2016 POTUS Election Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't think there are fake degree programs from accredited colleges. Just art degrees. Which aren't the same as shams, they just aren't really tracks for specific careers.

It's the difference between selling barren land over value, and selling the Golden Gate Bridge.

Art degrees should not receive loans (nor psychology, sociology or philosophy). Grants, such as can be made available to the best and brightest, I have no objection to. They are simply bad investments, and the average student will be much better off without the degree at the cost of the loans in the amounts currently accrued.
 
I'm not saying it's the biggest issue to be discussed but it is one issue the Townsend touched on so if it bugs you just ignore it. Did you work with student Loans?

I took out a student loan for myself and a child and I know plenty of people who have done the same.

How does working with them make you more knowledgeable?

I have more than enough working knowledge to know what the issues are.

And since we are asking questions how long since you worked in this field?
 
I don't disagree with you about the fringe college institutions but my point is that there needs to be a solution reached regarding how to be diligent about the education process before the fact not after the money has been spent. The borrowers need a disinterested source to review and determine whether the student is responsible and the school is worthwhile before it is approved.

Are you even reading what he said.

How about addressing the predatory lending aspects?
 
I took out a student loan for myself and a child and I know plenty of people who have done the same.

How does working with them make you more knowledgeable?

I have more than enough working knowledge to know what the issues are.

And since we are asking questions how long since you worked in this field?

I was talking about the default rate category. As service agents we got a multitude of reports including default and delinquency. I know how things were at one time and I would be willing to bet it has changed little.
 
Are you even reading what he said.

How about addressing the predatory lending aspects?

How about you quit being hall monitor and butting out. If Townsend has questions he can raise them. If you have answers for him address then to him. I don't need a dialogue nanny.
 
I was talking about the default rate category. As service agents we got a multitude of reports including default and delinquency. I know how things were at one time and I would be willing to bet it has changed little.

I can get default rates with a simple google search and unless default rates link with grade average or time in school they have no bearing on your argument.
 
How about you quit being hall monitor and butting out. If Townsend has questions he can raise them. If you have answers for him address then to him. I don't need a dialogue nanny.

He keeps saying the the same things and you keep ignoring it.

And then you start lecturing about something that is not relevant, you might not need a dialogue nanny but you need to at least respond to the matter at hand.
 
I can get default rates with a simple google search and unless default rates link with grade average or time in school they have no bearing on your argument.

Okay get a report that breaks down the default rates as well as the geographical areas and school types, delinquency aging as well as student profiles and then you have something you can study and confirm what I have already stated.
 
He keeps saying the the same things and you keep ignoring it.

And then you start lecturing about something that is not relevant, you might not need a dialogue nanny but you need to at least respond to the matter at hand.

He has his idea of what some of the issues are and I have mine. The fact that they are different only points out the difference in how we perceive things that need to be addressed. I am aware he thinks that most of the bad guys are the schools and lenders but I am pointing out that there is other issues as well. My solutions are different than his apparently since he thinks it is the lenders and government that should have their hands spanked. The other side of the coin is that the process of getting loans should scrutinized and evaluated by someone who is a disinterested party if there is not a responsible circumstance making the decision. I will pose the question to you: Would you have been comfortable with you child picking their school and financing program without you overview and input? There are literally thousands of students that either refused input or didn't want it and that constitutes a large part of the problem as well. Only you apparently think I am lecturing.
 
Last edited:
Okay get a report that breaks down the default rates as well as the geographical areas and school types, delinquency aging as well as student profiles and then you have something you can study and confirm what I have already stated.

You stated nothing about geographical areas, school types or delinquency aging.

Your entire argument has been screen out the people who should not be in school, while ignoring anything else.

And since you asked for some relevant data.

BN-HA712_studlo_G_20150219145135.jpg



Who’s Most Likely to Default on Student Loans?

By JOSH MITCHELL


Millions of Americans are struggling to repay their student loans. But somewhat counterintuitively, those with the smallest balances are struggling the most.

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York released research Thursday breaking down student-loan defaults based on how much debt a borrower owed upon leaving school. It divided borrowers into six categories, ranging from those who owed less than $5,000 to those who owed more than $100,000.

Defaults were most common among those with the smallest debt burdens and least common among those with the largest. (The New York Fed defines default in this case as a borrower having gone 270 days with no payment, the standard used by federal government, the primary lender in higher education.)

Among those who owed less than $5,000, one in three had defaulted at some point as of Dec. 31, 2014. Those borrowers made up 21% of the entire pool of those with debt.

The Fed researchers show that the higher the debt burden, the lower the default rate. Those with burdens above $100,000 had the lowest rate at 17.6%.

Why is that? One likely explanation, offered by the New York Fed researchers, is that many Americans with small loan balances are dropouts. They may have attended school for a semester or two without getting a degree. They often don’t end up with the decent-paying job that a college education is supposed to bring, and thus lack the income to repay their debt.

Another possibility is that low-balance borrowers attained credentials such as certificates that don’t lead to the kind of jobs and salaries that a bachelor’s degree does.

By contrast, many borrowers with large loan balances are people who graduated from master’s programs and professional schools—doctors, lawyers—who typically end up with generous salaries. (We said typical, not always. There are plenty of struggling lawyers.)

So while they have the biggest debts, they’re getting the actual returns on their investment and thus are in position to repay their loans. They also may be the most likely to enroll in income-based repayment programs, which many academics say disproportionately benefit high earners.
 
And Towsend was never really talking about loan defaults he was talking about how hard it is to repay loans once you finish school and can't find a decent job.

