>

Your numbers are well above the current maximum amount you can borrow in federal student loans. Go knock yourself out on private loans if you can get them but you can’t borrow more than $12k per year in federal loans and you can’t borrow more than 57k total for undergrad.
Conservatives on their way to tell us how Safety Nets are unfair unless it is for them specifically >

"I didn't get any help from the government!  I worked my way out of welfare all the way to Congress!  I never got any handouts!"

Lauren Boebert, paraphrased >

You don’t need to even make up a fake quote. Conservatives have you covered.

I've been on food stamps and welfare. Anybody help me out? No. No. They gave me hope, and they gave me encouragement, and they gave me a vision.

-Staunch conservative Craig T Nelson >

the selfawarewolves and leopards will feast on american politics for a while to come. >

I have yet to figure out why they don’t try and reduce the interest rate and late fees. That’s what kills people. You see people all the time saying I borrowed $20k for college and now it’s $65k. Reduce the interest rate to 1-2% and abolish all late fees. >

Interest rate is set by Congress each year based on treasury yields - it's established law. The executive can't change it.

Interest rates on federal student loans are set by federal law, not the U.S. Department of Education.

There have been several pieces of legislation introduced to lower or even remove interest rates, but Congress doesn't have the majorities to pass them.
Needs the House and Senate, and 60 votes in the Senate until there is filibuster reform.
So, like many problems in the student debt crisis, we need large majorities of higher-education-friendly representatives for progress. >

Even if the Dems had like 80/100 Senate seats I'm willing to bet the "revolving door villain" conspiracy will suddenly become real and 25 of them will magically out of nowhere not want to support it anymore. >

I'd love to see this actually happen before I worry about this. >

Just look at 2010. Magically 60 Senators for 2 months and yet they didn't pass anything other than naming some Post offices. >

The makeup of the Democratic caucus is crazy different now though. Many more conservative Democrats back then.
Didn't they also pass Obamacare during that time? >

They did not. That was not passed in the Senate until March 23, 2010. Democrats lost their Super on February 4th of that year.
Also, I'm more inclined to believe there are more conservative Democrats now than back in 2010. >

How do you figure? >

No payments if you make under $30,600. 5% income cap for undergraduate loans under IDR. These are two very good changes that will help a lot of borrowers if FSA can figure out funding and implementation. >

Even at just $50k, 5% of your monthly salary is $208. That’s simply infeasible when your take-home is $38k ($3166), rent is probably $1-1.2k, car anywhere from 200-500, insurance, gas, groceries, etc etc. >


That’s simply infeasible

It's definitely not.  Anyone with basic personal finance skills can handle this. >

Ah yes because basic personal finance is a required part of high school curriculum across the US..  /s >


It is part of the high school curriculum in parts of the US, and probably should be required everywhere.
Are you not permitted to learn things elsewhere, or just apply some common sense and put together a budget? >


It is part of the high school curriculum in parts of the US

Key word here is parts.

and probably should be required everywhere.

Probably??  Let’s just go ahead and replace that word with “definitely”. 

Are you not permitted to learn things elsewhere, or just apply some common sense

My friend, it sounds like you were raised in a family that actually has common sense - or perhaps you watched your family struggle and you said “not me” and were motivated to figure out what was going on… or maybe you were one of those rare kids lucky enough to learn actual common sense life skills in your high school curriculum.  Whatever it is that’s going on here, please don’t make assumptions that the rest of the worlds youth understands how important it is (or even has the motivation) to learn about debt and finances.  You are a product of where you grew up and plenty of kids, and plenty of those kids parents were never required to learn about this stuff. >

I'm not sure what the point of this sanctimonious lecture is.  Did you see where the person I replied to originally said it's simply infeasible for someone to pay $250 a month on loans when they're making $5k a month?  Do you realize how stupid that statement is?
Anyone who graduated from high school, let alone college, should be intelligent enough to do some basic math and set aside $250 of their $5000 monthly gross income to pay for the loans they used to get the degree that helped them make $60k a year.
If they don't know how and are unwilling to learn (particularly due to a lack of motivation), I really don't see that as my personal problem to help them out with financial assistance (which is what all IBR programs are). >

