Students Have No Moral Responsibility to Pay Back Federal Student Loans

The fact that the U.S. government lends money to naive, fresh-out-of-high-school eighteen year olds is reckless and irresponsible. An eighteen year old is still a teenager, though legally recognized as an adult. Considering that society (i.e. teachers, school counselors, television, etc) tells young people that college is the only way to succeed, and that - to be specific - attending a highly accredited private university is ideal, then it's to be expected that a naive eighteen year old is going to accept federal student loan money (assuming that they can't afford it without the aid) to attend college. To them, signing the dotted line is a mere formality on the road to success. Little do they know, college is not for everyone, so some of them wind up flunking out or dropping out, with tons of debt. 

I believe that such people have no moral responsibility in regard to paying the loans back. To lend tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars to a naive eighteen year old, fresh out of high school, is stupid and manipulative.

Keep that idea, it will get you far OP. 

It's not an issue of morality. 

The government gave you money for you to go to school. You have to pay it back. You are legally obligated to pay them back. Before accepting the FAFSA loans you sign agreements that you will pay them back. You do not need to use federally sponsored student loans to go to school either. 

You're a fvcking moron.chessmaster1989

It's not an issue of morality. 

The government gave you money for you to go to school. You have to pay it back. You are legally obligated to pay them back. Before accepting the FAFSA loans you sign agreements that you will pay them back. You do not need to use federally sponsored student loans to go to school either. 

Wasdie

I recogize that it's a legal responsibility, but am arguing that if someone refuses to live up to it, they shouldn't be criticized or stigmatized, which is often the case.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

It's not an issue of morality. 

The government gave you money for you to go to school. You have to pay it back. You are legally obligated to pay them back. Before accepting the FAFSA loans you sign agreements that you will pay them back. You do not need to use federally sponsored student loans to go to school either. 

BluRayHiDef

I recogize that it's a legal responsibility, but am arguing that if someone refuses to live up to it, they shouldn't be criticized or stigmatized, which is often the case.

The fact that the U.S. government lends money to naive, fresh-out-of-high-school eighteen year olds is reckless and irresponsible. An eighteen year old is still a teenager, though legally recognized as an adult. Considering that society (i.e. teachers, school counselors, television, etc) tells young people that college is the only way to succeed, and that - to be specific - attending a highly accredited private university is ideal, then it's to be expected that a naive eighteen year old is going to accept federal student loan money (assuming that they can't afford it without the aid) to attend college. To them, signing the dotted line is a mere formality on the road to success. Little do they know, college is not for everyone, so some of them wind up flunking out or dropping out, with tons of debt. 

I believe that such people have no moral responsibility in regard to paying the loans back. To lend tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars to a naive eighteen year old, fresh out of high school, is stupid and manipulative.

BluRayHiDef

College is pushed far too much as being the key to success.  I know a lot of people that got a lot of really pointless degrees (liberal arts of some kind), after being told that employers just look at the fact that you were smart enough to get a degree and will consider you.

In many professions, getting a degree can be very important but only if it is the right degree. 

For instance, I know a girl that got a degree in chicano studies and is stuck selling books at barnes & noble, as she can't find any jobs that need a chicano studies degree and all of her work history is working at barnes & noble.

My wife has a BA in child development and she is a preschool teacher, her degree is very necessary for her work.  

College is important for society, but having a bunch of liberal arts majors working as cashiers with massive debt doesn't help anyone.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

It's not an issue of morality. 

The government gave you money for you to go to school. You have to pay it back. You are legally obligated to pay them back. Before accepting the FAFSA loans you sign agreements that you will pay them back. You do not need to use federally sponsored student loans to go to school either. 

BluRayHiDef

they shouldn't be criticized or stigmatized, which is often the case.

[QUOTE="BluRayHiDef"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

It's not an issue of morality. 

The government gave you money for you to go to school. You have to pay it back. You are legally obligated to pay them back. Before accepting the FAFSA loans you sign agreements that you will pay them back. You do not need to use federally sponsored student loans to go to school either. 

Fightingfan

I recogize that it's a legal responsibility, but am arguing that if someone refuses to live up to it, they shouldn't be criticized or stigmatized, which is often the case.

Don't tell me you've stuck a Bentley badge on your truck :P.

Being naive to the conditions of a contract one signs is not a valid excuse to skip on those conditions.22Toothpicks

That's not entirely true.  A contract with a minor is voidable, which is why most organizations will not enter into a contract with a person under 18 without a co-signer.  Courts have also ruled certain contracts voidable when it is clear that one party took advantage of the other through a language barrier or something similar.

Everyone has a moral obligation to pay back debts that they accrue.

[QUOTE="BluRayHiDef"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

It's not an issue of morality. 

The government gave you money for you to go to school. You have to pay it back. You are legally obligated to pay them back. Before accepting the FAFSA loans you sign agreements that you will pay them back. You do not need to use federally sponsored student loans to go to school either. 

Master_Live

they shouldn't be criticized or stigmatized, which is often the case.

p

They should be respected for their decision. As for what should be done in regard to all outstanding student loan debt, it should be forgiven by the government en masse, just as the banks were forgiven.

