Another Round Of Trying To Forgive Loans

[Bigbrog]

Just don't understand it...get's struck down by the supreme court and yet Biden is trying to do it again.  Is THIS what some of you think is important in our country??  To NOT hold people accountable for contracts THEY signed and agreed to??  Makes no sense.  And spare the b.s. around "predatory loans"...the responsibility falls on the person who signed the loan contract to know what the terms are...period!!  You don't know what something means than don't sign it until you do.  If you aren't smart enough to understand the terms of the loan you are signing, then going to college probably isn't up your ally anyway.

Edited July 14, 2023 by Bigbrog

[WrestlingRasta]

I mean, you had me until: if you’re not educated enough at 18 yrs old to understand the contract, probably not a good idea to further your education. 
 

other than that, agree for the most part. 

Edited July 14, 2023 by WrestlingRasta

[Wrestleknownothing]

58 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

Just don't understand it...get's struck down by the supreme court and yet Biden is trying to do it again.  Is THIS what some of you think is important in our country??  To NOT hold people accountable for contracts THEY signed and agreed to??  Makes no sense.  And spare the b.s. around "predatory loans"...the responsibility falls on the person who signed the loan contract to know what the terms are...period!!  You don't know what something means than don't sign it until you do.  If you aren't smart enough to understand the terms of the loan you are signing, then going to college probably isn't up your ally anyway.

That is not what this is. The announcement today has to do with fixing the existing broken program regarding income based repayment plans. The issue here was that the federal government was not honoring the contract they signed. They were failing to count certain payments toward the required payments. That is what is being addressed.

[mspart]

41 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

That is not what this is. The announcement today has to do with fixing the existing broken program regarding income based repayment plans. The issue here was that the federal government was not honoring the contract they signed. They were failing to count certain payments toward the required payments. That is what is being addressed.

WKN - So you are saying that these loan holders were cheated out of $48k?   Seems like an awful lot for failing to count certain payments as required payments.  

From WSJ - 804000 borrowers, 39 billion dollars.    That is $48,500 per borrower.    Seems like an overreach based on what you present. 

mspart

[Paul158]

Biden and his administration are so desperate for votes in the 2024 election they will do anything to buy the votes. When the Supreme Court voted him them down they knew they were in deep shi!. When he promised 42 million voters he would give them 10 to 20 thousand dollars each in loan forgiveness that was a huge incentive to vote for him. So now he came away with 38  billion dollars for 804,000 voters.

[Wrestleknownothing]

57 minutes ago, mspart said:

WKN - So you are saying that these loan holders were cheated out of $48k?   Seems like an awful lot for failing to count certain payments as required payments.  

From WSJ - 804000 borrowers, 39 billion dollars.    That is $48,500 per borrower.    Seems like an overreach based on what you present. 

mspart

I am not saying that at all. I will not speak for any government derived headline numbers ever. No one knows the details of how they came up with those numbers. Did they include future anticipated forgiveness? Is it just past forgiveness that was incorrectly accounted for? Is it some combination of the two? Or some other way?

If you have ever tried to decipher a federal budget press release (never mind the actual budget document) you will know what I am talking about. Only a governmental entity can claim a larger number is a reduction.

[Wrestleknownothing]

19 minutes ago, Paul158 said:

Biden and his administration are so desperate for votes in the 2024 election they will do anything to buy the votes. When the Supreme Court voted him them down they knew they were in deep shi!. When he promised 42 million voters he would give them 10 to 20 thousand dollars each in loan forgiveness that was a huge incentive to vote for him. So now he came away with 38  billion dollars for 804,000 voters.

Are you suggesting a politician would do something that is potentially popular with the populace that won them the popular vote?

I am shocked, shocked, I tell you.

One more question, how have you felt about tax cuts?

Edited July 14, 2023 by Wrestleknownothing

[Paul158]

9 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Are you suggesting a politician would do something that is potentially popular with the populace that won them the popular vote?

I am shocked, shocked, I tell you.

One more question, how have you felt about tax cuts?

I have a question for you. In the upcoming election I decide to pay 1 million voters 1000 dollars each to vote for a certain candidate in order to win the election. We have the election and the candidate wins. Did I do anything improper? If so  what is it. As for your question about taxes. Taxes are derived from money I EARNED from WORKING. If the government wants to lower my taxes and give me back some of MY MONEY I'm fine with that. I have paid in Taxes for 54 years. Forgiveness of student loans is taking my tax money to pay for someone else's debt. I paid back my student debt. All of My 5 children have paid back their student debt. 

