- Quickdraw McLaw
- 49 Comments
- 172 Views
- Forgive the loans already. [TNI]
- Judge Gloria Sturman orders City of North Las Vegas to hold election for municipal judge position. [Las Vegas Sun]
- Las Vegas man faces federal charges after election worker threatened. [RJ]
- You don’t look like a lawyer. [ABA Journal]
Happy Friday.
I found the recipe for the Alpine Village Soup. It was printed in the Review Journal as recently as 2019. I have not tried it, yet.
ALPINE VILLAGE CHICKEN SUPREME SOUP
2 quarts water
2 teaspoons celery salt
2 teaspoons Accent
1 pound ground chicken (cooked)
1 medium onion, ground
2 teaspoons salt
1/4 teaspoon pepper
1 teaspoon Kitchen Bouquet
2 tablespoons chicken bouillon
2 to 3 carrots (ground)
Yellow food coloring (optional)
Roux:
1/2 cup oil
1 cup flour
Boil all soup ingredients together for about 30 minutes. To prepare the roux, heat oil until smoking, add flour and stir with a wire whisk. It should be the consistency of mashed potatoes. Add to soup and use the wire whisk to blend. Adjust the color with yellow food coloring.
ENJOY!
Anyone know the date of the post with the dip recipe? Thank you in advance.
ALPINE VILLAGE COTTAGE CHEESE SEASONING
2 lbs cottage cheese, small curd
1⁄2 teaspoon caraway seed
1 1⁄2 teaspoons sugar
1 teaspoon Accent seasoning
1⁄2 teaspoon white pepper
1 tablespoon dried chives
1⁄2 teaspoon celery salt
Mix all ingredients together and chill for several hours or overnight.
Serve as a condiment or as a dip with veggie sticks.
I recall that the Alpine Village served a traditional European crudite in an ice cold pewter bowl including celery, carrots, green onions, grape tomatoes and radishes.
You cannot possibly know how excited I am to get that soup recipe! Thanks 10:41!
Back to the tired "forgive the loans in their entirety" argument. It will never happen. There are too many kids taking federally-backed student loans to go on spring break trips, live in luxury apartments, buy the newest Macbooks, etc. IF ANYTHING, the forgiveness should be capped at the student's tuition (i.e., if a student attends four years of undergrad where tuition is $10,000 a year, but takes out a total of $60,000 because they need $20,000 for "living expenses, only the $40,000 is forgivable). Alternatively, and preferably, I am okay with amending the BK laws to making student loans dischargeable.
Getting rid of interest viable?
" There are too many kids taking federally-backed student loans to go on spring break trips, live in luxury apartments, buy the newest Macbooks, etc."
Citation please.
What year did you graduate from law school, 10:54? 1992?
Don't forgive the debts. Don't get rid of interest. Just restore bankruptcy protection. Going forward, make colleges and universities indemnify a portion of the loans. Forcing them to have skin in the game will bring tuition costs down for everyone.
@11:01- OP here, I graduated in 2019… I know EXACTLY what some (not all) students do with the student loan money. Because its not a small fraction of the student population, unfortunately, the bad apples abusing the system make it such that forgiving the debt would be wholly unviable.
Question – since I was financially prudent to pay off my student loans – will any student loan forgiveness program be paying me back? Seems like it should. Otherwise "there is no equity". And we know we all LOVE Equity.
We gave the ultra-rich $2 trillion in tax cuts without blinking an eye. Two TRILLION dollars out of the pockets of the American people, going to the people rich enough to afford yachts with smaller yachts inside them. What happened? Did they pay their workers more? Did the costs of goods decrease? Did they "create jobs" as they keep promising to do, if only they could get a few more billion dollars? No. They hoarded it amongst themselves, as they have always done and will always do.
Now we're quibbling over $1.6 trillion that will directly and immediately impact the lives of 43 million Americans. Money that will be immediately be injected right back into the economy in the form of cars, household goods, food, services. Money that increases the velocity of money throughout America. Money that pays the wages of service workers everywhere. Money that helps everyone.
We have the power to make everything better for everyone and we're not doing it because it might help a few people that "don't deserve it." We don't deserve to keep living.
LOL no. It's not about you 11:32. I know everything seems like it is, but it really isn't. It's about fixing the problem many Americans are facing and will continue to face if the issue isn't dealt with. You know, your fellow citizens? Do you care about them? Or maybe you hate America and don't want to see it prosper? The government losses money collecting the loans. What is the upside? I forgive you though, it must be tough to understand when you can't see past your nose, which it seems you're also willing to cut if off to spite your face.
11:53 FTW. This is the way.
