Business & Investing
Sponsored by

College Debt Forgiveness ideas

6,950 Views | 77 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by azul_rain
DRE06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It seems like we are likely to end up with some form of college loan forgives at some point. Loan foregivness with no strings attached seems incredibly unfair to those who either paid off their loans or couldn't go to college due to lack of money.

What if the program allowed someone to apply for up to $xx,000 of college debt forgiveness, but it came with an agreement that you pay an additional 4-5% of income tax until you pay back 120% of the forgiveness? You could even offer some incentive that if you pay off the forgiveness within 5 years there is no 20% adder and if within 10 years, there's only a 10% adder. A program set up like is still a money loser for the government, but at least offers some level of fairness, while stopping the compounding interest that makes these loans so cumbersome.

The program should focus on those who took out loans, worked hard to get a reasonable job, but are having trouble overcoming the debt/interest obligation. Perhaps the level of forgiveness is also based on some ratio of current income level and years since graduation.

I don't know how you can justify forgiving student loans for 1) people who graduated but didn't have the work ethic to obtain a real job or 2) people who took out loans and never graduated.
dummble
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I was thinking really hard about this this morning and annoyed that we worked hard and lived a very frugal life to pay off my wifes loans as fast as we could.

But if I take a step back and pretend that we are in an economical crisis, which we may be in 3 months. And look at this as a direct stimulus that targets young college educated middle class people. This may be a pretty good bang for the buck. This would free up $400 to $1200 a month for frivolous spending and increasing lifestyle. Home purchases, automobile purchases, general spending. Not sure what the savings percentage of 22 to 35yo's.

Anyways, I am not a smart person and I really hate the idea, but I was trying to be positive about it.
bmks270
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm for a cap on accumulated interest. Something like once you've paid back the loan principle X multiplier, the loan is forgiven.

Say 1.5-2x the principle.
Definitely Not A Cop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Make college loans dischargable in bankruptcy. Banks will start actually looking at your degree plan before handing you hundreds of thousands of dollars. Less people will go to college, and the powers that be will actually have to look at the root cause of the issue, that the HS degree is a joke nowadays, and the curriculum needs to improve so that companies won't require a college degree.
DRE06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

nm. didn't read.
Aston04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Champ Bailey said:

Make college loans dischargable in bankruptcy. Banks will start actually looking at your degree plan before handing you hundreds of thousands of dollars. Less people will go to college, and the powers that be will actually have to look at the root cause of the issue, that the HS degree is a joke nowadays, and the curriculum needs to improve so that companies won't require a college degree.
I like the idea... But then the problem is people could take advantage of the system that have extremely marketable degrees, large debt and no assets coming out of school. Do those docs, etc get a free pass too?

And the other problem it is wouldn't properly discourage people from pursuing non-marketable degrees that don't make money. Sure you can go to Baylor spend $120k to become a social worker... Just go bankrupt after the last game of beer ping is over your senior year...
Definitely Not A Cop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Aston04 said:

Champ Bailey said:

Make college loans dischargable in bankruptcy. Banks will start actually looking at your degree plan before handing you hundreds of thousands of dollars. Less people will go to college, and the powers that be will actually have to look at the root cause of the issue, that the HS degree is a joke nowadays, and the curriculum needs to improve so that companies won't require a college degree.
I like the idea... But then the problem is people could take advantage of the system that have extremely marketable degrees, large debt and no assets coming out of school. Do those docs, etc get a free pass too?

And the other problem it is wouldn't properly discourage people from pursuing non-marketable degrees that don't make money. Sure you can go to Baylor spend $120k to become a social worker... Just go bankrupt after the last game of beer ping is over your senior year...


If I'm missing something let me know, but if you allow the debt to be discharged in bankruptcy, then the banks would actually start evaluating how likely they are able to get paid back with your planned degree.

So if I choose to spend $120k at Baylor to become a social worker, or other major where I will likely not be able to pay the money back, then the bank wouldn't be loaning that money to that student anymore. They would either need to apply for federal grants based on their family income, get enough scholarships to cover it, or pay for college out of pocket.

