The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

In October, they temporarily modified loan forgiveness laws where they were too rigid.  The plan was supposed to help half a million people get 2+ years closer to paying off their loans, but for a few thousand, would complete them within the year.

My family was one of the few thousand.  We have no more student loans.

We are normal, working-class people.  My wife is a teacher and has been paying toward those loans since her career started with essentially no movement.  There were some unrealistic, rigid, and senseless technicalities that were used against her that were corrected from this order.

So, this is a big success story for us.  It doesn't really "give" us money, but it unsaddles us from this mountain that we were never going to climb.

Very nice, good to hear. Those loans can paralyze you financially.

I agree.   From what I've seen and read, student loan debt is some of the most toxic debt you can get yourself into.   It can't be discharged in a bankruptcy and will follow you to your grave if left unpaid.   

Thankfully, I had no student loans because I went to trade school for half the time when I was in 11th and 12th grade and went to work in said trade a few months after I graduated.  My wife graduated with minimal student debt thanks to a scholarship and paid it off quickly by going without certain things and making it a top priority. 

It can't be discharged through bankruptcy anymore because the government started to back the loans I believe in the 2000s. That's why tuition has skyrocketed and the loans are even more crippling. They pray on 18 year olds. No bank would give a teenager a house loan and they can just take back the house if they default, but they have no problems giving them $150k for any degree, useful or worthless because they know there is no risk, they will get paid.

I hadn't heard this but it sounds like it's heading in the right direction. I have several issues with student loans but I don't think they should be charged to people who didn't take them out. I also have issue with giving a kid 100,000 for a degree that they may or may not use while a kid who wants to start a business or do an apprenticehsip cannot get loan for 10k.

No offense to anyone here. But I disagree entirely. If you agree to borrow money, you should pay that money back.

Actually, they've been undischargable since the 1970s.   And the reason is a simple one which you partially stated.   You lend someone money for a house or a car, you can repossess it.  You can't repossess knowledge.   Once they find a way to repossess knowledge, they will allow student loans to be included in a bankruptcy filing.   That light device in Men In Black comes to mind.

I didn't take it as not paying it back. The way Dave put it I thought they just gave them better terms.

You cannot discharge student loan debt in bankruptcy because if you could, there would be no reason not to.  Bankruptcy (and a temporarily wrecked credit score) would simply be an expected component of higher education, just like student loans are now.

As we found out during the foreclosure crisis, you can, in fact, put a dollar value on your credit rating (for the next 7 years)... and that value is less than the hundreds of thousands of dollars that people would have owed on underwater houses, and still do owe on student loans.

I was under the impression that it was the same thing I read about a few months ago. Using government money toward paying down or paying off people's student loans. I also have a goofy pothead friend who keeps rambling about it after a few drinks. I have to remind him that he spent the money on a useless degree and now it's his responsibility to pay it back.

How would you feel about such a program if, instead of the government paying off student loans, the feds simply gave student debtors a tax break that was precisely equivalent to [the amount of their yearly student loan payments, over the length of time they will be required to pay them]?

You don't strike me as the kind of person who opposes tax breaks, especially for corporations or business owners.

Sure, that's fine. As long as you give everyone else a tax credit that averages what you're giving people who voluntarily took out loans. That means every individual that files a tax return.

And while we're at it, why don't we just pay off everyone's credit cards also? I mean the terms aren't very good, they're marketed to young adults, and they take many many years to pay off making the minimum payment.

At the end of the day, if you agreed to pay something back, just pay it back. No one put a gun to your head and made you sign a legally binding loan agreement. Or maybe just pay for college out of your own pocket instead.

???

Right now, I don't get the same handout tax credits that farmers, corporations, and other business interests get.  So why should a tax credit for student debtors also apply to people who didn't take out student loans?  Why can't they get the same sweetheart tax subsidies available to big business?  Just like every student debtor willingly signed their name to the loan, every business in this country is well aware that tax law can change at any time and no one owes you a subsidy.

