You might like to swim, but I don't want to have to jump into the risk pool so that the kids of someone that I don't know can go to college. I hear stories all the time about how hard people had to work to make it through college. Many students used to pay for their own education.

You think that the federal government should give loans to young people who are unlikely to be able to pay it back? That doesn't streamline anything. It puts the tax payers on the hook for ever increasing amounts. It is blatant redistribution of wealth. That's all it is.

Look at the public school systems. You think that Obama's new plan is going to do a better job with college? You don't think that there will be the achievement gaps that exsist in the public schools right now? What do they do then, spend more money so that weaker students can feel smarter?

Higher education? What are academics contributing to our country now, other than an heir of arrogance and an elitist mentality? Alright, that was using a broad brush, but what we really need is for the private sector to create jobs so that young people have opportunities, like the one that I had, to do things like serve and apprenticeship in the trades. I may never get rich (why would I want to do that and then be penalized for it) but I have learned a skill that will not become obsolete.

Young people don't need a college education to learn a good work ethic.

Funny you mention India. We've all been mad that when we've called customer support we reach someone in India that we can hardly understand. These people are making crap for money, with their publicly funded education. That's something really great to look forward to in our country. A public college education, and then a crappy paying job. Yes, that's incentive.

 

Ahem...The whole reason for the student loan program is so students can pay for their OWN education with the higher pay they can command with that education. What do you mean when you say "many students used to pay for their own education"? That's what this proposal is all about! The cost of higher education has risen double that of general inflation. I was only able to pay for my education because the university I attended was in-state and had reasonable tuition because it was publically funded AND I had the help of student loans (all paid back, thank-you).

If you bothered to look at the facts you would learn that student loans have a very low default rate, currently around 6.7% which is very low considering the bad economy. It's lower than residential mortgages. You should educate yourself before using the conservative talking point "redistributing the wealth". Obamas proposal is designed to LOWER the tax burden of student loans, currently the fat cat bankers are robbing the system blind. Somehow you conservatives seem to look the otherway when the wealth is being redistributed from the poor students and the average taxpayer to the wealthy bankers...

First, this is a program to provide loans to students, not a program to administer education.

Secondly, public four-year universities have a much lower than average student loan default rate, it's lower than private universities and MUCH lower than for profit technical colleges.

I see you are following the conservative talking points.

Actually, it's the engineers, mathematicians, scientists (computer and others), geologists (petroleum and others), etc. that drive a modern economy with high standards of living. We cannot increase our standard of living with more insurance saleman. These are the skills that students can acquire if they can figure out a way to pay for higher education. These kind of jobs drive the economy and allow it to expand.

Becoming an apprentice in the trades is fine for some people, others may want to create real wealth. Without that there is less opportunity to make money in simple trades like ship building, etc. It's the skilled jobs that drive and grow the economy.

Since when did this discussion de-evolve into one about good work ethics? If you are happy working in a coal mine or welding ships together (or whatever your skill is that you learned via your apprenticeship), fine, I'm happy for you. But we still need highly trained engineers to find that coal and to design the newest, most efficient ships and to geologists to skillfully extract the raw resources in an efficient and safe manner.

Actually, the cost of living is quite low in India. Those technical support people you mention are making around 100 times as much as their uneducated countrymen. That's a huge difference and something worth striving for. There are also many Indians for whom higher education has opened the doors to wealth they could only dream of. India has a fast growing new class of millionaires. American blue collar earnings are a pittance in comparison to what someone with a good head on their shoulders and access to higher education can achieve and this type of economic activity helps lift all classes of workers.

