I wonder why nobody is talking about refinancing student loans or giving some other relief to those of us who took out loans already?
It is really frustrating that this isn't an option.
It is amazing to me, the difference in interest rates that I have vs. Calvin. We graduated ONE YEAR apart!
The other part that I hate is that I've dealt with some lenders (of his and mine) that are mind-blowingly difficult, and engage in borderline unethical practices. There is no incentive for them to be reasonable or to work with customers, because we can't refi with another lender to get away from them. They've already got us. We took out all the loans as students, before assessing how they really treat customers. Now we are stuck with them for the life of the loans, which when you owe six figures collectively, really ties your hands on just "paying it off aggressively."
If my mortgage lender treated me like my SL lender does, I would refi in a heartbeat just to have the mortgage with a different lender.
It's because the lenders have incentives to fuck you over. I'm not making this up. It's a real thing. if you default, the feds pay the lender. Then the lender is allowed to sell the defaulted debt to a collection agency. In the case of Sallie Mae, their "collection agency" is a wholly owned subsidiary of Sallie Mae. That subsidiary then gets to collect on the debt. Which means Sallie Mae gets paid twice if you default, but once if you pay like you are supposed to.
I wonder why nobody is talking about refinancing student loans or giving some other relief to those of us who took out loans already?
Because the US has $16 trillion dollars of debt?
But see, many of these problems can be fixed without expensive federal programs. The above problem I just described would actually result in net savings to the feds, because taxpayers will stop being robbed blind by lenders like Sallie Mae. Nobody's interest is served by the current set up.
There's a lot of other things that can be done without costing money. Refinancing won't cost the government anything because the loans are held by a third party. It may save the government money because lower monthly payments means lower risk of default which means fewer government backed loans are being bailed out by tax payers. Same goes for other strategies which would increase the affordability of the loans -- things like allowing SL interest to be fully tax deductible at all income levels instead of capping it at $2500 for couples making less than some amount, etc.
There are also things that can be done to prevent the problem in the future that won't cost anything -- requiring better disclosures, tighter controls, etc. Requiring more compliance from universities. Requiring universities be on the hook for some percentage of loans taken out - like 20% of every SL taken out by their students, the college is on the hook. That will force them to drive down costs and admit only people that they can prepare for the work force. etc etc etc.
There is no reason why any of this has to cost the feds $$$.
Rbp, he would never plan to try to do something else (like become a lawyer). Our concern was that an agent would have the same billable hours stress as a lawyer, so the same long hours.
Susie will know more about this than me, but I do know that my friend has to deal with billable hours. I don't know if she has 1800 or 2000.
It is really frustrating that this isn't an option.
It is amazing to me, the difference in interest rates that I have vs. Calvin. We graduated ONE YEAR apart!
The other part that I hate is that I've dealt with some lenders (of his and mine) that are mind-blowingly difficult, and engage in borderline unethical practices. There is no incentive for them to be reasonable or to work with customers, because we can't refi with another lender to get away from them. They've already got us. We took out all the loans as students, before assessing how they really treat customers. Now we are stuck with them for the life of the loans, which when you owe six figures collectively, really ties your hands on just "paying it off aggressively."
If my mortgage lender treated me like my SL lender does, I would refi in a heartbeat just to have the mortgage with a different lender.
It's because the lenders have incentives to fuck you over. I'm not making this up. It's a real thing. if you default, the feds pay the lender. Then the lender is allowed to sell the defaulted debt to a collection agency. In the case of Sallie Mae, their "collection agency" is a wholly owned subsidiary of Sallie Mae. That subsidiary then gets to collect on the debt. Which means Sallie Mae gets paid twice if you default, but once if you pay like you are supposed to.
But see, many of these problems can be fixed without expensive federal programs. The above problem I just described would actually result in net savings to the feds, because taxpayers will stop being robbed blind by lenders like Sallie Mae. Nobody's interest is served by the current set up.
