Question by bluenote12482: The president said he will forgive student loans? last night during his speech, the president said he will forgive student loans after 10 years. how is this possible and who will pay for it? I am a 2002 graduate from Devry University with a BS in Computer Information Systems. I still owe the government about $ 33K....would I be able to join a program that forgives my student loan? Right now I am paying back my student loan through Chase Student Loan Servicing Best answer for The president said he will forgive student loans?:
Answer by Mike
chances are you and most of america will not meet the strict requirements of the people who will qualify for that forgiveness program. the goverment always makes it very hard to get any breaks.
Answer by Chris *I teabag Liberals *
No, Stick with Chase and dont get involved with the government
Answer by I love you so much
I don't really know. I hope to have my student loans paid off in 10 years. I hope you are enjoying your career.
Answer by clean truck
don`t wet your drawers, in case you didn`t know barack insane hardly ever tells the truth.
Answer by LA_Chick
What he said was student loans would be forgiven after 20 years and after 10 if you go into public service.
Answer by Sky
That would be nice. I owe about $ 15K myself and I haven't been able to pay mine back due to a lack of sustainable income.
Answer by Kman
The president urged congress to pass laws making college more affordable, and cited forgiving loans as an example. Obama suggesting it doesn't make it so. He's not a king. I think it's a great idea though. If you support the idea, write your congressmen.
Answer by vicsikix
Another empty promise that insults the intelligence of the American people. Most people would have their student loans paid off in 20 years anyway!
Answer by mad embalmer from the north II
the forgiveness program is for low paying social services type jobs that require higher education. Teaching and social work may be examples.
Answer by c c
Under his plan if your an American working at a non profit or Government service job it's forgiven after 10 years or if your employed by private industry 20 years. You must pay at least 10% of you income yearly. It will do you no good, I imagine you make $ 50,000 gross, so you would have to $ 5,000 per year over 20 years before the forgiveness kicks in. Your loan will be done in 8 years paying $ 5,000 a year, besides It's already there but it doesn't have the 10% cap on income right now. The only people that will profit from this is MDs, Lawyers, College professors, think tank types, and those pseudo intellect types. These are the people making the $ 250,000 a year he promised to tax yet he is rewarding the riches Americans with forgiveness of debt. The money they borrow comes from private banks and secured by US government so basically the million dollar education of a MD who earns crap during internship but millions during private practice will be paid for John Q Taxpayer! Same with College professors that may run a million up in debt for a starting salary of 35,000. It's after they get tenured 7-8 years they began making the 250K but by then they only has to pay 3 years of real money because colleges are covered in the 10 year plan. Then he or she can skate out on 800 K of the loans leaving the burden to blue collar workers and small biz....that plan will never pass and it is disgusting for him to ask the American taxpayer to do this.
Answer by SCOTT M
That's not what he said. I'm retired and don't have any students loans, so I didn't pay close attention, but I thibnk he said graduates with studnt loans will not have to pay more than 10 percent of their income for their loans and the balance will be forgiven after 20 years -- or 10 years if the graduate takes a public service job. Get a transcript of his speech and check it out. If any part of your loan is forgiven, the taxpayers will pick up the tab for the balance.
One of the most basic decisions when it comes to taking out a new loan, is whether to opt of a secured or an unsecured loan. Before we discuss the advantages and disadvantages, you should know that a secured loan means that if you cannot meet the repayments, the lender has access to an agreed security, such as your home or car, to pay off the loan. This is the huge draw back of secured loans. The asset they are secured over is usually very important to the borrower. For most people, the two most important assets they own, and are least willing to part with, are their home and their car. Your home can act as security whether it is currently mortgaged or not. The size of the loan will also depend on, among various other factors, the value of the asset. For example, if you home is worth �50000 it is extremely unlikely that a lender will grant you a loan of �60000. At the same time, just because you have significant assets to secure the loan, does not mean the lender will lend you the full value of the asset. Factors such as your income, your current indebtedness, and your repayment capacity will also be critical. Secured loans can be used for any purpose, typically debt consolidation or home improvements. However, since the loan is being secured over your home, many short term uses will inappropriate. While borrowing against your home to invest in home improvements may make sense, borrowing against your home in order to buy groceries and pay your day to day bills would not ...
http://leafgardenpress.com/ chase student Loan consoLidation caLcuLator
To chase student loans and other debts worth $ 100000 or less, the Justice Department started using private lawyers in 1986, during the Reagan administration. Congress had .... The YGS Group provides digital and printed reprint services for Daily Herald. Student loan defaults can lead to nightmare scenarios
On April 16, JP Morgan/Chase Manhattan, the bank that recently worked with the Fed to acquire the former Bear Stearns investment bank, announced that they will not be making student loans to entering or continuing students enrolled at schools that have a poor repayment rate. Yet their spokesperson refused to mention the schools that would be affected by the announcement.
Â
When I checked out comments on the Chronicle of Higher Education online, commentors speculated that the affected schools would be community colleges and for-profit colleges. They gave no reasons for their speculation, though I can offer one of my own: low graduation rates, meaning, that if students did not finish their education they were less likely to repay their student loans. I guess that government guarantees were not enough for Chase to continue lending to students at these schools.
No surprise, they weren't good enough for Citibank 30 years ago during the Chrysler bailout.Â
I would understand the rationale of Chase's decision better if I knew which schools were on their list. Without seeing the list, I have to wonder if they have something to hide, such as a lending methodology. The last thing prospective borrowers need to hear is that a money center bank is "redlining" by providing more favorable loan terms to students who attend some schools over others. The very next things prospective borrowers should do, if their college-bound student is sincerely interested in a "redlined" school, is to look at other schools or cease doing any business with that bank.
Â
Lending officers have no qualifications to make academic judgments about loan applicants or the academic qualities of a school. If university administrators fear the growing importance of media rankings, I can only imagine their fears if lenders determine the schools that will be their "haves" and "have nots."
Â
Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings has assured schools and borrowers that there are still plenty of lenders who will make student loans as well as the capacity to expand direct lending, where the government acts as lender of last resort. But she should be concerned that Chase's decision will have a ripple effect on other lenders. Even with no comments from Chase, word will get out on the Internet from prospective borrowers and that word will spread to other financial institutions as well. It's difficult to say if other lenders will fill the void to offer loans, offer tougher terms or refuse to take the same risk with Chase's targeted schools.
Â
If nothing else, Chase's decision has spurred a need for a new form of government intervention in the student loan markets: to publish an annual listing of "deadbeat" schools. There would be only one criterion for this list: a below-average repayment rate for government-supported student loans.
Â
The federal government would make no judgment on the academic quality of the schools, nor their graduation and retention rates. This list would be made available to educators, parents, students and lenders so that each may make their own decisions. It's true that the government would be taking the lenders off the hook; the banks would not need to disclose lending practices to the public if the government becomes the published resource.
Â
However, government would be doing all parties: educators, lenders and borrowers an important service. And the federal government has every right to use such a list as a means to collect their money.
Â
(Originally published at Educated Quest blog and reprinted with permission of the author, Stuart Nachbar).
Find More Chased Away From Student Loans Issues
No comments:
Post a Comment