Pages:
Author

Topic: Obama or Romney ? - page 8. (Read 21126 times)

legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1001
October 18, 2012, 11:13:40 AM
95% percentage cuts across the board, 100% tax on politicians, that is, any money you "make" by being a politician goes into the coffers and is unreachable by you.

That would change the face of government.  Then the people there would be those who want to be there for the betterment of the nation, instead of the betterment of their wallet.
Umm, no. The only people who would be there would be wealthy people who can afford to work without pay, perhaps mixed with a few conniving people who expect to make a killing in the future by brokering their contacts and influence after they leave government. The only people would wouldn't be there are the smart, honest, normal family folks just trying to make the country a better place. They couldn't afford to be there.

And... that's different from what we have today how?  Since when do we have "smart, honest, normal family folks" there today?

Those that are wealthy are probably the brightest and most capable of running for public office.  They wouldn't be there to increase their wallet size, which should weed out a lot of the miscreants we have today.

M
legendary
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1012
Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.
October 18, 2012, 11:04:31 AM
95% percentage cuts across the board, 100% tax on politicians, that is, any money you "make" by being a politician goes into the coffers and is unreachable by you.

That would change the face of government.  Then the people there would be those who want to be there for the betterment of the nation, instead of the betterment of their wallet.
Umm, no. The only people who would be there would be wealthy people who can afford to work without pay, perhaps mixed with a few conniving people who expect to make a killing in the future by brokering their contacts and influence after they leave government. The only people would wouldn't be there are the smart, honest, normal family folks just trying to make the country a better place. They couldn't afford to be there.
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005
October 18, 2012, 10:58:39 AM
I'd agree to a spending freeze + percentage cuts across the board to balance the budget. This would need to be combined with some sort of fair tax... meaning a single rate which is the same for every American. I personally don't care what that rate is but we need to end the class warfare being instigated by the liberal media and start evaluating on the basis of 'an equal share' instead of being selfish and wanting more for ourself and screw everyone else who isn't me.

Personally I think the rich and the poor both suffer from this form of greed. Otherwise there wouldn't be any traction with the 'eat the rich' crowdthink being pushed by the news outlets.

95% percentage cuts across the board, 100% tax on politicians, that is, any money you "make" by being a politician goes into the coffers and is unreachable by you.

That would change the face of government.  Then the people there would be those who want to be there for the betterment of the nation, instead of the betterment of their wallet.

M
Wouldn't that be nice!  Weren't congressmen originally unpaid?  Seems reasonable to me...

I wouldn't say it's cultural differences, but rather I suspect it's at least partly about exchange rates. The US dollar still has a lingering good perception, which props up the exchange rate over and above what would be expected from 'rational' market forces. A similar thing happens in parts of Europe where people travel across borders to work. That work may be minimum wage where they're temporarily staying, but they typically save or send money back to their family where, thanks to the exchange rate, those dollars or euros buy a lot more.

Many US people don't seem to understand (or somehow refuse to accept) that this is part of the reason why they have had such an easy life for so many decades. With endless wars and coups propping up the petro-dollar, together with "the American Dream" helping create a virtuous circle of irrational currency strength, if this situation collapses, people will have to completely re-evaluate what they thought was a fair amount of work for putting food on the table.
A fair amount of work for putting food on the table?  You mean something other than a 40+ hour workweek?  I certainly hope we don't come to the point where we have to work, on average, a longer week than 40 hours just to put food on the table
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1001
October 18, 2012, 06:03:13 AM
I'd agree to a spending freeze + percentage cuts across the board to balance the budget. This would need to be combined with some sort of fair tax... meaning a single rate which is the same for every American. I personally don't care what that rate is but we need to end the class warfare being instigated by the liberal media and start evaluating on the basis of 'an equal share' instead of being selfish and wanting more for ourself and screw everyone else who isn't me.

Personally I think the rich and the poor both suffer from this form of greed. Otherwise there wouldn't be any traction with the 'eat the rich' crowdthink being pushed by the news outlets.

95% percentage cuts across the board, 100% tax on politicians, that is, any money you "make" by being a politician goes into the coffers and is unreachable by you.

