What is Ron Paul going to do about student loans?

[F3d]

....

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

And government can do the exact opposite i.e. create competition. Who wrestled with the big corporations? The problem is that the majority of the U.S. is too drawn to issues like skin color, sex, religion, gay marriage, and abortion. How come the states haven't done anything? Shouldn't there be competition? There's been a consensus that 12 grades, AP test scams, holding people back, out of state tuition, foreign language classes, bogus degree requirements, and bogus cc courses are ok. Voters can change this but no one wants to.

Voters can change this? Perhaps, if they weren't ignorant on the issues.

 

[centure7]

Is Ron Paul going to give out federal money to students? I believe its "FAFSA" that gives out student loans, grants and etc? Is he gonna keep this entity alive?

Without this government money, many students may go for private loans from private companies.

Private loans -- which are more expensive and less flexible than federal loans -- now make up a quarter of the whole student loan market. Amounts borrowed from private lenders soared 1,201% between the 1995-96 academic year and 2005-2006, according to the College Board, from $1.3 billion to $17.3 billion. The amount tripled in the past five years alone.
Federal student loans limit how much you can borrow, come with low rate caps and provide a variety of flexible payoff terms. Private student loans, by contrast, let you borrow far more than you may be able to repay, have variable rates that can soar as high as 19% and aren't as flexible with payoff terms.

Even though private student loans involve no government money or guarantees, lenders were able to convince Congress to make private loans nearly impossible to discharge in bankruptcy court -- the same treatment afforded federal loans.

The above is from this source: http://articles.moneycentral.msn.co...e/HowDidStudentLoansGetSoSleazy.aspx?page=all

So, whats your guys stand on this, should we be giving out student loans? and of course, what is RPS stand or what do you think he would say?

I don't think that Dr. Paul should end any student loans or grants for the simple reason that they are an investment and there is a really big return on almost all of them. Hopefully Dr. Paul can see the difference there. That said, I think that is the last thing Dr. Paul will want to do because he'll cut the less worthy programs first.

 

[BrianH]

the proper thing to do: eliminate it at the fed level and leave it to the states

that seems the best answer, and eliminating income tax so families have more money for education

 

[unklejman]

I have a private 13,000 living expense loan and the interest rate is absolutely kicking my butt. I do have a small bit of borrowed money from the gov that went to tuition.
The school was private.

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

that seems the best answer, and eliminating income tax so families have more money for education

I prefer a system of voluntary contributions

 

[Pauliana]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...10/19/AR2007101902607.html?hpid=sec-education

"The inspector general concluded last year that the government had overpaid one lender, Nebraska-based Nelnet, $278 million from 2003 to 2005 -- a finding the lender disputes. In addition, a Washington Post analysis of data obtained recently through the Freedom of Information Act suggests that potential overpayments to other lenders from 2003 to 2006 could total roughly $300 million."

Typical government waste. Should be handled privately by people who are accountable for their....well, accounts.

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...10/19/AR2007101902607.html?hpid=sec-education

"The inspector general concluded last year that the government had overpaid one lender, Nebraska-based Nelnet, $278 million from 2003 to 2005 -- a finding the lender disputes. In addition, a Washington Post analysis of data obtained recently through the Freedom of Information Act suggests that potential overpayments to other lenders from 2003 to 2006 could total roughly $300 million."

Typical government waste. Should be handled privately by people who are accountable for their....well, accounts.

Supporters of the status quo just say "it's what the people want; they vote for the status quo." What if the majority of voters are just ignorant on this issue? They don't know what they want because they have never had the freedom to decide for themselves. You know zombie public education won't teach you anything like this, so what other education is out there that will teach individuals about the disaster of big government? Only self teaching, you really believe the majority of Americans teach themselves anything?

 

[jmdrake]

Hey troll, then you send them a check! Or hell, maybe they don't need to go to school? How about the kids get a friggin job.

Not everybody that disagrees with you is a troll! It's a legitimate question. Frankly I do agree that lower taxes will make it easier for anyone to go to school. And there are other options beyond "four year live in dorm" college like online schools. Plus a lot of states already give a lot of scholarship money to needy students PROVIDED that they maintain a decent GPA and there's a ton of private scholarship money out there that people aren't always aware of. THAT is a proper response to someone concerned about the cost of higher education, but is otherwise considering a vote for Dr. Paul. Being rude and calling them a "troll" is not.

Also when asked about medicare Dr. Paul has CONSISTENTLY said that he would have a transition period where we wean people off dependency. I would think the same thing goes for other programs like student loans. The key is ending our ongoing empire (bases around the world in Japan, Germany, Iraq etc) so that we actually have money to continue FUNDING programs to help people even as we transition away from them.

Regards,

John M. Drake

 

[jmdrake]

Ron Paul would actually help in leveling the playing field. We should get rid of public education, which would end the HS Diploma. All colleges require a HS diploma, right? SATs? Well, when you eliminate public education, this will eliminate the government barriers from education. Also, people will be able to attend all sorts of different schools. It would be freer. America currently embraces big government and corporatism, therefore, corporations work with government (as they do now in this quasi fascist country) to filter out the unwanted population (majority) so that they can force them to join the low level work force to slave for the corporations.

HS diplomas existed before public education. They just came from private schools and they may have been called something else. Also the idea of public education wasn't foreign to the founding fathers. Thomas Jefferson was an early proponent for public education because he saw IT as a way to "level the playing field".

http://www.servintfree.net/~aidmn-e...2001-11/PublicEducationInTheUnitedStates.html

Also as president Dr. Paul couldn't abolish public education even if he wanted to because states have the right to have public education if they wish. He could abolish federal involvement in public education and I think he should.

