Currently, total student loan debt exceeds $1 TRILLION!!! That’s taxpayer dollars thrown down a rat hole, in many cases, for people like Moochelle and the OWS numbskulls who don’t believe that they should have to repay their student loans.
Perhaps, the first thing they should have been taught in college is that a ‘LOAN’ is borrowed money that has to be repaid.
Reducing the payment amount doesn’t get the loan repaid sooner, it only drags it out for a longer period of time. That’s the second thing these morons should have been taught with their student LOAN money!!!
[ Currently, total student loan debt exceeds $1 TRILLION!!! That’s taxpayer dollars thrown down a rat hole, in many cases, for people like Moochelle and the OWS numbskulls who don’t believe that they should have to repay their student loans. ]
I used to think i was so smart by paying off my student loans, now Obama has made me feel stuipid because I could have just waited and let the gubermint re-pay it.
NAIL ON HEAD
The first lesson they need to be taught is that a loan is just that a loan.
You sign for it, you decide to sign for it and you decide to go to college with.
Today it seems every Tom, Dick and Harry is going to college and taking liberal art degrees.
You borrow, you pay back, hell even my youngest at aged 8 knows this.
Actually there is a student loan program that charges a percentage of future earnings; this may be it.
Now the relevant question is, “Does charging 10% of discretionary income rather than 15% actually repay the loan? Surely there is a percentage of discretionary income below which the loan does not get repaid.
IF this is the program in question, it depends on how much graduates are actually earning, and how “discretionary” income is computed.
Apparently this is not the fraction-of-income repayment scheme. So you’re right — it is a worse deal for the borrowers over the long run.