Celebrating 10 years! 2007-2017

Trump's student loan plan

Admin, feel free to move if this belongs in /pol but most St thirdtierlaw05/17/17
breach of k / promisorry estoppel on pslf? ginganinja05/18/17
wait, there's an actual draft? not just talking points? dingbat05/17/17
WaPo didn't release the draft just summarized it. Here is th thirdtierlaw05/17/17
If this is true I'm ready to jump on the impeachment bandwag seemedwiseatthetime05/17/17
Adding 5 years? Gtfo lolwutjobs05/17/17
Hmm the slight decrease in the percentage of income does not loblawyer05/17/17
Newsflash: for most Americans its IBR for 25-30 years. Sorry vohod05/17/17
Newsflash for most americans on IBR it is 20 years and for g thirdtierlaw05/17/17
I am paying $1,850 a month to pay the money-changers back. T vohod05/17/17
I'm happy you're able to pay $1800 a month. I couldn't affor thirdtierlaw05/17/17
I hope there are trials for the law school scam too. All Dea vohod05/17/17
You are one of those bitter people who think that everyone s adamb05/18/17
Hahaha. Its funny how fast you fell into the mold of a typic vohod05/18/17
Lol, my gf just got on PSLF. The Orange Sultan thinks studen kretan18205/17/17
Just pay the loan off on your own and don't fall for the lat hairypalms05/17/17
So is this plan coming up for a debate and a vote before the shitlawsf05/17/17
We'll be fine. Everything Trump succeeds in pushing through guyingorillasuit05/17/17
Question: Is there anything about removing the "tax bomb"? oberynmartell05/18/17
About time we started cutting white people's welfare program triplesix05/18/17
lol, I seem to recall the Trump student loan plan on his cam perkinwarbeck05/18/17
Can they do all this through rulemaking? I'm unclear what th perkinwarbeck05/18/17
If this is true. I'm leaving Gov't work ASAP. notthedroidyo05/18/17
Let me know. I'd gladly take said jerb over the terrifying d vohod05/18/17
I don't know what the private sector options would be for so perkinwarbeck05/18/17
For every one person who threatens to leave public service o flyer1405/18/17
I volunteer myself as tribute. 3lol05/18/17
Yup. The only rare examples will be PDs who could make a lot vohod05/18/17
Plsf people are sounding like lawl professors haha Martyr triplesix05/18/17
I would be more concerned if he had laid out specifics. Ther mrtor05/18/17
In the grand scheme though how high are the stakes? Very hig vohod05/18/17
But white people deserve a middle class lifestyle even if th triplesix05/18/17
What's with your repeated racial remarks? Do you have data c mrtor05/18/17
Federal government is a huge welfare program for middle clas triplesix05/18/17
You're entitled to your wacky beliefs. Just don't represent mrtor05/18/17
97% or more aren't bellyaching that they have to wait longer vohod05/18/17
Come to the federal building, buddy. It's mostly AA folks ou karlmarx05/18/17
A JD-advantage contract specialist with a triple t degree of flyer1405/18/17
8-10 relevant experience in the nuance of federal contractin vohod05/18/17
My problem with student loans is two-fold, the interest on t thirdtierlaw05/18/17
"There is something fundamentally wrong with the government jeffm05/18/17
Well we should just call student loans what they are: idiot triplesix05/18/17
I agree. The only reason for the program to provide loans in perkinwarbeck05/18/17
If reform is required, there should be some sort of safeguar mrtor05/18/17
This is especially the case with earlier folks in the progra downwardslope05/18/17
I assume I will have to keep making payments for the rest of fettywap05/18/17
Changes to pslf and elimination of payment programs has to g karlmarx05/18/17
i'm relying on this^ and calling my reps every damn day. I'l notthedroidyo05/18/17
I hope this happens. People need to pay back their loans. Bu gowcod05/18/17
This likely won't pass as the GOP does not want to alienate adamb05/18/17
I'm a State employee and I have an easy solution if they rem samfriedlander205/18/17
We wanted PSLF for all, and PSLFers told us to shut our rich vohod05/18/17
No dude. Total strawman argument you're making here. Most PS finklebots05/18/17
When exactly did PLSFers tell private sector people to shut samfriedlander205/18/17
The problem with the Van Wilder approach is that you have to onehell05/22/17
I just wish they'd adjust the student loan interest deductio barelylegal05/18/17
As others have mentioned, if this even makes it through Cong 6figuremistake05/19/17
NY Times focused on student loans for its Sunday editorial: loblawyer05/21/17

thirdtierlaw (May 17, 2017 - 7:19 pm)

Admin, feel free to move if this belongs in /pol but most Student loan discussions seem to fall into this forum.

An article on the Washington Post obtained a "draft" of the President's education budget dated May 23, 2017 the day it was expected to be released.

Cliff notes:
1.Rescind PSLF
2. Combined current student loans under 1 program, 12.5% of income.
3. Undergrad forgiveness in 15 years.
4. Graduate school forgiveness 30 years.

There was no analysis on how much money would be saved by implementing this plan or how the plan would treat people currently in an IBR program.

Reply
ginganinja (May 18, 2017 - 7:17 pm)

breach of k / promisorry estoppel on pslf?

Reply
dingbat (May 17, 2017 - 7:31 pm)

wait, there's an actual draft?
not just talking points?

Reply
thirdtierlaw (May 17, 2017 - 7:49 pm)

WaPo didn't release the draft just summarized it. Here is the link.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/trumps-first-full-education-budget-deep-cuts-to-public-school-programs-in-pursuit-of-school-choice/2017/05/17/2a25a2cc-3a41-11e7-8854-21f359183e8c_story.html?utm_term=.3ed9f15f0bfb

The discussion on student loans is down towards the bottom.

Reply
seemedwiseatthetime (May 17, 2017 - 7:37 pm)

If this is true I'm ready to jump on the impeachment bandwagon.

Reply
lolwutjobs (May 17, 2017 - 8:06 pm)

Adding 5 years? Gtfo

Reply
loblawyer (May 17, 2017 - 8:45 pm)

Hmm the slight decrease in the percentage of income does not make up for the 5 extra years. Damn, his earlier proposal chopped the grad forgiveness down to 20 years.

Reply
vohod (May 17, 2017 - 9:10 pm)

Newsflash: for most Americans its IBR for 25-30 years. Sorry but not sorry that your gov't job/benefits/prestige selves have to make IBR payments for 5 more years.

Reply
thirdtierlaw (May 17, 2017 - 9:36 pm)

Newsflash for most americans on IBR it is 20 years and for graduate loans it is 25.

Government workers will see a 10 to 15 year increase.

I have seen that you take it personally that some people have a job that you want. But what does that have to do with people who went to grad school making an extra 5 years of payments on their loans? The large majority of grad students are not working for the government.

If they overhaul the whole program and do not allow people to stay on the 25 year plan, I'll be making my final payment when I'm 59. Most graduate students will be about the same age. Nothing like wiping about a bunch of retirement accounts with tax bombs right before retirement! It'll be great for the economy and social welfare programs. But at least we get to spite all those PSLF people!

Reply
vohod (May 17, 2017 - 9:42 pm)

I am paying $1,850 a month to pay the money-changers back. That is $1,000 more than I need to but I am lucky enough to have no kids. If you can afford to pay more, do it. If not? It's essentially monopoly money from the get-go. You are only taxable to the extent you are solvent. This has been discussed at lengths on JDU. There were threads back in 2013 when I found this page of PSLFers worried the program would end.

FWIW Idon't think this will come to pass.

Reply
thirdtierlaw (May 17, 2017 - 10:01 pm)

I'm happy you're able to pay $1800 a month. I couldn't afford that with 2 kids. Though I fell for the scam, hard, I could comfortably afford payments that would have my debts paid off in about 20 years.

This isn't a situation where I'm overly worried about myself. Sure I'd prefer forgiveness but I won't be homeless if IBR was taken away tomorrow.

