Student debt slaves – to whom?

Minor note, mostly rhetorical questions. If you find answers, I’d love to see youtube videos, articles, all sorts on the topic. It’s only gonna get bigger. Regardless of your current politics, I assume you want a final solution.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-29/student-debt-slavery-bankrolling-financiers-backs-young

What were wages like, before the welfare state took off?
How did colleges agree to do the training the capitalist pigs were supposed to do, but less efficiently?
(clue there: Third World)
Why do left and right agree keeping people dependent on them is a good thing?
Are those not voting slaves, to lend a veneer of authority to this arrangement?
The main principle of liberal democracy is that education is free.
That is it.
It used to be in GB, until Labour changed it. Yes, welfare cliff-loving anti-Labour party.
The Tory/Lib Dem coalition merely increased it.
They want to increase it again.
Maybe just reduce the places, like before? Universities want their pound of flesh.
They’ll get it. They’ll also die, in this form.
This gets to a good point – with the Civil War, Americans enslaved themselves.
To buy shit they don’t need.
Student debt is the secret vote-changer.

As we learned from Trump, it pays to promise big.

If you only deliver on part of it, that’s still more than the guy promising small fries.

Boomers destroyed the social contract here to enslave the youth, as you can see on Best Post, we’re not having it. There’s a going Galt element to the whole Gen Y. We’re waiting for big ticket prices to come down, that’s the characteristic behaviour of a Depression.
You want this economy, you like this failing economy, you can keep this economy – and retire in it.
Which is likelier as a generational bailout?
The productive with 50+ voting years or the already dying-off lazy people who refused to save?
Don’t start me on their inability to retrain.
It would be karmic to liquidate Boomer’s Medicaid/Medicare/401ks, the ill-gotten gains. That’s blood money from Gen X, all of Gen Y and now Z.
Who told them they had to do college? Who were the teachers? Who ruined savings rates?
They voted in their gibs, we never consented to that.
We’re slowly learning that fact.
We won’t ever retire, either.
It’ll be high time the old socialists learn the young have power in any economy.
Whoever refuses to retire out of their outmoded title.
“You can’t put a price on an education” yes, because in the age of the net, it’s worthless.

In the UK it could easily fold, the loan company is Limited Liability. It can just disappear.
Into the ether.
The recent “Graduate Tax” is just that. It’s free money promised, real labour taken.

Youth stolen.
Kinda like being given a free shovel to dig your own grave.

Mis-sold a dream of a healthy capitalist economy. Sue all your teachers, back down to K. EVEN the nice ones. ESPECIALLY the nice ones. A mugger would at least have the decency not to smile and they only shake you down once.

Prices also rise to compete with foreign students’ fees. In an epic move of classism, most ‘domestic’ students are too stupid to realize the anchoring effect applies and the higher ‘overseas’ fees will eventually apply to them.
Plenty of Boomers have invested in funds that bleed students, one way or another. How can you retire off companies they can’t start? Beats me. They still live in the 70s in their heads.
Repayments as a rate is abysmal, something like half depending on who you ask (prolly ~2/3 then, going by British understatement), the UK’s company will tank. The economy won’t grow without fair loans, it bleeds the very youth who should be most prosperous. With a failing economy, there’ll be no jobs to earn sufficient wages (with immigrant competition too, thanks globalization!) to pay them back. Speaking of multicultural parasitism, Muslims get loans free. Yep, no interest, because they claim to believe interest is evil. Hey, me, real Christian, too? I doubt somehow that’ll work for me down the bank. Racists.

Calling it:

We’re living in the cat bounce economy.

All these bubbles are making it boing.

They’re not even making the most money out of this, that offends me. It’d be better to tax a healthy economy than squeeze a dead one. A smart enemy I could respect.
The student loan bubble, brought to you by the ‘educated’, like your moral betters of Hollywood, has made the West a dead parrot.
I’d wager by volume alone, the current student is lower in IQ compared to a century ago, when standards were higher and only the best men and women attended. [IQ section at end]
Schools are never “free”, they intend to bleed you more dry, by boosting your (blood) productivity volume.
It is not charity, they are not a Church.
“The availability of federally guaranteed loans allowed colleges and universities to raise their prices to whatever the market would bear.”
No free-market, no capitalism. That’s hardcore Communism – all in, whatever they want to take.
Universities were respected for centuries when led by the Right. Ever notice how, when the Left gets a hold of something, they turn it to shit then run it into the ground, waiting for the Right to come back in, scrape it up and fix it before they can try to push in again? It starts with clubbing cultures, quality people are put off by them. Why are colleges mixed? Aren’t grades lower that way? If you treat the centre of learning with the disrespect of a brothel, it’ll get that reputation.
America so free, unlike your college degrees.
Why aren’t you given an annual pie chart of who exactly gets your money? % admin, % teachers etc etc.
They’re your employees, right?
And how long do you work, for free, later, to have heard the gospel of your Prof’s opinion?
Rest assured, opinion it surely is.
You’re smart enough to read a textbook solo, right?
All you need are textbooks written by the experts. There wouldn’t be enough of those fill one college, let alone teach a nation. Why are we watering down the quality of academic communication? Busywork jobs?

