I completely get the impossibility of paying off 200K for an expensive non marketable degree and not being able to find a job, but I'm not fully understanding the issue with paying off a moderate loan when hired after graduation.
Comparing it to my loan, I graduated with $9,500 in debt and was hired at $10.50/hr. That creeped up of course but I initially made less than 25K/year. Compared to 104K now, that was very little income.
I was the sole earner, paid my rent, had a new but modest car, paid for my two kids (didn't even have maternity benefits on the first (the health insurance industry has never been a bed of roses), had a couple of horses and still paid off my loans in 10 years.
What I don't get is the primary reason why that doesn't work the same for anyone that graduates with student debt that is roughly half of their annual income these days.
I'm sure interest plays a part, but what else?
Do people just resent having to pay them back? They're cramping the new lifestyle norm?
Specializes in Medical Surgical/Addiction/Mental Health.
Here is where I have a problem. I am working towards loan forgiveness. My payments are made on-time, every time. I have an impeccable credit rating. Just to tell you how good my credit is, I bought a 50K truck last year at 0% for 72 month. I have no credit card debt. I put 17K a year into my 401K although I will have a pension from my employer along with an annuity to which they contribute 3%. So, because I did my research and learned of the loan forgiveness, I have no morals? I may be taking advantage of a program offered to all, but I bet you that I will not be applying for any help from the government when I retire.
Let me ask you this- do you deduct your student loan interest from your taxes? How many of you took advantage of the tax credit for buying a home several years ago, maximum of $8,000 I think. How many of you take deductions and write offs on your taxes? I do agree with the notion that the younger generation wants it all now. But, how many 40, 50, and 60 year old went out a bought a home between 2006-2008 and ended up foreclosing on it?
I agree with the notion that those who signed on the dotted line should be held accountable. I guess the part I am confused about is the number of repayment options along with deferments and forbearance. No person should ever be in default of a federal student loan.
I don't get it. $10,000 for my ASN. And
The country will fall due to the idea of everyone deserves the same rewards. Not everyone "earns" a trophy, but they do take the ones I have EARNED and GIVE it to people that don't have any idea as to how to earn it.
"Loan forgiveness" is a statement we should be embarrassed to know that it is now a acceptable phrase.
The fact that it doesn't embarrass people to openly state they don't want to keep their word shows the morals of our society. The blame game gets old, as it is not an credible excuse. Stating ignorance ("I didn't know") does not mean you should get a pass. You lack of planning should not be my problem, nor is it the problem of the person you promised to pay back….no one held a gun to your head.
I personally get sick to my stomach watching people I know post on FB about trips to the salon, vacations, starting their master's programs. The very same ones I have heard on the phone with debt collectors stating they just have "no money" to pay back their student loan. Sad thing is I can hear in their voice that they really believe their own lies.
Here is where I have a problem. I am working towards loan forgiveness. My payments are made on-time, every time. I have an impeccable credit rating. Just to tell you how good my credit is, I bought a 50K truck last year at 0% for 72 month. I have no credit card debt. I put 17K a year into my 401K although I will have a pension from my employer along with an annuity to which they contribute 3%. So, because I did my research and learned of the loan forgiveness, I have no morals? I may be taking advantage of a program offered to all, but I bet you that I will not be applying for any help from the government when I retire.
Let me ask you this- do you deduct your student loan interest from your taxes? How many of you took advantage of the tax credit for buying a home several years ago, maximum of $8,000 I think. How many of you take deductions and write offs on your taxes? I do agree with the notion that the younger generation wants it all now. But, how many 40, 50, and 60 year old went out a bought a home between 2006-2008 and ended up foreclosing on it?
I agree with the notion that those who signed on the dotted line should be held accountable. I guess the part I am confused about is the number of repayment options along with deferments and forbearance. No person should ever be in default of a federal student loan.
Your points are excellent and have been supported repeatedly in this thread. Its my understanding this isn't about loan forgiveness but about those who are resentful that they have to pay back the student loans they willingly signed up for.
I've been following this thread for a while and I have a question for the people who find the idea of a government student loan forgiveness program so morally and ethically objectionable.
Many of you seem to have no problem with people using grants or scholarships to fund education. Many of these are sponsored by government programs.
