you're welcome, Dennis - glad i could help - were you able to use all 4 programs I outlined? (Don't 4get 2 update them every time U turn on yr computer. --and then run a 'quick' scan B4 doing anything else online.)
June 2, 2011
H.R. 5043 post -why did you delete my post & what is your take in this bill?
I posted a question about H.R. 5043 just now, and it's deleted - I
guess you deleted it. Was my post offensive in some way? The issues
surrounding that are explained on
http://GordonWatts.com/Higher-Ed-Tuition-Costs.html
or http://GordonWayneWatts.com/Higher-Ed-Tuition-Costs.html
-- briefly, students used to have bankruptcy protections, and if
these standard loan protections are returned, the Federal Government
will be less likely to guarantee student loans, less loans will
originate, --and at a cost lower than before (Lower Tuition: since
colleges will know they can't price-gouge students without rick of
bankruptcy), and this will have a "side effect" of getting
Government OUT of Higher-Education. (Translation: GOOD, since
conservatives *want* the Govt out of Higher Education.)
For
some reason, liberals support this too -and I suspect they view it
as a free handout.
I don't want a free handout - I don't mind
paying what I owe, but I don't want to be over-taxed to death, and
tuition is technically a tax, since it is funding to a state-owned
college in most cases -and a college regulated by State &
Federal govt is all cases.
This is a rare issue where
liberals & conservatives can see eye-to-eye and agree -instead
of the usual Washington 'gridlock.'
What is your take on this
issue? -- And, what about my post was offensive to motivate you to
delete it?
I toko it down
because I wanted my constituents to see the post about the
balanced budget hearing going on right now. Nothing offenseive,
just didn't want that post mvoed down the page so far.
As
for HR 5043, I do not support it. Allowing discharge in bankruptcy
for student loans would cause a sharp decline in availability of
loans. I also do not supoprt the federal government being the only
student loan lender, as it is now after last year.
I *want* a
sharp decline in the availability of student loans (ideally, I
would eliminate ALL of the government's interference in the Free
Market -and get the Federal Government *out* of Higher Education
altogether!)
You see, Dennis, every time Congress raises
the loan limits (thus enabling students to be saddled with more
debt), dishonest liberal colleges find new excuses to raise
tuition (even though they're not justified, since quality of
education has actually gone down).
In the 50's US colleges
were tops in the world, in tuition could be paid for by a part
time job in the cafeteria over the summer.
Now-days,
tuition is unbearably heavy -with some students even committing
suicide -- have you ever wondered why tuition is skyrocketing much
faster than inflation's rate?
Liberals who support gov't
interference in the free market make unrealistically large loans
available, and colleges simply charge more because they can.
But
I don't see how a conservative such as you or I could support this
interference in the Free Market by the Government.
If the
gov't got out of guaranteeing loans (which would occur to some
small degree if HR5043 passed -since bankruptcy would partly
cancel out past loans -and discourage future ones from being
unrealistically large), then tuition would drop -since colleges
would know they could no longer price-gouge students without
repercussions.
If drug users & criminals with credit
cards can get bankruptcy, why not students?
Also, when
bankruptcy protections were in place for student loans just a few
years ago, lender were not so irresponsible, and the default rate
was not high -but when bankruptcy protections were removed, the
default rate skyrocket.
Lastly, the conservative Tampa
Tribune 'got it': (Beware the debt trap, Tampa Tribune, Oct 18,
2009)
http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/oct/18/co-beware-the-debt-trap/news-opinion-letterday
or:
http://GordonWayneWatts.com/FannyDeregulation/TampaTrib10-18-2009.jpg
or:
http://GordonWatts.com/FannyDeregulation/TampaTrib10-18-2009.jpg
You're
just as conservative as the Tribune, I trust – here is
documentation and clarification of my claims about
HR5043:
http://GordonWayneWatts.com/Higher-Ed-Tuition-Costs.html
or:
http://GordonWatts.com/Higher-Ed-Tuition-Costs.html
You
know I'm a conservative, and I don't want to 'get out' of paying
for my college education (eg getting a 'Free Handout'), but
tuition is, technically, a tax, since it goes to state-owned
universities in most cases --and Federal/State regulated colleges
in all cases, and students have been over taxed now for some time.
You don't support this over-tax which resulted from liberals'
intefering with the free market, do you? (Hint: Colleges of the
50's were low because the gov't didn't intefere in the Free
Market.)
I was a little
emotional earlier --rest assured I am not mad or offended at your
deleting my post. (But since I see you did delete my 'regular'
email -probably afraid the attachment might infect your computer,
I will hope to gain your ear just a little longer.)
Anyhow,
we've tried it the liberals' way --and all those 'Student Loans'
did nothing but enable a skyrocketing tuition.
So, that's
why I want to go back to the way it was: Either no loans at all
-or, if there are loans, standard consumer protections (eg
bankruptcy) --like it was back in the 50's --when quality of
education was high, and tuition was low.
What has, at root,
caused this lending system to grow in to the predatory beast it
has become, caused the schools to loose their honor in favor of
greed, hurt the students, etc. is #1: the removal of standard
consumer protections from student loans & also #2: the
creation of draconian collection powers. Combined, these two
actions made defaults the preferable outcome for the entire
lending system, and took away the motivation to help the students
from the people running the system (most importantly the people at
the Department of Education).
When the people making the
loans (the guarantors for the loans & even the Department of
Education) lost the financial interest to help the students, but
instead were given a financial incentive to want students to
default & fail, the entire system became predatory, corrupted,
inflationary, etc. This is the most fundamental cause that
explains the unchecked greed that came to dominate the
colleges/universities. Simply returning the standard consumer
protections that were taken away (e.g., those HR 5043 reactivated)
will fix this defect, and, over time, the various horrible things
that were created will go away, and this includes the raping of
the students by the schools.
Government interference in the
Free Market has not worked, as we see --I want the Federal
Government out of Higher Ed altogether, and students who were
over-taxed to be reimbursed.
I was wrong on
some of what I said regarding HR 5043... and I wanted to
apologise:
As I was heading out the door for lunch earlier
today, Jacob Walsh, a friend I haven't heard from in years call me
up because he wanted my help in helping him apologise to Alan
Collinge the head of Student Loan Justice -and it was because he
changed his views on student loan bankruptcy.
I was freaked
out because of the timing of this -- since I had planned, while I
was at lunch, to drop off a copy of my letter to the editor that
you deleted in your AOL email (you prob. deleted it because it had
an attachment --and I don't totally blame you).
Jacob has
been a student loan officer for many years now, and so I took the
chance to ask his opinion of the issue, so that if you and I
discussed it further, I would know if I had taken a "common
sense" approach.
Jacob looked up H.R. 5043 on the
computer while we talked, and he brought to my attention that this
affects only private student loans -not subsidised ones, such as
Stafford.
I relayed to him your concern that bankruptcy
protections would chill the market, and, as you say, cause a sharp
decline in availability of loans; Jacob pointed out that credit
card loans are typically on the same terms (interest, payment
options, fees, etc.) as these private loans, and yet credit card
loans have continued unabated -and that even someone with bad
credit can find a lender.
He also pointed out that there
would still be Stafford and other Federally-guaranteed loans
available to student -and that they would not have any bankruptcy
protections.
So, he concluded that your fears of a sharp
decline in availability of loans were unfounded.
He also
took a swipe at your stance on the issue, saying that you were not
a 'true' republican, since he believes you are bought out by the
big lenders to allow these loans to students, but I tried to
defend you on this point, saying I believed you were truly
conservative. Jacob lives in Indiana, and thus not a constituent
in your district, but I fear other constituents might sympathise
with the views he espoused.
Anyhow, now that I've clarified
that HR 5043 doesn't touch public or backed loans, as they call
them, and that even the private loans would be affected no
differently than credit card loans (which are done all the time
-with no difficulty), are your fears allied?
Lastly, if
what you're saying is true about bankruptcy protections causing a
sharp decline in student loans, then how did colleges get by in
the 50's without soaking student -and ruining their creidt with
super high loans that could not be discharged short of a full
disability or the like? (My guess is the colleges learned to live
within their means -and obeyed free market pressures.)
You'll
enjoy my letter to the Tampa Tribune --it is quite short and to
the point.
I am so sorry to hear of the health problems of your father, Dennis.
-- While I am not a specialist regarding Parkenson's disease, I do
know that America's diet/lifestyle is far worse than that of many
other countries which actually spend less on healthcare but live
longer, have lower cancer rates, etc. --I studied this on college,
and would encourage you to check out my health research page
regarding simple diet changes that have helped other countries to be
healthy --America (and you & your father) can be healthy too --I
hope and *pray* for the best blessings upon you and all other people
-- here is my research page:
(not rhetorical: I do *pray* for
my leaders, neighbours, friends, & even enemies -and I do have
them)
http://GordonWayneWatts.com/#health
or:
http://GordonWatts.com/#health
or
even:
http://Gordon_Watts.Tripod.com/#health
If you are
distracted & don't have time to read my research, here's the
long-story made short: Vegetarian diet is underrated & very good
--and regular supermarket milk (both 2%, regular, and even fat-free)
are horrendously bad for your health --VERY bad: You might drink
Soy, Rice, Almond 'Milk' or even calcium-fortified Orange
Juice.
Gordon Wayne Watts, editor-in-chief, The
Register
www.GordonWayneWatts.com
/ www.GordonWatts.com
ALWAYS FAITHFUL - To God
BS, The Florida State
University,Biological & Chemical Sciences
double major with
honours at FSU
AS, United Electronics Institute
Valedictorian
at UEI
(plus deep college debt & no job to show, but at least
my knowledge can help my friends stay healthy)
Dennis Ross is typing ...
You can no longer message Dennis Ross. Learn more.