Student loan debt

[poptart]

I screwed up, all hell let loose with my personal life and I got screwed.  Give me a chance to pay it off with good employment and I would happily pay off what I owe, as would millions.  I am so sick and tired of people ripping on us for things that happened out of our control.  You can google student loan suicide and more and more of us are blowing our brains out.  I've already been to an institution and am a shade of who I used to be.  Is it too much to ask that I be given the shot I was promised in school?  Or is this how it is that we will be blamed for the choices we made even though if the majority of us were given a shot we would work our backside off.  Everyone is suffering, even Stem majors are feeling it now.  If this is how its going to be then i;m going to enjoy  knowing that the jerks out there will be paying for my stay at a state run insitution when my sanity totally cracks.

[The Nehor]

4 hours ago, longview said:

1.  governments should NOT have been funding scholarships and grants to begin with.  It is a powerful disincentive to cost control.   Which directly leads to:

2.  bloated administration, professors only teaching just a few hours per week but receiving unjustifiably generous salaries, junky course offerings, politicized indoctrination, etc.

In the old days, students were able to work part time jobs year round and still carry full course loads and be able to graduate with little or no debt.  Nowadays, this scenario has been blown out of the water because of severe economic distortions due to unwise government largess (robbing Peter to pay Paul).  And the fact that NOT every high school graduate need to go to college (they are NOT that interested but their parents will push them to attend with free money).

It has less to do with government largesse and more to do with changing culture. In the Baby Boomer generation a college degree was an almost guarantee of more money and more opportunities and was almost certain to pay for itself. Then there is the conceit that white collar jobs are the best way to make money. So, good parents encourage all their kids to go to college. Whole demographic sectors do this. College costs shoot upwards while the value of a college degree falls. Snake oil salesmen show up offering even more worthless degrees to cash in on the trend. Poor foolish teenagers are stuck making financially devastating decisions.

Again, make student loan debt dischargeable by bankruptcy and a lot of the problem will go away. Creditors (including the federal government) need to face real risks in the student loan market for it to correct itself.

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, poptart said:

I screwed up, all hell let loose with my personal life and I got screwed.  Give me a chance to pay it off with good employment and I would happily pay off what I owe, as would millions.  I am so sick and tired of people ripping on us for things that happened out of our control.  You can google student loan suicide and more and more of us are blowing our brains out.  I've already been to an institution and am a shade of who I used to be.  Is it too much to ask that I be given the shot I was promised in school?  Or is this how it is that we will be blamed for the choices we made even though if the majority of us were given a shot we would work our backside off.  Everyone is suffering, even Stem majors are feeling it now.  If this is how its going to be then i;m going to enjoy  knowing that the jerks out there will be paying for my stay at a state run insitution when my sanity totally cracks.

As King Benjamin taught compassion is hard while blaming others for their misfortune is our natural/sinful state. I do it too.

[Kenngo1969]

5 hours ago, mnn727 said:

You took on the debt, you pay it. 

You could have gone to a community college for 2 years, then transferred to a state university. Working part time. All while living at home.

I did, and along with a couple of small scholarships graduated with zero student debt.

In general and in principle, I agree with your first sentence.  However, it's not that simple, not in all cases.  I, too, did most all of that as an undergrad, and I also graduated with no student loan debt as an undergrad.  Law school, however, is a different animal.  Standards of the American Bar Association, which accredits law schools and whose accreditation is close to a sin qua non for practicing law (one can receive a law degree from a non-ABA accredited institution, then is limited, provided s/he can pass the Bar in the state where the law school is located, to practicing law in that state) preclude first-year law students from having outside employment.

Yes, I have paid every single cent due on my student loans since they entered repayment.  That said, for nearly ten of those years, I did so while living below the poverty line (albeit with a good deal of family help when it came to paying other expenses).  Yes, it is very likely I will continue to pay every single cent due until they are repaid in full.  However, I received the degree with the expectation (or at least the hope) of a corresponding increase in income which would make repaying them easier, and that, as yet, has not materialized.  I have come full-circle, and am back doing the same kind of work at nearly the same rate of pay that I left when I decided to pursue that degree.  There are many things I don't know.  However, while I may never escape answering phones all day every day even with the degree, it's a virtual certainty that I would not escape such a fate if I hadn't gotten the degree.

Edited May 26, 2017 by Kenngo1969

[Calm]

8 hours ago, poptart said:

Worked in a skilled nursing facility for a while, seeing people at the end of life was depressing.  We all die someday, if you ask me extending your life via machines, drugs, etc. Is pointless considering the quality of life you get.  We all die someday,  is what it is. 

I am 'make me comfortable, don't force my body to live if it doesn't want to'.  

[Calm]

4 hours ago, poptart said:

I screwed up, all hell let loose with my personal life and I got screwed.  Give me a chance to pay it off with good employment and I would happily pay off what I owe, as would millions.  I am so sick and tired of people ripping on us for things that happened out of our control.  You can google student loan suicide and more and more of us are blowing our brains out.  I've already been to an institution and am a shade of who I used to be.  Is it too much to ask that I be given the shot I was promised in school?  Or is this how it is that we will be blamed for the choices we made even though if the majority of us were given a shot we would work our backside off.  Everyone is suffering, even Stem majors are feeling it now.  If this is how its going to be then i;m going to enjoy  knowing that the jerks out there will be paying for my stay at a state run insitution when my sanity totally cracks.

It must be so wearying having that kind of burden and never being able to see how it is going to be put down or even lightened.

 

[Stargazer]

9 hours ago, The Nehor said:

And I do not necessarily have a problem with it. There comes a time when treatment is pointless and can only extend life briefly and often at a decreased quality of life.

Most single payer systems have the option to opt out so if you can afford it....opt out.

The problem I have with it is this: it's not you, but someone else who decides that your life isn't worth saving.  Or, alternatively, costs require that even some routine tests or procedures are subject to rationing, and patients must sit in long first come first served queues waiting for an opening. This happens a lot in Canada, for example.  People have died before it was their turn.

I suggest you have a look at this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2jijuj1ysw

My wife is a nurse in the British National Health System.  I've been over there observing its operation a bit, even got treatment for an infection while I was there, and it actually doesn't seem all that bad for routine care.  But for more than routine care things get somewhat dicey: because treatment is rationed, and there are waiting periods that Americans would go ballistic over.  And there are doctor strikes (yes, I'm serious).  My wife makes extra money by working on cases that people pay extra for (she is a theatre nurse -- works with surgeons in procedures).  And I'm not talking about really special things, I'm talking about more-or-less routine things like varicose vein removal and hernia repairs.  That have long waiting periods.  My wife herself is on a long waiting list to get a knee replacement -- or it would be more accurate to say that she is on a waiting list to find out if they'll put her on the waiting list to get her knee replaced.  When she makes an appointment at the doctor's she sometimes has to wait several days before being seen, but when her cat needs to see the vet she can get an appointment sometimes on the same day.  That's because cats aren't on the NHS.

Single payer systems are NOT the panacea that you may think they are.

 

 

[The Nehor]

7 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

The problem I have with it is this: it's not you, but someone else who decides that your life isn't worth saving.  Or, alternatively, costs require that even some routine tests or procedures are subject to rationing, and patients must sit in long first come first served queues waiting for an opening. This happens a lot in Canada, for example.  People have died before it was their turn.

I suggest you have a look at this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2jijuj1ysw

My wife is a nurse in the British National Health System.  I've been over there observing its operation a bit, even got treatment for an infection while I was there, and it actually doesn't seem all that bad for routine care.  But for more than routine care things get somewhat dicey: because treatment is rationed, and there are waiting periods that Americans would go ballistic over.  And there are doctor strikes (yes, I'm serious).  My wife makes extra money by working on cases that people pay extra for (she is a theatre nurse -- works with surgeons in procedures).  And I'm not talking about really special things, I'm talking about more-or-less routine things like varicose vein removal and hernia repairs.  That have long waiting periods.  My wife herself is on a long waiting list to get a knee replacement -- or it would be more accurate to say that she is on a waiting list to find out if they'll put her on the waiting list to get her knee replaced.  When she makes an appointment at the doctor's she sometimes has to wait several days before being seen, but when her cat needs to see the vet she can get an appointment sometimes on the same day.  That's because cats aren't on the NHS.

Single payer systems are NOT the panacea that you may think they are.

 

 

There is no panacea. People want the best health care there is but no one wants to pay for it.

I lived in Britain for a while and know the NHS can be "fun". Some of the wealthy there pay for their own insuarance and get same-day care.

