r/FluentInFinance was created to discuss money, investing & finance! Join our Newsletter or Youtube Channel for additional insights at www.TheFinanceNewsletter.com!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FluentInFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The answer is not to simply start paying debt but to vastly lower the cost of college. They were not built to make money but that’s how they are ran now. Make the colleges foot the bill for the education
Gotta afford those multimillion dollar deals for these kids to play amateur football in college. It’s so bizarre how fixated America is on college football and this is coming from an American
Yes and yes. LSU football alone brings in $105 million annually. They are a cash cow for the university and provide for every other sport people don’t watch.
https://www.brproud.com/sports/college-sports/lsu/report-new-coaches-at-lsu-helped-increase-revenue-football-brings-in-105-million/amp/
The UK pays crap salaries for some of the most in demand jobs in the US. The right college degree is worth far more in the US.
Our costs are way too high but let’s not act like UK Universities are delivering for the population.
So if you zoom in, yes, the college football programs "fund themselves". If you zoom out, you realize that thousands of millions of dollars in endowments, donations, grants, are all directed at sports, where, and it's justified by saying sports was what brought in the endowment.
But when you zoom out, you realize that the overall demand for college isn't from sports, that's just how they are trying to get people to go to their individual school, and the societal demand for college isn't from the sports, but each sports team, err... college... is all needing to raise money and spend money on the sports to try and compete with each other and they're crowding out other resources for education. The sports also heavily rely on burying costs in with other departments, for example, a new stadium means that we now have new maintenance requirements, but the line item is on grounds, not on sports.
So if we were to totally separate the sports from the college, my theory is we would see that the actual costs of college have stayed relatively the same, but it's the needs of the sports team that have ballooned the cost and revenue of these colleges, leaving the education squeezed. The macro numbers agree with me here- if I look at the NCAA's own reports, depending on the division, over 50% of their revenue comes from the government or institutional funding. [https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/research/Finances/2020RES\_D1-RevExp\_Report.pdf](https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/research/Finances/2020RES_D1-RevExp_Report.pdf)
If we look at the overall size, and this is a number I would want to further the macro support, would be to look at the overall general total revenue of the NCAA vs the overall general cost of college. My guess is as the NCAA has increased in size, it has done so proportional to the general cost of college.
>So if we were to totally separate the sports from the college, my theory is we would see that the actual costs of college have stayed relatively the same, but it's the needs of the sports team that have ballooned the cost and revenue of these colleges, leaving the education squeezed. The macro numbers agree with me here- if I look at the NCAA's own reports, depending on the division, over 50% of their revenue comes from the government or institutional funding. [https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/research/Finances/2020RES\_D1-RevExp\_Report.pdf](https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/research/Finances/2020RES_D1-RevExp_Report.pdf)
See, now, [research disagrees](https://manhattan.institute/article/a-new-approach-for-curbing-college-tuition-inflation#notes). The cause of college cost increases is mostly excessive demand driven by the "Golden ticket" fallacy and anti-competitive behavior.
That is a great article. The only thing it lacks is a discussion of how states reduced investment in their public institutions, requiring higher tuition to offset the loss of funding. There’s also the increased layers of bureaucracy (i.e., higher salaried deans and provosts) too.
>The only thing it lacks is a discussion of how states reduced investment in their public institutions, requiring higher tuition to offset the loss of funding.
It does actually reference this, although it points out that funding has continued to increase since investment was reduced because there's excess demand being exploited.
>There’s also the increased layers of bureaucracy (i.e., higher salaried deans and provosts) too.
It also references this, and suggests that regulating this is unrealistic. What's more realistic is reducing administrators confidence in funding while encouraging competitive pressures to slim down the educational machine.
I missed those when I skimmed it. Good article though. The Bennet Hypothesis is lazy thinking and easily dismissed with even a cursory review of the data.
Fair enough. I find the Bennet Hypothesis unconvincing though. There’s more explanatory power with loss of state funding and higher demand (in the face on artificially constrained supply), especially where guilds like the AMA force it.
umm you do know that none of the NIL deals are coming from the colleges right? Those are businesses paying for the kids name image and likeness(sponsorships of their product). The only things that colleges pay for is the scholarships room and board.
The problem has almost nothing to do with football. It’s the entire student loan apparatus while reducing the funding for universities across the country. This is great for the government - the loans are a cash cow, they pay less to the schools and they receive the increased tax revenue from college graduates entering the workforce. For schools this meant more money had to come from tuition and the ease of access to loans allowed them to continually raise tuition at absurd rates because their students don’t have to be able to afford it.
I went to a school with no college football, barely any sports at all. Tuition was still insane. Maybe at some schools it's a sports problem, but by and large it is not. Besides the football program at many of the big schools are bringing in more than they spend.
Its how every industry is run. Minimum viable product. Overstate, under delivery, cut production costs, gut labor costs, offshore support, sell "add-ons", make a premium version that does most of things the original promised, overpay executives for short term gain, boost the brand not the product....
Its not about provided quality, experience, etc. every company is after minimal cost, max margin/profit.
At the expense of the consumer.
And they've gaslit half the nation into believing every issue is born of the left.
It's insane.
The cost of providing education hasn’t gone up that much, the biggest shift has been in who pays for it. Back when I was in college, on average states covered 80% of the cost of education, so students could pay the rest with a summer or part time job. These days states have slashed educational funding, so they cover 20% on average, with students covering 80%, meaning that education costs 4x as much (in constant dollars). On top of that, the costs are too high to work off, so students have huge loans, with fees and interest that pile on to more than double the cost paid for the education. The answer is to simply restore proper educational funding, so that they’re direct payments, with no interest or fees piled on. And because schools’ revenue would be based on stable funding instead of student sales pitches, they could stop funding the BS that they pile on to attract students (e.g. fancy sports arenas, student centers, etc., that attract students with their tuitions and fees the schools are dependent on, but add no educational value). If the states went back to funding education, the cost to students would go back to where it should be.
Funding education is funding centers of research and development, which is why it should be a top priority for the sake of national security and prosperity.
That students have debt is outrageous. We need educated people, whether their degrees are "useful" or not.
The real problem is the massive endowments and schools trying to use tuition to keep the body count down. My school was public and the endowment is 1.34 billion for 20k students. The long term return on that endowment averages to 120 million a year or $6k per student per year. In state tuition is 8k per year.
Well then we need to shift the burden back to the states where they will have to actually raise taxes. That is the largest reason why education costs exploded. Well that and making student loans non-dischargable.
Absolutely. And that should be the goal. But until we accomplish that goal, forgiving loans and getting the most financially vulnerable among us out from under these loans is life-changing for them. Just because we should be working towards a better, more holistic solution doesn’t mean we should not also be doing band-aid fixes in the meantime.
I don’t think anyone sees student loan forgiveness as anything more than a temporary fix. But there’s no doubt that students going into college now are infinitely more informed about the risks associated with student loans compared to a decade ago, so there should be some long term improvement.
Maybe, but cost of schools have done nothing but skyrocket. I think we should fix the issue driving the debt problem first. The costs of schools is just stupid expensive. Debt forgiveness will lead to people taking out debt with the hope/assumption another administration will forgive it. I could wry well do the opposite of what you propose. We simply can’t know the impacts now. But reducing the cost would reduce future debt.
Which is why I would have preferred a 1 time, blanket forgiveness. “All Fed student loans are forgiven and It’s never going to happen again” would keep people from thinking “hey, maybe they’ll forgive them, let’s take a shot.”
I agree something needs to be done about college costs, but I think student loan forgiveness is also necessary and it’s something that can be done quickly.
I'm just waiting for anyone, on either side of the aisle, to write a bill that says "colleges must provide tuition and interest rates five years in advance and then stick to those numbers."
The banks jacked my interest rates from 2% to 7% just before my senior year. Fuck that shit.
One way to lower the cost of college would be to reduce the duration from 4 years to 2-3 years. I remember taking so many classes that I had no interest in just for the sake of earning credits for electives. I was a science major and recall taking classes in things like Anthropology and Spanish literature to fill electives. Here I am now over 20 years into my career and these things had no bearing on my life or career. I could have finished school a year earlier and saved probably 20-30K (in today's dollars).
Also, in my area the cost of room and board at our state schools costs just as much, if not more, than tuition, essentially doubling the cost of college for someone that chooses to live on campus. You can save a tremendous amount of money by going to school close to home and commuting.
