i think that's really what it comes down to lb, which is why i always encourage people to work a few years (architecture or not) after undergrad.
in my case after undergrad, i worked for almost 4 years, paid off debt, made payments on a car, rented an apartment, and helped support my girlfriend, meanwhile saving about 10k a year. only then did i realize i had the means and responsibility to take on a large grad school loan.
i agree, there is no one to tell you what it takes to pay off loans when you're 18. that's why it's up to people who have been through the ringer to reach out and give the younger generation guidance.
i agree that more guidance should be given to students entering college, but i dont know how much it would really change things
i racked up some decent student loans from my undergrad, and honestly, i would do it all again the same way
i made the right choice for myself at the time
did i fully understand the impact of the student loans? of course not, i was 18
but i knew i had them and would be paying the back
i say student loan debt isnt necessarily a bad thing as long as you make the correct school choice for yourself
if your main focus is staying out of debt when you finish school, then taking on student loans is obviously not the way to go about it
someone (cm maybe?) mentioned the idea of freezing interest on student loans if you become unemployed
thats a more realistic idea in my opinion, especially in todays economy
i know you can freeze loans if you go back to school in some cases, i wonder if there is anything that can be done currently if you are unemployed?
probably not as it stands now i would think
I agree too but I think someone should show these students the difference, or lack thereof, between what you will make after a Barch and the March degree. Which is to say that they won't make one dime more for the extra $30,000 to $50,000 they will pay the schools. Add onto that the fact the Barch student worked for those 2 years at $30,000 - $35,000 that the March did not and the gap become something like $80,000.
The shcools don't want you to know these things so shhhhh. They just want to peddle that March to cover their own asses.
i think that is part of a whole seperate conversation fence
arch schools in general do a terrible job actually getting it through to their students what they will actually be doing in the real world when they leave school, let alone what they will be making and how it relates to how much their school costs
now clearly the students are to blame in many of these cases, as if you come out of school expecting to design whatever you want and never have to actually check shop drawings or do any other dirty work, you are really just an idiot
regardless of how hard each individual here worked to get him or herself out of debt, i have very little doubt that forgiving all federal student loan debt would give a major boast to the consumer spending. both now and in the future. it is a good idea that will never happen.
i assume the idea would be that X amount of dollars spent in payment towards a student loan would turn into X amount of dollars spent on goods and services that help the economy
i dont know if that article included any actual numbers or facts about how many people have student loans and what the amount of money freed up per month would actually be
but i dont see how it would work out that well (though i would love it if they did this)
if this was one of a couple things to happen, perhaps it could stimulate the economy
dont by itself? i dont see it as an idea that would be worth it for the government
i had a conversation with some accountants in my family and there is word of a $1500 tax rebate for those unemployed for all of 2008. does anyone know if this applies to students?
Marmkid--nope, not you specifically, just general sarcasm at everyone wanting something right now. (and feeling sadness that there is nothing to give)
Parents and college advisors need to try learn from these stories.
I knew people who sent their kids off to college with new sports cars, great wardrobes, credit cards, and lots of spending money, but made the kids take out loans for college expenses "so they would take their studies seriously." Their friends who biked to their jobs and worked through spring break and never experienced the spring break entitlement are thanking their own stingy parents now. Those stingy parents who directed whatever funds they had towards tuition, books, and fees, and pushed cheaper state schools and just lectured and nagged their kids "to take their studies seriously" are looking smarter (and nicer) now.
Since you all seem to have lots of spare time to write on blogs, write your congressperson and Senators. As someone without student loans (I had the mean stingy parent types) I would support a freeze on student loan interest or even a reduction of the interest rates, and certainly forebearance in these tough times.
i would agree, anyone who thinks this would be deserved, are completely kidding themselves
i had the mean stingy parent types who had me take out loans and work while in school rather than pay for it themselves
and i would say they made the right decision, as did i
not the right decision for everyone, but for me it was
"i assume the idea would be that X amount of dollars spent in payment towards a student loan would turn into X amount of dollars spent on goods and services that help the economy.."
All you're missing is an ACTUAL "X" being additionally put into the system. Get me? You've described a Peter-to-Paul zero sum game, which is what's being proposed...
All you're missing is an ACTUAL "X" being additionally put into the system. Get me? You've described a Peter-to-Paul zero sum game, which is what's being proposed...
no, it's really not all that much different than a tax cut. instead of the government being repaid the money owed, the money is put back into the economy. the economics behind the idea is pretty basic.
Removing student loan debt and repayments from those who have them would arguably have a greater effect than general tax breaks i.e. providing $X billion and divide between those earning a certain income band.
All this would be doing is targeting those with different criteria.
Firstly, the target would be broader in terms of income spread [because it might not be related to income];
the amounts for each would differ [if 20 people get $20 extra each, then all that happens is everything raises by $20];
the recipients are 'educated' and you could argue that the extra money would be used to greater effect [ok, this is debatable];
and you are targeting usually younger people who are burdened not only by debt, but by the increasing tax demand that will be placed upon them by hordes of retiring boomers [who in my country had completely free education].
If you are giving the money away as a stimulus package anyway, there wouldnt be too many other places you could put it with better use. And you could have a matrix where salary/payments made/debt level are factored in - so its not a blanket approach.
you don't get it, evilp. it makes no difference whether the money has been spent or not. instead of earned income returning to the federal government, it stays in the market. the market cares little if the money has been "spent," as you put it, or not.
"no, it's really not all that much different than a tax cut. instead of the government being repaid the money owed, the money is put back into the economy. the economics behind the idea is pretty basic."
This is crazy. How do you think this stuff works, jafidler? Do you think that if the government were to dream up such a student loan cancellation plan, that a loan amount outstanding that exists on Monday is gone with a wave of the hand on Tuesday?
"The money is put back into the economy?"
What? As if the government can or will just forget about the amount outstanding? You don't think they'll maybe, oh, I don't know, make that amount up somehow, hmm? And guess how they might do that...? Or maybe you think they are magic and can make a loans existence non-existent? Did taxpayers not then foot that bill?
Take 10 bucks a student received in the form a student loan -- where do you think that money came from?
You are disconnected from reality.
By your logic, students should just do the right thing and default on their loans, thereby stimulating the economy.
"All you're missing is an ACTUAL "X" being additionally put into the system. Get me? You've described a Peter-to-Paul zero sum game, which is what's being proposed..."
i am not missing a single thing
i never said it would work
people were asking how that was supposed to help the economy
that is how
Get me?
Do you think that if the government were to dream up such a student loan cancellation plan, that a loan amount outstanding that exists on Monday is gone with a wave of the hand on Tuesday?
yes.
"The money is put back into the economy?"
yes, again, money not repaid to the government will enter the market.
As if the government can or will just forget about the amount outstanding?
no, it's not forgetting. it's a deliberate action to jump start spending.
Did taxpayers not then foot that bill?
yes, taxpayers foot the bill. just as you did with aig and the banking industry. money active in the market is much better for the economy than money outside of the market that the government is collecting 3% interest on.
By your logic, students should just do the right thing and default on their loans, thereby stimulating the economy.
the plan has nothing to do with defaulting on loans.
outside of seething and sputtering your post really had absolutely no point.
The government didnt just hand out $350 billion, they bought preferred stock of which they will lose a little, break even or even profit. The other issue with the banking plan is that in theory the banks can stimulate much larger spending, lending and economic growth.
i am for it, even though i worked my ass off and paid off my loans. I got screwed by the school (who charged excessive fee for international students), got screwed by the bank also (who charged interest for the money), but what the hell, how bout 'forgive' the others!
and most of us know, the school we went to DOES NOT matter in the larger scale of things. unless you went into academics, in which case the choice of taking out a huge loan was stupid.
There is a new repayment option that will take effect in July of this year, called Income-Based Repayment. Basically it allows you to pay 15% maximum of your income to student loans. If that is not enough to cover interest, the government pays for that. After 25 years, all remaining balances are forgiven. 25 years is a long time, but for those really struggling it seems to be a good option.
but i do have to say that the logic that YOU worked while in school or YOU went to state school so you didnt have to take out as many loans or YOU did this or that really has no merit. fair is irrelevant.
The Senate just added to the stimulus package a $15,000 tax credit for homebuyers. Are we all homebuyers? What about those who rent or live at home? Is it not fair for them? Or what about all the people before who have paid off their mortgages who didn't get a tax credit?
It's just not the way the system works. Whether or not its fair to you does not matter, its whether or not it benefits the larger whole.
The other issue with the banking plan is that in theory the banks can stimulate much larger spending, lending and economic growth.
the sl plan works in reverse from the banking system bailout. while that bailout was implemented to increase lending, this plan works to stimulate spending. never in this country's history has so much money been tied up in student loans. it will have a negative effect on our economy. the current situation is a reflection of that as much as the subprime mortgage meltdown.
interesting program, beefeaters. perhaps a good compromise. do you have any additional information on the program? a website?
Not sure what you are having a hard time understanding, KURT.
Money that I pay to the gov't now, I'd go out and buy that entertainment center and TV with, maybe even another house. The money stays in the markets instead of being taken out.
Seems pretty simple. Plus, you give the money to people that are at least educated, which, theoretically, would make for better investments/purchases (I know, a reach, but it sounds good).
The tax payer is footing the bill for everything we do now. That $15k tax break for homeowners is great, but what about those that own already and pay on time?
Then there is the bailouts/stimulus packages. Tax payers are getting all of the toxic assets, which many feel are worth a big fat 0 and will never be worth anything (logically, they can't be worth anything).
I can't see how the tax payer will get anything back from any of this. We are essentially "forgiving" the f*cked up assets so they can function again.
While incredibly improbable, I don't see how eliminating student debt is any different than any of these other bailouts, it just doesn't look at good as promoting new home ownership (I can see people bitching "but they went to college and have good jobs, I just sat around and have a lousy job, I need a tax credit to buy more crap").
it is basically exactly the same as the other bailouts, just to a different group
I am not sure where the attitude or misunderstanding is coming from KURT
like has been said here, any bailout plan will not help someone
if you arent a homeowner is an example
if you are 20 and in college now, you probably dont get anything even if you are close to entering the work place
it will always be unfair to someone if you look hard enough
in a perfect world, all this bailout money would be used directly back in the economy to help us all
the reality is that a lot of people will use that money to just pay off other debts or just dump it into savings
if you, or anyone else, has a perfect plan that will definitely work, lets hear it
unlike many home mortgages, the student loans were not apr, not subprime, not predatory. Many were bundled and sold.However,the real issue to be addressed is the upward spiral of college costs. Outrage is growing over the salaries of ceo's but look at the paychecks of college administrators and the bulging of college budgets in all areas except faculty wages.
Did anyone discuss here about the differences in loans? I.e. student A has 100K loan vs student B has 10K loan? Do they get the same amount or proportional to the amount they owe? Not going near the "fairness" argument, but there is still a huge logistics issue there. And for graduates making less than $150K? Thats a bit ridiculous, it should be something like for people making less than $75K or even less.
Thats why I still think subsidizing interest on student loans for a much longer period of time would be a better idea. Or basically "Freezing" loans instead of "cancelling" loans.
I still dont see why no one on this board will ever denounce the MARCH. I dont have one. Ive been told Im jealous because of that. Thats wrong. This piling on of more years of fake education is a big part of the problem on top of the administration costs and fees. But no one will stand up to it. No one stands up to NCARB for quietly converting the states one by one to 5yr profesional bachelors required for registration when for the better part of a century the 4year or less not only suficed, the practitoners excelled. It almost seems like most of you are comfortable in your prisons. Its almost like our generation has been socialy engineered to be the greatest group of suckers ever born.
Well this March conversation is a somewhat related topic but probably belongs to its own thread.
I agree with Marmkid though. I attended a 5-year equivolent B.Arch program, but I don't think a 4+3 M.Arch is "fake" or less qualified or vice versa. I think we should have a different names altogether for a professional degree so there is no sense of hierarchy there. Like a P.Arch or something that you get after a 5 year professional degree and a 4+3 professional degree. Ok that sounds stupid, but you get the point.
Anyway back to this loan conversation. Its relevant to my interests (Ha!)
I still dont see why no one on this board will ever denounce the MARCH.--ep i've agreed with you twice on this. are you not reading my entries? you bastard.
my 4 year degree was not near enough up to standards to be equivilant to a 5 year degree, i am not sure what it is like at other 4 year programs
but i do agree with you, 4 year programs shouldnt be completely gotten rid of, but i think having standards for licensure is important to make sure certain education is given
when did the 4 year program stop being eligible for a license? when did the switch to 5 years come about?
i imagine it really wont be possible to switch back to a 4 year program, they have decided, for a license, that the 5 year is the minimum
ah well
its their license to give out, so they can make the requirements
at least an M.ARCH isnt required.....yet
and none of it really matters anyway
no one cares what degree you have or asks you what your degree is
but yes, back to the loan conversation
it really couldnt be all loans forgiven, as that is so unbalanced, the number of people being helped would be out of whack compared to a flat stimulus check being given out like before
Im saying this is relevant because 4 years of real education on how to be an architect is plenty. Then maybe we wouldnt be having this rediculous loan forgiveness debate. 5+1 is 50% more tuition or more since grad school is higher rate. 4+3 is 75% more tuition.
Imagine if your loans were 25% of what they are now
One issue I see with student loans is who's going to buy the starter homes if the generation is in debt? Theres a big chunk of demand that cant participate in the real estate market. But by no means does that endorse forgiveness.
by the way, i really wouldn't mind if they canceled my loans. i just don't see a problem in the broad scheme of things with free education, which is the way it should be anyway. other countries have free continued education. this may actually make americans seem a little less like mindless jackasses. anyway, you shouldn't be mad or jealous if you had to "work" to pay them back and now people wont have to work as hard. that seems like a childish way to act, and frankly cynical.
that is a problem with or without student loans though
i have a sizable chunk of student loans and i bought a starter home and was looking to buy my second home before the economy crapped out and my job became less secure
student loans alone shouldnt be an excuse for anything you can or cannot do
if you manage things correctly, it wont be an issue
some of those people who bought homes that got us into this economic craphole didnt have student loans
they were just bad with money and did something they shouldnt have
i agree though, the actual amount of the student loans is getting a bit outrageous
while a seperate issue, i think something needs to be done
and i also agree, forgiveness really isnt the answer for it
help? maybe
complete forgiveness?
eh
i wouldnt turn it down of course
but it wouldnt be a solution to the economy
if this was a miracle cure to end the economic problems, i think even those with no student loans would be happy that the economy was better, our jobs were now secure, etc
heck, give a bunch of people a ton of money and fix the economy
you dont need to give me anything
if the overal situation is better, then my situation becomes astronomically better as a result
I don't like the argument that people "had to work hard in paying back their student loans so everyone should experience that too." That would be like a former slave bitching about the end of slavery to the tune of "We had to endure all this slavery and so should our children!"
Like many ill-conceived US policies, the lack of universal education has always been one of the worse ones. And as history has tought us, bad policies eventually go away down the stretch.
They should just cancel them and then then completely rethink the entire higher education system. Far too many people are privaleged enough to have their entire education paid for in full by wealthy parents while a lot of us don't have that. This is not fair and far too many people could never afford to go to school because of this. Their only option was to accumulate massive debt for education. Overpriced education is up there with one of America's dumbest policies ever. They should end it.
Cancel Student Loan Debt to Stimulate the Economy
i think that's really what it comes down to lb, which is why i always encourage people to work a few years (architecture or not) after undergrad.
in my case after undergrad, i worked for almost 4 years, paid off debt, made payments on a car, rented an apartment, and helped support my girlfriend, meanwhile saving about 10k a year. only then did i realize i had the means and responsibility to take on a large grad school loan.
i agree, there is no one to tell you what it takes to pay off loans when you're 18. that's why it's up to people who have been through the ringer to reach out and give the younger generation guidance.
i agree that more guidance should be given to students entering college, but i dont know how much it would really change things
i racked up some decent student loans from my undergrad, and honestly, i would do it all again the same way
i made the right choice for myself at the time
did i fully understand the impact of the student loans? of course not, i was 18
but i knew i had them and would be paying the back
i say student loan debt isnt necessarily a bad thing as long as you make the correct school choice for yourself
if your main focus is staying out of debt when you finish school, then taking on student loans is obviously not the way to go about it
someone (cm maybe?) mentioned the idea of freezing interest on student loans if you become unemployed
thats a more realistic idea in my opinion, especially in todays economy
i know you can freeze loans if you go back to school in some cases, i wonder if there is anything that can be done currently if you are unemployed?
probably not as it stands now i would think
I agree too but I think someone should show these students the difference, or lack thereof, between what you will make after a Barch and the March degree. Which is to say that they won't make one dime more for the extra $30,000 to $50,000 they will pay the schools. Add onto that the fact the Barch student worked for those 2 years at $30,000 - $35,000 that the March did not and the gap become something like $80,000.
The shcools don't want you to know these things so shhhhh. They just want to peddle that March to cover their own asses.
i think that is part of a whole seperate conversation fence
arch schools in general do a terrible job actually getting it through to their students what they will actually be doing in the real world when they leave school, let alone what they will be making and how it relates to how much their school costs
now clearly the students are to blame in many of these cases, as if you come out of school expecting to design whatever you want and never have to actually check shop drawings or do any other dirty work, you are really just an idiot
yet many students feel that way it seems
"Cancel Student Loan Debt to Stimulate the Economy"
Still waiting to hear how that would work.
Fairness issues aside for the moment, how would canceling student loans outstanding in 2009 stimulate the economy?
regardless of how hard each individual here worked to get him or herself out of debt, i have very little doubt that forgiving all federal student loan debt would give a major boast to the consumer spending. both now and in the future. it is a good idea that will never happen.
i assume the idea would be that X amount of dollars spent in payment towards a student loan would turn into X amount of dollars spent on goods and services that help the economy
i dont know if that article included any actual numbers or facts about how many people have student loans and what the amount of money freed up per month would actually be
but i dont see how it would work out that well (though i would love it if they did this)
if this was one of a couple things to happen, perhaps it could stimulate the economy
dont by itself? i dont see it as an idea that would be worth it for the government
well, jafidler and i would each be driving a beamer... two M3's = $115k
i had a conversation with some accountants in my family and there is word of a $1500 tax rebate for those unemployed for all of 2008. does anyone know if this applies to students?
Marmkid--nope, not you specifically, just general sarcasm at everyone wanting something right now. (and feeling sadness that there is nothing to give)
Parents and college advisors need to try learn from these stories.
I knew people who sent their kids off to college with new sports cars, great wardrobes, credit cards, and lots of spending money, but made the kids take out loans for college expenses "so they would take their studies seriously." Their friends who biked to their jobs and worked through spring break and never experienced the spring break entitlement are thanking their own stingy parents now. Those stingy parents who directed whatever funds they had towards tuition, books, and fees, and pushed cheaper state schools and just lectured and nagged their kids "to take their studies seriously" are looking smarter (and nicer) now.
Since you all seem to have lots of spare time to write on blogs, write your congressperson and Senators. As someone without student loans (I had the mean stingy parent types) I would support a freeze on student loan interest or even a reduction of the interest rates, and certainly forebearance in these tough times.
i would agree, anyone who thinks this would be deserved, are completely kidding themselves
i had the mean stingy parent types who had me take out loans and work while in school rather than pay for it themselves
and i would say they made the right decision, as did i
not the right decision for everyone, but for me it was
"i assume the idea would be that X amount of dollars spent in payment towards a student loan would turn into X amount of dollars spent on goods and services that help the economy.."
All you're missing is an ACTUAL "X" being additionally put into the system. Get me? You've described a Peter-to-Paul zero sum game, which is what's being proposed...
no, it's really not all that much different than a tax cut. instead of the government being repaid the money owed, the money is put back into the economy. the economics behind the idea is pretty basic.
Removing student loan debt and repayments from those who have them would arguably have a greater effect than general tax breaks i.e. providing $X billion and divide between those earning a certain income band.
All this would be doing is targeting those with different criteria.
Firstly, the target would be broader in terms of income spread [because it might not be related to income];
the amounts for each would differ [if 20 people get $20 extra each, then all that happens is everything raises by $20];
the recipients are 'educated' and you could argue that the extra money would be used to greater effect [ok, this is debatable];
and you are targeting usually younger people who are burdened not only by debt, but by the increasing tax demand that will be placed upon them by hordes of retiring boomers [who in my country had completely free education].
If you are giving the money away as a stimulus package anyway, there wouldnt be too many other places you could put it with better use. And you could have a matrix where salary/payments made/debt level are factored in - so its not a blanket approach.
No because the loan money has been spent. The tax money has yet to be spent. So they are not the same.
you don't get it, evilp. it makes no difference whether the money has been spent or not. instead of earned income returning to the federal government, it stays in the market. the market cares little if the money has been "spent," as you put it, or not.
"no, it's really not all that much different than a tax cut. instead of the government being repaid the money owed, the money is put back into the economy. the economics behind the idea is pretty basic."
This is crazy. How do you think this stuff works, jafidler? Do you think that if the government were to dream up such a student loan cancellation plan, that a loan amount outstanding that exists on Monday is gone with a wave of the hand on Tuesday?
"The money is put back into the economy?"
What? As if the government can or will just forget about the amount outstanding? You don't think they'll maybe, oh, I don't know, make that amount up somehow, hmm? And guess how they might do that...? Or maybe you think they are magic and can make a loans existence non-existent? Did taxpayers not then foot that bill?
Take 10 bucks a student received in the form a student loan -- where do you think that money came from?
You are disconnected from reality.
By your logic, students should just do the right thing and default on their loans, thereby stimulating the economy.
No difference.
no difference? huge difference - your suggestion would be a credit killer. ;)
"All you're missing is an ACTUAL "X" being additionally put into the system. Get me? You've described a Peter-to-Paul zero sum game, which is what's being proposed..."
i am not missing a single thing
i never said it would work
people were asking how that was supposed to help the economy
that is how
Get me?
no need to be an ass, kurt. point by point.
Do you think that if the government were to dream up such a student loan cancellation plan, that a loan amount outstanding that exists on Monday is gone with a wave of the hand on Tuesday?
yes.
"The money is put back into the economy?"
yes, again, money not repaid to the government will enter the market.
As if the government can or will just forget about the amount outstanding?
no, it's not forgetting. it's a deliberate action to jump start spending.
Did taxpayers not then foot that bill?
yes, taxpayers foot the bill. just as you did with aig and the banking industry. money active in the market is much better for the economy than money outside of the market that the government is collecting 3% interest on.
By your logic, students should just do the right thing and default on their loans, thereby stimulating the economy.
the plan has nothing to do with defaulting on loans.
outside of seething and sputtering your post really had absolutely no point.
The government didnt just hand out $350 billion, they bought preferred stock of which they will lose a little, break even or even profit. The other issue with the banking plan is that in theory the banks can stimulate much larger spending, lending and economic growth.
i am for it, even though i worked my ass off and paid off my loans. I got screwed by the school (who charged excessive fee for international students), got screwed by the bank also (who charged interest for the money), but what the hell, how bout 'forgive' the others!
and most of us know, the school we went to DOES NOT matter in the larger scale of things. unless you went into academics, in which case the choice of taking out a huge loan was stupid.
There is a new repayment option that will take effect in July of this year, called Income-Based Repayment. Basically it allows you to pay 15% maximum of your income to student loans. If that is not enough to cover interest, the government pays for that. After 25 years, all remaining balances are forgiven. 25 years is a long time, but for those really struggling it seems to be a good option.
but i do have to say that the logic that YOU worked while in school or YOU went to state school so you didnt have to take out as many loans or YOU did this or that really has no merit. fair is irrelevant.
The Senate just added to the stimulus package a $15,000 tax credit for homebuyers. Are we all homebuyers? What about those who rent or live at home? Is it not fair for them? Or what about all the people before who have paid off their mortgages who didn't get a tax credit?
It's just not the way the system works. Whether or not its fair to you does not matter, its whether or not it benefits the larger whole.
Sorry to be an ass, jafidler.
Some of the reasoning on this thread is killing me.
the sl plan works in reverse from the banking system bailout. while that bailout was implemented to increase lending, this plan works to stimulate spending. never in this country's history has so much money been tied up in student loans. it will have a negative effect on our economy. the current situation is a reflection of that as much as the subprime mortgage meltdown.
interesting program, beefeaters. perhaps a good compromise. do you have any additional information on the program? a website?
Not sure what you are having a hard time understanding, KURT.
Money that I pay to the gov't now, I'd go out and buy that entertainment center and TV with, maybe even another house. The money stays in the markets instead of being taken out.
Seems pretty simple. Plus, you give the money to people that are at least educated, which, theoretically, would make for better investments/purchases (I know, a reach, but it sounds good).
The tax payer is footing the bill for everything we do now. That $15k tax break for homeowners is great, but what about those that own already and pay on time?
Then there is the bailouts/stimulus packages. Tax payers are getting all of the toxic assets, which many feel are worth a big fat 0 and will never be worth anything (logically, they can't be worth anything).
I can't see how the tax payer will get anything back from any of this. We are essentially "forgiving" the f*cked up assets so they can function again.
While incredibly improbable, I don't see how eliminating student debt is any different than any of these other bailouts, it just doesn't look at good as promoting new home ownership (I can see people bitching "but they went to college and have good jobs, I just sat around and have a lousy job, I need a tax credit to buy more crap").
it is basically exactly the same as the other bailouts, just to a different group
I am not sure where the attitude or misunderstanding is coming from KURT
like has been said here, any bailout plan will not help someone
if you arent a homeowner is an example
if you are 20 and in college now, you probably dont get anything even if you are close to entering the work place
it will always be unfair to someone if you look hard enough
in a perfect world, all this bailout money would be used directly back in the economy to help us all
the reality is that a lot of people will use that money to just pay off other debts or just dump it into savings
if you, or anyone else, has a perfect plan that will definitely work, lets hear it
Forgive all debt! Print more money and devalue the dollar further! Roll out the Amero!
unlike many home mortgages, the student loans were not apr, not subprime, not predatory. Many were bundled and sold.However,the real issue to be addressed is the upward spiral of college costs. Outrage is growing over the salaries of ceo's but look at the paychecks of college administrators and the bulging of college budgets in all areas except faculty wages.
Did anyone discuss here about the differences in loans? I.e. student A has 100K loan vs student B has 10K loan? Do they get the same amount or proportional to the amount they owe? Not going near the "fairness" argument, but there is still a huge logistics issue there. And for graduates making less than $150K? Thats a bit ridiculous, it should be something like for people making less than $75K or even less.
Thats why I still think subsidizing interest on student loans for a much longer period of time would be a better idea. Or basically "Freezing" loans instead of "cancelling" loans.
I still dont see why no one on this board will ever denounce the MARCH. I dont have one. Ive been told Im jealous because of that. Thats wrong. This piling on of more years of fake education is a big part of the problem on top of the administration costs and fees. But no one will stand up to it. No one stands up to NCARB for quietly converting the states one by one to 5yr profesional bachelors required for registration when for the better part of a century the 4year or less not only suficed, the practitoners excelled. It almost seems like most of you are comfortable in your prisons. Its almost like our generation has been socialy engineered to be the greatest group of suckers ever born.
the problem with that evil is that you then expect someone who already has a degree who switches to architecture to then go through 5 years of school?
i went to an unaccredited 4 year school for my undergrad, which i did part arch and part others
then i got my m.arch
i would say that was no more fake than going to just a 5 year program and nothing else
i see no reason to denounce it
because it wasnt for you doesnt mean we should get rid of it altogether
Well this March conversation is a somewhat related topic but probably belongs to its own thread.
I agree with Marmkid though. I attended a 5-year equivolent B.Arch program, but I don't think a 4+3 M.Arch is "fake" or less qualified or vice versa. I think we should have a different names altogether for a professional degree so there is no sense of hierarchy there. Like a P.Arch or something that you get after a 5 year professional degree and a 4+3 professional degree. Ok that sounds stupid, but you get the point.
Anyway back to this loan conversation. Its relevant to my interests (Ha!)
I agree marmkind, but then conversely dont get rid of the 4 year for licensure for people who want that route.
I still dont see why no one on this board will ever denounce the MARCH.--ep i've agreed with you twice on this. are you not reading my entries? you bastard.
No I know you agree with me but your not normal Vado
my 4 year degree was not near enough up to standards to be equivilant to a 5 year degree, i am not sure what it is like at other 4 year programs
but i do agree with you, 4 year programs shouldnt be completely gotten rid of, but i think having standards for licensure is important to make sure certain education is given
when did the 4 year program stop being eligible for a license? when did the switch to 5 years come about?
i imagine it really wont be possible to switch back to a 4 year program, they have decided, for a license, that the 5 year is the minimum
ah well
its their license to give out, so they can make the requirements
at least an M.ARCH isnt required.....yet
and none of it really matters anyway
no one cares what degree you have or asks you what your degree is
but yes, back to the loan conversation
it really couldnt be all loans forgiven, as that is so unbalanced, the number of people being helped would be out of whack compared to a flat stimulus check being given out like before
Im saying this is relevant because 4 years of real education on how to be an architect is plenty. Then maybe we wouldnt be having this rediculous loan forgiveness debate. 5+1 is 50% more tuition or more since grad school is higher rate. 4+3 is 75% more tuition.
Imagine if your loans were 25% of what they are now
they should pay for a lambo to transport me to school
i would be stimulated
i dont understand why anyone would want to "denounce" the M.Arch
isnt that all a little dramatic for a college degree?
maybe not everyone who has gone for one while racking up student loans made the right decision?
but some did, despite having student loans
and lets also remember, student loans are not the primary reason our economy is in the crapper
it is one contributing factor maybe, but i dont see it as being a big deal in the overall economic situation really
One issue I see with student loans is who's going to buy the starter homes if the generation is in debt? Theres a big chunk of demand that cant participate in the real estate market. But by no means does that endorse forgiveness.
by the way, i really wouldn't mind if they canceled my loans. i just don't see a problem in the broad scheme of things with free education, which is the way it should be anyway. other countries have free continued education. this may actually make americans seem a little less like mindless jackasses. anyway, you shouldn't be mad or jealous if you had to "work" to pay them back and now people wont have to work as hard. that seems like a childish way to act, and frankly cynical.
that is a problem with or without student loans though
i have a sizable chunk of student loans and i bought a starter home and was looking to buy my second home before the economy crapped out and my job became less secure
student loans alone shouldnt be an excuse for anything you can or cannot do
if you manage things correctly, it wont be an issue
some of those people who bought homes that got us into this economic craphole didnt have student loans
they were just bad with money and did something they shouldnt have
i agree though, the actual amount of the student loans is getting a bit outrageous
while a seperate issue, i think something needs to be done
and i also agree, forgiveness really isnt the answer for it
help? maybe
complete forgiveness?
eh
i wouldnt turn it down of course
but it wouldnt be a solution to the economy
if this was a miracle cure to end the economic problems, i think even those with no student loans would be happy that the economy was better, our jobs were now secure, etc
heck, give a bunch of people a ton of money and fix the economy
you dont need to give me anything
if the overal situation is better, then my situation becomes astronomically better as a result
I don't like the argument that people "had to work hard in paying back their student loans so everyone should experience that too." That would be like a former slave bitching about the end of slavery to the tune of "We had to endure all this slavery and so should our children!"
Like many ill-conceived US policies, the lack of universal education has always been one of the worse ones. And as history has tought us, bad policies eventually go away down the stretch.
They should just cancel them and then then completely rethink the entire higher education system. Far too many people are privaleged enough to have their entire education paid for in full by wealthy parents while a lot of us don't have that. This is not fair and far too many people could never afford to go to school because of this. Their only option was to accumulate massive debt for education. Overpriced education is up there with one of America's dumbest policies ever. They should end it.
I used to hope for the future but now I realize we are fucked.
at least we have stopped being dramatic
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.