I’m conflicted about student loan forgiveness and feel guilty for it but seriously.... there’s a ton of people out there who went to work for a skilled labor position instead of school because they thought they couldn’t afford school. There’s people like me, who joined the military because they couldn’t afford school and not out of a call for duty and service. I knew student loans would obligate me into debt I was uncertain I would be able to realistically pay off and so looked for other options. Meanwhile those without the foresight to look at the potential consequences, those that don’t read the fine print and think of how it might affect them get their loans forgiven? I don’t agree with it. You entered a contract, you agreed to the terms.
Political Discussion
- Thread starter David A.
- Start date
Bull Shannon
Well-Known Member
I was 16 when I agreed to the "contract;" was pressured by family, teachers, basically everyone, that contract was the path to a career and would guarantee the ability to pay off my debt; and my parents agreed to the terms and dumped the loans on me when I graduated. I'm sorry for your situation, unfortunately your struggle isn't unique in this country, and I'd say it only goes towards the argument that our current way of doing things is incredibly backwards and exploitative. But "hey I didn't get exploited" doesn't seem like a sound argument against debt reversal.
wokeupnew
Well-Known Member
I'd say even if it was just federal loans I think it's a step in the right direction.
I don't agree with this. We as a country have kids who are 16/17/18 years old decide to go to college because that's what they are conditioned to do. "they should have known that they'd need to pay off ridiculous debts with compounding interest that they'll be paying off until they're 40!" When I was 16 I wasn't thinking about paying this off. I was thinking I'll get a good job, make bank and worry about it in 10 years after graduating. That didn't happen and doesn't happen for the majority of people and now here we are.
If it sucks for a group of people, fix the issue. "I didn't go to college because I knew it was so expensive!" Fix it, and then more people will go to college and you can still go to college at a later age. "I already paid off my debts so it's not fair that other people will not have to pay off debts!" You can keep going and say "My family member died from Cancer but I don't think we should find a cure for Cancer because my family member is already dead."
I'm not calling you out, but it's an opinion that always crops up when these types of progressive debt forgiveness discussions happen. You're not alone in thinking this way. We're conditioned to think this because this country is so individualistic and no one looks out for each other. "Why should I have to suffer when future generations don't have to?"
Last edited:
Melt Face Molly Drop
Well-Known Member
There's also the argument that people who have already paid off their debts won't be able to take advantage of this and how they think it isn't fair. Having been in the situation where I've paid off my loans, I don't think it is a discussion of what's fair or not, but rather what is right for the country moving forward.
If these generations continue to be shackled by student loans, the economy will suffer if these kids are forced to penny-pinch for the rest of their lives. The 1% then grows richer, and no one really wins. So, I'm for this, but it needs to be a more nuanced plan than "POOF! Debt begone", obviously.
If these generations continue to be shackled by student loans, the economy will suffer if these kids are forced to penny-pinch for the rest of their lives. The 1% then grows richer, and no one really wins. So, I'm for this, but it needs to be a more nuanced plan than "POOF! Debt begone", obviously.
I agree with you, the system is fucked. I understand the “I didn’t get exploited” argument doesn’t work. I also feel the “hey I was young and naive” argument doesn’t work. I graduated in 2001, I remember the grand push for college enrollment and student loans. My wife is currently paying one off now so debt forgiveness would be a net positive for our family but I do not believe that it is the correct move. Perhaps reversing the portion in which you paid interest and changing terms to 0% for life going forward would be a compromise. But just giving tons of people that lacked foresight a free ride to a college education while skilled laborers are kept in poverty? That to me, seems counter productive.
wokeupnew
Well-Known Member
This is the domino of many that needs to fall in order to enact more progressive policies. That would include wage increases for all workers, strong unions, universal health care, etc. Also I'd argue that A LOT of skilled laborers and low-wage, service and retail employees are those who are underemployed because there are few jobs in their field that they graduated in. I have several friends from high school who went to college for one thing but are now skilled factory workers because they could not get a job in their major. So it's easy to think that this will benefit exclusively white collar office workers, which is only half true. You might feel that you'll get hard done by this. And you may be right. But this will benefit the whole of society. We have to think past "how will this help me?" and instead think "how does this help us?"
I get this. I was able to snag an academic scholarship for my undergrad but I had to take out loans for my grad school. I decided to go to the public university instead of the private which cut my cost in half. But, I consider myself one of the last people able to take advantage of things like full tuition scholarships for academics and cheap state school tuition because all of my school was completed before 2008. The current environment is down right predatory where people are paying more in interest than they ever did for school.
Honestly, helping people pay off student loans is a direct help to the middle class, not blue collar workers, so you are absolutely right. It isn't that fair to people who went to technical colleges to learn a trade or to the military. Student loan debt forgiveness would not have been my first choice of policies to start enacting, but it seems like the choice that will get the least push back by Republicans. Student loan debt should be just one piece in a transformation of our economy.
