Obama and his student loan claims

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The problem with keeping these rates low is that they are fueling a bubble, just like low mortgage rates fueled the housing bubble. Eventually we're going to have the same result. It's going to burst because the amount of student debt has already reached the point where it's too much for the consumer to handle. Historic levels of student loan default have already been reached and they are increasing and the government is directly responsible. Universities continue to charge more and more for an education that many are now arguing is no longer worth the cost and they can do it because the government keeps giving students more and more access to money through the student loan program at cheap rates.

You'd think we'd have learned our lesson, but I guess not.

 

[kwc57]

So I'm homeless now? Good to know.

Does your husband know that you're on here and not "working".

I'm elitist and you're homeless. See how that works? And I've told you before, I don't swing that way, so quit hitting on me. The answer is still no.

No I'm pretty sure I'm elitist and homeless and you're unemployed and are lying to your husband about what you do all day. Get it straight.

Look Nancy, quit checking out my ass.

 

[jillian]

I am not saying loans are not a burden... but if you want an Ivy League schooling without a scholarship, that is a decision and a consequence you personally make...

But I think it is quite disingenuous for him to state that he may have 'struggled' paying off loans when making what he and ones in his camp consider being 'rich'

so only rich people should go to ivy league schools? is that what you're saying??

there should be two educational tiers?

Did I say that?? No... What I am saying is that the choice of an expensive education is a personal one and not the concern of others... and that I fully do not believe his claims and consider what he was doing nothing more than disingenuous pandering.. when looking at reality, he was not in the same boat with the 'common folk' as he was trying to claim

Don't read any more into my statements than that, jill

If I were certain that was what you were saying, I would have phrased it as a statement, not as a question. I am trying not to read into your statement, which is why I asked for clarification.

You don't turn down a Harvard Education when you have the opportunity to get one. When I went to college, you could afford to pay your loans back. I had federally backed loans and paid them back within the time alotted. Given that you can't discharge student loans in bankruptcy, being able to eat, live and pay them off is really important. You may say "well, if you can't afford the expensive school, don't go"... but that does, in fact, result in a multi-tiered educational system... where rich people can go to the expensive schools and middle class people can, if they get in, go to state universities where you get a good education, but not nearly the same life opportunities. For the rest, it would be either a community college or no college at all.

And we already know that college graduates ultimately earn about twice what their non-college graduate counterparts make.

Overall, it's simply another way of restricting social mobility.

As for the president, you wouldn't believe him, DD, if his tongue were notarized.

 

[jillian]

The problem with keeping these rates low is that they are fueling a bubble, just like low mortgage rates fueled the housing bubble. Eventually we're going to have the same result. It's going to burst because the amount of student debt has already reached the point where it's too much for the consumer to handle. Historic levels of student loan default have already been reached and they are increasing and the government is directly responsible. Universities continue to charge more and more for an education that many are now arguing is no longer worth the cost and they can do it because the government keeps giving students more and more access to money through the student loan program at cheap rates.

You'd think we'd have learned our lesson, but I guess not.

Do you think colleges would drop their rates if the interest is raised?

Or do you think that my son will be screwed?

I figure it's the latter...

 

[kwc57]

so only rich people should go to ivy league schools? is that what you're saying??

there should be two educational tiers?

Did I say that?? No... What I am saying is that the choice of an expensive education is a personal one and not the concern of others... and that I fully do not believe his claims and consider what he was doing nothing more than disingenuous pandering.. when looking at reality, he was not in the same boat with the 'common folk' as he was trying to claim

Don't read any more into my statements than that, jill

If I were certain that was what you were saying, I would have phrased it as a statement, not as a question. I am trying not to read into your statement, which is why I asked for clarification.

You don't turn down a Harvard Education when you have the opportunity to get one. When I went to college, you could afford to pay your loans back. I had federally backed loans and paid them back within the time alotted. Given that you can't discharge student loans in bankruptcy, being able to eat, live and pay them off is really important. You may say "well, if you can't afford the expensive school, don't go"... but that does, in fact, result in a multi-tiered educational system... where rich people can go to the expensive schools and middle class people can, if they get in, go to state universities where you get a good education, but not nearly the same life opportunities. For the rest, it would be either a community college or no college at all.

And we already know that college graduates ultimately earn about twice what their non-college graduate counterparts make.

Overall, it's simply another way of restricting social mobility.

As for the president, you wouldn't believe him, DD, if his tongue were notarized.

So if all you can really afford is a KIA, but someone is willing to loan you the money for a Lexus, you should get the Lexus, correct?