That would change the face of government.  Then the people there would be those who want to be there for the betterment of the nation, instead of the betterment of their wallet.

M
donator
Activity: 213
Merit: 100
October 18, 2012, 05:44:57 AM
legendary
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1012
Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.
October 18, 2012, 12:34:21 AM
That's just the issue.  I have excellent credit, have never had an account in default, and yet I pay the same rate as someone who has shitty credit and pays late constantly.  Lumping all students together is retarded.  We are not all equal.  My loan should be considered very low risk, but there is no market I can take it to that will asses me for what I am.  They see "student loan" and throw it in the pile with all the others.
You can certainly just take out a personal loan then rather than a student loan. You lose the benefit of the Federal guarantee but you also don't get lumped in with all the other student loans.

The unfortunate reality is that student's ability to pay is one of the biggest factors holding down the cost of higher education. A college simply cannot charge more than their students can pay or they won't have many students. Any attempt to get people more student loans or lower rates will be significantly undone by increase in the cost of higher education. That will either mean students have to pay more or the government will have to pay more, and they won't necessarily get anything additional for their money.

donator
Activity: 1731
Merit: 1008
October 18, 2012, 12:31:51 AM
Do you know of efforts made to expose how biased and irrelevant the election process has become ?
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002
October 17, 2012, 11:00:17 PM
I support feedom of movement, I would like to see the borders opened much more than they are now, and practical policies and procudures put into place for people to immigrate legally.

You don't see US states putting up border patrolls and inspection points, this freedom of movement has been a great boon to the US. Why would we not see similar benefits from having national borders unrestricted?

++

I'm glad my family immigrated when Ellis Island was open, it helped us a lot. I want others to have that same freedom. We obviously need to find ways to more productively integrate immigrants. Each person represents a tremendous potential both economically and socially. Only seeing the potential downsides to immigration seems un-american to me.

Immigration, illegal or otherwise, is only a problem when:

a) the country is getting too full
b) immigrants come for a free lunch

a isn't happening
b is happening from mexico because of government handouts.   get rid of the handouts "stealing from peter to pay paul" and you won't have this problem anymore.

M

B is irrelevant.    Yes, people have been given handouts, but Mexicans are not getting anywhere near what they put in.  They are a net positive to the economy.  We are FUCKING ourselves by encouraging hard workers to leave.  Maybe I am in an usual area (Maryland) but I have only seen Mexicans working hard on roads, picking crops and doing outdoor work.  I have seen them doing jobs that we can not fill in Maryland without them.  On the Eastern Shore we do not have enough Mexicans to pick the fields.  

They might be a net positive for the near term, but what about the future. The slave owners 200 years ago also thought it was a net positive to own black slaves, they didn't think their sons and daughters will one day be wage slaves to support a 25% unemployed black population that rely on welfare/food stamps.

racist much?

Black unemployment is not 25%.  It is not even 15%.  

For 2012 food stamps are less then 80 billion dollars (projected) , defense is 1000 to 1400 billion dollars.   And while it is silly to break down into race, the 85% employees blacks are paying taxes to support those on the food stamps.  Get over the race bullshit, that is not the problem with the budget.  

You are really out of touch with reality, actually 25% is already a generous estimate, I think it may be as high as 50%. The 13% official black unemployment figure is only for those who are "actively seeking work but can't find work". How many blacks are not actively seeking work and just live on welfare/food stamps? foodstamps is not the only program, there are also housing, medicaid, prison (55% prison population are blacks), which together cost almost a trillion and would probably erase the deficit overnight if these programs were abolished.

Btw, defense is big, but not that big. For example defense was 895B in 2011, while welfare 565B + Medicaid 275B = 840B just on the federal level, remember the states don't spend anything on defense, but do have their own state level welfare programs, that's another hundreds of billions on welfare.

I don't think you can count prisoners in your unemployment figures.  Especially for African Americans who have faced decades of racial profiling.
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1003
October 17, 2012, 10:36:33 PM
I support feedom of movement, I would like to see the borders opened much more than they are now, and practical policies and procudures put into place for people to immigrate legally.

