"Boy" is that Elizabeth Warren doing a great job !

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    "Boy" is that Elizabeth Warren doing a great job !

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from AlleyCatBruin. Show AlleyCatBruin's posts

    Re:

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:



    Republicans can't stand that way of thinking.....

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re:

    In response to AlleyCatBruin's comment:

     

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

     

     



    Republicans can't stand that way of thinking.....

     

     

     

     

    Progressives once again show that they do not understand economics, and seem to not understand the difference between the overnight rate for our large finiancial insititutions and an unsecured loan given to an 18 year old.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re:

    No offense but it's only a "great job" if the legislation gets implemented. 

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re:

    If it's important to this country to have college educated people then the interest rates will be lowered...but really..lowering interest rates on college loans is not the way to make college affordable for most people. I learned an interesting statistic yesterday. I learned that only 30% of Americans hold a Bachelor's degree. That is far too low a percentage to make us competitive in an ever increasing global marketplace.

    College is unaffordable to most Americans. People are graduating from college with overwhelming debt..and limited income prospects.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re:

    In response to miscricket's comment:

    If it's important to this country to have college educated people then the interest rates will be lowered...but really..lowering interest rates on college loans is not the way to make college affordable for most people. I learned an interesting statistic yesterday. I learned that only 30% of Americans hold a Bachelor's degree. That is far too low a percentage to make us competitive in an ever increasing global marketplace.

    College is unaffordable to most Americans. People are graduating from college with overwhelming debt..and limited income prospects.



     "I learned that only 30% of Americans hold a Bachelor's degree. That is far too low a percentage to make us competitive in an ever increasing global marketplace."

    Especially because academia doesnt do its job of really preparing students for the workplace....bachelor degrees are given out like trophies at kid's soccer matches...Their value has been cheapened. Kids major in "gender and women's studies" and other idiotic progressive propaganda, and wonder why they arent hired...

    "College is unaffordable to most Americans. People are graduating from college with overwhelming debt..and limited income prospects."

    The free market system could fix this problem and level the playing field, with innovation like online courses and internships, but instead we have the heavy hand of government regulating education ;  academia hiring thousands of useless bureaucrats to do the regulatory paperwork of the Government...."diversity coordinators" and such.

    "Limited income prospects" ...welcome to the Obama Administration's economy...only 4 more years to go.

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re:

    In response to miscricket's comment:

    If it's important to this country to have college educated people then the interest rates will be lowered...but really..lowering interest rates on college loans is not the way to make college affordable for most people. I learned an interesting statistic yesterday. I learned that only 30% of Americans hold a Bachelor's degree. That is far too low a percentage to make us competitive in an ever increasing global marketplace.

    College is unaffordable to most Americans. People are graduating from college with overwhelming debt..and limited income prospects.



    I used to think like you.  Then, I began to notice how many young people are coming out of college only to land work at Starbucks and the like.  There has been a shift, and us older folks are not really seeing it, and therefore, I think give bad advice to the youngsters.

    The "everyone needs a college degree" I think is the paradigm of the past, when being well rounded was of some value.  What is more important now are skills, hard, valuable skills.  I think this is in part due to the fundamental transformation of technology on our economy.  Fewer well rounded people are needed.  More programmers, plumbers, etc. are needed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re:

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

     

    In response to AlleyCatBruin's comment:

     

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

     

     



    Republicans can't stand that way of thinking.....

     

     




    LOL!!!!!!  Lizzy is 3 weeks late

     

    Today, the House Education and the Workforce Committee marked up and two measures on to improve college costs and data transparency. The committee modestly amended and approved HR 1911, the Smarter Solutions for Students Act by a vote of 24-13, which ran largely along party lines. The amended HR 1911 would peg interest rates on all federal student loans, except Perkins loans, to the 10-year Treasury note rate plus 2.5 percentage points for undergraduate loans

    Tasty foot?

     



    Makes perfect sense, use the same variable rate loan scheme that caused the collapse of the housing market. What possibly could go wrong?

     

    The neo-con plan would cost borrowers thousands of dollars more in interest than if the current rates were allowed to double.

    This is why neo-cons shouldn't be allowed near anything involving basic math. Their 'solutions' always cost the average taxpayer more money.

    "Heck-uva job Brownie."

     

    On Wednesday, the nonpartisan CRS issued a memo analyzing the impact of the bill and described the additional cost that students would face if the proposal were to become law. The CRS outlined examples of the costs with different scenarios. It found, for instance, that students who borrow the maximum amount of $27,000 of unsubsidized and subsidized Stafford Loans over five years would pay $12,374 in interest under H.R. 1911, or $10,867 in interest under current law if rates are allowed to double to 6.8 percent, or $7,033 if rates stay at 3.4 percent.

