Should Government Forgive Home Loans?

[Revoltingest]

The government encourages student loans and grants them easily promoting the ability of schools to increase there charges. They do no such thing with home loans with an exception to military personal who get some benefit for serving our country but it is still nothing like student loans.

But government does heavily contribute to housing bubbles....
- Institutional inflation (currency devaluation) incentives
buying expensive homes as an investment, & hedge against
inflation.
- Government subsidizes home ownership with tax
deductible interest, property taxes, & capital gains.
- Government created lenders (Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, VA)
offer generous terms & low down payments.

The government should have the same standards for Student loans as it does for home loans and then the problem would be resolved most people would be able to pay off their student loans; however, schools would start bleeding money as not as many people would be able to get loans.

OK.

We all know how the government works can't have big business lose money but it OK to penalize the common folk.

Government allows many big businesses to lose money & die.
But occasionally it goes nuts with bail-outs.

 

[Heyo]

I don't see higher education as government's
responsibility. But if government does assume
it, there shouldn't be heavy subsidy of low
value fields, eg, Women's studies, Diversity
Studies, Medieval Art.

That's entirely in the realm of opinion, so no argument here, just a different opinion:
I think that an industrialized nation should value education in itself not as a means to an end (producing high tax paying citizens) and I think the resources are there. The same question frequently comes up when it gets to science. Should increasing knowledge be a value in itself or should we focus solely on applicable (in the near future) science? In both cases my vote is for the cultural value, not the mundane monetary. But I see that that is not easy to explain in a capitalist society where money is the only value that counts.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's entirely in the realm of opinion, so no argument here, just a different opinion:
I think that an industrialized nation should value education in itself not as a means to an end (producing high tax paying citizens) and I think the resources are there. The same question frequently comes up when it gets to science. Should increasing knowledge be a value in itself or should we focus solely on applicable (in the near future) science? In both cases my vote is for the cultural value, not the mundane monetary. But I see that that is not easy to explain in a capitalist society where money is the only value that counts.

Resources aren't limited, so the will be allocated
on some basis. Should funding for a rodeo clown
education match electrical engineering? Nah.
Who determines cultural value....government?
Nah. I don't trust it to decide what's good for us.

I see great potential for the cost of higher education
to drop. Not all education need be in fancy pants
schools that with spendy edifices, trophy professors,
& extensive research facilities.
A friend taught employment law at an internet based
school. His course was rigorous & cheap. This doesn't
work for all, but such approaches should play a larger
roll. And of course, AI will increasingly handle the load.

 

[bobhikes]

But government does heavily contribute to housing bubbles....
- Institutional inflation (currency devaluation) incentives
buying expensive homes as an investment, & hedge against
inflation.
- Government subsidizes home ownership with tax
deductible interest, property taxes, & capital gains.
- Government created lenders (Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, VA)
offer generous terms & low down payments.

OK.

Government allows many big businesses to lose money & die.
But occasionally it goes nuts with bail-outs.

Anyway for my part People are stupid they should know better than to take out loans they can't afford. Just because you want something doesn't mean you need it or should have it. So I have never been for the government balling out people or big business. Let it all collapse it's to only way people will learn (though I doubt it); However, if your ok with the government balling out the rich or companies then I don't see any reason why they can't pay off student loans and home loans, it is the tax payers money after all.

 

[Revoltingest]

Anyway for my part People are stupid they should know better than to take out loans they can't afford. Just because you want something doesn't mean you need it or should have it. So I have never been for the government balling out people or big business. Let it all collapse it's to only way people will learn (though I doubt it); However, if your ok with the government balling out the rich or companies then I don't see any reason why they can't pay off student loans and home loans, it is the tax payers money after all.

I've mixed views on bail-outs.
Some companies are critical for national security.
Failure could warrant intervention.
Some companies become troubled because of
new government policy, & would be deserving
of some assistance.
Others....let'm fail.

 

[Heyo]

Resources aren't limited, so the will be allocated
on some basis. Should funding for a rodeo clown
education match electrical engineering? Nah.
Who determines cultural value....government?
Nah. I don't trust it to decide what's good for us.

That's why the government shouldn't decide which fields of study should be preferably subsidized.
If you want a rodeo clown education you should have the same subsidies as an electrical engineer.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's why the government shouldn't decide which fields of study should be preferably subsidized.
If you want a rodeo clown education you should have the same subsidies as an electrical engineer.

You are a generous person who values diversity.

Yeah, I went there.

 

[Shaul]

What do you mean by forgiven? If the government is paying off these loans that would be using public funds for private functions, which is wrong. If forgiven means that the debt is cancelled without repayment that would be a government taking of private property of the lenders. It would also cause an ending of any more lending. (Why would any just give away their wealth?) No more home loans.

 

[Revoltingest]

What do you mean by forgiven?

See the quote directly below....

If the government is paying off these loans that would be using public funds for private functions....

If forgiven means that the debt is cancelled without repayment that would be a government taking of private property of the lenders. It would also cause an ending of any more lending.

Government could compensate private lenders.

(Why would any just give away their wealth?) No more home loans.

If all education should be free,
then why not housing?

 

[Valjean]

The government encourages student loans and grants them easily promoting the ability of schools to increase there charges. They do no such thing with home loans with an exception to military personal who get some benefit for serving our country but it is still nothing like student loans.