As far as medical degrees go, do the majority of doctors have issues paying off their loans? From what I understand, they may take longer due to 8 years of college, but pretty most MD's eventually repay the debt. And one of the reasons college is so expensive is because the universities know they can keep charging more and more, and the banks will keep loaning more and more money to cover it, because there is no risk involved for the banks. Eventually they will get their money, even if you have been paying the loan for 50 years. So I believe allowing the debt to be discharged will eventually lead to less students going to college, and college costs going down, in order to compete with the amount of money banks are willing to lend out. Which sucks if you are an administrator, but we will have less people who never had any real business going to college having to pay off thousands in student loans after they go for a few semesters and end up flunking out.

Oh and just to add, I don't think that my idea is what will happen. We have a major problem in this country accepting responsibility, even after signing on the dotted line in a contract. No politician wants to be the bad guy. I suspect that we eventually go to a more European route, where they decide at age 15 whether you are smart enough to go to college, or if trade school is more your speed, and the cost is "covered" either way.

But I do think my idea is the simplest answer, and the most fair to everyone involved.
Jet Black
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ridiculous
PeekingDuck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Making the debt dischargeable through bankruptcy, as it once was, is the only long term solution that incorporates market rates into the risk analysis. There's no other realistic solution.
Dr. Doctor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
One thing that some people don't think about is the types of degrees and the ultimate career path.

ENGR is pretty straight-forward, but what about History? Business Degrees?

Why? Well, lawyers tend to be History degree holders. So if someone wants to be a lawyer, they would need to figure out how to get funding for school; a bank will say no to History degree ($100k for ~$30k salary) because a History degree is high output but no demand. But you are ultimately going for a JD; how do you reconcile that?

I also see issues with those that switch, either intentional or unintentional. As I graduated and did not change majors, what about those that start ENGR but end up not ENGR? I knew plenty at A&M who started CHEN, ELEN, MEEN but ended up CHEM or Accounting or MechTech. How do you reconcile their loans vs. 'repayability'?

~egon
Dr. Doctor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
One note: currently GRADUATE loans are capped at 6.8% whereas undergrad loans are cheaper (2.75%). So while the interest rates may not be that much and doctors (and other graduate school people) pay them off, it can take a while.

I have an CHEN PhD. But to get to the point in which I could pay them off seriously, it took 4 years AFTER I graduated. Most of my loans were subsidized (no interest while student and 6 months after graduation). But I knew kids who had to take both (sub and un-sub loans). That 6.8% starts day 1. I took 4 years to graduate; MD's take 8. And then it takes about 3-4 more years before income starts increasing to make a good dent in loans. My minimum 6 months after I graduated was nearly my rent for an apartment in CS ($365 or something).

So 6.8% on ~$60-120k of loans is how much interest?

I see the arguments for both sides of the issue, but I think what will make things more amenable to the forgiveness side is dealing with interest issues. Make all loans subsidized while in school (at least federal loans).

~egon
HalifaxAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I could live with a merit based INTEREST forgiveness system, but only on degrees/certifications that the country deems required (STEM & Trades) and only after a successful graduation (or professional licensing) with some minimum GPA established.

I also like the idea of bankruptcy discharge and making the banks have skin in the game.


Bottom-line, no free rides for anyone, but if you're pursuing a real education, we'll help you out. And if they really pursue this, they need to come up with some sort of retroactive plan, something, at least let me claim my cumulative student loan interest for one tax year. A one time credit to help make the pill easier to swallow.
Deputy Travis Junior
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I posted this on one of the student loan threads the other day:

I hate the idea of straight up loan forgiveness, but 7%+ rates on loans that 1) aren't dischargeable in bankruptcy and 2) are guaranteed by the government is unethical usury. That's close to the sort of risk compensation you want on a broad market index; it is completely inappropriate for loans that are effectively riskless.

They should slap a few basis points on the treasury rate and call it a day. If the government entered the loan business as some sort of public good (to educate its population) then it should act that way. It should not participate in a process that sentences some people to a lifetime of indentured servitude while they sprint forever on the perpetual-interest treadmill.