There's a lot of other things that can be done without costing money. Refinancing won't cost the government anything because the loans are held by a third party. It may save the government money because lower monthly payments means lower risk of default which means fewer government backed loans are being bailed out by tax payers. Same goes for other strategies which would increase the affordability of the loans -- things like allowing SL interest to be fully tax deductible at all income levels instead of capping it at $2500 for couples making less than some amount, etc.
There are also things that can be done to prevent the problem in the future that won't cost anything -- requiring better disclosures, tighter controls, etc. Requiring more compliance from universities. Requiring universities be on the hook for some percentage of loans taken out - like 20% of every SL taken out by their students, the college is on the hook. That will force them to drive down costs and admit only people that they can prepare for the work force. etc etc etc.
There is no reason why any of this has to cost the feds $$$.
Yup. But there is not a National Association of Students Getting Fucked Ten Different Ways to lobby for us the way there is a National Association of Realtors.
There's a lot of other things that can be done without costing money. Refinancing won't cost the government anything because the loans are held by a third party.
How is the government going to make the third parties refi loans at a lower rate? My mortgage is privately held by BofA, and we're not eligible for HARP because BofA doesn't want to lose our 6.125% interest payment.
It is really frustrating that this isn't an option.
It is amazing to me, the difference in interest rates that I have vs. Calvin. We graduated ONE YEAR apart!
The other part that I hate is that I've dealt with some lenders (of his and mine) that are mind-blowingly difficult, and engage in borderline unethical practices. There is no incentive for them to be reasonable or to work with customers, because we can't refi with another lender to get away from them. They've already got us. We took out all the loans as students, before assessing how they really treat customers. Now we are stuck with them for the life of the loans, which when you owe six figures collectively, really ties your hands on just "paying it off aggressively."
If my mortgage lender treated me like my SL lender does, I would refi in a heartbeat just to have the mortgage with a different lender.
It's because the lenders have incentives to fuck you over. I'm not making this up. It's a real thing. if you default, the feds pay the lender. Then the lender is allowed to sell the defaulted debt to a collection agency. In the case of Sallie Mae, their "collection agency" is a wholly owned subsidiary of Sallie Mae. That subsidiary then gets to collect on the debt. Which means Sallie Mae gets paid twice if you default, but once if you pay like you are supposed to.
That's pretty horrifying.
The complaints I have aren't in the arena of defaulting, though, more to do with maximizing the interest that a borrower pays. Things like:
1. Applying extra payment to the lowest interest rate loan, even in the face of clear, express instructions to apply it to, e.g., the highest interest loan.
2. Advancing the due date on loans whenever extra is paid, so that a loan is perennially in prepaid status. That means they don't take auto monthly payments, or charge a monthly payment. There's a "date reset" button on the website, to take a loan out of prepaid status/"do not advance due date," but it doesn't work, never has. I've talked to them numerous times, and from what I gather that button is for show only. It doesn't and won't ever work. They're intentionally making it difficult to pay the loan off any faster.
There are others, I'm sure, those are just my two biggest pet peeves. Intellectually I understand that they're trying to maximize profits, but at what point is it too far?
As I said, if my mortgage lender were engaging in similar practices with my government backed FHA loan, I'd refi to someone else. "Hmm. I see that this extra payment is marked "extra principal," but I'd rather it sit in the customer's escrow account while I collect interest on the debt. I'll just apply the payment there instead to suit myself!" That wouldn't fly, so why does #1 above?
I hate that I have zero recourse, with a couple hundred grand of my financial future at stake and decades of my life locked to this lender.
People going to college need to get their heads out of their asses and realize shit is different now. They need to understand that taking on loans means you'll have to pay them back. They need to understand the economy is crap and jobs are hard to come by and you're not going to make $400k a year right out of college. Who is ultimately responsible for making the decision to go to undergrad + law school/med school/etc -- the person going.
Not to say it doesn't suck, but it's not like this is only known to a select few people.
