Perhaps it is. However, interestingly to note, most religions, like traditional Christianity and Islam, would actually be okay with an income sharing system (especially if the share was redeemable and payments set up to accomplish this) as opposed to an interest based system. It is unclear that an income sharing system is any morally worse than an interest bearing one, and there are reasons to think it is better.
Given that interest-bearing loans eventually convert to ISAs if they aren't paid (through wage garnishment), it seems hard to argue that they aren't strictly worse for the borrower.
ISAs are not wage garnishment though. My ISA would be tied solely to the amount you're making and a non-interest-bearing predetermined price. Wage garnishment is a form of interest sharing, sure, but the underlying liability is growing at an exponential rate, which is what would be wrong.
The biggest downside to the rise of ISAs is the decline of the humanities. There are some majors where the cost of educating the student is simply more than the school would earn in a lifetime of work, but they still have value to society. We would need some way to account for that in a world where ISAs fund all education. How do we incentive schools/lenders to fund people who want to study art and literature? Or sho…
basic supply demand. Less supply, more demand = higher salary = more students. There is obv equilibrium point.
It's great to have a presidential candidate that is running on this platform (and I think I know which one you're talking about), but I'm more interested in whether the broad coalition in congress exists, or whether it's being formed. There are a few members of congress I can think of, but not in remotely the size necessary to pull this off.
>I'm more interested in whether the broad coalition in congress exists Seeing as no "mainstream" political party candidate is running on this platform, I think the answer is no. Of course, I would probably say the same of any campaign issue any mainstream candidate is running on due current political climate of our 2 party system. Whats interesting is if this candidate won the election, perhaps the 2 parties would ha…
Glumly inclined to agree with the latter half of your analogy there, that "the market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent" is to "political parties can remain irrational longer than you can vote." On the other hand, there's power in numbers, and I keep wondering if some kind of equivalent to crowdfunding will emerge for lobbying and/or local politics. So much of the visibility seems to be at the national level, but a ton of the clout in terms of how things get done occurs on the city, township, county and state level. On one hand, that makes it a combinatoric explosion of complexity, in that you have 1:N:N:N just to get up to the state level, but it also lowers the boundary towards critical mass significantly. What's interesting here is that it looks like this has already been happening; at least from my end, I saw a significant amount of this sort of activity in the 2018 midterms. To some, it looked a little bit like a referendum. My question is how much further is needed for the critical mass to be achieved? Is it predicated on a generational shift?
Literally nothing can result in a lifetime of ruined credit other than a lifetime of not paying your bills.
Except student loans in the USA. They can't be discharged and the debt never goes away. Unpaid student loans will haunt you forever.
> student loans in the USA. They can't be discharged and the debt never goes away.
Yeah, this is a common myth. Student loan payments in the US are limited to 10% of discretionary income for up to 20 years. If you make too little to pay off your loans on the standard 10 year plan you aren't just saddled with the debt forever.
Except student loans in the USA. They can't be discharged and the debt never goes away. Unpaid student loans will haunt you forever.
> student loans in the USA. They can't be discharged and the debt never goes away. Yeah, this is a common myth. Student loan payments in the US are limited to 10% of discretionary income for up to 20 years. If you make too little to pay off your loans on the standard 10 year plan you aren't just saddled with the debt forever. https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/repay-loans/understand/plans/in...
> Student loan payments in the US are limited to 10% of discretionary income for up to 20 years.
No, they aren’t. You can choose an income contingent repayment plan that is limited that way, but it's not the default and servicers steer people beat served by those plans away from them in favor of staying on the standard plans and taking deferments.
Which leads us back closer to the ugly reality of people owning other people. ISA used to stand for Indentured Servitude Agreement. (Not saying Incoming Sharing Agreements's are bad, we just have to be careful...)
I don't disagree with you, but I'll note that the non-dischargeable terms of medical and student loan debt in the USA essentially do that already, with the added caveat of not even incentivizing the note holder to get the borrower on their feet. Is this no better than that? I think it's moving in the right direction. It's capped, and while there's still the potential structural issue of middleman taking an unfairly s…
How is medical debt not dischargeable in bankruptcy?
The currently proposed legal framework for ISA's[0] seems like it would make ISA's dischargeable in bankruptcy, which would likely cause all sorts of issues with people signing up for them, using them to pay for tuition, and then immediately taking on as much delinquent debt to declare bankruptcy. That seems like a very perverse incentive for schools to deal with, since degree's are permanent but bankruptcy only stay…
I believe the idea behind "income sharing" is that there is no demand for payment when there is not sufficient income. This makes it hard to qualify for bankruptcy, which is based on your ability to meet monthly debt obligations.
It used to be society wanted people to have an education and that people with degrees would get higher paying jobs which resulted in a net benefit to society through higher taxes. Now education is just looked at as a way to in debt young people for the rest of their lives. Because 1M people default on their student loans every year and the bubble is on the verge of popping, the parasites are looking to own 10% of eve…
At first you mention how higher education doesn't get you a good job anymore, but then you mention support for a candidate who will make college free. Don't you see the contradiction here? The reason college graduates have difficulty finding good jobs compared to the past is because so many people have a degree. Even if you forgive all of the student loans and make college free, people still won't find jobs based on college. College might not even get you anywhere because it'll become a default requirement for every job. There will be some other criteria used instead and somebody's probably going to make money off of that too.
There just aren't enough jobs that require the qualifications of English literature majors or similar.
I don't disagree with you, but I'll note that the non-dischargeable terms of medical and student loan debt in the USA essentially do that already, with the added caveat of not even incentivizing the note holder to get the borrower on their feet. Is this no better than that? I think it's moving in the right direction. It's capped, and while there's still the potential structural issue of middleman taking an unfairly s…
>I don't disagree with you, but I'll note that the non-dischargeable terms of medical and student loan debt in the USA essentially do that already As a preliminary matter this is false...student loans are dischargable in bankruptcy, they are just treated differently than other debt. However, there is a reason everyone thinks student loans aren't dischargable and the myth persists... >the incentive structure of "we do…
"Hey middle America, sucks that you went to trade school because college is expensive and doesn't yield the returns required to justify the expense but we are going to need you to cover the costs of all those art history degrees of the kids who got high and screwed around."