Why is Student Loan Overhaul in Health Care Bill?

[Care4all]

This is a damn good question. By including this in the healthcare reform legislation, it has the slimy feel of pork. Does anyone out there know WHY it was included?

it was included because they had to make the Bill, budget neutral....

The saving from the student loans being direct verses through the middle man. ..saves money, money they have used to fund the health care bill....is my understanding of why it had to be in there.

So it was done to make it deficit neutral; but at the cost of an entire industry?

Do you not fear this becomeing more commonplace as our debt increases annually?

government student loans that the private sector issued, were a guaranteed profit for the banks.....while the government took the losses.

tax payers funded the bank's profit and paid for the bank's losses...

this is not right imho, and if there is a way for us tax payers to not constantly give this kind of corporate welfare, the better off, we will be.

this does not stop students from trying to take out a private student loan from the banks...but they will have to qualify for such loan....making it more difficult, without the gvt backing and pledge for the student.

i am not certain on your last question....i would need to read up on it more first, to look at all consequences of such changes, like with VA loans....i need more details on how it works now.

 

[VaYank5150]

And Lord knows the sentiment by many... that the government should not be in the business of being a loan provider for college or anything else, let alone handling health care... but that is a whole other point

Even though you have heard that education, and particulalry higher educationis high on Obama's "to get fixed" list?

I have never heard that the issue was with student loans. I have heard many times that the issue is with the quality of lower education; AND with the cost of higher education. Not with the ability to take out a loan with for higher education.

Maybe I should have just Googled it to beging with. This seems like a pretty good article on it:
Overhaul of Student Loans Passes Congress - NYTimes.com

“Why are we paying people to lend the government’s money and then the government guarantees the loan and the government takes back the loan?” said Representative George Miller, Democrat of California and chairman of the Education and Labor Committee.

 

[Care4all]

We are told that increased competition by letting the government get involved in health care will lower costs yet they are telling us this philosophy does not apply with student loans... If the government is the only one granting student loans can't they charge whatever amount they want?

that would defeat their purposes of doing it, imho....

i can see the private sector, creating their own type of student loans that could be competitive with the gvt student loans....no one is stopping them kman....no one....

we are just not privatizing their profits and socializing their losses anymore....

 

[VaYank5150]

We are told that increased competition by letting the government get involved in health care will lower costs yet they are telling us this philosophy does not apply with student loans... If the government is the only one granting student loans can't they charge whatever amount they want?

Read the article I posted. The one big element you are overlooking is that the government already backs or guarantees these loans, so why not simply cut out the lenders who are getting rich with zero risk?

 

[Jarhead]

it was included because they had to make the Bill, budget neutral....

The saving from the student loans being direct verses through the middle man. ..saves money, money they have used to fund the health care bill....is my understanding of why it had to be in there.

So it was done to make it deficit neutral; but at the cost of an entire industry?

Do you not fear this becomeing more commonplace as our debt increases annually?

government student loans that the private sector issued, were a guaranteed profit for the banks.....while the government took the losses.

tax payers funded the bank's profit and paid for the bank's losses...

this is not right imho, and if there is a way for us tax payers to not constantly give this kind of corporate welfare, the better off, we will be.

this does not stop students from trying to take out a private student loan from the banks...but they will have to qualify for such loan....making it more difficult, without the gvt backing and pledge for the student.

i am not certain on your last question....i would need to read up on it more first, to look at all consequences of such changes, like with VA loans....i need more details on how it works now.

I believe your post and the article VaYank linked us to pretty much answers the question.

That being said, my second question is irrelevant. This seems to be more of a necessary move to eliminate the disparity between cost and risk to the government. Seems to be a logical move as I see it.

But I plan to read up more on it to see all views before I simply say "sounds good."

 

[Skull Pilot]

I find it funny that young peopl support this bill because it is on their backs that it will be funded.

First young healthy people will have to pay more in premiums so as to subsidize the sick and now the interest from their student loans will be jacked up and used to fund this monstrosity.

Jesus, I never remember being so fucking gullible.

Most young people do not have:

1) a high enough income to understand how the cost of entitlement programs will affect their bottom line

2) Responsibility to anyone but themselves; so they do not uunderstand the fear of not meeting their financial commitments and how it will affect others.

So gullible AND stupid

 

[Jarhead]

I find it funny that young peopl support this bill because it is on their backs that it will be funded.

First young healthy people will have to pay more in premiums so as to subsidize the sick and now the interest from their student loans will be jacked up and used to fund this monstrosity.

Jesus, I never remember being so fucking gullible.

Most young people do not have:

1) a high enough income to understand how the cost of entitlement programs will affect their bottom line

2) Responsibility to anyone but themselves; so they do not uunderstand the fear of not meeting their financial commitments and how it will affect others.

So gullible AND stupid

Gullible? Yes. I was one of them.
Stupid? No. Not me, at least.

 

[Claudette]

Right now most young folks are subsidized by their parents. They have no real worries so don't dwell on the politics of anything.

As soon as these young people get married. Start Families and have to pay their own mortgages and bills and taxes they will begin to realize whats going on. Its a whole lot easire when Mom and Dad payed your way.

I had this student loan deal on the HC thread last week under Surprise, Surprise.

Guess its just that to many.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Right now most young folks are subsidized by their parents. They have no real worries so don't dwell on the politics of anything.

As soon as these young people get married. Start Families and have to pay their own mortgages and bills and taxes they will begin to realize whats going on. Its a whole lot easire when Mom and Dad payed your way.

I had this student loan deal on the HC thread last week under Surprise, Surprise.

Guess its just that to many.

Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains. - Winston Churchill

 

[DiamondDave]

And Lord knows the sentiment by many... that the government should not be in the business of being a loan provider for college or anything else, let alone handling health care... but that is a whole other point

Even though you have heard that education, and particulalry higher educationis high on Obama's "to get fixed" list?

Fixing education, which is not really a federal mandate via the constitution, does not inherently mean that the government should become or should remain as a private lender or a safety net for absorbing the risk of private loans

 

[Dr Gregg]

Why does any other bill get thrown in with other bills. To me that's just bullshit. But it happens all the time

 

[Dr Gregg]

My bad...does anyone with a brain, who is not a partisan hack and who does not hate everything the Obama administration does, know why this is in the bill?

Why is this considered a partisan answer?

Do you have a better hypothesis?

I have NO hypothesis, which is why I was hoping for some actual debate on the subect. I am NOT looking for partisan talking points, such as "power grab, control, etc etc"

YOu won't find much here, its overrun by these hateful, ignorant partisan hacks

 

[Jarhead]

Why does any other bill get thrown in with other bills. To me that's just bullshit. But it happens all the time

I believe they were lumped together for a couple of reasons. One being so this congress does not have to have the opposition advertising about the takeover of an industry (student laons) using reconciliation.

It would not make for the best PR as they are licking their wounds from the negative PR they got with the healthcare passing; for good or for bad.

 

[RodISHI]

The whole bill is power, payback, and control... so is it really any wonder why some payback pork and control was added?

My bad...does anyone with a brain, who is not a partisan hack and who does not hate everything the Obama administration does, know why this is in the bill?

To cut out the banks, "the middle man". In doing this they also took away people's choices.

What choices did they take away Zoom-boing?

 

[Jarhead]

Why is this considered a partisan answer?

Do you have a better hypothesis?

I have NO hypothesis, which is why I was hoping for some actual debate on the subect. I am NOT looking for partisan talking points, such as "power grab, control, etc etc"

YOu won't find much here, its overrun by these hateful, ignorant partisan hacks

I found plenty here. Much was answered with little anger and arguing.

Maybe you should read the thread before you assume what took place.

 

[Dr Gregg]

Why does any other bill get thrown in with other bills. To me that's just bullshit. But it happens all the time

I believe they were lumped together for a couple of reasons. One being so this congress does not have to have the opposition advertising about the takeover of an industry (student laons) using reconciliation.

It would not make for the best PR as they are licking their wounds from the negative PR they got with the healthcare passing; for good or for bad.

That's a law I('d like to see passed, that you only vote on one bill at a time, as bullshit gets passed often cause its attached to more important bills.

 

[Jarhead]

My bad...does anyone with a brain, who is not a partisan hack and who does not hate everything the Obama administration does, know why this is in the bill?

To cut out the banks, "the middle man". In doing this they also took away people's choices.

What choices did they take away Zoom-boing?

For good or bad, we will no longer have a choice of what bank to finance our educations with. We will no longer be able to shop around for the best deal.

 

[Dr Gregg]

I have NO hypothesis, which is why I was hoping for some actual debate on the subect. I am NOT looking for partisan talking points, such as "power grab, control, etc etc"

YOu won't find much here, its overrun by these hateful, ignorant partisan hacks

I found plenty here. Much was answered with little anger and arguing.

Maybe you should read the thread before you assume what took place.

"not much" does not mean "none at all". If you can dig through the partisan trolls, there is something of substance. But I'm starting to ignore the blatant ones making it easier to sift through all the shit

 

[boedicca]

The whole bill is power, payback, and control... so is it really any wonder why some payback pork and control was added?

My bad...does anyone with a brain, who is not a partisan hack and who does not hate everything the Obama administration does, know why this is in the bill?

To cut out the banks, "the middle man". In doing this they also took away people's choices.

But they aren't lowering rates. The government is keeping a bigger profit margin to cook the CBO score.

A big question: education inflation is often worse than health insurance inflation. Why is the Federal Government enabling this inflation by funnelling massive loans into the system?

 

[Jarhead]

My bad...does anyone with a brain, who is not a partisan hack and who does not hate everything the Obama administration does, know why this is in the bill?

To cut out the banks, "the middle man". In doing this they also took away people's choices.

But they aren't lowering rates. The government is keeping a bigger profit margin to cook the CBO score.

A big question: education inflation is often worse than health insurance inflation. Why is the Federal Government enabling this inflation by funnelling massive loans into the system?

From what I understand (and I am only regurgitating what was explained to me and what a NYT article said):

The governemnt has been taking on the risk of private education loans, but not the profit.

That is a formula for failure.

If they take on the risk, they should take on the gain. And they should control it as well.

I understand the logic, but I am never happy about the government taking over any private industry.