Does U.S. Need To Split Along Political Lines?

[Soul Crusher]

I'm giving you a chance to tell us what you know so what's stopping you.

Tell me how it used to work and what has changed

just give us the facts

I already posted a few threads about it.  Look it up. 

[Jezebelle]

Anyone remember Ronald Reagan administration’s failure to regulate the S&Ls which resulted in a bailout of investors by taxpayers of at least 200 billion?

Or President Bush giving the Airlines a Bailout after September 11th?

[Soul Crusher]

Anyone remember Ronald Reagan administration’s failure to regulate the S&Ls which resulted in a bailout of investors by taxpayers of at least 200 billion?

Or President Bush giving the Airlines a Bailout after September 11th?

Two wrongs dont make a right. 

[BM OUT]

takeover = CEO's of various industries coming to Washington to beg for a bailout

Health Insurance companies still a legal monopoly thanks to the government

go back to watching your wrasslin videos and stop making such stupid and uniformed statements

Are they not dictating CEO pay?YES!!Did they take over the auto industry and give it to filthy unions?Yes!Take over the student loan program?Yes!!Force companies to pay idiotic amounts to insure employees?Yes!

Not one thing can you refute.Cap and trade a private industry killer.Card check a private sector killer.

Go back to watching MSNBC and keep believing their lies.You and the other 500,000 idiots in this country.

[Straw Man]

I already posted a few threads about it.  Look it up. 

what is it with you man?

I asked you a simple question and you first give me talking points and then brag about how much you know and then you won't even bother to cut and paste your own words into this thread or even link the thread you want me to go look at

what are the odds you are as misinformed about this topic as you are on almost every other topic?

you said :  

The govt has no business whatsoever obligating you or I to subsidize school loans.  

but isn't that exactly how it worked under the old program?

The old system consisted of guaranteed loans — the government would pay private banks to lend money to students for tuition, and guarantee their losses if the students defaulted.

Is this the program you want to keep in place?

Think aboutthis next question for more than a 2 seconds before you reply.

Is there anything under this new legislation that prevents banks from making student loans?

[Straw Man]

Are they not dictating CEO pay?YES!!Did they take over the auto industry and give it to filthy unions?Yes!Take over the student loan program?Yes!!Force companies to pay idiotic amounts to insure employees?Yes!

Not one thing can you refute.Cap and trade a private industry killer.Card check a private sector killer.

Go back to watching MSNBC and keep believing their lies.You and the other 500,000 idiots in this country.

All the CEO's had to do was not take the private money they came to Washington and begged for

right?

[Soul Crusher]

what is it with you man?

I asked you a simple question and you first give me talking points and then brag about how much you know and then you won't even bother to cut and paste your own words into this thread or even link the thread you want me to go look at

what are the odds you are as misinformed about this topic as you are on almost every other topic?

you said :  
but isn't that exactly how it worked under the old program?

The old system consisted of guaranteed loans — the government would pay private banks to lend money to students for tuition, and guarantee their losses if the students defaulted.

Is this the program you want to keep in place?

Think aboutthis next question for more than a 2 seconds before you reply.

Is there anything under this new legislation that prevents banks from making student loans?

I am busy as hell today and dont have time for lengthy repsonses.  I dont think the govt should have anything whatsoever to do with school loans.  

Why should Straw Man subsidize a defaulted student loan?  

[Straw Man]

I am busy as hell today and dont have time for lengthy repsonses.  I dont think the govt should have anything whatsoever to do with school loans.  

Why should Straw Man subsidize a defaulted student loan?  

yet somehow after saying this you had the time to post an article about Maddow not watching TV

FACT or FICTION?

The old system consisted of guaranteed loans — the government would pay private banks to lend money to students for tuition, and guarantee their losses if the students defaulted.


FACT or FICTION?


Is there anything preventing private banks from continuing to make student loans if they chose to do so?

[Soul Crusher]

No, however, the govt is now going to have to hire 35,000 or more GOVT EMPLOYEES to administer this nonsense that you and I have to pay for. 

I still see no reason whatsoever why the govt is involved in this. 

[BM OUT]

All the CEO's had to do was not take the private money they came to Washington and begged for

right?

The banks paid the money back or are in the process of doing so.Has GM or Fanny and Freddy?The government has made 50 billion on the bailout,how much have we made with GM or the stimulus.Anyone cutting the pay for fanny and freddy ceo?

[Straw Man]

No, however, the govt is now going to have to hire 35,000 or more GOVT EMPLOYEES to administer this nonsense that you and I have to pay for. 

I still see no reason whatsoever why the govt is involved in this. 

"no" to what question?

the old system was literally risk free/free money deal for banks

you're saying you're in favor of that system?

[Straw Man]

The banks paid the money back or are in the process of doing so.Has GM or Fanny and Freddy?The government has made 50 billion on the bailout,how much have we made with GM or the stimulus.Anyone cutting the pay for fanny and freddy ceo?

wait - a few posts up you were calling it a Takeover and you were crying for those poor CEO's and now you're back to calling it a bailout and you're mad at the CEO's

make up your mind

[Soul Crusher]

No, I am not in favor of the govt, taxpayer, you or me having to be on the hook for adminstering or guarantying this mess. 

[Straw Man]

No, I am not in favor of the govt, taxpayer, you or me having to be on the hook for adminstering or guarantying this mess. 

well that's how the old system worked to except banks also got a risk free profit

[Soul Crusher]

Fine, but I would change it to where the banks got the risk as well. 

The taxpayer should not be profiting or losing on school loans.  They should have nothing to do with school loans in the first place. 

[Skip8282]

Is there anything preventing private banks from continuing to make student loans if they chose to do so?

Not legally, but effectively it's likely to stop it as private banks won't be able to match the interest rates offered.  The Feds ran into this problem in 07 already with interest rate requirements, so we have a fairly good idea and what the result will be.


As for 33's claim about more government jobs, that's not correct.  The new program is designed to contract out the administration of this program to non-profit organizations (I think the bill calls them "servicers").

I suppose I could go either way on this.  Lot's of good paying private sector jobs may be lost and nobody knows what type of offset the non-profits will provide.  But, we can't cry about the "stupidity" rampant in America and then say "fuck you" when it comes to education.  We're not giving it away free, they still have to payback the money, so...maybe it's not such a bad idea.

[the_steevo_uk]

Yo guys chill

arent your election participation rates about 60%
if so that means 40% of the country really doesnt give a damn about politics, which means even if those at the edges of the 60% wanted to split theyd be in a massive minority...as for texas being a red state, theres some pretty blue areas there, huston and austin to name two. you couldnt split the country in to red centre and blue coasts anymore it would be impossible.

[Straw Man]

Not legally, but effectively it's likely to stop it as private banks won't be able to match the interest rates offered.  The Feds ran into this problem in 07 already with interest rate requirements, so we have a fairly good idea and what the result will be.


As for 33's claim about more government jobs, that's not correct.  The new program is designed to contract out the administration of this program to non-profit organizations (I think the bill calls them "servicers").

I suppose I could go either way on this.  Lot's of good paying private sector jobs may be lost and nobody knows what type of offset the non-profits will provide.  But, we can't cry about the "stupidity" rampant in America and then say "fuck you" when it comes to education.  We're not giving it away free, they still have to payback the money, so...maybe it's not such a bad idea.

perhaps so but banks weren't making student loans until we gave them a "no lose" proposition in the form of financial incentives and loan guarantees.

We already started direct lending for student loans in the early 1990's so this is nothing new

[Skip8282]

perhaps so but banks weren't making student loans until we gave them a "no lose" proposition in the form of financial incentives and loan guarantees.

We already started direct lending for student loans in the early 1990's so this is nothing new

No, it's not new but I think we have to consider it on the whole.  Certainly the customer service aspect for students is out the window.  Contractors, even nonprofits, only have to abide by the letter of the contract (not the spirit), and they typically do.  Students will have to make certain they dot all their "i's" and cross all their "t's".  The new servicers may or may not offset jobloss in the current system.  There's a great deal of controversy over government estimated default rates.  Tying rates to income is probably a good thing (IMO), though others may disagree.

Can't say I hate the new program, can't say I like it.  Suppose it's just one of those "wait and see" things.

[JohnC1908]

if you honestly believe Obama is destroying the private sector and he is doing so purposely then you need to go check yourself into a mental hospital

no joke - if you believe this then you're crazy

333 same goes for you

I will gladly check myself in. Every president since Woodrow Wilson has taken more and more from the private sector during their tenure. The only president who has attempted to let shit be is Coolidge. If you believe politicians are looking out for your own best interest you are either ignorant or crazy.

[Straw Man]

I will gladly check myself in. Every president since Woodrow Wilson has taken more and more from the private sector during their tenure. The only president who has attempted to let shit be is Coolidge. If you believe politicians are looking out for your own best interest you are either ignorant or crazy.

I certainly don't believe Obama is purposely destroying the private sector

that's just beyond nutty

[JohnC1908]

I certainly don't believe Obama is purposely destroying the private sector

that's just beyond nutty

Not all at once, but he is doing his damn best. It is in his own best interest to do so. The more the govt. takes from the private sector, the more they benefit.

[Straw Man]

Not all at once, but he is doing his damn best. It is in his own best interest to do so. The more the govt. takes from the private sector, the more they benefit.

would you care to flesh this out a bit more

exactly who is the "they" you are referring to and how to "they" benefit?

[JohnC1908]

would you care to flesh this out a bit more

exactly who is the "they" you are referring to and how to "they" benefit?

Congress, lobbyists, connected donors, bailed out CEOs...basically all receipients of our unaccounted tax money.

[Straw Man]

Congress, lobbyists, connected donors, bailed out CEOs...basically all receipients of our unaccounted tax money.

so all of these groups want to to destroy the private sector and they all benefit from said destruction?

are you serious man?