[QUOTE="22Toothpicks"]Being naive to the conditions of a contract one signs is not a valid excuse to skip on those conditions.TacticalDesire

That's not entirely true.  A contract with a minor is voidable, which is why most organizations will not enter into a contract with a person under 18 without a co-signer.  Courts have also ruled certain contracts voidable when it is clear that one party took advantage of the other through a language barrier or something similar.

Regardless of the source of the load, public or private, you are obligated to play the loan back. Remember that teenagers aren't always making the decision on their own. A significant number of college students rely on funds from parents, and the parents are co-signers of the loans. The parents are part of that responsibility. You cannot place this on naive teenagers.

I'd really like to see how far this philosophy takes you. If you aren't fined or arrested for defaulting on a loan in the long term, you will look all useful relationships, personal and public, because no one will be trusting enough to give anything to you.

[QUOTE="22Toothpicks"]Being naive to the conditions of a contract one signs is not a valid excuse to skip on those conditions.TacticalDesire

That's not entirely true.  A contract with a minor is voidable, which is why most organizations will not enter into a contract with a person under 18 without a co-signer.  Courts have also ruled certain contracts voidable when it is clear that one party took advantage of the other through a language barrier or something similar.

[QUOTE="TacticalDesire"]

[QUOTE="22Toothpicks"]Being naive to the conditions of a contract one signs is not a valid excuse to skip on those conditions.Fightingfan

That's not entirely true.  A contract with a minor is voidable, which is why most organizations will not enter into a contract with a person under 18 without a co-signer.  Courts have also ruled certain contracts voidable when it is clear that one party took advantage of the other through a language barrier or something similar.

Oh, in a situation such as student loans which OP is describing it'd be nigh impossible unless the person had a mental handicap, but the point is that there are laws in place to protect people who are unfairly manipulated into a contract.

[QUOTE="TacticalDesire"]

[QUOTE="22Toothpicks"]Being naive to the conditions of a contract one signs is not a valid excuse to skip on those conditions.22Toothpicks

That's not entirely true.  A contract with a minor is voidable, which is why most organizations will not enter into a contract with a person under 18 without a co-signer.  Courts have also ruled certain contracts voidable when it is clear that one party took advantage of the other through a language barrier or something similar.

For what it's worth though none of those claims would work for a normal 18 year old signing onto a student loan, so in most cases you're right:P

Regardless of the source of the load, public or private, you are obligated to play the loan back. Remember that teenagers aren't always making the decision on their own. A significant number of college students rely on funds from parents, and the parents are co-signers of the loans. The parents are part of that responsibility. You cannot place this on naive teenagers.

I'd really like to see how far this philosophy takes you. If you aren't fined or arrested for defaulting on a loan in the long term, you will look all useful relationships, personal and public, because no one will be trusting enough to give anything to you.

jimkabrhel

What about the students that are declared wards of the state or as independents because they don't have parents? Those students sign the loans on their own.

Morals don't mean shit if your life is ruined.

[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]

Regardless of the source of the load, public or private, you are obligated to play the loan back. Remember that teenagers aren't always making the decision on their own. A significant number of college students rely on funds from parents, and the parents are co-signers of the loans. The parents are part of that responsibility. You cannot place this on naive teenagers.

I'd really like to see how far this philosophy takes you. If you aren't fined or arrested for defaulting on a loan in the long term, you will look all useful relationships, personal and public, because no one will be trusting enough to give anything to you.

BluRayHiDef

What about the students that are declared wards of the state or as independents because they don't have parents? Those students sign the loans on their own.

Even if you're considered an independent for tax purposes your parents can still co-sign a loan with you.  Hell, anyone can be a co-signer.

they will pay or the government will just garnish their wages, take your tax refunds, etc

[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]

Regardless of the source of the load, public or private, you are obligated to play the loan back. Remember that teenagers aren't always making the decision on their own. A significant number of college students rely on funds from parents, and the parents are co-signers of the loans. The parents are part of that responsibility. You cannot place this on naive teenagers.

I'd really like to see how far this philosophy takes you. If you aren't fined or arrested for defaulting on a loan in the long term, you will look all useful relationships, personal and public, because no one will be trusting enough to give anything to you.

BluRayHiDef

What about the students that are declared wards of the state or as independents because they don't have parents? Those students sign the loans on their own.

The fact that the U.S. government lends money to naive, fresh-out-of-high-school eighteen year olds is reckless and irresponsible. An eighteen year old is still a teenager, though legally recognized as an adult. Considering that society (i.e. teachers, school counselors, television, etc) tells young people that college is the only way to succeed, and that - to be specific - attending a highly accredited private university is ideal, then it's to be expected that a naive eighteen year old is going to accept federal student loan money (assuming that they can't afford it without the aid) to attend college. To them, signing the dotted line is a mere formality on the road to success. Little do they know, college is not for everyone, so some of them wind up flunking out or dropping out, with tons of debt. 