Just so I'm clear -- is it your position that it's better as a country to blame the fact that home ownership, child birth, and retirement savings in under 35 demographic has slumped on misguided teenagers with heads up their asses? Or do lenders, educators, colleges & universities, Sallie Mae, the student loan lobby, the department of education, career counsellors, college counselors, the Princeton Review, the College Board, the test prep industry, and a million other groups also share in the blame? In other words, in my example above, you think the homeless person is stupider than the lender, and that the lender deserves promotions and special federal protections?
Those people in the blame the kids camp -- you do realize that most student loans are federally backed, right? You realize that when these people default, you pay for it with your tax dollars, right? You realize that Sallie Mae has federally-backed incentives to encourage defaults, because when someone defaults, Sallie Mae not only gets paid the full amount by the government, but is also allowed to continue to collect from the student, thereby getting paid twice for the same loan - once from taxpayers and once from the overly indebted kid. You realize that student loan lenders are now collaborating with banks and colleges to give people ATM cards that aren't tied to bank accounts, but to their student loan balance? And that you, as a taxpayer, are backing that? You realize that Sallie Mae gave kickbacks to college administrators to allow them to staff phony representatives on college committees, boards, and counseling departments to appear to students as if they were independent, unaffiliated advisors, when in fact they were pushing unaffordable loans under the guise of providing sound financial advice?
But sure, blame the dumb kids! Because everyone here was SMRT little bootstrapping whippersnappers who knew instinctively how to break through a nationwide federally backed scam when they were young. Kids these days are just entitled!!!!!!!!eleventy!!!
What I was trying to say (obviously not well) is that everyone needs to take responsibility. Admittedly I did not know about the ATM card thing or the kick backs from Sallie Mae, but is it not the responsibility of the student to know what they are getting into? Isn't it their responsibility to know that charging anything to a student loan or credit card will result in having to pay back that loan.
I agree that it's a shitstorm for people with SLs at 4, 5, 6+% interest rates that can't refi, but it's not Sallie Mae's fault that they gave out the loan. It's their fault that they are being assholes about it, yes.
Don't get me wrong, I think education is incredibly important, but how often do you see someone coming on here talking about how it was stupid to go to law school. Or posting an article about someone with $400k in SLs and they didn't realize it would cost so much to pay back. Education on the topic needs to be better and be HONEST so people know what they are getting into.
Lastly, I do think there is a difference between now and 5 years ago. People know now more than they did then what is going on with economy. I figured people might try to make different (better?) decisions regarding this.
Oh man, Redbellpeppers is going to be pleasantly surprised at the turn this thread took when she gets back...girl fight! lol.
And if we're playing the who has it worse card, I'll contribute!
I'm pretty sure medical residents make the lowest hourly wage lol. I'm too lazy to try and google, but working 80+ hours for about 45k when you have $200,000 in student loans might win this who has it worse competition
Lol. The 80 hrs work week regulations didn't come into place until DH was in his second year of residency, and didn't start getting enforced for surgery until his 4th or 5th yr. He spent about 4 yrs making low 30s and working 100-120 hrs a week. By his 7th year they had it better regulated to 88 hrs, as programs could apply for a 10% hrs extension due to "need" (and you best bet surgery programs love getting more hrs out of their residents) and made almost 50k that year!
I had it much easier. I think I regularly violated the 80 hrs restriction as an intern, but stayed around 60-70/wk after that. I didn't realize residents were starting out in the mid 40s now, that's great.
There's a lot of other things that can be done without costing money. Refinancing won't cost the government anything because the loans are held by a third party.
How is the government going to make the third parties refi loans at a lower rate? My mortgage is privately held by BofA, and we're not eligible for HARP because BofA doesn't want to lose our 6.125% interest payment.
I agree it's going to be a more difficult situation on private loans, but huge amounts of student loans out there are federally backed.
re private loans - I have no reason to believe the kickbacks and fraud are limited to Sallie Mae, but because it's one of the biggest fish, it happened to get the most attention. Open up a federal investigation, and require refinancing as a settlement.
There are probably other tools at the government's disposal to encourage refinancing. But generally the agencies overseeing this stuff are asleep at the wheel.