So, how is taking taxpayers' money in the form of a government grant or scholarship (which is never paid back in any way) more ethical than using a government sponsored loan forgiveness program (which rarely forgives all the amount and almost always requires a number of years of service in a generally undesirable area)?
With the scholarship or grant, the taxpayer has no promise that the person using it ever actually uses the degree for the betterment of society, if they even graduate at all. With the loan forgiveness programs, the person using it must usually pay back some of the money in addition to working in an underserved area for a period of years, which seems to be a better ROI for the taxpayer.
There seems to be some level of cognitive dissonance at work here.
I see it as a matter of planning and integrity.
I am a second-career nurse who was still paying student loans from the first degree. I applied for scholarships and grants, but received almost none (about 5% in scholarships). I didn't want any more loans to add onto the first. So, I got up every morning to teach at a local community college, went to classes for my BS to BSN program in the afternoon, worked at Best Buy in the evening, and had a small job on some nights after that. I graduated without any new loans.
I knew what I was getting into and I don't let anyone remove the burden of my choices. Scholarships are something you plan on in advance. You promise the taxpayer (or in my case, private corporation/trust) that you will work hard during school to maintain good grades. If you fulfill that promise, you are a good person with integrity.
Loans are also something you plan on in advance. You promise that you will work hard after graduation to be able to pay back the loan. If you don't fulfill that promise, you are going back on your word to a corporation and expect to get bailed out by the taxpayers. Now, it may not be your fault that your word is now meaningless, but your word is now meaningless.
With my student loans from my first degree, I once had to borrow $75 from my dad just to make up the extra money to keep my payment up to date, but I always kept my word.
Yes, the taxpayers (us) are paying the same either way. I'm sympathetic to people who want assistance for their loans, but it is different when you no longer want to do what you promised you would do.
(FWIW, I don't see a problem with loan forgiveness. You are helping people in need and just found a different way to keep your word.)
I attended a state school in California from 2001-2003. Before that I did my freshman and sophomore years at a California community college. Tuition at the community college was $12 a unit. Yes, you read that right -- $12 a unit! Tuition at the CSU was $1428 a year. Maybe $2000 once all the fees were added in. Needless to say, I didn't graduate with crippling debt.
Fast-forward to 2015. Tuition at a California community college is now $46 per unit. Still a deal, but roughly 380% more than I paid just 15 years ago. Tuition and fees for 2015 at my alma mater is $7,276 -- just over 500% more than I paid 15 years ago!
To really drive my point home, just for fun let's pretend I hadn't gone to a junior college those first two years. Let's say I went to the state school instead. After four years I would have graduated with $5712 in debt from tuition and fees.
Fast forward 15 years later, and a student attending the same school would graduate with $29048 in debt from tuition and fees. Even considering 15 years of inflation, this is a MASSIVE increase in the cost of education! $5712 vs $29048! Over 500% increase in only 15 years! You had better believe that I thank G*d every day that I was lucky enough to attend a state school at a time when budgets hadn't been slashed to the bone. I pray for the kids attending these days, and I live in fear of what things will be like when my daughter is ready to go, 16 years from now.
So please, can we stop dumping on "kids these days with their expensive tastes and gimmie attitudes" and acknowledge the fact that we had it pretty &%@# good? And that we should want the same for future generations?
I attended a state school in California from 2001-2003. Before that I did my freshman and sophomore years at a California community college. Tuition at the community college was $12 a unit. Yes, you read that right -- $12 a unit! Tuition at the CSU was $1428 a year. Maybe $2000 once all the fees were added in. Needless to say, I didn't graduate with crippling debt.
Fast-forward to 2015. Tuition at a California community college is now $46 per unit. Still a deal, but roughly 380% more than I paid just 15 years ago. Tuition and fees for 2015 at my alma mater is $7,276 -- just over 500% more than I paid 15 years ago!
To really drive my point home, just for fun let's pretend I hadn't gone to a junior college those first two years. Let's say I went to the state school instead. After four years I would have graduated with $5712 in debt from tuition and fees.
Fast forward 15 years later, and a student attending the same school would graduate with $29048 in debt from tuition and fees. Even considering 15 years of inflation, this is a MASSIVE increase in the cost of education! $5712 vs $29048! Over 500% increase! You had better believe that I thank G*d every day that I was lucky enough to attend a state school at a time when budgets hadn't been slashed to the bone. I pray for the kids attending these days, and I live in fear of what things will be like when my daughter is ready to go, 16 years from now.
