What tangible asset do they have I can sell off to give their creditor something?
Their creditor would be an idiot to loan someone with no assets and no income money. BTW, I’m looking forward, not backwards.
This would be for new loans.
A corollary of this, then, is that whether they owe a debt or not is subjective.
Absolutely, they can pay it back.
The notion that they don’t have the income requires that they’ll never work.
BTW, I wouldn’t mind a legal limit on what an undergrad can borrow for school. (I cringe to say that, because it requires yet another government regulation though. 
) If a student can’t obtain a degree with a reasonable amount of debt, maybe a degree (or one at the expensive college) is not right for him/her.
1 Like
Apparently some people think it is subjective. But no, it’s not.
I would support changes in new loans. Especially those that would lead to a decrease in the horrendous accumulation of student loan debt we currently have.
But the whole tuition discussion in the current political arena is about “debt forgiveness”. CANCELLATION, as the thread title says.
Then morality must be objective.
I was thinking of the terms synonymously.
Another consideration would be to limit all lending over a certain amount only to be written the school offering the degree the student is paying for.
If the school considers its own student a safe risk (and if it considers the degree being paid for worth the income after graduation to be able to pay it off), then let the school put its own money on the line. They all have huge endowments, after all.
No, it is subjective. Can you name a morality in which not repaying a loan is moral?
I will never stand behind proposals for cancellation of current loans. Not government-imposed cancellations, anyway. If a lender wants to do that on its own accord, that’s its business choice.
1 Like
A lot of these are government loans there is no private lender. It would have nothing to do with business and would actually just be a bookkeeping entry.
I am the lender. I like the idea of taking back the degree.
I like the idea of student loans being able to declared in bankruptcy. There will be no cost control for colleges when there is a government guarentee for student loans.
I believe there were some professionals that were graduating in the 80s and would declare bankruptcy after school, which lead to this creation of loans not being included for bankruptcy. Everyone agrees that is wrong, that’s not what bankruptcy is for. At the same time there is no collateral for the lender with a degree.
I would think tougher bankruptcy restrictions or not accrediting a persons degree would help though.
Unless there is some risks for the lender I dont see college costs slowing down.
I do too. You should not be able to benefit and not owe the money. If you want that degree, you got to pay the piper.
If the government wrote the loan, then you and I are the lenders.
1 Like
We’re there. 2% cap good? 1% for trade school?
And we were morons to give kids that have no income and no assets money. It was a terrible decision.
It would’ve been better just to give them scholarships for a certain GPA and program study. This is turned out to be far more damaging in the long run.
If you want to have children, you have to have them within a certain time. You can’t wait until you’re 50 and have your finances in order.
And look at the poorest nations on Earth. They tend to have the most children. Having children is the most human thing there is.
If you can’t get your finances in order before 50 you have no business having children or getting a loan.
We aren’t talking about the poorest nations, we’re talking about the US.
What you want is irrelevant.