No one really likes pure capitalism in healthcare because it ends up with people dying because they cannot afford lifesaving treatment. Single payer becomes a mess because mistakes happen and accountability is mediocre at best. The middle way the United States tried is insurance companies which gives you large scale inefficiency due to all the negotiating insurance companies have to do while never producing any actual health care while we subsidize their operating costs. Add to that the inefficiencies for doctor's offices who could probably cut their admin staff in half if they did not have to deal with insurers.

The ACA tried an inefficient system of shooting for a kind of insurance cartel operating under government guidelines. While the system increased insurance enrollment the system is fragile and is collapsing because no one is sure how long it will be around. Republicans tacitly acknowledge that some form of this cartel system is better then the nothing we had before by endorsing "repeal and replace" rather then just a "repeal". I think the end we will end up with a single payer system or a market system without insurance (you just pay your doctor) with some kind of safeguard built in where the government covers expenses over a certain threshold to prevent medical care from eating your whole paycheck. The former has the advantage of removing multiple provider inefficiencies but adds on the downsides of government health care you mentioned. The latter has the advantage of market competition as doctors lower prices to attract customers but you will also have to deal with the possible price wars and even lower standards of service in exchange for lower prices. I am torn between the two. I think the single payer system might be marginally better but am not sure.

Also, someone needs to smack the pharmaceuticals companies in the face repeatedly with a large blunt object. Double digit price increases on prescriptions every year for years. I think a threat to nationalize the industry is in order To scare them out of the insane price gouging.

 

[Stargazer]

18 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

There is no panacea. People want the best health care there is but no one wants to pay for it.

I lived in Britain for a while and know the NHS can be "fun". Some of the wealthy there pay for their own insuarance and get same-day care.

No one really likes pure capitalism in healthcare because it ends up with people dying because they cannot afford lifesaving treatment. Single payer becomes a mess because mistakes happen and accountability is mediocre at best. The middle way the United States tried is insurance companies which gives you large scale inefficiency due to all the negotiating insurance companies have to do while never producing any actual health care while we subsidize their operating costs. Add to that the inefficiencies for doctor's offices who could probably cut their admin staff in half if they did not have to deal with insurers.

The ACA tried an inefficient system of shooting for a kind of insurance cartel operating under government guidelines. While the system increased insurance enrollment the system is fragile and is collapsing because no one is sure how long it will be around. Republicans tacitly acknowledge that some form of this cartel system is better then the nothing we had before by endorsing "repeal and replace" rather then just a "repeal". I think the end we will end up with a single payer system or a market system without insurance (you just pay your doctor) with some kind of safeguard built in where the government covers expenses over a certain threshold to prevent medical care from eating your whole paycheck. The former has the advantage of removing multiple provider inefficiencies but adds on the downsides of government health care you mentioned. The latter has the advantage of market competition as doctors lower prices to attract customers but you will also have to deal with the possible price wars and even lower standards of service in exchange for lower prices. I am torn between the two. I think the single payer system might be marginally better but am not sure.

Also, someone needs to smack the pharmaceuticals companies in the face repeatedly with a large blunt object. Double digit price increases on prescriptions every year for years. I think a threat to nationalize the industry is in order To scare them out of the insane price gouging.

 

The problem with doctors offices with large admin staffs is not only dealing with insurers, but dealing with government regulations that require so much paperwork that whole forests could get denuded.  Even though some of it is now electronic.  The other huge issue is the tort system and malpractice insurance.  Doctors have to pay huge malpractice insurance premiums, especially in some specialties.  My own primary care physician at my health cooperative (also LDS and former military doctor) told me that the reason he worked for the coop and was not in private practice was because of malpractice insurance.  

When I was getting ready for my mission back in 1971 the Church required me to get a physical exam.  I went to a private GP and his fee for an office visit? $10.  Nowadays if I wanted to get a physical it would run me in the hundreds, and not just because of inflation.

The problem with pharma is that it costs millions of dollars to do all the testing that the FDA requires -- with no assurity at the end that the drug will be accepted.  I don't doubt that testing is important -- we all know that drugs can be dangerous when we don't know all the possible side-effects.  But if you invested 20 million dollars in five different drugs and only one passed all the tests, you think you could afford to charge $1 per pill?  Especially if it was for a rare condition?  The problem here is more the economics, not so much the greed.  I know it's easy to blame greed, but the system demands it, and I don't know how to avoid much of the economic costs associated with bringing a new drug to the market.

You worry too much about price wars, I think.  Every time I go to the supermarket I see endless varieties of food and food-like items for sale, and every single one of them is in competition with the others.  Yet they still manage a degree of quality and quantity that is the envy of those in the third world.  I believe that a less-regulated healthcare system would be much better and much cheaper than what we have today.  But I don't expect to see this tested in the near future.  The future, my friend, is in bureaucracy.  If one could invest in it, one could get rich.

[mnn727]

12 hours ago, poptart said:

I screwed up, all hell let loose with my personal life and I got screwed.  Give me a chance to pay it off with good employment and I would happily pay off what I owe, as would millions.  I am so sick and tired of people ripping on us for things that happened out of our control.  You can google student loan suicide and more and more of us are blowing our brains out.  I've already been to an institution and am a shade of who I used to be.  Is it too much to ask that I be given the shot I was promised in school?  Or is this how it is that we will be blamed for the choices we made even though if the majority of us were given a shot we would work our backside off.  Everyone is suffering, even Stem majors are feeling it now.  If this is how its going to be then i;m going to enjoy  knowing that the jerks out there will be paying for my stay at a state run insitution when my sanity totally cracks.

What does YOUR mental health have to do with this subject for anyone besides yourself?

[mnn727]

6 hours ago, Stargazer said:

 When she makes an appointment at the doctor's she sometimes has to wait several days before being seen,

 

Takes me an average of 2 weeks to see a specialist here in Dallas.

[poptart]

46 minutes ago, mnn727 said:

What does YOUR mental health have to do with this subject for anyone besides yourself?

Not much, except that the great recession nailed a lot of people like me hard and now mental illness is affecting a lot of people.  Can't speak for them but I wanted away to pay my debt, with this economy it's very difficult.   Didn't appreciate your attitude, but that's ok.  I end up in an institution it will be on your some.  

I see them possibly scrapping student loans in the future so it pleases me to know it will have been disposable people like me who ruined it for "The children".  Could have given us decient job prospects but nooo, let's bring the hammer down on those who fortune screwed.  

[Gray]

15 hours ago, longview said:

1.  governments should NOT have been funding scholarships and grants to begin with.  It is a powerful disincentive to cost control.   Which directly leads to:

2.  bloated administration, professors only teaching just a few hours per week but receiving unjustifiably generous salaries, junky course offerings, politicized indoctrination, etc.

In the old days, students were able to work part time jobs year round and still carry full course loads and be able to graduate with little or no debt.  Nowadays, this scenario has been blown out of the water because of severe economic distortions due to unwise government largess (robbing Peter to pay Paul).  And the fact that NOT every high school graduate need to go to college (they are NOT that interested but their parents will push them to attend with free money).

When state governments were partially funding tuition, tuition was much cheaper. Just chanting "small government" doesn't automatically control costs. 

Funding scholarships is a cost control on student debt. The problem is universities are now being run like businesses, which means an expanding number of highly paid executive roles. 

[mnn727]

1 hour ago, poptart said:

Not much,

Exactly where the post should have ended. I'm sorry you have mental health problems, but that's no reason for taxpayers to have to foot the bill for everyone's college. I paid for mine, why should I pay for people I don't even know? Especially since most degree's are not actually needed except to get past lazy corporate recruiters. Most people could do their jobs without having a 4 year college degree.

Edited May 26, 2017 by mnn727

[mnn727]

10 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

In general and in principle, I agree with your first sentence.  However, it's not that simple, not in all cases.  I, too, did most all of that as an undergrad, and I also graduated with no student loan debt as an undergrad.  Law school, however, is a different animal.  

Don't even think I'm going to feel sorry for lawyers. They are a big part of why this country is so messed up. Are there some good ones? yes, But in general the fewer lawyers there are, the better IMHO.

[poptart]

7 minutes ago, mnn727 said:

Don't even think I'm going to feel sorry for lawyers. They are a big part of why this country is so messed up. Are there some good ones? yes, But in general the fewer lawyers there are, the better IMHO.

Until you need one.  Lawsuits aren't fun.

[longview]

41 minutes ago, Gray said:

When state governments were partially funding tuition, tuition was much cheaper. Just chanting "small government" doesn't automatically control costs. 

Funding scholarships is a cost control on student debt. The problem is universities are now being run like businesses, which means an expanding number of highly paid executive roles. 

Government has no business meddling in education, no business imposing regulations on what is to be taught, no business dictating whether or not prayer is to be offered in class, and a whole host of other issues.  Everything must be the choice of parents and/or students.  The PTA used to be a viable method for accountability, discipline, quality between teachers and parents.  But it is now a sham with parents shunted off to the sideline.

No, universities are only partially run like a business.  When they get grants and funding and more students (due to greater availability of scholarships), they are actually being molded into the image of the bureaucracy.  They become more and more part of the government.

"Resistance is futile.  You will be assimilated."  The very essence of the socialist dream for imposing their version of "Social Justice."

[Gray]

6 minutes ago, longview said:

Government has no business meddling in education, no business imposing regulations on what is to be taught, no business dictating whether or not prayer is to be offered in class, and a whole host of other issues.  Everything must be the choice of parents and/or students.  The PTA used to be a viable method for accountability, discipline, quality between teachers and parents.  But it is now a sham with parents shunted off to the sideline.

No, universities are only partially run like a business.  When they get grants and funding and more students (due to greater availability of scholarships), they are actually being molded into the image of the bureaucracy.  They become more and more part of the government.

"Resistance is futile.  You will be assimilated."  The very essence of the socialist dream for imposing their version of "Social Justice."

We've seen what happens when universities start to be run like businesses, and that's the state of universities today. When they're run for the public good, education is cheaper and available to more without crippling them with lifelong debt. 

40 years ago education was not run like a business at all, and it was cheaper. And of course it's no accident that most for-profit universities offer lower-quality education. Many of them are outright scams. 

[longview]

11 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Poor foolish teenagers are stuck making financially devastating decisions.

And making young people (like Pop-Tart) more suicidal.  More dependent on government.  Making more and more "DRONES" to comply with the "Will of the Government" that knows all wisdom, all power, all beneficence.

11 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Again, make student loan debt dischargeable by bankruptcy and a lot of the problem will go away. Creditors (including the federal government) need to face real risks in the student loan market for it to correct itself.

NO, it will NOT go away.  You are SO naive.  You have voted to ROB Peter to pay Paul.  The taxpayers will be left holding the bag.  The national debt will get SO enormous that the interest payments on it will become the largest item on the annual budget.  That debt service will soon become so unwieldy that Congress will give up on it.  THEN hyper-inflation will blow out of control (like the Wiemar Republic).  The ONLY solution is to KICK government OUT of services that it has NO business being in.

[probablyHagoth7]

17 hours ago, poptart said:

I did, tried grad school, screwed up and had my mental health take a nose dive, I'm doing what I can and am having my sanity slowly slip away.  All I want is an opportunity to work in my field the way everyone else in my generation did.  Either that or enjoy when even more of us either end up on disability, the street, mental institutions or rotting bodies with holes in their heads that get found a month or more after death.  Either way the likes of you end up with the tab.  Ever dawn on you that maybe it's easier to help your own countrymen out *or are you part of the problem?*

Tax-funded education should be free. Period. There is no justification for paying for it for years thru taxes, and then paying a second time at the till, sometimes for years to come.

The technologies are all in place to stream it at essentially t no additional cost, and have been in place for about 2 decades. And peers in the same cohort can form virtual study groups as scaffolding.

But lobbyists will keep charity/reason at bay until we have enough critical mass, enough taxpayers, including students and prospective students, occupying campus and march on the hill, and demand change/redress. Or until a maverick executive at state and/or federal level does with the stroke of a pen what legislators and administrators should have done long ago.

State servers are housing online courses that we as taxpayers own by eminent domain. Artificial scarcity. Open the silos. Now. End the famine and the prolonged poverty. 

This coming holiday is a good day to memorialize millions n the land of the free who were and are fodder/pawns in the battle for the ivory tower. Open the damn silos. 

 

Edited May 26, 2017 by probablyHagoth7

[probablyHagoth7]

Many of the earliest writings on utopia included free education as an unwavering standard. We give that ideal mere lip service by granting it to our youth who want it the least...but withhold it from those wanting to be self sufficient and provide for others, and/or who want to make the world a better place.

If every young man or woman who wished to cure cancer or minister to the mentally ill,  could uptrain for free, what then? If ye have the desire...ye are called to the work...etc. etc.

An onramp to a rapidly better society

Edited May 26, 2017 by probablyHagoth7

[Calm]

4 hours ago, mnn727 said:

What does YOUR mental health have to do with this subject for anyone besides yourself?

This is social, not in In the news or main forum...it is meant for personal stories as long as they don't get too extreme or mean to be proselyting.  People share good and bad to help others and look for help, like I did when worrying about my mom's health insurance.

Edited May 26, 2017 by Calm

[Anijen]

20 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I'm starting to think a 4 year degree, unless it's for a career that requires it, is not needed. It pains me to see you on the board with student debt. I think someone who will go unmentioned was trying to change that and even give free college, forgot the school. I think it should happen!

I, 100%, completely, and fully agree.

I think because Pell grants and student loans are so easy to get these days that schools have become dependent over the years on these loans, thus they raise the tuition costs because they know the student will get the govt assistance to pay they higher tuition. Where it used to be where graduating from high school was quite the accomplishment, now days Associate and Bachelor degrees have become a dime a dozen and because of this has diminished their importance or even in some instances credibility, and students walk away with student loan debt and in many cases with a degree that is difficult to get it to pay for itself.

When the favorite majors are less science related and more liberal arts, the job pool after graduation is just not there. There are only so many jobs that require basket weaving, pottery, art appreciation, etc. that will support a person (let alone a family).  For example even the fields that are not insignificant or less important have become so highly popular that when someone graduates within that, the major the jobs are far fewer than the people who hold degrees in that field (i.e. Criminal Justice is an excellent pursuit and one of the most popular degrees in college, but after graduation is very difficult to get a job in the related field because of the mass amount of students). Best is to stay in the areas that always seem to have good opportunities for employment after graduation, such as in the medical or teaching [K-12] fields.

I believe and have seen it done by myself and by family and friends that undergraduate degrees are easy to obtain without the student loan, via scholarships, Pell grants (most students qualify for), and good old fashioned working through college.

However, graduate degrees have become the cash-cow for universities and every single grad student I know has amassed a large amount of student loans in obtaining them. Medical school, law school average about $20,000 (very low end) to $75,000. a year, more if you have to pay out-of-state tuition (as I had to). Even when I was able to supplement the costs with small limited scholarships, it still did not cover the full cost of tuition. Then there is the cost of housing (I didn't use) and food on top of the regular costs. I did not have to move or get a dorm because I commuted from Nebraska to South Dakota about an hour drive to get to school and an hour drive back, so I had a large gas bill, not to mention the cost of a parking pass (which borders criminality) and there is always the unavailability of of a parking spot on top of that. It gets quite scary.

Then there is the costs of books  My books averaged about $180. - $225. for each text book (renting was only slightly less). I averaged about $800. in books each (each) semester. Yes, most graduate programs are a cash-cow for the school in many, many ways.  I know many students who have well over $300,000 in student loans after they graduate (law school) and I imagine medical school is the same, but more than likely even higher. I have a pilot friend who went to flight school instead of the military (I think the military is an excellent way to pay for school, ooh-rah). This friend paid an astonishing $32,000 each semester. He was able to supplement some of that costs with a $16,000 scholarship each semester, but still paying $16,000 a semester is quite the pricey education. Lucky for him he got employment and makes over $140,000 a year flying for Continental Airlines (it might be Delta now).

I have been very blessed where I have retired early from the fed govt and receive a retirement (FERS not Civil-Service), I also own my own business (successful business), and I now plan to work for the state for the next 15-20 years. At the age of 65-72 (depending when I retire), I will get three retirement checks from the state, fed, and social security. I have planned it that way and have been working on that plan (still currently am). 

Its possible with some hard work and planning with getting by with little student loans, but most do not plan this way and the way student loans and their use by universities are set up, it makes it quite easy to become accustomed to, then dependent on.

Edited May 26, 2017 by Anijen

[Kenngo1969]

4 hours ago, mnn727 said:

Don't even think I'm going to feel sorry for lawyers. They are a big part of why this country is so messed up. Are there some good ones? yes, But in general the fewer lawyers there are, the better IMHO.

I'm not sure what I've written, so far, that has led you to believe I expect sympathy from you or from anyone else.  I simply responded to your assertion that anyone who incurs a debt should be held liable for paying that debt regardless of the debtor's circumstances by pointing out that, often, it isn't that simple.  Your professed lack of sympathy for lawyers puts you in good company, though I hope you don't suffer from claustrophobia or from agoraphobia, because, even as big as that room might be, it's hardly a limitless space.   Strictly speaking, I neither asked nor expected you to have any sympathy for lawyers.  There are some complexities of the problem (both of my personal challenges and for those pursuing legal education generally) that I think you're missing:

1. As I have made abundantly clear on this thread, on this Board, elsewhere in Cyber space, and in face-to-face interactions with others, I'm not a lawyer; should I ever achieve my desired outcome of working in the legal profession in some capacity, for all you know, perhaps my own attitude toward lawyers would parallel that of the inimitable Erin Brockovich, who, in an effort to build rapport with a potential client when her interlocutor asked if she was a lawyer, reportedly responded, "I hate lawyers.  I just work for 'em."
2. While I have not addressed the inefficiencies in the systems of legal education and of legal practice generally because they are beyond the scope of this particular dialogue, such inefficiencies do, indeed, exist, and they are a source of frustration not only to people such as yourself who distrust the legal system and those who operate in it, they are also a source of frustration to the people who actually are part of the system, attorneys included. While one may, for example, wish to go into public interest law by taking a job serving populations who are underserved (or who are ill-served) by the legal system, our would-be public interest lawyer may believe he is unable to do so because such a position will not allow him to pay back the considerable debt he has incurred in the course of pursuing his legal education.  (And remember, defraying legal education costs isn't not necessarily as simple as saying, "Get a job," since ABA accreditation standards forbid 1Ls from securing outside employment, and working while in law school is challenging even if one has advanced beyond the 1L year.)
3. It seems rather facile to say, in essence, that "Lawyers are the problem; therefore, a world with fewer lawyers would, ipso facto, be a better world."  As I pointed out in #2, as much as one might have a genuine desire to work where he is likely to make the greatest difference to the people who need it most, other factors may make it difficult (if not impossible) for him to do so.  I can argue just as effectively (if not more so) that, in fact, the problem isn't that there are too many lawyers, but, rather, that there are not enough lawyers where they are most neeeded.  Various factors have conspired needlessly to drive up the cost of legal education, and, thus, to reduce access to needed legal services, including such things as law schools' fetish for having all the bells and whistles, the ABA's ability to withhold accreditation from schools which lack certain bells and whistles, and so on.
4. While you may lack sympathy for "Kenngo1969, aspiring attorney," or for "Kenngo1969, aspiring legal support professional" (and rightly so, according to most all of the people in that very crowded room to which I alluded in #2) perhaps you ought to consider whether it is consistent with the Christian ethic for you to lack sympathy for a brother in Christ or for a fellow mortal traveller, no matter how responsible you believe he is for his own plight.  King Benjamin warned against that very attitude.  (See Mosiah 4:17-18.)  While he warned against having that attitude specifically toward the poor, I believe that principle is more widely applicable to a variety of circumstances in which people might find themselves in which, arguably, they have "made their own bed."  Even if, in many cases, that is true, who among us has made the wisest possible choices in every circumstance in which we have found ourselves?   

Long story short?  Again, I think that neither the problem nor your proposed "solution" are as simple as you're trying to make them out to be.

Edited May 26, 2017 by Kenngo1969

[The Nehor]

4 hours ago, longview said:

And making young people (like Pop-Tart) more suicidal.  More dependent on government.  Making more and more "DRONES" to comply with the "Will of the Government" that knows all wisdom, all power, all beneficence.

NO, it will NOT go away.  You are SO naive.  You have voted to ROB Peter to pay Paul.  The taxpayers will be left holding the bag.  The national debt will get SO enormous that the interest payments on it will become the largest item on the annual budget.  That debt service will soon become so unwieldy that Congress will give up on it.  THEN hyper-inflation will blow out of control (like the Wiemar Republic).  The ONLY solution is to KICK government OUT of services that it has NO business being in.

I wasn't convinced at first but your liberal use of the Caps Lock key won me over.

Your use of the slippery slope fallacy is also wonderful. Mind if I use it as an example?