Paul wants to phase out federal student loans.

Originally posted by Evolutionsend
reply to post by TinkerHaus

 

Who pays their check? That's right, a citizen of our country, because they're cheaper.

Actually, a citizen of "our" country pays a portion of their check. As does a citizen of a number of other countries. This is called "free trade" and "global economy."

Now, the portion they are paying isn't mandatory, it's voluntary. If you want to support only American Workers then you need to purchase only items that are engineered, manufactured, marketed for, and sold in your country. If you own a Dell, HP, Asus, or any other major computer or cell phone you are part of the problem you're whining about. To emphasize: YOUR purchases are dictating where jobs go and who is getting those jobs.

Just FYI, the call center we outsourced to in India didn't save us any money. Our major reason for going there was because the call center we were utilizing in the US was performing poorly, and when their contract was close to expiration we looked into other options. India provided a highly educated group that had a history of great performance. Numbers were much better on an individual scale too. For example, less employee turnover, higher individual levels of education, better overall performance and even with complaints about "talking to some desk-jockey in India" our overall customer satisfaction grew. I won't name the company I worked for but it was a MAJOR one. One who's commercials probably annoy the crap out of you, like they do me.

Originally posted by Evolutionsend
reply to post by Fitch303

 

That may be true, but college tuition won't go down until they can no longer fill classrooms. Who's to stop the private sector from taking over student loans and charging higher interest than the government? This whole idea is a massive mistake. This kind of thing is what worries me.

Getting the feds out at least get my taxes out of bailing out my loans. If it's privatised, so be it. There was a time when you didn't NEED a degree to get a middle management position in retail--we are now getting to that point. Besides, a lot of the things you want an education on you can get educated on for free, you just won't get a piece of paper for it.

Like I mentioned in the OP, I think there are many problems involved more than just eliminating student loans.

I don't think that would automatically drive tuition costs down.

I think you have to start addressing many of the other problems before you can address the problem of student loans and related student debt.

How many students take courses with virtually no career potential and then end up owing money because they chose a dying career field, then take out more loans to pursue a different degree?

What about what the price of tuition actually includes? I remember reading an article that highlighted many of the things tuitions were put towards, from over-priced professors, paying for travel and apparel for athletic teams, to hot tubs.

I don't think just eliminating student loans would have the desired affect. There are just too many factors involved to say that eliminating student loans would drive down tuitions and make it easier for people to afford a college education.

reply to post by TinkerHaus


This is off topic, we all know how a global economy works. Let's focus on Ron Paul's great idea.

Originally posted by dreamseeker
So then a college education would be free? If not this is a terrible idea.

A "free" education will be worth about as much as you paid for it. If every single person in this country holds a college degree, those pieces of paper would become nearly worthless overnight. Guess what, the massive "working class" that built this country into what it is didn't have college degrees. Not many people did at the time.

reply to post by ThaLoccster
You're right.

At 2:50 he explains why it's not needed.

As things stand right now, the reason he doesn't have student loans cut out of his plan because OTHER THINGS that are needed in place BEFORE you can cut it out and not really hurt people. Like the cost of education needs to go down first, and other various things...

reply to post by Fitch303


It won't be free. The end of government funded student loans will mean that the bankers have one more way to rake us over the coals. Nothing will change, except our interest rates and all the things people are looking at as good, will actually be worse. Unless something stops them, there's no way that the private business sector would let that opportunity slip by them.

Unless someone can show me a law that prohibits the private business sector from cashing in on this, I'm now completely against RP for president.

He wants to end HUD? How would this not hurt people? HUD is in charge of low income housing.

Originally posted by samlf3rd
reply to post by ThaLoccster

 

Wow, I'm a college student, later Ron Paul.

So your needs override the needs of the general public?

Loans are a hole for people to get stuck in. Especially, in an economic crisis. I agree with Ron Paul and think that loan programs only hurt the people, making them debt slaves. Take a grant rather than a loan.

Republican presidential contender Ron Paul said Sunday he wants to end federal student loans, calling it a failed program that has put students $1 trillion in debt

How much debt have businesses put students into? Probably just as much I would bet.

Republicans think only wealthy people should have education- along with jobs, healthcare, retirement, vacations, etc.

If you vote republican and you aren't rich (and selfish) then you are an idiot.

reply to post by Evolutionsend


So what will happen is a type of student loan crash much like what happened with real estate. The banks will increase the interest rates and everyone will default and boom another billion dollar bail out for the banks. Does this mean suddenly credit will be an issue. Will people with poor credit be denied loans for college? I have a fraud alert on my credit because of how much fraud had happened to me. Most people have at least some inaccurate information on their credit report.

reply to post by PunchingBag80


yeah but the problem is when certian careers recquire certian degrees. Could a poor person ever become a DR if it was not for loans? I feel education should be low cost to no cost but this not the reality we live in. How much easier will it be to control people with less education?

Originally posted by dreamseeker
He wants to end HUD? How would this not hurt people? HUD is in charge of low income housing.

The HUD with complete disregard for nearby property values places these developments in the wrong demographics. Cincinnati's west side is a working class area with smaller homes but still very nice, these people worked hard to keeps neighborhoods clean and safe. Then comes the HUD building low income housing in these nice communities bringing drugs and crime with them.

Im a college student currently on federal loans. The video that was posted explains the situation perfectly. My college since freshman year (currently a junior) tuition alone has gone up over $2000 for an in state attendant. Once again its slowly going up for next year too i think they talked about another 800 per instate student. My loans are not worth as much more and i have to borrow even more money which is rediculous. I am not a fan of the government provided loans, let him take this away, and i strongly believe that he knows what hes doing when it comes to paying for college and what not. In the end being in debt with a country thats in debt with no jobs is not working very well. My dad has three friends all went through college with student loans, and two went bankrupt cause they couldnt find a well enough paying job, and one is still paying back the loans after 15 years.

reply to post by dreamseeker


Probably not. Most students will be in the boat of having no credit at all. What worries me, is what would serve as collateral for these loans? A college isn't going to want to lower tuition, and our banker pals are going to see an opportunity here. I see the potential for long term issues with his proposal right now. He doesn't seem to take into account that when he worked his way through college, the world was a fundamentally different place. He can't change the nature of the beast, especially by opening a huge door for them to take on the role of lifetime debt keepers over us.

This is just another link in the chain that is Ron Paul's plan to create a serf class in America.

Just goes to show how Ron Paul is in the pockets of big business here in America. He doesn't want the poor to be able to better themselves by education, he believes that education is only meant for the wealthy. Poor? Well, according to Ron Paul, that must be your fault for being lazy and therefore a slave, Paul obviously agrees with Aristotle that some people were just meant to be slaves and he wants to make sure they always will be slaves.

reply to post by HauntWok


How is refusing a loan which means you'll be in debt make you a slave??

reply to post by Fitch303


So where are low income people supposed to live. I get section 8 and I do not come with crimes and drugs. I don't want to live in an area like that myself. Yet the reality is I don't make enough for a market rate apartment. If these programs ended I would be homeless and so would the 46 million americans who live in poverty.
That is a complete fallacy that low income housing brings drugs and crime. When i applied for section 8 I went through 2 screenings, several background checks. I have disturbing the peace(over the telephone); civil charge; that almost disqualfied me for low income housing. So you are really telling me that people with felonies get in to public housing. No they do not! I have a friend who has a mom who killed her husband in self defense; she had a bad lawyer and was charged with voluntary man slaugter and went to jail for 15 years. She gets out early for god behavior yet the only apartments that would take her were NON section 8 apartments! I have lived in luxery apartments before that had drugs and crime. I lived in a brand new fancy apartment that had a SHOOTING! I have been to low income apartments before and they had LESS problems. It is not HUD that is the problem; they have many strict regulations. It takes months up to almost a year to even get into most income based apartments! Please take your stereotypes somewhere else!
By the way you mentioned it was a working class neigborhood. that is typically where section 8 apartments are located demographically speaking. Not everyone feels safe enough to live in the ghetto areas. Unlike current belief there are non section 8 or non low income apartments in the ghetto as well. In those areas rents are so low section is not needed. I personally believe all apartments should offer a certian percentage of low income units.

I agree with Paul why the hell should people who already have degree's and other people too busy paying their own bills have to pay for people who should be paying their own way.

Government is not responsible for your education you are.