Current Events > Shouldn't people who paid their student loans get something?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Full disclosure, I never intend to pay off my loans. I'm banking entirely on the public service loan forgiveness program. Failing that, I have no real plan. So this isn't about me.

But just looking at the logic of the argument - like that train track meme where they parody opponents of student loan forgiveness because they don't want to switch the track to save people because other people have already been run over. But isn't it just as bad to ignore all those people that got run over?

Now, I understand why this will never happen in practical terms. There are so many procedural and political reasons it's a non starter.

But morally it seems totally justifiable to want some recompensation for people who paid their loans off already

---

how about they shut their mouth and know their damn role.

---

I, for one, don't think we should change laws if they don't benefit people in the past.

---

are the rest of us financially compensated when less fortunate people get food stamps?

---

I mean practically speaking, isnt it the case that biden can forgive federally owned debt via EO but any distribution to folks who have paid off their loans would take congress?
---

Oh you acknowledged the practical limits, im a bad reader
---

I'd rather they find a way to reduce cost in the future, then forgive loans now. People who took big loans already made their choice. New students haven't.

---

They get the life lesson that fulfilling your financial responsibilities is for suckers.

---

TheGoldenEel posted...

are the rest of us financially compensated when less fortunate people get food stamps?

No, but I don't think universal programs and means tested ones are comparable. If you mean student loan forgiveness should be structured like food stamps, that's different than the proposal I'm hearing

---

They get to see progress in action and be happy for others. Not whining about what they feel they're owed from decades earlier.

---

Balrog0 posted...

But morally it seems totally justifiable to want some recompensation for people who paid their loans off already

Does it though

If this is supposed to be helping those in need, wouldnt paid off loans indicate that you arent really as in need?

The more problematic part is giving money to folks who can pay off their loans just fine
That is future govt revenue that could have gone to the needier
Imo
---

I paid off my student loans like ten years ago and I have no problem with student loan forgiveness.

---

g980 posted...

The more problematic part is giving money to folks who can pay off their loans just fine
Imo

Yeah but people justify this without justifying what I'm asking about, which is what I don't understand

---

They already got something. They got themselves out of debt.


---

g980 posted...

The more problematic part is giving money to folks who can pay off their loans just fine
Imo

Should public utilities only be available to people who can't afford better?

---

whitelytning posted...

They already got something. They got themselves out of debt.

Haha, what? How is this any different than, like, "they already got a college degree on my dime"

---

If you've already paid of your loans, you clearly weren't having a "crisis" over it.

Any policy that would compensate students who have already paid their loans would resort to picking cut off dates and people will still feel screwed over by it.

It's just easier to forgive current unpaid loans than to compensate people who have already paid them off whether that was last year or decades ago.

---

JustMyOpinion posted...

No, but people don't usually choose to be poor. People chose to go to college although admittedly maybe they weren't fully aware of the cost or job prospects.

Every American is told they will be a worthless piece of shit living in a box if they don't go to college immediately after high school.

---

SquirtleSkwad posted...

They get to see progress in action and be happy for others. Not whining about what they feel they're owed from decades earlier.

Why can't we tell that to the people with loans? We can work on reducing the cost of college for future students, and those with loans get to see progress in action and be happy for them, not whining about what they feel they're owed from choices they made years earlier.

---

hockeybub89 posted...

Every American is told they will be a worthless piece of shit living in a box if they don't go to college immediately after high school.

And now you're living in a box, but with a meaningless "fine arts" degree!

The most hilarious thing to me is those people that freak out when people who paid off their loans want help too, they call them selfish and other names. But then when you bring up that we need to change student loans at the source so we can give a better future to all kids instead of just waving loans for the current group they absolutely lose their s*** screaming about how they need their money

I've noticed many people on this board specifically who are all for student loan forgiveness upset about unemployment payments, someone got more than them etc, so to me in the end it's all pure selfishness. Most of these people crying for forgiveness while attacking those who paid their loans off are pathetically transparent at this point.

---

TendoDRM posted...

Why can't we tell that to the people with loans? We can work on reducing the cost of college for future students, and those with loans get to see progress in action and be happy for them, not whining about what they feel they're owed from choices they made years earlier.

So it's not fair if these people now get something you didn't, but it will be fair if people in 2 generations get what you didn't?

---

BignutzisBack posted...

The most hilarious thing to me is those people that freak out when people who paid off their loans want help too, they call them selfish and other names. But then when you bring up that we need to change student loans at the source so we can give a better future to all kids instead of just waving loans for the current group they absolutely lose their s*** screaming about how they need their money

Any student loan forgiveness that isn't coupled with significant reforms on handing out more loans, just means we'll be right back here all over again in a few years.

Tmaster148 posted...

Any policy that would compensate students who have already paid their loans would resort to picking cut off dates and people will still feel screwed over by it.

It's just easier to forgive current unpaid loans than to compensate people who have already paid them off whether that was last year or decades ago.

Yeah, there are lots of reasons things might not happen. I suspect if we ever take reparations seriously in this country, we'll run into tons of administrative and political issues with distribution, for example. I'm just asking about it at a basic moral level

---

People who have paid student loans do get something, an intact credit rating. They should just amend the bankruptcy code to allow student loans to be dischargable.

CarrieChan posted...

They should just amend the bankruptcy code to allow student loans to be dischargable.

This.

Not having to pay the income tax on the forgiven loans is what they get.
---

Are you guys saying it's time for me to take out a loan and get my bachelors in education? >_>

Cause that's what it sounds like

---

No, that's silly.

---

IShall_Run_Amok posted...

No, that's silly.

What's silly about it?

---

Ideally because the whole system is bogus. But not doing so shouldn't get in the way of relief for people currently under the gun.

---

The thing I don't understand about this is that Public Student Loan Forgiveness already exists. It's already a service available to a small percentage of the population, where all your loans are automatically forgiven after 10 years, and the forgiveness is not taxable. But I don't see any outrage about people wanting to be compensated for not being eligible for that program when it first started in 2007.

Also, this isn't the first time something became available to people and previous people didn't get compensated.
- When Lasek was created, people with lifelong eye problems weren't compensated for all the money spent on glasses and contacts while newly-vision-impaired people got the treatment immediately
- Families of those who died of incurable medical conditions weren't compensated when a cure for that condition was invented that helps people today
- When Medicaid expansion became a thing and more people became eligible for Medicaid, no one who would have qualified for that expansion before it was passed was compensated for the years they didn't get it
- Many school districts across the nation have shifted to a free lunch format for the whole district (instead of only serving free-lunch-eligible students) so all students get fed regardless of income. Any families whose kids are now out of school are not getting compensated for the years of school lunches they had to pay for their kids simply because now all kids get free lunch.

That's just how progress works. When something new comes around, you can't retroactively compensate everyone who existed before that new thing came. Where would it end? If that were the case, nothing new could ever be introduced.

---

Yes they should, but stopping the creation of new victims should be more important than making things right for old victims. Remove the student loan problem, THEN try and help people who escaped it.

Like, legit, if you've already paid for it, the IRS could put a gold star on your file and give you a small tax break or something for like 4 years.

---

JustMyOpinion posted...

I mean, job prospects aren't great if you don't go unless you're looking into a trade school. It's also the case that job prospects with certain degrees or certain schools isn't much better either.

Doesn't matter. Figure out your life right now, high schoolers, or you might as well kill yourselves.

We don't set these kids up for success. This is the reason we see bad degrees and people taking out loans they can't pay back.

---

If you rephrase your question as "shouldn't people who aren't in trouble also get help?" it looks quite different. Forgiving student loans would be a measure to lift a lot of people out of crippling debt. But the goal should be that no one is in crippling debt, no? So no, I don't think people who are ahead need help. People who are struggling because they spent all their savings paying off their student loans? Naturally they deserve as secure a life as anyone else.

---

Zanzenburger posted...

The thing I don't understand about this is that Public Student Loan Forgiveness already exists. It's already a service available to a small percentage of the population, where all your loans are automatically forgiven after 10 years, and the forgiveness is not taxable. But I don't see any outrage about people wanting to be compensated for not being eligible for that program when it first started in 2007.

The logic behind it is that nonprofit and government compensation is lower than private for profit, but socially valuable enough to subsidize. General student loan forgiveness is available to everyone, but in a much longer timeline. I do see people mad about it, but it's not been successful enough to get much notoriety.

Zanzenburger posted...

Also, this isn't the first time something became available to people and previous people didn't get compensated.
- When Lasek was created, people with lifelong eye problems weren't compensated for all the money spent on glasses and contacts while newly-vision-impaired people got the treatment immediately
- Families of those who died of incurable medical conditions weren't compensated when a cure for that condition was invented that helps people today
- When Medicaid expansion became a thing and more people became eligible for Medicaid, no one who would have qualified for that expansion before it was passed was compensated for the years they didn't get it
- Many school districts across the nation have shifted to a free lunch format for the whole district (instead of only serving free-lunch-eligible students) so all students get fed regardless of income. Any families whose kids are now out of school are not getting compensated for the years of school lunches they had to pay for their kids simply because now all kids get free lunch.

Two of these aren't public policies, and two of them aren't an individual benefit, but social welfare policies. So I don't really see the similarities. Though if we could recompensate families for student lunches and medical debt that wouldn't be bad.

Zanzenburger posted...

That's just how progress works. When something new comes around, you can't retroactively compensate everyone who existed before that new thing came. Where would it end? If that were the case, nothing new could ever be introduced.

Maybe not every time, but I'm sure you could sometimes.

---

scar the 1 posted...

If you rephrase your question as "shouldn't people who aren't in trouble also get help?" it looks quite different. Forgiving student loans would be a measure to lift a lot of people out of crippling debt. But the goal should be that no one is in crippling debt, no? So no, I don't think people who are ahead need help. People who are struggling because they spent all their savings paying off their student loans? Naturally they deserve as secure a life as anyone else.

It does, but it's not a fair rephrasing. Many people who have student loan debt don't need help, either. This logic leads to means testing forgiveness, which is fine but different than what people seem to want

---

They should. I paid mine all off, at a huge opportunity cost. Could be making hundreds of thousands in the market. If Biden forgives $10k (which he won't, but if he does) I'd like a few grand tossed my way as well. For my troubles.

---

If you can prove that you paid your student loans and that your degree hasnt helped you get work, then you should be able to get your money back somehow.

College can definitely help you get ahead in life, but it can also make sure youre in six figures of debt when youre still young. To be honest, college is basically a scam unless you know exactly what you want to do, which most 18 year olds dont know. Society pressures college on people when theyre too young and immature to handle it.

If I enrolled in college today at age 32, I would get more out of it than I would have at age 18.

Balrog0 posted...

Two of these aren't public policies, and two of them aren't an individual benefit, but social welfare policies. So I don't really see the similarities. Though if we could recompensate families for student lunches and medical debt that wouldn't be bad.

Can you clarify what you mean how two of them aren't an individual benefit? To me, getting access to free lunch or free healthcare despite people who didn't have it before follows the same rationale as getting access to student debt forgiveness despite people who didn't have it before. In both situations, a social service was added to help a struggling population, but the people who suffered before the service was implemented were not being compensated. You can even argue that under the free lunch mandate, a lot of rich kids are now getting their lunch subsidized by the government, while kids from poor families who didn't qualify for free lunch before had to pay for their meals for years simply because they didn't meet the income threshold.

But if you're saying that in all three cases we should compensate those who did not benefit from this new law, I guess I agree with you on a moral standpoint, but as you stated in the OP, there is just no feasible way to do this, practically speaking.

---

Paying your loan builds credit

---

If they do then you would have to get in line behind people who's lives were destroyed by marijuana laws. And reparations for slavery. There are a ton of instances of people getting fucked by the state and/or society, public sentiment finally changing over time, and no reimbursements being made. Partly because it doesn't matter, right? The money is the least of it. It's all the opportunities and time you missed because of your debt (or your time as a slave, or time in jail for a small amount of pot). No one can go back and give you that.

---

Zanzenburger posted...

Can you clarify what you mean how two of them aren't an individual benefit?

Sure, so for example, if you leave Arkansas you don't get Arkansas works. If you leave the school district, you don't get free lunch. The program is tied to the place. The logic isn't so much for the individual benefit, but the public benefits.

Student loan forgiveness is portable. You benefit from it even when you leave the jurisdiction. There are social benefits, but the primary motivation seems individual (not "this school district needs well fed students to succeed" but "with less debt these people can make a future for themselves"). Of course they aren't mutually exclusive, but they're structured differently.

You could consider this an administrative barrier, but I don't because states and school districts opt into those things, not people


---