student loans

[Butthead]

i am a bit awed that this has not been brought up yet. for those of you that love the new h/care bill, it also provides for a complete takeover of the student loan systems. the government no longer guarantees the loans, they also provide and service them. horrible in my opinion. you?

[eersfanpilot]

In a nutshell it makes all future student loans direct loans. It also makes all future student loans (and students who take such loans) eligible for the Income Based Repayment program which was created by this administration. This is huge! Take it from someone like me who has nothing but private loans. After 2005 when the previous administration changed the bankruptcy laws, having private loans sucks! The borrower no longer has options or any leverage to get a fair repayment schedule. Mine personally skyrocketed after 2005 to $1800 a month! I was told by AES and KeyBank to pay what they asked, or default. I requested an income sensitive payment, deferments, and forbearance's only to be denied all of them by the lenders. Why? They said they are now (post 2005 bankruptcy law change) "optional services" and they decided not to award them to me. Layman's terms, pay or we will force you into default.

I think the new changes for student loans are a step in the right direction. Taking out the middle man is a good thing. They can still service the loans and make money, they just have to follow the rules now when they work. There is still MAJOR reform needed on the student loan crisis that is going unnoticed in the US today, but at least now we are taking baby steps toward that crisis.

[Ablev1]

Don't like it, but don't fully understand it. Does this mean private parties cannot offer student loans? If so, hate it. If this means the gov't won't back loans as in the past, but will offer them directly I am OK with it. From what I understand I do not like the idea that after 20 years you no longer have to pay.

[Butthead]

you seem to believe the federal government will be easier to deal with (or more forgiving). i doubt either will materialize.


In a nutshell it makes all future student loans direct loans. It also makes all future student loans (and students who take such loans) eligible for the Income Based Repayment program which was created by this administration. This is huge! Take it from someone like me who has nothing but private loans. After 2005 when the previous administration changed the bankruptcy laws, having private loans sucks! The borrower no longer has options or any leverage to get a fair repayment schedule. Mine personally skyrocketed after 2005 to $1800 a month! I was told by AES and KeyBank to pay what they asked, or default. I requested an income sensitive payment, deferments, and forbearance's only to be denied all of them by the lenders. Why? They said they are now (post 2005 bankruptcy law change) "optional services" and they decided not to award them to me. Layman's terms, pay or we will force you into default.

I think the new changes for student loans are a step in the right direction. Taking out the middle man is a good thing. They can still service the loans and make money, they just have to follow the rules now when they work. There is still MAJOR reform needed on the student loan crisis that is going unnoticed in the US today, but at least now we are taking baby steps toward that crisis.

[Butthead]

private parties can still offer loans but they will not be guaranteed by the g'ment.


Don't like it, but don't fully understand it. Does this mean private parties cannot offer student loans? If so, hate it. If this means the gov't won't back loans as in the past, but will offer them directly I am OK with it. From what I understand I do not like the idea that after 20 years you no longer have to pay.

[Ablev1]

I just don't like the idea that the gov't (taxpayers) are going to end up picking up the remaining balances of loans over 20 years and in some cases 10.

[Troutman]

^^^^^I need to slow down my repayment then ^^^^

[MrBlah]

I don't understand why the government ever guaranteed loans provided by private "for profit banks" in the first place, student loans cant even be discharged in bankruptcy, and the IRS collects for them.

so yes, I support removing the private bank from the equation

[eersfanpilot]

I just don't like the idea that the gov't (taxpayers) are going to end up picking up the remaining balances of loans over 20 years and in some cases 10.

"The Congressional Budget Office said the direct-lending approach would save taxpayers about $61 billion over 10 years. Roughly $40 billion of the savings will be redirected to higher education." - NY Times

Butthead. Just based on my personal experience so far dealing with private lenders vs gov't lenders (before i re-consolidated and lost my gov't issues loans) the gov't was easier and more forgiving to deal with. Like I said earlier, the major positive about this change is the fact that all loans taken by the student from the gov't will be IBR eligible. That is HUGE for the student when it comes time to repay. Repayments will be capped at 10% of the students income. That is a big help.