The problem with this $5,000 is that it’s gross. Take out retirement, healthcare, taxes and you are left with $3k. Half of that 3k easily goes for rent or mortgage. Clearly, you can’t drive in this scenario because a car payment and insurance seem out of touch if you want to eat and pay other bills. >

You're not even close to correct for the average American.  Even if you are, they still have $1250 for a car, insurance, utilities, clothing, and food each month after paying for all the things you mentioned (including $1500 per month for housing, which is very high for one person) and their student loans.  Definitely doable. >

You are you assuming this person doesn’t get to have a kid or family? >

Loans will be forgiven after 10 years if you took out less than $12,000, and an additional year for each $1,000 beyond that. So if you took out $37,000 in loans (the current average) you will be paying it back for 35 years now instead of 25? How is that any better? There is no mention of a cap on how long you have to pay anymore. So the people who really got screwed over and took out $100,000 will never be able to pay them back. >

I was thinking that, too. Hopefully, it stops at 25 years. My previous payment plan allowed for 25 years, with this proposed plan I'm fucked. >

One thing they should simply do is increase the after graduation grace period from six months to like 5 years or so (and not charge interest during this time, of course).
Six months is kinda just a ridiculously short amount of time for students that kinda haven't even been in the workforce for several years to get a job and gain steady enough income to cover all their expenses and then the loan repayment on top of that. Very absurd.
The loans would still be paid back, just delayed, so the loan companies can't complain they won't make their money back. 
A lot of students already have to apply for deferment and forbearance after the grace period ends, so extending the grace period would really just cut out a couple extra steps.
If we are selling the idea to kids that a college education is enough of a benefit to their future careers and income to be worth saddling themselves with these thousands of dollars in student loan debts, it goes along with the idea that in 5 years time, they will be way more set up to pay the loans back than if they had never gone attended college in the first place. >

That’s the first time I’ve ever seen this suggested, and I think that’s a fantastic idea. I graduated in ‘19 and it’s been a rocky road to say the least, but by 2024 I should be in a good spot to pay back my loans, if they aren’t forgiven. >

It's a good start, but it doesn't touch upon the root issue: A job requiring a college degree shouldn't pay $30K a year. I worry this plan will just further incentivize companies to continue offering poverty wages for jobs that require college degrees, making these student loan changes a form of corporate welfare. 
I guess this plan makes sense for people who struggle to find jobs after graduating, but if you work in your chosen career field it doesn't make much sense. It should be against the law to offer such low wages while requiring a college degree. No one should go $50K in debt for a psychology degree only to make $30K as a social worker. >

I applied for an environmental specialist/compliance job in Dublin, CA which requires a degree. I don’t have experience in that field but went to a research university and had hands on experience in the environmental field. In the interview the lady asked my desired salary. I said preferably between 60-70k depending on the duties of the position, I thought that was reasonable given the location (Dublin is very expensive , like really expensive even in CA measure) and work that would need to be done. She said bc of my lack of experience she couldn’t offer me anything about 40-45k. 40k is the base with no experience. I understand that experience is essential and stuff but how the fuck is that the base pay? In DUBLIN?! Who can survive on that much? She mentioned that they do bonus pay every month and it would total out to be around 60-65k a year but even then that doesn’t sound very secure… the base pay is only $21 an hour, with a fucking college degree in the stem field (environmental science). I can go work at in n out down the street and be compensated almost as much. Hell, I think even teachers get paid more (love teachers, no disrespect they deserve way more), and I’m currently subbing making base $32 an hour…why the hell would I accept that job? Mind you it does have benefits but even then…40k is actual poverty wages, and it’s literally exploiting people without experience. >

I'm not far from collecting Social Security retirement. It would really help me out for the remaining 7K in debt to be gone. Only in America - Social Security retirement and student loans. >

How long have you had those student loans? >

I obtained them in my late 40's to early 50's when I went back for a Comp Sci degree. I've paid 2 of the 3 beck, and the last one (the largest one) has a little over 7K. I'm 64. >

Do you regret the degree? Curious as I’m 42 and going back to school and shitting my pants about loans >

I'm mixed. I didn't really need it for my job (Software Developer), but I always felt bad about not finishing my degree. So I did it for myself. I didn't learn a whole lot, most I already knew from experience. And they certainly don't teach you how to code. But I did learn some things - analysis of algorithms and did get a good math refresher. I feel better about myself except for the debt I incurred. It's why I didn't do a Master's. >

I know that the Republicans’ SCOTUS argument is that Biden’s plan is not fair, but this is not an honest or legitimate argument.  In 2002, President George W. Bush granted the Secretary of Education authority to waive federal student loans through the Higher Education Relief Act.  
It’s telling that a billionaire spent his spare time suing to stop Biden's student debt forgiveness that helps the poor and middle working class.  The lawsuit challenging student loan forgiveness was filed by the Jobs Creators Network Foundation, a conservative advocacy group founded by billionaire Bernard “Bernie” Marcus, former CEO of Home Depot.  While railing against student loan relief, Marcus conveniently leaves out how he used his Jobs Creators Network to launch bus tours in 2017 and 2018 to promote Trump’s infamous tax cuts for the rich.  
The honest legal argument would be we believe tax cuts for the rich are good and student loan relief for poor and middle working class is bad. >

How is that proper use of PPP loans? He should be required to pay it all back. >


PPP loans?

Where did you get on this tangent? >

There should be a certain amount of years that pass after one’s last set of loans go into repayment, that allow people to qualify for bankruptcy. I don’t know what the number is but after a certain amount of time I think it’s fair to say someone’s degree isn’t going to magically matter more or suddenly make them enough money to live in luxury. Most people didn’t really need the degree they received…at all. It’s painful to see and think about actually
Edit: most of the people who have issues repaying their loans/it sincerely effects their lives have loans from graduate school for majors outside of things like medicine or business. The reforms deliberately exclude this demographic of person lmfao >

When they’ll do it for banks and corporations, but not the people, it’s time to burn this motherfuker down. >

I actually like the idea of a safety net better than the forgiveness. Forgiveness is great for those in need now, but a safety net could be beneficial for future generations. >

Sounds like both would juice the economy and make things better for seeking out education >

I really have a feeling (I know - my feelings are worth nothing, but regardless I’ll speak…) that the Biden admin wouldn’t have gone this far without a pretty solid legal strategy. It just seems like way too big of a political loss for Ds. Again this is just a feeling. But of course the Rs need to challenge it and make it look like they’re doing something. >

well like Biden said the other day its true that blocking this would set terrible fucking precedents. With this surpreme court all bets are off but there is still a pretty good chance they recognize the standing on these is bullshit. >

Nope. Cancel them all. >

Just let me bankrupt out of the fucking things just like every rich asshole does for all the debt they’ve racked up when we have a recession. >

This is just people throwing gasoline on the dumpster fire that is our college funding scheme, and then patting themselves on the back at the same time.
I find it hard to believe that the people developing these policies are too dumb or uninformed to understand what this is going to do to tuition costs, so I wonder what their actual agenda is. >

It's just a fucking show. They waited until RIGHT before the midterms to do it. Which like, I get you need the political win for turnout and at least they were trying to deliver on a promise but it just felt like too little too late. They got what they wanted in the midterms and now, o golly it might not quite be what we said. Fucking half ass solutions from dems and pure chaos and insanity from republicans. >


They got what they wanted in the midterms and now, ~~o golly it might not quite be what we said~~.

Republicans are throwing the kitchen sink to stop it in the courts out of spite. FIFY. >

Seriously.  That dude is blaming Biden because Republicans are blocking the forgiveness. >

Wipe all balances and student loans illegal moving forward. It’s predatory and it traps kids in debt. Colleges would be forced to figure out a way to make it cost effective. 40 years ago dorms didn’t have air conditioning and colleges didn’t pay someone 150k a year to be Director of Diversity Inclusion, that would be a good start. The end goal should be for middle-lower middle class families to afford college without having to go balls deep into debt. >

Not to mention these private companies that handle student loan servicing are incompetent at best and criminals at worst. 
My original student loan servicer, MyFedLoan, shut down after they got caught committing criminal fraud against PSLF borrowers. They transferred my loans to a new company called Edfinancial Services, chosen without my consent. Their website looked straight out of the 1990s and so horribly insecure I thought it was a scam. Two months later I am notified Edfinancal Services was breached and my personal information stolen. They had my account for two months and got it stolen. 
These are the companies we trust to carry out student loans? Criminals, all of them. >

How about they go after the root of the problem, the government guaranteed loans? >

