Doc you are the best, but freebies is insulting to anyone who busted their butt to provide for their family! Buying votes with your and our $$$ is unacceptable!
You gave me some things to think about that I did not consider. I was a slacker my first two years at Purdue. Such that it took me 5 years to get my engineering degree. Dad was only good for the normal four years. I took out a $2500 loan (cheap then!!) and I paid it off within one year. But I lost some weight and there were times I could not afford to fill up my car with gas. No regrets. I learned a few lessons early in life.
I never get upset when tax money returns to folks in a way that makes their lives a little easier. This forgiveness program does not solve the larger problem of the cost of higher education in this country. I wish that we made education and healthcare affordable for everyone. the country would be better for it if we did.
I taught at a for-profit college and had many students who were given big loans but did not have the capacity to learn the information. They soon failed miserably. The students were motivated but did not have the educational foundation, resources, or support to succeed. I often think of them and how they ever managed to repay their loans. If even one of them is helped by the loan forgiveness, it may change their life. Humanity.
When You and I went to school the public universities anyway, were heavily subsidized. I left OSU in 1978 with zero debt and a full tank of gas in my car. I worked full time my final two years. We paid for our kids undergrad about half. My oldest, 38 years old paid his student loans off over 10 years. My youngest and spouse went to Law School and have accumulated 6 figure student loan debt. Fortunately, their income level does not qualify for any debt relief. They would love to have $20K loan relief but knew when they were signing the notes that they would someday have to repay them. Do they begrudge some of their friends getting relief? Heck no. The cost of tuition especially for private schools is off the charts and has risen faster than any inflation index. I think the schools are culpable and that their tuition aid offices are too chummy with the financial institutions. I think that the opportunity created to relieve some debt is a good thing and will spur some debt holders to do great things.
As they say, go to the source/root of the problem to get a fix. As an example; when my duaghter was in college I got her second year's tution bill and it was 8.6% higher then her Freshman year. CPI at the time was 1.6%, So I called the University and asked what additional servcie/help she would get for that up charge. Crickets.....basically pay or there are other schools for her. Let's hope the trade schools, 2 yr schools and other viable career options cause a little "competition" Welcome back Doc, you've been missed!
I graduated Wright State U with 24k in debt in 2002. My parents helped immensely to pay for my cost of living or it would’ve been more. I’m proud that I paid it off, 10 years in the same field of my degree.
I couldn’t be happier for those who got the relief.
I feel no ill will and as an American taxpayer, I’d rather my taxes go towards education than billion dollar businesses and their subsidies.
Colleges and Universities have been screwing kids for years with their inflated costs. Correct me if I’m wrong, but prior to Fickell coming into UC Football, I believe the Enquirer ran an article that said kids going to UC were paying more tuition to help subsidize the football program. (I wish I could find that article) So was it fair for an engineering student with no care for football to pay more just to help the athletic department? No. Is it fair for them to also be carrying that debt? Nope.
Also, corporations are employing graduates at record low incomes, scaling back benefits, forcing graduates to intern for longer...all while giving CEOs record salaries and stocks.
Maybe Republicans can take out a mirror and look at themselves considering they’ve continued for 30+ years to lower the corporate tax rate. If the tax rate on corps was what it was 30 years ago, this would be a small line item in our budget.
Lastly, the American taxpayer has been funding public education for 12 years per person in every city in America. Why is it such an issue to help fund higher education? It only makes us brighter, smarter and more competitive in the global market.
This is an investment I’m all for. Good for the Democrats for actually using tax payer money to help the actual tax payer. Anyone says otherwise is just blind to the bigger picture.
I’m not from the 1940’s mentality and I do understand economics. But much more importantly I’ve lived 60 years and seen what a culture does and what humans do without a level of discipline and self restraint, not to mention a healthy dose of self reliability.
No I disagree. The trend since 2009 recession is spend our way out with subsidies.
I agree, but I haven't criticized subsidizing stadia, so much as protested the way the positives are spun. Don't tell me how much PBS helps the local economy, for example.
I paid off my loans in 2016, 14 years post graduation. I had about $30k to start. At Butler University, they have more than doubled tuition since I graduated. I WOULD NOT go there today because of the price of tuition and amount of debt I’d be staring at. That’s the real issue.