 

[RDD_1210]

I'm elitist and you're homeless. See how that works? And I've told you before, I don't swing that way, so quit hitting on me. The answer is still no.

No I'm pretty sure I'm elitist and homeless and you're unemployed and are lying to your husband about what you do all day. Get it straight.

Look Nancy, quit checking out my ass.

You didn't have a problem with it last Saturday night.

 

[RDD_1210]

Did I say that?? No... What I am saying is that the choice of an expensive education is a personal one and not the concern of others... and that I fully do not believe his claims and consider what he was doing nothing more than disingenuous pandering.. when looking at reality, he was not in the same boat with the 'common folk' as he was trying to claim

Don't read any more into my statements than that, jill

If I were certain that was what you were saying, I would have phrased it as a statement, not as a question. I am trying not to read into your statement, which is why I asked for clarification.

You don't turn down a Harvard Education when you have the opportunity to get one. When I went to college, you could afford to pay your loans back. I had federally backed loans and paid them back within the time alotted. Given that you can't discharge student loans in bankruptcy, being able to eat, live and pay them off is really important. You may say "well, if you can't afford the expensive school, don't go"... but that does, in fact, result in a multi-tiered educational system... where rich people can go to the expensive schools and middle class people can, if they get in, go to state universities where you get a good education, but not nearly the same life opportunities. For the rest, it would be either a community college or no college at all.

And we already know that college graduates ultimately earn about twice what their non-college graduate counterparts make.

Overall, it's simply another way of restricting social mobility.

As for the president, you wouldn't believe him, DD, if his tongue were notarized.

So if all you can really afford is a KIA, but someone is willing to loan you the money for a Lexus, you should get the Lexus, correct?

So the best education is only for the rich? At least it aligns with everything else you believe.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The problem with keeping these rates low is that they are fueling a bubble, just like low mortgage rates fueled the housing bubble. Eventually we're going to have the same result. It's going to burst because the amount of student debt has already reached the point where it's too much for the consumer to handle. Historic levels of student loan default have already been reached and they are increasing and the government is directly responsible. Universities continue to charge more and more for an education that many are now arguing is no longer worth the cost and they can do it because the government keeps giving students more and more access to money through the student loan program at cheap rates.

You'd think we'd have learned our lesson, but I guess not.

Do you think colleges would drop their rates if the interest is raised?

Or do you think that my son will be screwed?

I figure it's the latter...

In the long term, yes, they will. When less people are able to afford going to school, the demand for higher education will decrease. School will have no choice but to start lowering their tuition to get their enrollment back up. This is the only way the problem will be solved and it's going to be the ultimate result regardless of what action the government takes.

 

[Foxfyre]

The problem with keeping these rates low is that they are fueling a bubble, just like low mortgage rates fueled the housing bubble. Eventually we're going to have the same result. It's going to burst because the amount of student debt has already reached the point where it's too much for the consumer to handle. Historic levels of student loan default have already been reached and they are increasing and the government is directly responsible. Universities continue to charge more and more for an education that many are now arguing is no longer worth the cost and they can do it because the government keeps giving students more and more access to money through the student loan program at cheap rates.

You'd think we'd have learned our lesson, but I guess not.

Do you think colleges would drop their rates if the interest is raised?

Or do you think that my son will be screwed?

I figure it's the latter...

In the long term, yes, they will. When less people are able to afford going to school, the demand for higher education will decrease. School will have no choice but to start lowering their tuition to get their enrollment back up. This is the only way the problem will be solved and it's going to be the ultimate result regardless of what action the government takes.

Yup. The free market works in education as well as it does anywhere else. If the federal government pulled all its support for education and forced colleges and universities to depend on student enrollment and philanthropy in order to survive, the costs come down in short order.

As far as those student loans go, for those who actually get a marketable education, a $40 or $50k student loan debt is pretty easy to pay off. For those who major in typewriter maintenance or general studies, maybe less so. The choice is always in our hands however.

And in answer to Jillian's question, yes, only those who can afford to go to the most expensive colleges and universities should go to the most expensive colleges and universities. Just as those who can't afford a million dollar home--which by the way Michelle and Barack Obama did while paying off those oppressive student loan debts--should choose a more modest home. (Which my husband and I did.)

The world does not owe us a fine house or expensive car or a cadillac education. Those are things we work for to afford for our kids or which we pay the necessary dues to acquire for ourselves. I got my education by earning an academic scholarship and otherwise working while going to school. I don't feel the least bit deprived because I could only afford a state university or that I didn't have anybody paying my bills for me.