So please, can we stop dumping on "kids these days with their expensive tastes and gimmie attitudes" and acknowledge the fact that we had it pretty &%@# good? And that we should want the same for future generations?
We did have it good but I still consider 29K these days pretty good ROI (if you can get a job, if you borrow in a poor job market, that was a poor decision).
California just doesn't have the money to keep providing 6K BSNs*. Can you imagine, 6K for a brick and mortar BSN?
I attended a state school in California from 2001-2003. Before that I did my freshman and sophomore years at a California community college. Tuition at the community college was $12 a unit. Yes, you read that right -- $12 a unit! Tuition at the CSU was $1428 a year. Maybe $2000 once all the fees were added in. Needless to say, I didn't graduate with crippling debt.
Fast-forward to 2015. Tuition at a California community college is now $46 per unit. Still a deal, but roughly 380% more than I paid just 15 years ago. Tuition and fees for 2015 at my alma mater is $7,276 -- just over 500% more than I paid 15 years ago!
To really drive my point home, just for fun let's pretend I hadn't gone to a junior college those first two years. Let's say I went to the state school instead. After four years I would have graduated with $5712 in debt from tuition and fees.
Fast forward 15 years later, and a student attending the same school would graduate with $29048 in debt from tuition and fees. Even considering 15 years of inflation, this is a MASSIVE increase in the cost of education! $5712 vs $29048! Over 500% increase in only 15 years! You had better believe that I thank G*d every day that I was lucky enough to attend a state school at a time when budgets hadn't been slashed to the bone. I pray for the kids attending these days, and I live in fear of what things will be like when my daughter is ready to go, 16 years from now.
So please, can we stop dumping on "kids these days with their expensive tastes and gimmie attitudes" and acknowledge the fact that we had it pretty &%@# good? And that we should want the same for future generations?
Thank you for providing the best written response in this thread.
We did have it good but I still consider 29K these days pretty good ROI (if you can get a job, if you borrow in a poor job market, that was a poor decision).
California just doesn't have the money to keep providing 6K BSNs*. Can you imagine, 6K for a brick and mortar BSN?
*6K sounds low but I'm trusting your math.
California absolutely DOES have the money to provide 6k BSNs.
If you study the graphs you'll see that over a 20 year period, the percentage of California budget allocated to higher ed fell from 14% to 9%, whereas the percentage of the budget allocated to corrections went from 3% to 10%. California now spends more money locking people away than on educating them.
But nevermind all of that. If Germany can provide what is essentially free higher ed to its citizens, why can't we?
Actually, I wouldn't be behind a 6K BSN. I wouldn't be behind supporting any more ASNs or BSN's in California as it is, we don't need more here and it's not remotely close to a priority.
And more than that, why should it be that cheap on the consumer end? 6K over 4 years? An iPhone is $750, the state doesn't need to pony up that cheap of an education.
Why did it have to stop being so cheap? What have more expensive degrees led to, aside from ever-increasing debt loads?
The cynical part of me (full disclosure: that's a big part) would say that the upper-middle class got panicked by all the social mobility inexpensive education creates, so they figured it was high time to put a stop to all that nonsense.
ParkerBC,MSN,RN, PhD, RN
886 Posts
Here is where I have a problem. I am working towards loan forgiveness. My payments are made on-time, every time. I have an impeccable credit rating. Just to tell you how good my credit is, I bought a 50K truck last year at 0% for 72 month. I have no credit card debt. I put 17K a year into my 401K although I will have a pension from my employer along with an annuity to which they contribute 3%. So, because I did my research and learned of the loan forgiveness, I have no morals? I may be taking advantage of a program offered to all, but I bet you that I will not be applying for any help from the government when I retire.
Let me ask you this- do you deduct your student loan interest from your taxes? How many of you took advantage of the tax credit for buying a home several years ago, maximum of $8,000 I think. How many of you take deductions and write offs on your taxes? I do agree with the notion that the younger generation wants it all now. But, how many 40, 50, and 60 year old went out a bought a home between 2006-2008 and ended up foreclosing on it?
I agree with the notion that those who signed on the dotted line should be held accountable. I guess the part I am confused about is the number of repayment options along with deferments and forbearance. No person should ever be in default of a federal student loan.