Agreed. It’s another situation where foresight comes into play but that one is a tale as old as time. Too many people really like philosophy and want a degree in it but also really like money. I’m all for benefiting the whole of society but also hold dearly the idea that hard work and smart decisions will yield greater monetary reward (if that is your individual ideal). Regardless everyone should have their basic needs met with or without an education, that’s not happening and that’s where the focus should be.
wokeupnew
Well-Known Member
100% agreed. I think when these policies come into play then we start thinking about M4A, UBI and other things. Having basic needs met, healthcare, food/shelter (UBI) will help fix those things. The system is rigged to either go in one direction, skilled worker/retail/service worker who doesn't make a lot. Or go to college to potentially make more money (key word "potentially"), and be saddled with enormous debt. Smash the system and make it better.
Indymisanthrope
Well-Known Member
If more people could study philosophy because they love it and still find a career instead of feeling like they need majors in marketing and business, that might make us a better society, too.
The liberal arts play a crucial role in developing a well-rounded and empathetic society. We could use more of that. Curtailing what we're passionate about learning because there's no straight line between that and money is one of the ways in which we're doing this wrong, IMO.
...says the religion major.
Ideally yes, unfortunately... capitalism
I also think that there’s a myopia to saying that making third level education cheaper isn’t good for me so don’t do it. Or that it doesn’t benefit the working classes. Third Level Education when freely available and affordable has the potential to be the single greatest force for social mobility.
Also late stage neo capitalism isn’t capitalism. We don’t need to keep down this path. Study for studies sake increases intellectual capacity and is good for the economy. Considerate people capable of detailed analysis have multiple transferable skills. We don’t need to believe the myth that only degrees that train you directly for a career are worthwhile.
Also late stage neo capitalism isn’t capitalism. We don’t need to keep down this path. Study for studies sake increases intellectual capacity and is good for the economy. Considerate people capable of detailed analysis have multiple transferable skills. We don’t need to believe the myth that only degrees that train you directly for a career are worthwhile.
Agreed. As mentioned, debt forgiveness would be a net positive for my family on a selfish level. It IS good for me, directly. I disagree with it on principle and also feel that going forward we should make third level education accessible to all. The part I disagree with is forgiving debt incurred already.
As for liberal arts and their relation to well paying jobs, it really doesn’t need to be debated. The data is out there and easily accessible. As for their relevance to a society, abso-fuckin-lutely! Far more important to society than the marketing majors in my opinion, and it’s not even close! I never said it wasn’t important. It all comes down to what ones holds virtuous and deems important to them. Empathy, emotional intelligence, compassion, etc all pay far more dividends for society than the monetary credit they are awarded. That doesn’t change the fact that in today’s society the blacksmith gets paid more money than the philospher. This one really isn’t a contentious topic at all, it’s pretty well established.
Last edited:
Morally I find that pretty bankrupt. The people who went before got cheaper education, the people who come after we strive to give free across to. The people who came in the middle. Sorry lads, bad timing, you’re financially crippled for life, laters.
Morally I feel one ought to be prepared to accept the consequences for their decisions. The onus is on the moral agent not the moral construct. This is not to say I feel we shouldn’t recognize fault and work towards improving access nor does it imply that we deny individuals basic needs. We probably disagree on an ethical stance here.
Hard disagrees. There’s a social and societal imperative to have as highly an educated population as possible. There is also an ever increasing pressure on young people in the post-industrial age to get as educated as possible or fail. There are ever decreasing alternatives. Penalising people for making that choice is counterproductive and amoral to me.
One of the things I saw in the last year or two on a special report on NBC was about how a college education is not worth it for most since the recession. A bachelor's degree is the absolute worst degree to get when it comes to debt to income ratio and whether or not your degree was worth it's price.
As a society we say that a college degree means success. You need one to get a good job that pays well. It's so ingrained in our society many of us don't even blink an eye at it or question the idea of is a college degree the right path for me.
Over the last 40 years we made it so affordable to go to college. Everyone can apply for loans and get one. But then capitalism, the beast that it is, saw to it that the cost of education skyrocket well above the rates of inflation because loans were guaranteed.
We saw a generation or two go through where record numbers of people were going to college. And it is an expectation of society and and families that future generations do as well.
The problem is our economy is not generating enough jobs that require a college degree. As corporations offshore and automate things the vast majority of the new jobs our economy is generating are low wage jobs in the service industry that do not require any sort of degree.
More people are graduating with degree than there are jobs hiring people with degrees / at that pay level. Worse, networking is far more influential at landing you that good job than your degree and achievements. Someone coming from wealth or Ivy League schools who have the right social circles are far more likely to land that job than a lower middle class graduate with a 4.0 GPA who went to a regular college.
When it comes to a bachelor's degree, you are either overqualified or underqualified for most jobs generated by our economy.
The majority of jobs being generated are looking for just a High School Diploma or Associates Degree. Those jobs that are looking for higher degrees are often looking for a Masters Degree or higher. Much higher when it comes to specialties like phycology or doctors. You need a PhD and fellowship.
Currently as a country we have more college graduates entering the workforce with a bachelor's degree than there are jobs hiring people with those degrees. So we can classify a group of college graduates with a bachelor's degree as under employed.