    The new proposal would also impact borrowing fees for loans parents take out. The CRS estimates that a parent who borrows the maximum amount of $40,000 in PLUS loans for their child would pay $27,680 in interest under the Republican bill, more than the $21,654 in interest under the current law.



    Chasing the problem to a bad end, while ignoring the poor fundamentals underlying the issue.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re:

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

     

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

     

    In response to AlleyCatBruin's comment:

     

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

     

     



    Republicans can't stand that way of thinking.....

     

     




    LOL!!!!!!  Lizzy is 3 weeks late

     

    Today, the House Education and the Workforce Committee marked up and two measures on to improve college costs and data transparency. The committee modestly amended and approved HR 1911, the Smarter Solutions for Students Act by a vote of 24-13, which ran largely along party lines. The amended HR 1911 would peg interest rates on all federal student loans, except Perkins loans, to the 10-year Treasury note rate plus 2.5 percentage points for undergraduate loans

    Tasty foot?

     



    Makes perfect sense, use the same variable rate loan scheme that caused the collapse of the housing market. What possibly could go wrong?

     

    The neo-con plan would cost borrowers thousands of dollars more in interest than if the current rates were allowed to double.

    This is why neo-cons shouldn't be allowed near anything involving basic math. Their 'solutions' always cost the average taxpayer more money.

    "Heck-uva job Brownie."

     

    On Wednesday, the nonpartisan CRS issued a memo analyzing the impact of the bill and described the additional cost that students would face if the proposal were to become law. The CRS outlined examples of the costs with different scenarios. It found, for instance, that students who borrow the maximum amount of $27,000 of unsubsidized and subsidized Stafford Loans over five years would pay $12,374 in interest under H.R. 1911, or $10,867 in interest under current law if rates are allowed to double to 6.8 percent, or $7,033 if rates stay at 3.4 percent.

    The new proposal would also impact borrowing fees for loans parents take out. The CRS estimates that a parent who borrows the maximum amount of $40,000 in PLUS loans for their child would pay $27,680 in interest under the Republican bill, more than the $21,654 in interest under the current law.

     




    Uhm, it ties it to T-notes, and those rates are dramtically lower.  It also caps, and BTW, mirrors President Obama's proposal, and dems are against it.  Warren is just late to the dance.

     



    Airborne seems to have run from this one.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Re:

    I always loved this Derek Bok quote .... "If you think education is expensive, try ignorance"

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re:

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

     



    Especially because academia doesnt do its job of really preparing students for the workplace....bachelor degrees are given out like trophies at kid's soccer matches...Their value has been cheapened. Kids major in "gender and women's studies" and other idiotic progressive propaganda, and wonder why they arent hired...

     

     

     



    As someone who just graduated with a bachelor's degree after devoting literally thousands of hours and tens of thousands of dollars...I take exception to your remark that Bachelor's degrees are handed out like trophies at kid's soccer matches. I don't know what your college experience was like..but most people work very hard to obtain these degrees.

    Your comment is very telling about how you value education. With only 30 percent of Americans holding an undergrad degree..it doesn't sound like they are "given out at random". These degrees are earned with hard work.

    I am sorry that you dislike some of the degree programs offered by major universities. These programs are created in response to a societal need and to prepare students for a global marketplace. A degree in Gender and Women's study may seem irrelevent in the US...but in many other countries around the world people with these degrees are extremely valuable.

    Perhaps you can provide us with a list of degree programs which you consider appropriate and relevent to an ever changing world.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re:

    In response to miscricket's comment:

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

     

     



    Especially because academia doesnt do its job of really preparing students for the workplace....bachelor degrees are given out like trophies at kid's soccer matches...Their value has been cheapened. Kids major in "gender and women's studies" and other idiotic progressive propaganda, and wonder why they arent hired...

     

     

     

     



    As someone who just graduated with a bachelor's degree after devoting literally thousands of hours and tens of thousands of dollars...I take exception to your remark that Bachelor's degrees are handed out like trophies at kid's soccer matches. I don't know what your college experience was like..but most people work very hard to obtain these degrees.

     

    Your comment is very telling about how you value education. With only 30 percent of Americans holding an undergrad degree..it doesn't sound like they are "given out at random". These degrees are earned with hard work.

    I am sorry that you dislike some of the degree programs offered by major universities. These programs are created in response to a societal need and to prepare students for a global marketplace. A degree in Gender and Women's study may seem irrelevent in the US...but in many other countries around the world people with these degrees are extremely valuable.

    Perhaps you can provide us with a list of degree programs which you consider appropriate and relevent to an ever changing world.



    I don't think it is as easy as that. If your daddy is rich, who cares? Your cost/benefit is zero.  If you rack up 250k in debt for a degree in sociology, English or history, you are likely a fool.

    degrees worth having changes with the economy.  I think the most valuable right now would be a doctorate in biology, chemistry, or possibly physics.  A doctorate in sociology will make you the most interesting barista in your town, but that's about it.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

     

     



    Especially because academia doesnt do its job of really preparing students for the workplace....bachelor degrees are given out like trophies at kid's soccer matches...Their value has been cheapened. Kids major in "gender and women's studies" and other idiotic progressive propaganda, and wonder why they arent hired...

     

     

     

     



    As someone who just graduated with a bachelor's degree after devoting literally thousands of hours and tens of thousands of dollars...I take exception to your remark that Bachelor's degrees are handed out like trophies at kid's soccer matches. I don't know what your college experience was like..but most people work very hard to obtain these degrees.

     

    Your comment is very telling about how you value education. With only 30 percent of Americans holding an undergrad degree..it doesn't sound like they are "given out at random". These degrees are earned with hard work.

    I am sorry that you dislike some of the degree programs offered by major universities. These programs are created in response to a societal need and to prepare students for a global marketplace. A degree in Gender and Women's study may seem irrelevent in the US...but in many other countries around the world people with these degrees are extremely valuable.

    Perhaps you can provide us with a list of degree programs which you consider appropriate and relevent to an ever changing world.

     



     

    I don't think it is as easy as that. If your daddy is rich, who cares? Your cost/benefit is zero.  If you rack up 250k in debt for a degree in sociology, English or history, you are likely a fool.

    degrees worth having changes with the economy.  I think the most valuable right now would be a doctorate in biology, chemistry, or possibly physics.  A doctorate in sociology will make you the most interesting barista in your town, but that's about it.




    Skeeter..with all due respect..that is pretty much what I expect from you. You would be amazed at how many fields open up to someone with a degree in sociology. To start..major companies will hire people with sociology degrees or psychology degrees as part of their human resource departments. People with sociology degrees are often play intergral roles in marketing and marketing campaigns. Those are just a couple of examples. Other careers for people with sociology involve politics and education.

    It never ceases to amaze me just how narrow your world view is.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from ImYourDaddy. Show ImYourDaddy's posts

    Re:

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

     

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

     

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

     

    In response to AlleyCatBruin's comment:

     

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

     

     



    Republicans can't stand that way of thinking.....

     

     




    LOL!!!!!!  Lizzy is 3 weeks late

     

    Today, the House Education and the Workforce Committee marked up and two measures on to improve college costs and data transparency. The committee modestly amended and approved HR 1911, the Smarter Solutions for Students Act by a vote of 24-13, which ran largely along party lines. The amended HR 1911 would peg interest rates on all federal student loans, except Perkins loans, to the 10-year Treasury note rate plus 2.5 percentage points for undergraduate loans

    Tasty foot?

     



    Makes perfect sense, use the same variable rate loan scheme that caused the collapse of the housing market. What possibly could go wrong?

     

    The neo-con plan would cost borrowers thousands of dollars more in interest than if the current rates were allowed to double.

    This is why neo-cons shouldn't be allowed near anything involving basic math. Their 'solutions' always cost the average taxpayer more money.

    "Heck-uva job Brownie."

     

    On Wednesday, the nonpartisan CRS issued a memo analyzing the impact of the bill and described the additional cost that students would face if the proposal were to become law. The CRS outlined examples of the costs with different scenarios. It found, for instance, that students who borrow the maximum amount of $27,000 of unsubsidized and subsidized Stafford Loans over five years would pay $12,374 in interest under H.R. 1911, or $10,867 in interest under current law if rates are allowed to double to 6.8 percent, or $7,033 if rates stay at 3.4 percent.

    The new proposal would also impact borrowing fees for loans parents take out. The CRS estimates that a parent who borrows the maximum amount of $40,000 in PLUS loans for their child would pay $27,680 in interest under the Republican bill, more than the $21,654 in interest under the current law.

     




    Uhm, it ties it to T-notes, and those rates are dramtically lower.  It also caps, and BTW, mirrors President Obama's proposal, and dems are against it.  Warren is just late to the dance.

     

     

     




    Ya, makes perfect sense if you just abandon logic and basic math.

     

    Stafford loans issued today under the (House Republican) plan would have an interest rate of 4.3%, higher than the current 3.4% interest rate for subsidized loans.

     


    Considering that T-bills are only projected to rise, that discrepency between the neo-con rate and the current rate will only get larger.

    So your entire argument is predictably and hilariously wrong.

     



    The key word here is subsidized ...  meaning taxpayer footing the bill. Hey why stop at 3.4% lets make it 0% interest , is not your money right? Money grow on tree

    http://www.nasfaa.org/advocacy/News/Interest_Rates_for_Federal_Subsidized_Loans_to_Jump_to_6_8__on_July_1,_2012.aspx

     

    In his State of the Union address, President Obama proposed that Congress stop the student loan interest rate from doubling in July 2012. Without Congressional intervention, the interest rate for Federal Direct Subsidized Loans for undergraduates will increase from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent beginning July 1, 2012. 

    Prior to the Obama's proposal, it may have seemed unlikely that Congress would intervene, due simply to the state of the U.S. economy, a continued push towards austerity, and an unbalanced federal budget. But, one day after the Presidents annual address, Rep. Bruce Braley, R-Iowa, introduced legislation to keep the interest rate at 3.4 percent indefinitely. 

     

    ===================

    http://edmoney.newamerica.net/blogposts/2012/student_loan_interest_rate_fix_raises_questions-69162

    Obama had a chance but he only extended the subsidized rate for 1 year

    And guess what JULY 2013 is here, rate will revert back to 6.8% if not for the neo con's bill

    Congress appears set to pass a bill tomorrow that allows certain undergraduate students to borrow up to $5,500 for the coming school year at a fixed interest rate of 3.4 percent instead of 6.8 percent.  The president spent months making the case for the one-year, low-rate extension, and Congress spent almost as much time debating how to pay for it. The whole episode raises a lot of questions that students, reporters and policymakers should have been asking all along.

    For all the effort the president went to in arguing for the lower rate, why did he ask Congress for only a one-year fix? Did he think a longer extension would be too expensive at more than $6 billion a year?

    It looks that way: His 10-year budget request sent to Congress earlier this year included only the one-year extension. That is, when the president had his choice about where to set spending and revenue levels for every line item in the federal budget, he didn’t make room for more than a one-year interest rate extension. Why?

     

     

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re:

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

     

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

     

     

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

     

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

     

    In response to AlleyCatBruin's comment:

     

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

     

     



    Republicans can't stand that way of thinking.....

     

     




    LOL!!!!!!  Lizzy is 3 weeks late

     

    Today, the House Education and the Workforce Committee marked up and two measures on to improve college costs and data transparency. The committee modestly amended and approved HR 1911, the Smarter Solutions for Students Act by a vote of 24-13, which ran largely along party lines. The amended HR 1911 would peg interest rates on all federal student loans, except Perkins loans, to the 10-year Treasury note rate plus 2.5 percentage points for undergraduate loans

    Tasty foot?

     



    Makes perfect sense, use the same variable rate loan scheme that caused the collapse of the housing market. What possibly could go wrong?

     

    The neo-con plan would cost borrowers thousands of dollars more in interest than if the current rates were allowed to double.

    This is why neo-cons shouldn't be allowed near anything involving basic math. Their 'solutions' always cost the average taxpayer more money.

    "Heck-uva job Brownie."

     

    On Wednesday, the nonpartisan CRS issued a memo analyzing the impact of the bill and described the additional cost that students would face if the proposal were to become law. The CRS outlined examples of the costs with different scenarios. It found, for instance, that students who borrow the maximum amount of $27,000 of unsubsidized and subsidized Stafford Loans over five years would pay $12,374 in interest under H.R. 1911, or $10,867 in interest under current law if rates are allowed to double to 6.8 percent, or $7,033 if rates stay at 3.4 percent.

    The new proposal would also impact borrowing fees for loans parents take out. The CRS estimates that a parent who borrows the maximum amount of $40,000 in PLUS loans for their child would pay $27,680 in interest under the Republican bill, more than the $21,654 in interest under the current law.

     




    Uhm, it ties it to T-notes, and those rates are dramtically lower.  It also caps, and BTW, mirrors President Obama's proposal, and dems are against it.  Warren is just late to the dance.

     

     

     




    Ya, makes perfect sense if you just abandon logic and basic math.

     

    Stafford loans issued today under the (House Republican) plan would have an interest rate of 4.3%, higher than the current 3.4% interest rate for subsidized loans.

     


    Considering that T-bills are only projected to rise, that discrepency between the neo-con rate and the current rate will only get larger.

    So your entire argument is predictably and hilariously wrong.

     

     




    Well then your hero Obambi is hilariously wrong, and thank your dems for opposing it, and him.

     

    And your "projected rise" bit is what is truly hilarious.  Duh!

    http://blogs-images.forbes.com/billconerly/files/2012/10/RM-Forecast.jpg

     

    So take your 0.14% and add 2.5% and tell me its bad, doof.  Guess what Lizzy is proposing?  Hello! 

    God this is easy.



    Looking forward to Airborne moving the goalposts as he's known for doing.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share