The Brandon jubilee presses on. Income based payment plans are planned to be at a lower pct of discretionary income, the threshold for discretionary income is planned to be higher, and govt will cover/prevent interest from accruing. Obviously not as good as blanket forgiveness, but this is very good to prevent kids/grown kids from being crushed by snowballing debt payments.
And, while this is essentially what was announced last August, it appears at least to more clearly cover grad loans, and this, to my recollection, is the first time that the administration has confirmed continued interest in this policy. Not out of the woods obviously, but an encouraging sign.
Fuck's sake, stop means testing shit, it will never stick if you keep means testing it. This is so clearly bullshit.
everyone qualifies?
If shit is 'income-based', then it means that some plans are only available based on how small your income is. Cost of living is wildly different around the country, making 60,000 in New York is not the same as making 60,000 in Alabama.
is a progressive income tax means tested? (income based here means your payment is just a function of your income, not that only some income levels qualify jfc.) everyone here qualifies, everyone just pays a function of their discretionary income.
what's the average income of a teacher in nyc vs mobile?
Actually, I read that wrong. I read that as different plans, not as one plan, one scaling rate. Not technically means testing, but still incredibly ineffective as a poverty reduction-education increasing policy.
The average income can be the same, the purchasing power (especially concerning rent) will be quite different depending on region. Average income of a teacher in mobile and nyc are about the same (about 10,000k less a yearin mobile), but rent isn't.
it's clearly less good than blanket forgiveness, but i don't understand how it could be ineffective at poverty reduction. anything under 30k, and the borrower will just never have to make payments and the debt eventually is forgiven. no interest accruing. this would allow kids the opportunity to go to college without worrying that they will become crushed by debt.
i'm seeing a ~20k difference between alabama and nyc for new/low experience teachers (w/ nyc making 50pct more (61 vs 42k), so miss me with those numbers lol-- someone who is good at the economy please help me budget this: i'm spending 6000/month on candles and a lux studio appartment on the upper east side.
That's not what I was seeing, I was seeing 37k low in mobile and 45k low in NYC, but fine, we'll go with your numbers. You're acting like 60k buys anything substantial in NYC, that person will be sharing rent in mid-low level apartments, or have to do an hour commute each way minimum, if they want to save anything for retirement, for their whole lives if they don't get married, and that is assuming the economy works and their investments pay off.
It's ineffective at poverty reduction because everyone I know makes more than 30,000k a year working full-time, and that's fry cooking at McDonald's, which is still poverty wages if you are not trying to live with three other dudes in a shitty apartment for your entire life. There is no material incentive to 'get an education' if, the better you do, the more you have to pay back.
I will say that the really good thing I am seeing here is that interest cannot exceed maximum repayment. That's a small unequivocal blessing. But that is all these things are, pieces of carrot in a pile of shit. Guess it is still better than the shit other people have to suffer from, better than nothing, but treating scraps as a win is just sad.