MSU community reacts to Obama loan plan

Who in their right mind on a college campus would be against this proposal? Unless they just got done reading Going Rogue, and thought that they were the second coming of Thomas Jefferson. Student loan debt is crippling, and if your pals on Wall Street (supported by Republicans) should be bailed out, so should our country’s future. The debt will fix itself with all of the extra money that these straddled graduates will put into the economy. Instead of living in a cardboard box or their parents’ basements, these people will take jobs with non profits and improve our infrastructure, while spending money in the economy on rent, taxes, and consumer goods. I get bent out of shape at how short sighted these new found libertarians (joke) are. Where were these wanna be Thomas Jeffersons when Bush was stomping a mudhole in their 1st,4th, 5th, and 14th Amendment rights while running up the American taxpayer bill by millions on no bid contracts for his pals. All they do is point the blame at Barack Obama, and claim that he is the devil for running up the deficit while at least attempting to aim the spending programs at the American people.
My question for these Glenn Beck libertarians, is why make the world as fair as it was for you (e.g. college cheap to free, healthcare free)? Because, then everyone can be free to make their own decisions. However, as long as this country financially cripples people, we will not be fair enough to be a libertarian society. Those who live off their parent’s handouts should not look down on those who need help because they were not as fortunate. Intelligent citizens from the lower and middle classes should have the same opportunities as those from the upper class. Not receiving a four year degree in this brave new world means that you are destined for a life of failure and no opportunity. But I guess according to these guys, we should continue to line the pockets of Wall Street Execs., and bomb the world into oblivion with that hard earned tax payer money that you guys seem to have fell in love with as of late, instead of funding our future. Ridiculous that you guys mock Thomas Jefferson with your claim of libertarianism, Glenn Beck is worthless.

Yes, by all means, let’s have ANOTHER government program that allows people to borrow money they can’t afford to pay back. It worked so well the last time we did it.

This guy REALLY went to Harvard?

If you cant pay back the loan, dont you think you should perhaps go to school for something else. Its great to love what you do, but wheres the motivation. Dont spend 100000 in tuition for a job that is going to pay you 20000 a year.
Take some responsibility for yourself. Its not the governments job. Typical, everyone wants everything for free.

To person without a name:

This program is designed to make sure people can actually pay back (at least some of) their loans.

I have no idea what you’re talking about borrowing new money. In case you didn’t know, Obama didn’t create student loans.

First off, Glenn Beck did not create libertarianism. I don’t know how libertarians became the target of your vitriol “Anonymous.” You obviously have issues with people who expect personal responsibility, which brings me to my next point:

Second, loans are not against libertarian ideology. If I take out a loan, I am expected to pay it back including the interest. Why should the loan companies make money off this? Because that’s the only incentive to lend. This isn’t charity people, and if you’re taking out a boatload of money to get your BA in English/Philosophy without post-graduate studies then that’s your problem.

Now you can take your assumptions about libertarians (you seem to think we liked Bush and we’re all silver-spooners) to your next PETA meeting, cry about the state of affairs from your armchair, and major in something that will actually make you money.

Thank you Matt, Leslie, and Weee.

And to the anonymous, I am on a college campus and I am against these modifications until I know more about the scope of who they effect. I think people should be able to afford education sure, but not at increasing the expense to tax-payers. Just as a thought, so when these ‘forgiven sums’ are expunged, who actually pays for them? There is some honor, dignity, and humility in taking out student loans and paying them back in full and knowing, I fulfilled my responsibility and am a better person for it.

If I graduated in 2007 and have student loans to pay back, am I going to be forgiven of my debt if I chose to start paying the absolute minimums and defer the interest? Why wouldn’t I pay them off sooner to reduce the amount of interest liability?

And Obama said he hated the idea of bank bailouts, but they were necessary and now we need to be paid back. So I know I felt this way for a moment too, but the logic ‘if you bail one person out, you should bail everyone out’ is a disaster.

A better country starts with ourselves, our own responsibility, and our own accountability.

Anyone involved in higher education must recognize its intrinsic value to the health of any society. The inflation of tuition costs over recent years will inevitably lead to lower social mobility and, due to an inevitable reduction in the number of people pursuing postgraduate degrees, will lead to a decrease in the quality of research generated in this country. This in turn will have a negative impact upon all sectors of American business and industry. Therefore, I believe that any form of government subsidy, even if it is only a slight reduction in loan repayments, should be welcomed. This is essential if the US is to compete in the global economy with countries that provide heavily subsidized higher education of an equally high standard.

Anonymous, looks like you stand alone. Like everyone else is saying, why would someone rack up 100,000 dollars in debt and then go make 30,000 a year? It’s stupidity and this moron wants to reward those people. I know people who have been going to school for ten years and keep racking up debt just because they can’t pay for it and as soon as they get out they are screwed! Four degrees and not a pot to piss in. Obama wants to reward these actions? Every lazy s.o.b in this country is applauding this idea, lets just go to school forever!! BTW my wife and I have over 30,000 dollars in school loans that we would love not to pay back, however we did this to get better jobs so that we have more money. I guess that backwards though huh?