[eersfanpilot]

I don't understand why the government ever guaranteed loans provided by private "for profit banks" in the first place, student loans cant even be discharged in bankruptcy, and the IRS collects for them.

so yes, I support removing the private bank from the equation

Exactly. It opens the door and rewards predatory lending practices.

[SlimDizzleATL]

I just don't like the idea that the gov't (taxpayers) are going to end up picking up the remaining balances of loans over 20 years and in some cases 10.

Exactly. Someone defaults, we pick up the bill as taxpayers. I hate banks, but I hate the govt dipping into everything. I generally dont complain, but this is rubbing me the wrong way. From what I understand, private companies service the loans, but the government is the money.

P.s. - Coming from someone with some out-of-state loans from a big school.

[Butthead]

what is said student has no income?


"The Congressional Budget Office said the direct-lending approach would save taxpayers about $61 billion over 10 years. Roughly $40 billion of the savings will be redirected to higher education." - NY Times

Butthead. Just based on my personal experience so far dealing with private lenders vs gov't lenders (before i re-consolidated and lost my gov't issues loans) the gov't was easier and more forgiving to deal with. Like I said earlier, the major positive about this change is the fact that all loans taken by the student from the gov't will be IBR eligible. That is HUGE for the student when it comes time to repay. Repayments will be capped at 10% of the students income. That is a big help.

[Butthead]

the CBO said the new h/care bill will save money too. and we all know that is BS.

how can the government taking over the entire process save the taxpayor money?


"The Congressional Budget Office said the direct-lending approach would save taxpayers about $61 billion over 10 years. Roughly $40 billion of the savings will be redirected to higher education." - NY Times

Butthead. Just based on my personal experience so far dealing with private lenders vs gov't lenders (before i re-consolidated and lost my gov't issues loans) the gov't was easier and more forgiving to deal with. Like I said earlier, the major positive about this change is the fact that all loans taken by the student from the gov't will be IBR eligible. That is HUGE for the student when it comes time to repay. Repayments will be capped at 10% of the students income. That is a big help.

[MrBlah]

where does it say capped at 10 % and 20 or 10 years?

[eersfanpilot]

what is said student has no income?

There will always be exceptions to every situation. I think this would be an exception and not the norm. The services such as forbearance and deferments are still in place and issued from the gov't.


where does it say capped at 10 % and 20 or 10 years?

The IBR program was passed last year and took effect around June/July. Here is why I mentioned the 10%, it does not come from the current legislation that was just recently passed with the Health Care Reform.

http://www.ibrinfo.org/what.vp.html
"For most eligible borrowers, IBR loan payments will be less than 10 percent of their income - and even smaller for borrowers with low earnings. IBR will also forgive remaining debt, if any, after 25 years of qualifying payments. "

[Butthead]

so if i cannot pay you in 20-25 years, i don't have to pay. well, i am sure the banks would have loved that deal.

so again, the taxpayor is paying for screw-ups.

[eersfanpilot]

There are two things that I personally have no issues with contributing part of my taxes for.

1. An educated America. Personally, I think education should be available and free. (Don't get me wrong, rules need to be in place to ensure the system is not abused, another topic, another time.)

2. A healthy America. I can't say I am against the new Health Care reform that was passed. I have had both Medicare style insurance and my current Blue Cross Blue Shield insurance. Personally, my state insurance I had in WV when I was in college was Much better. I think it should be a civil right to get the medical treatment one needs.

Without a healthy and educated country, we have no future.

[eersfanpilot]

so if i cannot pay you in 20-25 years, i don't have to pay. well, i am sure the banks would have loved that deal.

so again, the taxpayor is paying for screw-ups.

You are misreading this or misunderstanding this one of the two? If you do not pay across your 25 years, you will still have to pay. Loan forgiveness if only after 25 years of "Qualifying PAYMENTS". After 25 years of deferments, (for example) if you still have not paid, you would not be forgiven. The loans are still your responsibility.

[Spicoli]

It's called College for Everyone.

[Karl Hungus]

Butthead's list is

1. Killing people who don't love Jesus.
2. Keeping dopeheads in prison.

[impalanar]

Butthead's list is

1. Killing people who don't love Jesus.
2. Keeping dopeheads in prison.

Well, that was completely random.

[Wheedle]

Just what the F*#$ does that have to do with healthcare???

[Butthead]

well, that's all peachy. but me thinks national security comes way before those two cost choices. as far as education is concerned, K-12 has and always will be free. that is more education than many can handle. the high schools are do dumbed down that they are like middle school from my parents generation. nearly 50% of those even going to college do not finish. and many of those in college do not belong there. the government does not need to be in the business of deciding who should go to college and who should not. the free market works fine. (other than the fact, that like healtcare, noone writes a check anymore, except the student loan office, and therefore there are absolutely no checks and balances on costs or attempts at cost containment.)

you will have to further explain why your WV insurance was better than BCBS. i have had BCBS for years and other than the fact that i have had to argue with them a few times over claims, they have treated me well. my wife went to WVU and according to her the state of WV is certainly not know for world class healthcare.


There are two things that I personally have no issues with contributing part of my taxes for.

1. An educated America. Personally, I think education should be available and free. (Don't get me wrong, rules need to be in place to ensure the system is not abused, another topic, another time.)

2. A healthy America. I can't say I am against the new Health Care reform that was passed. I have had both Medicare style insurance and my current Blue Cross Blue Shield insurance. Personally, my state insurance I had in WV when I was in college was Much better. I think it should be a civil right to get the medical treatment one needs.

Without a healthy and educated country, we have no future.

[Butthead]

absolutely nothing.


Just what the F*#$ does that have to do with healthcare???

[BUD]

There are two things that I personally have no issues with contributing part of my taxes for.

1. An educated America. Personally, I think education should be available and free. (Don't get me wrong, rules need to be in place to ensure the system is not abused, another topic, another time.)

2. A healthy America. I can't say I am against the new Health Care reform that was passed. I have had both Medicare style insurance and my current Blue Cross Blue Shield insurance. Personally, my state insurance I had in WV when I was in college was Much better. I think it should be a civil right to get the medical treatment one needs.

Without a healthy and educated country, we have no future.

The Healthcare bill has NOTHING to do with improving healthcare and EVERYTHING to do with CONTROL. You have bought into a false premise.

[Karl Hungus]

well, that's all peachy. but me thinks national security comes way before those two cost choices. as far as education is concerned, K-12 has and always will be free. that is more education than many can handle. the high schools are do dumbed down that they are like middle school from my parents generation. nearly 50% of those even going to college do not finish. and many of those in college do not belong there. the government does not need to be in the business of deciding who should go to college and who should not. the free market works fine. (other than the fact, that like healtcare, noone writes a check anymore, except the student loan office, and therefore there are absolutely no checks and balances on costs or attempts at cost containment.)


You say national security, I say killing people who don't love Jesus. Same thing.

About the college thing, I agree with you. No one pays as they go anymore. Same thing with healthcare. We just pay the copayment and don't think about the real cost. We wouldn't make a lot of the decisions we do if we were feeling it in the wallet more immediately.

I'd like to see insurance eliminated for all but really catastrophic stuff but it ain't gonna happen. But my wife and I have been fortunate with our health so what do I know.

[MrBlah]

I'd like to see insurance eliminated for all but really catastrophic stuff but it ain't gonna happen. But my wife and I have been fortunate with our health so what do I know.

I like how it is now, YOU can do that right now, and I don't have to, I like having insurance that pays for my doctors visits

I've had 3 surgeries, each one was over 30,000 $

[Butthead]

regardless of how you feel about this issue, one of the responsibilites of the potus and the executive branch is the protection of our country and the military. military may be focusing its efforts, right now, on those who don't love Jesus, but they have killed a ton of Brits in the past that did. and if canada or mexico got frisky, they would kill them too.


You say national security, I say killing people who don't love Jesus. Same thing.

About the college thing, I agree with you. No one pays as they go anymore. Same thing with healthcare. We just pay the copayment and don't think about the real cost. We wouldn't make a lot of the decisions we do if we were feeling it in the wallet more immediately.

I'd like to see insurance eliminated for all but really catastrophic stuff but it ain't gonna happen. But my wife and I have been fortunate with our health so what do I know.