Executive Order to forgive $50,000 in student debt

[Cecilie1200]

There is all kinds of work done in an office setting not actually done by the engineer. Both the engineer and the pharmacist student would be spending most of their time in class.

But most jobs are not like that. If a drug store needs a pharmacist, they don't have six years to wait for one. They need one right now. I don't know anything about that line of work, but I'm assuming that somebody that isn't a pharmacist won't be able to do at least some of the work a pharmacist does while still being profitable to the drug store.

Pharmacists, like doctors, have to be licensed. Much of the work in a pharmacy is done by pharmacy assistants, but they have to be supervised by a licensed pharmacist, and only the pharmacist can explain the use and possible side effects of medicines to a patient, or make possible pharmaceutical suggestions (such as generic substitutes) or give advice. I believe there are some medications that can only be dispensed by the pharmacist, as well, but I won't swear to that.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Twenty minutes? Damn, aren't YOU the optimist.

Sometimes less. All my followups are the same way every time. The nurse takes my weight and blood pressure. The doctor comes in, checks the heart and breathing, looks at my eyes, asks the same ole questions while I nod my head yes, and I'm out of there in 15 minutes. $280.00.

Today is the eye doctor. Same thing. Nurse will give me eye drops, ask a bunch of dumb questions, do some vision tests, and the doctor will come in and look in my eyes with that scope, and tell me when my cataract surgery is going to be. From the time she walks in until I leave, less than 20 minutes.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Businesses can create an agreement where the student gets educated and then agree's to work for that company for X years. I know Pharmacies used to take advantage of this quite a bit (I have no idea if they still do).

I've been saying for many years we need to get back into apprenticeships and less classroom schooling. I have an Associate's Degree from a business school and then a Bachelor's and MBA from two different universities. I learned a lot from the business school because it had a more practical focus. I learned some stuff from the higher degree education at the universities, but most of what I do today I learned on the job.

Universities need to cut out the bullshit two years of liberal arts requirements. Shorten those requirements to one year with a focus more towards the major you're wanting and then your senior year should be mostly apprenticing at an actual company doing a job in your field. You get the experience they want and you need to get a job and they get more affordable labor while you're apprenticing. It's a win win.

 

[Concerned American]

Democrats Plan $50,000 Of Student Loan Cancellation By Executive Order

Will your student loans get cancelled? It depends who you ask.

www.forbes.com

Congratulations US Taxpayer, looks like you will get to pick up the $50,000 tab of irresponsible college students and families who took on more debt than they could handle because they felt entitled to go to private elite colleges 3 time zones away and concentrate their studies in useless majors that have no demand in the job market. These students and families who feel entitled to this have the audacity to say they have been “enslaved” or victimized by student debt.

Moving forward, there needs to be more controls in place to qualify students and their families towards state and local institutions and concentrations of study that yield good paying jobs.

Check your race cards and class warfare bullshit at the door.

I think this is much ado about nothing. Contracts cannot be undone by EO. Courts can do it if the contract is shown to be invalid or illegal, but they are going to have to find another way. Lenders will not stand for it.

Did you bother to read the linked article? They're not talking about wiping out loans held by other institutions (yet); they're talking about wiping out loans held by the federal government.

Guaranteed Student Loans issued before 2011 were from banks. If those are off the table, I'd like to see it in writing.

The federal government cannot write off loans to private institutions. What part of that are you simply not getting?

I'm not getting why you're ignoring guaranteed student loans, issued before 2011, which were issued by banks and that the government will cover. If the proposal doesn't cover those, then it's not a concern, but I've seen no indication that it doesn't.

The loans are guaranteed and why would anyone have loans that old? If I recall, 10 years was the payback on those. Why would they be bailing out banks?

They extend them past the ten years--at least they did for my son-in-law. The guarantee may end and the lender figures if they can keep the student paying, it is better than collections or a total loss. IDK.

 

[pknopp]

Businesses can create an agreement where the student gets educated and then agree's to work for that company for X years. I know Pharmacies used to take advantage of this quite a bit (I have no idea if they still do).

I've been saying for many years we need to get back into apprenticeships and less classroom schooling. I have an Associate's Degree from a business school and then a Bachelor's and MBA from two different universities. I learned a lot from the business school because it had a more practical focus. I learned some stuff from the higher degree education at the universities, but most of what I do today I learned on the job.

Universities need to cut out the bullshit two years of liberal arts requirements. Shorten those requirements to one year with a focus more towards the major you're wanting and then your senior year should be mostly apprenticing at an actual company doing a job in your field. You get the experience they want and you need to get a job and they get more affordable labor while you're apprenticing. It's a win win.

