this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2023
112 points (71.1% liked)

Asklemmy

43945 readers
638 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This would save young Americans from going into crippling debt, but it would also make a university degree completely unaffordable for most. However, in the age of the Internet, that doesn't mean they couldn't get an education.

Consider the long term impact of this. There are a lot of different ways such a situation could go, for better and for worse.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Why make it illegal? Why not offer only federal loans?

How about:

20 year loan, 4.125% fixed rate 30 year loan, 4.375% fixed rate

No early repayment penalties and maybe interest returned incentives for full repayment return before term at certain benchmarks.

The average debt for a 4-year Bachelor's degree is $34,700. At the end of 20 years the total repayment amount would be $36,131.375, 30 years would be $36,218.125.

Looks good to me.

[–] Aicse@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why not make it free? At the end of the education cycle the student will get a job and start paying taxes. Isn't that what society needs? Having educated people to do various jobs. Why putting that behind a crazy paywall?

[–] LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

I’d be in favor of that too. My point was to highlight that it’s not the loans themselves that are the problem.

[–] yanyuan@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe my understanding of the wording is wrong, but I think you assume a total return of investment of 4.125% and 4.375%. Hence, your total payments correspond to fixed rates of less than 0.5% per year.

For a fixed rate of 4.125% (per year), I calculate a total repayment of $51,016.80, over 20 years.

[–] LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Sorry, I wasn’t clear. Those aren’t APRs, they are the fixed loan rates. Whatever amount is borrowed is repaid plus 4.125% or 4.375% interest depending on the term selected.

It’s like a reverse bond. The government has established that those rates are a fair return on money they “borrow” from citizens in bonds, it seems fair to give the same terms in the other direction.