How does screening out help that?
 
You stated nothing about geographical areas, school types or delinquency aging.

Your entire argument has been screen out the people who should not be in school, while ignoring anything else.

And since you asked for some relevant data.

BN-HA712_studlo_G_20150219145135.jpg



Who’s Most Likely to Default on Student Loans?

By JOSH MITCHELL


Millions of Americans are struggling to repay their student loans. But somewhat counterintuitively, those with the smallest balances are struggling the most.

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York released research Thursday breaking down student-loan defaults based on how much debt a borrower owed upon leaving school. It divided borrowers into six categories, ranging from those who owed less than $5,000 to those who owed more than $100,000.

Defaults were most common among those with the smallest debt burdens and least common among those with the largest. (The New York Fed defines default in this case as a borrower having gone 270 days with no payment, the standard used by federal government, the primary lender in higher education.)

Among those who owed less than $5,000, one in three had defaulted at some point as of Dec. 31, 2014. Those borrowers made up 21% of the entire pool of those with debt.

The Fed researchers show that the higher the debt burden, the lower the default rate. Those with burdens above $100,000 had the lowest rate at 17.6%.

Why is that? One likely explanation, offered by the New York Fed researchers, is that many Americans with small loan balances are dropouts. They may have attended school for a semester or two without getting a degree. They often don’t end up with the decent-paying job that a college education is supposed to bring, and thus lack the income to repay their debt.

Another possibility is that low-balance borrowers attained credentials such as certificates that don’t lead to the kind of jobs and salaries that a bachelor’s degree does.

By contrast, many borrowers with large loan balances are people who graduated from master’s programs and professional schools—doctors, lawyers—who typically end up with generous salaries. (We said typical, not always. There are plenty of struggling lawyers.)

So while they have the biggest debts, they’re getting the actual returns on their investment and thus are in position to repay their loans. They also may be the most likely to enroll in income-based repayment programs, which many academics say disproportionately benefit high earners.

You are dense young man. I said we got these reports. That's plural then I gave you some header info of the type reports we got when I worked in this area and asked you to pull those up on Google. They are not on Google so you cannot get access to the information I used to get. That's why I can say I knew first hand. Please don't bother me with your pretend crap anymore.
 
And Towsend was never really talking about loan defaults he was talking about how hard it is to repay loans once you finish school and can't find a decent job.

How does screening out help that?

Not paying loans makes them default loans. Screening up front would eliminate a lot of the loans made to people that should not have been granted them then they wouldn't be in a bind later possibly. If this makes no sense to you then there is no need to address it with me again because I am not capable of communicating with you or you are just trying to be a horses ass and if that is the case you have succeeded. There is no solution for those who have made the debt and cannot repay it. It's done. It cannot be reversed and it will follow them to the grave so why spend time yapping about that aspect of it. Work on solutions about the future not wailing about the unchangeable past.
 
Local news started reporting that FL Gov Rick Scott is on Trumps list of VP candidates.

Worst. Ticket. Ever. I mean, literally in the history of world politics that might be the worst case scenario for any country.
 
Local news started reporting that FL Gov Rick Scott is on Trumps list of VP candidates.

Worst. Ticket. Ever. I mean, literally in the history of world politics that might be the worst case scenario for any country.

Holy shit that sucks.

But then again he could choose Sarah Palin.

Oh, that would be so fucking hilarious.
 
Local news started reporting that FL Gov Rick Scott is on Trumps list of VP candidates.

Worst. Ticket. Ever. I mean, literally in the history of world politics that might be the worst case scenario for any country.

That would be bad and could be the worst Republican ticket ever..

But Carter/Mondale, Obama/Biden, Kerry/Lieberman, Kerry/Edwards, Hillary/??? are all worse.
 
That would be bad and could be the worst Republican ticket ever..

But Carter/Mondale, Obama/Biden, Kerry/Lieberman, Kerry/Edwards, Hillary/??? are all worse.
Ya, I'm not convinced of that.

The he only good news is I don't think that combo is electable. They would literally not get one vote from any teacher in the country.
 
Ya, I'm not convinced of that.

The he only good news is I don't think that combo is electable. They would literally not get one vote from any teacher in the country.

That combo would be bad. And I can't think of a worse combo on both sides in the general election. Trump vs. Hillary with whatever VP's would rival Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin.

This country is so screwed. Personality over policy wins the day. First Obama and his empty 'hope and change' with many wanting to make history electing the first black President. Now we have entitled Hillary who thinks the position is a birthright vs. a reality TV megalomaniac with no substance.
 
Last edited:
That combo would be bad. And I can't think of a worse combo on both sides in the general election. Trump vs. Hillary with whatever VP's would rival Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin.

This country is so screwed. Personality over policy wins the day. First Obama and his empty 'hope and change' with many wanting to make history electing the first black President. Now we have entitled Hillary who thinks the position is a birthright vs. a reality TV megalomaniac with no substance.

If Trump wins this country is screwed. There is no way he can win in the general election unless tons of Democrats break ranks and vote for him. Many true Conservatives will not vote for him. If he is nominated I will abstain from voting for President and all of my Conservative friends feel the same way.
 
If Trump wins this country is screwed. There is no way he can win in the general election unless tons of Democrats break ranks and vote for him. Many true Conservatives will not vote for him. If he is nominated I will abstain from voting for President and all of my Conservative friends feel the same way.

The Republicans are as polarized against Clinton as need be. They will make sure they vote against her whoever the GOP candidate turns out to be. The election may well be a anti vote from both sides.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom