• randon31415@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    Before the concept of “tuition free classes” meant “it costs nothing”, Britain was working with the idea of “anyone can take the class for free, but you have to pay a fee to take the final - and you can’t pass the class without taking the final.” Instead of having students take out loans and then something happens to them such that they can’t pass the class or they get so far behind that they know they will fail the class, they make the decision a week or so before the class is over to take out the loan. With everyone moving to post-videos-auto-graded-homework-online-only, the only real per-student cost is grading the exams anyway.

  • bean@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    As someone who was bright-eyed and bushy tailed when I started college, I was not expecting that being a student was a constant bleed of money.

    The college partnered with some student loan vendor? and that vendor issued only a debit card which only worked on campus at specific ATMs. There was no apps for this shit. There was no bank withdrawal. Is was only the card and the ATM. They charged a fee for every use of it. So when I need to get that tuition money, I had to pay to get my money. It limits at 300$ so you’d have to repeatedly get charged to take multiple sums out. Tuition was exorbitant too. Didn’t include cafeteria or anything else. Books also out of pocket and 3-4 new ones each semester. We were also forced to pay ‘health fees’ for access to the newly built rec center, which you paid whether you ever stepped foot there or not.

    Look it’s one thing to have a ‘way about things’ but by this point it was more like an excuse to fleece us for everything we had and more.

    After 2.5 years of it I finally had to get a job on top of everything just to afford to be there. The job then took most of my time and it was not easy working around the school schedule. I finally had to quit school. What did I do? I stayed in my job because it was the only income source I had as a young person without a college degree and at least I was literally getting working experience.

    Tell me, who benefited here? You can argue it was me, but I have no degree in my hand. I have now almost 20,000$ on top of my original amount (40k) due to interest. I’ve always struggled to make ends meet and I’m essentially trapped with this debt. Is this really fair? I didn’t know the true consequence of these loans adding up. It was only after I got so far and saw how big a problem was growing that I had to bail. There was no way I could afford it. I was a kid, I was told I had to go to college and I had no choices in life unless I did that. So much pressure growing up.

  • Skkorm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    Is this one of those things where is enough people don to pay, one of the financial systems will be ripped down?

  • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again: if you need your citizens to have a post-secondary education to keep your country humming along, MAKE IT AS EASY AS POSSIBLE FOR PEOPLE TO GET THE EDUCATION AND NOT BE BURDENED WITH BULLSHIT DEBT. FREE COLLEGE. FREE UNIVERSITY. FREE TRADES SCHOOL.

    • TechAnon@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      It’s already free. Everything is on the Internet. We need employers to step up and put in their own tests, questions, etc instead of relying on degrees to create a pool of potential employees. Some places already do this.

      • prole@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        We need employers to step up and put in their own tests, questions, etc instead of relying on degrees

        Oh yeah, let’s put control of post-secondary education into the hands of corporations. What could possibly go wrong?

        • TechAnon@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          This doesn’t put education into the hands of corporations. It’s here already… on the internet. You can watch entire Standford or MIT courses for nothing right now.

            • TechAnon@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              I learned new programming languages online using courses like those. I use them fairly consistently at work. I also went to a 4 year university prior to that. Learning online was both cheaper and faster. Also, a few university classes I took were 100% online. No difference except for cost.

              I test those that I hire now with real-world problems - all of which have college degrees due to company policy to limit which resumes I can see based on requirements. There’s a huge difference between these people - some don’t know anything and some are fairly well-versed. This standard education thing isn’t working.

              • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                9 months ago

                Online lectures are a tool you can use to educate yourself; the lectures aren’t educating you.

                Education is an action done by a human being.

                • TechAnon@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  If that’s your definition then it’s the same as college. Most courses I took had 200-300 students in a large auditorium where we just sat there a listened to the professor, took notes, read the book (that cost $300) and took a few tests. I also took a few online courses in obtaining my degree. Educating myself later was faster and more efficient.

  • paddirn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Can we start doing that with rent payments en masse? I really wish there was a big, organized campaign around this to force rental companies to stop charging these outrageous made-up numbers for rent based on “market value” (which they themselves set).

    With student loan payments, I sympathize and hope they all ultimately get their loans forgiven, but ultimately I think the rental situation is the worse offender that’s driving more of the issues that we’re seeing today. I try to pay on my loans/debts religiously, even if I hate the idea of paying all this extra interest on top of it.

  • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Real talk - How will not paying convince conservatives to be for student debt forgiveness? They’re the ones blocking loan forgiveness, and this is a demographic of people that does lean toward them, so why would they listen?

    IMHO, showing up to vote is what would actually put the fear of god into these politicians. Not paying a loan will totally fuck up your ability to rent, get a credit card, get reasonable car insurance, and even get a job. Bad credit is no joke.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Not paying a loan will totally fuck up your ability to rent, get a credit card, get reasonable car insurance, and even get a job.

      I don’t agree to credit checks from landlords.

      I have reasonable car insurance.

      I don’t agree to credit checks from employers.

      I do have a credit card and I test it once a month on a small purchase, usually coffee.

      Any other dire warnings you wish to inform me about that do not match the real world?

      • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Don’t match the real world? Just because you have been lucky to avoid that stuff doesn’t mean that a LOT of us haven’t experienced that stuff.

        Credit checks are common in housing markets with limited supply, all the largest auto insurance companies in the US now do credit checks, and jobs in industries like finance and security often add a credit check during your pre-hire background check.

        And god forbid you ever need some serious financial products like another loan. That is off the table.

          • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            It depends on your age and where you live. You may have gotten into housing, an insurance policy, or your gig before this trend took off.

            It’s now a big enough problem that a handful of states have started to draft and pass legislation that bans credit checks for insurance, housing, and employment. So, if you’re in a place like CA or MA, you might not notice that this is fair game in most of America.

            That said, a lot of this fuckery is still super common and fair game in most of the US.

            • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              Housing: 6 years ago

              Car insurance: I think about 3 maybe 2.

              Job: 3.5 years ago

              Do not live in CA or MA or a state that has rules like that. In fact 11 years ago a landlord did ask me and I said no. She backed down when I said I wasn’t going to bend on the issue. Of all the places in my life this was the only one that asked.

              But yeah you continue to worry

    • guacupado@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Yeah these people are only hurting themselves. The US isn’t hurting for cash and sooner or later those loans you’re avoiding turn into garnishments.

    • umbrella@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      strikes* will put the fear of god into politicians

      also the benefit of not paying off those loans is they are actually left with a bit more money.

    • TheGoldenGod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      It won’t, but I hope most of these people realize the only way it’ll change is consistently going to vote and keeping their family updated on what to vote on.

      • umbrella@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        you voted for the most liberal candidate you had available for presidency already.

  • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    Refusing to make payments on a debt that can never be repaid is smart.

    That guy wrecking his credit over $1200 is not.

  • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    I was gonna do this, then my partner badgered me into it saying she wanted to buy a house someday, and my credit being crap would screw that up.

    • glomag@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Your partner wants to finance a house someday. I know I’m on the losing side of this battle but I really wish people would stop associating BUYING a house with taking out a LOAN from a bank.

      It just feels like people are only deceiving themselves by saying “I need good credit to buy a house” when what they really mean is “I need good credit so I can take on a lot of debt and pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars in interest over the next 30 years.”

      • Signtist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Eh, I bought a house in 2020 just before the pandemic hit, and by the time I sold it late last year it had appreciated in value enough to completely offset the money I’d put into the mortgage. Essentially I’d lived there for 3.5 years for free.

        • glomag@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          Yes it sounds like everything worked out great for you. Good job on timing your investment! But this is a perfect example of the type of financialization of the housing market that I’m against. You used leverage to buy an expensive, risky asset and sold it for a profit just a few years later. This doesn’t always work out so well (ask anyone who bought a house in 2007) and I don’t want to put essentially all my savings into a wallstreetbets style gamble just so I can have somewhere to sleep at night.