comment
“Higher education is a wealth transfer from indebted families to professors.”
Yep, you know who to picket next. The people constantly telling you to rebel against other people. Red herring over there! No, over there!
comment
“I was a finance major from a top university, graduated with high honors, got my CMA, etc. No one ever brought up the rather simple concept that total debt has to constantly expand else the old debt + interest can’t be repaid. I didn’t figure that out until 30 years later – in fact I just hadn’t given it any thought. It wasn’t until 2006 that I started looking at what was going on and the implication of what happens if debt starts shrinking hit me. I bring that concept up to people occasionally and almost everyone’s eyes glaze over.”
Yeah, the Bible did warn you that debt is evil. A lot.
You keep owing more and more dead people until you die.
Or your demographics die, either/or.
“I blame parents and kids too naive to realize long term debt like student loans is like a prison sentence.”
Young adults are naive. If you’re old enough to be a grandparent or more, you are not allowed that reason.
In many prisons, you don’t work.
The bankruptcy law can be un-written as an ageist incursion on human rights, if there were a sufficient voting bloc, BernHeads.
Bad laws are struck down all the time.
National debt itself is intergenerational bondage, it wouldn’t hold up under scrutiny. Why should we observe dead people’s IOUs? Are they my blood? Who is We? I didn’t sign shit.
The damning irony is how young people pay twice: first to faceless investors (get the names, start a petition) for the interest, then to national debt as the Government backed their debt.
comment
“Trump should reverse the legislation that prevents students from declaring bankruptcy to shed student loan debts. Student numbers would drop, loans would drop, and those dipshit libtard professors of stupidity and PC would soon be grovelling for handouts. Also the lenders would get their asses kicked for having made stupid loans secured only by the lifetime ownership of the slave, or debtor.”
If he does that before the next election, he would definitely win.
Debtor’s prison is now invisible, you’re still breaking rocks for someone else.
comment
“College is a scam. You can learn just about anything nowadays on the internet, we only need facilities for proper testing as verification of learned skills. [old purpose of a college] College in it’s current form only needs to exist for specific fields such as Medicine and STEM.”
MENSA has methods. MOOCs exist. Why should college employees be full time?
You could also make credit cards hard to get, the way they should be, because that’s another way to get stupid teens hooked on the drug of free money.

Talking of the illusions of opportunity. Here’s where I get shitposty.

This situation reminds me of Louise Redknapp. Bear with me on this story.

Women are cunts in one particular situation – to break up a marriage, a happy marriage. Whether it’s out of envy or because they want the husband (who needs a shoulder to cry on) doesn’t matter. (Men can do this too but it’s a female tactic based on emotional manipulation of insecurities, that might not have existed before). Men just plain gaslight, usually e.g. you’re mad if you can’t see your wife’s getting fat, why don’t you leave her? Proper response: stop looking at my wife (Biblical). Related is the guy who keeps telling you to quit your job dramatically, they are toxic and want to ruin your life for thrills. Like living vicariously but destructively.

Let’s see how this plays out in a real female case.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/4640392/louise-redknapp-marriage-jamie-redknapp-daisy-lowe-strictly-come-dancing/
“LOUISE Redknapp has revealed she quit her marriage to football star Jamie after Daisy Lowe convinced her she was still sexy.”

Chucked an apple of discord into something that was none of her business.
Planted a seed of doubt. Mean Girls tactics, as I mentioned before. Frenemies.
Homewreckers don’t need to sleep with anyone, they can split you up with words. They can be male or female.

“Louise, 42, said a turning point came when Daisy burst into her dressing room and told her: “Oh, my God look at your gorgeous body. You have to wear a sexy dress.”

See, I would’ve told her to fuck off, but most women are weak. She’s way too old to plead dumb.
It’s like the female trolling thing, they never suspect ulterior motives either.
A friend trusts you to handle your own marriage, you aren’t a child. It’s like the ex-spouse who hangs around (as a “friend”) making sure you can never move on or ruining any happiness you do find – men are dumb to that (coughs in a cloud of Musk). Classic female revenge, tactic #1. I can’t live with him, he took so much away from me, I’ll make it so he can’t live without me.

Making you needy isn’t what a healthy friend does.

3 Questions if you suspect someone is doing this to you: Why is this person lovebombing me? What plan are they seducing me into? Has life dragged since they came along?

That burst-in moment was clearly planned. Since the woman is bi, isn’t that peeping?

“The star admitted: “She kept on at me to wear something sexy and by week three, I was in a leotard and tights not feeling self-conscious at all.”
He should be able to sue for alienation of affections. Really.
These laws protected people, including the children, they exist for good reason.

The economy right now is kinda like Vapid Louise’s mindset, with the perfect life and perfect husband and great kids, chucking it all in on the word of a slag. This is why you guard acquaintances to your marriage very carefully on both sides. Protect the family unit from all “well-meaning pals”, who want your free, single time back again. This isn’t going to end well, because it’s based on a total inversion of the truth. The grass isn’t greener, unless it’s also full of shit.

IQ

http://www.apa.org/monitor/2013/03/smarter.aspx

Academics deciding academics are smarter than those pesky people who can sustain themselves.

OK no bias there.
“The average person can do creative work today that they couldn’t do in 1900.”
Yeah that must be why the artwork is so much better… see what I mean?
To say someone who doesn’t want to sit behind a desk is 2SD below mean (and so retarded) is such a huge category mistake. To claim that of someone with more skills than you is a barefaced lie.
“Do you expect these gains to continue through the 21st century?
-Who knows?”
Isn’t that your job? Whole purpose of life?
“The developing world is a different kettle of fish. They’re taking off in the way we did 100 years ago.”
With our money?
The great replacement, you trained it. Paid for it, too. Will continue to, in national debt.
“Remember that in America and Britain in 1900, the mean IQ was 70.”
I think you’ll find it was 100, we are not the standard. Saying that doesn’t make it so.
If scores should be lowered for criminals, why not everyone else, inc. students?
“Initially, it was very tough going. People had the notion that an IQ score was fixed. It just told you what the person’s IQ was — they don’t realize that it’s a relative score and that sometimes people are being compared with the previous
generation.” How do they not know this? Who else is there?
What do they think normative means?
If kids can get “genius”-label IQ scores, the system is broken. That number tells us nothing now.
I don’t care how Asian they are. Child abuse with the side of habitual caffeine IVs are no excuse.

White toddlers being declared genius also show the system is null and void as-is.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-education-tests-idUSKCN0QL0KK20150816
Good move, but ya gotta test real knowledge. No scoring on a bell curve. As we all know, grading on a curve is what Hitler would want.
Otherwise, when you import Asians, you import Asian corruption.
https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/03/how-sophisticated-test-scams-from-china-are-making-their-way-into-the-us/474474/
Knowledge is nothing in their culture (instead obedience), intellectual honesty is funny. It’s all about money and social status. Elections are rigged too. Thanks to that lovely import of Asian culture.

http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/11/psychologist-modern-colleges-are-making-kids-dumber/
Haidt FTW.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2381482/Were-children-smarter-century-ago-Test-eighth-graders-Kentucky-dated-1912-ignites-debate-kids-intelligence-today.html
Bring back rote, if you care about the children.

Learning is purely based on memory, not a singular performance. Life is not that simple.

comment
“Back then children were treated and expected to act like little adults.”
They are, there’s no such thing as a teenager. Either you have adult rights (majority) or you don’t.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/are-you-smarter-than-your-grandfather-probably-not-150402883/
“political scientist James Flynn”
Oh. That explains it. Not a scientist.
Meanwhile, in psychometrics (founded by that evil meanie Sir Galton);
https://phys.org/news/2013-05-victorian-era-people-intelligent-modern-day-counterparts.html
Unlike IQ, you can’t cheat on RT by hiring a tutor (yes, that’s cheating, it’s a resource and the other kids taking the test don’t get one).

IQ is a sound construct. What is claiming to be in colleges is a shitacular circus show.
Just like SAT cheating.

Labour wants to abolish student loans they introduced

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-tuition-fees-student-debt-angela-rayner-university-costs-jeremy-corbyn-a7831556.html

Look it up, they brought in the tuition fees.
When do they scrap the debts already on the books, if we’re all equal?
“Shadow Education Secretary Angela Rayner says she does not yet know how such a policy might be funded.”
We could try selling leprechaun gold?

http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/the-parasitic-human-bubble.html

For some damn fine reasoning on this subject.

Student loan cancellations in talks

http://moneyweek.com/merryns-blog/student-loans-why-cancelling-them-is-the-next-frontier-of-modern-monetary-policy/

It will have to be done, they simply can’t be paid. I think they’ll drop it to about 10% and insist that is paid.

on the back of an “obscure federal law” from 1994 that allows debt forgiveness if students have been “defrauded” by their colleges.”

Most courses lie about job prospects and practicality of information.

Europe is worse.

Compare these discussions to the subhuman treatment of the UK.

Where being poor after investing in a Government scheme (SLC) gets you fined. Primo logic, kemosabe.

http://www.hexjam.com/uk/news/attention-not-paying-back-your-student-loan-is-now-a-criminal-offence

And being Muslim gets you racist, special treatment with interest-FREE loans.

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/loans/2014/09/government-gives-sharia-compliant-student-finance-the-go-ahead

Student loan repayments could be £40k more

Marxists can’t do maths.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/11366155/Student-loans-the-real-cost-could-be-40000-more-than-official-estimates.html

The Government has severely underestimated the cost of funding a university degree with a student loan, a damning report has warned.

The analysis, compiled by RedSTART, an education arm of the consultancy firm Redington, claims the Government’s mathematicians have used “outdated” sums to calculate the size of repayments graduates will make on student loans taken out after 2012.

The report claims someone graduating this year on an average starting salary of £29,000, will make total student loan repayments of £62,272 over 30 years, compared to £33,346 if official numbers are used.

It also found students set to graduate this year with a starting salary of £38,000 will face the largest repayments, and can expect to repay £100,146 in total. This compares to a much smaller £55,000 estimated repayment if official assumptions are used in the calculation….

….The report has criticized the Government for calculating how much future payments will be worth in today’s money terms by using what its author describes as an “insanely high” measure of inflation, as measured by RPI, plus 2.2pc – a measure decided upon in 2010.

By assuming a higher rate of inflation, future repayments appear lower.

Instead the report argues that calculations based on the rates at which banks lend to one another would be more appropriate……

Another key reason why graduates will repay more under the new system is because the repayment period has been extended from 25 years to 30 years.

Frederick Patten, the report’s author, refutes government claims that most students will be better off under the new system, maintaining that the vast majority of students will be much worse off.

He said: “Our numbers show that the average student will be around £30,000 worse off in today’s terms from the changes. They are undeniably worse off from the changes to student finance, with people at all starting salaries experiencing a rise in the cost of the loan in today’s terms. Only those from more affluent backgrounds will be able to pay the university costs upfront and avoid the substantial interest rate charges.”

not a word about overseas students, eh?

Martin Lewis, founder of MoneySavingExpert.com, said: “It’s impossible for people to accurately work out how much student loan they will repay because it’s all based on calculations that use assumptions. The size of the initial student loan is a red herring. There are no official estimates as the government won’t build a calculator to predict this – it would get heavily criticised for spinning things if it did.”

The new student loan system was met with strong opposition from young people when it was first proposed by the Conservative Government [and Liberal Democrat] in 2010. Tens of thousands of students took to the streets in a protest organised by the National Union of Students over plans to hike tuition fees to £9000 (up from just over £3000).

However, a number of experts have warned that the new repayment terms, which impose a much higher interest rate of up to RPI plus 3pc, compared to the 1pc interest rate on loans for people who started university earlier than 2011, could prove more worrying than the fees themselves.

wow somebody understands compound

The report also claims graduates with student loans taken out before 2011 will repay more than the government’s sums suggest. [is it against terms they signed?] The calculations show someone who started university in 2011 and graduated last year on a salary of £29,000, will repay £32,496 in total. This compares to the lower amount of £22,833, if government assumptions are used instead.

Since the new student loan system was introduced, academic cost analyses have focused on the burden the new loans will place on the taxpayer, rather than on the potential cost over decades to students, according to Rowena Mason, a senior research economist at the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

RedSTART’s warning that student debt could be more expensive than expected comes at a time of uncertainty for people trying to decipher total study costs.

Unless you have to go, it isn’t worth it.
If it’s something you can do at home, forget it.

People trawling the internet for an estimate will find a range of calculators and online tools, which all throw up wildly different results.

For example, MoneySavingExpert.com’s student loan calculator shows someone who started a three year full time degree in 2012 and borrowed £45,000, would repay around £36,000 over 30 years.

But type the same details into the student loan repayment calculator on DirectGov, a website run by the Student Loans Company, and the same student will be told they will face a repayment of £93,792 over 30 years. What the website doesn’t explain is that this figure is presented in future money terms, which makes it look like a much bigger sum because inflation isn’t taken into account. If the figure was presented in today’s money terms, it would be around £54,500.

yes, that’s much better /sarc

Research by the Intergenerational Foundation, a think tank, suggests that a graduate would need to be earning more than £50,000 a year before they start to repay the capital on the loan.

you can calculate, the system works!

Co-founder of the foundation, Ashley Seager, said: “Students have been led to believe that they are signing up to cheap loans. The reality is that interest rates are not only unfairly high but interest also starts accruing from the moment a student loan agreement is signed.

Policy makers are over-burdening graduates for the next 33 years as they are forced to pay 9pc on income over £21,000 over the course of that period, plus over the course of the three years during which they are studying.” [Coalition governments, eh?]

unless it’s written off
en masse
because no chunk of graduate is getting a decent job in this economy off the bat

But a further blow could be on the way for young people if the salary level at which graduates start repaying their student loans is frozen at this level, as several senior education advisers have recommended. [inflation, uhuh]

The move would help cover university financing shortfalls at the expense of far higher repayments for graduates, which would hit everyone with a post-2012 student debt.

so it’s the University’s fault?
is this being conveyed clearly? [doubtful]

Mr Lewis claims the move would mean the Government would have “mis-sold university education to students”, and has pledged to organise a mass protest outside Parliament if politicians do decide to go ahead with it.

Which Government started it?
Oh, Labour.

As commentor Vicar’s Knickers adds;

I doubt the majority of these fees will ever be paid back, and there lies a future problem.

The impending student loan bubble, in the UK

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cardsloans/article-2326560/Debt-timebomb-85-cent-students-pay-loans.html

Basically, the excessive number of students going (thanks Labour) to a number of low-quality institutions and the changes to payments (thanks Lib Dems) mean that students can’t even pay off their own interest. <Einstein joke>

Research among his pupils confirmed widespread ignorance about the changes to the interest charges applied  to student loans taken out  from last September.

‘I asked 160 pupils what the new tuition fees cap was and they all chorused £9,000 a year,’ he says.

‘But when I asked about the rate that would be applied to these loans, not one boy could tell me what it was.’

Interest continues to be applied to the debt with the rate depending on  the size of earnings – the more they are paid, the higher the rate, subject to a maximum  of RPI plus three points.
You’re punished for paying down debt – by the people who want you to pay it off.

Take, for example, someone starting on the average national wage of £26,600. Assuming earnings growth throughout their career of  RPI plus two points and the £21,000 threshold increases in line with inflation, Clugston calculates they will never repay their loan. The £43,515 debt accumulated at university will escalate for 27 years – peaking at £78,510 – before falling slightly to £76,800 at the end of Year 30. Under current rules, the debt is then written off.

Why pay them a penny?
Foreign students go off the radar completely, never to be seen again. Why aren’t they charged with theft? Oh yeah, ‘racism’. Except in Scotland, where they don’t have to pay either. Anything. Any tuition fees. At all. Pretty sure they’re white. It’s a direct tax on the English youth.

For the £43,515 debt not to escalate, the graduate’s starting salary would have to be £51,460. For graduates on a lower starting salary, Clugston’s analysis is more worrying. At £21,000 – the threshold for loan repayments to be made – and using the same assumptions as in the previous example, Clugston calculates that the graduate’s debt will keep on escalating because the required repayments are insufficient to arrest the impact of compound interest. At the end of 30 years, the outstanding debt is £101,942.

Swallowed up by the Goverment when it’s written off.
Almost like Marxists can’t do maths.

Only those graduates among the top ten per cent of earners will come close to clearing their debt. Someone starting on £35,000 will be left with a debt of £2,245 after 30 years.

Wait, they still won’t clear it?

Clugston says: ‘David Willetts, the Universities Minister, says 60 per cent of students will repay their debts over their working lives. But  I think this is highly unlikely. Based on the reasonable assumptions I have made, the Government will be forced to write off billions of pounds of student debt per year.’

John McCabe, rector of St Mary’s Church, Byfleet, Surrey, has closely followed Clugston’s work and says the findings are devastating.

‘It’s already extremely difficult for young people to get on the housing ladder and these accelerating loans are not going to help,’ he says.

‘The regulator warned about the time-bomb of interest-only mortgages. Well these loans are another time-bomb. This  is creating a culture of living with unrepayable debt – and wasn’t it that culture that has caused so much damage to the strength of the economy?’

You mean stupid people making stupid financial decisions? Yes.
Think of it as a financial IQ test.
Any students smart enough to figure this out are doing STEM. Higher entry level pay. Or Mummy/Daddy pay. Or they’re somewhere prestigious with connections.
The waste of space arts majors who can’t do maths will spend the rest of their lives suffering to pay off the debt to the institutions they’ve been brainwashed to adore while slaving away on minimum wage. It’s karmic.