I’m not “jealous” of people who got some relief. The list is long of reasons why this is a bad idea.
1) This does zero to address the out of control prices of higher education. 2) incentivizes universities to support politicians in favor of debt relief. 3) creates a new entitlement. 4) increases income inequality. 5) not fair to the people who paid their loans off instead of spending those dollars on lifestyle. 6) does nothing to make students look at the debt/income ratio of their higher Ed choices. 7) the rage of tax payers who never attended college is underestimated. 8) creates tuition inflation for future students (my kids for example).
I’m with ya Doc in that opportunity is the engine of success. More than anything, I think universities will see this as a green light to continue to raise tuition. And this will be a political wedge issue going forward.
The President’s plan does include holding colleges accountable for rising costs. Also, addresses loan repayment based on income. Read more details in the link below.
Mom and Dad paid for my first year at UC. The rest of the five year program in Engineering I made enough on my Co-Op job and part time work during school session to pay my way and graduate with sero debt and zero money.
If you think you can’t afford it, there’s ways to make it happen.
The issue is very nuanced, for sure. I have less problem transferring some debt away from a young school teacher (and that's what it is btw, a transfer of debt, not "forgiveness"), but I have a huge issue doing the same for someone who studied something useless, or was totally irresponsible in college, etc. I suspect many feel similarly. Separating the two isn't so easy.
But all of this is ignoring the elephant in the room: Why/how are our young people able to take out such exorbitant, life-altering loans to begin with? Where's any talk on reforming these insane lending practices? I'm afraid we're just trying to treat the symptom, while willfully ignoring the cause.
At least in the aftermath it was a little more difficult to get mortgage. In 2007, there was this prevailing mentality (championed by folks like Barney Frank) that every American deserved their own home, like home-ownership was some sort of God-given right. Anyone with a pulse could get a mortgage at that time. Since the burst, mortgage-lending practices seem to have improved, at least somewhat. I just hope college lending practices start improving too (but I have my doubts).
I think it's really selfish and crummy that some people are only complaining because they didn't receive the same benefit. Or because they didn't go to college at all. Things change, and sometimes people get breaks that others never receive. You don't hear people screaming about tax cuts for folks with kids (vs those without), do you?
That being said, I don't feel like this is the right move right now. Inflation is still VERY high and more govt money being doled out at this time will not help. I also wish we could have tied some stipulations to it. Somehow let the country get something in return for what I view to be a pretty nice gift. I'm not sure what that is...community service, commitment/requirement to staying in the employment market, etc. I'm not outraged by it or anything, but I think we could have been a bit smarter about providing the relief.
Also, I'm really glad you've decided to pick TML back up. I'm looking forward to reading your work and also having good discussions with everyone. Have a great weekend!
Firstly, I don't think that this will really happen, because I don't believe the President has any authority to do it. Secondly, I think the thing that does piss me off is the fact that some of the students who will receive this benefit went to schools that have large endowments or have just received a windfall from TV contracts for athletic programs. So, why not have the university that is in a financial position to do so, foot the bill for this, instead of the taxpayer. If a University is in a position to build buildings with marble floors, then they should be in a position to refund tuition. If a University cannot do this, then let's see about a federal or state program that helps the students.
The endowments are generally used as a grant to kids to lower the cost of the private college education to the cost of a state college. Some universities will use the grant to fully subsidize a student of need. Harvard is now free to students whose family makes less than $75k.
The years 1968-1972 I worked a lowest level job in the summers in a factory and made enough money to pay for my schooling at BGSU. There is no way a student could do this today!
It costs $60K a year to attend my alma mater now, according to USNews and World Report, which devotes a whole issue every year to rating colleges. My dad never made more than 50K a year.
Doc you are the best, but freebies is insulting to anyone who busted their butt to provide for their family! Buying votes with your and our $$$ is unacceptable!
I don’t disagree. But I can think of many more examples where our money is misspent. Lots more money.
So glad to have you back Doc.
