Student loan reform

[Kaylyn]

Found this video posted by a friend on Facebook, detailing Obama's ideas for student loan reform. Figured I'd just throw it in here for discussion.

Personally, I think it's a great idea. If it works, and if it passes and actually gets implemented, of course. It basically says no one will ever pay more than 10% of their income in student loan payments, and once you've paid for 20 or 25 years, the remainder of your debt is forgiven.

[Panacea]

Found this video posted by a friend on Facebook, detailing Obama's ideas for student loan reform. Figured I'd just throw it in here for discussion.

Personally, I think it's a great idea. If it works, and if it passes and actually gets implemented, of course. It basically says no one will ever pay more than 10% of their income in student loan payments, and once you've paid for 20 or 25 years, the remainder of your debt is forgiven.

It only affects students who aren't in repayment yet. The ones who are already drowning don't get to take advantage of this plan.

[Kaylyn]

Hm. Well, it's a start at least. Maybe it will kick in before we have to start repaying hubby's student loans, as he's already racking up more than I did.

[HYHYBT]

One thing it would mean is that people will be less willing to lend the money in the first place... at least, not to those who are less likely to make enough to pay it back in a reasonable amount of time. Which, I suppose, is a good thing in itself so long as it's not taken too far.

[MadMike]

This could prove to be interesting, since I work in the student loan industry myself. My supervisor scheduled a meeting in her office tomorrow morning to discuss the issue, and I think we're watching some sort of speech from Obama himself.

I don't think our company is in any danger. She said something about this being "a huge project with an aggressive timeline." Nothing like job security!

[mikoyan29]

It only impacts the Federally backed student loans. If you have private loans, you're pretty much screwed.

[Dreamstalker]

It only affects students who aren't in repayment yet. The ones who are already drowning don't get to take advantage of this plan.

What about existing loans that are currently in an economic-hardship deferment? (not in repayment at present)

[Panacea]

One thing it would mean is that people will be less willing to lend the money in the first place... at least, not to those who are less likely to make enough to pay it back in a reasonable amount of time. Which, I suppose, is a good thing in itself so long as it's not taken too far.

Well, the reason loans are so popular is because tuition costs have skyrocketed, especially as states have cut support for schools due to the economy. Admission offices are quick to push students to the Financial Aid office rather than have a frank discussion about other options like community college or serving in the military to get the GI bill.

I was lucky; my parents could afford to send both me and my brother to college; this was back in the 1980's, and pay cash. I finished both my LPN program and my BA in history with NO debt at all (and paid for part of my BA with what I earned as an LPN). I also managed to pay cash for my ADN. It wasn't until I went for a BSN that I got my first student loan, and that was only because I wanted work part time (which ended up not happening for other reasons). But even then, I graduated from my BSN program with only about 15K in debt.

My MSN was another story all together. I owe about 40K on that (graduate school is much more expensive, and I went to an online school, which is more expensive). It's going to take me YEARS to pay that back. And I'm pretty much stuck with it. So I understand the frustrations of those with massive student loans, because I have one. I'm just lucky that my income is good enough that it's not sucking away everything I earn. But I also know I'll never earn enough over the remaining 15-20 years in my professional career to justify what I spent to get where I am today.

It annoys me somewhat, though I'm not like some of the Occupy folks who think their loans should flat out be forgiven (which will never happen). I'd never do it again, for sure, and it's what keeps me from going on for a PhD. I simply cannot afford it, but without it I can't teach at the university level.

Bottom line is, higher education is no longer affordable and hasn't been for about a decade. We've just been kidding ourselves while signing the dotted line on the loan forms. The only way to pull in tuition costs is for universities to take a hard look at what they're spending that money on . . . and they're starting to do that. Some few are actually cutting sports by dropping out of Division I (which is a big money waster). Others are cutting back on cadillac deals with superstar research professors who don't actually teach but are used to draw students to University Exellence.