I think a fair approach that forces people to take responsibility for their decisions while giving them a path to freedom would look like this:
1) reduce rates to something appropriate to the risk level
2) cap the loans' lifetime accruable interest
3) make loan payments tax deductible


A 4th item I'd add that I didn't include in my original post: don't capitalize interest.
A 5th item that's a bit more radical: apply payments to principal and save interest for last.
Keeper of The Spirits
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I have intentionally paid the minimum on mine and financed for 20 years because I knew this day was coming. Needs to come soon thought I'll be done in 6 years
JSKolache
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
17yrs ago i got job that offered SL reimbursement after 1st year of employment. I stuck with them and they paid it off. Is loan reimbursement still a fringe benefit anymore?
Sandman98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm disgusted at the suggestion of taxing Americans to pay for other people's debt. It's immoral.
themissinglink
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
dummble said:

I was thinking really hard about this this morning and annoyed that we worked hard and lived a very frugal life to pay off my wifes loans as fast as we could.

But if I take a step back and pretend that we are in an economical crisis, which we may be in 3 months. And look at this as a direct stimulus that targets young college educated middle class people. This may be a pretty good bang for the buck. This would free up $400 to $1200 a month for frivolous spending and increasing lifestyle. Home purchases, automobile purchases, general spending. Not sure what the savings percentage of 22 to 35yo's.

Anyways, I am not a smart person and I really hate the idea, but I was trying to be positive about it.
The estimates I've seen is a multiplier is between 0 and 0.22x. It also doesn't target middle class. It disproportionately targets upper class. You get way more bang for you buck if you just write people checks or spend money on frivolous Keynesian projects such as digging holes and refilling them.
30wedge
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Deputy Travis Junior said:



I hate the idea of straight up loan forgiveness, but 7%+ rates on loans that 1) aren't dischargeable in bankruptcy and 2) are guaranteed by the government is unethical usury. That's close to the sort of risk compensation you want on a broad market index; it is completely inappropriate for loans that are effectively riskless.


Except that it isn't usury. When the loans were taken out, the borrower knew the terms of the loan and the rules regarding discharging in bankruptcy. Totally self-inflicted. As far as I am aware, nobody was forced to take out a loan at gunpoint.

Willingly borrow money, pay it back. No need for a bunch of rules and carve outs and what ifs and what abouts and what for. Borrow. Repay.
LOYAL AG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You guys are assigning logic where none is required. The party pushing this is the party of the aggrieved and one of their current grievances is how unfair it was that they have to pay for their college degree that's worthless in the job market. In economic terms that "investment" into the borrower's future is a loss. The political class sees a group of people willing to vote to give them great power and wealth in exchange for socializing these losses and they are willing to take advantage of those people. There will be no logic, only forgiveness until eventually college becomes free or the whole system collapses.
RightWingConspirator
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I find the idea disgusting as well. I put myself and my wife through school as well as graduate school for me. I paid it all back. Within three years of graduation. It's immoral.
"But it is easier to purchase products that denote superiority than to be actually superior in economic achievement." - Thomas J. Stanley
birdman
How long do you want to ignore this user?
How about a compromise? A big pile of existing debt is discharged but going forward there is no federal backing. The banks would evaluate each loan on its own merits.

That sounds great and would take that deal. But it will never work. The government will just start backing loans a few years later.
rlb28
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I guess I'll have my two college kids take out student loans to finish off the couple years they have left.
John Francis Donaghy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Not in favor of forgiving student loans at all. But from a systemic standpoint we are in a major economic mess with student debt. We rely on spending from young people to sustain large portions of our economy. Starting families, buying houses, buying family vehicles, buying all the kids presents at Christmas, etc. Are all big drivers of the US economy, and a lot of that spending activity is being suppressed now due to student loan burdens constricting young people's spending power.

I am in favor of a cap on student loan interest. Once you've paid x% in interest, all payments go 100% to principal until paid in full. It's not a quick fix, but it can be evenly applied across the board, won't let anyone off the hook for paying back what they borrowed, and at least gives a light at the end of the tunnel for people in lower paying careers like education who are stuck in an endless cycle of compounding interest.

At the end of the day, the only way to fix things is for the government to turn off the money spigot to universities by refusing to lend the amounts being charged by universities. Universities won't reign in their budgets until students hit a point where they can't get the loans to pay the tuition.
mazag08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Get the government out of backing loans, period. Then watch as tons of schools close half their programs, small schools fold up shop, and tuition rates decrease. But that would never happen, because WAY too many would be set to lose a lot of money and prestige.

It's the same with medical. The system is set up to rob the taxpayers and middle class blind while everyone associated with the institutions lives off the ever escalating costs that are fully guaranteed by the government.
gigemhilo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
IF the government does it - and I think its a terrible idea - it should be 100% taxable income to the recipient. This is just like any other debt forgiveness.

You can even apply the insolvency rules to it - I dont care. But the idea that irresponsible people received something for nothing just blows my mind. They will just be waiting on the next round of forgiveness....
Deputy Travis Junior
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The dictionary definition of usury is charging the borrower an unethically high amount rate, so let's break down student loans:
-Student loans can't be discharged in bankruptcy and, if I'm not mistaken, are guaranteed by the government, meaning they're essentially riskless.
-The rate on a ten year treasury (a nice comp) is something like 0.8%.

I'd say ~8-9x the going rate of another risk free asset is usury.

Compounding the immorality, teenagers and the adults making the loan process information differently:

https://www.stanfordchildrens.org/en/topic/default?id=understanding-the-teen-brain-1-3051
" The rational part of a teen's brain isn't fully developed and won't be until age 25 or so.

In fact, recent research has found that adult and teen brains work differently. Adults think with the prefrontal cortex, the brain's rational part. This is the part of the brain that responds to situations with good judgment and an awareness of long-term consequences. Teens process information with the amygdala. This is the emotional part."


So put another way, teens are particularly vulnerable to the "if you don't go to college you're a failure" criticisms and more easily swept up in the "you're gonna go get a 6 figure job!" fairy tale, making them more likely to make a dumb, emotional decision. Meanwhile, the adults are more coldly aware of the consequences of the actions they're enabling

Finally I'd note that student loans are probably the only money lending where the lender doesn't really negotiate with the borrower if circumstances change. That is, miss a few mortgage payments and your bank will call up with offers to restructure or whatever. So there's nothing unique or unfair about changing student loan terms to help the borrower pay it off and help the lender recover as much of the principal as possible.
ChoppinDs40
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
adjust interest rates and maximum allowable amount lent based on degree path.

Want to get an accounting degree from university of Houston? should be about 1% interest.

Want a sociology degree from Baylor? 7% and max allowed loan of $100k.

Don't like it? get a scholarship and get a job to pay for it.

People may argue that "the humanities" and other scholarly tracks will fail. That may be so.. or.. tuition will go down and a fkin history professor will have to resort to living a life like Indiana Jones, which I'm not opposed to.

The real crux is the absolute worthlessness of a high school education. Need to get more vocational programs in place for the kids that score a 15 on the ACT - go make $80k/year as an auto mechanic straight out of school. Or be a plumber or electrician. Or go to a junior college and see if it's "for you" while you wait tables at Chili's.

I met way too many people in college (even at A&M) that really had no business at seriously pursuing a higher degree for professional skill set or academia. You shouldn't need a college education to sell insurance or work in marketing, or be a gdamn realtor.

American society needs to take a lesson from many European countries - kids should take a gap year after High School - whether that's getting a job, getting a part time job and taking a few community college classes, taking daddy's money to travel the world, do volunteer work, go work at a gdamn ski resort, whatever.
30wedge
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Deputy Travis Junior said:

The dictionary definition of usury is charging the borrower an unethically high amount rate, so let's break down student loans:
-Student loans can't be discharged in bankruptcy and, if I'm not mistaken, are guaranteed by the government, meaning they're essentially riskless.
-The rate on a ten year treasury (a nice comp) is something like 0.8%.

I'd say ~8-9x the going rate of another risk free asset is usury.

Compounding the immorality, teenagers and the adults making the loan process information differently:

https://www.stanfordchildrens.org/en/topic/default?id=understanding-the-teen-brain-1-3051
" The rational part of a teen's brain isn't fully developed and won't be until age 25 or so.