What you are ignoring is that many are not in this position. Even with IBR something like 11% of people with federal student loans are defaulting on their loans.

This is a serious problem. It will also have a drastic effect on the economy. Younger people aren't able to buy homes, start businesses, etc. They most certainly aren't able to save for retirement. So what happens when all these boomers who were planning to downsize and live off the proceeds of their home can't find a buyer? What happens when you have a large portion of the millenial generation broke at retirement age?

Great you're pulling yourself up by the bootstraps. Wonderful! I am genuinely happy for you. That doesn't stop the trainwreck coming down the road.

I also agree that I don't see this passing either.

Reply
vohod (May 17, 2017 - 10:24 pm)

I hope there are trials for the law school scam too. All Deans rounded up and a trial at Cooley Law School's mock court room.

Reply
adamb (May 18, 2017 - 3:46 pm)

You are one of those bitter people who think that everyone should suffer your fate and your bitterness for no particular reason. Grow up.

Reply
vohod (May 18, 2017 - 3:59 pm)

Hahaha. Its funny how fast you fell into the mold of a typical, defensive gov't worker. I miss your crazy stories.

Reply
kretan182 (May 17, 2017 - 9:35 pm)

Lol, my gf just got on PSLF. The Orange Sultan thinks student debtors are the real bad hombres.

Reply
hairypalms (May 17, 2017 - 9:40 pm)

Just pay the loan off on your own and don't fall for the latest government scam to get you to take on exorbitant student loan debt. Whenever you rely upon government programs, the gubmint can always pull the rug out from under you with the stroke of a pen. I sleep well at night knowing I didn't sign up for this BS.

Reply
shitlawsf (May 17, 2017 - 9:49 pm)

So is this plan coming up for a debate and a vote before the Obamacare repeal and replace vote, the tax reform vote, immigration reform, the "good government shutdown" and the impeachment proceedings ... or after?

Reply
guyingorillasuit (May 17, 2017 - 10:54 pm)

We'll be fine. Everything Trump succeeds in pushing through will be ground into dust by the next administration, with extreme prejudice. I wouldn't worry.

Reply
oberynmartell (May 18, 2017 - 1:31 am)

Question: Is there anything about removing the "tax bomb"?

Reply
triplesix (May 18, 2017 - 9:22 am)

About time we started cutting white people's welfare programs

Reply
perkinwarbeck (May 18, 2017 - 9:24 am)

lol, I seem to recall the Trump student loan plan on his campaign website was much like Hillary's, only less detailed. Anyone who bought that was a sucker.

In any discussions about this, it's important to point out that these are adjustments to how PROFITABLE the student loan program is for the government.

Reply
perkinwarbeck (May 18, 2017 - 9:32 am)

Can they do all this through rulemaking? I'm unclear what the limits of their authority there is. It seems pretty broad with all the changes Obama made to the program after the overhaul that was rolled into Obamacare.

Reply
notthedroidyo (May 18, 2017 - 9:45 am)

If this is true. I'm leaving Gov't work ASAP.

Reply
vohod (May 18, 2017 - 9:49 am)

Let me know. I'd gladly take said jerb over the terrifying depths, screaming maniacs, and conman clients of "small law."

Reply
perkinwarbeck (May 18, 2017 - 9:52 am)

I don't know what the private sector options would be for someone like me who just knows admin law and various things federal agencies have to deal with.

Reply
flyer14 (May 18, 2017 - 10:16 am)

For every one person who threatens to leave public service over PSLF, there's ten more c*cked lawyers who would leap at the chance for a steady paycheck.

Reply
3lol (May 18, 2017 - 10:17 am)

I volunteer myself as tribute.

Reply
vohod (May 18, 2017 - 10:19 am)

Yup. The only rare examples will be PDs who could make a lot of cash in private criminal defense.... these folks leave anyway.

Reply
triplesix (May 18, 2017 - 10:32 am)

Plsf people are sounding like lawl professors haha

Martyrs are doing charity work for the entire world and it is an ungrateful endeavor

Reply
mrtor (May 18, 2017 - 10:37 am)

I would be more concerned if he had laid out specifics. There are no details regarding what happens to current enrollees, when prospective enrollees would be prevented from enrolling, etc.

I cannot imagine legislators would enact such a vague plan when the stakes are so high. There need to be difficult discussions before specifics could be laid out and Congress hates difficult discussions..

Reply
vohod (May 18, 2017 - 11:09 am)

In the grand scheme though how high are the stakes? Very high in JDUlans no doubt. But most grads have nowhere near the loan debt that would necessitate the full 30 years. Unless you are a public defender, social worker, or new teacher I don't really have much sympathy. Those jobs suck and were the intended beneficiaries of PSLF. I don't get how legions of Contract Analyst I-IIIs performing essentially for-profit type work are able to use this program. They do typical corporate office paper pushing but without the insane clienrs, layoffs, and awful pay/benefits of the private sector.

Reply
triplesix (May 18, 2017 - 11:20 am)

But white people deserve a middle class lifestyle even if they make poor financial decisions

Reply
mrtor (May 18, 2017 - 2:52 pm)

What's with your repeated racial remarks? Do you have data confirming PSLF is used by more white graduates than minority graduates? This is a financial discussion. Go to OT if you want to peddle this petty race bait.

Reply
triplesix (May 18, 2017 - 3:03 pm)

Federal government is a huge welfare program for middle class whites, get real buddy.

Plsf is an extension of this expansive charity program that benefits a certain kind of Americans.

You are right, it is a financial discussing and I am tired of paying for other people's mistakes esp when those people are already receiving a hand out, ie a federal job. Poor working lawyers subsidizing comfortable lives of federal and state employed lawyers. This charade has got to stop.

Reply
mrtor (May 18, 2017 - 3:17 pm)

You're entitled to your wacky beliefs. Just don't represent them as being based on facts. Federal government employment demographics virtually mirror our country-wide demographics. In fact, AAs are over-represented. You'll note in the report below that the only underrepresented minorities are Hispanics, though federal employment diversity continues to improve.

So, in short, no, federal government work is a yugggeee welfare program for middle class whites.

http://www.fedweek.com/issue-briefs/workforce-demographic-breakdown-reported/

Reply
vohod (May 18, 2017 - 3:31 pm)

97% or more aren't bellyaching that they have to wait longer to discharge their loans. Most will endure the 15 year period or actually pay back the balance under regular IBR payments for 10 or so years.

The average fed isn't a Contract Specialist JD-advantage guy with $175,000 trips t degree.

The gov't worker mentality bites them in the ass. Instead of working to get PSLF for all, all we small law slaves get from our peers in gov't is their phoney envy and insane speculation that all us private sector guys will make $6873576257 a year with 100% match 401ks, flying first class to exotic locales to network. It shouldn't surprise anyone that the great majority of debtors like us reciprocate the cold carelessness.

Reply
karlmarx (May 18, 2017 - 3:35 pm)

Come to the federal building, buddy. It's mostly AA folks outside smoking. It's been a refuge and method to the middle class for AA workers since before the Wilson admin (although Wilson did try to resergate it).

Reply
flyer14 (May 18, 2017 - 3:45 pm)

A JD-advantage contract specialist with a triple t degree often winds up becoming a contracts administrator for Northrop after 8-10 years in the government. They wouldn't do that at all if the private sector paid as poorly as some on here claim.

Reply
vohod (May 18, 2017 - 4:09 pm)

8-10 relevant experience in the nuance of federal contracting will certainly lead to a great job. Good luck getting there wasting your twenties in lawl skoo skam academies and running from low brow practice to low brow practice to climb up from $34k to $48k. Only fed jobs give you such experience.

Reply
thirdtierlaw (May 18, 2017 - 11:34 am)

My problem with student loans is two-fold, the interest on the loans and not being able to discharge the debt in bankruptcy. The problem is that many people on IBR plans can't pay down the interest. So they may very well have more than paid back the principle by year 10 but only have seen their total owed gone down slightly.

If the government were to allow all these IBR people to refinance their loans at a variable interest rate tied solely to inflation, I'd be a huge proponent of getting rid of all IBR programs. I take issue with student loans being one of the only places the federal government makes a profit. There is something fundamentally wrong with the government making a profit off people attempting to improve their lot in life.

Lawyers and doctors skew the perception of PSLF in a bad direction. Social workers, drug counselors, speech pathologists, etc. all need advanced degrees. They also are needed in extremely low-income areas that can only pay them $35,000 a year. The creation of PSLF makes a lot of sense for those situations.

Reply
jeffm (May 18, 2017 - 11:58 am)

"There is something fundamentally wrong with the government making a profit off people attempting to improve their lot in life."

Like the income tax? The sales tax? They don't even have to give or guarantee loans for you to get that dough. Talk about profit...

Reply
triplesix (May 18, 2017 - 4:13 pm)

Well we should just call student loans what they are: idiot and poor people tax

Reply
perkinwarbeck (May 18, 2017 - 12:05 pm)

I agree. The only reason for the program to provide loans instead of grants is to save the public money. The goal of the program should be to improve access in a way the government can afford. I've always thought the program should be run at a small loss overall. There should also be price controls on schools accepting payments.

Reply
mrtor (May 18, 2017 - 3:11 pm)

If reform is required, there should be some sort of safeguard in place to prevent doctors, highly paid attorneys, and other highly paid enrollees from abusing the system. Perhaps they could develop some sort of tiered subsidy that pays off a decreasing percentage of the loan balance as income increases.

That being said, I do agree that government should not be making gross profits off of education debt. It has been a quiet means of increasing government revenue. If the government needs more money, it should have to come to the people (all of the people, not just borrowers) and ask for traditional tax increases.

Reply
downwardslope (May 18, 2017 - 8:36 pm)

This is especially the case with earlier folks in the program. I didn't even take out federal loans since the program hadn't really started when I began law school and GradPLUS rates were 8.5% (without accounting for the fees and origination) while private loan interest rates were going down. It wasn't until the feds started direct lending that the interest rates got a bit better. I know several people who graduated when I did who looked into it and said it wasn't even worth it because they were getting quoted outrageous consolidation interest rates and didn't trust that the program would stay intact the full 10 years they'd need to finish the program. This was back in around 2010. Most of the people I know who started the program then have more outstanding debt than they had when they started the program because they aren't even making enough payments to cover the interest.

My private loan interest is somewhere between 1.75-2% right now. The term there is 15 years. For most people, a more reasonable interest rate would make the payments much easier to make as opposed to 7-8%, which is what a lot of people have on their consolidation rates.

Reply
fettywap (May 18, 2017 - 11:32 am)

I assume I will have to keep making payments for the rest of my life. I just hope they don't get rid of it altogether and tell me I have to pay it off once my balance gets up to $250,000.

Reply
karlmarx (May 18, 2017 - 11:48 am)

Changes to pslf and elimination of payment programs has to go through Congress. Congress can't even fulfill their main campaign promises, much less ancillary stuff like this. This is all candy land red meat that isn't going anywhere. Can't sign an order and grand stand, requires actual political acumen. Trump has none

Reply
notthedroidyo (May 18, 2017 - 2:33 pm)

i'm relying on this^ and calling my reps every damn day. I'll find a fax machine if I have to.

Reply
gowcod (May 18, 2017 - 4:20 pm)

I hope this happens. People need to pay back their loans. Buncha deadbeats.

Reply
adamb (May 18, 2017 - 4:21 pm)

This likely won't pass as the GOP does not want to alienate the young any more than they already have for no good reason. The political costs far outweigh the benefits, and this issue is low on the GOP wishlist.

Reply
samfriedlander2 (May 18, 2017 - 9:22 pm)

I'm a State employee and I have an easy solution if they remove PLSF. Sign up for a community college course every semester and never pay off my loan. I'm paying 600 a month right now and that will undoubtedly end if I lose PLSF (I'll wait for the results of numerous lawsuits which would be filed though). You can't get blood from a stone anyway. A few people here seem to hate those that use PLSF which is something I struggle to understand. Misery truly loves company.

Reply
vohod (May 18, 2017 - 9:49 pm)

We wanted PSLF for all, and PSLFers told us to shut our rich private sector mouths and enjoy our caviar and 1st class tickets. Despite the fact almost all of us earn less than a county boy. Most of us apply to every state job religiously to this day. Private practice sucks.

Reply
finklebots (May 18, 2017 - 10:14 pm)

No dude. Total strawman argument you're making here. Most PSLF ers would gladly extend it to private sector bretheren. Think back to 2007 when Bush created PSLF. Bubble had yet to burst and there was still a strong argument that private sector earnings over time would outpace a stable government salary. 2006 grad here. At that time, government was the only option for me. Private sector wouldn't hire at that time, at least not me. PSLF wasn't why I went government, it was an incedental benefit.

Reply
samfriedlander2 (May 18, 2017 - 10:34 pm)

When exactly did PLSFers tell private sector people to shut up? I always felt student loans should be dischargeable in bankruptcy. Its amazing people can file for bankruptcy after spending thousands in credit card items but students are shut out to feed the education industry. We are all on the same side when it comes to these issues.

Why would you support the plan to REMOVE a good program when your real argument is to expand it.

Reply
onehell (May 22, 2017 - 1:53 pm)

The problem with the Van Wilder approach is that you have to be at least half-time and making "satisfactory academic progress" in a degree granting program to be eligible for an in-school deferment. So just taking a class here and there isn't going to cut it.

Don't get me wrong. You can drag it out for a long time (Johnny Lechner, the inspiration for Van Wilder, pulled it off for about 15 years by constantly changing majors), but eventually you'll run out of degree programs that will admit you, the school will conclude that you aren't making "satisfactory progress," or (if at the undergrad level) you'll hit the lifetime Stafford limits.

Reply
barelylegal (May 18, 2017 - 9:58 pm)

I just wish they'd adjust the student loan interest deduction.

Reply
6figuremistake (May 19, 2017 - 9:17 am)

As others have mentioned, if this even makes it through Congress, it will be heavily revised by the time it becomes law.

That said, as someone who initially had six figures of debt from law school (see my username), I think we can over estimate how much anyone cares about our plight. The law schools are collapsing because they can't attract students not because anyone "found religion" regarding the scam.

Aside from med students, it's really only law students who end up with this much debt. Most undergrads probably don't need IBR forgiveness because they can't borrow that much from the feds. (Those who get in trouble usually are dealing with private loans). Most (though certainly not all) grad programs tend to be 30 credit hour programs, which easily allow for a part time or even full time job. It's hard to get into too much trouble with these programs. Most med students and even MBA students tend to find jobs that let them service their debts.

The grad school debt crisis is really largely a law school problem where the programs are incredibly expensive and the job options are meager at best.

If this is retroactive, then I think it's a bad idea. I've mostly paid off my loans, but I feel terrible for anyone whose life is ruined because they're stuck under a mountain of debt. I'd even support a complete discharge for anyone with federal loans even though I wouldn't really benefit.

That said, expanding the forgiveness period for future students isn't a terrible idea. Right now, the scam deans can lure in the lemmings with the safety net of "only" paying 10% for 20 years (or 10 years under PLSF) if things don't quite work out. The calculus changes if the forgiveness and repayment terms aren't quite as favorable.

Repayment liberalism should help those who are currently in the hole. It shouldn't exist to encourage others to walk the plank.

Reply
loblawyer (May 21, 2017 - 9:56 am)

NY Times focused on student loans for its Sunday editorial:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/20/opinion/sunday/student-debts-economy-loans.html?_r=0

Not too much of substance but nice to see it occasionally getting some attention.

Reply
Post a message in this thread