Biden Administration Forgives $39 Billion in Student debt...

You did not read the Supreme Court Decision. In fact, Biden is following what the Supreme Court laid out by using the Higher Education Act.

 

I don't think so. We have people take out huge loans from venture capitalists when they start their business and they don't go running the moment they get their loans. Second, the 2004 Bankruptcy Act prevents that. There is a minimum time period from when you obtained your loans and the time you file for bankruptcy. You also have to go into financial counseling and do some other requirements. When this passed, the one person who was upset the most and criticized it the most was someone name, Donald J Trump. So, I would not be too upset with student loan debt being able to be discharged through bankruptcy but have anti-abuse rules to boot.

As for tuition, it is not just the tuition, it is the real wages, which have been relatively flat for 5 decades or more. We had one bump in 2018 with wages in the private sector, and that was because the companies all of a sudden had an excess of cash and needed to spend it. So, they gave it to their employees, made improvements to the company, and a few other things. But that was only one year. State tuition is based on how much the state governments provide to those state colleges and universities. The remainder is made up of tuition costs and the earnings off endowments for various purposes. So state governments either need to invest more in state colleges and universities or tuition is still going to go up with those tuition fees and other fees associated with college.

 

That makes no sense. If that sort of debt forgiveness was written into the contract, there would be no reason for Biden to intervene or do a thing. It also makes no business sense to have forgiveness provisions built into a loan, as it's a good way to get broke really quickly.

 

Plan B involves fewer people. But its still paying off loans assumed by irresponsible bums that won't pay it back... with MY TAX DOLLARS!

 

That would be pretty accurate, but whatever assets remain will be used in an order. Contractors do not have any notable protection. But make no mistake; the government will be solidly on the side of unpaid labor over everything else... except perhaps themselves, because the people usually in control of bankruptcies have a cash cow to milk, and they will. Seen it happen many times, where neither trustees nor judges were playing by the rules.

The idea however that the government can arbitrarily dismiss thousands of loans in the way Biden wants to do doesn't qualify as anything but squander and corrupt governance. Biden wants to buy votes and create dependency in people- which translates into control of those people and loss of their freedom. Do you not understand that?

 

In theory, but in reality the bulk of those loans were not being dismissed after ten years (or 20, or now 25) like they were originally supposed to because nobody was keeping track of the total number of payments being made. I have only had 2 servicers and I know my payment count because I can see which payments I made plus the COVID pause now. My mom says that she has had somewhere around 6 since her first undergraduate loan went into effect and when she contacted them, they only had the running total number of payments she had made since her loan was transferred to them.

 

Thanks very much for proving my point... took balls.....

 

Recently, my homeowners insurance company neglected to bill me for a month's worth of coverage. Do you know whose problem that is? MINE! I still have to pay for it, even though the month has passed and no claims were necessary, because it's my responsibility to keep track of what I owe and pay for it even if they mess up. I see no reason that student loans should be any different. I once borrowed some money from my brother for some home improvements, and while I didn't track it in my head, I had a spreadsheet I could access at any moment to see how much my outstanding balance was, when the next payment was scheduled for, and how much it was. As the borrower in this case, you (and your mother) should keep closer track of that than your service company, and not expect Uncle to come swooping to your rescue with my money. I don't know you, and as I have previously said, if I want to pay for someone's tuition, I'll go back to school myself.

 

What do you mean it makes no sense? Biden is using the Higher Education Act, the very same act that the SCOTUS ruling used in which this could be legally and Constitutionally possible. I think you are upset because it is "Biden" and nothing else.

However, there have been discrepancies in which people who tried to use the various debt forgiveness, especially Public Sector debt forgiveness where there has been a lot of mismanagement with the Department of Education dragging its feet or never worked on the application prior to the Trump Administration. Then you have Betsy DeVos, who as Education Secretary under Trump, put a total and permanent hold on any and all debt forgiveness, including total and permanent debt forgiveness.

https://protectborrowers.org/public-service-loan-forgiveness-2/

 

Yes, Biden and the DP are buying $39 billion dollars worth of votes. Smart politics.

'VOTE REPUBLICAN!'
'We will stop those awful Democrats from giving you money and other nice things!'

 

From my understanding of bankruptcy, the pecking order is as follows: secure debt lenders, unsecured debt lenders, employees, vendors, and then contractors who are owed money. In many cases only the secured debt lenders get anything in Chapter 7 bankruptcy because the assets of the company is just enough to cover some of that debt. If the company is still receiving income from past contracts, then that is dispensed to the other remaining creditors.

Second, no one is arbitrarily dismissing the loans in question. The SAVE program is where the borrower, using the income reduction repayment method, to repay those loans based on their income, will not have any fees, and a near-zero interest rate. In other words, only the principal is being repaid. Others such as the Public Sector Debt Forgiveness programs will allow borrowers who have already paid at least 120 payments to apply for the debt relief. This can apply to other programs such as one for nurses and others who need to pay 120 payments before getting debt relief. And then you have total and permanent disability where the person must prove, through a questionnaire by the Department of Education, that they are totally and permanently disabled. This form is signed by both the borrower and the physician in question, generally. Below is the link to various student loan forgiveness programs. Some involve military veterans, other involve on the occupation they obtained when they got the loan, and others are based on facts and circumstances of the borrower.

https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/loans/student-loans/student-loan-forgiveness

 

You should go back to school because you can't seem to grasp that many of these people paid TOO MUCH. The reason this is an issue isn't because Joe Biden wants to win votes. It is because the Department of Ed is getting sued left and right. The very first of the 25 year IDR loans were issued in 1994 and started becoming dis- chargeable in late 2019 right before COVID hit and they still haven't been discharged going on 3 years later because despite your insurance experience, only the government can determine which payments are "qualified" and they relied on servicers who either weren't keeping track at all or were applying the wrong standards. Even if Trump were President, this would still be a problem that had to be sorted out. It is not comparable to your insurance payment, it would be comparable to your mortgage holder forcing you to pay extra years of payments after you had already paid off your mortgage pursuant to the terms of the note.

And Biden certainly isn't going to be getting many votes this time around because of it. A lot of borrowers are pissed as hell about the way he has been jerking them around. This has been mishandled from the beginning. Even yesterday, I saw conflicting information on the Department of Ed website in the same article about which past payments/periods of forbearance/deferment would be counted for the one-time revisions. There were several qualified bullet points as to what will and won't and then a bullet point that said all months in repayment, deferment, and forbearance would be counted which contradicts all the qualification language above it.

 

I think you would find employees tops the list- and of course, taxes.

The basics of financial literacy don't depend on various excuses or reasons. When bills you create get written off, somebody else gets hurt. In this case, that money will be subsidized by all the taxpayers. We can't repossess what they bought, so there is no recourse. This is about the same as you refusing to pay off your home loan and just declaring you own it free and clear- but with the balance then being charged to your neighbors as a special tax.

The people in favor of getting their debts dismissed are the people who get the free benefits. It doesn't matter why you borrowed the money or who you are. If you borrowed it, you made a bargain. If you are an honorable person, you keep your bargain. If you don't you are a person comfortable with dumping your bills on others. That kind of mentality is fundamentally anti-social and detrimental to any society.

Joe's motive is blatantly obvious- he's buying votes. Unfortunately, voters will vote for the politicians that promise them the most free benefits, and that has led to the failure of most every democracy historically.
Joe doesn't care about the future at all, just the moment. That's NOT presidential- and it's very un-American.

Ask yourself what you want for the nation you live in. Do you want honesty, integrity, trustworthiness, civility, all the things that allow it to thrive? Or the status quo of today, where 80% of your phone calls and emails are spam or con artists, where people can "squat" and take over your home while you are on vacation and the law says you must sue them to get them out.... where violence on the street is so common that people are afraid to go for a walk, where businesses are closing because of crime, etc? It's a much longer list, but you should be able to recognize that the level of character and responsibility in America is falling like a rock. The consequences of that fall on everyone, including those who are gaining from it in the short run.

If you want to live in a safe, thriving community- you have to support the premises and rules that keep it that way. Not just when it's convenient, but all the time.

 

You thought wrong, dude.

I do not generally care to or even like talking about individual persons, whether they are politicians or not, rather I like speaking about policies and principals, and how things should be compared to how they are. While if I ever bother running for office, an option that my disability made even less likely than it already was, I would likely have little choice but to run as a Republican, I do not even consider myself all that partisan, as depending on the topic, I can come off sounding like hard-core right on subjects dealing with money, mostly, or hard-core left, for example on social issues generally, like my desire to see drug prohibition ended, and my support of the LGB community, with T left off intentionally for reasons that are a whole other thread.

I have serious issues and problems with the government confiscating my hard earned cash to subsidize pretty much any cost of living expenses for complete strangers, and while the number of things that could be included on a list of those is large, the context here is taking my money to pay off loans for grown-ass adults who signed a contract to pay it off from their own personal funds, not mine. THAT is what I object to, and it matters not whose idea it is, and what party they might belong to, I would object to it under any circumstances, with any sponsor, President or otherwise. It just happens in this case that it was Biden who gave birth to this abomination, at the urging of his more hardcore fiscal leftists who are admitted and avowed socialists in the form of the Squad and people like Bernie Sanders, AOC, Cory Booker (who I knew in NJ), and even the group of people protesting rent prices in downtown St. Petersburg near where I live... A factoid that the news who gave their protest visibility conveniently omitted from their story.

I object to virtually all wealth transfers to able-bodied individuals who are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves, but who have representatives in government who are more than happy to bribe them with my money in exchange for their votes and promises of a brighter future that never come to pass. We've been fighting the 'War on Poverty' for longer than I've been alive, spent countless trillions in the process, and have made no statistically significant changes over all that time. And the why is simple, as long as an economy based on trade of goods and services is required (and in the medium to long term future, it may not be), I expect grown ups to act like the adults they are and take care of their own needs... Be it a roof over their heads, food in their bellies, a cell phone, daycare or education for their offspring, the costs of their own personal transportation from place-to-place, healthcare expenses, and so forth. It is not the proper role of a government to subsidize those things for a subset of persons at the expense of other persons who don't even know the recipients of their money, or care about their well being.

Now, that can sound a bit cold, and believe it or not I am an empathetic person who gladly jumps in and helps when the opportunity presents itself, but that is voluntary on my end, as such things should always be.

That sounds like their problem. Which makes it not mine, and I should not have to pay for it. I find it ironic that you take issue with what the Dept. Of Education might change as regards to debt forgiveness (which should not exist to begin with), but I'm quite sure you have no problem whatsoever when the ATF decides to classify bump stocks as a "machinegun", despite the fact that federal law does not even say that.

Now, if it is a contractual item that under X, Y, or Z circumstances, the debt will be forgiven, then it needs to be honored like any other contract. Not having used student loans, I am not at all familiar with that level of details, but even though I object in principal to the concept, contracts are contracts. But... The reverse is also true. Contracts are contracts for the person who took out the loan, and if their contract specified a pay back at X% interest over Y amount of time with an onset delay of Z number of years, that is what should happen even if the socialists want to use my money to pay off some lawyer's (or doctor's or sales person's, or physicist's) loans.

That is theft. Straight out of, not Compton this time, but Robin Hood, which some people think is a viable thing for government to do, but it simply is not, and instead of adding more financial burdens onto the taxpayers, we need to be reducing them to the absolute bare minimum required to have a functional society.

 

What you are describing sounds like a pure contractual dispute. Like my example of my loan from my brother, which was pretty simple as loans go as it had a fixed term, a fixed interest rate, and a fixed repayment plan. If I think I have paid it off and he disagrees, then it becomes a question of facts... Which one of us got our math wrong... Did I miss a payment 3 years ago that I didn't realize, that resulted in interest on that missed payment piling up to the point that I actually own an additional 3 payments beyond what I thought, or did he neglect to record that payment? One or the other is true, in this example, and the same concept would apply to a student loan. Either the borrower or the lender messed something up, which can be tracked based on the history of payments made when due, and so forth, to determine who is right. This requires no intervention from an outside authority (except maybe a Court to decide whose alleged facts are correct), no special payments from taxpayer funds, or anything else. Either it's in the contract, or it ain't.

 

This particular initiative is being done to settle lawsuits against the Department of Education because they were not keeping accurate records. Going forward it should benefit no one new after this is implemented because they are also making substantial changes to the way student loans are administered. They will now keep track of all payment counts in addition to all payment records in-house instead of relying upon the third-party servicers. Once my payments resume, I need to double check the math on something I more recently discovered that I don't know if I believe my current servicer or not. According to its website, I am paying a certain amount of interest and am not getting a discount I am supposed to be getting of a quarter percent for doing payments with auto-pay. The customer service rep says I actually am getting the discount, but the information shown on my account on their own website isn't "what's in our computers." I need to reverse calculate it to make sure I am actually paying less interest than what is shown.