In fact, recent research has found that adult and teen brains work differently. Adults think with the prefrontal cortex, the brain's rational part. This is the part of the brain that responds to situations with good judgment and an awareness of long-term consequences. Teens process information with the amygdala. This is the emotional part."


So put another way, teens are particularly vulnerable to the "if you don't go to college you're a failure" criticisms and more easily swept up in the "you're gonna go get a 6 figure job!" fairy tale, making them more likely to make a dumb, emotional decision. Meanwhile, the adults are more coldly aware of the consequences of the actions they're enabling

Finally I'd note that student loans are probably the only money lending where the lender doesn't really negotiate with the borrower if circumstances change. That is, miss a few mortgage payments and your bank will call up with offers to restructure or whatever. So there's nothing unique or unfair about changing student loan terms to help the borrower pay it off and help the lender recover as much of the principal as possible.
It is usury, in a legal sense, if the rate of interest is at a rate higher than the law allows. Clearly not the case. Maybe the kid made a bad decision, maybe his or her parents played a role because they are just like the kid. Thing is, many, many, many people borrowed, majored in something they could make money doing, and repaid their loan. It does take effort, smart decision-making, determination, just like so many other things do. Perhaps the teen can try to go to court and claim usury. Good luck with that.

I have never seen something defended on the basis that a "teen's" brain isn't fully developed, lol. Perhaps lobby for a change in the law such that "teens" (and it would be late teens if going into college) just cannot borrow. Perhaps not until the age of 25, according to your study you came across.

I am surprised that only recently has research revealed that a teen and an adult brain works differently. Who knew?

Of course, many adult brains work differently. For example, a conservative brain might argue for personal responsibility, like if you take out a loan you should repay it. A liberal brain might argue that taking out a loan and not repaying it is the way to go, just let others repay if for you.
C1NRB
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
This guy is about as liberal as they come, but I can get behind this particular take:
https://insidehighered.com/blogs/confessions-community-college-dean/fallback-position-student-loan-relief

Summation- Forgive interest and don't charge any for new loans, either. Let banks or whoever decide if it's in their best interest (pun intended) to continue with student loans as a goodwill gesture or not.
TriAg2010
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
themissinglink said:

dummble said:

I was thinking really hard about this this morning and annoyed that we worked hard and lived a very frugal life to pay off my wifes loans as fast as we could.

But if I take a step back and pretend that we are in an economical crisis, which we may be in 3 months. And look at this as a direct stimulus that targets young college educated middle class people. This may be a pretty good bang for the buck. This would free up $400 to $1200 a month for frivolous spending and increasing lifestyle. Home purchases, automobile purchases, general spending. Not sure what the savings percentage of 22 to 35yo's.

Anyways, I am not a smart person and I really hate the idea, but I was trying to be positive about it.
The estimates I've seen is a multiplier is between 0 and 0.22x. It also doesn't target middle class. It disproportionately targets upper class. You get way more bang for you buck if you just write people checks or spend money on frivolous Keynesian projects such as digging holes and refilling them.


Say it louder for the people in the back.

It's bad policy on pretty much any dimension:
- Doesn't address cost of education
- Doesn't address risk of lending
- Creates moral hazard
- Doesn't create any economic stimulus

But it does provide a kickback to a key Democratic voting block.
deadbq03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I miss the good ole days of government handouts when they just stole land from injuns and gave it to honest hardworking European immigrants.
Deputy Travis Junior
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's not legal usury because the government writes the laws, but i do think it's unethical because the rates are much higher than those of investments of similar risk. That is, legal, but sleazy.

So look, I think you will agree with the following:
1) American society places enormous pressure on kids to attend college, and they often wrap it in an emotional "follow your dreams" message. This is really hard to resist at 18-22.

2) Any credit model worth anything would reject a ton of these loan apps with prejudice. That is, the student loans program is knowingly giving out bazillions of dollars that they strongly suspect that the borrowers will not be able to pay off. However, rather than share in the predictable consequences, the lenders got the government to exempt them from the downside via federal guarantees and lol@your bankruptcy provisions. No other money lending works like this. Normally, if you're a money lender and you give a stupid loan, you lose money right alongside the borrower.

