year that people are applying. I have checked recently, but last I heard DeVos had yet to approve any application and has been delaying.
-
I hope that you haven't made too many plans around this.
Even before DeVos came to power, people were having problems with the program, e.g., the loan servicer saying "oh, you didn't fill out Document X, it turns out that you have to start all over, i.e., your past three years of payments don't count toward the PSLF."
If I have time later today, I will try to post a link or two (though they should be toward the top of a simple Google search)
We are aware of all of this. We've been keeping up to date on it and making sure every i is dotted and t is crossed. In the end, it will likely be moot if it gets taken off the books entirely.
-
We are aware of all of this. We've been keeping up to date on it and making sure every i lower-case j is dotted and t is crossed. In the end, it will likely be moot if it gets taken off the books entirely.
(https://i.makeagif.com/media/4-29-2015/2dkGaH.gif)
-
Question.... how many of you can explain the concept of "moral hazard" without a Google?
I hope the "cancelling student loans is just like allowing people to declare bankruptcy" crowd are just ignorant of the concept. I say hope because the alternative is really scary.
-
Question.... how many of you can explain the concept of "moral hazard" without a Google?
I hope the "cancelling student loans is just like allowing people to declare bankruptcy" crowd are just ignorant of the concept. I say hope because the alternative is really scary.
(https://m.popkey.co/285102/bgOwV.gif)
-
(https://m.popkey.co/285102/bgOwV.gif)
It never ceases to amaze me how financially ignorant even many highly intelligent people are.
I was recently involved in a discussion on whether it was better to give out raises or bonuses to employees. There are several arguments each way, but I had someone insist that the main reason raises are better is because you pay more income tax on a bonus than on a salary increase. I could not convince this person otherwise.
-
It never ceases to amaze me how financially ignorant even many highly intelligent people are.
I was recently involved in a discussion on whether it was better to give out raises or bonuses to employees. There are several arguments each way, but I had someone insist that the main reason raises are better is because you pay more income tax on a bonus than on a salary increase. I could not convince this person otherwise.
Yeah that doesn't make any sense.
The biggest disconnect on fiscal policy is the way that we load so many different subjective judgments into what should be a fairly objective analysis. Taking a step back, I don't think that cancelling student debt is inherently a more shriek-inducing step than a lot of the other fracked up, nonsensical economic policies we already have. But the enemy you know, eh? That's certainly not a reason to just go ahead and do it, but I think it would only be about a 6/10 on the "this is Americuh" moral outrage scale.
-
I hope the "cancelling student loans is just like allowing people to declare bankruptcy" crowd are just ignorant of the concept. I say hope because the alternative is really scary.
Slightly on an off but similar note, I am a strong advocate of requiring colleges and universities to carry a percentage of student debt on their own balance sheet (something in the order of 5-10%) and - under certain circumstances - allowing discharge of student loans in bankruptcy. IOW, moral hazard goes both ways.... put a portion of the student debt risk on the institutions and watch how fast student loan defaults will plummet.
As it stands, colleges and universities keep spending more and more and pay for it by charging the students more and more because they know they the students can simply keep borrowing more and more. That cycle - well not really a cycle as a spiral - needs to stop.
-
Slightly on an off but similar note, I am a strong advocate of requiring colleges and universities to carry a percentage of student debt on their own balance sheet (something in the order of 5-10%) and - under certain circumstances - allowing discharge of student loans in bankruptcy. IOW, moral hazard goes both ways.... put a portion of the student debt risk on the institutions and watch how fast student loan defaults will plummet.
As it stands, colleges and universities keep spending more and more and pay for it by charging the students more and more because they know they the students can simply keep borrowing more and more. That cycle - well not really a cycle as a spiral - needs to stop.
I thought I heard at one point that universities had an "account" with the US Govt that student loans to their school were funded, and repayments of those loans went back to their account. That way, the schools were incentivized to churn out students that could actually pay them back.
Either I was misinformed, or the rules changed, because there is no way those crappy for-profit schools would have survived under that model.
-
Do you have any qualms with the fact that it's your generation that led our nation to this political climate?
My generation? Those are broad strokes. Technology did some of it. The marketplace tends to fill voids. In my view the 24/7 news cycle has been terrible for the political climate. Social media, not part of my generation, has made it even worse. We are more siloed than I can remember, the middle doesn't really exist and the news is delivered to a targeted audience accordingly.
Let me give you some examples. I can watch CNN and MSNBC and find very little on a strong economy. Very little on the war against terror. Some of this is because we have a buffoon as President that drives the news, but I have a game I play. Insert Biden for Trump, and how would the news react? Differently? Yes, and it is pronounced.
I can watch Fox, and the reverse happens. One finds very little on the Mueller investigation, sexual scandals by Trump (much like MSM did with Clinton). As a result, people retreat to their areas of comfort.
I noticed the Washington Post article with 20 years of data showing the left becoming more liberal, the right becoming more conservative as I have seen in my life, was not commented at all. Instead attacks. This was caused by my generation? Are people of all generations not involved in the political climate of today? My opinion, you comment is broadstrokes and doesn't properly capture how people have been divided by politicians, technology, corporations and it has been done on all sides.
-
My generation? Those are broad strokes. Technology did some of it. The marketplace tends to fill voids. In my view the 24/7 news cycle has been terrible for the political climate. Social media, not part of my generation, has made it even worse. We are more siloed than I can remember, the middle doesn't really exist and the news is delivered to a targeted audience accordingly.
Let me give you some examples. I can watch CNN and MSNBC and find very little on a strong economy. Very little on the war against terror. Some of this is because we have a buffoon as President that drives the news, but I have a game I play. Insert Biden for Trump, and how would the news react? Differently? Yes, and it is pronounced.
I can watch Fox, and the reverse happens. One finds very little on the Mueller investigation, sexual scandals by Trump (much like MSM did with Clinton). As a result, people retreat to their areas of comfort.
I noticed the Washington Post article with 20 years of data showing the left becoming more liberal, the right becoming more conservative as I have seen in my life, was not commented at all. Instead attacks. This was caused by my generation? Are people of all generations not involved in the political climate of today? My opinion, you comment is broadstrokes and doesn't properly capture how people have been divided by politicians, technology, corporations and it has been done on all sides.
I was simply referring to your generation being the current who are the heads of the organizations, government, etc. They are the ones setting the rules and deciding how to play the game, currently. Most of the things you mention are tools that are used.
Agreed that both sides do it. But I don't believe both sides do it equally.
-
My generation? Those are broad strokes. Technology did some of it. The marketplace tends to fill voids. In my view the 24/7 news cycle has been terrible for the political climate. Social media, not part of my generation, has made it even worse. We are more siloed than I can remember, the middle doesn't really exist and the news is delivered to a targeted audience accordingly.
Let me give you some examples. I can watch CNN and MSNBC and find very little on a strong economy. Very little on the war against terror. Some of this is because we have a buffoon as President that drives the news, but I have a game I play. Insert Biden for Trump, and how would the news react? Differently? Yes, and it is pronounced.
I can watch Fox, and the reverse happens. One finds very little on the Mueller investigation, sexual scandals by Trump (much like MSM did with Clinton). As a result, people retreat to their areas of comfort.
I noticed the Washington Post article with 20 years of data showing the left becoming more liberal, the right becoming more conservative as I have seen in my life, was not commented at all. Instead attacks. This was caused by my generation? Are people of all generations not involved in the political climate of today? My opinion, you comment is broadstrokes and doesn't properly capture how people have been divided by politicians, technology, corporations and it has been done on all sides.
Isn't it easier to just say, "Hi my name is Jamie, and I have an unhealthy obsession with muscoop."?
-
I was simply referring to your generation being the current who are the heads of the organizations, government, etc. They are the ones setting the rules and deciding how to play the game, currently. Most of the things you mention are tools that are used.
Agreed that both sides do it. But I don't believe both sides do it equally.
Again, broad strokes. There are people of all ages that are heads of organizations, government agencies. Some are my gen, some are Gen X, some Xenniels, and now even some Gen Y creeping in.
Once we start to die off and leave our money to our kids, we will be loved again. Ha ha
-
Again, broad strokes. There are people of all ages that are heads of organizations, government agencies. Some are my gen, some are Gen X, some Xenniels, and now even some Gen Y creeping in.
Once we start to die off and leave our money to our kids, we will be loved again. Ha ha
Truth! ;)
-
Trump Administration Looking at Bankruptcy Options for Student Debt
WASHINGTON—The Trump administration indicated Tuesday it is considering allowing more Americans to erase student debt in bankruptcy.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-looking-at-bankruptcy-options-for-student-debt-1519146215
________
The White House reads Scoop, apparently.