 

They aren't GIVING me anything. They are using MY TAX DOLLARS. They are TAKING from me.

 

Me me me, that's all Republicans can think about.

 

Gimme a free ride! I don't want to EARN! I want YOUR MONEY!@! GIMME YOUR MONEY because I just want to drop out of school, sit under a tree and strum a guitar! Smoke Dope! And chase wimmins!! I don't WANT to EARN anything!! GIMME YOUR EARNINGS!!!... Democrat mantra.

 

Secured debtors is the top of the pecking order in Bankruptcy law, not employees who are owed money. Then there is priority debts, which employees who are owed money by the company are first in line in that category and can include vendors, tax agencies, and contractors, among others.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/09/corporate-liquidation-unpaid-taxes-wages.asp

All President Biden is doing is streamlining the process and correcting errors of the past now. That is it. But this is not buying votes no more than a tax decrease on certain taxpayers buys votes. Second, those who are wanting their debts discharged under the various programs are not getting free benefits of anything, or wanting that. Some are wanting the contract that was signed to be honored, such as the Nurses, Teachers and Public Sector workers who want the debt discharged after paying at least 120 payments on the debt. Those who are total and permenanately disabled didn't plan to be that, and are using the law to their advantage. As for the rest of the post, it is pure garbage.

 

Oh great, using buzz words again. For starters, wealth transfer happens all the time. Wealth Transfer in the 2018 JCTA was transferred to the upper 1% and yet I bet you were in favor of that act, weren't you? Wealth transfer happens when you purchase something with "your money" either by credit, debit, or cold cash. We see wealth transfer in other areas as well. And somehow you are not against that type of wealth transfer, are you? However, under the new Biden plan, using the Higher Education Act, nothing is a wealth transfer at all. It is merely correcting the wrongs of the past today. That is all it is doing. And the only reason why you are against this policy is because it is coming from a Democrat. Biden can say the Sun rises in the East and sets in the West and somehow you will disparage Biden for saying that under any circumstance that came about. But again, you are not against bankruptcy, are you? Not politically that is. And Trump with his companies did this several times and somehow you were against that were you? So, stop with the BS here and be honest, at least, and stop with the political hyperbole.

Finally, Student loans has been around since the mid 1970s. It has been amended by both the Democratic Party and Republican party on occasion. The last major overall was in 1992 when the Democrats was in control of both houses and created and President Bush Sr signed into law. In 2007, we had the CCRAA where the public sector service debt forgiveness was passed and signed. This is where Congress was controlled by Democrats and the President was a Republican. We had other laws, but in essence, student forgiveness has been around a lot longer than we are discussing now. And now, all of a sudden, you are against this? Yeah, sure, right lol.

https://lendedu.com/blog/history-of-student-loans
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/24/timeline-key-events-on-the-path-to-student-loan-forgiveness.html
https://www.newamerica.org/educatio...l-student-loans/federal-student-loan-history/

It is no more theft than bankruptcy. But then again, you changed your mind because you think debt forgiveness is, generally, a wealth transfer, and somehow you went a completely different route.

 

And?

Being selfish is a lot more honorable than being generous, but using other people's money to do it with to somehow assuage your, what... Guilty conscious? Being kind and charitable is a good thing, and laudable, but if all you're doing is redistributing dollars you stole from other people, you're just a common thief. Robin Hood was a fictional story, and even if it were real, it doesn't mean that he wasn't stealing from people, depending on which version of the story you might be using, possibly armed robbery. That is not generousness, it's evil.

 

Hey, I never received the dime of government assistance in my life, I don't know what you're on about.

In any case, I don't mind that some of my tax dollars go to Farmers who need to be bailed out after a drought, or to the residents of East palestine, who were affected by the toxic spill. My view, this society is better off if tax dollars go to the common good.

But, you do you and gripe and gripe about the supposed moochers who are coming after your hard-earned tax dollars, it's not surprising this attitude is dime for a dozen in GOP land.

 

In fact, they are taking from you and giving it to their voter base.

 

Everything government does is with "other people's money".