During WWII the Americans had to go to European trained scientists in order to develop the atomic bomb that precipitated Japan's surrender. Americans also went to European trained scientists to take us to the moon and that endeavor spawned an entire technological revolution that lifted the economic standards of an entire generation of Americans. If America wants to remain competitive in the world they will have to embrace higher education, not embrace the backwards belief that ignorance is bliss and that the educated are arrogant and elitist. Oh, wait, since when did 'elitist' mean something negative? I grew up striving to be elite or the best I could be. Elite athletes were awarded the best scholarships and elite schools turned out the best trained professionals who commanded the highest salaries. I guess you have been brainwashed by the far right because in my book 'elite' means 'the best'. Only in America have the far right bastardized the word and put down the ideal of striving to be better. Yes, I guess we would all be better if we set our sights low, no need to strive as long as there is food on the table, if it's good enough for Joe the plumber I guess it's good enough for everyone.

 

A couple points about federally guaranteed student loans. They have a low default rate, because you really can't default on them. If you fail to pay then any tax refund you are owed is seized. Any social security you are due when you are old will be reduced. Any federal benefit will be denied or reduced until you are current on your student loan.

The socialist/communist thought states that anything the government can provide will be cheaper than anything the private industry provides because there is no profit motive in government. This has never played out. If government backed student loans were directly loaned and serviced by the US government the people employed by the program would receive pay on the GS scale. People in low cost of living areas will receive pay above the people employed in local private industry. People in high cost of living areas would receive pay lower than available in the local job market. What happens is people in low cost areas don't leave, but people in high cost areas won't stay. High turn over is very expensive. Low turnover results in people hitting the top of the pay scale and not leaving, resulting in a very expensive workforce. Generally speaking federal benefits are better than local benefits.

 

People used to work to earn the money to pay for their education. They would get good grades in high school to earn scholarships. They would apply for grants, given out by privately funded entities. This proposal does cut out the middle man. That middle man is the checks and balances on our government. That middle man is the people. This proposal is one of many that cuts out the middle man. It appears that this administration is intent on us relying on the federal government for our every want and every need. I take issue with that.

6.7%? Did you just pull that number out of thin air? You very rarely post any supporting source for your "facts". You tell me to educate myself. I actually do. You tell me that I'm looking to the wrong sources, yet you can't provide any sources that you might use, to contrast my "bias" sources. On this one, I don't need to "bother" to look up the facts. Common sense tell us that, given their extensive track record, the federal government is inept at administering social welfare programs. I know that you want to believe every word your idol says but the reality is, it isn't going to save money. It's going to send more young people to college, at the expense of the tax payers. They may be loans now, but this administration has made it clear that they want to have socialized education.

For a supposedly educated person, you seem to be missing some basic facts. In the private sector, there isn't redistribution. If you don't like what a company is doing, you don't do business with them. The federal government collects our money. They decide how much they are going to collect. The constitution says what they can use that money for, but they stretch the intent. They redistribute, but we can't stop paying taxes. We don't have the choice of ceasing our business relationship with them. Left unchecked, they will spend our money on what ever they want.

This proposal is for student loans. Given what Obama has said about health care, it seams quite plausable that he would do the same thing with higher education. Incrimental socialism.

As for the default rate, I think that 1depd has made some valid points.

We have over three hundred million people in this country. How many engineers, mathematicians, scientists (computer and others), geologists (petroleum and others), etc, do we actually need? We all have different standards of living. We all have different expectations. We can all improve our stantard of living through hard work. It would be silly if we had a country who could do the theory, but couldn't do the work.

Simple trades? You are saying that the people who go to college to learn theory are skilled and the people who learn the trades aren't. Are you of the believe that, the taxpayers should finance the educations so that we can have more rich people to vilify? You've never stopped to think that some people won't want to strive to earn six figures, and would rather live a simpler exsistence where they could spend time with their family, and enjoy their life, have you?

The term would be devolve by the way. Work ethic is actually very important in this discussion. If no one had a formal education, it would be the ones with a good work ethic that would survive. You don't seem to understand the different rolls that people play. You can have your college educated people find the coal, but that coal ain't worth a chit if you don't have someone to get it out of the ground. In my trade, I have worked with engineers to help them make a better product, based on what I need it to do. Theory and reality aren't always the same.

You can tell me what you know about India, but I think that I'll stick with what the people from India have told me about India.

Elitist.