I support the idea of making electives less of getting your education to bring costs down. In some cases an apprenticeship can work and in many other it can't so we are just generalizing.

Using the Pharmacy example while I support things like the Pharmacy offering paid schooling for X years of the employee's services we all have seen how busy a pharmacist generally is. He does not have the time to teach everything that is needed to be learned to become a pharmacist.

 

[Concerned American]

I am glad you ask this because it acknowledges that you agree that this is their rightful cost.

How to accomplish this? Simple, whatever educational requirements a business has should be collected as a tax.
So if a company requires an MBA, a company must pay a tax amount comparable to that cost.

Okay. So you and I are trying for the same job. I have a college education in which to do the job immediately. You apply for the job and the employer would have to fund your education first. Who do you think would get that job, you or me?

Why should a business fund your education when you can go get a better job the minute you complete your studies?

Many do, my former employer would pay tuition and books for any employee without a post graduate degree. They also would fund post-grad degrees if they benefited the company. Not all companies do this, but there are a few.

And I'm guessing they also required the employee to remain in their employ for a certain amount of time to justify the cost to the company. They didn't just let them get the degree and then prance off to their competitors.

There were NO strings attached to undergrad degrees, post grad degrees had some requirements, chief among them, the degree had to advance them in their chosen field in the company. There were no length of employment requirements. I have worked for a few larger companies and a couple of smaller ones that provided this benefit.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Twenty minutes? Damn, aren't YOU the optimist.

Sometimes less. All my followups are the same way every time. The nurse takes my weight and blood pressure. The doctor comes in, checks the heart and breathing, looks at my eyes, asks the same ole questions while I nod my head yes, and I'm out of there in 15 minutes. $280.00.

Today is the eye doctor. Same thing. Nurse will give me eye drops, ask a bunch of dumb questions, do some vision tests, and the doctor will come in and look in my eyes with that scope, and tell me when my cataract surgery is going to be. From the time she walks in until I leave, less than 20 minutes.

The last time I spent twenty whole minutes in a room with a medical professional was when I got a root canal. Not sure I've ever done so without getting a major procedure done.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I am glad you ask this because it acknowledges that you agree that this is their rightful cost.

How to accomplish this? Simple, whatever educational requirements a business has should be collected as a tax.
So if a company requires an MBA, a company must pay a tax amount comparable to that cost.

Okay. So you and I are trying for the same job. I have a college education in which to do the job immediately. You apply for the job and the employer would have to fund your education first. Who do you think would get that job, you or me?

Why should a business fund your education when you can go get a better job the minute you complete your studies?

Many do, my former employer would pay tuition and books for any employee without a post graduate degree. They also would fund post-grad degrees if they benefited the company. Not all companies do this, but there are a few.

And I'm guessing they also required the employee to remain in their employ for a certain amount of time to justify the cost to the company. They didn't just let them get the degree and then prance off to their competitors.

There were NO strings attached to undergrad degrees, post grad degrees had some requirements, chief among them, the degree had to advance them in their chosen field in the company. There were no length of employment requirements. I have worked for a few larger companies and a couple of smaller ones that provided this benefit.

So they were willing to pay out the money for you to get a degree, and then have you immediately jump ship to their competitors before the ink was dry on the diploma? I'm really dubious about that.

 

[Jarlaxle]

What a dumb thing to say.

Honest, WTF?

Why on earth should a kid learn cursive? Why?
Just because you did? Time is change and cursive is simply not needed today. This is a fact.

As to your nephew. He is an idiot or a lazy slob who never bothered to look at his bill and understand it.
A 3rd grader could figure out if there was an extra change on his bill if he simply looked at it.

Maybe he is like you? Maybe that is the problem. That is sure as hell what he sounds like to me.

He's a very bright kid. You can't be dumb and earn a Masters degree. The point that flew over your head is they don't teach this kind of stuff in high school anymore and they should. They should be teaching kids about stuff like that. They should be teaching them about investments like the stock market, the commodities market, real estate, and the basics to opening up your own business. So it seems, high schools are failing these kids, and I don't mean in a grading way.

You don't need cursive? I'd love to see you fill out a police report and see what it looks like when you're done.

Cursive? What is this, 1960? I haven't used cursive in 20 years.

 

[bripat9643]

I am glad you ask this because it acknowledges that you agree that this is their rightful cost.

How to accomplish this? Simple, whatever educational requirements a business has should be collected as a tax.
So if a company requires an MBA, a company must pay a tax amount comparable to that cost.

Okay. So you and I are trying for the same job. I have a college education in which to do the job immediately. You apply for the job and the employer would have to fund your education first. Who do you think would get that job, you or me?

Why should a business fund your education when you can go get a better job the minute you complete your studies?

