Pisses me off: Student Loan Forgiveness Act of 2012 (H.R. 4170)

[rwh11385]

I also find it strange that you can't understand the illogical stance you've taken by advocating that people who fight in wars should be paid tax payer money but people who go to school should not receive any tax payer money...yet you worry that our educated population is not comparable to the rest of the world.

Our military is supreme compared to the rest of the world...given our military budget that shouldn't be a surprise. I don't understand how you're surprised where we rank in these two sectors. You can't have it both ways: both are investments. If you want to be competitive in the intellectual domain you have to be willing to invest in education of our population. If you want to be competitive in the military domain you have to be willing to invest in the militarization of our population.

The appropriate proportion of one to another is a personal opinion but it's asinine to argue against public funding for education.

I didn't say we shouldn't support secondary education via public universities, BUT WE SHOULD NOT BE SUBSIDIZING DEBT. There are plenty of ways to pay for college other than simply taking out loans. And clearly we should not be rewarding students for choosing to student in majoring in things that don't pay, going to expensive private schools, or taking longer to graduate. And there are ALREADY programs to help pay back student loan debts of those in public service! (People who support this bill are of course too lazy or stupid to find that out)

And we should as a nation not project that only a 4 year degree is the path to take, we need vocational and technical training too.

Plus, liberal arts and fine arts have a much lower contribution to economic growth than useful fields. The same shift to worthless degrees (rice pudding) and away from technical / vocational fields is what helped bring about the decline in the UK.

The government paying people to be qualified to make coffee at Starbucks is a poor investment.

[e30slidewayz]

I'll chime in on this discussion. I'm a graduate student right now. By the time I graduate, I will be over $150,000 in debt. Many of you can argue "well, that was your decision to go that route" or some other shit. However, since the year 2000, the cost of tuition and fees has doubled! MFing doubled. It sucks. I graduated in high school 2003 with my mind set on becoming a pharmacist. I never attended private colleges and the colleges I have attended are definitely not expensive comparatively to other colleges in my area. I even had the privilege of having grants and scholarship along the way. Not to mention I work like crazy. Also not to mention the job market for pharmacists has drastically fallen out compared to what it was just 3 years ago. I work as much as I can and can still barely afford my rent and food and this is with loan overage money. Much of the reason is the rising cost of education. Where as it cost around $30,000 when I graduated HS to complete pharmacy school, compare that to my debt now. Insane. The $45,520 that I could get back as result of this act doesn't nearly make up for the difference in the rising cost of education. Now, was it my decision to get an undergrad degree and then continue on to earn an MSCR/PharmD? Yes. But did I agree to have my tuition increase to twice what that of what it should be? Hell no. I think it's a nice gesture from our government to help ease the pain of what they've done for education thus far. However, other loan programs like Stafford Grad loans are taking a hit along with this. Subsidy will no longer be available, so that is taking up some of the slack from this "loan forgiveness". I read that this alone will save the government $18 billion over 10 years. So, either way, some of us are still getting screwed. I welcome any help I can get. Otherwise... I will have put over 10 years into a college education to be eating ramen noodles on a nightly basis until I get my loans repaid.

[rwh11385]

I'll chime in on this discussion. I'm a graduate student right now. By the time I graduate, I will be over $150,000 in debt. Many of you can argue "well, that was your decision to go that route" or some other shit. However, since the year 2000, the cost of tuition and fees has doubled! MFing doubled. It sucks. I graduated in high school 2003 with my mind set on becoming a pharmacist. I never attended private colleges and the colleges I have attended are definitely not expensive comparatively to other colleges in my area. I even had the privilege of having grants and scholarship along the way. Not to mention I work like crazy. Also not to mention the job market for pharmacists has drastically fallen out compared to what it was just 3 years ago. I work as much as I can and can still barely afford my rent and food and this is with loan overage money. Much of the reason is the rising cost of education. Where as it cost around $30,000 when I graduated HS to complete pharmacy school, compare that to my debt now. Insane. The $45,520 that I could get back as result of this act doesn't nearly make up for the difference in the rising cost of education. Now, was it my decision to get an undergrad degree and then continue on to earn an MSCR/PharmD? Yes. But did I agree to have my tuition increase to twice what that of what it should be? Hell no. I think it's a nice gesture from our government to help ease the pain of what they've done for education thus far. However, other loan programs like Stafford Grad loans are taking a hit along with this. Subsidy will no longer be available, so that is taking up some of the slack from this "loan forgiveness". I read that this alone will save the government $18 billion over 10 years. So, either way, some of us are still getting screwed. I welcome any help I can get. Otherwise... I will have put over 10 years into a college education to be eating ramen noodles on a nightly basis until I get my loans repaid.

Pharmacists make six figures, here is the worlds's tiniest violin. /

[rwh11385]

No, people coming out of state schools are now suffering from huge student loan debt because of slashed state budgets and the state responding by increasing state tuition. I explained this to you in my earlier post.

Those salaries you're quoting...they ticked up 3%? That's your evidence that the job market is a great payoff and the other students are choosing the wrong career paths?

No, those students you're citing as doing well making $50-60K per year are barely living above the poverty threshold. What is wrong with your math skills? Tuition is increasing at state schools by 10-12% yet income trends are only raising 3-4%. The cost to enter the job market quadruples the income return and you think that's sustainable?

The students leaving with 80K in debt are not going to private universities. They are graduating from state schools and with the degrees you are listing.

It's your faulty opinion that someone is ok raising a family on 60K per year while paying for their loans, a home, a car, and children and taxes that is the problem here, not my reading comprehension.

Can you not read? The average debt for people with student loan debt is $25K, and ONLY 1 PERCENT HAVE DEBTS ABOVE $75K.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/02/student-loan-debt-who-are-the-1/

Stick to the facts and stop making up complete bullshit.

[rwh11385]

I'm not making up complete bullshit, you just don't know what you're talking about.

Read the article you posted. The numbers you are citing are for 4 year, undergraduate degrees.

I'm sorry, but I thought you knew that teachers, economists, social workers, pharmacist, and the jail administrators I mentioned are graduate students. Those people who earn Master's and Doctorates are getting hammered by education costs and our salaries are not rising commensurate with the rising tuition.

The 4 year students aren't hit as hard because they leave quicker but they also are the students with degrees you're bitching about that can't do much more than work at a Starbucks. See, you just don't know what you're talking about and you're all pissed off without even getting the information sorted in your mind.

None of the majors I mentioned NEED graduate degrees.

If salaries don't validate the need for bachelor and graduate degrees, then they ought not to major in them and complain afterwards.

Should the government pay for everyone to get Ph.D's in exercise science?

[rwh11385]

Yes they do. You need at least a master's to teach. You need at least a master's to be a therapist or social worker. You can't dispense medicine without a graduate degree.

This should be basic knowledge. I'm sorry I didn't explain this to you clearly when I first posted. I didn't realize how ignorant you were on the topic, I thought you were trolling.

Dude, in NONE of your original posts did you mention grad degrees. And you don't need a masters to do accounting, be an engineer, be a nurse, program computer programs, etc. etc. You don't need a master's to teach in america, hell you don't even need an education degree.

I can't believe how completely obsessed you are with the government paying for degrees that the market isn't willing to pay as much as you think they are worth.

Are you complaining about pharmacist salaries?? Really?

If people KNOW social workers don't make shit, they shouldn't take out triple their annual salaries in student loans. That's just stupid.

[rwh11385]

I mean, how could I think you were serious when you posted someone making near the poverty line as a social worker or teacher and arguing that's positive evidence for your argument?

I don't think people should pay for their college solely through loans if they want to be either. Most of either I've seen in school are from well-off families and don't need loans, nor expect high salaries. (Besides of course, from their own career - usually looking for that from a husband)

If people can't afford school, they should at least major in something that is valued by the market and can repay their loans... not just do it anyway and then protest. Most of the people I know who are from less off families study things they know will provide good paying jobs.

[rwh11385]

And by what liberal math are you saying $30K is almost poverty? How many kids do you want to make affordable for a single mother working as a teacher??

Even if both parents are teachers, that is greater than median houshold income. What minimum income should the government mandate for even the least skilled careers to make you happy?

Why just college graduates? When do you want the government to stop in destroying the market economy??