How is the government going to make the third parties refi loans at a lower rate? My mortgage is privately held by BofA, and we're not eligible for HARP because BofA doesn't want to lose our 6.125% interest payment.
I agree it's going to be a more difficult situation on private loans, but huge amounts of student loans out there are federally backed.
re private loans - I have no reason to believe the kickbacks and fraud are limited to Sallie Mae, but because it's one of the biggest fish, it happened to get the most attention. Open up a federal investigation, and require refinancing as a settlement.
There are probably other tools at the government's disposal to encourage refinancing. But generally the agencies overseeing this stuff are asleep at the wheel.
I'm cynical enough to think it's not just about agencies being asleep at the wheel. It's also about an incredibly powerful financial lobby throwing its weight around in Washington.
As for aspentosh's statement, all I can say is the idea that an individual 18-year-old should be held to the same standard as a billion-dollar industry which spends millions on lobbying is kind of laughable. The system is stacked in favor of the banks, and I just find it infuriating how many people seem to think that's OK and the real answer is 18-year-olds being able to outsmart them.
I agree it's going to be a more difficult situation on private loans, but huge amounts of student loans out there are federally backed.
re private loans - I have no reason to believe the kickbacks and fraud are limited to Sallie Mae, but because it's one of the biggest fish, it happened to get the most attention. Open up a federal investigation, and require refinancing as a settlement.
There are probably other tools at the government's disposal to encourage refinancing. But generally the agencies overseeing this stuff are asleep at the wheel.
I'm cynical enough to think it's not just about agencies being asleep at the wheel. It's also about an incredibly powerful financial lobby throwing its weight around in Washington.
As for aspentosh's statement, all I can say is the idea that an individual 18-year-old should be held to the same standard as a billion-dollar industry which spends millions on lobbying is kind of laughable. The system is stacked in favor of the banks, and I just find it infuriating how many people seem to think that's OK and the real answer is 18-year-olds being able to outsmart them.
That's probably a better way of framing it. There is also the fox guarding the henhouse problem, where industry insiders get top jobs at the agencies that are supposed to protect us from those people.
I can't win. I've said the position sucks and you should be able to refi. I've said Sallie Mae are dicks about the whole process. Trust me, we are dealing with the same thing on our end. All I was trying to say was students going to school in the coming years should think long and hard about taking on loans and what that means. And the companies holding the loans should help out those people paying back those loans and getting them in the future.
Just so I'm clear -- is it your position that it's better as a country to blame the fact that home ownership, child birth, and retirement savings in under 35 demographic has slumped on misguided teenagers with heads up their asses? Or do lenders, educators, colleges & universities, Sallie Mae, the student loan lobby, the department of education, career counsellors, college counselors, the Princeton Review, the College Board, the test prep industry, and a million other groups also share in the blame? In other words, in my example above, you think the homeless person is stupider than the lender, and that the lender deserves promotions and special federal protections?
Those people in the blame the kids camp -- you do realize that most student loans are federally backed, right? You realize that when these people default, you pay for it with your tax dollars, right? You realize that Sallie Mae has federally-backed incentives to encourage defaults, because when someone defaults, Sallie Mae not only gets paid the full amount by the government, but is also allowed to continue to collect from the student, thereby getting paid twice for the same loan - once from taxpayers and once from the overly indebted kid. You realize that student loan lenders are now collaborating with banks and colleges to give people ATM cards that aren't tied to bank accounts, but to their student loan balance? And that you, as a taxpayer, are backing that? You realize that Sallie Mae gave kickbacks to college administrators to allow them to staff phony representatives on college committees, boards, and counseling departments to appear to students as if they were independent, unaffiliated advisors, when in fact they were pushing unaffordable loans under the guise of providing sound financial advice?
But sure, blame the dumb kids! Because everyone here was SMRT little bootstrapping whippersnappers who knew instinctively how to break through a nationwide federally backed scam when they were young. Kids these days are just entitled!!!!!!!!eleventy!!!