You don't see US states putting up border patrolls and inspection points, this freedom of movement has been a great boon to the US. Why would we not see similar benefits from having national borders unrestricted?

++

I'm glad my family immigrated when Ellis Island was open, it helped us a lot. I want others to have that same freedom. We obviously need to find ways to more productively integrate immigrants. Each person represents a tremendous potential both economically and socially. Only seeing the potential downsides to immigration seems un-american to me.

Immigration, illegal or otherwise, is only a problem when:

a) the country is getting too full
b) immigrants come for a free lunch

a isn't happening
b is happening from mexico because of government handouts.   get rid of the handouts "stealing from peter to pay paul" and you won't have this problem anymore.

M

B is irrelevant.    Yes, people have been given handouts, but Mexicans are not getting anywhere near what they put in.  They are a net positive to the economy.  We are FUCKING ourselves by encouraging hard workers to leave.  Maybe I am in an usual area (Maryland) but I have only seen Mexicans working hard on roads, picking crops and doing outdoor work.  I have seen them doing jobs that we can not fill in Maryland without them.  On the Eastern Shore we do not have enough Mexicans to pick the fields.  

They might be a net positive for the near term, but what about the future. The slave owners 200 years ago also thought it was a net positive to own black slaves, they didn't think their sons and daughters will one day be wage slaves to support a 25% unemployed black population that rely on welfare/food stamps.

racist much?

Black unemployment is not 25%.  It is not even 15%.  

For 2012 food stamps are less then 80 billion dollars (projected) , defense is 1000 to 1400 billion dollars.   And while it is silly to break down into race, the 85% employees blacks are paying taxes to support those on the food stamps.  Get over the race bullshit, that is not the problem with the budget.  

You are really out of touch with reality, actually 25% is already a generous estimate, I think it may be as high as 50%. The 13% official black unemployment figure is only for those who are "actively seeking work but can't find work". How many blacks are not actively seeking work and just live on welfare/food stamps? foodstamps is not the only program, there are also housing, medicaid, prison (55% prison population are blacks), which together cost almost a trillion and would probably erase the deficit overnight if these programs were abolished.

Btw, defense is big, but not that big. For example defense was 895B in 2011, while welfare 565B + Medicaid 275B = 840B just on the federal level, remember the states don't spend anything on defense, but do have their own state level welfare programs, that's another hundreds of billions on welfare.
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005
October 17, 2012, 10:28:51 PM
If you cannot afford to pay back the student loans after you get out of college, perhaps you should reconsider taking them in the first place. (and by "you" I am not talking to you specifically, but the general you of all the people considering taking out student loans.) Many people take out student loans and then study subjects that will not help them pay back those loans. I even saw an article that says a "computer science" degree is basically worthless, companies are more interested in actual experience than a piece of paper.
Now this I definitely agree with.  I've had at least one job since I was 16, gaining experience in a variety of positions.  By the time I graduated college, I already have a position lined up with my (then) current employer in the field that I studied.  I took out plenty of student loans while I was in college, but I knew I would have the capabilities to pay them back when I graduated.

Certainly, it sucks to be in a position without a job, and I know the job market is incredibly tough for new graduates, but it's not as if they haven't had chances to gain experience and better themselves as job candidates along the way.  It's survival of the fittest, and those who screwed around in high school and college are the ones who aren't surviving.  Generally, people are just reading what they sow.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 250
October 17, 2012, 10:09:31 PM

Why would you cut taxes for the rich (or punish horribly the middle class) while you are trying to balance the budget.  The only balanced budget in recent memory came from a 39% tax rate for the upper bracket.  It is simple, we have done it before, it WORKS.

Combine the additional revenue with modest across the board cuts including defense and you can get a balanced budget.  Leave student loans as they are, as the rate is ALREADY ABOVE PRIME.  Education is a cost for a functioning society and pays dividends later.  Changes need to be made to how colleges operate and to the very high costs but that is a separate issue.  



I think you misunderstood what I was saying about taxes. My suggestion includes raising the taxes on the wealthy (by removing all the exemptions). I am not suggesting any taxes get cut, until after the budget is balanced and the debt is payed down.

Student loans are already above prime, because they are high risk, and they would be higher if not subsidized. Think about it, we are giving money to people on the hope that they will be able to earn money later. This is very different from most loans, which are given to people who demonstrate they are able to pay on those loans now.

I'd agree to a spending freeze + percentage cuts across the board to balance the budget. This would need to be combined with some sort of fair tax... meaning a single rate which is the same for every American. I personally don't care what that rate is but we need to end the class warfare being instigated by the liberal media and start evaluating on the basis of 'an equal share' instead of being selfish and wanting more for ourself and screw everyone else who isn't me.

Personally I think the rich and the poor both suffer from this form of greed. Otherwise there wouldn't be any traction with the 'eat the rich' crowdthink being pushed by the news outlets.

legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002
October 17, 2012, 10:05:23 PM

What I would like to see happen: income tax should be flattened, exemptions and credits eliminated so there is a single tax rate for all income. At the same time, the spending should be drastically cut: Close oversea military bases, increase minimum social security receiving age, sell off national parks (preferably to states to make state parks or to non-profits who will care for them), raise the interest rate on student loans, give all federal employees a 10% paycut, and whatever else can be cut. After the tax revenue rises above the spending, the surplus can be used to pay down the debt, eliminating that huge chunk of the budget that goes to debt servicing. After the debt is eliminated, taxes should be lowered (still keeping it as a flat income tax so everybody benefits from the lowering) and governemnt services can be expanded.

Why would you cut taxes for the rich (or punish horribly the middle class) while you are trying to balance the budget.  The only balanced budget in recent memory came from a 39% tax rate for the upper bracket.  It is simple, we have done it before, it WORKS.

Combine the additional revenue with modest across the board cuts including defense and you can get a balanced budget.  Leave student loans as they are, as the rate is ALREADY ABOVE PRIME.  Education is a cost for a functioning society and pays dividends later.  Changes need to be made to how colleges operate and to the very high costs but that is a separate issue.  



I think you misunderstood what I was saying about taxes. My suggestion includes raising the taxes on the wealthy (by removing all the exemptions). I am not suggesting any taxes get cut, until after the budget is balanced and the debt is payed down.

Student loans are already above prime, because they are high risk, and they would be higher if not subsidized. Think about it, we are giving money to people on the hope that they will be able to earn money later. This is very different from most loans, which are given to people who demonstrate they are able to pay on those loans now.

That's just the issue.  I have excellent credit, have never had an account in default, and yet I pay the same rate as someone who has shitty credit and pays late constantly.  Lumping all students together is retarded.  We are not all equal.  My loan should be considered very low risk, but there is no market I can take it to that will asses me for what I am.  They see "student loan" and throw it in the pile with all the others.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
October 17, 2012, 09:58:04 PM

What I would like to see happen: income tax should be flattened, exemptions and credits eliminated so there is a single tax rate for all income. At the same time, the spending should be drastically cut: Close oversea military bases, increase minimum social security receiving age, sell off national parks (preferably to states to make state parks or to non-profits who will care for them), raise the interest rate on student loans, give all federal employees a 10% paycut, and whatever else can be cut. After the tax revenue rises above the spending, the surplus can be used to pay down the debt, eliminating that huge chunk of the budget that goes to debt servicing. After the debt is eliminated, taxes should be lowered (still keeping it as a flat income tax so everybody benefits from the lowering) and governemnt services can be expanded.

Why would you cut taxes for the rich (or punish horribly the middle class) while you are trying to balance the budget.  The only balanced budget in recent memory came from a 39% tax rate for the upper bracket.  It is simple, we have done it before, it WORKS.

Combine the additional revenue with modest across the board cuts including defense and you can get a balanced budget.  Leave student loans as they are, as the rate is ALREADY ABOVE PRIME.  Education is a cost for a functioning society and pays dividends later.  Changes need to be made to how colleges operate and to the very high costs but that is a separate issue.  



I think you misunderstood what I was saying about taxes. My suggestion includes raising the taxes on the wealthy (by removing all the exemptions). I am not suggesting any taxes get cut, until after the budget is balanced and the debt is payed down.

Student loans are already above prime, because they are high risk, and they would be higher if not subsidized. Think about it, we are giving money to people on the hope that they will be able to earn money later. This is very different from most loans, which are given to people who demonstrate they are able to pay on those loans now.
legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1004
October 17, 2012, 09:46:35 PM

What I would like to see happen: income tax should be flattened, exemptions and credits eliminated so there is a single tax rate for all income. At the same time, the spending should be drastically cut: Close oversea military bases, increase minimum social security receiving age, sell off national parks (preferably to states to make state parks or to non-profits who will care for them), raise the interest rate on student loans, give all federal employees a 10% paycut, and whatever else can be cut. After the tax revenue rises above the spending, the surplus can be used to pay down the debt, eliminating that huge chunk of the budget that goes to debt servicing. After the debt is eliminated, taxes should be lowered (still keeping it as a flat income tax so everybody benefits from the lowering) and governemnt services can be expanded.

Why would you cut taxes for the rich (or punish horribly the middle class) while you are trying to balance the budget.  The only balanced budget in recent memory came from a 39% tax rate for the upper bracket.  It is simple, we have done it before, it WORKS.

Combine the additional revenue with modest across the board cuts including defense and you can get a balanced budget.  Leave student loans as they are, as the rate is ALREADY ABOVE PRIME.  Education is a cost for a functioning society and pays dividends later.  Changes need to be made to how colleges operate and to the very high costs but that is a separate issue.  

jr. member
Activity: 56
Merit: 1
October 17, 2012, 09:44:52 PM
I have seen them doing jobs that we can not fill in Maryland without them.  On the Eastern Shore we do not have enough Mexicans to pick the fields. 

Maryland is not unique. The same can be said about practically every state.

What are Mexicans doing this job?  If they can "make a living" from it, why can't Americans?  What's different?


M

Americans will not settle for working $7 an hour, in a hot field for 14 hours. If the wage was higher, the business would be unprofitable. Everyone has their price and the price of an American is too high.

It won't be unprofitable if everyone was paying higher wages and raising prices. Food is too cheap in this country, the waste of food is pretty disturbing to be honest (estimated 40% food produced go to waste).

That's not for you to decide.
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002
October 17, 2012, 09:40:31 PM


Fuck you.  We're already paying 6% variable and the only likely direction is already up.  Your talking about a group of people for which 50% can't find employment that actually uses the skills they were promised were valuable.  Older people are working longer because of the tough economic times and so fresh graduates can't find jobs.  How much more burden do you expect us to bear?  Our "elders" have already given us a pile of steaming shit for a country when they were handed a land of opportunity.  We won't take much more abuse before you start seeing violence.  I personally am more anti-violence than almost anyone my age I know, but I can't control my peers.

whoa buddy, agree with you on the generational warfare, agree that times are tough, where exactly do you propose the money comes from?

I'm okay with the other suggestions made by bitcoinbear.  In fact, I'm all for reform of the student loan industry.  But raising interest rates on one of the groups that is struggling the hardest is outrageous.

Yes, we absolutely need to put restrictions on who can take out student loans (GPA requirements, minimum # of hours, no alcohol related offenses, etc).  I hate all forms of government guaranteed loans, but you can't fuck over those of us who have worked hard to better ourselves so we can provide useful labor.

I am in grad school now, and my education is paid for by my GTA position, but I have about $20k debt still to be paid down from undergraduate.  I graduated early with a 3.4 GPA from a great engineering school.  I have made every payment on time or early and I have even made several extra payments on my loans.  How am I rewarded?  By paying more interest than someone who takes a mortgage out on their home.  By suggestions that I should be paying more.  By suggestions that my friends, who are still smart but not quite as talented as me, who are struggling to pay the bills each month because they can't get a job outside of retail of food, pay more.  Whoa buddy yourself.  That shit pisses my off.

The point is that everybody will have to give a little for this to work. If everybody says "Ok, the list is good except for the one point that effects me", then everything will get taken off the list and nothing will get done.

Once we pay down the debt we can go back to subsidizing student loans (although perhaps not quite so much, we don't want to get back into debt as a country).

If you cannot afford to pay back the student loans after you get out of college, perhaps you should reconsider taking them in the first place. (and by "you" I am not talking to you specifically, but the general you of all the people considering taking out student loans.) Many people take out student loans and then study subjects that will not help them pay back those loans. I even saw an article that says a "computer science" degree is basically worthless, companies are more interested in actual experience than a piece of paper.

Every suggestion you gave other than "cut federal employee pay by 10%" affects me.

As for the student loan issue, like I said, I am all for being drastically more restrictive on who can take them out.  But that won't change the past where dumbasses thought it was a good idea to hand them out like candy and children were told that borrowing money to go to college was the only way to succeed.  The reason they have to be subsidized just to get it down to 6% is because the default rate is high due to the ongoing structure of the program.  But punishing me, who has paid as much or more than I owe every month since graduation is not fair.  First, fix the problem by adding restrictions, then maybe we can work something out.  By the way, when I decided to take them out, the rate was 4%.  It's already up to 6% and slowly rising.  As far as I can see, it is the only credit based industry in this country where interests rates are rising.  They have gone down for everyone else.

Oh, and while you're at it, let the housing market bottom instead of spending $40 billion/month subsidizing it.  That's about $130 per person per month in case you haven't done the math.  And yes, I'm a homeowner, so that would hurt me too, but it's more fair than raising interest rates on student loans.  Oh, and how about not bailing out corporations.  We may have privatization of profits, but way too many losses are publicized.  We left capitalism behind a long time ago.  Hopefully one day we can make it back to it.
legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1004
October 17, 2012, 09:32:43 PM
I support feedom of movement, I would like to see the borders opened much more than they are now, and practical policies and procudures put into place for people to immigrate legally.

You don't see US states putting up border patrolls and inspection points, this freedom of movement has been a great boon to the US. Why would we not see similar benefits from having national borders unrestricted?

++

I'm glad my family immigrated when Ellis Island was open, it helped us a lot. I want others to have that same freedom. We obviously need to find ways to more productively integrate immigrants. Each person represents a tremendous potential both economically and socially. Only seeing the potential downsides to immigration seems un-american to me.

Immigration, illegal or otherwise, is only a problem when:

a) the country is getting too full
b) immigrants come for a free lunch

a isn't happening
b is happening from mexico because of government handouts.   get rid of the handouts "stealing from peter to pay paul" and you won't have this problem anymore.

M

B is irrelevant.    Yes, people have been given handouts, but Mexicans are not getting anywhere near what they put in.  They are a net positive to the economy.  We are FUCKING ourselves by encouraging hard workers to leave.  Maybe I am in an usual area (Maryland) but I have only seen Mexicans working hard on roads, picking crops and doing outdoor work.  I have seen them doing jobs that we can not fill in Maryland without them.  On the Eastern Shore we do not have enough Mexicans to pick the fields. 

They might be a net positive for the near term, but what about the future. The slave owners 200 years ago also thought it was a net positive to own black slaves, they didn't think their sons and daughters will one day be wage slaves to support a 25% unemployed black population that rely on welfare/food stamps.

racist much?

Black unemployment is not 25%.  It is not even 15%. 

For 2012 food stamps are less then 80 billion dollars (projected) , defense is 1000 to 1400 billion dollars.   And while it is silly to break down into race, the 85% employees blacks are paying taxes to support those on the food stamps.  Get over the race bullshit, that is not the problem with the budget. 
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
October 17, 2012, 09:16:09 PM


Fuck you.  We're already paying 6% variable and the only likely direction is already up.  Your talking about a group of people for which 50% can't find employment that actually uses the skills they were promised were valuable.  Older people are working longer because of the tough economic times and so fresh graduates can't find jobs.  How much more burden do you expect us to bear?  Our "elders" have already given us a pile of steaming shit for a country when they were handed a land of opportunity.  We won't take much more abuse before you start seeing violence.  I personally am more anti-violence than almost anyone my age I know, but I can't control my peers.

whoa buddy, agree with you on the generational warfare, agree that times are tough, where exactly do you propose the money comes from?