I remember they ran a story about someone from San Francisco 2 summers ago who works at Starbucks as there are simply no jobs available for people with his degree. When jobs pop up there are 100+ people applying for them. And someone like him, who has been out of college since the recession who hasn't had any jost experience is thrown to the bottom of the pile of job applicants. It's the what have you been doing since graduating college? Working at Starbucks, oh...
He's unable to afford to pay back his student loans and fell behind on his payments. His debt can't be discharged in bankruptcy court as student loans are exempt. And then the federal government administratively started garnishing his wages. He ended up then not being able to make rent and living in a tent homeless.
On top of that, with wages stagnant the return of the ever increase cost of a degree is shrinking if not flipped for many fields.
People who get degrees flock to the cities where the high paying jobs are. Many rural communities are unable to get a doctor or have a heart surgeon at their hospital. As their existing doctors age and retire out of the system they are finding a job shortage in rural America. Most new doctors are not taking the jobs in this areas because the pay is too low. They can't afford to pay back their loans by taking these jobs. So they take jobs in the cities. The rural communities can't afford to pay the rates that the new generation of doctors are looking for and must make so that they are living above their means. They are banking on attracting doctors who are in it for the love of the practice and not the money. But those doctors are few and far between these days and asking them to go into debt / financial ruin by not paying enough for them to make payments on their loans is not sustainable. But I don't expect anything to change until the problem starts creeping in to suburbia.
As a society we say that a college degree means success. You need one to get a good job that pays well. It's so ingrained in our society many of us don't even blink an eye at it or question the idea of is a college degree the right path for me.
Over the last 40 years we made it so affordable to go to college. Everyone can apply for loans and get one. But then capitalism, the beast that it is, saw to it that the cost of education skyrocket well above the rates of inflation because loans were guaranteed.
We saw a generation or two go through where record numbers of people were going to college. And it is an expectation of society and and families that future generations do as well.
The problem is our economy is not generating enough jobs that require a college degree. As corporations offshore and automate things the vast majority of the new jobs our economy is generating are low wage jobs in the service industry that do not require any sort of degree.
More people are graduating with degree than there are jobs hiring people with degrees / at that pay level. Worse, networking is far more influential at landing you that good job than your degree and achievements. Someone coming from wealth or Ivy League schools who have the right social circles are far more likely to land that job than a lower middle class graduate with a 4.0 GPA who went to a regular college.
When it comes to a bachelor's degree, you are either overqualified or underqualified for most jobs generated by our economy.
The majority of jobs being generated are looking for just a High School Diploma or Associates Degree. Those jobs that are looking for higher degrees are often looking for a Masters Degree or higher. Much higher when it comes to specialties like phycology or doctors. You need a PhD and fellowship.
Currently as a country we have more college graduates entering the workforce with a bachelor's degree than there are jobs hiring people with those degrees. So we can classify a group of college graduates with a bachelor's degree as under employed.
I remember they ran a story about someone from San Francisco 2 summers ago who works at Starbucks as there are simply no jobs available for people with his degree. When jobs pop up there are 100+ people applying for them. And someone like him, who has been out of college since the recession who hasn't had any jost experience is thrown to the bottom of the pile of job applicants. It's the what have you been doing since graduating college? Working at Starbucks, oh...
He's unable to afford to pay back his student loans and fell behind on his payments. His debt can't be discharged in bankruptcy court as student loans are exempt. And then the federal government administratively started garnishing his wages. He ended up then not being able to make rent and living in a tent homeless.
On top of that, with wages stagnant the return of the ever increase cost of a degree is shrinking if not flipped for many fields.
People who get degrees flock to the cities where the high paying jobs are. Many rural communities are unable to get a doctor or have a heart surgeon at their hospital. As their existing doctors age and retire out of the system they are finding a job shortage in rural America. Most new doctors are not taking the jobs in this areas because the pay is too low. They can't afford to pay back their loans by taking these jobs. So they take jobs in the cities. The rural communities can't afford to pay the rates that the new generation of doctors are looking for and must make so that they are living above their means. They are banking on attracting doctors who are in it for the love of the practice and not the money. But those doctors are few and far between these days and asking them to go into debt / financial ruin by not paying enough for them to make payments on their loans is not sustainable. But I don't expect anything to change until the problem starts creeping in to suburbia.
A man who knows what's going on...
This. I think we as a species, definitely the USA as well, have historically been focused on things that only benefit ourselves. I know there has always been a small contingent that has sought solutions for the good of the country/society/humanity and I'd love to see that become more of the norm in modern-day thought and discussion.
It is always a convo stopper as well when discussing policy with friends/colleagues.
"So you're saying that you want X to happen because its good for you even though it would be bad for the majority of people?"
"Well yeah"
"That seems fairly selfish. Don't you want things that help everyone?"
"......."
Here’s an even harder one if we’re being theoretical
“I’m a good person that works hard and earns every penny that I get but my job/employer is overal bad for humanity/the planet. What’s the right action?”
These are interesting and important conversations but I am also more than cognisant that we are in a very lucky place to be able to have them and not spend our entire existence scraping together enough to just about pay rent and/or put food on the table.
Last edited: