Ron Paul wants to phase out federal student loans
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:10:05 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  Ron Paul wants to phase out federal student loans
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Author Topic: Ron Paul wants to phase out federal student loans  (Read 3649 times)
redcommander
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,816
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: October 23, 2011, 05:55:47 PM »

More reason that Libertarianism as a philosophy is dangerous for the country. At least American libertarians could become accepting of some government programs like their European counterparts.
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,096
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: October 23, 2011, 06:06:46 PM »

Why should the Federal government be giving out loans. The states should be doing these programs.

Why do conservatives/libertarians worship the 'states"?

It's not because of the Constitution, btw. There are plenty of parts of the  Constitution that conservatives and libertarians ignore/dislike.

Because, the US is made up of 50 sovereign "states". "States". A state is a country, not a province. The logic behind the Federal government was to keep peace between the states and protect them as a whole. Not to pay for your higher education.

Tell me, what do Conservatives ignore in the Constitution, and dont use the PATRIOT ACT as an example, that is NOT Conservative.
LOLOLOLOL. Should we try the whole secession thing again?'
edit: somebody brought out his true colors before me
If the Federal government crosses its boundries, then yes, I believe the states have the right to secede. Are the people of South Sudan bad? They are slaughtered. Yes, we are not slaughtered here, and it will NEVER happen, but the principle of the matter should be on the table. I don't advocate secession, but I would support it if, for whatever reason, (most likely nuclear/zombie disaster) if it had to happen.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: October 23, 2011, 06:42:23 PM »

I love this... so it's fine for the children of the wealthy to be able to walk into any college they want.

But the children of the poor, even middle-class can go 'f*** themselves'... and who are the ones accusing class warfare?
Logged
redcommander
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,816
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: October 23, 2011, 07:07:42 PM »

I don't even understand the logic in this. Federal loans aren't perfect, but they at least give an opportunity for everyone to go to college even if they have debt afterwords. Ideally state universities should be free like most countries in the world, but obviously too many Americans would rather maintain an inequality gap in universities that contribute some more in taxes every year to help better education. Getting rid of student loans helps education how exactly? States should be expected to allocate adequate funding for students? Do you think a place like California or Texas should be trusted with that responsibility when their state governments are dominated by batsh*t crazies? No wonder Paul is dropping in the polls with ideas like that. It's one thing to be opposed to the Department of Education, but forcing students to go cold turkey without college loans is dangerous and cruel.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,665
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: October 23, 2011, 07:35:03 PM »

I don't even understand the logic in this. Federal loans aren't perfect, but they at least give an opportunity for everyone to go to college even if they have debt afterwords. Ideally state universities should be free like most countries in the world, but obviously too many Americans would rather maintain an inequality gap in universities that contribute some more in taxes every year to help better education. Getting rid of student loans helps education how exactly? States should be expected to allocate adequate funding for students? Do you think a place like California or Texas should be trusted with that responsibility when their state governments are dominated by batsh*t crazies? No wonder Paul is dropping in the polls with ideas like that. It's one thing to be opposed to the Department of Education, but forcing students to go cold turkey without college loans is dangerous and cruel.
do you know what "phase out" means?
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: October 23, 2011, 07:37:40 PM »

I don't even understand the logic in this. Federal loans aren't perfect, but they at least give an opportunity for everyone to go to college even if they have debt afterwords. Ideally state universities should be free like most countries in the world, but obviously too many Americans would rather maintain an inequality gap in universities that contribute some more in taxes every year to help better education. Getting rid of student loans helps education how exactly? States should be expected to allocate adequate funding for students? Do you think a place like California or Texas should be trusted with that responsibility when their state governments are dominated by batsh*t crazies? No wonder Paul is dropping in the polls with ideas like that. It's one thing to be opposed to the Department of Education, but forcing students to go cold turkey without college loans is dangerous and cruel.
do you know what "phase out" means?

Sorry... but if that's the only issue you have with what RC wrote... then the point is made.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,665
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: October 23, 2011, 07:49:31 PM »

I don't even understand the logic in this. Federal loans aren't perfect, but they at least give an opportunity for everyone to go to college even if they have debt afterwords. Ideally state universities should be free like most countries in the world, but obviously too many Americans would rather maintain an inequality gap in universities that contribute some more in taxes every year to help better education. Getting rid of student loans helps education how exactly? States should be expected to allocate adequate funding for students? Do you think a place like California or Texas should be trusted with that responsibility when their state governments are dominated by batsh*t crazies? No wonder Paul is dropping in the polls with ideas like that. It's one thing to be opposed to the Department of Education, but forcing students to go cold turkey without college loans is dangerous and cruel.
do you know what "phase out" means?

Sorry... but if that's the only issue you have with what RC wrote... then the point is made.
No, it's the issue most relevant to the question that I could see there.  Whether the loans come from federal or state government doesn't matter. Either way you're inflating the price.
Logged
MaxQue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,600
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: October 23, 2011, 07:53:15 PM »

I don't even understand the logic in this. Federal loans aren't perfect, but they at least give an opportunity for everyone to go to college even if they have debt afterwords. Ideally state universities should be free like most countries in the world, but obviously too many Americans would rather maintain an inequality gap in universities that contribute some more in taxes every year to help better education. Getting rid of student loans helps education how exactly? States should be expected to allocate adequate funding for students? Do you think a place like California or Texas should be trusted with that responsibility when their state governments are dominated by batsh*t crazies? No wonder Paul is dropping in the polls with ideas like that. It's one thing to be opposed to the Department of Education, but forcing students to go cold turkey without college loans is dangerous and cruel.
do you know what "phase out" means?

Sorry... but if that's the only issue you have with what RC wrote... then the point is made.
No, it's the issue most relevant to the question that I could see there.  Whether the loans come from federal or state government doesn't matter. Either way you're inflating the price.

Because you think than all states will match dollar to dollar the amounts which were loaned by federal government?
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: October 23, 2011, 07:53:35 PM »

This is my biggest problem with the Paulites, they seem to reside in a world where there are no real-world consequences of their positions.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,665
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: October 23, 2011, 08:04:27 PM »

I don't even understand the logic in this. Federal loans aren't perfect, but they at least give an opportunity for everyone to go to college even if they have debt afterwords. Ideally state universities should be free like most countries in the world, but obviously too many Americans would rather maintain an inequality gap in universities that contribute some more in taxes every year to help better education. Getting rid of student loans helps education how exactly? States should be expected to allocate adequate funding for students? Do you think a place like California or Texas should be trusted with that responsibility when their state governments are dominated by batsh*t crazies? No wonder Paul is dropping in the polls with ideas like that. It's one thing to be opposed to the Department of Education, but forcing students to go cold turkey without college loans is dangerous and cruel.
do you know what "phase out" means?

Sorry... but if that's the only issue you have with what RC wrote... then the point is made.
No, it's the issue most relevant to the question that I could see there.  Whether the loans come from federal or state government doesn't matter. Either way you're inflating the price.

Because you think than all states will match dollar to dollar the amounts which were loaned by federal government?
No, I wouldn't assume that, since they have to balance their budgets on a shorter schedule than the feds do. But if they did somehow manage to, it wouldn't solve the price inflation problem, so the whole feds v. states angle is a distraction.
Logged
Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!
ModernBourbon Democrat
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,273


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: October 23, 2011, 08:57:01 PM »

This is my biggest problem with the Paulites, they seem to reside in a world where there are no real-world consequences of their positions.

Because federal student loans don't have any consequences. You know, besides causing dramatic increases in costs due to a disconnect between the costs and the students.

The real world consequence of a sudden loss of student loans (ignoring the fact that many state probably WOULD reinstate it in some form) would be a decline in university costs roughly equal to what would have otherwise been paid for with loans.

See, this is what makes arguing with liberals about cutting programs so irritating. You can always see the BENEFITS of these programs (students getting easier access to uni), but you can't see the MANY problems (or, as Bastiat said, "That Which Is Unseen"). Distortions in the market, the many things that COULD have been created or done had the resources required not gone towards student loans, not to mention that the student loans themselves cause distortions that are taken to be representative of the"free market", which then has more government programs put in to "counterbalance rising costs", which in turn makes it worse. You can see this when people talk about financial regulation, medical interventionism, etc

[/rant]
Logged
DrScholl
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,929
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: October 23, 2011, 09:08:06 PM »

Libertarians do not get it, they are the same as hardline Communists in the respect that they believe that their excessive economic policies will solve issues, when they really will just make them worse.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: October 23, 2011, 09:08:58 PM »

This is what makes it so difficult to talk to Paulites, there are a lot of assumptions as to what will happen.

You assume that if federal loans are taken away, Universities will have to reduce costs? Therefore more students could get in without them... an assumption - you assume that states would re-instate their own schemes... but wouldn't that create the same distortion you're worried about?

Either way you slice it, it DOES support those who can pay full price to go regardless and makes a lot of assumptions of what 'could' happen that might make it possible for poorer students to go to college.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,665
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: October 23, 2011, 10:13:59 PM »

Sanchez wasn't making the cost distortion argument, and no one else was saying "let the states do it."

An inductive inference isn't a sure thing, but it's more than just an assumption.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: October 24, 2011, 12:16:08 AM »

Why should the Federal government be giving out loans. The states should be doing these programs.

State vs. Federal on loans doesn't really matter unless States only made loans available to attend in-state public universities.

What is weird is that so many people who think subsidizing private universities with government backed student loans is a bad idea are the same people who think subsidizing private K-12 schools with government vouchers is a good idea.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: October 24, 2011, 12:18:20 AM »

I do get the point that NDN is making. It seems like college would be less expensive if students weren't given the ability to pay so much more by way of loans.
Logged
Likely Voter
Moderators
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,344


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: October 24, 2011, 12:39:53 AM »

Is there any Federal department, service or program that Ron Paul does not want to phase or or immediately eliminate?
Logged
Mercenary
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,575


Political Matrix
E: -3.94, S: -2.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: October 24, 2011, 03:00:14 AM »

I agree that it should be phased out. I think cheap credit is bad in general though. Just like the federal reserve keeping interest rates so low brought up home prices far beyond what they should be, so too did this bring up tuition beyond what it should be.

Now, I support education funding, in fact I think we need to expand it. However, cheap credit is not the way to do so. We also need to recognize that college is not for everyone. And in some cases, it is a waste of time even for intelligent people who do well in it. I say that because many people can learn on their own just as effectively, or even more effectively, than they can at a university. I know I can. Instead of placing values in degrees that just tell us someone attended class and got passing grades, how about we value knowledge itself. Who cares if someone went to university or not if they have the knowledge. If I study and can pass the CPA exam, why should I need 150 semester hours of university to be able to sit for it?

Not only does cheap credit cause prices to sour, it also puts people in a greater debt since they can "afford" a large total debt with a lower rate.

Now, I think college has its place. It is necessary for some people who either cannot learn on their own, or don't have the discipline to stick with something. And I support fully funding college for those who need to go, but we need to evaluate whether someone needs to go or not instead of just encouraging everyone to. Maybe a different type of self study subsidy for those who feel they don't need college to learn. And then an apprenticeship subsidy for those who want to learn a trade.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: October 24, 2011, 03:59:13 AM »

It should be noted that college studies is a field where it is likely that a private market cannot adequately support a sufficient investment level. Thus, government intervention is needed.
Logged
Jacobtm
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,216


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: October 24, 2011, 07:16:37 AM »
« Edited: October 24, 2011, 07:24:54 AM by Jacobtm »

Paul is right, federal loans cause tuition to increase, and students to end up in more debt.

If your only goal is to lower the cost of college, reducing loan availability will work. But it will also mean fewer college educated people.

Ideally the state would provide plentiful quality public universities with reasonable tuition and scholarships for the poor, to further compete down the price of private universities.

Though it is amazing that in NY, with plenty of quality colleges that charge about $7,000 a year in tuition, that people still opt to spend $45,000 a year. If there weren't student loans and instead you had to fork over $45,000 each year, obviously only a few thousand people in the country could afford that, so tuition would have to drop.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: October 24, 2011, 07:59:25 AM »

It should be noted that college studies is a field where it is likely that a private market cannot adequately support a sufficient investment level. Thus, government intervention is needed.

Communist!
Logged
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,763
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: October 24, 2011, 11:00:54 AM »

Is there any Federal department, service or program that Ron Paul does not want to phase or or immediately eliminate?

The ones the Constuition permits the federal government to have (and even those would have some cuts)
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: October 24, 2011, 11:37:38 AM »

To elaborate a bit more, imagine there were some federal loan program to give out up to $20,000 of low-interest loans to every person who wants to buy a car.  Now, as it stands, nearly everyone who wants to buy a car can buy a car, and automakers are capable of making profits at current prices.  Now, what if you introduce this loan program?  What do you do as an automaker?  The answer is obvious.  You simply raise the price of every car you sell by $20,000 and pocket the differential.  Same exact thing happens with colleges.  "Not-for-profit" colleges literally have made more money than they know what to do with (and this after paying the college president $6 million).

In addition, government policy that aims to increase college attendance also decreases social mobility, since employers will simply start demanding additional qualifications of new hires.  When you think about it, there are almost no jobs, except doctors, lawyers, accountants etc. that really require a college eduation.  But an employer will still pick a more qualified hire if they have the chance, which is why you have the situation now where Ph.Ds are stocking shelves.  This also means that the very poorest in society, those who can't afford even a loan or to be away from home for four years, are completely shut out of the upper echelons of the labor market.

Bingo.

By the way, pretty much the only growth in consumer credit over the past 4 years is student loans, and the generalized increase in tuitions/combination of loans suggests a pretty obvious bubble in higher education extending back to early part of last decade.

Where student loans are different than everything else is their inability to discharge in bankruptcy created by the 2005 amendments.  That should naturally be repealed, but the question remains is to whether kids would actually do that, since so many of them are either underwater or close to drowning.

I happen to know for a fact that a number of the kids are getting these ridiculous loans with the assumption that the Feds will eventually bail them out.

Of course, the smarter kids would make it such that their total loan amount is no greater than a standard mortgage debt-to-income ratio, presuming an average salary after finishing said degree.  That, however, is becoming nearly impossible, except at state institutions, even with working part-time.
Logged
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: October 24, 2011, 12:15:24 PM »
« Edited: October 24, 2011, 12:19:50 PM by Link »

When you think about it, there are almost no jobs, except doctors, lawyers, accountants etc. that really require a college eduation.

College degrees are so easy to get in the United States.  I personally would never hire anyone for a management position that didn't have one.  Well never say never.  If you don't have a college degree it says more about you than if you have one.  And of course I mean that only in the context of climbing the management ladder.  Obviously if you are a certified plumber or electrician I would find that acceptable as well.  I consider a trade school and apprenticeship leading to certification similar to a college degree.
Logged
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: October 24, 2011, 12:18:55 PM »

Why should the Federal government be giving out loans. The states should be doing these programs.

Why do conservatives/libertarians worship the 'states"?



If you listen carefully when conservatives are talking you will hear the dog whistle.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.064 seconds with 13 queries.