Ok, I made that name up.

http://consumerist.com/2012/12/04/new-bi...-paycheck/

Haven't they been able to garner wages for outstanding student loan debt for awhile now?

Sure they have, but it has always been for those in default.

The whole college system is so messed up. While I love college sports, I could be a billionaire and I'd never directly donate any money to a college.

Student loans don't go away in bankruptcy. That means, there's much less risk for whomever is issuing them (which means they don't care if the major is actually going to pay off or not). The schools meanwhile benefit tremendously from all the loans as it gives them a lot more ability to raise tuition and fees (which allows them to add money where they want it or avoid painful decision of their own like questions over professors salaries, benefits, etc) and simply let more loans cover the difference.

We let and encourage kids get into all of this debt and a very large number don't really get better jobs because of it. I can't tell you how many people I know who have graduated college and are doing the same thing they were in it or something they could have done before. Meanwhile if they get in over their head in debt (and the way prices are going and with the ease of loans a lot do), they can't get out of it in the way people can get out of any other kind of debt.

Debt needs to be a two way street with a risk to both the borrower and the lender. The borrower risks a terrible credit rating and inability to borrow in the future. The lender risks losing some of the money they lent out. Removing the 2nd part of that calculation (something that exists with every other form of debt) is terrible for the student. In short, the problem in the system isn't too few loans, it's dispensing them far too easily.

(12-07-2012 12:35 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  The whole college system is so messed up. While I love college sports, I could be a billionaire and I'd never directly donate any money to a college.

Student loans don't go away in bankruptcy. That means, there's much less risk for whomever is issuing them (which means they don't care if the major is actually going to pay off or not). The schools meanwhile benefit tremendously from all the loans as it gives them a lot more ability to raise tuition and fees (which allows them to add money where they want it or avoid painful decision of their own like questions over professors salaries, benefits, etc) and simply let more loans cover the difference.

We let and encourage kids get into all of this debt and a very large number don't really get better jobs because of it. I can't tell you how many people I know who have graduated college and are doing the same thing they were in it or something they could have done before. Meanwhile if they get in over their head in debt (and the way prices are going and with the ease of loans a lot do), they can't get out of it in the way people can get out of any other kind of debt.

Debt needs to be a two way street with a risk to both the borrower and the lender. The borrower risks a terrible credit rating and inability to borrow in the future. The lender risks losing some of the money they lent out. Removing the 2nd part of that calculation (something that exists with every other form of debt) is terrible for the student. In short, the problem in the system isn't too few loans, it's dispensing them far too easily.

All key points.

You might like this

http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2012/11/h...tamps.html

The two way street thing is key.

It's plain skeevy for banks to give mortgages to people they can not afford, only to offload the debt to someone else and hope for a bailout. In the same way the fact that Colleges get the loan, spend it, and have no further care if it ruins the kid is skeevy.