Many do, my former employer would pay tuition and books for any employee without a post graduate degree. They also would fund post-grad degrees if they benefited the company. Not all companies do this, but there are a few.

And I'm guessing they also required the employee to remain in their employ for a certain amount of time to justify the cost to the company. They didn't just let them get the degree and then prance off to their competitors.

I've worked at companies that have educational benefits. That's the way they look at it, as a benefit. They will pay for one or two classes per year. It's a relatively small amount of money.

 

[Jarlaxle]

I am glad you ask this because it acknowledges that you agree that this is their rightful cost.

How to accomplish this? Simple, whatever educational requirements a business has should be collected as a tax.
So if a company requires an MBA, a company must pay a tax amount comparable to that cost.

This is weapon-grade stupid.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The last time I spent twenty whole minutes in a room with a medical professional was when I got a root canal. Not sure I've ever done so without getting a major procedure done.

No, not major procedures. But regular checkups are about that give or take five minutes. Everything they need to know about you is on their computer screen.

 

[Concerned American]

I am glad you ask this because it acknowledges that you agree that this is their rightful cost.

How to accomplish this? Simple, whatever educational requirements a business has should be collected as a tax.
So if a company requires an MBA, a company must pay a tax amount comparable to that cost.

Okay. So you and I are trying for the same job. I have a college education in which to do the job immediately. You apply for the job and the employer would have to fund your education first. Who do you think would get that job, you or me?

Why should a business fund your education when you can go get a better job the minute you complete your studies?

Many do, my former employer would pay tuition and books for any employee without a post graduate degree. They also would fund post-grad degrees if they benefited the company. Not all companies do this, but there are a few.

And I'm guessing they also required the employee to remain in their employ for a certain amount of time to justify the cost to the company. They didn't just let them get the degree and then prance off to their competitors.

There were NO strings attached to undergrad degrees, post grad degrees had some requirements, chief among them, the degree had to advance them in their chosen field in the company. There were no length of employment requirements. I have worked for a few larger companies and a couple of smaller ones that provided this benefit.

So they were willing to pay out the money for you to get a degree, and then have you immediately jump ship to their competitors before the ink was dry on the diploma? I'm really dubious about that.

Be dubious all you want. There are numerous companies that do it. I worked for my last employer for 33 years, but I attended school during my time with other smaller companies for sometimes less than two years.

 

[Concerned American]

I am glad you ask this because it acknowledges that you agree that this is their rightful cost.

How to accomplish this? Simple, whatever educational requirements a business has should be collected as a tax.
So if a company requires an MBA, a company must pay a tax amount comparable to that cost.

Okay. So you and I are trying for the same job. I have a college education in which to do the job immediately. You apply for the job and the employer would have to fund your education first. Who do you think would get that job, you or me?

Why should a business fund your education when you can go get a better job the minute you complete your studies?

Many do, my former employer would pay tuition and books for any employee without a post graduate degree. They also would fund post-grad degrees if they benefited the company. Not all companies do this, but there are a few.

And I'm guessing they also required the employee to remain in their employ for a certain amount of time to justify the cost to the company. They didn't just let them get the degree and then prance off to their competitors.

I've worked at companies that have educational benefits. That's the way they look at it, as abenefit. They will pay for one or two classes per year. It's a relatively small amount of money.

The companies I worked for paid all tuition and books. It was a substantial amount--you were required to pay the taxes if any.

 

[bripat9643]

He doesn't seem to be aware that tuition reimbursement programs ALWAYS contain a clause specifying that the employee MUST work for the company for X amount of time after the education in order to pay it off. If they leave before that time is up, they have to pay it back, because the company has not used those skills sufficiently to pay back their investment. Also, you have to already BE an employee for a certain amount of time first; they aren't going to hire you off the street and then send you to school.

Yep, that's what my employer did for his employees that have been with him for years. We had tractor-trailer drivers and straight truck drivers which are two different licenses. He always had one or two straight truck drivers with a Class A (tractor-trailer) license as a backup for when one of us were off for illness or vacation.

The straight truck driver had to get his temps. An experienced driver took him out on weekends to teach him how to drive a T/T. When our experienced driver felt he drove good enough to pass the test, they both went out to get him his written and road test complete. When he passed, we always had him as backup. They would advance to full time T/T job when one became available. The guy that took my job when I left was our backup.

My employer also realized that with a Class A, that straight truck driver could find a better paying job driving T/T full-time somewhere else. So he made them sign a three year contract in order to be trained and get his Class A license.

How long do these classes last, three months? It's not the same as paying for 4 years to get a bachelor's degree.

 

[bripat9643]

I am glad you ask this because it acknowledges that you agree that this is their rightful cost.