And should make sure if they don't have to work during school, pay for school entirely in loans, and a brand new car loan and 2200 sq ft house too? When should the government stop making sure that everyone, regardless of life choices and job skills have a super high standard of living so liberals like you are happy?? Should ever get iPads too?

[bmwstephen]

I'll chime in on this discussion. I'm a graduate student right now. By the time I graduate, I will be over $150,000 in debt. Many of you can argue "well, that was your decision to go that route" or some other shit. However, since the year 2000, the cost of tuition and fees has doubled! MFing doubled. It sucks. I graduated in high school 2003 with my mind set on becoming a pharmacist. I never attended private colleges and the colleges I have attended are definitely not expensive comparatively to other colleges in my area. I even had the privilege of having grants and scholarship along the way. Not to mention I work like crazy. Also not to mention the job market for pharmacists has drastically fallen out compared to what it was just 3 years ago. I work as much as I can and can still barely afford my rent and food and this is with loan overage money. Much of the reason is the rising cost of education. Where as it cost around $30,000 when I graduated HS to complete pharmacy school, compare that to my debt now. Insane. The $45,520 that I could get back as result of this act doesn't nearly make up for the difference in the rising cost of education. Now, was it my decision to get an undergrad degree and then continue on to earn an MSCR/PharmD? Yes. But did I agree to have my tuition increase to twice what that of what it should be? Hell no. I think it's a nice gesture from our government to help ease the pain of what they've done for education thus far. However, other loan programs like Stafford Grad loans are taking a hit along with this. Subsidy will no longer be available, so that is taking up some of the slack from this "loan forgiveness". I read that this alone will save the government $18 billion over 10 years. So, either way, some of us are still getting screwed. I welcome any help I can get. Otherwise... I will have put over 10 years into a college education to be eating ramen noodles on a nightly basis until I get my loans repaid.

you should drop out while you are ahead to boycott the school that chose to raise its tuition. I mean what incentive does the school have to lower fees when they realize students will have guaranteed financing for their education. go on, take one for the team =D

[rwh11385]

The poverty line for a family of four is $22,000.

You can use whatever math you deem necessary, liberal or otherwise, to figure out the rest.

So you expect a single teacher pay for a family of four??

No, you can't assume a family of four and complain about only ONE of the incomes. That's moronic.

[rwh11385]

if you want to assume a two parent working household you have to take into account child care costs

You want to throw in a car loan an mortgage too like your earlier plea?

It's socially amoral for people to not have what everyone else has because they chose to make their careers in lower paying fields.

To each according to their needs, from each according to their abilities after all, that seems like your style.

[rwh11385]

So the government should make sure everyone can own a home, regardless of career or life choices? And a shiny new car too? (have you been by many schools, they don't have new cars nor nice ones usually)

so you want to assume poverty, then keep adding things to it to make your point, like food? Because poverty amount doesn't include that...

What income is acceptable to you? Regardless of ability or supply?

[rwh11385]

I'm saying you are tryin to double count food and shelter, taking poverty level and then adding more food and shelter to that.

You're trying to make your point about poverty by making it much greater than poverty

if you want teachers to be more well regarded, move to Finland

what do you mean poverty amount doesn't include that?

the poverty line is calculated off the assumption that it costs the average family three times their grocery expenditure to cover the cost of living

the poverty line is calculated off the cost of a family's food requirements.

it's clear that you really have no clue what you're talking about.


what income is acceptable to me? I think that our teachers and people who make our communities safe, and our children/women from being in abusive homes, and the people making sure parolees are following their conditions of release, I think those people shouldn't be hovering near the federal poverty line.

how much above that isn't really relevant. It looked like the bill that was quoted cut it off at 150% of the poverty line. that would include the people I'm referring to and exclude the people you keep bitching about.

[rwh11385]

Plus what about English majors, poli sci, history, humanities and art history majors? Should we guarantee them income if they choose to invest a lot in educations that the market does not value?? Where does it stop?

Why do you hate economics?

[rwh11385]

Plus, if you are only worked up about social workers and teachers, maybe you should stop being ignorant and find out that (as previously mentioned in this thread) THERE ALREADY EXISTS LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAMS FOR PUBLIC SERVICE WORKERS!

http://studentaid.ed.gov/PORTALSWebApp/students/english/PSF.jsp