You gave me some things to think about that I did not consider. I was a slacker my first two years at Purdue. Such that it took me 5 years to get my engineering degree. Dad was only good for the normal four years. I took out a $2500 loan (cheap then!!) and I paid it off within one year. But I lost some weight and there were times I could not afford to fill up my car with gas. No regrets. I learned a few lessons early in life.
I never get upset when tax money returns to folks in a way that makes their lives a little easier. This forgiveness program does not solve the larger problem of the cost of higher education in this country. I wish that we made education and healthcare affordable for everyone. the country would be better for it if we did.
I taught at a for-profit college and had many students who were given big loans but did not have the capacity to learn the information. They soon failed miserably. The students were motivated but did not have the educational foundation, resources, or support to succeed. I often think of them and how they ever managed to repay their loans. If even one of them is helped by the loan forgiveness, it may change their life. Humanity.
Doc,
When You and I went to school the public universities anyway, were heavily subsidized. I left OSU in 1978 with zero debt and a full tank of gas in my car. I worked full time my final two years. We paid for our kids undergrad about half. My oldest, 38 years old paid his student loans off over 10 years. My youngest and spouse went to Law School and have accumulated 6 figure student loan debt. Fortunately, their income level does not qualify for any debt relief. They would love to have $20K loan relief but knew when they were signing the notes that they would someday have to repay them. Do they begrudge some of their friends getting relief? Heck no. The cost of tuition especially for private schools is off the charts and has risen faster than any inflation index. I think the schools are culpable and that their tuition aid offices are too chummy with the financial institutions. I think that the opportunity created to relieve some debt is a good thing and will spur some debt holders to do great things.
The motivation behind this is simple. Biden is trying to buy votes.
As they say, go to the source/root of the problem to get a fix. As an example; when my duaghter was in college I got her second year's tution bill and it was 8.6% higher then her Freshman year. CPI at the time was 1.6%, So I called the University and asked what additional servcie/help she would get for that up charge. Crickets.....basically pay or there are other schools for her. Let's hope the trade schools, 2 yr schools and other viable career options cause a little "competition" Welcome back Doc, you've been missed!
I graduated Wright State U with 24k in debt in 2002. My parents helped immensely to pay for my cost of living or it would’ve been more. I’m proud that I paid it off, 10 years in the same field of my degree.
I couldn’t be happier for those who got the relief.
I feel no ill will and as an American taxpayer, I’d rather my taxes go towards education than billion dollar businesses and their subsidies.
Colleges and Universities have been screwing kids for years with their inflated costs. Correct me if I’m wrong, but prior to Fickell coming into UC Football, I believe the Enquirer ran an article that said kids going to UC were paying more tuition to help subsidize the football program. (I wish I could find that article) So was it fair for an engineering student with no care for football to pay more just to help the athletic department? No. Is it fair for them to also be carrying that debt? Nope.
Also, corporations are employing graduates at record low incomes, scaling back benefits, forcing graduates to intern for longer...all while giving CEOs record salaries and stocks.
Maybe Republicans can take out a mirror and look at themselves considering they’ve continued for 30+ years to lower the corporate tax rate. If the tax rate on corps was what it was 30 years ago, this would be a small line item in our budget.
Lastly, the American taxpayer has been funding public education for 12 years per person in every city in America. Why is it such an issue to help fund higher education? It only makes us brighter, smarter and more competitive in the global market.
This is an investment I’m all for. Good for the Democrats for actually using tax payer money to help the actual tax payer. Anyone says otherwise is just blind to the bigger picture.
Really can’t agree.
40 million x $ 10,000 or more.
I thought you hated subsidizing.
Paul Brown stadium, Great American ballpark.
I’m not from the 1940’s mentality and I do understand economics. But much more importantly I’ve lived 60 years and seen what a culture does and what humans do without a level of discipline and self restraint, not to mention a healthy dose of self reliability.
No I disagree. The trend since 2009 recession is spend our way out with subsidies.
I agree, but I haven't criticized subsidizing stadia, so much as protested the way the positives are spun. Don't tell me how much PBS helps the local economy, for example.
Thanks for answering. I was sorry to see you retire but happy for you.Good luck with this forum.
I paid off my loans in 2016, 14 years post graduation. I had about $30k to start. At Butler University, they have more than doubled tuition since I graduated. I WOULD NOT go there today because of the price of tuition and amount of debt I’d be staring at. That’s the real issue.
