1) the amount of debt accumulated by this group for their degrees is much larger than they're comfortable with
2) how much more important personal finance is as compared to government finance at this particular point in time
Student loan terms are the worst loan terms our country has had since debtors prison was taken off the table.
You have to go to college to be allowed to sweep the floors (so to speak) and because bad loans are available, college tuition grows to match the available balance.
The result is that people are forced into loans with bad terms by necessity only to find out they can't buy that house because they already have a horrible mortgage on their education.
The idea of trading the chains of bad loans now for a few votes (and only potential chains later) understandably becomes appealing.
If anything, this shows that college needs to go back to basics and become sustainable again. Capping student loans at amounts way below current market would be a good start (perhaps at what colleges cost in 1980 before super inflation happened).
Capping student loans would definitely be a positive first step in the process. A study conducted by the federal reserve bank of NY found that:
"We find apass-through effect on tuition of changes in subsidized loan maximums of about 60cents onthe dollar, and smaller but positive effects for unsubsidized federal loans. The subsidized loaneffect is most pronounced for more expensive degrees, those offered by private institutions, andfor two-year or vocational programs"
Once you lose the right to vote, you are on track to lose all your other rights too. Suddenly you'll find out the trade was not worth it, albeit it'd be too late.
Never surrender voting rights for any reason. No vote == no voice in government.
Having worked before at a government agency in a program explicitly designed and chartered to cause change in the respective agency, I really can't agree with that particular item. As organizations get larger and older they become ossified and (in the absence of systems designed to improve standards) slower, which tends to cause a vicious cycle that all large organizations suffer from private or public sector. Not all agencies are described this way, but the ones I have interest in changing (the most influence) are very, very resistant to change and what changes do happen are the opposite of the what I'd wish due to cultural resistance stuck in a feedback loop. This is at least leading to failed companies in private sector oftentimes, but it's even sadder in public sector.
I think many people see this list and the first reaction will be "how will this enact change?" because many of us see that these actions are oftentimes ineffective against very well funded political machines and an increasingly jaded public. I basically don't look at political flyers and thanks to ad blockers I saw almost zero ads this past election cycle. But I did see lawn signs in Atlanta's record-setting congressional race this year.
That survey seemed to be designed for a the sensationalist headline. When half the country's vote doesn't matter anyways (due to the Electoral College) it's easy to trade "the right to vote in the next two presidential elections" with tens of thousands of student loan debt that prevents you from, say, buying a house and starting a family.
Let's say I have $130k+ in college loans. Would voting for a particular person (or a set of people over the rest of my life) give me $130k+ in direct benefits? Probably not.
The more poignant conclusion here is that our votes are actually worth very little.
Another conclusion is that "values" are more important than money, and we vote to establish values, not to make money.
Your right to vote does a lot more for you than get you money, it can keep you alive! For one it could reduce the likelihood of the draft being reinstated and people forced to go due in Vietnam.
> For one it could reduce the likelihood of the draft being reinstated and people forced to go due in Vietnam.
Could it, though?
Remember, if you’re not in a swing state, your Presidential vote is literallly— not figuratively, literally— worthless. Same goes for your Congressional vote if you’re in one of the increasingly-common gerrymandered districts. And even if that’s not he case, the odds of your vote making a tangible policy difference are remote at best.
Sounds to me like Millenials are making an entirely rational calculation on their votes’ value.
>voting could reduce the likelihood of the draft being reinstated
... only in the unlikely event that my vote changes the outcome of an election, and the candidate I voted for would also be able to affect such a big legislative change.
Millenials as a group might be worse off if many traded away their right to vote, but that's not the same thing as saying that individuals benefit in a tangible way from that right.
Consider that btwn 43 and 52% of eligible voters don't vote during the presidential cycle. It's not surprising that some of those might never care to vote --given that some never vote while being eligible, it's not a stretch that some people might consider it more attractive to get a debt forgiven than to vote if they were hesitant to vote anyway.
"Lucullus now turned his attention to the cities in Asia, in order that, while he was at leisure from military enterprises, he might do something for the furtherance of justice and law. Through long lack of these, unspeakable and incredible misfortunes were rife in the province. Its people were plundered and reduced to slavery by the tax-gatherers and money-lenders. Families were forced to sell their comely sons and virgin daughters, and cities their votive offerings, pictures, and sacred statues. At last men had to surrender to their creditors and serve them as slaves, but what preceded this was far worse, — tortures of rope, barrier, and horse; standing under the open sky in the blazing sun of summer, and in winter, being thrust into mud or ice. Slavery seemed, by comparison, to be disburdenment and peace. Such were the evils which Lucullus found in the cities, and in a short time he freed the oppressed from all of them."
"In the first place, he ordered that the monthly rate of interest should be reckoned at one per cent., and no more; in the second place, he cut off all interest that exceeded the principal; third, and most important of all, he ordained that the lender should receive not more than the fourth part of his debtor's income, and any lender who added interest to principal was deprived of the whole. Thus, in less than four years' time, the debts were all paid, and the properties restored to their owners unencumbered. This public debt had its origin in the twenty thousand talents which Sulla had laid upon Asia as a contribution, and twice this amount had been paid back to the money-lenders. Yet now, by reckoning usurious interest, they had brought the total debt up to a hundred and twenty thousand talents. These men, accordingly, considered themselves outraged, and raised a clamour against Lucullus at Rome. They also bribed some of the tribunes to proceed against him, being men of great influence, who had got many of the active politicians into their debt. Lucullus, however, was not only beloved by the peoples whom he had benefited, nay, other provinces also longed to have him set over them, and felicitated those whose good fortune it was to have such a governor."
Read that and tell me it's sensible to extrapolate that and validate the title. There's a reason it's not linked as a source. Because it's crap.
TL:DR Amongst other huge problems like only providing the final percentages of selected answers, 50% is exactly 250 people who have student loans with the company. It's not a "personal finance" company. It's a student loan provider who all of the respondents likely owe varying amounts of money to.
This is exactly an actual debt collector asking it's debtors what they would do to get their debt forgiven while dangling their life in front of them.
Intellectually, it might be an interesting hypothetical discussion. But this article and the survey aren't worth much.
Sure, the survey is questionable, and the results are even more so.
But I feel like someone could equally do the same thing about baby boomers and medical costs. A lot of people are just desperate, and would basically give anything to solve their very real problems. Really the title should be "desperate people willing to do anything to solve really hard problem agree to ridiculous hypothetical for magical solution"
Afaik this is already possible, just commit a serious enough felony and make sure you go to a federal prison :) you won't be able to vote anymore, plus easy way to get rid of your student loan(s). I wouldn't advice it though.
Aside from the silliness of the title and lack of any credible statistical analysis, that page looks like it was slapped together by a middle schooler back in 1998.
I honestly thought it was comical spoof site or an impostor and had to double check the url to make sure it was really "FOX News".
I'd offer FOX News has sunk to new lows with this, but that would be inaccurate too.
25 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 51.2 ms ] thread1) the amount of debt accumulated by this group for their degrees is much larger than they're comfortable with 2) how much more important personal finance is as compared to government finance at this particular point in time
You have to go to college to be allowed to sweep the floors (so to speak) and because bad loans are available, college tuition grows to match the available balance.
The result is that people are forced into loans with bad terms by necessity only to find out they can't buy that house because they already have a horrible mortgage on their education.
The idea of trading the chains of bad loans now for a few votes (and only potential chains later) understandably becomes appealing.
If anything, this shows that college needs to go back to basics and become sustainable again. Capping student loans at amounts way below current market would be a good start (perhaps at what colleges cost in 1980 before super inflation happened).
"We find apass-through effect on tuition of changes in subsidized loan maximums of about 60cents onthe dollar, and smaller but positive effects for unsubsidized federal loans. The subsidized loaneffect is most pronounced for more expensive degrees, those offered by private institutions, andfor two-year or vocational programs"
http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/staff_reports/sr733.pdf
Never surrender voting rights for any reason. No vote == no voice in government.
- Donating to a candidate
- Volunteering to help a candidate's campaign
- Running for office
- Working for a government agency
- Writing about politics in blog, news publication, or scholarly journal.
- Writing and circulating petitions
- Protesting
- Flyering for a cause
- Creating tech that supports a political cause
- Calling and emailing candidates and politicians about an issue
I think many people see this list and the first reaction will be "how will this enact change?" because many of us see that these actions are oftentimes ineffective against very well funded political machines and an increasingly jaded public. I basically don't look at political flyers and thanks to ad blockers I saw almost zero ads this past election cycle. But I did see lawn signs in Atlanta's record-setting congressional race this year.
Let's say I have $130k+ in college loans. Would voting for a particular person (or a set of people over the rest of my life) give me $130k+ in direct benefits? Probably not.
The more poignant conclusion here is that our votes are actually worth very little.
Another conclusion is that "values" are more important than money, and we vote to establish values, not to make money.
Additionally it could keep you out of jail.
Could it, though?
Remember, if you’re not in a swing state, your Presidential vote is literallly— not figuratively, literally— worthless. Same goes for your Congressional vote if you’re in one of the increasingly-common gerrymandered districts. And even if that’s not he case, the odds of your vote making a tangible policy difference are remote at best.
Sounds to me like Millenials are making an entirely rational calculation on their votes’ value.
... only in the unlikely event that my vote changes the outcome of an election, and the candidate I voted for would also be able to affect such a big legislative change.
Millenials as a group might be worse off if many traded away their right to vote, but that's not the same thing as saying that individuals benefit in a tangible way from that right.
I'm only surprised the % of millennials giving up their right to vote isn't far higher.
"Lucullus now turned his attention to the cities in Asia, in order that, while he was at leisure from military enterprises, he might do something for the furtherance of justice and law. Through long lack of these, unspeakable and incredible misfortunes were rife in the province. Its people were plundered and reduced to slavery by the tax-gatherers and money-lenders. Families were forced to sell their comely sons and virgin daughters, and cities their votive offerings, pictures, and sacred statues. At last men had to surrender to their creditors and serve them as slaves, but what preceded this was far worse, — tortures of rope, barrier, and horse; standing under the open sky in the blazing sun of summer, and in winter, being thrust into mud or ice. Slavery seemed, by comparison, to be disburdenment and peace. Such were the evils which Lucullus found in the cities, and in a short time he freed the oppressed from all of them."
"In the first place, he ordered that the monthly rate of interest should be reckoned at one per cent., and no more; in the second place, he cut off all interest that exceeded the principal; third, and most important of all, he ordained that the lender should receive not more than the fourth part of his debtor's income, and any lender who added interest to principal was deprived of the whole. Thus, in less than four years' time, the debts were all paid, and the properties restored to their owners unencumbered. This public debt had its origin in the twenty thousand talents which Sulla had laid upon Asia as a contribution, and twice this amount had been paid back to the money-lenders. Yet now, by reckoning usurious interest, they had brought the total debt up to a hundred and twenty thousand talents. These men, accordingly, considered themselves outraged, and raised a clamour against Lucullus at Rome. They also bribed some of the tribunes to proceed against him, being men of great influence, who had got many of the active politicians into their debt. Lucullus, however, was not only beloved by the peoples whom he had benefited, nay, other provinces also longed to have him set over them, and felicitated those whose good fortune it was to have such a governor."
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/e/roman/texts/plutarch/l...
Read that and tell me it's sensible to extrapolate that and validate the title. There's a reason it's not linked as a source. Because it's crap.
TL:DR Amongst other huge problems like only providing the final percentages of selected answers, 50% is exactly 250 people who have student loans with the company. It's not a "personal finance" company. It's a student loan provider who all of the respondents likely owe varying amounts of money to.
This is exactly an actual debt collector asking it's debtors what they would do to get their debt forgiven while dangling their life in front of them.
Intellectually, it might be an interesting hypothetical discussion. But this article and the survey aren't worth much.
But I feel like someone could equally do the same thing about baby boomers and medical costs. A lot of people are just desperate, and would basically give anything to solve their very real problems. Really the title should be "desperate people willing to do anything to solve really hard problem agree to ridiculous hypothetical for magical solution"
Afaik this is already possible, just commit a serious enough felony and make sure you go to a federal prison :) you won't be able to vote anymore, plus easy way to get rid of your student loan(s). I wouldn't advice it though.
The power of a voting block scales with the square of the size of the block. Individual votes are near meaningless.
I honestly thought it was comical spoof site or an impostor and had to double check the url to make sure it was really "FOX News".
I'd offer FOX News has sunk to new lows with this, but that would be inaccurate too.