[mspart]

34 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I am not saying that at all. I will not speak for any government derived headline numbers ever. No one knows the details of how they came up with those numbers. Did they include future anticipated forgiveness? Is it just past forgiveness that was incorrectly accounted for? Is it some combination of the two? Or some other way?

If you have ever tried to decipher a federal budget press release (never mind the actual budget document) you will know what I am talking about. Only a governmental entity can claim a larger number is a reduction.

So what are you saying?   You made a statement of what the issue was that is driving this latest effort.   Reports are that $39 billion goes to 804k borrowers for this latest effort.   That is over 48K per borrower on average.   That is what will be paid out for the items you described.    Not sure how that is not what you are saying when you said it.   Those are the numbers for what your definitive statement below describes.  It seems to me like that is what you were saying.  I'm not sure how to interpret it otherwise. 

2 hours ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

They were failing to count certain payments toward the required payments. That is what is being addressed.

mspart

[DJT]

The one that gets me is “forgiving” student loans is an investment that benefits everyone. If someone isn’t able to pay their student loans with their chosen college degree, it seems like it was a poor investment on their part, but somehow it is a good investment for everyone else?

[Paul158]

3 minutes ago, DJT said:

The one that gets me is “forgiving” student loans is an investment that benefits everyone. If someone isn’t able to pay their student loans with their chosen college degree, it seems like it was a poor investment on their part, but somehow it is a good investment for everyone else?

its good for Joe Biden and his bid to get reelected. 

[DJT]

22 minutes ago, Paul158 said:

its good for Joe Biden and his bid to get reelected. 

Yeah, but if he succeeds at getting student loans “forgiven”, what will his next promise be? Reparations?

Then again, according to Joe, if you don’t vote for him, you ain’t black, so not sure what good that’d do.

Edited July 14, 2023 by DJT

[Scouts Honor]

1 hour ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I am not saying that at all. I will not speak for any government derived headline numbers ever. No one knows the details of how they came up with those numbers. Did they include future anticipated forgiveness? Is it just past forgiveness that was incorrectly accounted for? Is it some combination of the two? Or some other way?

If you have ever tried to decipher a federal budget press release (never mind the actual budget document) you will know what I am talking about. Only a governmental entity can claim a larger number is a reduction.

here in lies the problem

NO ONE KNOWS...

[Scouts Honor]

They were failing to count certain payments toward the required payments. That is what is being addressed.

this statement....addresses that some loans were paid at 10% of income?

which means the payments at that time were less than they were 'supposed' to be. and these are now counted as the required payment.?

so, in other words they tried.

which is good. i like that better than just canceling i guess.

[DJT]

I say “forgive” student loans, but they continue to accrue interest, and every tax return (including standard deduction/ rebates/ credits) for the borrower is withheld until the account is paid in full… seems equitable.

[Paul158]

8 minutes ago, DJT said:

I say “forgive” student loans, but they continue to accrue interest, and every tax return (including standard deduction/ rebates/ credits) for the borrower is withheld until the account is paid in full… seems equitable.

That could work but that won't win the election for Joe.

[DJT]

Just now, Paul158 said:

That could work but that won't win the election for Joe.

Sure it could… Joe would just have to call in a favor from China to cook up another “pandemic” and call for universal mail-in voting.

[WrestlingRasta]

I took a shot at reading through it, and I relatively suck when it comes to figuring this type of shit out.  But it seems to me that, in laymans terms, that basics of this plan is that, people are not being forgiven any of the amount they borrowed, they're going to pay back what they borrowed, many will just not being paying as much more in interest and fees as a lot of us have paid in the past.  

Can someone who does understand this, and doesn't have a defiant bias one way or the other left or right, tell me if that's in the ballpark, and explain what I'm missing?

[MPhillips]

1 minute ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Can someone who does understand this, and doesn't have a defiant bias one way or the other left or right...

Most of those folks get shot down quickly and rest won't even bother.

[Paul158]

40 minutes ago, DJT said:

Sure it could… Joe would just have to call in a favor from China to cook up another “pandemic” and call for universal mail-in voting.