I'm okay with the other suggestions made by bitcoinbear.  In fact, I'm all for reform of the student loan industry.  But raising interest rates on one of the groups that is struggling the hardest is outrageous.

Yes, we absolutely need to put restrictions on who can take out student loans (GPA requirements, minimum # of hours, no alcohol related offenses, etc).  I hate all forms of government guaranteed loans, but you can't fuck over those of us who have worked hard to better ourselves so we can provide useful labor.

I am in grad school now, and my education is paid for by my GTA position, but I have about $20k debt still to be paid down from undergraduate.  I graduated early with a 3.4 GPA from a great engineering school.  I have made every payment on time or early and I have even made several extra payments on my loans.  How am I rewarded?  By paying more interest than someone who takes a mortgage out on their home.  By suggestions that I should be paying more.  By suggestions that my friends, who are still smart but not quite as talented as me, who are struggling to pay the bills each month because they can't get a job outside of retail of food, pay more.  Whoa buddy yourself.  That shit pisses my off.

The point is that everybody will have to give a little for this to work. If everybody says "Ok, the list is good except for the one point that effects me", then everything will get taken off the list and nothing will get done.

Once we pay down the debt we can go back to subsidizing student loans (although perhaps not quite so much, we don't want to get back into debt as a country).

If you cannot afford to pay back the student loans after you get out of college, perhaps you should reconsider taking them in the first place. (and by "you" I am not talking to you specifically, but the general you of all the people considering taking out student loans.) Many people take out student loans and then study subjects that will not help them pay back those loans. I even saw an article that says a "computer science" degree is basically worthless, companies are more interested in actual experience than a piece of paper.
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002
October 17, 2012, 08:50:31 PM


Fuck you.  We're already paying 6% variable and the only likely direction is already up.  Your talking about a group of people for which 50% can't find employment that actually uses the skills they were promised were valuable.  Older people are working longer because of the tough economic times and so fresh graduates can't find jobs.  How much more burden do you expect us to bear?  Our "elders" have already given us a pile of steaming shit for a country when they were handed a land of opportunity.  We won't take much more abuse before you start seeing violence.  I personally am more anti-violence than almost anyone my age I know, but I can't control my peers.

whoa buddy, agree with you on the generational warfare, agree that times are tough, where exactly do you propose the money comes from?

I'm okay with the other suggestions made by bitcoinbear.  In fact, I'm all for reform of the student loan industry.  But raising interest rates on one of the groups that is struggling the hardest is outrageous.

Yes, we absolutely need to put restrictions on who can take out student loans (GPA requirements, minimum # of hours, no alcohol related offenses, etc).  I hate all forms of government guaranteed loans, but you can't fuck over those of us who have worked hard to better ourselves so we can provide useful labor.

I am in grad school now, and my education is paid for by my GTA position, but I have about $20k debt still to be paid down from undergraduate.  I graduated early with a 3.4 GPA from a great engineering school.  I have made every payment on time or early and I have even made several extra payments on my loans.  How am I rewarded?  By paying more interest than someone who takes a mortgage out on their home.  By suggestions that I should be paying more.  By suggestions that my friends, who are still smart but not quite as talented as me, who are struggling to pay the bills each month because they can't get a job outside of retail of food, pay more.  Whoa buddy yourself.  That shit pisses my off.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 250
October 17, 2012, 08:43:30 PM
Americans will not settle for working $7 an hour, in a hot field for 14 hours. If the wage was higher, the business would be unprofitable. Everyone has their price and the price of an American is too high.

That's false, if they can't find anyone to work the fields, that's because their pay is too low. It won't be unprofitable if everyone was paying higher wages and raising prices. Food is too cheap in this country, the waste of food is pretty disturbing to be honest (estimated 40% food produced go to waste).

Exactly correct. The problem with illegal migrant labor is that farming shouldn't be leverage business - a farmer should farm as much as he, his family and employees can farm. We shouldn't be turning a blind eye to them importing 1000 illegals for harvest at slave wages.

But we also need to remove subsidy programs that pay farmers to now grow crops - they're only in place to keep food prices up...


Pages:
Jump to: