Shared publicly  - 
 
"Congress needs to keep interest rates on student loans from doubling, and they need to do it now." -President Obama in his Weekly Address #DontDoubleMyRate
148
21
Chris Sherbak's profile photoZhe Xu's profile photoMartin Lichtblau's profile photoCassidy Larsen's profile photo
101 comments
 
"Thou shall not lend upon usury to thy brother." Deuteronomy 23:19
Translate
吴斌
 
hello Obama.您扔过皮鞋吗?在我们国家您上午扔的皮鞋下午就做成酸奶和果冻吃到你肚子里。求美国派B2来轰炸我国无良的企业。
Translate
 
The only way to lower tuition costs is to get rid of student loans and grants. Colleges charge more because they know they can.
 
Take a look at Germany.
Education needs to be in reach for everyone!
 
+Ben Anderson Grants are free - keep those. Loans are only bad because they come with compounding "interest." Outlaw usury and there wouldn't be this problem.
 
+John Lilly Grants aren't free. We as American citizens have to pay for them. And their existence, not necessarily their use, encourages colleges to charge higher tuition.
 
Free, as in, don't have to be paid back. Of course the money comes from somewhere, but then we have to digress into the whole meaning of fiat currency.
 
Oh- THOSE LOANS- Totally forgot about those things. They still around? Gotta go check the mail.
 
I have figured out that I'll make the last payment ($525 a month) on my student loans about 4-5 months after I turn 65. Now THAT is depressing. And I owe a fraction of what some students coming out of college today owe.
 
That is awfully idealistic +Ben Anderson , and I agree with your basic principle, but all these problems are enmeshed with one another. Its like code - one misplaced dot or slash and nothing works.

Would you say you're a proponent of free public education all the way through college? If so, where would all that "free" money come from?
 
I think there should be some control (? encouragement?) on the spiraling cost of college. As long as the feds back low-cost loans, there's very little incentive for Colleges and Universities to keep their tuitions and fees down.
 
Sir, Obama,can we the poor little flatterer have a moment from Ur valuable eye sight to a theory that If implemented, the Earth will be turned into heaven?That makes U The next President of USA?There we found a golden mine in the infant country BANGLADESH?

If we cant, then pls, wish U a Good Morning.Bye.
 
+John Lilly Absolutely not. In fact, I'm a huge proponent of private schools. I understand that not all parents can afford to send their children to private schools, which is why I support a school voucher system. Ultimately, the free market decides which schools perform well and which do not.

I understand that there's no such thing as "free money," which is exactly why I am against grants; they represent a government loan that is being paid back by all Americans, including the person who used the grant in the first place. Maybe if the American government didn't rape us of our income, we could afford to pay for our own higher education, healthcare, etc. by ourselves, under our own steam. Then those of us who work hard for every penny wouldn't have to work even harder to hold others' heads above water because they're lazy and don't want to swim anymore.

I understand that our economy isn't in great shape, and lots of people who are willing to work can't find jobs right now. Rather than treating the symptoms and causing more problems as a result, we should look at why the economy is down and fix those issues, and then unemployment will fix itself. Once people have a means of making money, they can afford healthcare and education costs, which means that the government won't need to pay for them anymore, which means lower taxes. But none of this can happen until we lower taxes. And that can't happen until we cut social programs necessitated by these higher taxes.
 
The Free Money would come from a 95% tax on inheritance above 100 million. It would help stop the inequality gap and and put a check on the growth of the new Trust Fund Billionaires. I don't begrudge a man keeping what is rightfully his, but Most Billionaires do not acquire their money through hard work OR honesty. They are either born into relative wealth or created giant pyramid schemes and got out in time. That is a fact.
And even if they did earn Billions from honest work in their society, they owe it to the society to put those giant pools of artificial wealth back in the economy.
If they don't people will stop believing in your American Dream, and all your billions will be as useless paper.
 
+Timothy Edgin Punishing success has never worked in the history of ever. The American Dream is to be wealthy and successful, and if we punish people who achieve it, then people will stop believing in it.
 
I discussed this post with 1 person in a hangout.
 
+Ben Anderson Cool, man. We're pretty much in agreement. Although, there are thousands of private grants available that students don't have to pay back, and that aren't funded by the government via taxpayers.
 
