That is a pretty funny quote. It doesn't take a team to figure out that people need transportation, shelter, food, and warmth. All of those things will be put above loan payments. Well, that is honestly the issue with the current education system. They promise that everyone will be making a lot of money, but that is not how it works. Not everyone can make a ton of money with the degrees that they have picked. And if they pick something minor or obscure, it raises the level of risk that they took.Once his deferment expires, he isn’t sure if he will feel obliged to pay down his loan. “They promised me everything,” he said of his for-profit college. “And I honestly have nothing to show for it except a piece of paper that doesn’t really do me any good.”
It's more than that - the company you took out the loan with has probably sold it two or three times, you've maybe consolidated a few, that whole thing has been offloaded to someone else and you end up owing a giant nut to a company you've never heard of that can't even keep in touch with you in a reasonable fashion. Lookin' at you, Granite State. So you borrowed money for school, which isn't like borrowing money for say, a car or something you like, and you got fuckall for it, and now this company says "you can pay up or... you know, postpone things until the future gets better. We'll just add a bunch of interest." So now not only do you owe a fuckton more than you actually borrowed, you're reminded that your situation has not improved in the past year and you've heard it's gonna take years before they can do anything but fuck with your credit rating, and you're not buying a house in this market so who cares? Not shown in this article is the income-based repayment options, which are easy to game and still qualify as "payments." By the time we're done with income-based repayment we will have paid 30% of the principal on my wife's medical loans and about 10% of the interest owed. Over the course of the loan, her $180k in bills will have mushroomed to $2.2 million and you know what? NOBODY is going to feel obligated to pay that.
Anecdotal, but when I dropped out of college, I had a relatively decent time with my student loans. I was raised with the idea that I shouldn't borrow more than I think I could pay back, do what I can to pay on time, and a loan is like any other promise, if you give your word, you have to keep it. So, after dropping out I didn't have much to show for myself, other than a big, ugly debt. I buckled down, got two full time jobs, and started working 70-80 hours a week, paying off that loan as quickly as possible. After about three years, it was gone. I still kept those two jobs though, to try and keep myself out of debt, build a nest egg, etc. Unfortunately, I made some very bad decisions that left me in a financially bad state for a few years that I had to crawl out of as well (life pro-tip people, just because you can afford something this month, doesn't mean you can afford it every month for years, this applies to car loans, apartments, etc.). Anyhow, I came out relatively intact. The thing though? I didn't owe anywhere near what your wife or other people end up owing by the time they graduate, so they struck me as reasonable and managable. If I had owed that much money I would have found myself so overwhelmed it would have shut me down emotionally. I would have taken a hard look at my loan payments and a hard look at that shiny El Camino on Craigslist and make the logical choice. I'd get the El Camino. College already burned me. That car? That car is material happiness bro.
When the equity in your house pays a percentage of the principal on your student loan, you recognize that it's all a big fucking game and the sooner you learn the true rules the happier you will be.
That much is true. Unfortunately that risk isn't mirrored on the lenders end. If it were, there would probably be less student loans issued, and the cost of college education would be lower. It drives me crazy to hear politicians talking about loans as a way to make college more affordable. That's like saying that lower interest rates, or lowering the necessary deposit on a mortgage makes housing more affordable. It just takes a short time before those adjustments are reflected in higher prices.And if they pick something minor or obscure, it raises the level of risk that they took.
I remember you posting that before, but I didn't remember how truly awful that slippery slope of debt is. When do you expect the dam to break? For comparison, the system here is now that I have 35 years to pay it off, with minimum payments at the level where after 35 years it should be paid off. Interest is <1% and the minimum payments are income-dependant.
One of the arguments made a lot during the recession was that the 1% wants a capitalist system when they're making money and a socialist system when they're losing it. The more things break, the more intervention we throw at it. So the question becomes, how does it break next time? Let's suppose the economy takes a shit within the next 18 months. Gonna go out on a limb and predict Clinton as president, but the Sanders campaign still has a giant mailing list and a political machine par excellence. People forget: MoveOn.org started over the Lewinsky hearings; it was just a petition of people who wanted congress to "move on" from the fucking blue dress but since they signed their email address, a juggernaut was born. So there's President Clinton, cozy with the bankers, and there's a recession, and people are out of work, and the people hit hardest are going to be the millennials because that's the way it's been for the past ten years and a plurality of them felt the Bern. Imagine if Occupy Wall Street actually wanted something, instead of simply hanging around in drum circles. I think a few angry gatherings of out-of-work millennials burned by the smoldering carcass of Dot.Bomb II demanding student loan reform are likely to get shit passed right quick. That's a point a few people have made, but nobody really takes seriously - the Sanders campaign has built a hell of a political machine and it's not going to suddenly dismantle itself after the convention. You don't put something like that together so you can leave it parked in the garage.
I don't see Sanders being swallowed up by the Clinton campaign. He ran, he said, because he didn't want to see Clinton unopposed. He switched his allegiance from "independent" to "democrat" just so he could. He's always been an oppositional figure, a gadfly in the machine, and just because he (probably) won't win this time doesn't mean he's going to roll over and play dead. I mean, yeah. He's not going to say nice things about Clinton. Already isn't. But he's going to say less nice things about Cruz/Trump/DarkHorseduJour.
Well right now he doesn't have to say nice things about her but if he doesn't win hes going to be expected to tow the party line. Hes likely going to have to come out supporting Clinton in positions that are going to be against the interests of his base. I don't think hes going to be allowed to come out and say that yeah Clinton is shit, I agree, she is bought and paid for by big business and corrupt as hell but the other guy is a crazy loony so vote Clinton. I could be wrong but I don't think that's how politics works. Sanders basically has to either withdraw his presence from 2016 presidential election and re-purpose his movement into local elections or go independent to maintain the movement. Otherwise he will be forced to actively endorse and promote existing Clinton positions which suck and will loose him credibility. VP sanders would also kill the movement because then he would just be a puppet in the Clinton campaign. Basically I think either the movement is re-purposed to support Clinton and it dies (because Clinton excites absolutely nobody) or it needs to be split off from the democratic party and I'm not sure how that would happen. What kind of scenario do you envision that allows the movement to continue on its own?
That's just it, though, dude - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders#Party_affiliation_since_2015 Sanders' party affiliation is younger than my driver's license. "Going independent" is hardly a tribulation for him. If he decided to hook up with the Green Party they'd be viable for the first time since 2000. If he decides to retain his senate seat he gets to be Pelosi's counterbalance. The only way Sanders goes away is if he decides he wants to go away and makes the active decision to fuck off with all of it. And if you don't think Barack Obama doesn't email everybody that donated to his campaign every day you clearly didn't donate.Sanders basically has to either withdraw his presence from 2016 presidential election and re-purpose his movement into local elections or go independent to maintain the movement.
In November 2015, Sanders announced that he would be a Democrat from then on, and will run in any future elections as a Democrat. On February 4, 2016, Sanders said, "Of course I am a Democrat and running for the Democratic nomination."
I'd bet you a quarter that hes not going to branch out as independent if he looses. Friendly wager :) (Its going to cost more to mail the quarter but it would still be fun) . I would love to see a 3 man 1 woman race this year. Sure would make for an interesting election
Two things: 1) I believe we're speaking at cross-purposes. If Sanders loses the nomination, I don't expect him to run as an independent. I expect him to basically become a PAC, a la Avaaz or MoveOn. It is my opinion (and the opinion of a lot of clever people) that Sanders ran primarily to shape the narrative; winning the nomination would be icing on the cake but not the whole goal of his campaign. 2) I coulda sworn you were up in Seattle somewhere, so the wager should have been a beer. But again, I don't think we're on opposite sides on this.