I believe that such people have no moral responsibility in regard to paying the loans back. To lend tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars to a naive eighteen year old, fresh out of high school, is stupid and manipulative.

BluRayHiDef

The government DOES NOT lend money to students. They GUARENTEE the money. The difference? They contract out the work of lending the money to banks, and they do not themselves lend the money.

Cute, OP.

dumb, it's just a part of life. Our government doesn't care if students leave college with thousands of dollars of debt. Where as other countries allow their students to go with no or very little cost.

You are to a certain degree correct but the issue is a cultural one. Some people believe that in order to be a productive member of society you have to have a degree.

The issue with what you are saying is in order to be permanently weighed down you would have to have dropped out very late on during the course.

Leejjohno

One does not need to drop out very late in their major to incur large debt. A single year at a private university can cost $50,000, which is absurd.

[QUOTE="Leejjohno"]

You are to a certain degree correct but the issue is a cultural one. Some people believe that in order to be a productive member of society you have to have a degree.

The issue with what you are saying is in order to be permanently weighed down you would have to have dropped out very late on during the course.

BluRayHiDef

One does not need to drop out very late in their major to incur large debt. A single year at a private university can cost $50,000, which is absurd.

Yes, they do. There would be no other way for the student to go to college if they did not receive a loan.

How else are we supposed to get money for college? I have maybe 10K in saving for it but that isn't going to cover the entire cost which will be $80,000 -$100,000.YoshiYogurt

If the government stopped interfering with the market for education, the Law of Demand would ensure that tuition costs would drop, since the demand for education is so high. Ironically, by flooding money into the educarion market, the government is causing the cost of education to increase, because educational institutions have an incentive to increase their prices, because they know the government will simply give more money to students to pay the increased prices.

[QUOTE="BluRayHiDef"]

[QUOTE="Leejjohno"]

You are to a certain degree correct but the issue is a cultural one. Some people believe that in order to be a productive member of society you have to have a degree.

The issue with what you are saying is in order to be permanently weighed down you would have to have dropped out very late on during the course.

LJS9502_basic

One does not need to drop out very late in their major to incur large debt. A single year at a private university can cost $50,000, which is absurd.

People who graduate from expensive, private schools have a greater chance of being employed in the field of study they majored in. Hence, people are effectively forced to attend expensive, private universities. Be honest. Who do you think Lockheed Martin would choose to hire? Someone who attended MIT or someone who attended  some no-name community college?

[QUOTE="YoshiYogurt"]How else are we supposed to get money for college? I have maybe 10K in saving for it but that isn't going to cover the entire cost which will be $80,000 -$100,000.BluRayHiDef

If the government stopped interfering with the market for education, the Law of Demand would ensure that tuition costs would drop, since the demand for education is so high. Ironically, by flooding money into the educarion market, the government is causing the cost of education to increase, because educational institutions have an incentive to increase their prices, because they know the government will simply give more money to students to pay the increased prices.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="BluRayHiDef"]

One does not need to drop out very late in their major to incur large debt. A single year at a private university can cost $50,000, which is absurd.

BluRayHiDef

People who graduate from expensive, private schools have a greater chance of being employed in the field of study they majored in. Hence, people are effectively forced to attend expensive, private universities. Be honest. Who do you think Lockheed Martin would choose to hire? Someone who attended MIT or someone who attended  some no-name community college?

Lockheed Martin recruits engineers from the state school I go to (and the in-state tuition runs under $10k annually), so . . . what the fvck are you talking about?

[QUOTE="BluRayHiDef"]

[QUOTE="YoshiYogurt"]How else are we supposed to get money for college? I have maybe 10K in saving for it but that isn't going to cover the entire cost which will be $80,000 -$100,000.lo_Pine

If the government stopped interfering with the market for education, the Law of Demand would ensure that tuition costs would drop, since the demand for education is so high. Ironically, by flooding money into the educarion market, the government is causing the cost of education to increase, because educational institutions have an incentive to increase their prices, because they know the government will simply give more money to students to pay the increased prices.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="BluRayHiDef"]

One does not need to drop out very late in their major to incur large debt. A single year at a private university can cost $50,000, which is absurd.

BluRayHiDef

People who graduate from expensive, private schools have a greater chance of being employed in the field of study they majored in. Hence, people are effectively forced to attend expensive, private universities. Be honest. Who do you think Lockheed Martin would choose to hire? Someone who attended MIT or someone who attended  some no-name community college?

[QUOTE="BluRayHiDef"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Are you being forced to attend such a costly university? No. There are state schools, community colleges, tech schools, all of which cost less. If you incur too much debt....it's your fault.coolbeans90

People who graduate from expensive, private schools have a greater chance of being employed in the field of study they majored in. Hence, people are effectively forced to attend expensive, private universities. Be honest. Who do you think Lockheed Martin would choose to hire? Someone who attended MIT or someone who attended  some no-name community college?

Lockheed Martin recruits engineers from the state school I go to (and the in-state tuition runs under $10k annually), so . . . what the fvck are you talking about?

Your state school is an anamaly. Also, for every engineer not chosen from your state school, a dozen are chosen from a private school.