Skip to comments.Conservative Solution for Student Loans
Posted on 09/27/2013 12:22:05 AM PDT by freedom462
So as conservatives rally behind Cruz for taking on the establishment and doing such a great job trying to prevent the statist from destroying health care, I have figured, soon after it will be time to turn the same attention to the gov't's attempts to take over our education and gov'ts attempts to use education to enslave the people. Student loans are pretty close to being as dire a crisis as saving health care from gov't tyranny. The following are solutions that conservatives have suggested for student loans:
1. Privatize student loans entirely
2. Cap the amount students can borrow from the Feds at a very strict limit, i.e. no more than 30,000 total for any undergraduate degree
3. Force colleges to pay a part of any debt that their graduates default on
4. Allow them to be discharged to bankruptcy
5. Require that all employers be informed of prospective employees who have had student loans defaulted on or "forgiven"
6. Some combination of the above policies
7. Eliminate student loans entirely, public and private
Do you support any of the above options for student loans or do you support a different option?
Congrats on your educational success, but the only actually conservative solution on that list is to get the government out of the student loan business.
Privatize lending and reduce the lenders' security level to that of mere consumer debt or credit card balances.
It would simultaneously become both a lot harder to get student loans and to charge outlandish tuition.
What do health care and college have in common? The government!
Only allow engineers/science student to get the loan. No Loan for law, art etc.
I’ll read your post tomorrow, but the title reminded me that it has been a couple of decades since conservatives had a few years of offering alternatives to the left’s idea.
I remember something about a deal that had the incentive of spending your money on health care, or building savings by not wasting it, among other ideas.
I wish William F. Buckley was still here. (and his magazine that “grew” after his death)
I might add that those loans should be on condition that they can provide a very clear cut plan from the beginning, i.e.e show what kind of jobs they will get or demonstrate an ability or willingness to go to a med school or an MS/PhD school where they will get a job that they know will pay it back.
I know that those who get into upper tier med schools and STEM grad programs, only a small minority of them even had the time to work at a job of any kind while going to school unless they got a TAship, and if they got one as an undergrad there was often a lot of luck involved. Some of them spend a bare minimum of 14 hours a day, all 7 days a week, in classwork and in research labs.
In any event, their situation would clearly be different from, say, someone majoring in anything ending in Studies.
I would agree...if you aren’t working on a science, engineering, or medical degree....there ought to be a limit of $20,000 max that you can borrow for higher education. The mere suggestion that you get an art degree, with a loan of $60,000, and hope to pay it back over fifteen years is silly. You are simply giving up your chances of buying a house or accepting a marginal IRA account at age 65.
The reality here is that we used to have a limited number of people show up at a university, and the vast majority studied science or engineering. After WW II and the GI bill....that all went away. An idiot will borrow $90,000, get a multi-media degree of some bogus nature, and then fall into shock by age twenty-four at the limited job options, the limited pay, and the amount of taxation. I know people today....who are forty-two, and still owe over $20,000 in student loans. Their lives have been marginalized by this act of stupidity.
Who gets loans for what amount at what rate for what major should be up to the market.
The market will probably get it right, but, if not, no gubmint bailouts!!!
Allowing them to be discharged in bankruptcy leads to more borrowing, especially when the loan is backed by the government. (Banks willing to lend more with the gov guarantee.) If colleges faced a shrinking market due to available education funds, tuition and fees wouldn't keep going up. Why does it cost $60,000 a year in tuition, fees, room and board at most private institutions? Because that's what the consumer will/can pay with the system we're stuck in.
Yes, husband and I both had student loans and hated sending that check out every month. But it was our debt so we payed it. We live in a smaller house because of that debt, but as we get a little older, and the loans are payed off, we're also glad our home will be payed off in three years.
And then child number 1 will go off to college, but I'm not giving them a blank check. They need some skin in the game they are responsible for.
Kid 2 is already (in jr high) thinking about job first, learn a skill, college pay-as-you-go.
That seems reasonable. BTW, do you think me and my parents necessarily made a huge mistake in relying on scholarships and then using family savings to pay for about 4700 dolalrs a year for the rest of college costs? Do you think that could be ok in some cases? I admit that when i was graduating high school in numerous ways I was sort of going along with some of the things my parents wanted to do (for a multitude of reasons) and getting a full time job and learning a skill before going to college, and using money from that job to help pay for college, never actually crossed any of our minds, mine or my parents. Another factor is that my parents had extremely different views on college than many posters here, including the idea that going to college right after high school was sort of an absolute necessity that had to be dcne.
Exactly—the amount of social engineering, however well intended, on this thread is disheartening.
$60,000 will get you one year with room and board at places like Syracuse, which I use as an example only because I remember being shocked at the $25,000/yr price tag and I'm not that old!
Let's sell Hitler gas.
I have no problem with the way you paid for school! Actually sounds like an ideal scenario. A small amount of student loan is not a bad thing, and if paid back on time helps to build credit. Any money from your parents— thank them and pay it forward if you have kids! Earn a scholarship—awesome!
My first kid will insist on going to college immediately after HS as well, and I agree with her. Knowing her, NOT getting a job and going directly to school is the right move. It was the right move for me as well, keep moving toward that educational goal, and I believe the statistics show it’s more likely to graduate if you don’t take a break, if possible.
Second kid is more like my husband, who Graduated from high school a year before me and undergraduate two years after. He worked and figured out he needed an education! He also has a skill that he will always have and has been helpful in life as well as employment. My second is only 12 so who knows what life will be like at 18?!
Because we want some Conservative teachers, lawyers, doctors, writers/journalists, engineers, climate scientists, etc, etc, etc!!
I enjoyed being one of the few conservatives to speak up in class! There are more conservative students at our colleges then you think, and they have more influence on fellow students then most professors.
I should add that while I said private student loans are the only way to go concerning student loans, as it stands now only parents and not full time students can take out these private student loans, unless the student has employment that can pay back the loan immediately. For many full time college students that simply isn’t possible. The system of lending to students would have to be changed.
But as with most things, Government involvement has not helped the situation but made it worse.
I think folks ought to sit down and ask themselves the real value of some degree (doesn’t matter which college) and how it will be funded/paid by in time.
If I were 18 today, and you laid out the eventual cost of $75,000 at some southern no-name college for everything, and my dad would only cover $20,000 of that....I’d probably walk away and join the Air Force. You just couldn’t convince me of standing there at 21, and owing over $50,000 for something of a perceived value. If it linked up with a job and I knew I’d pay back the loan in ten years...it’d be different, but there are no guarantees in this whole business.
For this reason, I’m convinced the only way ahead over the next decade or two...is community college, and living out of dad’s house, with a part-time job at Pizza Hut or Piggly Wiggly during this tight-money era. You graduate with almost no debt....get a real job in two years...and generally make $40,000 by age thirty-five. In the long-run...it makes economic and common sense.
The idea of some idiot finishing four years of college, and ending up as the shift supervisor of some car rental shop at the airport...is a joke. All that education, and you run a car rental shop? Two decades ago....it was a guy with a high school diploma. We’ve lowered our standings and educational expectations.
Well gee...Looking for a conservative solution to the student loan problem.
How about the old fashioned one, you know, don’t make financial committments one can’t possibly keep. When one is playing Three Card Monte with other peoples money there’s little incentive to be fiscally responsible.
Old school way of my age cohort was to work summers and after school to SAVE money for college. To work part-time during the school year and during summers. I If one didn’t have enough money for a full academic load one worked full time and took night classes. Took longer but one it certainly focused one’s efforts to actually learn and look forward to a debt free degree.
That work experience also translated into higher starting salaries and a more responsile position upon entering the market place. If the prior work experience was in one’s chosen so much the better.
Tough? You betcha! So is life.
It can't be done without rescinding Obamacare. The ACA made student loans an arm of the federal govt.
The real conservative solution? Don’t get the loan. Don’t go into debt for ANYTHING especially a liberal indoctrination center degree.
Work hard, live on less than you earn, save, lather rinse repeat. A college degree is NOT necessary to a successful life. Today, a college degree that doesn’t translate to a 6 figure income is the fast lane to an unsuccessful life, a life of debt, and hardship.
But if one INSISTS on going deeply into debt, one had better figure on being a lawyer, doctor, engineer, or something that pays. I would guess 75% or greater of the college students today really shouldn’t even be there. Most are not ready anyway given the sad state of what their HS diploma has prepared them with.
Thanx Mac .. I really needed that.
My solution - pay it back! If you borrowed it, pay it back. Period.
But don't you understand, on FR we all must bow down before the Great God of Engineering and Science. No other studies are important!
Right—because students with no other major have a chance of becoming financially successful, and financial success is all that matters in the world.
I missed that—what’s the relationship between student loans and Obamacare?
Part of the ACA deems that all student loans will be from the federal government. Don’t have a link at the moment but it’s been well documented onFR. Also, I believe there is ONE bank in the country that can still do student loans. Big Obama supporter.
Try this for starters:
Financial success is key when it comes to student loans - since the majors with the highest chance of financial success mean the highest chance of paying it all back and thereby not being a burden on the economy. Ergo, those who say the standards should be different for STEM majors really do have a valid point. Are there majors outside STEm with high earning potential? Of course, but there are mixed in with the useless ones.
How about letting private sector lenders decide?
And smarts are ultimately more important than major.
I think much of that is valid, but in our times, paying your way through for all of college is simply not gonna be an option for everyone who wants to get a college degree.
For starters, there are many colleges where tuition alone is 20,000 - 40,000 dollars a year - which means that cost does not include room and board, books, additional fees and any other living expenses one might incur. The probability of students earning enough through part time jobs during school and during summer to cover all of that are increasingly low. Some will be able to do it but not all will. Especially if they are a STEM major.
In the short term, it is unlikely that this will change. Which is why I was thinking that one of the first 5 options I listed at the start of this thread.
I do think in the long term, your solutions would work for sure once we get rid of the idea that college is for everyone - which has become very deeply ingrained in people’s heads. Get more of them acclimated to the idea of trade schools and community colleges and bring academic standards back to where they were before. End the unproductive majors. Then, tuition could go back to where it used to be and students could afford it with a combination of scholarships and working, something that millions of them just will not be able to do right now.
BTW, as I asked another poster, I had listed the methods by which i had paid for college. Do you think that the methods by which I had paid for college were unreasonable? I would have to concur that if my family had no money at the time, I do may have incurred about 20000-3000 worth of student loans, and it would have been so I could work 14 hours a day 7 days a week in order to prepare myself for getting into a STEM PhD tack, which would allow me to earn more than enough to pay it all back.
I think you are right that that is the best option of all. I do predict, though, that if the private sector were allowed to make all the decisions by itself, they would for sure find that STEM majors are much more practical to finance than the majority of other types of majors, though of course there would be some notable exceptions in economics, pre law, business, accounting, finance and a few other areas (note I am counting pre med as STEM here just to avoid confusion).
I also think the free market would do a much better job than the gov’t on deciding who should get the loans based on what their complete educational plans are during and after college, i.e. Phd, Med School, Law School and so on. And I think they would end up giving the same kind of loans the feds currently do for STEM majors and then look at some of the other majors - as a favorite example, anything ending in Studies and most sociology majors - and decide they are on their own; there’s just no point in them giving those loans to people when a mighty percentage of them will end up with jobs they could have gotten right out of high school.
If there were only private lending, bankers would overwhelmingly look for collateral from cosigners (parents), as makes perfect sense.
Beyond that, the caliber of school and student matter far than study plans and long-range goals.
(And pre-law is a goofball major—most solid law students come with a history or English or some other substantial, traditional major.)
But yeah, point taken—EE majors are less likely to end up as baristas after graduation than are sociology majors.
And your point is also taken - in a private student loan scenario, the lenders would probably look at a student’s caliber and work ethic first and foremost and give out loan rates based on that first and foremost. I suspect that in due time, the most capable and determined students would be getting private loans at the same rates and with the same conditions that the feds currently give out for all students, regardless of how qualified (or unqualified) they are.
To be sure though, there is definitely some correlation between the caliber of the students and the major they choose. Some majors by nature attract the most capable and hard working students and others by nature attract students who have zero business of any kind going to college at all.
In any event, I fear that the above solutions could only be realistically implemented long term anyway. Before we do, we would have to get rid of the idea that finishing college in 4 years after high school is for everyone, . At the moment, there really seems to be national consensus that if you do not get a 4 year college degree after high school, you are an underachieving failure. And then drastically reduce the amount of excessive majors that lead to jobs you can get out of high school and eliminate the idea that a luxurious college experience with 4 star quality food, luxury dorms and health spas is a sort of basic right. After we get to this stage, then we can privatize student loans and take all other necessary steps to solve the crisis.
I agree about the majors, though there are only a few that aren’t also cluttered with marginal students.
I also agree with you on what needs to be done, but federal funding created those excesses (”the bubble”)—and I don’t see anything but a reversal of that changing our course.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.