I’m not “jealous” of people who got some relief. The list is long of reasons why this is a bad idea.
1) This does zero to address the out of control prices of higher education. 2) incentivizes universities to support politicians in favor of debt relief. 3) creates a new entitlement. 4) increases income inequality. 5) not fair to the people who paid their loans off instead of spending those dollars on lifestyle. 6) does nothing to make students look at the debt/income ratio of their higher Ed choices. 7) the rage of tax payers who never attended college is underestimated. 8) creates tuition inflation for future students (my kids for example).
I’m with ya Doc in that opportunity is the engine of success. More than anything, I think universities will see this as a green light to continue to raise tuition. And this will be a political wedge issue going forward.
The President’s plan does include holding colleges accountable for rising costs. Also, addresses loan repayment based on income. Read more details in the link below.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/08/24/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-student-loan-relief-for-borrowers-who-need-it-most/
Excellent post, BM. I stopped giving to my alma mater when I learned its endowment was $500 million.
Excuse me. $1.63 billion.
Mom and Dad paid for my first year at UC. The rest of the five year program in Engineering I made enough on my Co-Op job and part time work during school session to pay my way and graduate with sero debt and zero money.
If you think you can’t afford it, there’s ways to make it happen.
The issue is very nuanced, for sure. I have less problem transferring some debt away from a young school teacher (and that's what it is btw, a transfer of debt, not "forgiveness"), but I have a huge issue doing the same for someone who studied something useless, or was totally irresponsible in college, etc. I suspect many feel similarly. Separating the two isn't so easy.
But all of this is ignoring the elephant in the room: Why/how are our young people able to take out such exorbitant, life-altering loans to begin with? Where's any talk on reforming these insane lending practices? I'm afraid we're just trying to treat the symptom, while willfully ignoring the cause.
They asked the same pertinent question after the housing bubble burst.
At least in the aftermath it was a little more difficult to get mortgage. In 2007, there was this prevailing mentality (championed by folks like Barney Frank) that every American deserved their own home, like home-ownership was some sort of God-given right. Anyone with a pulse could get a mortgage at that time. Since the burst, mortgage-lending practices seem to have improved, at least somewhat. I just hope college lending practices start improving too (but I have my doubts).
I think it's really selfish and crummy that some people are only complaining because they didn't receive the same benefit. Or because they didn't go to college at all. Things change, and sometimes people get breaks that others never receive. You don't hear people screaming about tax cuts for folks with kids (vs those without), do you?
That being said, I don't feel like this is the right move right now. Inflation is still VERY high and more govt money being doled out at this time will not help. I also wish we could have tied some stipulations to it. Somehow let the country get something in return for what I view to be a pretty nice gift. I'm not sure what that is...community service, commitment/requirement to staying in the employment market, etc. I'm not outraged by it or anything, but I think we could have been a bit smarter about providing the relief.
Also, I'm really glad you've decided to pick TML back up. I'm looking forward to reading your work and also having good discussions with everyone. Have a great weekend!
Firstly, I don't think that this will really happen, because I don't believe the President has any authority to do it. Secondly, I think the thing that does piss me off is the fact that some of the students who will receive this benefit went to schools that have large endowments or have just received a windfall from TV contracts for athletic programs. So, why not have the university that is in a financial position to do so, foot the bill for this, instead of the taxpayer. If a University is in a position to build buildings with marble floors, then they should be in a position to refund tuition. If a University cannot do this, then let's see about a federal or state program that helps the students.
The endowments are generally used as a grant to kids to lower the cost of the private college education to the cost of a state college. Some universities will use the grant to fully subsidize a student of need. Harvard is now free to students whose family makes less than $75k.
Very true. Harvard's endowment is $39.2.... BBBBillion. No kid should ever pay a nickel to go there, ever.
The years 1968-1972 I worked a lowest level job in the summers in a factory and made enough money to pay for my schooling at BGSU. There is no way a student could do this today!
It costs $60K a year to attend my alma mater now, according to USNews and World Report, which devotes a whole issue every year to rating colleges. My dad never made more than 50K a year.