Keep the loans, but only give them to people going to colleges that keep their tuition under a certain amount. If they don't want to set their prices reasonably, they don't deserve any federal money. >

They could also change the rules.  When you graduate highschool, loans can only be applied to a community college.
Then when you have a two year diploma, transfer to a 4 year school, and you are eligible for undergrad loans.
After 4 years, you have the same degree as everybody else, with much less debt.   And if school isn't for you, maybe you can stop after two years and still have something to show for it. >

Community college is a fantastic option, but it does lack certain opportunities.  I went the CC route and got a bachelors degree from a state school with something like $7k debt total, which is great.  But when I transferred over, I missed out on several intern and research opportunities that were given to students who already knew the faculty, had taken several classes from them, had experience in the appropriate clubs and labs, etc.  I found other opportunities, but many of those student positions lead directly to job offers that just aren't available without them.  Just a thought. >

People on Reddit love to champion community colleges as a one-size fits all solution but there are definitely drawbacks. I taught at a community college for a semester and I wouldn't begin to claim that I had the same resources as a university professor. The students definitely suffer from the lack of resources and opportunities. 
Community colleges are often underresourced and trying to fill multiple missions. People forget that the majority of community college students aren't looking to transfer. For a lot of people, the CC is where they get their education for their career or trade. There are a lot of careers that only require a degree or certification from a community college. Those are the students who CCs are best positioned to serve and we should make sure THOSE programs have the resources necessary to prep people for their careers. 
Community colleges do not even remotely compare to an actual four year college or university, not in terms of resources in the classrooms or the extracurriculars that they can offer. At a community college, your professor is going to be someone like me, a schmuck with a masters degree who knows enough about a topic to teach an intro class. At a university, your professor is going to be someone actively doing research, with whom you can work and get more knowledge in your field. 
A CC simply does not compare to a university and we're really doing a disservice to lower income kids by suggesting that they're remotely comparable. The whole "go to CC and transfer" rhetoric seems like a band-aid on the gushing wound of unaffordability in higher education. 
This isn't even a knock at community colleges, they deserve more resources to serve the community. They should be able to offer robust trade and career oriented courses and continuing education courses for people in the community. We should stop looking to them as a band-aid on the four year college affordability problem. >

That sounds like a generalization. My CC had 35k students and many professors were former university professors who no longer wanted to focus on research. 
There’s always a trade off but I had a great experience. >

I really just hope that these kinds of things mean the Dems are genuinely serious about doing something about this and not going to just give up. >

What do you expect them to do exactly? It's amazing you are blaming Democrats for this. >

I have no problem blaming Dems to a degree. Look, I get that right now there's nothing they can do - but this whole issue is bigger than right now. Both parties have had many many opportunities to do something about this. It's the same for so many issues. We spend our time blaming left or right when the reality is they've both been kicking the can down the road. >

So you admit there's nothing they can do but are still mad that they aren't doing anything? Despite a lot of pushback, Democrats did what they could do, and that's what got us here. Until we have enough people in Congress who give a shit, they can't do more. >

This is the shit they're going to throw you so the AG can stop defending the right of the president to cancel debt. This is who the Democratic Party fundamentally IS: a bait and switch organization that serves private capital >

How the fuck if this the Democrats fault? What would you rather have them do? >


Feds propose 'student loan safety net' alongside forgiveness

Will there be a proposal for a credit card safety net? >

Bankruptcy is the credit card safety net. We allow it for every debt except student loans. >

What they don't mention is that they have no way of paying for it. FAS doesn't have the funding needed to be able to implement this new safety net. 
Rep. Were going to give the money needed to fund it with one caveat. That the money was not to be used to implement the student loan forgiveness program that is tied up in the Courts right, should it be allowed to move forward. Dems obviously were t going to agree to that. So, no additional funding was given to FAS for '23. >

Never gonna happen >

the only solution that will work is fixing the actual problem of universities charging 60k a year for tuition. everything else is a bandaid >

The federal government should pay off loans upon graduation for undergrad students. This should include vocational certification in fields where there is a shortage of workers. >

The answer is to link government student loans to the major of the student. If you're a computer science major that has an average starting salary of $80,000 then you can borrow up to $360,000. If you are a gender studies major that has an average starting salary of $25,000 then you can borrow up to $100,000. Why are we bailing out people that spend money on college that their occupation will never be able to repay?