What I was trying to say (obviously not well) is that everyone needs to take responsibility. Admittedly I did not know about the ATM card thing or the kick backs from Sallie Mae, but is it not the responsibility of the student to know what they are getting into? Isn't it their responsibility to know that charging anything to a student loan or credit card will result in having to pay back that loan.
I agree that it's a shitstorm for people with SLs at 4, 5, 6+% interest rates that can't refi, but it's not Sallie Mae's fault that they gave out the loan. It's their fault that they are being assholes about it, yes.
Don't get me wrong, I think education is incredibly important, but how often do you see someone coming on here talking about how it was stupid to go to law school. Or posting an article about someone with $400k in SLs and they didn't realize it would cost so much to pay back. Education on the topic needs to be better and be HONEST so people know what they are getting into.
Lastly, I do think there is a difference between now and 5 years ago. People know now more than they did then what is going on with economy. I figured people might try to make different (better?) decisions regarding this.
If I had a kid going into college right now, you bet he/she would consider all of this. I'd be able to tell them my tales of woe about student loans, and hey - I may very well have a kid actually in college before my loans are paid off, and you're darned right I will educate the heck out of that kid.
But - not everyone knows what they don't know. It is hard as an 18 year old - or 25 year old, even - to really conceptualize what student loan repayment means. I hate to keep using myself as an example, but I was a 1st generation college kid. My parents never had student loans, neither did anyone I could have used as a mentor or role model. I had the impression, probably partly from my parents, that I should borrow as little as I can, but not to worry too much about it either because a degree (especially a graduate degree!) meant a good job with plenty of income to pay back the loans. I also didn't understand when I started grad school exactly what it meant to take on unsubsidized loans and defer my undergrad loans while they were collecting interest. The 47k I actually borrowed to attend 2 state schools quickly turned into 53k after interest compounded and I've been barely making a dent in them since.
You can say I should have done more research, and I'd agree with you. But I didn't know I needed to do that at the time, and I don't know that the same resources were available about this back in 2005 when I decided to go to grad school as there are now. I certainly didn't know about money message boards or read financial magazines or whatever. I just knew how to sign up for the loans and some vague concept of paying them back with a salary I was told (by my research) that would be obtainable that I have yet to reach since the economy crashed right around the time I graduated.
I know I am not the only one who went to college with big dreams and what I had no idea were unrealistic expectations. I was doing the best I could with the information available to me at the time. As I said before, I count myself lucky (while still sad, lol) that I am able to actually make my monthly payment without a bigger sacrifice. Many are not so lucky.
And actually, allowing borrowers to refinance to lower interest rates would actually help the govt. (when it comes to subsidized loans) since they would be on the hook for less interest when the borrow is in deferment.
But as others have pointed out, those who have a vested interest in keeping the status quo are the ones walking the halls of the capitol building. When was the last time any of you wrote to your senator/congress person about the plight of student loan borrowers? It is idealistic to think that people can influence law making, but it is a start. If anything, college students should band together and make up an AARP like lobby...or, if following AARP model, a lobby should just sign up every new college student in their group.
I do think it is utterly ridiculous that the student loan system is set up the way it is. Student loans are not the only government backed/subsidized loan program out there, yet they are the only type of debt that you cannot discharge with a bankruptcy. I don't know how the lobbyists got away with this law that was pretty much solidified in 2005, but wow. People vilify the banks, the rating agencies, and the borrowers but we also really need to look hard at our representatives in Congress. How the eff did this happen people? We can get away from our mortgages and our credit cards but not our SLs.
The system IS effed up and I truly do want to know to fix it. There has to be something keeping the rest of the loan products excluded from this even though the government still supports Fannie, Freddie, and Ginnie Mae.
With all that said, I went to an expensive private college thinking that I would repay my SLs after I "made it big" post law school. I still subscribe to a bootstrap mentality for those who were fortunate to graduate college/law school/grad school before 2008. However, I fully recognize how hard it was/is for those who finished after. It is unfair to be saddled with ridiculously high interest rates. Until someone takes up the cause for our generation and tries to lobby for changes, I honestly don't know how the SL repayment features will change.