And more people are going to have to accept that a community college education is just as good as a four year university, and plan on going there for at least 2 years before moving on.

What about existing loans that are currently in an economic-hardship deferment? (not in repayment at present)

I honestly don't know. But I suspect that those loans won't qualify because they were already scheduled to go into repayment but haven't. But I could be wrong . . . I hope so.

[Rageaholic]

It only affects students who aren't in repayment yet. The ones who are already drowning don't get to take advantage of this plan.

That sucks. I would think those who are already in debt could use some help.

Though since it supports the little guy, I can't wait to see how many senators and congressmen want to vote against this.

[Andara Bledin]

Forget just the little guy: It supports education. The assholes in charge hate the idea of an educated voter base.

^-.-^

[Panacea]

That sucks. I would think those who are already in debt could use some help.

Though since it supports the little guy, I can't wait to see how many senators and congressmen want to vote against this.

It's not up for a vote. Obama is doing this by executive order. Congress can override it, but probably won't because they can't get off their collective asses to do anything right now. But if a GOP candidate wins in 2012, he could revoke the executive order.

That's why the relief is so limited. To do more, and affect people already in repayment, Congress would have to pass new legislation and that just ain't happening right now.

[Andara Bledin]

It's not nearly enough, but at least it's something.

Hopefully in two years it'll still be something and we'll be making further steps.

^-.-^

[AdminAssistant]

And more people are going to have to accept that a community college education is just as good as a four year university, and plan on going there for at least 2 years before moving on.

When all community colleges enforce the exact same standards as 4-years in hiring and student admissions, I will agree with that statement.

My short list for 'things that need to be done to higher education' includes:
1) All athletic programs must be profitable or be slashed. Coaches are paid on the same scale as faculty. (No $3 million contracts for coaches, Bill Self). Athletes on scholarship are held to strict academic standards and must remain out of legal trouble. However, they can accept sponsorship deals provided a small percentage goes back to the University. (ETA: Eliminate the NCAA and the Division system.)

2) All student activity fees are to undergo a review process, and only used for necessary purposes, such as rec centers and technology improvements. No bringing in B-list comedians or shitty pop bands to play at the Union. Set aside some funds for guests of an academic nature.

3) Research/teaching/service ratio is moved from 40/40/20 to 30/60/10. Along with this, Universities must relax publishing standards required for tenure, provided the faculty member performs well in the classroom. Those primarily interested in research are relegated to staff. If you don't teach, you aren't faculty. That goes for Emeritus Faculty as well.

4) Only a small percentage (10%?) of faculty can be adjunct faculty or lecturers. The rest must be full-time faculty that are invested in and paid benefits. Graduate Teaching Assistants are given a manageable teaching load and are either paid a reasonable wage or allowed to apply for federal/state assistance with the provision that tuition waivers are not counted as income.

And so on and so forth.

[Greenday]

A^2, it sounds like you want colleges to have something to do with...academics. Am I getting this right?

I think it's good to forgive people for student loans after 20 years. Let's be honest. If it takes you 20 years to pay them off, you are probably in deep shit by that point and if no one steps in, you'll probably be utterly screwed. And if some people want to just pay minimum for 20 years so they don't have to pay the entire thing, go ahead and make payments to some group for 20 freaking years and willingly hurt yourself financially. That'd be a dumb move and wouldn't save you money.

[AdminAssistant]

A^2, it sounds like you want colleges to have something to do with...academics. Am I getting this right?

Yeah, something crazy like that. Of course, it won't happen, because colleges/universities have to appeal to 17-18 year olds, who have an annoying habit of being completely fucking stupid. (That is a generalization based on current experience at a major R-1 institution. There are many intelligent high schoolers in existence. Please don't yell at me.)

Oh, I forgot one. No official Greek system/Panhellenic council. It's unnecessary at best and extremely harmful at worst. We need to eliminate the 'beer and circus' atmosphere and get students refocused on academics so that they can do well in classes and graduate in 4 years.