Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

White House rolls back protections for people in default on student loans

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 164 posts

Re: White House rolls back protections for people in default on student loans

#31

Post by smkellat »

andr wrote: post #8
smkellat wrote: post #2

It doesn't matter if it was a nice idea but if it was adopted outside the normal and proper means of adopting regulations then it is not okay. Forms of action matter regardless of the desirability of the substance. However, nothing prevents this being adopted again in the proper fashion under the Administrative Procedures Act.

From the article it sounds like the regulation comes from a court precedent. The court sought advice from the Obama administration. It was not an executive order.

Not quite. The use of "Dear Colleague" letters by the US Department of Education have dubious status in terms of being regulations let alone being binding. It didn't play a role in a court case directly. A court sought clarification after a settlement was reached between litigants but it wasn't necessarily required to be issued in that fashion by the case.

Re: White House rolls back protections for people in default on student loans

#32

Post by nhangen »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #30
nhangen wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're talking about corporate debt not personal debt. Show me an example of personal date that is frequently discharged (outside of bankruptcy) and I'll adjust my position. If you're referring to the fact that it can't be discharged as part of bankruptcy, then I tend to agree with you. It should be.

How about medical debt? I understand that US hospitals will cut you a deal based on your ability to pay.

Yes that's true. However, they won't discharge it completely. They'll set you up with a payment plan and/or negotiate the total. I think they still report it to your credit profile though.

Re: White House rolls back protections for people in default on student loans

#34

Post by HeavenBanned »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #3

This is probably a good idea. It's ridiculous that we coddle people who wastefully took out loans with the goal of improving human capital, and then failed to take advantage of them. Previously student loans were a socialized losses, privatized gains situation. This gives borrowers some skin in the game and will hopefully give them more reason to carefully evaluate whether college is really a good idea for them.

>and then failed to take advantage of them.

Giving kids 120K loans for Puppeteering majors at public universities will be looked back upon as a bait for criminal indentured servitude of our nation's young academic minds.

Your pathetic insistence on their fault in this manner while big loan fat-cats get fatter off the false promises made to the younger generation that can "major in anything and get a living wage" is perfectly archetypical of the sociopathic capitalistic mindset peddled on here regularly that seeks to milk naive yet gifted minds of their worth for the benefit of the higher classes that exploit them mercilessly.

I have a comment if you go into my history that detail's Harvey Mudd's model for universities. Only STEM. No other majors. If you want to major in Gender Theory, you can do it at a private university without loans. I don't want tax dollars funneled in that direction if they're not getting the general public jobs. If you can pay out of pocket for Queer Marxist Theory you can do that at a private "university". Otherwise, stop milking the bright kids/teens out of high school with false promises, big loans and useless majors.

If you think for one second having useless majors doesn't line the pockets of the rich, you're an evil, evil person. Don't trample on others because you made it out cleanly.

Re: White House rolls back protections for people in default on student loans

#35

Post by brianwawok »

brogrammer2 wrote: post #26

Sometimes I do wonder why American Universities charge exorbitant tuition fee? Education being the bedrock of an advanced society, isn't but natural the developed economies like US should be able to subsidize education to such an extant that youth of country don't have to worry about paying their tuition fee and focus more on learning and innovation that will take everyone forward. It is but a reflection on the sad s…

> Sometimes I do wonder why American Universities charge exorbitant tuition fee?

Students demand a lot. Good profs. Dorms with AC. Sports teams. Medical care.

All that cost a lot.

States and federal gov't pays less each year. The difference has to come from somewhere?

In any case, its not perfect but I will take US colleges 100x over Japanese Colleges or Chinese Colleges or Mexican Colleges or 98% of the colleges in the world.

Re: White House rolls back protections for people in default on student loans

#36

Post by brianwawok »

nhangen wrote: post #10

I'm surprised by the comments here. I am a fiscal conservative, but having taken and struggled to pay for student loans, and having hired people in the same situation, find that the lending programs are predatory by nature in that they know students will be unable to service the high monthly payments, and eventually default as a result. Do I think people should pay their debt? Yes, but these lenders are the same lend…

> The only reason I was able to pay my loans was because the Army paid them for me after I completed my term of service. I tried for years to find employment that could help me escape a life of poverty but could not.

Okay, so then I must ask: What did you major in, what was your total debt, and did you research the career prospects of your major BEFORE going to college?

Sometimes I think a basic mandatory form that came with your college acceptance letter would do wonders for student debt.

  You have chosen to apply to be a history major at private 
  school X. Our graduation rate for the program is 95%. Your 
  total student debt upon graduation will be approximately 
  $145,000. That is a monthly payment of $2000. Our 25th, 
  50th, and 75th percentile wages for graduates with this 
  degree are $20,000, $25,000, and $30,000. This means you 
  can expect to pay about 107% of your income towards 
  servicing your loan for the first 10 years after 
  graduation.

Re: White House rolls back protections for people in default on student loans

#37

Post by WaxProlix »

brianwawok wrote: post #35
brogrammer2 wrote: post #26

Sometimes I do wonder why American Universities charge exorbitant tuition fee? Education being the bedrock of an advanced society, isn't but natural the developed economies like US should be able to subsidize education to such an extant that youth of country don't have to worry about paying their tuition fee and focus more on learning and innovation that will take everyone forward. It is but a reflection on the sad s…

> Sometimes I do wonder why American Universities charge exorbitant tuition fee? Students demand a lot. Good profs. Dorms with AC. Sports teams. Medical care. All that cost a lot. States and federal gov't pays less each year. The difference has to come from somewhere? In any case, its not perfect but I will take US colleges 100x over Japanese Colleges or Chinese Colleges or Mexican Colleges or 98% of the colleges in…

Sports teams are generally a net positive. You and I see the $3.5M salary for a football coach at a public university and think it's absurd, but the football program itself pulls in tons of cash directly and indirectly and is probably more than 'worth it' to the school overall.

edit: Looks like this is generally wrong. I'll leave it up but see below comment.

Re: White House rolls back protections for people in default on student loans

#38

Post by PKop »

nhangen wrote: post #10

I'm surprised by the comments here. I am a fiscal conservative, but having taken and struggled to pay for student loans, and having hired people in the same situation, find that the lending programs are predatory by nature in that they know students will be unable to service the high monthly payments, and eventually default as a result. Do I think people should pay their debt? Yes, but these lenders are the same lend…

Removing loan guarantees, and forcing students to scrutinize the value of the degree they are pursuing will improve the problem of students blindly doing what they've been told to do.

If they don't suffer the consequences of buying a useless degree, why wouldn't they keep doing it?

Any possible improvement of the status quo is going to involve pain. Certainly universities themselves could start feeling some of it, as they are complicit in accepting the guaranteed money without any incentive to more selectively filter either: the students getting the loans, or the quality of degrees they are receiving, or both.

Re: White House rolls back protections for people in default on student loans

#39

Post by UpDownLeftRight »

BucketSort wrote: post #5

After a few years of unemployment and being treated for bipolar depression my loans were in default. Due to the grace of the system at the time, I was able to bring my loans out of default and I now pay them like everyone else. This type of thing punishes the downtrodden even more. There must be a set of checks and balances that at least attempts to differentiate between deadbeats and broke people that don't need a h…

I don't pay student loans. Do you know why? I don't have them. I went to an inexpensive local school, worked while going to school, and took the public bus to and from it. (I was fortunate enough to be able to live with my parents.)

While I don't know your situation, it's hard for me to feel sorry for someone who went to an expensive private school, lived on campus in a "country club" atmosphere, and then expects the Taxpayers to cover it.

Re: White House rolls back protections for people in default on student loans

#40

Post by PKop »

brogrammer2 wrote: post #26

Sometimes I do wonder why American Universities charge exorbitant tuition fee? Education being the bedrock of an advanced society, isn't but natural the developed economies like US should be able to subsidize education to such an extant that youth of country don't have to worry about paying their tuition fee and focus more on learning and innovation that will take everyone forward. It is but a reflection on the sad s…

They charge an exorbitant fee because tuition is being heavily subsidized. The consequences of this exact policy change being discussed is a form of removing part of that subsidy.
Post reply on HN