You mentioned the SATs (and ACTs)? No college or university is required by law to use them. Some don't. Many only accept the ACT instead of the SAT and vice versa. The free market allows colleges and universities to "decide" if these tests will be important or not. The problem now is all of the NCLB federally mandated testing that's going on.

Regards,

John M. Drake

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

HS diplomas existed before public education. They just came from private schools and they may have been called something else. Also the idea of public education wasn't foreign to the founding fathers. Thomas Jefferson was an early proponent for public education because he saw IT as a way to "level the playing field".

http://www.servintfree.net/~aidmn-e...2001-11/PublicEducationInTheUnitedStates.html

Also as president Dr. Paul couldn't abolish public education even if he wanted to because states have the right to have public education if they wish. He could abolish federal involvement in public education and I think he should.

You mentioned the SATs (and ACTs)? No college or university is required by law to use them. Some don't. Many only accept the ACT instead of the SAT and vice versa. The free market allows colleges and universities to "decide" if these tests will be important or not. The problem now is all of the NCLB federally mandated testing that's going on.

Regards,

John M. Drake

So? I never challenged the internal working of PRIVATE schools; I'm challenging the monopoly of public education. And I don't care about anyone's opinion on justifying public education, we'll just leave it for the states to decide on their education policies.

 

[jmdrake]

So? I never challenged the internal working of PRIVATE schools; I'm challenging the monopoly of public education. And I don't care about anyone's opinion on justifying public education, we'll just leave it for the states to decide on their education policies.

You claimed that getting rid of public school education would somehow "level the playing field" because there would be no "HS diploma". I'm saying that logic is faulty. I also agree that states should decide their education policies. But that is NOT the same as saying that public school should be abolished. There were public schools in America long before the federal government tried to take them over and there will continue to be public schools even if a President Paul abolishes the department of education. Abolish the dept of ed? Yes. Abolish public schools? That's up to the states.

Regards,

John M. Drake

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

You claimed that getting rid of public school education would somehow "level the playing field" because there would be no "HS diploma". I'm saying that logic is faulty. I also agree that states should decide their education policies. But that is NOT the same as saying that public school should be abolished. There were public schools in America long before the federal government tried to take them over and there will continue to be public schools even if a President Paul abolishes the department of education. Abolish the dept of ed? Yes. Abolish public schools? That's up to the states.

Regards,

John M. Drake

Seems you have a problem with my personal opinions on public education. I believe in complete separation of state and economy; this includes education. In the US we have state's rights, that's the only barrier from just scraping public education entirely.

 

[jmdrake]

Seems you have a problem with my personal opinions on public education. I believe in complete separation of state and economy; this includes education. In the US we have state's rights, that's the only barrier from just scraping public education entirely.

I could care less about your personal opinions regarding education. I'm just saying that A) scrapping public education wouldn't automagically have the effect you're expecting and B) this isn't really a presidential election issue. Like you said (and I said before that) states have the right to have public schools if they wish. And many of the founding fathers apparently felt that public education was a good idea as a way to level the playing field. (As opposed to the playing field being leveled by not having HS.) I agree with those that say there are a LOT of problems with the public school system today. The answers IMO are to get the federal government OUT and to lower taxes so that people will have more money to either choose home school or private school if they wish.

Regards,

John M. Drake

 

[Adamsa]

Without an income tax saving is easier.

 

[Meatwasp]

In the old days you got a job and saved for your own education. After doing this you can have a Clledge trained mind. Ugh

 

[Meatwasp]

Ps I better correct my spelling or I will be urged to go to College.

 

[Santana28]

I'd imagine Ron would address making the cost of college more affordable so that anyone who is so inclined would be able to realistically afford it and not go into debt for the rest of their lives. I'd also imagine somewhere down the road a rise in company-sponsored vocational training programs.

Just imagine going to the doctor and actually being able to pay for it out of pocket? Wow, that will be the day. Ron Paul has given me hope.

 

[Santana28]

I could care less about your personal opinions regarding education. I'm just saying that A) scrapping public education wouldn't automagically have the effect you're expecting and B) this isn't really a presidential election issue. Like you said (and I said before that) states have the right to have public schools if they wish. And many of the founding fathers apparently felt that public education was a good idea as a way to level the playing field. (As opposed to the playing field being leveled by not having HS.) I agree with those that say there are a LOT of problems with the public school system today. The answers IMO are to get the federal government OUT and to lower taxes so that people will have more money to either choose home school or private school if they wish.

Part of the problem is the culture that has been created which now treats a college education as the "benchmark" requirement for any living-wage job. Back when my parents were growing up, Vocational and Trade programs were strong and college was something for those so inclined as to become Doctors, or Lawyers. Not everyone had to put themselves into debt in order have a decent life (usually Federal loans, so i'd consider this yet ANOTHER tax - The "Right to a Decent Life" tax). As the people i grew up with went to college, i saw the majority of them pushed into college by their parents before they were ready - and then drop out, flunk out, get thrown out, change majors several times and THEN drop out, or go to school and in debt for something that they discovered they had absolutely NO interest for when they graduated. The reality that no one these days wants to admit is that NOT EVERYONE is ready/will use/is able to complete a college education. Some people don't have the inclination, or simply appreciate good hard laborous work. Meanwhile, society has placed more value on an expensive piece of paper saying that their employee is competent and capable, instead of being responsible for hiring employees with the proper skillset needed. Having universal standards in a public school system creates a caste system in this country that unfairly benefits those with personal wealth or connections. Yes, if you are willing to "play the game" and go into debt the rest of your life, you might possibly eventually succeed to the point where you get ahead. But under this system rarely if ever will anyone who starts out on the bottom ever catch up with those who are already leaps and bounds ahead in life.

 

[Corydoras]

Money is not the only thing that is debased in contemporary America. Education also is debased, and a college diploma means less than a high school diploma used to.