          • Signtist@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            I certainly don’t think that the housing market is a wallstreetbets style gamble. If you’re getting a loan that you can afford on a house that’s not falling apart, it’ll generally rise in value over time. The only reason my house didn’t appreciate even more in value is because it was a cheap house in a bad neighborhood, and I did nothing to improve it while I was there. My sister’s house doubled in value in a little over twice as long as I had mine, and she already paid off her mortgage in just 10 years, albeit due to near-fanatical saving and planning. Even through 2008 people’s values usually went up if they managed to hold onto the house for a few years - it was a rocky time to be getting into or out of the market, but if you just stayed put, you made it out on top in the end.

            I agree that it shouldn’t be necessary to finance a purchase that’s worth several times more than your annual salary, hoping that nothing too bad happens in the meantime before you can cash it out, but it’s still the best investment your average low/middle class person has access to, and it’s a hell of a lot better than spending a comparable amount of money on an apartment that you’ve got nothing to show for in the end.

      • Doubletwist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        One way or the other, you’re paying every month. Either it’s rent (paying for the landlord’s house, including taxes, insurance and interest), or you’re paying towards your own. The general populous has never really been able to buy a house outright. One way or another you’re mortgaging your time to spread out the time to either pay for a house, or pay for property and building your own.

        Yes, people have been going WAY to far into debt, pushing the size and prices of houses to unsustainable levels. Hell my mom grew up just fine with 5ppl (2 parents, 3 kids) in an 800sqft house (plus a tiny finished attic) with 1 bathroom. Nobody really needs 2500-4000sqft houses.

        But even if we go back to reasonably sized homes, in no realistic world are mortgages going away.

        The best you can hope for is to live as cheaply as possible to save up a large down payment (and emergency fund), and buy only as much house as you really need, for as little interest as you can manage, and then pay it off as quickly as you can.

        • glomag@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          I’m not saying mortgages should completely go away. I’m sure a mortgage is the right decision for many people’s situations. It’s just the way that people talk about buying a house, a mortgage seems to be assumed. If it wasn’t just assumed then maybe people would put more thought into whether they want to save for a larger down payment (or the full price) or whether they want to pay $750,000 for a $400,000 house.
          I don’t know, maybe people see these numbers and think its a great deal. All I see is a bank making a huge amount of money from me that I would rather keep for myself. Also, if people stopped stretching their budget to the absolute limit with financing nonsense (3% down, variable rate loans, rate buydowns), in aggregate there would be less demand for houses at these high prices and sellers would have to start accepting lower offers.

      • Deceptichum@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        In 30 years they’ll be able to afford a shack in the middle of the Texan wastelands once global warming desolates the place.

  • frickineh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    Not very effective when they can just garnish your wages, your taxes, and your social security. I’m fully on the side that believes student loans desperately need reform, and Biden’s forgiveness plan getting shot down has definitely negatively impacted my life, but I’m not dealing with ruined credit and the stress that not paying causes when I know they’ll find a way to get their money unless I basically throw away my career to work cash jobs. That would impact my life way worse in the long run.

    • ReallyKinda@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Right now borrowers are incentivized to keep low income jobs and avoid settling down (they can’t buy houses anyway) which isn’t exactly excellent from a state perspective.

      • frickineh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        That kind of sounds like when people say that anyone on welfare could be doing better but chooses not to so they can keep their benefits. Of course there will always be people right on the cusp who determine that the little extra money they’d make by working more hours or trying to get a slightly better job won’t make up for what they’d lose (either in benefits or in savings from a lower student loan payment), but anyone who can afford to do significantly better generally tries to do that for a lot of reasons.

        • ReallyKinda@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          Sure but right now you can essentially defer forever under 60k, 60k vs 120k I absolutely agree, but that usually happens in steps and $60k to $70k you might not see a benefit.

      • skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Not factoring in the borrowers that still have student loans from a decade or two or three ago and can’t just upend their now-established lives by halting payment. They’ll be forced to keep paying and keep that turd floating, not by choice, mind you.

  • andros_rex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    I took out my student loans to get a teaching degree. I worked full time during school, but tuition at my public university was 10k$/year when I was making $16k. My state has effectively made it illegal to be transgender in a public school, so despite a devastating shortage in my area of expertise, I can no longer work in the career I took the loans out for. My option is now to take out more student loans to pay for a masters degree and hope that I’ll be able to save up enough to move out of state, because I want to do the thing that I love to do and am good at. I will be a debt slave for the rest of my life.

      • andros_rex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        The state that just hired the LibsOfTikTok person to evaluate school materials… and is going after a principal’s license for dressing in drag on the weekends. Imma be vague because my life sucks enough without getting Chaya involved…

    • EssentialCoffee@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      You should look trying to move to a state before taking the loans. Plenty of states need teachers and are willing to pay for you to get your master’s as part of retaining you.

  • jamesmor0207@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    All these comments whining about how this will hurt credit scores, pay attention to the laws that we have currently. Student loan companies cannot take any action on unpaid loans for 1 year from the start of repayment. Interest still accrues but they cannot garish wages like all these morons are saying. That means for most, you don’t need to pay anything until after the next election. Use the only leverage we have and don’t pay back the loan for at least a year. Make them earn the vote and do something else to cancel these loans

    • ReallyKinda@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      If so joke’s on them, they didn’t put the propaganda in the headline so this will just make more people boycott. And if it leads to financial ruin for 1 in 10 borrowers that just costs the taxpayers even more.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Like housing they can’t afford anyway?

      If they system isn’t going to give anything back for being a good citizen, then why would they? There’s too much stick and not enough carrot.

  • OpenStars@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    I mean… right or wrong, FAAFO with banks does not sound fun, I hope they have an exit strategy like to live with someone else as they drop off the grid.:-|

    • bhmnscmm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      I agree. More power to them, but I’m way too risk adverse to personsally stop paying. I genuinely hope they can induce some change. I guess that makes me a scab.

      I hope this debt is forgiven someday, but I don’t have enough faith in the powers that be to risk my future on it.

      • OpenStars@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        I mentioned to someone else replying at the same time as you did:

        Don’t beat yourself up - that’s the banks job.

        Like if someone scams you and you follow them to their house, break in and take your money back… you become the assailant at that point - e.g. if someone spots you, maybe not even the owner, and shoots you dead or whatever, then the fact that it’s their house is all that police are going to see and care about.

        Movies and TV shows about vigilantes are fun to watch but the reality is that it is quite dangerous. Right or wrong, they have the entire weight of society behind them.

        Find a way to resist that does not involve the likelihood of losing everything you have.:-)

      • OpenStars@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Don’t beat yourself up - that’s the banks job.

        Like if someone scams you and you follow them to their house, break in and take your money back… you become the assailant at that point - e.g. if someone spots you, maybe not even the owner, and shoots you dead or whatever, then the fact that it’s their house is all that police are going to see and care about.

        Movies and TV shows about vigilantes are fun to watch but the reality is that it is quite dangerous. Right or wrong, they have the entire weight of society behind them.

        Find a way to resist that does not involve the likelihood of losing everything you have.:-)

        • Donkter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          What if they’ve built a system where peaceful resistance is encouraged but designed to be ineffective so the only way to resist effectively is to risk everything you have?

          • OpenStars@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            Then feel free to do so, bc at that point you know what you are risking, and more importantly what you are fighting for.

            The banks won’t really care either way ofc. But you will notice, and at the end of the day that’s what matters.:-) There are worse things to lose than merely your life - like your soul (center of being).

            Although… it wasn’t the banks who caused the colleges to scam students into getting loans. And most professors and staff at the colleges resisted the conversion into becoming for-profit - many (those who could) literally quit over it. The ones who caused that though have likely already cashed out and walked away.

            But even they weren’t the ones who changed our economy from being one that worked FOR the people into one that used people to build more wealth for the already obscenely wealthy, and in so doing not hiring people with college degrees. As so many documentaries (like Inequality For or All) explain, that was Reagan on behalf of Republicans who broke the backs of the unions, and everything since has only reinforced and strengthened those steps.