I took philosophy, history, government, anthropology, ethics in science... I have been enriched by every one and think about things I learned from them all the time. Educating people LESS is not the fucking direction we should be moving.
Is that enrichment worth 30-40K per year or more? There are many subjects that I researched and learned about on my own without having to take out a loan. There are lots of ways to get educated without breaking the bank.
Not to mention you're going to get far more "enroched" by actual life far more than in a classroom.
Take the same $30-40K and go see the world. Go see the States. Get out to the bars with people different than you for a few years, etc.
That, vs a room with a bunch of kids and one adult lecturing is far more "enriching"
Public universities are still like $10k for tuition on average. Private tuition is nuts averaging $35k. They need to cut the private universities off from federal loans. I bet magically those tuitions would resolve themselves.
For public universities a large percentage of their cost was subsidized at the state and federal levels. That financing has gotten progressively smaller, so schools are forced to make up the gap from their primary revenue stream, tuition.
My school has yearly operating revenues of over a billion. They make over 500 mill a year in tuition. I think most major universities are doing fine on revenue
Or stop pushing it on every high schooler in the country. My high school had college posters up everywhere every year around march or April for the seniors
The reason they are so expensive now is because the government got involved in the first place with fed loans. Now they are getting involved again which will just raise prices again.
This. The most expensive schools have billions of dollars in endowments. Why don't they use some of that money to cover the price gouging they laid upon students.
How does a college foot the bill without funding? Why don't we spend more money, like we used to, to fund colleges?
I'm for forgiveness, personally, and funding universities better (again) in order to bring education (which is societally beneficial, since people are smarter and more capable thereby) back into reach (and allow graduates to be fuller contributors to the economy, start families, etc.).
Education, health, housing, groceries, transportation, etc.
These are things needed for a society to function properly but here in America we are all about business. If it doesn't make money it's worthless. No other value is added to society other than the filling of a few individuals pockets with money that will no be shared with anyone else.
Every subsequent semester I attended college, the tuition increased and there were additional lab fees. Also, every subsequent year, the president's salary increased (currently $559k).
Funny when they got involved in health care with Medicare is when spending got out of control there as well.
Almost as if the guy who prints the money fucks up the market when he
Gets involved.
The kind they administer at hospitals. Might be the same $30 vial, but administering it in a hospital balloons the price. Same reason why you see $40 for 2 pills of Tylenol in hospitals.
If Medicare refused to pay, watch the price drop.
Medicare sets a price floor. If the government is going to pay your $40 to give Tylenol to someone in the hospital, you take it. It is also ILLEGAL to charge someone less
Than Medicare. So everyone has to pay that ludicrous price.
Privatized healthcare is profit driven to they drive the cost up. The only instance I can think of that you’re relating to was the launch of the ACA when people were forced to buy more expensive insurance after they lost coverage because their plans didn’t meet a minimum.
Not trying to be pedantic, but the federal government doesn’t print money, that’d be the federal reserve, and despite having federal in their name are *NOT* a federal government entity.
Make the Universities be the private lenders. It's their product. A buy now, pay later sort of deal. Their product isn't worth it? They refine it or lower the price.
That's what financial aid from schools is a remnant of. The student loan system we have now is banks and then the government refining the system of personal loans students would take out.
The financial aid competes with the inflated pricing they're able to offer on the market due to the unsecured loans backstopped by the gov.
The only reason liquidity doesn't dry up on these unsecured loans is because they can't be discharged in bankruptcy.
Take the government and these mechanics out and the cost of education will plummet. Will less people qualify? Sure, but that could be a blessing to many and the really determined ones may be able to pay their way through at costs a fraction of where they are now.
“Cost” here meaning projected revenues not received from Americans who have paid against loans taken out when they were teenagers and that have been making payments back to the government for years.
This is not money actually being spent by the US govt.
And those people ‘costing’ the US govt are frequently already paying a higher percentage of their income (and wealth, if they have any) in taxes than the folks who were already rich enough to pay for college without loans.
Not relevant to me. But I'd rather see $84 billion go to something like this than another foreign-intervention war boondoggle. It's an investment in America.
You may not agree with it, but that's basically the argument for funding Ukraine. We're fighting Russia there so we don't have to fight a stronger Russia later. It's the "what if Germany was stopped in Austria" argument.
Yes, that's the standard "Murica #1" argument I've heard my entire adult life (I am over 40).
Comparing everything to Hitler is cliche and usually wrong. I don't care if Russia becomes "stronger". I don't care if China becomes "stronger".
The US could do with some reduction in empire, frankly. It's pointless to maintain "primacy" on the world stage and fail to take care of our own people at home. The US does things like spend 20 years and trillions of dollars occupying a country just to lose the war and hand control back to the people we were supposed to be fighting all along.
The US has more military resources than, what, the next 20 largest militaries combined? We still haven't pulled out of Germany, Japan, Italy, or Korea after those wars.
How much is "good enough", when the whole world becomes one gigantic US military base?
I understand your frustration (I'll be hitting 40 next year), but I'd like to point out that this isn't simply a misallocation of tax dollars.
"If we hadn't supported a foreign conflict, we could have spent that money on our own people" seems reasonable, but there was never anything stopping our government from working on legislation to help our people. They just haven't come together to make it happen.
This is less about money management and more about the reality that too many people in our government (I won't try to paint all of the House and Senate as completely problematic, but there's enough in each to where gridlock is a problem) aren't spending their time and energy into **improving** the economic health of their constituents. Instead, they spend their time as if they're playing a sport and as long as they don't allow the other team doesn't win, they've somehow scored points.
[https://executivegov.com/articles/us-budget-explained-for-non-experts-a-guide-to-your-tax-dollars/](https://executivegov.com/articles/us-budget-explained-for-non-experts-a-guide-to-your-tax-dollars/) gives a good breakdown of the Toper Federal Spending of a $5.5T budget for 2023. National Defense was 13% of it at $736B. I'm not going to argue with that and say that I feel it needs to stay, or even grow, but it's a limited perspective that doesn't look at a whole situation before making decisions.
It could very well be that reducing our military budget is an appropriate action. But it could also be that a different area should be examined instead of, or even in addition to, the military budget!
My gut is telling me that we could save a lot of money if we focused on revising and refining processes. Statistically, Health Insurance companies charge you way more for your monthly premium than an equivalent tax would be under a Universal Healthcare program. Pharmaceutical costs are also much lower under programs like Medicare or Medicaid for a variety of valid economical reasons. Insurance is trying to profit, but a governmental program's goal isn't to be profitable, it's to minimize costs. That reduces prices.
You're completely right in being dissatisfied with our current situation, but I think the cause of our situation has less to do with our militaristic budget/actions and more to do with not having enough of the right people in government to actually focus on fixing antiquated systems that desperately need to be updated for the sake of the population.
The [Paycheck Protection Program (PPP)](https://www.investopedia.com/how-to-navigate-the-new-stimulus-plan-and-get-a-ppp-loan-4843031) was a huge federal program ***that paid out $790.9 billion in small business loans*** during the COVID-19 pandemic. The [PPP Act](https://www.investopedia.com/paycheck-protection-program-flexibility-act-of-2020-an-overview-4846944), which instigated the program, allowed for much of that money to be forgiven, so the businesses that received it don’t have to pay it back. Since the program ended on May 31, 2021***,*** [***nearly $661.5 billion has been forgiven***](https://www.investopedia.com/where-ppp-money-went-5216725)***.1***
U.S. Small Business Administration, via U.S. Department of the Treasury. “[Paycheck Protection Program Loan Forgiveness](https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/PPP-Forgiveness-Factsheet-508.pdf).”
Source: [Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) Loan Forgiveness: Requirements, When and How to Apply (investopedia.com)](https://www.investopedia.com/paycheck-protection-program-ppp-loan-forgiveness-7550209)
Come back with "fiscal responsibility" when you are worried about collecting on this rather than letting it go.
Not to mention the PPP was studied a year later, a[nd the current estimate is that to save one job they had to spend $377k](https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/tracker-summary.pdf). The median salary of the job saved $35k, meaning we could have literally just paid these people to stay home, not do any labor, not spread any disease (so that we could get back to work faster), and it would have cost 90% less.
PPP is definitely a contender for largest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people. The Republicans almost didn't let the second round of direct checks to be sent out by Biden unless he funded PPP even more.
The unemployment office doesn’t pick up the phone and the website crashes when unemployment is at record lows. The PPP loans were to have people just stay on the payroll.
Some businesses still went under with it. Some made a killing. We should prosecute fraud but it wasn’t a horrible idea at the time. Wasn’t perfect and wasn’t going to be.
>The PPP loans were to have people just stay on the payroll.
This is the lie. If it was to 'keep people on the payrolls' then it should have cost 90% less, or at least something closer to 80%.
>We should prosecute fraud but it wasn’t a horrible idea at the time.
Yes it was. We paid businesses for unnecessary production at 900% higher than the actual cost instead of directly paying people to not spread a contagious deadly disease. This wasn't like the Great Recession yet we treated it exactly the same. The sheer amount of fraud is shocking.
It isn’t a lie. That was the intention. Could it have been done better? Absolutely.
If we had paid people to stay home, their jobs would have gone away and everyone would need to reapply. Assuming businesses were still open.
It was a shit show.
lol a foxbusiness link was enough for me to not even open the article. This is part of the parent company that paid Smartmatic a 💩 ton of money to settle the 2020 false election narrative that Fox pushed. If this comes from Reuters or BBC or some more neutral based news organization I’d give it consideration.
However this is just my opinion but I’d take anything coming out of Fox’s umbrella with a humongous grain of salt. Salt so large that it reminds me of Milton says Office Space, “There was salt on the glass, BIG grains of salt.”
https://preview.redd.it/hxfe0oftotxc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=df3fdd7b467354e7908d01d319211521e123a322
Can already see how much of a joke this is from where NPR is. Just look at the current whistle blower situation and realize this is a crock of shit.
Fox is also a crock of shit. So don't even start thinking of me as some 'other' tribalistic bullshit. Just that if you think those 'truthful unbiased sources' you posted are as such means you are biased and don't realize it
Yea, it's been going on for a few weeks now. Uri Burliner, senior Editor for over 25 years, brought up the internal bias issues going on. And it blew up as people looked into it more. Ultimately resigned last month.
So, after a bit of reading, some guy got suspended from NPR, wrote an article citing three examples of bias, and "quit." No corroborating accounts from any of his former colleagues, and the only place I can read his story is on Fox News? Does that sound correct?
No, it seems like you are coming at this already wanting to discredit the issue. I get it though, we all want to justify our own ideas and naturally don't want to go against initial constructs.
NBC, NY times, politico, and many others wrote about this. Read Uri's article and NPR's direct response. Listen to NPRs new CEOs (Maher) TED talk and how news should balance truth with beliefs.
I can't make a decision for anyone, but I would hope anyone can look at the situation first hand and realize that NPR is far from mid ground bias and high truth like the graph I called it showed.
States used to pay 80% of public university expenses, students 20% in the form of tuition. Now it's flipped.
Giving just a little back to student loan borrowers is only restoring a fraction of the subsidy that previous generations used to get much more of.
You people act like **public** colleges are somehow outside of public control. But it's "we the people" that fucking OWN THEM! They are state property. Any state could, tomorrow, shut down its colleges, and not open them again until they get prices under control.
It's because you don't want to pay state taxes or audit your universities that they cost so much.
Fuck these colleges. I hope they all fail.
One of the shittiest institutions in this country is that of our education. Primary and collegiate. Beyond embarrassing. Millions if not billions in endowments. No wonder when you’re charging more per year than many earn.
Funny how reducing revenue via tax cuts isn’t considered a cost.
But reducing revenue via student loan forgiveness is considered a cost.
Nothing like double standards.
We’re 30 something trillion in debt. Wtf does another 84B matter? We’re well past the point it no return anyways. People only seem to get upset when the money is going to actually help people here.
Who gives a shit how much it costs ... the fact that we send 95 billion over seas to help people without a second guess, who don't care about us as individuals, and pat ourselves on the back.... while also ignoring that 60% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck INFURIATES THE S**T out of me.
They could do it but they dont... why...??? Is my point
I love helping other BUT WE ALSO NEED HELP TOO!!!!
So fuck posts like this that are supposed to make me feel bad
I dont understand how college won out. College students arent the only ones crippled by debt. Government secured the loans and made it to where you cant claim student loans on bankruptcies. Colleges then decided to charge whatever they wish because the are government secured loans. I dont see how its up to the taxpayers to pay for college. If one decided to take out a 100k loan to get a degree in field that pays 20k a year or something is just not a wise decision. My main issue is people aee crippled by debt, be it mortgage, student loans, credit cards, car payments, etc. Why are student loans the focus. I really think its the Biden Administration trying to buy the votes of the younger crowds.
I think a better step would be to fix state schools tuition at certain levels depending on income. This would drive down the cost for kids who can’t afford 20k a year, and don’t want to incur massive debt. Over time, this would make state schools more desirable to lower income students so private schools may feel the heat to lower tuition also. Right now state tuition in my state is obscene. For instance UVa has been consistently raising tuition for a long time despite having billions in reserve. I’m sorry but if you have billions in reserve you don’t need to raise tuition.
I think one of the key issues is balancing increasing education access without inflating college costs. As it stands today college costs are mostly driven by supply and demand at a high level. If you try to increase access via funding such as more money to state school, grants, lower interest rates on student loans, inevitably the cost will go up. In the past, lenders had a risk of default so they acted as a lever to keep costs down. If you couldn’t get a loan, you couldn’t go. But they lobbied for the same protections from bankruptcy and default that the federal government did and won. Now they will bankroll loan balances that would have never have been approved before. All that extra funding raises the demand for college and in turn prices. In my view we have a few options. Accept that not everyone should go to college and reduce access. Accept that everyone should go but costs will be high. Or accept that some type of government regulation will be required.
As far as loan forgiveness, I think we need to ease bankruptcy restrictions on student loans and some amount of forgiveness seems fair considering the corporate bail outs we have undertaken in the past. But we cannot do so without fixing the underlying issue.
I’d like for the government to have a solution to fix the problem BEFORE forgiving loans.
Make the colleges cheaper, make the loans harder to get, require the colleges to put out degrees that have a high 75% or greater chance of landing that job within the first 1-2 years of graduation or they must pay the loan themselves.
Put the risk on the colleges, not a fresh out of highschool 18 year old. Stop the shark program these colleges are doing to people.
Reading the “proposals,” a lot of this is already in existing forgiveness programs. The bulk of the cost, per the article, is forgiving loans after 20 years, and 25 years for graduate student debt. That didn’t change with the new plan, that existed before Obama, they’re just shifting the rules slightly and calling it new.
People who go to college make considerably more money than those who do not.
I thought the rich were supposed to pay their fair share and he was watching out for the blue collar working class? As it stands this is bourgeoisie welfare.
How to fix the student loan crisis:
1) Drop interest rates to <=4%, even for existing loans.
2) Implement a law in which universities that take government money (i.e. 99%) can't spent X amount on administration costs.
That's fucking it crisis averted.
OR …. It transfers $84 billion from the older generation who is living on pensions and social security with paid off houses and aren’t suffering …. To the younger generation who are struggling BECAUSE of the previous generations “we got ours, fuck everyone else” attitude
Funny thing, all these loan forgiveness plans seem to be an exact match for the master promisary note's that all the borrows signed which outlined forgiveness for ontime payments for 20 and 25 year payment plans (undergraduate/graduate). I'm not exactly sure what this will do politically taking ownage of something that the Government was legally obligated to do anyways when they financed the loan terms.
I have a lot of student debt, like many. Yeah it'd be nice to get some of it lopped off. But more concerning to me os what good will that do for those going into the system today? Or in the future? I don't think college needs to be free. It is an investment of time and money into yourself to build skills and knowledge. But for the most part I think private universities need to take a 70% haircut off tuition amd public universities need to take a 90% haircut. Then only allow COLA based tuition adjustments every 5 uears not inflation based increases every year. Why? Because employers only raise wages when they absolutely must, why should universities be any different?
This is dumb the taxpayer is footing the bill for entitled people to go to college cheaper. If you decide to go to college you take the financial responsibility not the government and certainly not the rest of society
Does that cost factor in the economic benefits of giving these people more disposable income to spend in the economy vs paying down the loans?
Debt forgiveness can be stimulus
If ya'll are mad about the cost then tell you state to fund public school tuition. Drop all public school tuition to $0 in state and watch how fast private school tuition drops when enrollment plummets.
Supreme Court rulings be damned. Dictator much?
Throwing billions at The issue without solving the problem is typical government behavior. No wonder we ended up 34 trillion in debt.
College professors aren’t making more money today they used to. Administration has exploded in number and self importance to the point that they are making tuition skyrocket. Admin is full of useless leaches. Most are completely unnecessary for a university to educate students.
Public education in the country has been massively defunded, States just don't pay into education like they used to. We've moved the burden on the individual students and thus made public education less public.
This is the best solution in a bad situation. The students with the most debt come from the lower classes and minorities. Refusal to offer them any assistance in a country overflowing with privileges for the wealthy, who own more money than anytime in human history, just out of fear of the debt would be in further service to these wealthy aristocrats. Who only bring up the national debt when it serves them, because they know deep down they have all the goddamn money and if the bill ever needs to seriously be paid off it's going to come from their extensive fortunes. Because no one else in this country has any wealth to speak of.
War cost more. Subsidies to billionaires cost more. Subsidies to Big Agra cost more. Educated people are a win for society… leaves them less receptive to fascist and neoliberals.
And the U.S. has an educated workforce to compete in the world economy. I don't see how this is as bad an investment as sending $95B in corporate welfare to the shareholders of weapons manufacturers through Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan "aid".
It should be easy to eliminate the debt of colleges. They inflated the cost of colleges by bloating middle management.
Forcibly confiscate all college endowments to pay for it.
Why not? Let's pile some more on. You know, when I have a water leak in my house, my first step is to find and stop the leak, then I repair and paint the drywall. This administration is not concerned at all with repairing the leak.
Why cant more colleges be like[ The College of the Ozarks](https://www.cofo.edu/) which can be[ free if students agree to work](https://www.cofo.edu/Admissions/Cost-Financial-Aid) at many of the various college industries (ex. candy, honey, diary products) or some other campus job?
Nah, let's just prop up more puppet govts and fund their opps too, in hopes it's gets all squiggly like. Then we can lend lease both sides, and in the end kill them all. Or whatever....
Any rational economist knows that this is a biased analysis since it omits the cascading impact of that money being spent on goods and services rather than going straight to wealthy banks. That will increase tax collections far beyond the forgiveness. This is an obvious right wing hit piece. They are scared that Biden is doing something that benefits an important demographic.
What these articles always like to ignore is the fact a lot of these people took those loans with forgiveness baked into the agreement.
This isn't rocket science. If I agree to pay you five dollars for a sandwich with tomatoes, I expect a sandwich with tomatoes. If someone agrees to a loan with forgiveness, than they should get a loan with forgiveness. It's wild to me that so much of our country is openly for reneging on contracts.
That’s good. I’m glad it’s about time My goddamn tax dollars went to people who deserve it and not people who already have too much money.
And no, I’m not being sarcastic. I am dead serious. I am tired of every time I turn around the Republicans are saying oh we need to give tax breaks to the rich. We need to give tax breaks to the corporations. They need help well what about the American people? We need some freaking help too.
This is like saying “not increasing taxes on Reddit users is costing the government millions of dollars.” Any time the government spends money on something it costs something. The question is if it’s a good use of money or not.
1. Lower the cost of college. 2. Freeze student loan rates at 0.5%. It really isn’t that fucking hard. Like we don’t even need the principal to be paid back, just kill the interest. That’s the biggest problem.
How much have we sent to Israel at this point? "Extra" my ass. When it benefits working class Americans it's extra; when it benefits literally anyone else it's a blank monopoly money check.
People took out their loans. They should be responsible for paying them back. The one thing that I would be fine with is to make it bank ruptable debt. So if you really can't make it work, you have a way out. But it's still a big enough thing to where you wouldn't do it if you didn't have to.
What we should be doing is making college cheaper so future people don't have issues that we've seen many students face in recent years. Public schools shouldn't have tuition greater than like $10k per year on the high end. Preferably closer to $5k per year. Private schools can charge whatever they want, but public schools shouldn't be.
We always complain about boomers doing things for their generation and screwing over future generations. Student loan forgiveness and ignoring the issue of college prices is just benefiting us and screwing the future.
Aw dang, how are we gonna keep the military's blank check budget, along with welfare subsidies for billionaires if we do something as irresponsible as student debt forgiveness?
A country has issues with monopolistic energy producers overcharging citizens to the point of bankruptcy. Instead of forcing the providers to lower prices for something that is a necessity, they pay billions to bail them out. That’s how much sense this shit is making
Does it really "cost" 84 billion if it is unpaid interest? The principal is paid off.
The boost to the economy by putting money in the hands of regular people is enormous. Not having people in debt is good for society. A little less money in the hands of the 1% will have virtually no negatives to it.
I can’t believe these colleges with lazy rivers, billion dollar athletic programs that run at a deficit, and luxury apartments are unaffordable for the average American
It’s a pretty easy fix. Strip supercreditor status, that should never have existed in the first place. Watch tuition plummet overnight, once the blank check for mayhem is withdrawn.
Please tell me that the American people will be all for helping out those trying to better themselves, and being taken advantage of by predatory lenders, just like they were okay with the recent 93 billion to aid
Cancelling federal student loans does not actually cost anything. The original layout of the system was to have the private sector purchase the loans from the government. After the repeal of Glass–Steagall, the private sector found more destructive things to do with their money. This has left the government as the creditor. Meaning the government is also collecting the interest. This has become a revenue positive operation. The loans could be cancelled without having to pay anyone else. Also, the debt would be considered taxable income now that the exemption has expired. The only issue would be having funds available to lend for new students, but again, revenue positive... Unlike most other government expenditures.
r/FluentInFinance was created to discuss money, investing & finance! Join our Newsletter or Youtube Channel for additional insights at www.TheFinanceNewsletter.com! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FluentInFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The answer is not to simply start paying debt but to vastly lower the cost of college. They were not built to make money but that’s how they are ran now. Make the colleges foot the bill for the education
Gotta afford those multimillion dollar deals for these kids to play amateur football in college. It’s so bizarre how fixated America is on college football and this is coming from an American
Those programs generally fund themselves and their proceeds fund other operations at the schools as well.
Seriously. College football pays for most of college sports.
College basketball and football do pay for all of the other sports plus much more at the big universities lol
Yes and no. Those big athletic programs enjoy eating their profits. LSU spent almost $30mn dollars remodeling the football teams locker room.
Yes and yes. LSU football alone brings in $105 million annually. They are a cash cow for the university and provide for every other sport people don’t watch. https://www.brproud.com/sports/college-sports/lsu/report-new-coaches-at-lsu-helped-increase-revenue-football-brings-in-105-million/amp/
[удалено]
The UK pays crap salaries for some of the most in demand jobs in the US. The right college degree is worth far more in the US. Our costs are way too high but let’s not act like UK Universities are delivering for the population.
All but like 15 athletic departments run at a loss. Football does not make up the difference
So if you zoom in, yes, the college football programs "fund themselves". If you zoom out, you realize that thousands of millions of dollars in endowments, donations, grants, are all directed at sports, where, and it's justified by saying sports was what brought in the endowment. But when you zoom out, you realize that the overall demand for college isn't from sports, that's just how they are trying to get people to go to their individual school, and the societal demand for college isn't from the sports, but each sports team, err... college... is all needing to raise money and spend money on the sports to try and compete with each other and they're crowding out other resources for education. The sports also heavily rely on burying costs in with other departments, for example, a new stadium means that we now have new maintenance requirements, but the line item is on grounds, not on sports. So if we were to totally separate the sports from the college, my theory is we would see that the actual costs of college have stayed relatively the same, but it's the needs of the sports team that have ballooned the cost and revenue of these colleges, leaving the education squeezed. The macro numbers agree with me here- if I look at the NCAA's own reports, depending on the division, over 50% of their revenue comes from the government or institutional funding. [https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/research/Finances/2020RES\_D1-RevExp\_Report.pdf](https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/research/Finances/2020RES_D1-RevExp_Report.pdf) If we look at the overall size, and this is a number I would want to further the macro support, would be to look at the overall general total revenue of the NCAA vs the overall general cost of college. My guess is as the NCAA has increased in size, it has done so proportional to the general cost of college.
>So if we were to totally separate the sports from the college, my theory is we would see that the actual costs of college have stayed relatively the same, but it's the needs of the sports team that have ballooned the cost and revenue of these colleges, leaving the education squeezed. The macro numbers agree with me here- if I look at the NCAA's own reports, depending on the division, over 50% of their revenue comes from the government or institutional funding. [https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/research/Finances/2020RES\_D1-RevExp\_Report.pdf](https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/research/Finances/2020RES_D1-RevExp_Report.pdf) See, now, [research disagrees](https://manhattan.institute/article/a-new-approach-for-curbing-college-tuition-inflation#notes). The cause of college cost increases is mostly excessive demand driven by the "Golden ticket" fallacy and anti-competitive behavior.
That is a great article. The only thing it lacks is a discussion of how states reduced investment in their public institutions, requiring higher tuition to offset the loss of funding. There’s also the increased layers of bureaucracy (i.e., higher salaried deans and provosts) too.
>The only thing it lacks is a discussion of how states reduced investment in their public institutions, requiring higher tuition to offset the loss of funding. It does actually reference this, although it points out that funding has continued to increase since investment was reduced because there's excess demand being exploited. >There’s also the increased layers of bureaucracy (i.e., higher salaried deans and provosts) too. It also references this, and suggests that regulating this is unrealistic. What's more realistic is reducing administrators confidence in funding while encouraging competitive pressures to slim down the educational machine.
I missed those when I skimmed it. Good article though. The Bennet Hypothesis is lazy thinking and easily dismissed with even a cursory review of the data.
This article doesn't exactly dispute the Bennet Hypothesis. It just suggests the easier solution is demand-side intervention, rather than supply-side.
Fair enough. I find the Bennet Hypothesis unconvincing though. There’s more explanatory power with loss of state funding and higher demand (in the face on artificially constrained supply), especially where guilds like the AMA force it.
Taxpayers are not paying for athletics at the major schools
You know school was expensive before two years ago, right?
umm you do know that none of the NIL deals are coming from the colleges right? Those are businesses paying for the kids name image and likeness(sponsorships of their product). The only things that colleges pay for is the scholarships room and board.
The problem has almost nothing to do with football. It’s the entire student loan apparatus while reducing the funding for universities across the country. This is great for the government - the loans are a cash cow, they pay less to the schools and they receive the increased tax revenue from college graduates entering the workforce. For schools this meant more money had to come from tuition and the ease of access to loans allowed them to continually raise tuition at absurd rates because their students don’t have to be able to afford it.
Blaming sports when those sports are the biggest money maker is certainly a choice lol
Lol, tell us you know nothing about college football....
Um, you have no idea what you’re talking about.
I went to a school with no college football, barely any sports at all. Tuition was still insane. Maybe at some schools it's a sports problem, but by and large it is not. Besides the football program at many of the big schools are bringing in more than they spend.
Ummmm Colleges don’t pay their players. The players name money via NIL (name, image, likeness) deals so pretty much sponsorships.
Its how every industry is run. Minimum viable product. Overstate, under delivery, cut production costs, gut labor costs, offshore support, sell "add-ons", make a premium version that does most of things the original promised, overpay executives for short term gain, boost the brand not the product.... Its not about provided quality, experience, etc. every company is after minimal cost, max margin/profit. At the expense of the consumer. And they've gaslit half the nation into believing every issue is born of the left. It's insane.
The cost of providing education hasn’t gone up that much, the biggest shift has been in who pays for it. Back when I was in college, on average states covered 80% of the cost of education, so students could pay the rest with a summer or part time job. These days states have slashed educational funding, so they cover 20% on average, with students covering 80%, meaning that education costs 4x as much (in constant dollars). On top of that, the costs are too high to work off, so students have huge loans, with fees and interest that pile on to more than double the cost paid for the education. The answer is to simply restore proper educational funding, so that they’re direct payments, with no interest or fees piled on. And because schools’ revenue would be based on stable funding instead of student sales pitches, they could stop funding the BS that they pile on to attract students (e.g. fancy sports arenas, student centers, etc., that attract students with their tuitions and fees the schools are dependent on, but add no educational value). If the states went back to funding education, the cost to students would go back to where it should be.
Funding education is funding centers of research and development, which is why it should be a top priority for the sake of national security and prosperity. That students have debt is outrageous. We need educated people, whether their degrees are "useful" or not.
The real problem is the massive endowments and schools trying to use tuition to keep the body count down. My school was public and the endowment is 1.34 billion for 20k students. The long term return on that endowment averages to 120 million a year or $6k per student per year. In state tuition is 8k per year.
Well then we need to shift the burden back to the states where they will have to actually raise taxes. That is the largest reason why education costs exploded. Well that and making student loans non-dischargable.
Absolutely. And that should be the goal. But until we accomplish that goal, forgiving loans and getting the most financially vulnerable among us out from under these loans is life-changing for them. Just because we should be working towards a better, more holistic solution doesn’t mean we should not also be doing band-aid fixes in the meantime.
Trust me, if you bail out the current student loans, the problem will be solved forever. /s
I don’t think anyone sees student loan forgiveness as anything more than a temporary fix. But there’s no doubt that students going into college now are infinitely more informed about the risks associated with student loans compared to a decade ago, so there should be some long term improvement.
Maybe, but cost of schools have done nothing but skyrocket. I think we should fix the issue driving the debt problem first. The costs of schools is just stupid expensive. Debt forgiveness will lead to people taking out debt with the hope/assumption another administration will forgive it. I could wry well do the opposite of what you propose. We simply can’t know the impacts now. But reducing the cost would reduce future debt.
Which is why I would have preferred a 1 time, blanket forgiveness. “All Fed student loans are forgiven and It’s never going to happen again” would keep people from thinking “hey, maybe they’ll forgive them, let’s take a shot.” I agree something needs to be done about college costs, but I think student loan forgiveness is also necessary and it’s something that can be done quickly.
I'm just waiting for anyone, on either side of the aisle, to write a bill that says "colleges must provide tuition and interest rates five years in advance and then stick to those numbers." The banks jacked my interest rates from 2% to 7% just before my senior year. Fuck that shit.
Agreed but good luck getting tenured profs & admin to take a pay cut/freeze
Exactly. The profit motive does not add value or efficiency to every model.
One way to lower the cost of college would be to reduce the duration from 4 years to 2-3 years. I remember taking so many classes that I had no interest in just for the sake of earning credits for electives. I was a science major and recall taking classes in things like Anthropology and Spanish literature to fill electives. Here I am now over 20 years into my career and these things had no bearing on my life or career. I could have finished school a year earlier and saved probably 20-30K (in today's dollars). Also, in my area the cost of room and board at our state schools costs just as much, if not more, than tuition, essentially doubling the cost of college for someone that chooses to live on campus. You can save a tremendous amount of money by going to school close to home and commuting.
I took philosophy, history, government, anthropology, ethics in science... I have been enriched by every one and think about things I learned from them all the time. Educating people LESS is not the fucking direction we should be moving.
Is that enrichment worth 30-40K per year or more? There are many subjects that I researched and learned about on my own without having to take out a loan. There are lots of ways to get educated without breaking the bank.
Not to mention you're going to get far more "enroched" by actual life far more than in a classroom. Take the same $30-40K and go see the world. Go see the States. Get out to the bars with people different than you for a few years, etc. That, vs a room with a bunch of kids and one adult lecturing is far more "enriching"
Students pay “athletic fees”.
Public universities are still like $10k for tuition on average. Private tuition is nuts averaging $35k. They need to cut the private universities off from federal loans. I bet magically those tuitions would resolve themselves.
For public universities a large percentage of their cost was subsidized at the state and federal levels. That financing has gotten progressively smaller, so schools are forced to make up the gap from their primary revenue stream, tuition.
My school has yearly operating revenues of over a billion. They make over 500 mill a year in tuition. I think most major universities are doing fine on revenue
Or stop pushing it on every high schooler in the country. My high school had college posters up everywhere every year around march or April for the seniors
The reason they are so expensive now is because the government got involved in the first place with fed loans. Now they are getting involved again which will just raise prices again.
This. The most expensive schools have billions of dollars in endowments. Why don't they use some of that money to cover the price gouging they laid upon students.
How does a college foot the bill without funding? Why don't we spend more money, like we used to, to fund colleges? I'm for forgiveness, personally, and funding universities better (again) in order to bring education (which is societally beneficial, since people are smarter and more capable thereby) back into reach (and allow graduates to be fuller contributors to the economy, start families, etc.).
Public schools, in general, are even this way now. They make all the “profit,” but legally require you to pay them lol
Education, health, housing, groceries, transportation, etc. These are things needed for a society to function properly but here in America we are all about business. If it doesn't make money it's worthless. No other value is added to society other than the filling of a few individuals pockets with money that will no be shared with anyone else.
Why wouldn't they when everyone gets financial aid? When you know the cost will be paid for, raise the prices to the top.
Every subsequent semester I attended college, the tuition increased and there were additional lab fees. Also, every subsequent year, the president's salary increased (currently $559k).
Something like this needs to come with meaningful measures to reduce the costs associated with college
Like completely ending student loan programs?
All that will do is boost the private student loan market.
Funny how the cost of college started to spiral out of control when the government got into the student loan business.
Funny when they got involved in health care with Medicare is when spending got out of control there as well. Almost as if the guy who prints the money fucks up the market when he Gets involved.
Blaming Medicare on $1,000 on Insulin and $300 ibuprofen pills?
There are many types of insulin. Which one is $1000?
The kind they administer at hospitals. Might be the same $30 vial, but administering it in a hospital balloons the price. Same reason why you see $40 for 2 pills of Tylenol in hospitals.
If Medicare refused to pay, watch the price drop. Medicare sets a price floor. If the government is going to pay your $40 to give Tylenol to someone in the hospital, you take it. It is also ILLEGAL to charge someone less Than Medicare. So everyone has to pay that ludicrous price.
Private insurance set the price floor, Medicare just has to pay it. Insurance, and the hospital charge masters associated with it, predates Medicare.
Yeah this is why people who live in countries with single payer systems pay more than we do in America..... Wait a minute that's not what's happening
Yes. Countries that have single payer have it cheaper. Our hybrid system really fucks it up.
Most of those countries don’t even have single payer. It’s usually some form of multipayer.
Medicare was launched in 1965, when do you feel like healthcare spending got out of control?
It has been Growing faster than inflation since then
...and the inflection point was 1965? You got a source?
Privatized healthcare is profit driven to they drive the cost up. The only instance I can think of that you’re relating to was the launch of the ACA when people were forced to buy more expensive insurance after they lost coverage because their plans didn’t meet a minimum.
Not trying to be pedantic, but the federal government doesn’t print money, that’d be the federal reserve, and despite having federal in their name are *NOT* a federal government entity.
Make the Universities be the private lenders. It's their product. A buy now, pay later sort of deal. Their product isn't worth it? They refine it or lower the price.
That's what financial aid from schools is a remnant of. The student loan system we have now is banks and then the government refining the system of personal loans students would take out.
The financial aid competes with the inflated pricing they're able to offer on the market due to the unsecured loans backstopped by the gov. The only reason liquidity doesn't dry up on these unsecured loans is because they can't be discharged in bankruptcy. Take the government and these mechanics out and the cost of education will plummet. Will less people qualify? Sure, but that could be a blessing to many and the really determined ones may be able to pay their way through at costs a fraction of where they are now.
“Cost” here meaning projected revenues not received from Americans who have paid against loans taken out when they were teenagers and that have been making payments back to the government for years. This is not money actually being spent by the US govt. And those people ‘costing’ the US govt are frequently already paying a higher percentage of their income (and wealth, if they have any) in taxes than the folks who were already rich enough to pay for college without loans.
Yes! This right here!
This is what the anti forgiveness crowd doesn't understand. That money is already spent.
Not relevant to me. But I'd rather see $84 billion go to something like this than another foreign-intervention war boondoggle. It's an investment in America.
You may not agree with it, but that's basically the argument for funding Ukraine. We're fighting Russia there so we don't have to fight a stronger Russia later. It's the "what if Germany was stopped in Austria" argument.
Yes, that's the standard "Murica #1" argument I've heard my entire adult life (I am over 40). Comparing everything to Hitler is cliche and usually wrong. I don't care if Russia becomes "stronger". I don't care if China becomes "stronger". The US could do with some reduction in empire, frankly. It's pointless to maintain "primacy" on the world stage and fail to take care of our own people at home. The US does things like spend 20 years and trillions of dollars occupying a country just to lose the war and hand control back to the people we were supposed to be fighting all along. The US has more military resources than, what, the next 20 largest militaries combined? We still haven't pulled out of Germany, Japan, Italy, or Korea after those wars. How much is "good enough", when the whole world becomes one gigantic US military base?
I understand your frustration (I'll be hitting 40 next year), but I'd like to point out that this isn't simply a misallocation of tax dollars. "If we hadn't supported a foreign conflict, we could have spent that money on our own people" seems reasonable, but there was never anything stopping our government from working on legislation to help our people. They just haven't come together to make it happen. This is less about money management and more about the reality that too many people in our government (I won't try to paint all of the House and Senate as completely problematic, but there's enough in each to where gridlock is a problem) aren't spending their time and energy into **improving** the economic health of their constituents. Instead, they spend their time as if they're playing a sport and as long as they don't allow the other team doesn't win, they've somehow scored points. [https://executivegov.com/articles/us-budget-explained-for-non-experts-a-guide-to-your-tax-dollars/](https://executivegov.com/articles/us-budget-explained-for-non-experts-a-guide-to-your-tax-dollars/) gives a good breakdown of the Toper Federal Spending of a $5.5T budget for 2023. National Defense was 13% of it at $736B. I'm not going to argue with that and say that I feel it needs to stay, or even grow, but it's a limited perspective that doesn't look at a whole situation before making decisions. It could very well be that reducing our military budget is an appropriate action. But it could also be that a different area should be examined instead of, or even in addition to, the military budget! My gut is telling me that we could save a lot of money if we focused on revising and refining processes. Statistically, Health Insurance companies charge you way more for your monthly premium than an equivalent tax would be under a Universal Healthcare program. Pharmaceutical costs are also much lower under programs like Medicare or Medicaid for a variety of valid economical reasons. Insurance is trying to profit, but a governmental program's goal isn't to be profitable, it's to minimize costs. That reduces prices. You're completely right in being dissatisfied with our current situation, but I think the cause of our situation has less to do with our militaristic budget/actions and more to do with not having enough of the right people in government to actually focus on fixing antiquated systems that desperately need to be updated for the sake of the population.
We love to repeat history and then wonder why people were so stupid back then at the same time.
The [Paycheck Protection Program (PPP)](https://www.investopedia.com/how-to-navigate-the-new-stimulus-plan-and-get-a-ppp-loan-4843031) was a huge federal program ***that paid out $790.9 billion in small business loans*** during the COVID-19 pandemic. The [PPP Act](https://www.investopedia.com/paycheck-protection-program-flexibility-act-of-2020-an-overview-4846944), which instigated the program, allowed for much of that money to be forgiven, so the businesses that received it don’t have to pay it back. Since the program ended on May 31, 2021***,*** [***nearly $661.5 billion has been forgiven***](https://www.investopedia.com/where-ppp-money-went-5216725)***.1*** U.S. Small Business Administration, via U.S. Department of the Treasury. “[Paycheck Protection Program Loan Forgiveness](https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/PPP-Forgiveness-Factsheet-508.pdf).” Source: [Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) Loan Forgiveness: Requirements, When and How to Apply (investopedia.com)](https://www.investopedia.com/paycheck-protection-program-ppp-loan-forgiveness-7550209) Come back with "fiscal responsibility" when you are worried about collecting on this rather than letting it go.
Not to mention the PPP was studied a year later, a[nd the current estimate is that to save one job they had to spend $377k](https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/tracker-summary.pdf). The median salary of the job saved $35k, meaning we could have literally just paid these people to stay home, not do any labor, not spread any disease (so that we could get back to work faster), and it would have cost 90% less. PPP is definitely a contender for largest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people. The Republicans almost didn't let the second round of direct checks to be sent out by Biden unless he funded PPP even more.
The unemployment office doesn’t pick up the phone and the website crashes when unemployment is at record lows. The PPP loans were to have people just stay on the payroll. Some businesses still went under with it. Some made a killing. We should prosecute fraud but it wasn’t a horrible idea at the time. Wasn’t perfect and wasn’t going to be.
>The PPP loans were to have people just stay on the payroll. This is the lie. If it was to 'keep people on the payrolls' then it should have cost 90% less, or at least something closer to 80%. >We should prosecute fraud but it wasn’t a horrible idea at the time. Yes it was. We paid businesses for unnecessary production at 900% higher than the actual cost instead of directly paying people to not spread a contagious deadly disease. This wasn't like the Great Recession yet we treated it exactly the same. The sheer amount of fraud is shocking.
It isn’t a lie. That was the intention. Could it have been done better? Absolutely. If we had paid people to stay home, their jobs would have gone away and everyone would need to reapply. Assuming businesses were still open. It was a shit show.
What does PPP have to do with student loans
>What do PPP LOANS have to do with student LOANS? Idk man, probably that word they share
Obviously both are federal programs regarding loan forgiveness. Don't be obtuse
lol a foxbusiness link was enough for me to not even open the article. This is part of the parent company that paid Smartmatic a 💩 ton of money to settle the 2020 false election narrative that Fox pushed. If this comes from Reuters or BBC or some more neutral based news organization I’d give it consideration. However this is just my opinion but I’d take anything coming out of Fox’s umbrella with a humongous grain of salt. Salt so large that it reminds me of Milton says Office Space, “There was salt on the glass, BIG grains of salt.” https://preview.redd.it/hxfe0oftotxc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=df3fdd7b467354e7908d01d319211521e123a322
Can already see how much of a joke this is from where NPR is. Just look at the current whistle blower situation and realize this is a crock of shit. Fox is also a crock of shit. So don't even start thinking of me as some 'other' tribalistic bullshit. Just that if you think those 'truthful unbiased sources' you posted are as such means you are biased and don't realize it
>current whistle blower situation Can you expound on this?
Yea, it's been going on for a few weeks now. Uri Burliner, senior Editor for over 25 years, brought up the internal bias issues going on. And it blew up as people looked into it more. Ultimately resigned last month.
So, after a bit of reading, some guy got suspended from NPR, wrote an article citing three examples of bias, and "quit." No corroborating accounts from any of his former colleagues, and the only place I can read his story is on Fox News? Does that sound correct?
No, it seems like you are coming at this already wanting to discredit the issue. I get it though, we all want to justify our own ideas and naturally don't want to go against initial constructs. NBC, NY times, politico, and many others wrote about this. Read Uri's article and NPR's direct response. Listen to NPRs new CEOs (Maher) TED talk and how news should balance truth with beliefs. I can't make a decision for anyone, but I would hope anyone can look at the situation first hand and realize that NPR is far from mid ground bias and high truth like the graph I called it showed.
I’d rather have my tax dollars help young kids then another Trump tax break for rich bastards.
States used to pay 80% of public university expenses, students 20% in the form of tuition. Now it's flipped. Giving just a little back to student loan borrowers is only restoring a fraction of the subsidy that previous generations used to get much more of. You people act like **public** colleges are somehow outside of public control. But it's "we the people" that fucking OWN THEM! They are state property. Any state could, tomorrow, shut down its colleges, and not open them again until they get prices under control. It's because you don't want to pay state taxes or audit your universities that they cost so much.
Fuck these colleges. I hope they all fail. One of the shittiest institutions in this country is that of our education. Primary and collegiate. Beyond embarrassing. Millions if not billions in endowments. No wonder when you’re charging more per year than many earn.
What gets lost here is that some of those students were defrauded by corrupt diploma mills who are now bankrupt.
Ah I remember those. They were taking people off the street who could get student loans. Predatory.
Everest, ITT, etc
Have the billionaires foot the bill
Just cancel interest
Funny how reducing revenue via tax cuts isn’t considered a cost. But reducing revenue via student loan forgiveness is considered a cost. Nothing like double standards.
Or offset the cost by taxing churches and multi billion dollar corporations appropriately 🤷🏻♂️. Just thinking out loud
We’re 30 something trillion in debt. Wtf does another 84B matter? We’re well past the point it no return anyways. People only seem to get upset when the money is going to actually help people here.
Right about the amount we just sent to the newest part of Russia. I mean Ukraine sorry. What a waste….
Who gives a shit how much it costs ... the fact that we send 95 billion over seas to help people without a second guess, who don't care about us as individuals, and pat ourselves on the back.... while also ignoring that 60% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck INFURIATES THE S**T out of me. They could do it but they dont... why...??? Is my point I love helping other BUT WE ALSO NEED HELP TOO!!!! So fuck posts like this that are supposed to make me feel bad
Great. We'll take it out of the 2017 tax cuts.
I dont understand how college won out. College students arent the only ones crippled by debt. Government secured the loans and made it to where you cant claim student loans on bankruptcies. Colleges then decided to charge whatever they wish because the are government secured loans. I dont see how its up to the taxpayers to pay for college. If one decided to take out a 100k loan to get a degree in field that pays 20k a year or something is just not a wise decision. My main issue is people aee crippled by debt, be it mortgage, student loans, credit cards, car payments, etc. Why are student loans the focus. I really think its the Biden Administration trying to buy the votes of the younger crowds.
Don't worry they'll send that to ukraine instead after you morons vote for free ice cream in the cafeteria.
I think a better step would be to fix state schools tuition at certain levels depending on income. This would drive down the cost for kids who can’t afford 20k a year, and don’t want to incur massive debt. Over time, this would make state schools more desirable to lower income students so private schools may feel the heat to lower tuition also. Right now state tuition in my state is obscene. For instance UVa has been consistently raising tuition for a long time despite having billions in reserve. I’m sorry but if you have billions in reserve you don’t need to raise tuition.
I think one of the key issues is balancing increasing education access without inflating college costs. As it stands today college costs are mostly driven by supply and demand at a high level. If you try to increase access via funding such as more money to state school, grants, lower interest rates on student loans, inevitably the cost will go up. In the past, lenders had a risk of default so they acted as a lever to keep costs down. If you couldn’t get a loan, you couldn’t go. But they lobbied for the same protections from bankruptcy and default that the federal government did and won. Now they will bankroll loan balances that would have never have been approved before. All that extra funding raises the demand for college and in turn prices. In my view we have a few options. Accept that not everyone should go to college and reduce access. Accept that everyone should go but costs will be high. Or accept that some type of government regulation will be required. As far as loan forgiveness, I think we need to ease bankruptcy restrictions on student loans and some amount of forgiveness seems fair considering the corporate bail outs we have undertaken in the past. But we cannot do so without fixing the underlying issue.
I’d like for the government to have a solution to fix the problem BEFORE forgiving loans. Make the colleges cheaper, make the loans harder to get, require the colleges to put out degrees that have a high 75% or greater chance of landing that job within the first 1-2 years of graduation or they must pay the loan themselves. Put the risk on the colleges, not a fresh out of highschool 18 year old. Stop the shark program these colleges are doing to people.
Plus interest as all that money is borrowed
Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice…
Reading the “proposals,” a lot of this is already in existing forgiveness programs. The bulk of the cost, per the article, is forgiving loans after 20 years, and 25 years for graduate student debt. That didn’t change with the new plan, that existed before Obama, they’re just shifting the rules slightly and calling it new.
Very limited thinking. Look into MMT https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_monetary_theory
How much of free PPP loans were forgiven?
Who cares?
Good! The PPP welfare cost us close to a Trillion.
I think schools should have to back the loans since they are charging these high tuition costs. They need to have some skin in the game.
Hey, that's only like less than a tenth of the annual military budget!
If it costs the beneficiaries of UNNECESSARY spending in universities $84b I am in for it.
People who go to college make considerably more money than those who do not. I thought the rich were supposed to pay their fair share and he was watching out for the blue collar working class? As it stands this is bourgeoisie welfare.
Still less than my loans over time considering interest.
How to fix the student loan crisis: 1) Drop interest rates to <=4%, even for existing loans. 2) Implement a law in which universities that take government money (i.e. 99%) can't spent X amount on administration costs. That's fucking it crisis averted.
Apply that second rule to any company that gets subsidies from the government while you’re at it.
OR …. It transfers $84 billion from the older generation who is living on pensions and social security with paid off houses and aren’t suffering …. To the younger generation who are struggling BECAUSE of the previous generations “we got ours, fuck everyone else” attitude
Funny thing, all these loan forgiveness plans seem to be an exact match for the master promisary note's that all the borrows signed which outlined forgiveness for ontime payments for 20 and 25 year payment plans (undergraduate/graduate). I'm not exactly sure what this will do politically taking ownage of something that the Government was legally obligated to do anyways when they financed the loan terms.