You nailed it.

[Wrestleknownothing]

2 hours ago, Paul158 said:

I have a question for you. In the upcoming election I decide to pay 1 million voters 1000 dollars each to vote for a certain candidate in order to win the election. We have the election and the candidate wins. Did I do anything improper? If so  what is it. As for your question about taxes. Taxes are derived from money I EARNED from WORKING. If the government wants to lower my taxes and give me back some of MY MONEY I'm fine with that. I have paid in Taxes for 54 years. Forgiveness of student loans is taking my tax money to pay for someone else's debt. I paid back my student debt. All of My 5 children have paid back their student debt. 

Given that the law is clear on your debt with respect to taxes, it really is not your money even if it is tied to your employment. You may have earned it in a very real sense, but in doing so your incur a liability that you can not shake, so do not act like you are somehow more virtuous accepting a tax cut than a student is enforcing their rights according to the contract they signed.

A friend of mine use to say his kids' idea of sharing is "you give to me". You sound like one of his kids when you claim that a tax cut is getting your money back.

[mspart]

40 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

I took a shot at reading through it, and I relatively suck when it comes to figuring this type of shit out.  But it seems to me that, in laymans terms, that basics of this plan is that, people are not being forgiven any of the amount they borrowed, they're going to pay back what they borrowed, many will just not being paying as much more in interest and fees as a lot of us have paid in the past.  

Can someone who does understand this, and doesn't have a defiant bias one way or the other left or right, tell me if that's in the ballpark, and explain what I'm missing?

I don't understand this.   They will not get their loan forgiven but the interest will?   So that is $48k of interest for each borrower?   That's a huge average loan.   I'm guessing with payouts averaging $48k, this is not just covering interest but principle  as well. 

That said, with a 30 year loan you can pay 2-3 times the principle in interest.   So maybe it is not a stretch but anyone taking out that kind of loan for a non paying degree doesn't deserve to have loan forgiveness.   Those that did get a paying degree, same.  Just my thoughts on this.  

mspart

[mspart]

2 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

A friend of mine use to say his kids' idea of sharing is "you give to me". You sound like one of his kids when you claim that a tax cut is getting your money back.

Isn't that the definition of a tax cut?   I pay x now, but I will be paying x-y  then.   So I get to keep my y amount of money.   I'm not clear on what you are saying here.   Of course it is my money if I get reduced rate or a credit that is not more than what I paid in.   That is the definition of a tax cut. 

mspart

[Wrestleknownothing]

2 hours ago, mspart said:

So what are you saying?   You made a statement of what the issue was that is driving this latest effort.   Reports are that $39 billion goes to 804k borrowers for this latest effort.   That is over 48K per borrower on average.   That is what will be paid out for the items you described.    Not sure how that is not what you are saying when you said it.   Those are the numbers for what your definitive statement below describes.  It seems to me like that is what you were saying.  I'm not sure how to interpret it otherwise. 

mspart

I made two points that were a direct counter to claims that bigbrog made. The first point is that this is not at all like what the Supreme Court struck down. This is an existing program that was being poorly administered. The Biden administration is fixing the administration of the program and correcting past mistakes in the process. His second claim is that students should not be able to get out of the contracts they willingly signed. And in this case the exact opposite has been happening. The federal government has not lived up to the contract that they both designed and signed. So he was wrong on both counts.

You then asked a related question about the accounting that lead to the headline numbers. My point there was to never trust any number any politician quotes you ever. And that is a bipartisan statement. So when you asked me if I was saying that every person covered by the error correction was going to get X, my reply is that I absolutely was not saying that because of my distrust of the numbers. And when you think about incentives, it is in Biden's best interest to inflate that number.

[WrestlingRasta]

19 minutes ago, mspart said:

I don't understand this.   They will not get their loan forgiven but the interest will?   So that is $48k of interest for each borrower?   That's a huge average loan.   I'm guessing with payouts averaging $48k, this is not just covering interest but principle  as well. 

That said, with a 30 year loan you can pay 2-3 times the principle in interest.   So maybe it is not a stretch but anyone taking out that kind of loan for a non paying degree doesn't deserve to have loan forgiveness.   Those that did get a paying degree, same.  Just my thoughts on this.  

mspart

Appreciate the effort, but…