Elizabeth Warren Wants to Lower Student Loans to .75%

Student's ability to pay back loans vs Bank's ability to pay back loans

FIGHT!

 

I like the spirit of her idea in tying together student and bank loan rates. To be even more fair those rates should apply to everyone. :grin:

 

Dont know why but kind of reminded me of this clip which I just saw.

http://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10...y-wrong-about-this-mind-blowing-fact-2?c=ufb1

 

Why .75%? Why not .25%? How about 0%? Mandating outcomes is so simple.

 

Students without good performance records and a realistic ability to re-pay should not be loaned tens and tens of thousands of dollars. It's pretty simple.

 

Have to agree with this post

 

Yeah, I hear you, Kojirou, but on the other hand, banks that will recklessly play with their customers' money and the federal government's money, losing trillions in speculation... maybe they shouldn't be given huge new rolls of credit either.

Warren rocks, IMO, and she's spot on here. She's going to keep shining a light on the whoring we are all made to do to Wall Street.

 

Encouraging human capital investment versus encouragement of real estate bubbles, interest rate manipulation, criminal foreclosure fraud, and frenetic consumerism.

Education reduces crime, increases political awareness, creates more positive externalities than a church full of do-gooders without the spiritual hoo-hah. Can I say the same for banks implicated in laundering money for terrorists and drug dealers?

societal values are f**king wack. You can argue the finer points of the monetary transmission mechanism with me some other time, but this statement and the spirit that embodies it is exactly what is wrong with consumer society these days.

 

Bankers are some of the most educated people in the world.

I have an idea. How about instead of letting every dim wit get a wad of cash to flunk out of college, actually reform public education.

Oh wait, that will never happen because Democrats are afraid of teacher unions.

 

Yes, and?

you know who are also some of the most educated people in the world---entrepreneurs a la Peter Thiel (Stanford Law), Elon Musk (Wharton Business), and Reid Hoffman (Stanford and Oxford). Except they're actually creating ideas with their education, instead of profiting off of others.

It's high time people stopped with their fascination about who can generate the most money. Intelligence does not equal financial ability. Moral scruples, and the will to create things and invest in human beings have gone out of the window. Instead, all people think about is what cash will come in or out---irregardless if the cash is spent educating and raising children, or starving the Third World with long-only speculation on food.

 

I'm in favor of lowering the rate because:

Student loan debt is the hardest debt to discharge
The government can garnish to get their money

The rate has never reflected the risk the banks have. Private loans often carry lower rates than 6.8% for those with good credit. I love the government handling most of the stafford loans these days.

I don't necessarily think 0.75% is right, I actually like 3.4%, which would keep up with inflation

 

So instead of helping more kids be able to apply for grants and scholarships, which they could get if they had better grades, you would rather have more kids get student loans?

 

What, in my statement, led you to believe that my fondness for investing in education precluded the increase of merit-based grants or scholarships?

perhaps my barely hidden desire for free education for all---but then again, one can always dream of the day society realizes human capital investment is good for you, me, and all.

 

Why is the public system so bad? Why not fix the public system? These loans are terrible for the future of young men and women.

 

won't lowering the cost of borrowing encourage more student debt and discourage lowering tuition?

 

I choose to believe it would be a better investment to reform public education.

 

again, what precludes this from being done in addition to further investment in said education?

 

The fact that we are in debt to our eyeballs and I chose to spend education budget working on a bigger problem then going in more debt as a country.

 

in a society that values cash above people, perhaps the urgency of giving people an incentive to learn would stop at a certain preordained point.

but maybe a more educated society would see beyond the money the value of exposing a child to the world, and lighting a flame to his or her possibilities, versus someone who made their money selling products primed to blow up to other banks.

one can only dream, i suppose.