How to accomplish this? Simple, whatever educational requirements a business has should be collected as a tax.
So if a company requires an MBA, a company must pay a tax amount comparable to that cost.

Okay. So you and I are trying for the same job. I have a college education in which to do the job immediately. You apply for the job and the employer would have to fund your education first. Who do you think would get that job, you or me?

Why should a business fund your education when you can go get a better job the minute you complete your studies?

Many do, my former employer would pay tuition and books for any employee without a post graduate degree. They also would fund post-grad degrees if they benefited the company. Not all companies do this, but there are a few.

And I'm guessing they also required the employee to remain in their employ for a certain amount of time to justify the cost to the company. They didn't just let them get the degree and then prance off to their competitors.

I've worked at companies that have educational benefits. That's the way they look at it, as abenefit. They will pay for one or two classes per year. It's a relatively small amount of money.

The companies I worked for paid all tuition and books. It was a substantial amount--you were required to pay the taxes if any.

It's a lot less than your medical benefits.

 

[Jarlaxle]

He doesn't seem to be aware that tuition reimbursement programs ALWAYS contain a clause specifying that the employee MUST work for the company for X amount of time after the education in order to pay it off. If they leave before that time is up, they have to pay it back, because the company has not used those skills sufficiently to pay back their investment. Also, you have to already BE an employee for a certain amount of time first; they aren't going to hire you off the street and then send you to school.

Yep, that's what my employer did for his employees that have been with him for years. We had tractor-trailer drivers and straight truck drivers which are two different licenses. He always had one or two straight truck drivers with a Class A (tractor-trailer) license as a backup for when one of us were off for illness or vacation.

The straight truck driver had to get his temps. An experienced driver took him out on weekends to teach him how to drive a T/T. When our experienced driver felt he drove good enough to pass the test, they both went out to get him his written and road test complete. When he passed, we always had him as backup. They would advance to full time T/T job when one became available. The guy that took my job when I left was our backup.

My employer also realized that with a Class A, that straight truck driver could find a better paying job driving T/T full-time somewhere else. So he made them sign a three year contract in order to be trained and get his Class A license.

My company gave me time to go (4-day workweek) and paid for (reimbursed) about half the cost of driving school to get my class A license.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Cursive is useless. I have not used it since high school and I am 60 years old.

I still write checks for tax deductible items so I have a paper trail. My bank sends back photo copies of the canceled checks. Then I can categorize them, do the math, and present the results to my tax preparer. The more work I can do on taxes myself, the less she charges.

If I get audited, I don't have to show the IRS all my bank statements with selected deductions. I can give them photo copies of the checks of questionable payments only showing who I sent money to and why.

But as I said earlier, if somebody had to fill out a police report, I'd love to see one written by a person that doesn't know cursive.

Last police reports I saw were typed.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I am glad you ask this because it acknowledges that you agree that this is their rightful cost.

How to accomplish this? Simple, whatever educational requirements a business has should be collected as a tax.
So if a company requires an MBA, a company must pay a tax amount comparable to that cost.

Okay. So you and I are trying for the same job. I have a college education in which to do the job immediately. You apply for the job and the employer would have to fund your education first. Who do you think would get that job, you or me?

Why should a business fund your education when you can go get a better job the minute you complete your studies?

Many do, my former employer would pay tuition and books for any employee without a post graduate degree. They also would fund post-grad degrees if they benefited the company. Not all companies do this, but there are a few.

And I'm guessing they also required the employee to remain in their employ for a certain amount of time to justify the cost to the company. They didn't just let them get the degree and then prance off to their competitors.

I've worked at companies that have educational benefits. That's the way they look at it, as a benefit. They will pay for one or two classes per year. It's a relatively small amount of money.

My sister got her Master's degree in Health Administration through her company's tuition reimbursement program. She had to agree to put that degree to use with that company for X number of years (I don't remember how long, off the top of my head) if she doesn't want to become responsible for paying it back. Of course, I don't think that's much of a hardship, since she works for one of the best companies in our area for that field, and they pay her obscene amounts of money AND happily let her work from home even without Covid.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The last time I spent twenty whole minutes in a room with a medical professional was when I got a root canal. Not sure I've ever done so without getting a major procedure done.

No, not major procedures. But regular checkups are about that give or take five minutes. Everything they need to know about you is on their computer screen.

When I say "medical professional", I'm talking a doctor or nurse practitioner. My checkups are performed by a medical assistant, maybe a nurse, with a quick five-minute visit for the doctor to come in and read the results at me. Of course, I'm obscenely healthy, so my checkups rarely involve much.

I guess we could count my annual Pap smear, which is performed by a gynecologist. I prefer not to think about those (bleh).