What is Punishing about letting someone keep Everything they have honestly earned in a life time until they become worm food? One hundred Million Dollars is more than enough to "Keep the Family Afloat" and if not something is broke. The pools of wealth I am referring to can in many cases be traced all the way back to the Pre-Civil War era. We have created a New Aristocracy! And if you are not born into it your chances of reaching it are becoming slimmer and slimmer.
Ya, The American Dream.
 
It is technically imprudent to bundle these student loans because each loan's risk is unique. Raising interest rate is a strong indicator that valuation of the products is difficult. We are stealing our future by the new development of the "student" loan industry from the past 10 - 20 years.
 
+Ben Anderson The notion that the government is raping us with taxes is indefensible. But I would love to see you try. Show me how we are being raped (Keep in mind inflation.)
 
@Timothy: Couldn't agree more. We are doing something about it though in an international leadership and liberty group. Check out Oliver DeMille's book The Coming Aristocracy and Freedom Shift. We are doing it!
 
+Timothy Makin I think "rape," in this sense, is a matter of perception. Its all just ones and zeroes on computer screens.
 
i love to hear this, i am in the middle of an extensive essay covering college education, pricing, and debt that people are facing for a good education! Thank you Obama!
 
Am I a supposed to be mad at successful people for spending their OWN money the way they want or be mad at the Government for spending MY money the way they want? I am so sick of people crying because they have to earn, save and work for a living or education in this case. I guess working hard is a thing of the past, it's now a Nation of Government Intrusion and Self Entitlement!! The reason the intrest rates double is because alot of people default on their loans, because the government should pay for it!! Simply pathetic!
 
The president is absolutely right we need to ensure school loans are affordable and accessible. He understands this since he went through this himself. The president is always looking out for the people's interest I commend him for that. You have my vote president Obama.
 
"Everything we can to put higher education within reach of every American" - President Obama.

So if we're taking an "all of the above" approach, we'll do what we can to reduce the cost of higher education by allowing more competition across all avenues (online, distance learning, etc), and not just have Congress play around with the interest rate on student debt, right?
 
The most important work of the government is to work for the people, and to work for them work :)
 
A higher education should always be an option and attainable, but that doesn't mean it should be easy or any less expensive.

A loan is something that must be paid back with interest. If you don't understand that, don't sign on that line. If you can't realistically afford it, don't sign on that line. If the grace period of 6 months or more isn't enough time to get on your feet, don't sign on that line.

Everyone deserves the right to live a better life, but just because you were born into this world or born a United States citizen doesn't afford you the right to shirk your responsibility. What ever happened to a solid resolve of wanting to be self-sufficient?

A higher education is a luxury that requires that resolve... either you have it or you don't.
 
Oh? All loans have interest, do they? I shall have to tell my country which has been offering interest free student loans for years that they're doing it wrong...because, i mean we'd all be much better off if we had to work even harder whilst studying to pay back phenomenal interest as well as the loan itself, wouldn't we, +Michael Powell ?

The fact that "higher education is a luxury" as you put it, is one of the many things that is fundamentally broken about the U.S.

In your world, a person's financial state governs their ability to learn, which governs their ability to earn.

Fuck that world.

EDIT:

But then, my country does silly things like provide free health care for every man woman and child, be they a citizen or not...so, what do I know?

Making people pay to treat their body and their mind is obviously the new cool, I'll tell my local politician we're doing it all backwards here.
 
We understand your fight. Students from Québec are currently in the street standing for the right to higher education. The only difference is that our prime minister is insulting its people instead of helping it.
 
+Hayden Pearce: The country of New Zealand, going off your profile, is 67 times smaller in population than the entire country of the United States. To put that into a little more perspective, the city of Los Angeles, just the city, has 3.5 million people (that's about 75% of your entire countries' population), and the city of New York has twice the population of New Zealand.

What your countries' government has to deal with and how they deal with it is not comparable to the United States. I'm not saying the US is better or that New Zealand is worse; I'm just saying that throwing out, "my country can do it; so, why can't yours." isn't a valid argument.
 
There is nothing "successful" about inherited wealth like Bush, Romney and Trump. That is not punishing success. That is a tired propaganda point by Mr. Etch A Skecth.

Tax Rates where much higher before 1980s and the USA experienced great growth during that period. It was only after 1980 that everything got screwed up and now recovering from Bush's Depression.

The USA and its Banks have violated the Biblical principle against Usury and it is paying the price now, at least the normal people are. The criminals are fine bribing their political puppets. I like Ron Paul but his domestic policy is pathetic.

"Free Markets and De-regulation" is exactly what gave us the financial collapse. Screw "Bush Free Markets GOP style". I like Ron Paul's Foreign Policy. His domestic policy is a disaster though.
 
"ailàm theo ý mướn của cha ta ở trên trời, nấy là anh em ta,chị em và mẹ ta vậy "
Translate
 
+Thiago Leobons what a horrifically poorly informed point of view. Yes, the 70s did suffer from lowered tax rates and deregulation. Not really certain how you think that makes your point. You don't really seem to understand the powers of The Top Executive Office. See, the POTUS doesn't get to "give money away". About all he can do their, is sign a budget, for which he needs the help of a group of people we call "Congress". Even if the POTUS COULD "give away" money, what leads you to believe that he would? Certainly not the past 3+ years. I am curious why you think the work history of Obama's cabinet is important. How about that whole "productive people" business. I take your find speculative investment "productive". It is not. The only people who benefit, in any way, from speculative investments, are speculative investors. It does not benefit the rest of the economy in any way.
 
+Michael Powell perhaps your country would have more to spend on the healthcare and education of its citizens if it wasn't spending most of it fighting in and starting wars?

...just a thought.

4 million, or 400 billion, it doesn't matter. The U.S is more concerned with what is going on in other nations than fixing the obvious faults contained within it's own shores.

And that, is broken, plain and simple.
 
"When it rains it pours, they got money for war's but can't feed the poor".
- R.I.P Tupac Shakur
 
+Hayden Pearce
: I agree that the United States is more concerned with other countries' affairs over others, and while some may think it's excessive, what should you suggest we do? The US is not the only shining beacon of hope and goodwill in this world, but we do care more than most other countries and that speaks volumes.

You can't ignore foreign policy and politics, because we all live on this planet: together.

Either way, none of this has anything to do with the original topic.
 
+Thiago Leobons He wants the top margins to be taxed as much, or more than the rest of us, and I agree with him.

Flat Percentage Tax = Taking 85%of a poor person's disposable income is EXACTLY THE SAME as taking .00001% of a rich person's disposable income.

Even if that weren't true, the top margins don't get there through "hard work", they get there through the leverage of massive amounts of capital. For the most part they get there, because they start there. They get there, and then some, because they live in an economy that allows abuse of the leveraging effect of capital in so many ways. You need to drop the myth that the rich got that way through "hard work". All "lowering taxes" does is make damn certain that this country is controlled by the very few people with the most money. That is the only thing lowering top marginal taxes does. You are an idiot if you think lowering taxes will give you any more to spend. Unless you are a billionaire or a CEO, the taxes being lowered aren't yours. The are the taxes of people who will use the money they are not paying in taxes in order to leverage more money from the rest of us, which includes you.
 
yeah...and the fucking bill they pass to keep the interest rates from doubling will probably just make it so the students have to pay more to the federal government so they can line their godamned pockets more...what a fucking joke!!!
 
Th solution is not taking from the rich to give to the poor...because the poor will not use that money to get rich...
 
+Thiago Leobons Those numbers are both correct and irrelevant. Yes, they pay a large percentage of the tax revenue. The problem is that they represent a much LARGER percentage of the national income.

If you don't understand leverage, then there really isn't much point to you being involved in this conversation. You listed of the names of a bunch of people who have worked hard. That hard work is not why they are rich. They are rich for a lot of reasons, but hard work represents a pretty small portion of those reasons. Most of them are rich because of luck. Blind, stupid, luck. Right place, right time. The hard work that they have done is no harder, at all, than the hard work of many people who are on welfare, and working two jobs.

See, what makes you ill equipped to take part in these conversations, is a set of two beliefs that you possess: 1)You believe that people who are "rich", the top margin, got that way in a vacuum. That no one else played any role, in any way, in their current status. 2)That Capital (Money) = exchange of goods and services. Both of those are entirely incorrect. They are also why you believe what you believe, and I know that you are dead wrong. You see, first of all, you can't get rich without other people. You can survive, though as humans, we are not well designed to do so, at all. But you absolutely, positively, can not get rich. The problem is that no one can work as hard as you have it in your head that these people worked. Not enough hours in a day, nor power in a body. The way you get rich is by leveraging deals and exchanges so that their outcome is favorable to you. That is the only way. There are a nearly infinite number of ways to do this, but what it all boils down to is getting something, a lot of something, for some amount less than it is worth.

Now do not get me wrong, I don't ACTUALLY have a problem with that. There is no conceptual way to know the "true value" of anything, and even if there were some magical way to do so, the value of things change, so it would be somewhat pointless. In every deal, someone comes out some amount ahead. That's capitalism, and I'm OK with that. What I am NOT OK with is the idiotic assumption (demonstrably untrue) that this system is self balancing. It isn't. If it were, then no where near the percentage of our national wealth would be pooled into so very few hands. One of the few systems we have to balance that system is progressive taxation, which works out well, because it is also what fuels the function of our nation, and funds our government's execution of its contracted duties. (Duties you ignorantly do not believe it should execute).

Now here's the worst part. Your correct, but moronic numbers you just posted. Yeah, they are correct. They are the truth that your GOP overlords use to lie to your idiot self. Because while the top 1% may be paying 27% of our tax revenue, they are, in fact, paying a smaller percent tax than the rest of us. The top 400 incomes pay a smaller PERCENT TAX on their income, after standard deductions than a person making 29K. (Information care of www.irs.gov) So, I'm going to say it again, because I think you missed it the first time.

Flat Percentage Tax = Taking 85%of a poor person's disposable income is EXACTLY THE SAME as taking .00001% of a rich person's disposable income.

and we don't even have anything as good as a flat tax.
阿睿
 
迅速占领!
Translate
Translate
 
Well, you covered how little you know pretty well. Telling me we have a progressive tax system, because the base tax rates are progressive is pure ignorant. I don't care if the tax rate on the top margin is 100%, after standard deductions, they pay a smaller tax rate than anyone making 29K. That IS NOT A PROGRESSIVE TAX SYSTEM.

I'm done with you, you are right and truly indoctrinated. You are ignoring full data because you have some facts. You have just made the argument that the tax structure is progressive, regardless of what actually gets payed.
 
bence medya sizi yönetsin nasıl olsa yük olarak görüyor kürtçe yazacaktım da terörle ilgili başınızı ağrıtmıyayım sizinki can bizimkisi değil...
Translate
 
verrdadero nommbre es barak problema
 
You guys never went to college, right?
 
I will, quite literally, will be paying off my loans until I am dead. The interest on my loans has already doubled a couple of times because I defaulted due to financial difficulties. If they double again, I will not be able to pay them off. Ever. Nor will I be able to pay for rent, food or clothing. How does this help anyone?

 
Why do we have to pay for education again? Seriously, how is that good for our country? For fee education only serves to re-enforce barriers to the eradication of poverty. It's almost as if our country were controlled by German fascist billionaires whose sole goal is to destroy America. How about the WH grows a pair and stands up to the rising tide of fascism. How about you take your "walk like a Republican" cues from Eisenhower instead of Nixon and Reagan. How about telling the fascists "you no pay taxes, you no get army"? I hate having to hold my nose to vote.

On a side note, you could probably get someone who is a socialist to explain in burning detail just how not socialist our president is. I'm starting to wonder if he's even a Democrat. :(
 
Please don't change him he is a good president¡!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Zhe Xu
 
This is very good policy, the students's burdens should not be heavy.
 
I'm student +University of Minnesota and loan interest should be down lower for student. Especially for-low income student and immigration student like me.
 
Interesting to see the number of pro-private school and 'eradicate tax' viewpoints here. I was actually discussing the same thing ( the eroding of the American way of life, social safety net, education system, etc ) with my fellow Australian workmates, and we all very much agreed we were lucky we're not as foaming-at-the-mouth neo-conservative as in the US. Here, ideas that appear quite popular there, such as the idea that tax is 'stealing' and poor people only have themselves to blame ... they really don't find too many supporters. That's not to say the ruling class don't have their mouthpieces ... you can still hear this trash on talkback radio. But the general population are too smart to allow it to sink in. A product of our public education system? I'm sure its' a factor.
 
+Timothy Edgin thanks, but I don't believe you have any right to the money my father earned over his lifetime.

And how about people stop taking student loans they can't afford?
 
@Jeffrey Hamby Cool- I haven't put my trust in your fathers money anyway which is why I can afford to NOT WORK for a living like you, I have been using gold for some time and magically it buys me more than twice the things than it did 2 years ago. Soon your trust fund $$$ will be worthless lol.
 
Should the gov pay for the re-training of Gulf Coast business owners and employees? No. But if you are not going make BP oil pay for it's crime. Then yes, the gov should. I'd like grant for more education.
 
+Timothy Edgin who said I don't work for a living or that I have a trust fund?

Your assumptions led you down a strange path.
 
Not everybody has to go to college. All throughout history people have had to use their own intellect and initiative to get ahead in the world. That's still the case, and I don't think the government can afford to pay for everyone to get a college education.
 
And see here- I am strong enough to back up what I say; I don't agree to the new terms/interest and I will fight you before I pay a cent back. I will pay principal ONLY. So please quadruple your numbers in you like-it is paper wealth that YOU hold that I do not recognize as honest debt.
 
+Barbara Godin Excellent observation! OH! I forgot to mention elsewhere- I am a True Socialist (ya- I am not afraid to admit it) and I promise you Obama is no socialist-quite the opposite. He is trying to save the Rich from themselves cause he is rich too lol.
 
Well, I was arguing against inherited wealth ABOVE 100 million; if that includes you you are the definition of TRUST FUND BABY. If not, you are either a shill not sure what your debating just trying to make your quota or trailer park trash supporting the rich cause they are white too.
 
+Timothy Edgin the discussion was about taxing inheritance. I said you aren't entitled to the money my father earned (and has paid a substantial tax on already). I never said I have any of it, and he's still alive.

Hell, he may decide I'm not entitled to it either. The facts are he earned it through very hard and challenging work and by taking some risks that could have ended disastrously, and that he's paid taxes on that income.

You (with predisposed mentality) assumed immediately that I'm a trust fund baby (I'm not I can assure you) who is not working (also untrue) to support his family. I have also worked very hard and continue to do so.

Rather than assume, you should find out facts. This discredits any argument you make as you've shown yourself to be the kind of person that would rather point a finger without understanding at all what that person has/is actually doing.
 
And I disagree with usury on completely different grounds (non-Biblical). Usury implies you have some kind of upper hand allowing you to set new terms. But what you fail to realize is the moment you changed the ORIGINAL terms you gave me the excuse I was waiting for- you invalidated the debt cause I will never agree to any terms that do not include reverse interest of 6% compounded monthly now that you reneged. In other words- you have to pay me to owe you.
 
And nothing personal Jeffrey- we both have personal stakes in this so I don't aim anything at you as an individual- just debating the idea of Aristocracy is all.
 
Well, in that sense I believe people should be allowed to hold on to what they've earned honestly.
 
So you think you are better than me because you were born to a better father- I will have to disagree and work to see your system fail to prove you wrong. Like I said, gold has served me well for 10 years- the only way I can see to invalidate those pockets of inherited wealth is to stop playing with that paper money your father holds.
 
I never said I was better than anyone... Where did you get that notion?

And who said my fathers money was paper?

#captainassumption
 
Basically once I saw the market was rigged I got out lol- taking my ball to another court since the money makers keep changing the rules/interest rates.
 
IF he has over 100 million it is paper unless he is a smart man indeed.
 
Ah, this time a conditional assumption.
 
Ya- I make mistakes and admit them pretty quick when debating. And sorry if I seem confrontational- I haven't seen my wife in 4 months lol
 
All you socialists care about is money. Money, money, money. They've got it, and you want it.
 
Makes me wonder +Timothy Edgin ... How willing are you to share that gold with people that someone else deems need it more than you do?
 
To those of you with excessive loan debt, what are your degrees in? Did you attend a private university?
 
A hundred percent if you do the same lol, which neither of will do- but mine is really small, less than 3 oz. I was working 70 hours a week to save it up. I didn't swindle a billion people to get it (the fact NASDAQ still exist is an absolute joke- Bernie Madoff was one of the original founders of that pyramid scheme too but people seem to be whistling Dixie to avoid contemplating that). I am saying IF your father was part of the Pyramid scheme of the past that wealth will soon be null and void anyway-watch. So all these talks about paying debts are rhetorical anyways. It aint happening.
 
People down here been exchanging gold at some extreme premiums- the Cartels don't even want our dollars lol- they want gold or guns! Hell, they actually accept payment in commodities to avoid holding any more of our $$$. So you keep right on depending on your daddies trust fund. I'll depend on my ability to exchange services directly for goods and vice versa till some cream gets back in the pot. As it is all the trust funds sucked all the cream, milk, and the cow, right down their fat mouths. Dirty money lenders done got us in a wreck again.
 
With so many unemployed diploma-holders, how can one argue that the colleges and universities deserve any support, whatsoever, from anyone? They are in large failing to fulfill the promises they make to prospective students every year, who make the decision to go to their respective university based on what they feel is an educated process. What we are seeing is that that a diploma from each institution is worth less every year in a saturated job market while the price of that same empty diploma is annually bloated, several times more so than inflation, encouraged by none other than the government intervention that you are now representing via a congressional molestation of the free market. This is the next bubble, in the form of college diplomas, and the time has come to let it burst. You did not create this situation, but with courage and a bit of lateral thinking, you can end it while teaching Americans a valuable lesson in financial planning.
Alternate forms of education that are of real economic value will arise while these fall, and if you just trust in the power of liberty at all, America will pull through this on it's own.
 
Some people have no vision at all. Either that, or they're just plan evil. ALL children deserve the very best start to life society can offer. It's completely unfair to condemn a child to a 2nd-rate education ( or basically NO education if the 'every man for themselves' people got their way ) simply because their parents can't afford to pay for their education on the grand 'free market'. Some kids have poor parents. Some kids have abusive parents. Some kids have no parents. Some kids have rich parents. Why should society distinguish between them when providing an education? If it does, then it's not a society at all; it's just a random association of uneducated self-centred fools.
 
+Jason Talley If you look at the cost to attend college (4+ years) then you evenly understand President Obama's argument.
 
What the coward in the White House could have done...

So President Obama has, available to him without the need for 80, or 60, or 51, or 41, or 31 votes in the Senate, a public option that doesn't require any legislative involvement at all. He simply signs an executive order that allows anyone to buy into Federal health benefits at 102% of the cost for a Federal employee (this is the amount that would be owing to an ex-employee under COBRA). Small businesses and individuals simply sign up and pay their premiums and they're insured. Voila. One executive order that would take a week to draft and the public option is up and running.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/08/22/770759/-The-do-it-yourself-public-option-updated-
 
Once again, the president is singling out the middle class and dividing the country. Not to mention, colleges are governed by the state so it's not like the Federal government can do much about it. And hrmm, let's look at the reasons of why college is so expensive!?
 
Simple solution for students
Get a job/volunteer before you apply to college. Explore whatever industry you're interested in. (you might realize you don't like the industry after you've looked around for a while). Find out what qualifications they want, what kind of degree program they are looking for, find out what they pay for each qualification.
Gravitate towards the businesses that have a in-house training program or tuition reimbursement program. OJT or apprenticeships.
If you have to go to college, go to a two year school first to get the general requirements out of the way.
Keep checking with the industry to see if their standards have changed. At least every 6 months to a year.
Work 10 to 15 hours a week while you're in college. Preferably in the department of the industry you aspire to enter.

The flip side is government.
The federal government shouldn't be loaning anyone money. But that's my dream.
First, the government shouldn't be charging interest on student loans. At least they shouldn't be charging more interest than they do for the trillions they loaned the banks
Each state should have a tuition reimbursement program for students who do public service. 5 years of public service pays for a four year degree.
I'd love it if the government got rid of the loan/grant programs and replaced them with a community service program that would pay college tuition.
 
I hope you didn't take offence to my comment you act insincere...ha ha...
 
If Australia ever had oil or anything like that, we'd probably get invaded by North Vietnam and China.  Lucky we don't really..Silly isn't it, to be lucky you dont have it...
Add a comment...