So it seems to me that if we can have an entrenched system of tax credit welfare for businesses (without giving the same credits to every individual that files a tax return), we can do the same for student debtors.

Can I safely assume that you don't agree with tax credits to farmers, corporations, and business interests?

To clarify, we didn't get better terms.  In our case, the remainder of the debt was wiped.

As an incentive to become a teacher, where your pay isn't good, as compared to the education level required for the position, there are programs to expunge debt if you teach for x amount of years or in certain subject areas or whatever.  It's also to prevent teachers from leaving for the private sector where the pay is better.

But that program had weird clauses....like, you had to pay for 10 years -- but it had to be 10 consecutive years with unrealistically strict terms.  My wife got promoted to the district level (still working for the school) but since she was out of the classroom, that stopped the consecutive payments streak within the classroom....not really the spirit of the rule.  Another thing has to do with teaching certificates.  Sometimes (I don't know the exact details), but your teaching certificate will expire and you have to be rehired -- and sometimes you'll get hired on a temporary certificate...something like that.  But that isn't considered part of the 10 years.

Anyway, we kinda got screwed on those things, because...frankly, they were bullshit technicalities, which the federal government recognized and corrected.  So, they retroactively credited all of the payments to the 10 year program thing and resolved the debt.

I don't normally share such intimate details online, especially about my finances.  However, I just think that we're so quick to complain about government and programs and who gets helped and all this stuff seems so nebulous.  But finally my train came in and it will matter a whole lot to my family.

I'm glad you got this 800 pound elephant off your back.   Debt can be crippling if you're not careful, even student loan debt.   I, personally, try to avoid debt whenever possible.  My wife and I have a couple of rewards credit cards that we pay all our monthly bills with, but we make it a point to slam them each month so that they have a zero balance.  When we need to make a big purchase, we find a good deal but one that also involves zero interest for a certain period of time.

As for the story involving your wife, I agree, it was technicalities that shouldn't have been in the way to begin with.   If she was still working for the school system, then she should've reaped the benefits.   They are doing that because of the shortage of teachers in Florida and in the nation.   They are also letting people with no experience teach public school as long as they have at least a bachelors degree and can pass a couple of exams.  My wife had an advertising degree and went into teaching this year after subbing last year.

In theory, I agree. However, as someone who just turnd 40, kids these days are idiots and shouldn't even be allowed internet access until they reach 25. They have no right to be making life altering decisions at 18. They just can't grasp the concept of how much the debt really means and what it would take to pay it off. Banks know this and pray on them.

If I made $40k a year, no bank would give me a $50k loan. So, why does a kid whose degree maxes out at $50k a year get over $100k?

For the record, I am not in favor of clearing out all student loans as to do so without fixing the prices of colleges and lending practices would be like having someone file for bankruptcy but keep their credit cards. I don't like how we are creating debt slaves who are doomed at 21 but I also don't have a lot of great solutions to it either other than public executions for the lenders and deans of colleges.

For it to be equivalent the person getting the tax breaks would have to generate enough business, jobs, etc. so that the taxes were made up in other areas. Corporate tax breaks are not just gifts. They have to generate more than what's given  ... at least on paper.

This was the Federal government and not the state? I thought that schools and teachers fall under state programs.

There are federal TEACH grant programs

It depends.  Some I agree with, some I don't.

The person getting the tax break is receiving the money to spend elsewhere, just like a corporation would.  Put another way: if I receive a $50k tax break on my student loans and now I can afford to go buy that $50k Tesla I wanted, isn't that "generating as much business" as if Tesla received a $50k tax break?

Corporate tax subsidies are welfare, just like any other welfare program.  There are qualifying conditions and if you meet them, the government gives you money.

The student loans are Federally provided.  And this particular change to the temporary wording came through Federal Executive Order and lasts one year.

The needs of the State might play into subject area or location or whatever...that didn't apply to us.  Ours was based on longevity -- 10 years.