I have a lot of student debt, like many. Yeah it'd be nice to get some of it lopped off. But more concerning to me os what good will that do for those going into the system today? Or in the future? I don't think college needs to be free. It is an investment of time and money into yourself to build skills and knowledge. But for the most part I think private universities need to take a 70% haircut off tuition amd public universities need to take a 90% haircut. Then only allow COLA based tuition adjustments every 5 uears not inflation based increases every year. Why? Because employers only raise wages when they absolutely must, why should universities be any different?
It’s not loan forgiveness, it’s loan transfer.
This is dumb the taxpayer is footing the bill for entitled people to go to college cheaper. If you decide to go to college you take the financial responsibility not the government and certainly not the rest of society
As opposed to the the near 2 trillion the debt currently costs?
And that’ll mean more taxation or borrowing and possibly higher inflation! YAY! Fuck personal accountability!
Does that cost factor in the economic benefits of giving these people more disposable income to spend in the economy vs paying down the loans? Debt forgiveness can be stimulus
It's an investment. People unburdened by insane debt will be able to spend more into the real economy.
If ya'll are mad about the cost then tell you state to fund public school tuition. Drop all public school tuition to $0 in state and watch how fast private school tuition drops when enrollment plummets.
So like…a few months of foreign war support?
Supreme Court rulings be damned. Dictator much? Throwing billions at The issue without solving the problem is typical government behavior. No wonder we ended up 34 trillion in debt.
College professors aren’t making more money today they used to. Administration has exploded in number and self importance to the point that they are making tuition skyrocket. Admin is full of useless leaches. Most are completely unnecessary for a university to educate students.
Public education in the country has been massively defunded, States just don't pay into education like they used to. We've moved the burden on the individual students and thus made public education less public. This is the best solution in a bad situation. The students with the most debt come from the lower classes and minorities. Refusal to offer them any assistance in a country overflowing with privileges for the wealthy, who own more money than anytime in human history, just out of fear of the debt would be in further service to these wealthy aristocrats. Who only bring up the national debt when it serves them, because they know deep down they have all the goddamn money and if the bill ever needs to seriously be paid off it's going to come from their extensive fortunes. Because no one else in this country has any wealth to speak of.
War cost more. Subsidies to billionaires cost more. Subsidies to Big Agra cost more. Educated people are a win for society… leaves them less receptive to fascist and neoliberals.
And the U.S. has an educated workforce to compete in the world economy. I don't see how this is as bad an investment as sending $95B in corporate welfare to the shareholders of weapons manufacturers through Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan "aid".
LOL most majors are junk.
From Fox so I call bs
No problem. Let's just take another walk on down to the free money tree.
Sounds like a deal.
How many votes is this guy gonna buy? Forgiveness doesn’t address the problem.
worth every penny - do it now (i am old and have no student loan debt... i am also old and had no PPP loans ... )
So... less than we just spent on Ukraine and Taiwan? Sounds like an easy W.
It should be easy to eliminate the debt of colleges. They inflated the cost of colleges by bloating middle management. Forcibly confiscate all college endowments to pay for it.
With zero incentive to stop predatory loans?
So like next to nothing compared to the debt
Why not? Let's pile some more on. You know, when I have a water leak in my house, my first step is to find and stop the leak, then I repair and paint the drywall. This administration is not concerned at all with repairing the leak.
You cant collect revenue on debts people are not paying
Why cant more colleges be like[ The College of the Ozarks](https://www.cofo.edu/) which can be[ free if students agree to work](https://www.cofo.edu/Admissions/Cost-Financial-Aid) at many of the various college industries (ex. candy, honey, diary products) or some other campus job?
Nah, let's just prop up more puppet govts and fund their opps too, in hopes it's gets all squiggly like. Then we can lend lease both sides, and in the end kill them all. Or whatever....
Any rational economist knows that this is a biased analysis since it omits the cascading impact of that money being spent on goods and services rather than going straight to wealthy banks. That will increase tax collections far beyond the forgiveness. This is an obvious right wing hit piece. They are scared that Biden is doing something that benefits an important demographic.
What these articles always like to ignore is the fact a lot of these people took those loans with forgiveness baked into the agreement. This isn't rocket science. If I agree to pay you five dollars for a sandwich with tomatoes, I expect a sandwich with tomatoes. If someone agrees to a loan with forgiveness, than they should get a loan with forgiveness. It's wild to me that so much of our country is openly for reneging on contracts.
That’s good. I’m glad it’s about time My goddamn tax dollars went to people who deserve it and not people who already have too much money. And no, I’m not being sarcastic. I am dead serious. I am tired of every time I turn around the Republicans are saying oh we need to give tax breaks to the rich. We need to give tax breaks to the corporations. They need help well what about the American people? We need some freaking help too.
This is like saying “not increasing taxes on Reddit users is costing the government millions of dollars.” Any time the government spends money on something it costs something. The question is if it’s a good use of money or not.
1. Lower the cost of college. 2. Freeze student loan rates at 0.5%. It really isn’t that fucking hard. Like we don’t even need the principal to be paid back, just kill the interest. That’s the biggest problem.
How much have we sent to Israel at this point? "Extra" my ass. When it benefits working class Americans it's extra; when it benefits literally anyone else it's a blank monopoly money check.
Whats a few more billion. We keep just sending it away to other countries but god forbid we use it for the people…
People took out their loans. They should be responsible for paying them back. The one thing that I would be fine with is to make it bank ruptable debt. So if you really can't make it work, you have a way out. But it's still a big enough thing to where you wouldn't do it if you didn't have to. What we should be doing is making college cheaper so future people don't have issues that we've seen many students face in recent years. Public schools shouldn't have tuition greater than like $10k per year on the high end. Preferably closer to $5k per year. Private schools can charge whatever they want, but public schools shouldn't be. We always complain about boomers doing things for their generation and screwing over future generations. Student loan forgiveness and ignoring the issue of college prices is just benefiting us and screwing the future.
Aw dang, how are we gonna keep the military's blank check budget, along with welfare subsidies for billionaires if we do something as irresponsible as student debt forgiveness?
A country has issues with monopolistic energy producers overcharging citizens to the point of bankruptcy. Instead of forcing the providers to lower prices for something that is a necessity, they pay billions to bail them out. That’s how much sense this shit is making
We could have a war in Ukraine for that kind of money!
Does it really "cost" 84 billion if it is unpaid interest? The principal is paid off. The boost to the economy by putting money in the hands of regular people is enormous. Not having people in debt is good for society. A little less money in the hands of the 1% will have virtually no negatives to it.
I can’t believe these colleges with lazy rivers, billion dollar athletic programs that run at a deficit, and luxury apartments are unaffordable for the average American
Smart idea but where is this money coming from?
Gotta stop the bleeding before you clean up the blood. Otherwise, were just going to do this again and again.
I don't think more inflation is the solution
Lmao end all student debt with 2 years of Elon’s “compensation package”
It’s a pretty easy fix. Strip supercreditor status, that should never have existed in the first place. Watch tuition plummet overnight, once the blank check for mayhem is withdrawn.
Pennies on the dollar at this point
Please tell me that the American people will be all for helping out those trying to better themselves, and being taken advantage of by predatory lenders, just like they were okay with the recent 93 billion to aid
Makes me sick to think our taxes are going towards paying people with higher earning potential. Steal from the poorer and give to the poor.
That's far less than the amount we spend on foreign wars. Money well invested into our youth.
Cancelling federal student loans does not actually cost anything. The original layout of the system was to have the private sector purchase the loans from the government. After the repeal of Glass–Steagall, the private sector found more destructive things to do with their money. This has left the government as the creditor. Meaning the government is also collecting the interest. This has become a revenue positive operation. The loans could be cancelled without having to pay anyone else. Also, the debt would be considered taxable income now that the exemption has expired. The only issue would be having funds available to lend for new students, but again, revenue positive... Unlike most other government expenditures.
Dump these progressive liberal democrats forever
Alternatively, if you take out a loan, you can pay it back. Pretty sure that's how it's supposed to work in the first place.
We need to cut spending.
How is it legal for Biden to transfer debt from students who received a credential to the tax payer?
They forgot the JUST 84 Billion. Who are these people?
Oh look. More fake student loan headlines. Yay!
Inflation is never going away.