11:01 – I'm not the person you're responding to, but the first paragraph of the TNI link that prompted this discussion admits that the author used law school loan money to take international trips and to pursue 2 masters. I'm not sure who is in the right position to judge whether those things were worthwhile or if taxpayers should subsidize them through loan forgiveness, which I think makes the idea of limiting loan forgiveness to actual tuition amounts a nice bright line approach. I honestly don't know the answer. I think a lot of student loan dollars go to propping up terrible failing schools and worthless degree programs that really ought to go away, but won't as long as a student can get "free" money to pursue them. Although I don't have a problem with Boyd, there's no way its tuition makes sense without the (potentially false) promise of good-paying jobs and the help of student loans.
The current PAYE system in place is more than enough.
While I agree that some level of forgiveness could be good, I worry that it would have an unintended consequence of incentivizing future frivolous lending. If you're a 19 year old in college right now or even a 24 year old in law school, once forgiveness kicks in you then have an incentive to borrow as much as possible on the implied promise that your loans would be forgiven. If some level of forgiveness moves forward there needs to be crystal clear guidelines on what the time frame is and what limits there are. The poster above recommending that only the costs of tuition be eligible is a good start.
No forgiveness except the public interest after 10 years program. But lower the interest rate to something reasonable, 1-3% max. College grads have the advantage of higher salaries than non-grads. Inequity would be making HS grads pay for the college grad's education. Also, the colleges should have some stake in guaranteeing repayment, which would be an effective means of controlling higher ed bloat and tuition inflation.
I quit paying on my loans in 2009 (after 10 years of payments). I waited them out, never got sued, changed my phone numbers and they all just went away after time. Credit took a hit, but I never got sued. Sitting pretty with a 765 credit score.
@2:38p – did you have private student loans or federally backed loans? (the ones you stopped paying in 2009)?
@238 here
Subsidized. About $100k
Out of high school, I got accepted into a top 10 school for undergrad – however, the school offered $0 in scholarship. I did some quick math and just on tuition alone it would've been nearly a quarter of a million dollars (pre-interest). Meanwhile, with the abundance of scholarship I got to stay in-state, I went to UNR for free and only worked part-time for spending money. I chose Boyd over other schools for a very similar reason (while not "free", with scholarship, the cost was a pittance compared to what some of the east coast schools wanted). During my first year at Boyd I remember talking to another student who told me he already had over $100k in loans because "he took the maximum allowed out every year because they're going to get forgiven eventually". That was when I knew even dumb people made it into law school.
Dumb and dishonest.
2:38 for POTUS
The link for the Sun article is broken.
Please do not forgive the loans. You want to work out a program similar to foreclosure mediation and make the terms more favorable? Fine. You want to forgive them based upon public service/volunteerism that adds value to society? Fine. But many of us chose our schools to minimize/avoid student debt. Forgiveness is offensive to many of us who avoided debt or who worked doubly hard to pay it off. This author has a history of writing columns detached from reality.
43 million debtors can sway any election if mobilized, and this number will only grow. A promise to put tens of thousands of dollars in a voter's pocket will be more than enough incentive to influence most voters. So if you took out loans in the last fifteen years, why did you pay them down aggressively when the writing was already on the wall?
Around 15% of student loans go into default. That means 85% of the loans do not go into default. That means 85% of borrowers do what they promised to do and expect others to do as they promised to do. As far as why did I pay down my student loans, the answer is as simple as the contract I signed, the commitment that I made and the monies that I received upon the promise to pay it back. This "free money" argument is attractive to the few and anathema to the majority who do as they promised and expect others to do the same.
This is a good point. I went to a crummier law school because I got a scholarship. I worked a full time job the whole time so I wouldn't need loans. I'd feel like a total fool if it turned out that I would've been better off going to the expensive school and taking subsidized trips because of an ultimate loan forgiveness.
The writing is on the wall for student loan forgiveness? That's funny. Isn't that what Biden promised yet a month or two ago said he's not going to honor that promise? Repay your loans folks. Cuz you aren't going to get any relief after Republicans regain control of Congress in November.
That assumes a false dichotomy where every one of the 85 percent who are paying back their student loans are happy about doing so. I am in the 85 percent category you mention, but I would welcome forgiveness with open arms. It would be against my own self interest to do otherwise. Even if a few debtors would receive a total windfall, I am still personally much better off with the remainder of my own loans forgiven after years of required payments. The only cohort who "loses" via forgiveness are those who chose to sacrifice so they could aggressively pay down their loans entirely. But I suspect that is a far smaller percentage of the total nber of borrowers.
@226. Amen. That whole "forgiveness" line was just that. And guess what, borrowing skyrocketed.
There is no such thing as money.
@2:29– There is no false dichotomy. No one is happy paying for the bills they incurred regardless of whether rent, utilities, credit cards or student loans. But that is the nature of our society is that we pay the bills that we incur, and we expect those who incur debt to us to pay their bills. You assume that the only people who paid off their student loans did so aggressively. Quite to the contrary, the vast majority of those who paid (and are paying) off their loans do and did it exactly in accordance with the schedule provided. They did it because that was and is the rules of the game and the terms to which they agreed.
Change the scenario. Government states that student loans are not forgiven but starting February 1, 2022 all colleges, trade schools and law schools are free for anyone who wishes to go. You still are out your money, but everyone behind you gets a free ride. They are going to be thrilled; everyone who did as they promised are not going to as receptive to changing the game on them.
The difference between federal student loans and everyday expenses like utilities and rent is that unlike almost all other widespread debt, the voters elect the people who can wipe out that debt at the stroke of a pen. And as more people incur more of this type of debt, the odds are that voters will elect representatives to excuse performance. Even assuming morality plays a part in the issue, practically speaking the student debt issue is no different than advocating for changes in the tax code that result in certain groups or corporations paying lower taxes, or paying lobbyists to convince lawmakers to keep regulations favorable to an interest group. And there is nothing socially unacceptable about tax-related advocacy or lobbying. Why should student loans be any different?
And, free college? Most advanced economies have lower cost higher education than the United States anyway. If interest groups can make free college happen in this country, good for them.
Except utilities are highly regulated and often publicly owned. There are programs for low income hardship; no one is writing off everyone's utility bills across the board which could easily be done. Home loans are backed by FNMA; no one (even in time deepest crisis) forgave everyone's home loans. The argument that "And as more people incur more of this type of debt, the odds are that voters will elect representatives to excuse performance" can be solved more simply by not allowing more people to incur this type of debt.
The difference between the tax code and student loan debt is that one rewards success and the other rewards failure. Furthermore the tax code argument belies the historical and political reality that politicians are going to pass legislation that voids contractual rights.
As far as your argument about lower cost higher education, we can agree that higher education costs have outpaced inflation. The answer to that is cost control on the education side and not encouraging needless spending under the auspices that practicality does not matter because it will all be whitewashed anyway under debt forgiveness.
Even in the darkest times, other debts were not forgiven… that's largely true, but those debts are also typically easier to discharge in bankruptcy for debtors in the worst circimstances. What is it about student loans that requires them to be virtually impossible to discharge in bankruptcy, when frivolous credit card purchases would qualify? There might be no need for forgiveness writ large if student debt was simply treated like any other unsecured debt under the bankruptcy code. (Not legal advice)
Most loans have security. As for credit card debt, they have limits well below student loan limits tied to one's salary and ability to repay, along with creditworthiness checks, neither of which SLs have. In non-SL debt, one could argue the lender suffers the loss for taking on a bad rrisk. SLs do have a single safeguard.
If risk of loss is a factor, then the government took more risk than a private lender by not performing credit checks before they lent money. Seems like the risk of loss falls more heavily on them if the taxpayers' representatives remained asleep at the wheel and operated under the assumption that the law would never change to make loans forgivable or dischargeable, the same way earlier subprime lenders assumed home values would always go up when they issued second mortgages that ultimately got stripped off and discharged in bankruptcy.
1131, I guess you'd be in favor then of limiting loans based on the student's ability to pay moving forward. Sounds like a very good idea. Anyone going into to teaching shouldn't be able to rack up $200k from an ivy league school to teach kindergarten and earn $35k/year.
I have a different take. Education should not be a "right" and in fact we should make it harder to get. That way the cream rises. Look at what governmental interference in the arts has done. IMHO we have had no great art for a couple hundred years. But back in the day artists would realize their potential because it burned in their souls. Now, not so much. If you do forgive student loans then I want what I paid back, back.
Start off with a bedrock fundamental belief then willingly abandon it for cash.
2:56, OP back. I appreciate your wittiness and succinctness; but I started the last sentence with "if" meaning I did not abandon my belief but if I was forced to live with another reality, then I want something back. Have a great weekend friend.
If the if happens though, wouldn't it make your position stronger to say the money you paid made you stronger, rather than quibbling about the if?
If they forgive student loans, there needs to be reparations for those of us who paid our student loans off!!
You get what you get and you don't throw a fit! If you want to start talking about reparations to make things equal, what if we start comparing every advantage you had in life.
Exactly no reparations for anyone. Lets start with not forgiving student loans.
I agree, you don't need to forgive. The GOvt should
1) Make dischargeable for public service up to a certain amount, but get over the exceptions and filling in the wrong form nonsense.
2) make loans dischargeable
3) penalize Schools with higher default rates
You go, Judge Sturman!
Good morning, judge hoeffgren.
Ha ha. He must get that a lot, misspelling of his name. So now both judges in Northtown are up for election. I know that it is only Municipal Court, but has anyone put their name in the race. I heard that Craig Mueller now lives there, will he file for one of the seats?
There are a number of people that have filed, I think. There's one campaign sign on Lake Mead. White guy, can't remember his name.