Btw, I fully recognize that the bachelor's is the new HS diploma. It is much, much harder for someone to find a full time job without that BA/BS. I will spare sharing another anecdote because we all know that's usually the exception, not the rule. I am actually hoping for a SL bubble to somehow stop the ridiculously skyrocketing costs of education.
Post by simpsongal on Feb 19, 2013 17:16:17 GMT -5
I'll take my variable private loans over my stupid federal ones right now. The private loans have been in the low 3% interest rate. Feds and NJ are at a whopping 6.8%. Ugh!
Ditto buckybells, ESF, and a few others. It's F'ed up.
I like to think every generation has gotten screwed in different ways. While I was burning borrowed money at a high interest rate in law school, people were buying houses at top dollar before the real estate market crashed. When my parents bought, they paid 13% on their mortgage, so that sucks. Some people invested heavily in IT stocks in the late 90s, Enron, etc.
But I'm not a Republican so "life sucks" and "look before you leap" are not the answers. Write to your Congressmen and advocate for logical reform in the SL industry.
ESF, I had no idea about any of this with student loans. Thanks for the info. It is very interesting (and alarming). Do you know if there are any news articles where I could read more? Obviously, I can google, but if you are aware of any, let me know.
Post by zacksbride on Feb 19, 2013 17:35:14 GMT -5
i can't really weigh in on anything related to debates on whether or not to go to law school.... however as someone who falls into the 6 figure SL debt category I echo all the others who wishes they system was a little different for all of us who actually pay our loans. we are fortunate that i earn enough to make the payments on our loans, however i paid more in SL interest in 2012 than I ever did when we used to own a home on mortgage interest- and none of it will be deductible on our taxes. this will be our first year without mortgage interest as a deduction, and believe me i am nervous to do our taxes
ESF, I had no idea about any of this with student loans. Thanks for the info. It is very interesting (and alarming). Do you know if there are any news articles where I could read more? Obviously, I can google, but if you are aware of any, let me know.
i was also totally unaware of these practices and would love to read more about it... truly mind boggling...
ESF, I had no idea about any of this with student loans. Thanks for the info. It is very interesting (and alarming). Do you know if there are any news articles where I could read more? Obviously, I can google, but if you are aware of any, let me know.
i was also totally unaware of these practices and would love to read more about it... truly mind boggling...
I have read consumerist.org and a blog put out by Public Citizen, pubcit.typepad.com/clpblog/ for years, so I have picked up a lot from them. Both have very broad focuses, and I'm not aware of any place that is good for one stop shopping on this issue. But this blog post from consumerist is incredibly informative, and gives a good overview of the situation.
If I had a kid going into college right now, you bet he/she would consider all of this. I'd be able to tell them my tales of woe about student loans, and hey - I may very well have a kid actually in college before my loans are paid off, and you're darned right I will educate the heck out of that kid.
But - not everyone knows what they don't know. It is hard as an 18 year old - or 25 year old, even - to really conceptualize what student loan repayment means. I hate to keep using myself as an example, but I was a 1st generation college kid. My parents never had student loans, neither did anyone I could have used as a mentor or role model. I had the impression, probably partly from my parents, that I should borrow as little as I can, but not to worry too much about it either because a degree (especially a graduate degree!) meant a good job with plenty of income to pay back the loans. I also didn't understand when I started grad school exactly what it meant to take on unsubsidized loans and defer my undergrad loans while they were collecting interest. The 47k I actually borrowed to attend 2 state schools quickly turned into 53k after interest compounded and I've been barely making a dent in them since.
You can say I should have done more research, and I'd agree with you. But I didn't know I needed to do that at the time, and I don't know that the same resources were available about this back in 2005 when I decided to go to grad school as there are now. I certainly didn't know about money message boards or read financial magazines or whatever. I just knew how to sign up for the loans and some vague concept of paying them back with a salary I was told (by my research) that would be obtainable that I have yet to reach since the economy crashed right around the time I graduated.
I know I am not the only one who went to college with big dreams and what I had no idea were unrealistic expectations. I was doing the best I could with the information available to me at the time. As I said before, I count myself lucky (while still sad, lol) that I am able to actually make my monthly payment without a bigger sacrifice. Many are not so lucky.
You're definitely not the only one. On one hand, I agree with apentosh that people (and I'm not limiting this to dumb college freshmen...see folks who used their homes as ATM machines pre-market crash) need to put a hell of a lot more thought into what they're borrowing and whether or not they'll be able to pay it back before they take that loan.
On the other hand, though, I look at my 18 year old self and wish I'd been adopted by MM parents at birth. As it was, I was basically raised by wolves; there wasn't a single conversation when I was growing up about careers or money or managing either one. There was not one conversation about what I would do with myself after high school. I went to college because that's what most of my classmates were doing and I didn't know what else to do with myself. I had to take student loans for almost every bit of it, and while I was forced to watch a video that said that my wages could be garnished and my house/car/pets repossessed if I didn't pay up, I foolishly figured that (a) what else was I going to to, and (b) I'd get a job after college and pay it back.
Short story: ditto bucky--a lot of people just don't know what they don't know.
Something needs to be done about the current situation, and the best solution is not to vilify students getting these massive student loans.
"There are several options that exist for students to not take these loans"
1. Go to school part time and get a job paying your way through school. -Where are these (tens of)thousands of jobs that require only a high school diploma which allow students a flexible schedule, and the ability to pay for living expenses and tuition for 8 years while going ot school part time (and of course tack on a few 8 more years for a Masters). Sure there are jobs that do exist, but certainly not enough to sustain hundreds of thousands of 18-26 year olds.
2. You have parents that can afford to pay for your school
So, those are the options? And for prestigious degrees, number 1 is certainly not an option, let's be honest. So, in this world where people have the "choice" to take out student loans, only people with rich parents should be going to law or medical school(and many other degrees that are not very condusive to part time schooling)? Oh, and of course those who "made the choice" and now just have to suck it up, we don't feel sorry for them.
Our country cannot progress like that. The system itself is designed for students to NEED to take out student loans to succeed in this country.
FYI-I have an engineering degree and though I went to a state school I still had 60K in SL. I can pay them just fine, I make a very good living for having "just" a BA; but my state school BA didn't cost any more than a teaching degree from the same school.
i was also totally unaware of these practices and would love to read more about it... truly mind boggling...
I have read consumerist.org and a blog put out by Public Citizen, pubcit.typepad.com/clpblog/ for years, so I have picked up a lot from them. Both have very broad focuses, and I'm not aware of any place that is good for one stop shopping on this issue. But this blog post from consumerist is incredibly informative, and gives a good overview of the situation.
Being able to afford college outright does not mean only people who are rich will make great lawyers/doctors/etc. Being from a well-off family is not a pre-requisite for the vast majority of careers. Ergo, if you tell someone they can't afford to go to law school because they aren't wealthy, it 1) reeks of classism and 2) eliminates a huge pool of potentially top-notch lawyers.
Something needs to be done about the current situation, and the best solution is not to vilify students getting these massive student loans.
"There are several options that exist for students to not take these loans"
1. Go to school part time and get a job paying your way through school. -Where are these (tens of)thousands of jobs that require only a high school diploma which allow students a flexible schedule, and the ability to pay for living expenses and tuition for 8 years while going ot school part time (and of course tack on a few 8 more years for a Masters). Sure there are jobs that do exist, but certainly not enough to sustain hundreds of thousands of 18-26 year olds.
2. You have parents that can afford to pay for your school
I totally agree with these points.
Canada is different because our SL interest is tax deductible but our mortgage is not tax deductible. However, Sl payments can still go on for years and years and hurt your ability to contribute as much to society, etc.
but if an 18yr old came to me and said "student loans or no school?" I would definitely say SLs but I would check that their final goal is an achievable one. Not a job that is saturated, doesnt give a good return on their investment.