Normally there is a balance in the risk associated with a loan. But BAPCPA removed the risk from the lender since the loan cannot be cleared in Bankruptcy. Lenders will loan any amount to anyone. Universities will raise tuition in turn since they know that lenders will loan any amount. and students will borrow whatever it takes. Restore the risk to the lender, and allow the free market back into play.

That is a sensible solution (and fair in that it provides relief to those who really need it rather than spreading the bailout scattershot). If it leads to higher loan rates, that is a GOOD thing. I want people thinking about the costs.

“higher education so obfuscates the costs that I doubt most students even know what they are paying”

The students are teenagers, in 11th and 12th grade as they are applying. Don’t know how much experience you have with that age group, but most of them have NO perspective on financial matters. Their parents ought to have a better idea, but perhaps are trying to be “hands off”?

But yes, the costs are obfuscated by the process. You are already deep into the application/selection process before you find out about any financial aid you might receive.

Truth in pricing, perhaps with a six-year lock on tuition and fees for admitted students? What a concept!

TFF, higher education so obfuscates the costs that I doubt most students even know what they are paying. Until we have truth in pricing, they won’t stop paying. If this were any other industry (oops, there’s a nasty business word again), we would have successful lawsuits and government regulation by now.

Curmudgeon, tuition will stop rising when people stop paying it. Whether or not colleges are businesses is irrelevant — they can’t fight the law of supply and demand.

If CONGRESS actually wanted to help students, they would have made up one set of simple rules… 3% above the federal rate, simple interest, payments applied 50/50 to the principal/interest, limits on fees and charges that do NOT get ‘capitalized’ to the principal, basic bankruptcy and consumer protections as on ALL OTHER consumer debt, statute of limitations AS ON ALL OTHER DEBT, limit the amount of guarantee to the original loan amount – NOT a ridiculously geometrically inflated balance – and forbid capitalization of interest.

But understand that the PURPOSE of student loans has changed – they are NOT designed to help anyone, they are designed to create perpetual debt that cannot be discharged, therefore perpetually inflate.

AND they did this RETROACTIVELY, so NO, a contract isn’t a contract when one side can change the terms at will RETROACTIVELY any time they are paid enough to do so.

In any case, I’d rather have less debt than cheap debt. Debt is like McDonalds food. If it is too easy and cheap, you keep eating more and more until you weigh 800 lbs and can’t stand up without a crane.

Let’s forgive debt for public servants. Forgive debt for those who went to public schools, if they truly need the help. But forgive debt for PRIVATE individuals who went to PRIVATE schools to work in PRIVATE industry? Not on my life!

I’m guessing you knew I would support bigger investments in public universities, but that’s as likely as to happen as any of my tax plans. Our education system was a primary reason the U.S. developed into the dominant economy of the last half century, and its decline (the education system, that is) is paralleling the decline of the economy. However, with so many people viewing college graduates as elitists, and spewing hate on teachers for their unions, we’d be lucky just to maintain the current sorry state of public university funding, let alone increase it.

Robert Applebaum http://forgivestudentloandebt.com/ OR https://www.facebook.com/groups/forgives tudentloandebt/

Denise Smith https://www.facebook.com/groups/aging.wi th.student.debt/ who is feverishly working for those older students who are over 50 & also those who under 50 that are saddled with student loan debt.

Natalie Abrams https://www.facebook.com/OccupyColleges

http://www.studentloanjustice.org

Loan Reform Now: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Loan-Refo rm-Now/186052074801911

“The mission of Loan Reform Now is to encourage the passage of laws that protect students from the negative impacts of the private student loan industry and their misleading practices.”

“Reporter looking to do a piece on parents who owe a lot for their children’s student loans.” Please E-mail raeann.roca@gmail.com

for more info: http://studentloandebacle.blogspot.com/

In any case, the crux of the matter is this: “Josh Barro also notes that loans are just one way to fund higher education – direct state funding of public universities is the most obvious alternative.”

Subsidizing student loans and direct funding of public universities are two ways we can invest in education. But the two approaches have a VERY different impact on the cost of education.

If you subsidize student loans, then people borrow more and spend more. You end up with some of our graduate carrying $100k+ debts, because they fell in love with a private school (and somebody was willing to loan them a ridiculous amount of money to go). Besides, with the tuition hikes at the public universities it is “only” another $20k a year.

But suppose instead you invest in the PUBLIC universities? Drive down class sizes. Drive down tuition. Give students a top-notch education for $10k a year and some of the country-club private universities may have a hard time competing at a $50k price point.

The NYT cites a student who foolishly went $120k into debt to acquire a degree in marketing from Ohio Northern University. Given that I’ve never heard of the school, I suspect a degree from Ohio State would have served just as well at a fraction of the cost.

Let’s push that price competition until people stop making foolish choices. We can’t (or shouldn’t) directly dictate costs to private schools. We definitely shouldn’t subsidize tuitions at private schools any more than we already do (that just drives them higher, anyways). Let’s try a different approach!