Agree totally with your assessment that Keith's dad was the genius.
If I was Keith's dad, I would demand full repayment of the loans, and removal of my name as a co-signer the moment he decided to go to school to learn how to be a short order cook.
And, the problem here is not so much getting the loans, or pursuing the degree, it is expecting someone else to clean up after you. Please, please plesae explain to me why student loan debt should be in any way eligible for discharge under bankruptcy? Anyone?
Are you saying why it should be? Or why it should?
It should be dischargable because it would force the lending bodies to look long and hard at who they lend to because they could risk losing their money. As it stands now they are guaranteed to get their payments so there is nothing stoping them from issuing 140,000 to individuals majoring in worthless with a minor in economicaly stupid.
I'm torn here. My Darwinian side says 'f*ck 'em, they should have known.' This is especially true with regards to law school, because out of all the people I know who are going there (I'm 22, so lots), I only know one who I don't think is headed for absolute disaster, and the law school scamblog movement has been alive and well for several years. On the other hand, these kids have been lied to their entire lives about the natural of postsecondary education in this country, especially by the Boomers. It's important to remember that this corner of the internet speaks more truth about this subject than 99% of the message out there.
Those kids have been told 'follow your bliss' their entire lives by everybody they thought they could trust. Judging them by the standards of people who were cynical enough to realize it was all BS may not be entirely fair and certainly isn't in the best interest of our society. More constructive would be putting Worthless into the hands of as many kids as we possibly could so that we can at least save the next crop.
And make the loans dischargeable, because the idea that the private lenders can make those kinds of returns virtually risk-free is absurd and immoral. Once that happens maybe the lenders can apply a little bit of sanity and tell the incoming students 'We'll lend for engineering, but we won't lend for sociology because we'll never get our money back.'
Actually, it's 8 years *after* culinary school, not 8 years *in*.
(I also question how disabled he is if he's able to live in the van - versus being a sous chef or other job?)
The problem with making the loan dischargable is that the value of the loan stays in your brain, even if you don't pay it back.
I don't think the principle should be dischargable, but making the interest/penalties dischargeable should go a long way towards helping the problem, without letting people screw over the lenders.
Student loans *should* be dischargeable, just as pretty much any other loans are. (So should back taxes, but that's even less likely to change.) There should be a minimum time before that can be done, so that a student can't declare bankruptcy on graduation, and wipe out their student loans.
Loans that were made under the current rules, however, should remain harder to discharge than normal, because the lender made them on somewhat easier terms *because* they weren't dischargeable.
I also like Instapundit's idea that the school should be a partial co-signer, on the hook for at least a few percent of the total loan, so they're more careful about who they enable to get loans.
7 comments:
Agree totally with your assessment that Keith's dad was the genius.
If I was Keith's dad, I would demand full repayment of the loans, and removal of my name as a co-signer the moment he decided to go to school to learn how to be a short order cook.
And, the problem here is not so much getting the loans, or pursuing the degree, it is expecting someone else to clean up after you. Please, please plesae explain to me why student loan debt should be in any way eligible for discharge under bankruptcy? Anyone?
I wonder how one could possibly become permanently disabled on a meal assembly line.
Are you saying why it should be? Or why it should?
It should be dischargable because it would force the lending bodies to look long and hard at who they lend to because they could risk losing their money. As it stands now they are guaranteed to get their payments so there is nothing stoping them from issuing 140,000 to individuals majoring in worthless with a minor in economicaly stupid.
I'm torn here. My Darwinian side says 'f*ck 'em, they should have known.' This is especially true with regards to law school, because out of all the people I know who are going there (I'm 22, so lots), I only know one who I don't think is headed for absolute disaster, and the law school scamblog movement has been alive and well for several years. On the other hand, these kids have been lied to their entire lives about the natural of postsecondary education in this country, especially by the Boomers. It's important to remember that this corner of the internet speaks more truth about this subject than 99% of the message out there.
Those kids have been told 'follow your bliss' their entire lives by everybody they thought they could trust. Judging them by the standards of people who were cynical enough to realize it was all BS may not be entirely fair and certainly isn't in the best interest of our society. More constructive would be putting Worthless into the hands of as many kids as we possibly could so that we can at least save the next crop.
And make the loans dischargeable, because the idea that the private lenders can make those kinds of returns virtually risk-free is absurd and immoral. Once that happens maybe the lenders can apply a little bit of sanity and tell the incoming students 'We'll lend for engineering, but we won't lend for sociology because we'll never get our money back.'
My favourite comment on that post:
"You need degrees to boil water!"
Quite clever.
Actually, it's 8 years *after* culinary school, not 8 years *in*.
(I also question how disabled he is if he's able to live in the van - versus being a sous chef or other job?)
The problem with making the loan dischargable is that the value of the loan stays in your brain, even if you don't pay it back.
I don't think the principle should be dischargable, but making the interest/penalties dischargeable should go a long way towards helping the problem, without letting people screw over the lenders.
Student loans *should* be dischargeable, just as pretty much any other loans are. (So should back taxes, but that's even less likely to change.) There should be a minimum time before that can be done, so that a student can't declare bankruptcy on graduation, and wipe out their student loans.
Loans that were made under the current rules, however, should remain harder to discharge than normal, because the lender made them on somewhat easier terms *because* they weren't dischargeable.
I also like Instapundit's idea that the school should be a partial co-signer, on the hook for at least a few percent of the total loan, so they're more careful about who they enable to get loans.
Post a Comment