Solutions For a College Debt Trap
- Print print this page
- Discuss 57 comments, Blog about
Advertisement
While a billion dollars may be federal "chump change," a trillion is a lot of money, even by government standards. Yet that is about the amount of American unpaid college debt.
It is more money than we borrow on credit cards; but, unlike credit cards or even taxes owed to the IRS, these loans, for the most part, cannot be forgiven even in a bankruptcy court.
What popular wisdom does to the young is to sell them a myth that college is for everyone and everyone ought to borrow money to attend. Why not? The government borrows about half of what it spends. So why should parents save for their children's education? Children can borrow.
America's current fiscal philosophy is to "never put off until tomorrow what you can put off on the next generation." It is a philosophy that came crashing down with home mortgages a few years ago and persists with student loans today.
In reality, many student loans are a federal fraud. We tell students that there is no success without college. They borrow money for that college based upon that falsity. Then, according to The New York Times, about 50 percent who try will fail to obtain a bachelor's degree within six years.
Now liberals want to expand student loans. They want to create more debt and call it "opportunity." The truth is that the current regimen of encouraging 18-year-olds to borrow enough money for a house and requiring them to pay off that "house" before buying an actual home is an opportunity for nothing more than a postgraduate debtor's prison. We can do better than that.
First, we must realize that only about half of high school graduates should even attempt four years of college. As such, our high schools must realize that 50 percent of their mission is vocational, not college preparatory. A high school ought to be as proud of its military and industrial job placement as it is of its college placement. Principals ought to hire teachers who can interpret wiring manuals with the same zest that they hire teachers who can interpret Shakespeare.
Additionally, community colleges must concentrate more on their vocational placement and less on their liberal arts transfers.
The federal student loan program ought to be cut back, not expanded. Loans for colleges that offer degrees not readily convertible into job placement ought to be limited or nonexistent. There should be nothing to stop a parent or grandparent from saving so that a student can become the best poet in America. But lenders ought not finance it.
It is as much the responsibility of a lender to ensure that the borrower can repay as it is the responsibility of the borrower to borrow only money he can repay. This is especially important when the borrower is still a teenager and will likely carry the debt into middle age.
Some, like Democrat Richard Durbin, say one remedy for the student loan problem is to allow for discharge in bankruptcy. Oddly enough, this might be part of the solution. Then, private lenders might reconsider before lending to students without job prospects after graduation.
Lending a confused teen $100,000 so he can write poetry and demanding he pay it back from royalties is almost absurd. It will work for someone, just as someone will win the lottery. But it makes no sense to loan money to lottery players and expect a profitable return.
Bankruptcy inclusion will cause private lenders to adjust their lending accordingly. But without curtailing government lending in a like manner, bankruptcy will only shift the burden of student loan default to the taxpayers. That may be Durbin's plan.
If America is to invest in higher education, it can no longer simply throw money at anyone with a whim to try his luck at whatever degree a college can offer. Colleges and high schools must survey job needs expected in the coming decades and organize courses for students motivated to learn those skills.
Opportunities for students choosing degrees in other fields should be open, but only to the extent that the students or their parents are able and willing to pay "up front."
Robert M. Levy is chairman of the Moore County Republican Party. Contact him at Law52@prodigy.net.
More like this story
Advertisement
Comments
Toyboy52 1 year, 1 month ago
If we cut back on student loans, perhaps universities would make their professors actually teach rather than publish papers that no one reads. Perhaps universities would then trim their bloated budgets and give students real value for their tuition.
CNMT 1 year, 1 month ago
One needs to be careful when selecting the source of a student loan. I have a family member who obtained a student loan thru SallieMae. Guess what - they are not "owned" by the US Government anymore and don't report the interest paid on the student loan to the IRS - therefore it can not be claimed on income taxes as an education expense. I agree with the writer that one needs to b e sure that borrowing the money is worth the risk. My family member borrowed $ 25,000 for a program that was supposed to improve his job prospects - and he is still in the same job he had before the program, is not making any more money than he was before, and has a student loan payment to make. I realize this does not happen to everyone, but I am willing to bet he isn't the only one in this situation. Be careful anytime one is borrowing money.
snookyone 1 year, 1 month ago
Private banks (Sallie Mae) carry the student loan debt, not the goverment. Unlike every other loan, student loan terms are are almost 100% in favor of the lender and are grossly unfair to the consumer. THE BANKS created this problem and they deserve to take the hit for their greed and carefully crafted traps for student. Cold-cold hearted Mr. Levy once again shows he hasn't been within a million miles of a college campus and isn't qualified to speak on the subject of student debt. There are two problems that caused student debt: 1. Unscrupulous lenders and 2. Financial illiteracy by the student and parents. Why don't you talk about those two things, Mr. Levy, rather than "blame the victim" and offer alternatives to college that will never affect YOU.
JimHeim 1 year, 1 month ago
There was a time when this country yearned to be great; when we built roads and bridges, and electrical grids and rails. We put our kids through school so they could do better than we did. We even sent war veterans returning from combat in Europe and Asia into colleges. The result was an explosion of creativity and innovation. No more
Apparently our Republican friends have given up on America. We're too poor to maintain our roads and bridges. We can't afford to buy products made here. And we can't afford to educate our young.
The reason college costs are soaring even more than health care spending is that governments at all levels have given up on providing educational opportunities. It's not the lazy or the greedy; it's the failure of society to be willing to fund the future. Mr. Levy would turn our universities into glorified vocational training centers.
The only countries which do not need higher education are failing ones. The GOP has decided to put the U.S. in that category.
It's not just Bob Levy either. Just listen to Virginia Foxx (how does she remember to breathe?) who thinks that students can just work their way through college. I guess middle-class kids are swimming in cash, as tuitions and other costs are typically $20,000 and much more a year.
Perhaps the GOP war on knowledge is even more dangerous than the one they are waging on women.
JER 1 year, 1 month ago
Just as a broken clock gives the correct time twice a day, Mr. Levy is right in his comments and I agree with him on this subject.
fugitiveguy 1 year, 1 month ago
Great article. Very bad situation as if we weren't in the soup already. Jim posts the same old same old without really acknowledging the problem or offering any workable solution.
fugitiveguy 1 year, 1 month ago
Can anyone tell me or point me to a link that shows how much projected revenue the gov't is to recieve if the president gets his way about raising taxes on millionaires and billionaires?
Thatcher 1 year, 1 month ago
fugitiveguy-- Here ya go. http://blog.heritage.org/2012/03/23/the-numbers-are-in-and-the-buffett-rule-comes-up-short/. About $47 billion over 10 years ($4.7 billion a year). Our government borrows almost $4 billion a DAY. Don't you just love meaningless gimmicks? (the estimates are from the Joint Committee on Taxation). Be well!
JimHeim 1 year, 1 month ago
Don't forget the $3 triilion+ shortfall the Ryan budget would cause.
Maybe if states quit cutting school budgets at all levels to give rich folks even greater tax breaks, we wouldn't have to give up the dream of improving our children's lives. And if conservatives understood the concepts behind raising rich earner's incomes and the positive effects that would have on the economy, they might quit trying to justify the current low-tax system.
fugitiveguy 1 year, 1 month ago
Jim-are the figures in Thatchers post consistent with what your sources have stated?
Toyboy52 1 year, 1 month ago
@jim: it is not the taxes. Spending is the problem. If you keep chasing spending with taxes you will never catch up no matter what your justification. There is always a good reason to spend but the result is a devalued dollar. College loans are similar. The more you spend the more bloated college budgets get and the less incentive colleges have to make their courses relevant to the job needs of the country.
We need less spending, fewer government guarantees and greater reliance on the free market to create jobs and provide relevant education to feed those markets with qualified workers
JimHeim 1 year, 1 month ago
Show me the middle-class family who can afford to save $100,000 per child for college, Especially given the wage stagnation GOP policies have caused for the last thirty years.
Economists tracking college costs have laid the entire blame on reduced state support. I think that Robert Dole played a major role with his law to encourage colleges to emphasize patents and reduce attention to actual teaching. But then, I'm a Democrat.
In any event, the nation's future is directly tied to educational achievement by its children. By all accounts we are failing in that arena. That is no way to maintain our number one position in the world's economies.
Mozambique 1 year, 1 month ago
Well said, Mr. Levy. Too many kids are going into five or six figure debt to get degrees in "Post-Modern Transexual Literature" and other completely useless degrees that provide the graduate with zero marketable job skills. Then they realize that they were lied to, and go "occupy" and demand someone else pay for them. Somehow they find their own personal and political greed to be more righteous than what they call "corporate greed".
nothingspecial 1 year, 1 month ago
Great, thought provoking article Mr Levy as usual!!!
fugitiveguy 1 year, 1 month ago
Jim, what is the Democratic plan to tackle the $16T debt. Now I am going to go ahead in the hopes of getting an actual answer from you for the sake of this question I am going to go ahead and asign blame for the entire 16T debt to GWB. What do Democrats propose we do to begin paring back this debt? We already know the health care law increases it that is not the answer. I too was shocked.
Mozambique 1 year, 1 month ago
During his speech on the Buffet Tax Hikes, Obama said, “This is not just about fairness. This is also about growth. It’s about being able to make the investments we need to strengthen our economy and create jobs.”
If we take King Hussein at his (small 'h') words, he just said that he wants to tax more so he can spend more. Nowhere has he hinted at using tax hikes to reduce the debt. He just wants more money for his forced venture capital business, and everyone knows it.
Consider your own greed Jimmy.
Thatcher 1 year, 1 month ago
jimheim-- Please tell us about this $3 trillion+ shortfall the Ryan budget will cause. Then tell us about Obama's actual budgets and proposed budgets, and what "shortfalls" they will bring. We await your answer. (Ponder this while you think up an answer: http://thestir.cafemom.com/in_the_news/135546/battle_of_the_budgets_barack.). By the way, how many votes did Obama's proposed budget get from Democrats in the House and Senate? Think Alaska in the winter. Think zero. Those Republicans are so mean, they're even forcing all Democrats to say no to Obama. Now that's power!
fugitiveguy 1 year, 1 month ago
Jim, in case you missed it, please read and respond to my post above, it is between Mozambique and nothingspecial.
fugitiveguy 1 year, 1 month ago
Oh and Jim, do you agree with the revenue predictions from the tax hikes proposed by the president posted above by Thatcher. If not, please provide a link if possible.
JimHeim 1 year, 1 month ago
fugitveguy, If it was up to Democrats there would be no debt. When Bush took office, the national debt had declined for four consecutive years and was scheduled to drop to zero by 2009. George Bush was worried that with no debt, Democrats would go wild with spending, so he jacked the deficit back up.
Every Republican president since WWII has added more to the national debt then any Democrat. Don't blame us.
JimHeim 1 year, 1 month ago
Bob, Here's my question: When you went to Hastings, was it part of the UC university system? Did you enjoy a taxpayer subsidized education? Did you go to a taxpayer subsidized college before that?
If so, how do you justify denying that same privilege to today's students?
AFCHIEF 1 year, 1 month ago
Why should I pay for someones college education. You want to go to college get a scholarhsip, have your parents pay for it, or maybe go find a job and pay for it yourself.
JimHeim 1 year, 1 month ago
afchief, a college graduate (on average) earns a million dollars more in their lifetime as compared to a HS grad. That means about $300,000 in extra tax revenue, which is good for us, and more than pays for the cost of the schooling.
Why should taxpayers pay for military training? Why do we have to pay to teach you how to load bombs, fire rifles and the like. Wouldn't we be better off if soldiers saved up and funded their own training? Why should we have to pay for their education?
moonchild7 1 year, 1 month ago
The "Mass Marketing" of a college education has been the ROOT of the PROBLEM. Not everyone needs or should have a 4 yr undergraduate degree but it was "sold" to the Mass of our Populace who were that gullible, to believe they needed one (and an expensive one) to succeed in this life. First and foremost a person attends a 4 yr college for an EDUCATION and NOT a JOB. For anyone to go highly into debt for more than that reason isn't thinking right. While it's possible to learn a profession from a college or university it isn't always a given. There are Community Colleges, Technical Colleges, Trade Schools, Apprenticeships and even still some "On-the-job-training" programs to help people become prepared for a career to help them learn to earn a living. These programs have been maligned and disgarded by our school boards and teachers. We'll always need Plumbers, Electricians, Truck Drivers, Mechanics, Bakers, etc., etc., etc. Just like with the Housing/Real Estate Bubble a lot of people are being sold a "Bill of Goods" when it comes to educating themselves and going into debt. My son attended a NC Public College. He borrowed money, his family gave him money and he worked a part-time job for the entire 4 yrs. When he graduated he owed $7000.00. Within 2 yrs of graduating he paid the loans off in their entirety. The next 3 yrs he spent working at times 3-4 jobs and attending college in NYC for his Masters Degree. He paid in cash for each class as he registered. We weren't able to give him much money at that time so it was all mostly on him. When he graduated his $25,000 Masters Degree was paid for. He's been working full time ever since as an Urban Planner. Children need guidance and I think we gave him the best two parents could here in Moore Co. We need an educated populace of course more than ever, but responsibilty about money and how it relates to work, school and life are the skills that seem are NOT being taught. The future of our country and our children is at stake. Debt is a given. I've been in debt like everyone else and I had to work hard to repay it. I also paid taxes, food bills, mortgages, electric bills, car payments, child care, etc. I avoided traps and scams. many others need to do the same. The Rich have played the "don't tax me blues" scam long enough. It's time to get into AMERICA'S Game or GET OUT!!!!!
Thatcher 1 year, 1 month ago
fugitiveguy-- As best I can tell, jimheim has answered your questions the only way he knows how.
JimHeim 1 year, 1 month ago
Thatcher, actually I answered it as I chose to.
Thatcher 1 year, 1 month ago
MC7-- Help us out here. (a) What do you classify as "rich"; (b) what percentage of these "rich" folk's income should be taken in federal income taxes; and (c) how much in federal income taxes did you pay this year? Thanks for taking the time to answer us!
Thatcher 1 year, 1 month ago
JimHeim-- "Thatcher, actually I answered it as I chose to." Yes, you did.
fugitiveguy 1 year, 1 month ago
Jim H-as predictable, (more predictable) than my 0640 constitutional. I don't know you or what your line of work is but I think we can mark off attorney, accountant, financial planner. Are you really the top Dem in the county?
fugitiveguy 1 year, 1 month ago
"The Rich have played the "don't tax me blues" scam long enough."
Moon, I read your whole letter, sounds like you did a good job and raised a fine son. Not sure why the gratuitous jab at the rich was neccesary but good post.
fugitiveguy 1 year, 1 month ago
"(b) what percentage of these "rich" folk's income should be taken in federal income taxes"
Thatcher if I may, what is the maximum percentage of income should the rich pay in taxes?
I have yet to get anyone on the left to give me a figure.
Thatcher 1 year, 1 month ago
fugitiveguy-- Thanks for the question. Remember I am only addressing federal income tax rates (not state taxes, local taxes, etc.). I am in favor of the Fair Tax, where there is no federal income tax. http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer. Short of that, I am in favor of a flat-tax. http://taxes.about.com/od/statetaxes/a/Flat-tax.htm. And short of that, no American should ever have to pay the federal government (in taxes) more than 15% of his/her income. Earn less than $50k? A 5% federal rate. Earn $50k to $200k, 10%. Over $200k, 15%. No deductions for any rate, except the mortgage interest deduction. Economic growth would follow, but not as much with the Fair Tax. Be well!
nothingspecial 1 year, 1 month ago
We pay $50,000 per second in deficit spending for failed policies and to fix problems that will not be fixed no matter how much money we pour into solutions.
The solutions are so easy they are missed because our modern adults are blinded by the desire to do what they want to do no matter the consequences and into rationalizing that they are more enlightened than their predecessors.
This data in the enclosed hyperlink for instance describes the problem that is greater than affordable health care or alternate energy sources or any of the other common senseless solutions being brought forth by the current administration. EMPHASIZE A RETURN TO MARRIAGE AND FOR FATHERS TO BECOME RESPONSIBLE AGAIN. INSTEAD OF PUSHING ABORTION, SPEND HALF THAT MONEY ON PROGRAMS TO COACH TEENAGE GIRLS TO BELIEVE IN THEMSELVES AND TO DEVELOP GOALS FOR THEMSELVES.
Just one of the key quotes: "Being married has roughly the same effect in reducing poverty that adding five to six years to a parent’s education has. Interestingly, on average, high school dropouts who are married have a far lower poverty rate than do single parents with one or two years of college."
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/09/marriage-america-s-greatest-weapon-against-child-poverty
Thatcher 1 year, 1 month ago
fugitiveguy-- Sorry! I was citing a flat-tax advocate who proposes a hybrid-system. Under a standard flat-tax, things would be slightly different: here's how to compare the Fair Tax, the Flat Tax, and Cain's 9-9-9. http://www.forbes.com/sites/nathanlewis/2011/10/13/flat-tax-vs-fair-tax-vs-herman-cains-9-9-9-plan/. Be well!
Thatcher 1 year, 1 month ago
I love economics, and economic theory. I look forward to talking with the liberals here about their ideas about federal income tax rates.
fugitiveguy 1 year, 1 month ago
Thatcher-I like the fair tax, I think Neal Boortz is a very smart man. I agree, I would be for any tax system that makes it so simple that accountants and tax prep companies would not be needed to do taxes. Everyone should have some skin in the game. It should be progressive but as we know, far, far too many people are riding for free. I wonder how much revenue would be generated if all those who pay nothing now had to pay...well lets just say 2.5% for sake of discussion. My guess is that would be at least as much if not more than the proposed increased taxes on the rich. My guess is, the upper eschelon earners wouldn't mind paying a little more if significant cuts were made or even if the budget was frozen at current levels. That would be BIPARTISAN, certain to be demagogued by the left.
moonchild7 1 year, 1 month ago
Let's just go back to the 90's, Back to the Future, so to speak. Bill Clinton was President for 8 yrs, 2 Terms. He and Congress Balanced the Budget, Raised Taxes and handed over a Surplus to George Bush in 2001. George Bush was President for 8 yrs, 2 Terms. He and Congress drove our country to the BRINK of DISASTER!!!!!! and.....IN MORE WAYS THAN ONE. He handed over a Budget Deficit, Lower Taxes for the RICH, HUGE Unfunded War Bills, thousands of DEAD and WOUNDED SOLDIERS, and a Lowered Standing in the World's Opinion over to Barack Obama in 2009. Now you know-it-alls...TELL ME which of those two Presidents "Plans" for America is the one we need to adopt? Guys, STOP all this "How much do you pay and How much should they pay?!!!! I'm the 99% and I pay what I'm supposed to. The 1% seem to NOT pay what they should but they need to start and NOW! Have you figured out which way to go?
AFCHIEF 1 year, 1 month ago
MC7, that would be a Democratic Senate and Congress under Bushs term
AFCHIEF 1 year, 1 month ago
Heim, you want to compare training military members to do there jobs to paying for some snot nose kid to go to college. Thats a pretty sad comparison.
AFCHIEF 1 year, 1 month ago
MC7 this is for you
The day the democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009, it was actually January 3rd 2007 the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th Congress.
For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this:
January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress. At the time: The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77 The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5% The Unemployment rate was 4.6%
George Bush Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB GROWTH
Remember the day... January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee. The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy? BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES! Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES! Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy.
Who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA
Who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie? OBAMA and the Democrat Congress So when someone tries to blame Bush..
Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 & 2011.
In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases.
For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budgets. And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009.
If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.
If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th.
JimHeim 1 year, 1 month ago
Fortunately there will not be a shortage of college grads to keep the economy going. China is already graduating more engineers than we are and the trend is accelerating. I'm sure they will be willing to take our place at the top of the economic heap.
afchief, Bush jr had the worst employment growth record since Reagan.
moonchild7 1 year, 1 month ago
AFCHIEF, the depravity and destruction that the Bush Administration heaped upon america is really almost too much to accept, isn't it? That you have to say that there was an absolute line between how things started to "go down hill" and when President Obama took office is WRONG. The "Downward Spiral" was just that and it was a long slow tidal wave that has overwashed us thru most of the last 4 yrs. Surely you do know that "all of the really bad economic reverberations" created from BUSH didn't really effect Bush? I was speaking to my son this past weekend and asked him if he's upset about the amount of income taxes he had to pay this year. His answer? "No. It's what we have to do. I budget for what I have left over and I'm doing really well", he said. Some of you guys need to really grow up. My son's only 29 yrs old and he's more of an adult than most of you.
AFCHIEF 1 year, 1 month ago
MC7, you just can't admit the fact that Pelosi, Reid, Barney Frank and Dodd were leading the charge in the meltdown of our ecomony.
As for your SON, why is he more of an adult than me? Sounded like he was spoon fed his whole life to me
moonchild7 1 year, 1 month ago
Spoon fed? So funny, I was working a J-O-B from the time he was 1 1/2 yrs old and past his HS graduation. I was the absent parent since my J-O-B also took me out of the home at times for up to a week at the time. He was "spoon fed" an education since he was in Day Care at that early age and was with his Father all the other times. His self-employed father gave him quite an unconventional education and work ethic, traveling the East Coast in the summer and at other sporatic times during the rest of the year. Between visits to Biker Bars, Swap Meets, and Motorcycle Shops, I think my kid's no Mama's boy at all. He just know's what the right and responsible thing's to do in this life are as he has no "agenda" to adhere to other than to work hard and be decent. Someone told me about my son that he was only person they had met who knew how to be a good person for no other reason than to be a good person. But at the same time he'll KICK your A** if he needs to.
AFCHIEF 1 year, 1 month ago
MC7 so you and your son are now threatening to kick my A$$.
moonchild7 1 year, 1 month ago
No, AFCHIEF; Not YOUR A, but more like "YOUR A" as in ANYONE who threatens him. He does live and work in NYC you know; when he lived in EAST HARLEM when he first moved there he obtained a NYC TAXI Driver License. Not many "spoon fed" guys could survive that job and especially one from NC. He always drove the 6PM to 6AM schedule on weekends. Get a Grip.
JER 1 year, 1 month ago
The best way to kick AFCHIEF's butt is to challange him to an intelligence contest.
AFCHIEF 1 year, 1 month ago
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
nothingspecial 1 year, 1 month ago
MC7, it's nice to see the obvious pride and love you feel for your son that shows in so many of your emails and he does indeed sound like a really fine man.
emb6683 1 year, 1 month ago
Why should taxpayers pay for military training? Why do we have to pay to teach you how to load bombs, fire rifles and the like. Wouldn't we be better off if soldiers saved up and funded their own training? Why should we have to pay for their education?
It's the difference in meaning of two verbs, to provide and to promote.
moonchild7 1 year, 1 month ago
Back on topic, I'd just like to say that so many people in so many ways have been steering themselves and others in the wrong direction and that's what irks me to no end. Again, while DEBT is a given, the AMOUNT of DEBT a person takes on in their life has to have a logical starting and ending point or what the appropriate amount of it a person should "take on" in considering their circumstances. While I agree with Mr. Levy that to borrow $100,000 to learn how to write poetry is probably NOT the best thing a young student should do, this student might end up being the best POET the world has ever known. That part is sorta okay but someone needs to let that student know how the Debtor/Lender relationship works and that they'll probably need to be writing Pulitzer Prize winning POETRY from the GETGO. In other words, probably NOT GONNA HAPPEN and so maybe they should instead write poetry on the side and study to become a Teacher. There are some programs(and I think they should be extended) that will "releave" some students from some of their DEBT if they work in certain public sector jobs and in certain low-income areas. Those should be extended. Schools were supposed to be "testing" students to help them figure out which future "path" they wanted to take from back in my days in school that I can remember. Then there were just only a few of those as in College vs Vocational. Things went far off the tracks several years ago when SCAMS of every sort became the mantra of BANKS, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS, REAL ESTATE AGENTS, BUBBLE MASTERS, NO-REVENUE START-UPS, DESIGNER CLOTHES MAKERS, HEDGE FUND CREATORS, and on and on. BOGUS and more BOGUSER. Predatory Lenders and Scamers took over. Does anyone know what's REAL anymore? I guess NOT.
AFCHIEF 1 year, 1 month ago
So Pilot comment deleters. SO above moonchild7 6 hours, 53 minutes ago MC7 says her son will kick my A@@, but you delete my comment on my reply calling her out for the threat. Do you see something wrong here...
moonchild7 1 year, 1 month ago
Thanks nothingspecial. I really appreciate your remarks and yes, he's a good "kid" just trying to enjoy life and help make the world a better place....for everyone. AFCHIEF, I made absolutely NO THREAT towards you. I was speaking in a much LARGER context than you seem to be able to understand. And one more "college comment". Students in the 11th or 12th grades should have to take some sort of Personal FINANCE class that's taught by teachers who understand the real meaning of PROFIT and LOSS.
AFCHIEF 1 year, 1 month ago
MC7 this is what you wrote But at the same time he'll KICK your A if he needs to.
What kind of larger context is that.
moonchild7 1 year, 1 month ago
Your A, as in ANYBODY's A who might cross his path in the WRONG sort of way. I was trying to put into "CONTEXT" just what my "spoon fed" kid could be capable of doing if he more or less had to "FIGHT" his way out of a BAD situation. NOT your situation AFCHIEF here in Moore Co., rather taken as a whole, as in "the streets of NY" how my "spoon fed" kid could DEFEND himself if need be.
JimHeim 1 year, 1 month ago
After all of these comments - many just bizarre - I remain convinced that the future of this country depends on an educated populace, and that current trends of eliminating public funding for education at all levels (but especially high education) will only lead to the decline of the nation.
The children of the one percent will do just fine. Their folks can afford $100,00-plus per child. Sorry about yours.
moonchild7 1 year, 1 month ago
The majority of children in America attend public schools. We must continue to fund our schools with as much money as possible because we are talking about the future. Without a good education FAILURE is inevitable. Mitt Romney says he'll reduce the Dept. of Education to almost nothing and give the states back their control. So smart, give the states all control again to run their public schools. The states are really messed up with so many state legislatures wanting to take us back to the 1800's in way too many ways. College must become more affordable for everyone who wants to attend. Instead, why are we making it more difficult. Does anyone have any sense anymore?
Tatoosh 1 year, 1 month ago
The concept of throwing as much money as possible into the public school system makes about as much sense as throwing more money at GSA to provide oversight of our taxpayers dollars. More money pays for increased sick days, more pension funding, poor performance, and more tenure. The government is funding higher amounts to universities via student loans as tuition continues to increase. Harvard, Stanford, and Columbia were the 3 highest donors to the Democratic campaign. Not much teaching going on with those education dollars you seek. Don't see how this makes college much more affordable either.