Make no mistake: Obama is terrified of what’s coming in Novemeber. His popularity has plummeted, his health care program is broken, and people are finally starting to see that the “change” he promised is limited to huge increases in government.

So what to do? Cater to college kids and recent college grads, of course. Toss them a bone to get votes in November. Never mind holding people responsible for the money they borrow, let’s toss accountability completely out the window!

10 years is more than enough to pay off student loans. You might not have a nice car or a nice house, but that’s the breaks if you have a job that doesn’t pay well. People have to have priorities, and Obama wants to make sure that getting what you want (and the votes he wants) is the most important.

By the way – is anyone thinking what this will do to lending practices? keep in mind that private institutions do NOT have to loan money to you. But then again, I’m sure Obama will create a huge bureaucracy and toss a huge “stimulus” to federal student loans.

I am not in favor of Obama or his ideologies, but I think is a good plan. Paying back loans is important but tuition rates have gotten WAY out of hand. I think if a student has been paying off their loans until they are in their 40s, they have suffered enough!

Our economy is coming to the point where it will be impossible to earn a living wage without some post-high school education and/or training. It is in the interest of society, therefore, to make this education/training affordable to every person who has the ambition to seek it. But doing that by loaning people money and then offering various schemes through which they can avoid full repayment sets a bad precedent.

Instead, we should increase overall gov’t support of higher education across the board, thereby lowering everyone’s cost to become a productive, self-supporting member of society. And people who need to borrow some money to do this will be expected to repay the amount they borrowed — which is how a loan is supposed to work.

Sounds to me like a bunch of whities who don’t want brown people to get educated…

R fonz: You forgot this point: why should only the super-rich or the soon-to-be super rich get into the elite schools? If I choose to be a social worker & help people for my crappy $25,000 a year (cuz this nation values actors & athletes more), you are saying that I should not attend Princeton? or USC? or any other big name, more expensive school? So the “little $ professions” like the helping professions should go to what — Peoria U while the future docs attend Harvard? Oh wait, that only applies if you are white, middle class. If you are a minority, the schools I mention will subsidize you! And if you are a foreigner, you’ll get even more!!!

I find it disconcerting that so many of the comments here regard a degree as simply a financial investment for a future career. Obtaining a degree should also be about the pursuit of knowledge for knowledge’s sake, enabling people to better themselves and then to go on and better society as a whole. Regarding the process as purely a financial investment undermines the whole principle of a university and will lead to an emphasis on degrees which can only provide a guaranteed financial ‘pay off’ in the future. Should we eliminate the arts and humanities departments because they teach subjects that will not guarantee a graduate with a high salary? By reducing the crippling debt facing future graduates, these vital departments may be able to survive. And that is something that will benefit everyone in the long run. This is a worthy way to spend tax payer’s money.

I’ll try that again…

I find it disconcerting that so many of the comments here regard a degree as simply a financial investment for a future career. Obtaining a degree should also be about the pursuit of knowledge for knowledge’s sake, enabling people to better themselves and then to go on and better society as a whole. Regarding the process as purely a financial investment undermines the whole principle of a university and will lead to an emphasis on degrees which can only provide a guaranteed financial ‘pay off’ in the future. Should we eliminate the arts and humanities departments because they teach subjects that will not guarantee a graduate with a high salary? By reducing the crippling debt facing future graduates, these vital departments may be able to survive. And that is something that will benefit everyone in the long run. This is a worthy way to spend tax payer’s money.

“And that is something that will benefit everyone in the long run. This is a worthy way to spend tax payer’s money.”

I disagree. I love my friend very much, but her American Studies degree won’t do much for me. I suspect it won’t do much for her either.

A lot of the arguments here could also be applied to a home mortgage. After all, if people had their mortgage forgiven after 20 years, they’d be able to put money into the economy. And isn’t a home a basic need that will enable a person to provide back to society? Why not build free houses for everyone?

The answer is that building a hosue is expensive. A lot of people work on its construction, and they too have needs for housing and education. For a mortgage company to fund all of that work, and then be expected to smile when someone chumps out of a loan, devalues the home itself and the work of the people going into it.

Our entire economy is based on paying in full for what you get. Instead of forgiving debt, the focus should be on reducing interest rates, forcing tuition increases to be capped at the rate of inflation, and making tough decisions on where to spend money. This includes cutting degree programs that cost more than the value they provide.

our man child president said “I” 96 times in 70 minutes during last night’s blame fest.

what a self-centered dick.

IS – if you think the color of your skin is important to anyone but you then you truly have a lot to learn in this world.

Usagi – knowledge for its own sake is wonderful. You’d be amazed how much of it is out there FOR FREE. And here’s a bit of knowledge that’ll serve you well in your lifetime: if you’re going to pay for something, make sure it’s worth at least what you’re paying for it.

If your college education costs $100,000 and it only allows you to make $10,000 more a year than you could have made without it, then you didn’t make a very good investment.

See, knowledge is wonderful, but if you can’t apply it, then you’re a bigger idiot than the illiterate guy living under a bridge. At least he’s got an excuse.

Oh, and if you want tuition rates to come down, the LAST thing you want to do is help people artificially afford more school. When enrollments fall because people cannot afford to attend school, then the schools will have to find a way to lower tuition or go out of business. Ah, the wonders of the free market. It actually works if you let it.

Jason, while your friend’s American Studies degree may not benefit you directly, I do believe that the advantage of maintaining such departments is that by doing so we ensure that knowledge is actively passed on and built upon. If we continue to slash the budgets of these departments, future generations will be far poorer intellectually.
Unfortunately this is inevitable if students cannot afford the tuition and my argument is that by reducing graduate debt more students will enroll and, therefore, provide support for these departments. I would argue that the value that these degree programs provide isn’t simply financial.
As far as strategy goes, I completely agree with you that we should focus on reducing tuition increases and particularly in reducing interest rates on student loans. I also agree that absolving a loan after a given amount of time isn’t ideal and, as you say, would be harmful to the lenders (although I have little sympathy because of the excessive interest rates they levy on student loans). I would rather see tax payer’s money being spent on subsidizing universities directly to enable the universities to reduce tuition fees for all.

So….. What’s the projected cost of this gov’ment program after about TWENTY years?

…99999999999 Billion?

Wow, Obama. Way to try and make yourself popular by spending more of my future childrens tax money.

What a fucking moron.

Half the kids in college don’t belong there because they are unwilling to put in the work that the degree requires. In turn, they devalue the degrees of those who do work hard.

I say we up the admission standards, and start dropping kids with below a 2.5 GPA. Let them work in factories, or do other hard labor. They don’t deserve a degree.

What a STUPID president we have.

Yeah, lets tell kids that they don’t HAVE to pay loan money back if they don’t want to… Just wait for it to disappear!

Great way to promote financial responsibility, BO. What a dumb piece of crap. Financial irresponsibility is what got us into this mess to begin with, and now he is publicly promoting it???

Wow. Just wow.

Matt, I’m well aware of the availability of information in the public domain and I’m a big proponent of self learning. However, even with regard to published literature, much of this simply isn’t available for free and to perform meaningful research in almost any field journal subscription fees must be paid. The advantage of performing research within a university is that these fees are paid for by the university. It goes without saying that the knowledge which is obtained from practical experimentation can only be obtained by working in a well funded institution like a university – unless you plan on building a cyclotron in your back yard that is?

As far as university being a bad investment for a student goes, this goes back to my previous point, I don’t believe that universities should be regarded as businesses and shouldn’t therefore be allowed to sink or swim in the free market. They are far more socially valuable than a business and must be treated as such.

Usagi-

Everyone thinks college should be made more affordable. But forgiving debt? Why do you think the guy working in the factory should subsidize your education. May I add, especially if you’re persuing academia (arts degrees) and will not return anything to him? You’re effectively forcing him to invest in something that doesn’t matter to him.

And Universities have to be considered a business. You do realize there are operating costs (professors, other faculty, landscaping, construction, maintenance to name a few). In order to keep it afloat, you have to pay up.

I just think it’s morally reprehensible to transfer your education costs to other people via government spending. Do you think the guy picking up your garbage is beaming over the fact that he is picking up the slack over some 20-something who won’t make his life any easier?

Loans Weeee,

I would argue that supporting universities through taxation is in everyone’s interest, including the guy working in the factory. Using a greater proportion of the taxes paid by the guy working in the factory to subsidize university education will enable US universities to remain globally competitive and, therefore, to draw the best and brightest from around the world. In turn, this leads to a high standard of academic research, some of which will lead to scientific, philosophical and technological breakthroughs that, through collaboration with business and industry, will benefit US businesses and may enable the factory within which the guy is working to grow and become more successful. And in this way, said guy will keep his job.

Uh, a lot of these academia degrees go on to become professors and teachers, and if you think teaching our nation’s children history isn’t of social value, well than your a moron. Also, you can’t become these teachers without a degree, point blank. We have to have education standards or we get a bunch of self taught computer geeks who believe everything wikipedia tells them to teaching our children. Our kids are already behind by world standards, and it’s beginning to impact our economy. It just baffles me that you honestly think that these jobs are something you can even qualify for without a degree, and that you don’t believe that people like social workers shouldn’t have to take courses in child development and proof that they know in order to become one. Furthermore you can’t see the value to society to education, social workers, etc? It’s obvious to me that anyone that feels this way, only values money. Sorry to say this but having money won’t do a bit of good, if your children don’t have good teachers, etc. You won’t even get adequate elderly care. These things don’t pay a lot, but they require certifications and degrees because there is a lot more that goes into them than you think and without them we get divided, unequal, and random care. These things may not add dollars to american economy, but their social value is immeasurable which is why society has paid for it for thousands of years and nothing we have now would be possible today without the academic world.