3) tuition has skyrocketed due to profligate spending by greedy academics who are taking advantage of infinite demand (see #1 for the reason for this infinite demand).

I get that a lot of these kids made really stupid, emotional decisions, but I think items 2-3 show that they are not the only ones deserving of blame, so it isn't fair or just to place 100% of the consequences on some of these hopelessly underwater people. I think reducing interest rates, capping total interest, and making payments tax exempt is a nice way to hold both the borrowers and the lenders responsible, and honestly it's a far better deal than the lenders would get in any other industry.
Grown Pear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Was thinking it'd be $10-15K range... when and how did $50K happen all of a sudden?

If it's gonna happen, I at least hope they don't set people up for failure:

1) FIX THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM AT THE SAME TIME!
2) Prefer the amount to be lower like in the $15K range.
3) For all $'s above the payoff threshold, drastically reduce the interest rate.
4) Make the payoff/reduced interest rate contingent on some sort of retirement savings contribution.

Encourage and Incentivize good habits. If this is going to happen, make it as big an impact as possible on people's lives. Wiping out debt thus giving higher cash flow then encouraging them to go and spend it is a recipe for long term financial disaster for these people. Sure it stimulates the economy short term, but long term it has drastic effects, will lead to no savings, will increase debt, and more burden in the future. Social security isn't growing last I checked.

Example:
- Contribute X% of your annual payment amount to an IRA or HSA and $15K of your debt is forgiven and the remainder of your debt payments will be adjusted to an appropriate interest rate (say 3% instead of 7%).

ETA - maybe make a portion of the forgiveness tax-free? maybe make it taxable? maybe federal/state income tax free but subject to social security tax?
30wedge
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Deputy Travis Junior said:

It's not legal usury because the government writes the laws, but i do think it's unethical because the rates are much higher than those of investments of similar risk. That is, legal, but sleazy.

So look, I think you will agree with the following:
1) American society places enormous pressure on kids to attend college, and they often wrap it in an emotional "follow your dreams" message. This is really hard to resist at 18-22.

2) Any credit model worth anything would reject a ton of these loan apps with prejudice. That is, the student loans program is knowingly giving out bazillions of dollars that they strongly suspect that the borrowers will not be able to pay off. However, rather than share in the predictable consequences, the lenders got the government to exempt them from the downside via federal guarantees and lol@your bankruptcy provisions. No other money lending works like this. Normally, if you're a money lender and you give a stupid loan, you lose money right alongside the borrower.

3) tuition has skyrocketed due to profligate spending by greedy academics who are taking advantage of infinite demand (see #1 for the reason for this infinite demand).

I get that a lot of these kids made really stupid, emotional decisions, but I think items 2-3 show that they are not the only ones deserving of blame, so it isn't fair or just to place 100% of the consequences on some of these hopelessly underwater people. I think reducing interest rates, capping total interest, and making payments tax exempt is a nice way to hold both the borrowers and the lenders responsible, and honestly it's a far better deal than the lenders would get in any other industry.
These "kids" got the benefit of the loan.

1. Get the government out of the college loan business.
2. Make universities put warning labels on every major for which completion of the degree plan will likely leave you as a barista in a Starbucks.
3. A lot fewer kids would get a shot at college, but that is no different than a lot of us not getting a shot at a Lamborghini. If you can't afford something, and your parents didn't plan for it, so be it.
4. If you are able to borrow, then repay what you borrowed.
Deputy Travis Junior
How long do you want to ignore this user?
1. Agreed
2. Agreed
3. Yep
4. Sounds nice, but this is not how money lending works. Things change and people fail to pay according to agreed-upon terms all the freaking time (think of a well intentioned premed who bombs upper level chemistry).
Anyway, regardless of your "pay it off!" line, reality is that a lot of people now have loans they will never be able to pay off. The principal is too big, the interest rates are too high, and their earning potentials are too low. The lenders, who were every bit as irresponsible as the borrowers in extending the loans, do not have a right to keep these idiots in indentured servitude, paying endless interest, for the rest of their lives. They should share in the consequences of their bad actions. Capping their max interest profit is a good way to punish them without resorting to a massive public bailout.
Last Page
Page 1 of 3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.