As regards the legislation of student loans in our bill of health news …..?
…. My question is: when Student loans are government backed and can not be erased in bankruptcy (thus essentially guaranteeing repayment) why capitalism market has not seen a bank step in and offer low (1% or 2%) interest in place of the gouging even at 7% or more? I mean, would not flock students to such a bank. I mean WTF, they stepped up to offer you toxic subprime!
"As Americans know what it actually does, they will be really unhappy, "predicted Alexander. "The first people will be really unfortunate the 19 million students who, after July 1, will have no choice but to go to call centers to obtain federal student loans. They will become even more unhappy when they discover that the government is charging 2.8 percent to borrow money and 6.8 percent for lending to students, and spending the difference on the new bill of health and other programs. In other words, the government will be overloaded 19 million students. "The additional cost is" significant, "Alexander adds, because" on a $ 25,000 student loan, which is an average loans, the amount the government will average between $ 1,700 and overloading $ 1,800. "Up To date, 15 loans on 19 million students private loans were backed by the government, "said Alexander." Now, we borrow half a trillion from China to pay for billions of dollars in new loans. Not only does it add to the debt, but in the midst of a recession, casting 31,000 Americans working in banks and Nonprofit lenders not work. "Alexander, a former president of the University of Tennessee, said the effects of policy Obama could be felt for decades. "When I was education secretary, one of my main objections to shoot at government is that I do not think the government could manage, "he said. "It will be too big and too crowded, and makes getting your student loan about as attractive as the tail to get your driver's license in some states. "It changes the nature of the country in which we live more than education U.S. exchange, "Alexander concluded. "The American system of higher education has become the best in the world because of choice and competition. Unlike K-12, we give money to students and let them choose among schools, with the choice of private lenders or lessors of government. This is the case for 20 years. Having no choice, and the government runs everything, more like a Soviet-style, European, and even Asia model of higher education where the government takes care of everything. In most of these countries, they have been falling over themselves reject their controlled by the authoritarian state universities, which are much worse than ours, and to move towards the American model, which focuses on the choice competition and peer-reviewed research. In this sense, we are now a step back from our culture-choice competition, which has given us not only some of the best universities in the world, but almost all of them. "Http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MjA0Y2NiNDI4Y2ZkZWNiMWJjZTAwMzAwMTYwZTA0MGE = Scott wrote: "Because, by nature, banks are greedy, and want to make as much money as they can." Gee, theres a shock. The banks want to make money. I guess you're more comfortable doing business with a bank that does not make money or lose money.