Barack Obama says that his family were of limited means and unable to help him. He also says he got some help along the way but never says where he got it. (Those records are sealed.)

But for him to say that his student loans were a 'burden' is utterly ridiculous.

 

[DiamondDave]

You have no idea, in other words, and until you can us figures, your conclusion is merely "wah" by you.

Again... a salary of what he and ones in his camp consider 'rich', and he claims to have 'struggled' like the 'common man'... it just does not make sense... and funny that he did not try and produce totals since he knows that he released his income and tax statements and people could easily look up his salary during this time of his 'struggles'...

I found it a bit off.... funny, no tears in my eyes.... I simply conclude off base pandering considering what we do know

I actually watched the vid on it, and absolutely no pandering can be derived from the situation. You, though, are pandering to the far right shibboleths here.

Taking care of that silliness, I can move to noting that MR (correctly) wants an extention on the low-interest college student loans.

Attempting to lump himself in with the common folk and their situations of struggle.. while he was making what he tries to label everyone else now as 'rich'... that is indeed pandering

 

[mudwhistle]

You have no idea, in other words, and until you can us figures, your conclusion is merely "wah" by you.

Again... a salary of what he and ones in his camp consider 'rich', and he claims to have 'struggled' like the 'common man'... it just does not make sense... and funny that he did not try and produce totals since he knows that he released his income and tax statements and people could easily look up his salary during this time of his 'struggles'...

I found it a bit off.... funny, no tears in my eyes.... I simply conclude off base pandering considering what we do know

I actually watched the vid on it, and absolutely no pandering can be derived from the situation. You, though, are pandering to the far right shibboleths here.

Taking care of that silliness, I can move to noting that MR (correctly) wants an extention on the low-interest college student loans.

Wonder who put the expiration clause in that bill? (Democrats)

Same folks that stopped Bush from making the tax-cuts permanent. (Democrats)

 

[DiamondDave]

so only rich people should go to ivy league schools? is that what you're saying??

there should be two educational tiers?

Did I say that?? No... What I am saying is that the choice of an expensive education is a personal one and not the concern of others... and that I fully do not believe his claims and consider what he was doing nothing more than disingenuous pandering.. when looking at reality, he was not in the same boat with the 'common folk' as he was trying to claim

Don't read any more into my statements than that, jill

If I were certain that was what you were saying, I would have phrased it as a statement, not as a question. I am trying not to read into your statement, which is why I asked for clarification.

You don't turn down a Harvard Education when you have the opportunity to get one. When I went to college, you could afford to pay your loans back. I had federally backed loans and paid them back within the time alotted. Given that you can't discharge student loans in bankruptcy, being able to eat, live and pay them off is really important. You may say "well, if you can't afford the expensive school, don't go"... but that does, in fact, result in a multi-tiered educational system... where rich people can go to the expensive schools and middle class people can, if they get in, go to state universities where you get a good education, but not nearly the same life opportunities. For the rest, it would be either a community college or no college at all.

And we already know that college graduates ultimately earn about twice what their non-college graduate counterparts make.

Overall, it's simply another way of restricting social mobility.

As for the president, you wouldn't believe him, DD, if his tongue were notarized.

If you can't afford it RIGHT NOW.. work and save for it.. if you do indeed choose to go far into debt and do it now, that is a personal choice and your problem/concern.... that does not make a forced or segregated multi-tiered educational system... it does not prevent by law someone from pursuing the things they want... just like nothing prevents you from pursuing the Porsche that you dream of... you may have to scratch, work more, and give up things while someone else just withdraws from their bank account... that does not mean that you cannot do it

As for me... I am glad I earn more than the average college graduate.. and all with my measly military training, knowledge, and pure driven effort

Nobody is guaranteed an advanced education... just as nobody with an advanced education is guaranteed success...

As for me not believing him... he has not given much reason at all to believe him... do I believe him when he says he loves his kids? yeah... do I believe him when he makes a campaign point or promise in terms of government (reducing deficit, etc)?? Hell no

 

[kwc57]

If I were certain that was what you were saying, I would have phrased it as a statement, not as a question. I am trying not to read into your statement, which is why I asked for clarification.

You don't turn down a Harvard Education when you have the opportunity to get one. When I went to college, you could afford to pay your loans back. I had federally backed loans and paid them back within the time alotted. Given that you can't discharge student loans in bankruptcy, being able to eat, live and pay them off is really important. You may say "well, if you can't afford the expensive school, don't go"... but that does, in fact, result in a multi-tiered educational system... where rich people can go to the expensive schools and middle class people can, if they get in, go to state universities where you get a good education, but not nearly the same life opportunities. For the rest, it would be either a community college or no college at all.

And we already know that college graduates ultimately earn about twice what their non-college graduate counterparts make.

Overall, it's simply another way of restricting social mobility.

As for the president, you wouldn't believe him, DD, if his tongue were notarized.

So if all you can really afford is a KIA, but someone is willing to loan you the money for a Lexus, you should get the Lexus, correct?

So the best education is only for the rich? At least it aligns with everything else you believe.

The rich have always been able to afford the best. As far as education goes, considerations are made on merit for those who can't afford it. I realize in your politically correct "participation award" world, giving merit scholarships is as equally elitist as the rich affording the best. Why should those with high aptitude and good grades get the edge over the C student? Because educational resources are a finite resource like anything else. Better schools want to spend their resources on those who have the most promise to do the best. Had you ever been to even a community college, you'd know that schools will kick out those who don't apply themselves to make room for those who will. Everyone will benefit from education, but not everyone will qualify for the best schools. Giving everyone a free education and lowering entrance standards is not the path we really want to follow is it? Do you really aspire to mediocrity in the name of "fairness"?

 

[Claudette]

Do you think colleges would drop their rates if the interest is raised?

Or do you think that my son will be screwed?

I figure it's the latter...

In the long term, yes, they will. When less people are able to afford going to school, the demand for higher education will decrease. School will have no choice but to start lowering their tuition to get their enrollment back up. This is the only way the problem will be solved and it's going to be the ultimate result regardless of what action the government takes.

Yup. The free market works in education as well as it does anywhere else. If the federal government pulled all its support for education and forced colleges and universities to depend on student enrollment and philanthropy in order to survive, the costs come down in short order.

As far as those student loans go, for those who actually get a marketable education, a $40 or $50k student loan debt is pretty easy to pay off. For those who major in typewriter maintenance or general studies, maybe less so. The choice is always in our hands however.

And in answer to Jillian's question, yes, only those who can afford to go to the most expensive colleges and universities should go to the most expensive colleges and universities. Just as those who can't afford a million dollar home--which by the way Michelle and Barack Obama did while paying off those oppressive student loan debts--should choose a more modest home. (Which my husband and I did.)

The world does not owe us a fine house or expensive car or a cadillac education. Those are things we work for to afford for our kids or which we pay the necessary dues to acquire for ourselves. I got my education by earning an academic scholarship and otherwise working while going to school. I don't feel the least bit deprived because I could only afford a state university or that I didn't have anybody paying my bills for me.

Barack Obama says that his family were of limited means and unable to help him. He also says he got some help along the way but never says where he got it. (Those records are sealed.)

But for him to say that his student loans were a 'burden' is utterly ridiculous.

WOW Loads of sealed records for Barry.

Don't know bout you but I'd love to get a peek at his records.

I'd also like to find someone who actually went to school with the guy. Kinda funny you don't hear anyone volunteering any info about Barry during college days or perhaps his trip to Pakistan. Hell. If I went to college or held a job in the same place as the POTUS I think I would be knocking on doors just begging to spill the beans about what he was like. Haven't heard of anyone fitting that bill yet. Have you??

Gotta Wonder what we will find if those records are ever unsealed. Bet it will be very interesting reading.

Also. Gotta wonder why are they all sealed??

 

[Foxfyre]

Again... a salary of what he and ones in his camp consider 'rich', and he claims to have 'struggled' like the 'common man'... it just does not make sense... and funny that he did not try and produce totals since he knows that he released his income and tax statements and people could easily look up his salary during this time of his 'struggles'...

I found it a bit off.... funny, no tears in my eyes.... I simply conclude off base pandering considering what we do know

I actually watched the vid on it, and absolutely no pandering can be derived from the situation. You, though, are pandering to the far right shibboleths here.

Taking care of that silliness, I can move to noting that MR (correctly) wants an extention on the low-interest college student loans.

Attempting to lump himself in with the common folk and their situations of struggle.. while he was making what he tries to label everyone else now as 'rich'... that is indeed pandering

It's a campaign gimmick of course and therefore forgivable. All candidates use campaign gimmicks to get elected. Romney has been struggling for a message through this entire campaign period, and I think as of Tuesday night he had finally honed in on a theme that will resonate with those who don't want a leftwing clueless person in the White House.

Or is Obama clueless?

Why didn't he want to go on to serve at the Supreme Court which his credentials at Harvard would have given him a foot in the door? Who would turn down that opportunity in favor of a poorly defined 'private law practice' and some sort of 'community work'? Nothing in his background or activities suggest he has any altruistic motives of any kind.

Or has he been groomed from the beginning--put into all those prestigious schools by design? By whom? We don't know. The record is sealed.

And was the intent to return to Illinois based on the promise that the strings had already been pulled for him to enter the Illinois State legislature? For Michelle to receive a double six figure salary for which she had zero expertise or training. And a million dollar house would be made magically possible? And from there election to the U.S. Senate? And from there the Presidency? Who else with as thin credentials as Obama possesed, no family with any connections, a poor kid of limited means and strapped with a huge college debt and an extremely thin resume would have enjoyed such a meteroic rise?

We'll never know. The records are sealed.

 

[rightwinger]

No one is forced to attend Harvard. There are cheaper routes to education that are affordable to almost anyone.

Sure....you can always ask Daddy to pay

Or you can do it the old fashioned way and get a job and work your way thru.

Yes, in old fashioned times it used to be that way. I worked my way through college working Minimum wage summer jobs at $2 an hour. I am not naive enough to expect college kids to do the same at $7.50 an hour and $35,000 a year tuition

 

[JakeStarkey]

The only pandering we are finding on this thread is the pandering to silly far right themes.

 

[Foxfyre]

Sure....you can always ask Daddy to pay

Or you can do it the old fashioned way and get a job and work your way thru.

Yes, in old fashioned times it used to be that way. I worked my way through college working Minimum wage summer jobs at $2 an hour. I am not naive enough to expect college kids to do the same at $7.50 an hour and $35,000 a year tuition

But fairly easy to do at say the University of New Mexico where the spring, summer, and fall tuition for a full course load will cost in state students less than $10,000 per year. Subtract maybe a Pell grant, merit a scholarship or two, do some volunteer work in return for some student discounts, take out student loans when you have to, and you can still work your way through college.

I have a family member who didn't have to pay much of anything for a master's and PhD at Stanford? How? A 4.0 GPA and graduation with honors from the nearby relatively inexpensive state university earned her acceptance and attractive financial packages from all seven top graduate schools to which she applied. She choose Stanford. She still had some hefty student loans preferring to go that route during times she needed to work less and focus more on her academic projects. But she also has qualified for jobs that allowed her to pay them off in fairly short order.

It can still be done for those with the gumption and initiative to do it.

 

[DiamondDave]

Sure....you can always ask Daddy to pay

Or you can do it the old fashioned way and get a job and work your way thru.

Yes, in old fashioned times it used to be that way. I worked my way through college working Minimum wage summer jobs at $2 an hour. I am not naive enough to expect college kids to do the same at $7.50 an hour and $35,000 a year tuition

Not all colleges are 35K a year.. and even in your time you were not going to work your way thru MIT or Yale on a minimum wage job

but nice try

 

[kwc57]

I actually watched the vid on it, and absolutely no pandering can be derived from the situation. You, though, are pandering to the far right shibboleths here.

Taking care of that silliness, I can move to noting that MR (correctly) wants an extention on the low-interest college student loans.

Attempting to lump himself in with the common folk and their situations of struggle.. while he was making what he tries to label everyone else now as 'rich'... that is indeed pandering

It's a campaign gimmick of course and therefore forgivable. All candidates use campaign gimmicks to get elected. Romney has been struggling for a message through this entire campaign period, and I think as of Tuesday night he had finally honed in on a theme that will resonate with those who don't want a leftwing clueless person in the White House.

Or is Obama clueless?

Why didn't he want to go on to serve at the Supreme Court which his credentials at Harvard would have given him a foot in the door? Who would turn down that opportunity in favor of a poorly defined 'private law practice' and some sort of 'community work'? Nothing in his background or activities suggest he has any altruistic motives of any kind.

Or has he been groomed from the beginning--put into all those prestigious schools by design? By whom? We don't know. The record is sealed.

And was the intent to return to Illinois based on the promise that the strings had already been pulled for him to enter the Illinois State legislature? For Michelle to receive a double six figure salary for which she had zero expertise or training. And a million dollar house would be made magically possible? And from there election to the U.S. Senate? And from there the Presidency? Who else with as thin credentials as Obama possesed, no family with any connections, a poor kid of limited means and strapped with a huge college debt and an extremely thin resume would have enjoyed such a meteroic rise?

We'll never know. The records are sealed.

I'd like to know who the poor slob is that had to trade places with him?

View attachment 18555