A mixture of "Safety in Numbers" and "Danger in Numbers" is more the takeaway I got during COVID.
Namely, whatever the people around you want they will force on you and you have no rights. As such, you can't let people who don't share your values be near you as they are a threat to take away your most basic rights.
For instance, if the people around you wear masks, they are likely to force you to wear a mask or be punished.
When I see that everyone in East Asia is still wearing masks outdoors all the time, it freaks me out.
I encountered only three instances of mask mandates being overwhelmed during COVID.
One was homeschool skate in my town, where unmasked homeschoolers crowded into the skate arena and refused the order. The staff did not try to stop them because they are overwhelmed.
Another was during mass at my local church, the priest refused to enforce a mask mandate and I'd says a majority didn't wear masks. I would note though that official Catholic Church position was pro mask and it was enforced in less conservative churches.
The third was the private christian daycare we sent our kids to, which refused to mask children despite threats from the state.
We are also lucky that we live in a small town in a slightly red area. If we lived in NYC, even having the safety in numbers of the Orthodox Jewish community wouldn't stop the state from saudering your playgrounds shut and breaking up your funerals.
The lesson I took away is that right wing christians are the only ones that will stand up for my basic rights, and especially stand up for children. If you are around too many leftists even that won't be enough.
End government backing of student loan defaults by fiat. Investors will lose a lot of money and the value of the government guarantee will go down, but so be it.
Investors who are now responsible for losses will go about the business of figuring out how much and in what manner individuals can pay because it's in their financial interest to do so. They will squeeze whatever can be economically squeezed.
Focusing on broke young people feels like a waste of time. You go after the schools. If the schools have to pony up for loan defaults, it will dramatically increase underwriting quality. Furthermore, I think we all hate academia here and wouldn't mind a lot of marginal colleges going under.
"When you owe the bank $300,000 it's your problem but when you owe the bank $300,000,000 it's the bank's problem." MORPHS into "When you owe the IRS $300,000 it's your problem but when "you" - the collective - owe other taxpayers $1,750,000,000,000 it's their problem." Add in the fact that the government is the collective' agent and you do not have to be that bright to know how this is going to play out.
Brian, I suspect you are underestimating how conformist normal people are. Those with student loans even more so.
Supposedly one million student loans enter default each year. There will be some difficulty associated with the transition but I would be shocked if the steady state is more than 2 million defaults per year.
Consider the new IBR rules - I think the savvy strategy won't be to default and dare the government, but to pay the absolute minimum and wait for the next batch of forgiveness.
I think I'd take this bet at even odds if you put numbers to it. Something like: conditional on forbearance ending (which I'd probably bet against, but conditioned on it happening), less than half of borrowers are in default by April 1?
It's not going to stop because it's culture war chum for the team that has much more schooling in useless subjects, sticking it to te other team who have less schooling but often significant debt of other sorts. Why else wouldn't they put "forgiveness" for every truck driver's truck loan into the plan?
How about capping the maximum loan per year (the whole cost of attendance thing) at whatever the current value is for the most expensive school ... in nominal dollars? That way, the most expensive schools are put under a budget constraint first. And the students who attend the most expensive schools are likely the ones who can most readily get family contributions, private scholarships, and private loans.
By this reasoning, why does anyone pay any tax? Along with a couple of other commenters, I would be very surprised if the majority of people default on their loans and I hope you find someone to bet with.
In the UK the student loan repayment, along with other taxes, is paid directly by your employer. So unless self-employed or a less than normal tax situation (which is probably less likely for those with degrees), you pay whatever you owe with no choice in the matter.
Would it really be legal to retroactively impose harsher punishments for nonpayment on borrowers for debt taken on in the past? Wouldn't that be an "ex post facto law"?
A mixture of "Safety in Numbers" and "Danger in Numbers" is more the takeaway I got during COVID.
Namely, whatever the people around you want they will force on you and you have no rights. As such, you can't let people who don't share your values be near you as they are a threat to take away your most basic rights.
For instance, if the people around you wear masks, they are likely to force you to wear a mask or be punished.
When I see that everyone in East Asia is still wearing masks outdoors all the time, it freaks me out.
I encountered only three instances of mask mandates being overwhelmed during COVID.
One was homeschool skate in my town, where unmasked homeschoolers crowded into the skate arena and refused the order. The staff did not try to stop them because they are overwhelmed.
Another was during mass at my local church, the priest refused to enforce a mask mandate and I'd says a majority didn't wear masks. I would note though that official Catholic Church position was pro mask and it was enforced in less conservative churches.
The third was the private christian daycare we sent our kids to, which refused to mask children despite threats from the state.
We are also lucky that we live in a small town in a slightly red area. If we lived in NYC, even having the safety in numbers of the Orthodox Jewish community wouldn't stop the state from saudering your playgrounds shut and breaking up your funerals.
The lesson I took away is that right wing christians are the only ones that will stand up for my basic rights, and especially stand up for children. If you are around too many leftists even that won't be enough.
End government backing of student loan defaults by fiat. Investors will lose a lot of money and the value of the government guarantee will go down, but so be it.
Investors who are now responsible for losses will go about the business of figuring out how much and in what manner individuals can pay because it's in their financial interest to do so. They will squeeze whatever can be economically squeezed.
Focusing on broke young people feels like a waste of time. You go after the schools. If the schools have to pony up for loan defaults, it will dramatically increase underwriting quality. Furthermore, I think we all hate academia here and wouldn't mind a lot of marginal colleges going under.
"When you owe the bank $300,000 it's your problem but when you owe the bank $300,000,000 it's the bank's problem." MORPHS into "When you owe the IRS $300,000 it's your problem but when "you" - the collective - owe other taxpayers $1,750,000,000,000 it's their problem." Add in the fact that the government is the collective' agent and you do not have to be that bright to know how this is going to play out.
Brian, I suspect you are underestimating how conformist normal people are. Those with student loans even more so.
Supposedly one million student loans enter default each year. There will be some difficulty associated with the transition but I would be shocked if the steady state is more than 2 million defaults per year.
Consider the new IBR rules - I think the savvy strategy won't be to default and dare the government, but to pay the absolute minimum and wait for the next batch of forgiveness.
Would you bet that less than 50% of student loan debtors will resume making payments by by April 1, 2023?
I think I'd take this bet at even odds if you put numbers to it. Something like: conditional on forbearance ending (which I'd probably bet against, but conditioned on it happening), less than half of borrowers are in default by April 1?
It's not going to stop because it's culture war chum for the team that has much more schooling in useless subjects, sticking it to te other team who have less schooling but often significant debt of other sorts. Why else wouldn't they put "forgiveness" for every truck driver's truck loan into the plan?
How about capping the maximum loan per year (the whole cost of attendance thing) at whatever the current value is for the most expensive school ... in nominal dollars? That way, the most expensive schools are put under a budget constraint first. And the students who attend the most expensive schools are likely the ones who can most readily get family contributions, private scholarships, and private loans.
By this reasoning, why does anyone pay any tax? Along with a couple of other commenters, I would be very surprised if the majority of people default on their loans and I hope you find someone to bet with.
In the UK the student loan repayment, along with other taxes, is paid directly by your employer. So unless self-employed or a less than normal tax situation (which is probably less likely for those with degrees), you pay whatever you owe with no choice in the matter.
Would it really be legal to retroactively impose harsher punishments for nonpayment on borrowers for debt taken on in the past? Wouldn't that be an "ex post facto law"?