The State University system was originally designed to be free for in-state students. No more.

Fifty years ago a student could afford tuition at most colleges and universities with a Summer job or, as I did, with a part-time job. Student loans were something I never heard of or imagined.

What changed? -- the Neoliberal revolution.

The government should have the same standards for Student loans as it does for home loans and then the problem would be resolved most people would be able to pay off their student loans; however, schools would start bleeding money as not as many people would be able to get loans. We all know how the government works can't have big business lose money but it OK to penalize the common folk.

But we could go back to government For the People, rather than the legislative arm of the oligarchy/big business, couldn't we?
That would "solve" a multitude of problems.

 

[Valjean]

I don't see higher education as government's
responsibility. But if government does assume
it, there shouldn't be heavy subsidy of low
value fields, eg, Women's studies, Diversity
Studies, Medieval Art.

So what is the purpose of government, if not to maximize the safety and prosperity of those it works for?
From the US Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,...

I see support of The Commons -- those services and institutions used universally, such as healthcare, education, infrastructure, police and fire services, environmental protection, &al -- as a natural purview of government. These are best managed as natural, publicly managed, non-profit, transparent, monopolies. This wouldn't preclude privatized alternatives, but could go a long way to ensuring these services are universally available and affordable.

I also see a role for government in intervening when privatized industries like healthcare, education or housing become exploitative; but when these industries employ armies of lobbyists and have captured their regulators, reform becomes an uphill battle.

 

[Heyo]

These are best managed as natural, publicly managed, non-profit, transparent, monopolies. This wouldn't preclude privatized alternatives,

Yes it would. You either have a monopoly or you have private alternatives.

 

[Valjean]

Yes it would. You either have a monopoly or you have private alternatives.

Dosn't Britain have both a socialized healthcare system, along with privatized alternatives for those with the money to pay for them?
Doesn't Canada have both a single-payer system along with private alternatives?

 

[Audie]

I've mixed views on bail-outs.
Some companies are critical for national security.
Failure could warrant intervention.
Some companies become troubled because of
new government policy, & would be deserving
of some assistance.
Others....let'm fail.

Credit card debt?

 

[Heyo]

Dosn't Britain have both a socialized healthcare system, along with privatized alternatives for those with the money to pay for them?
Doesn't Canada have both a single-payer system along with private alternatives?

Yes, that's why they don't have monopolies. Having a monopoly with a private alternative is like having a married bachelor, monopoly means no alternative.

 

[Alien826]

Yes, that's why they don't have monopolies. Having a monopoly with a private alternative is like having a married bachelor, monopoly means no alternative.

That's right. I agree with @Valjean if the word "monopoly" is removed. Actually, if properly managed having both can be good. Rich people will opt out of the system to get luxurious, single occupancy rooms, faster service and so on but still pay the taxes that support the Government system. I emphasize "properly managed" though. The private system must not be allowed to degrade the Government system.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Education should be free as it is in developed nations.

100% possible if we automate it making instruction free for most subjects and set up certification centers with very low testing costs...like 25 per student. Most materials for this are already available, and all that remains is to cut funding for the bloated universities.

 

[Alien826]

To those who believe government should forgive
student loans, I ask about loans for home owners.
Answer & reasons please.

I'd say the two things are not totally comparable. The short answer is no to both, if you borrow money you should be prepared to repay it. But if we have some kind of safety net, it will probably have to include assistance to those that get into trouble with their loans. I"ll talk about each separately.

Housing, over my lifetime, has probably been the best investment available to the middle class of all time. I say middle class because the rich have other excellent investment possibilities and the poor can't afford any. That makes me unwilling to support measures to forgive housing loans, with exceptions. Exceptions include helping those in danger of losing their houses though unemployment or whatever and helping the poor to get into the housing market.

Education is somewhat different, as the value of the "product" is difficult to determine in advance. I can expand on that if anyone wishes, but it seems obvious. The same principle of repaying a debt applies, but the assistance offered to those in trouble needs to be more, and different. The education system (in the USA) is broken imo and many solutions have already been offered here, so I won't go any further in this post.

Having said that, I'll add one example, that I first read from Robert Reich. Everyone pays 10% of their income for the first ten years after graduation. There are probably various ways it could go wrong, and the details need to be considered, but I like the concept.

 

[Revoltingest]

So what is the purpose of government, if not to maximize the safety and prosperity of those it works for?

Defense, courts, law enforcement, & treaties are the basics.
Social services can be added when the economy can support them.
Happiness is for individuals to pursue...not for government to provide.

I see support of The Commons -- those services and institutions used universally, such as healthcare, education, infrastructure, police and fire services, environmental protection, &al -- as a natural purview of government. These are best managed as natural, publicly managed, non-profit, transparent, monopolies. This wouldn't preclude privatized alternatives, but could go a long way to ensuring these services are universally available and affordable.

Sound good to me.

I also see a role for government in intervening when privatized industries like healthcare, education or housing become exploitative;

Those industries suffer from government intrusion.
So government intervention to fix government intervention
isn't necessarily a solution. Regulation, deregulation, &
subsidy are complex issues.

but when these industries employ armies of lobbyists and have captured their regulators, reform becomes an uphill battle.

Lobbying is definitely a problem.
Perhaps we should prevent people from
redress of grievances to government?

 

[Revoltingest]

Credit card debt?

Government forgives that all the time.
Bankruptcy.