An Idea for Student Debt Relief

The numbers I came up with were based on a spreadsheet calculation that actually computing each year's income (based on 3.5% annual growth) and each year's deduction (based on 2% per year). I think it works out the way I said. However, if I'm missing something, the numbers could be tweaked (in terms of how many dollars of forgiveness you get per 0.1-point tax increase) to fine-tune it to the intended level (which, for me, is the level where it's clearly a good deal for most poor people, possibly a worthwhile deal for some in the middle class, and definitely not a good deal for the rich). If you think that wouldn't do it at a level of $1,000 of forgiveness for 0.1-point of tax increase, how about $2,000, or $5,000? At some point, you'd get a situation like I'm talking about.

You are asking people to give up a lifetime worth of income. As a financial advisor, I would never advise to take such a deal, though honestly, I was not much of a financial advisor.

It becomes an open ended debt, which would always worry me.
 
the problem is leveraging away our future based on funny money interest loans.

Once again, when taking out a loan, interest is your friend. If you took out a mortgage in the 1960's, and then saw the inflation of the 1970's erode your payments, that would be a great thing. So I would prefer a funny money loan to the relatively solid Dollar loans we are currently working with.
 
Once again, when taking out a loan, interest is your friend. If you took out a mortgage in the 1960's, and then saw the inflation of the 1970's erode your payments, that would be a great thing. So I would prefer a funny money loan to the relatively solid Dollar loans we are currently working with.

that's a stupid way to look at it.

you're an idiot.

this assumes that your wages keep pace with inflation.

that's become a pipe dream in prison planet.
 
You are asking people to give up a lifetime worth of income. As a financial advisor, I would never advise to take such a deal, though honestly, I was not much of a financial advisor.

It becomes an open ended debt, which would always worry me.

Yet, presumably even you would accept there comes SOME level where it's worth it, right? Like if you could wipe out $100,000 of debt for a permanent 0.1% tax increase, wouldn't that be worth it for almost everyone? Even if you average $200,000 in AGI over the course of a 60-year career, that's still just $12,000 in extra taxes, mostly in the distant future, in exchange for $200k right now. You'd be a fool not to jump at that one. So, I think it's just a question of fine-tuning the amounts. I think the 0.1-point per $1,000 level works out the way I intend, but if someone could show me math suggesting a better level, I'd be fine with that.
 
Yet, presumably even you would accept there comes SOME level where it's worth it, right? Like if you could wipe out $100,000 of debt for a permanent 0.1% tax increase, wouldn't that be worth it for almost everyone? Even if you average $200,000 in AGI over the course of a 60-year career, that's still just $12,000 in extra taxes, mostly in the distant future, in exchange for $200k right now. You'd be a fool not to jump at that one. So, I think it's just a question of fine-tuning the amounts. I think the 0.1-point per $1,000 level works out the way I intend, but if someone could show me math suggesting a better level, I'd be fine with that.

both of you are avoiding the topic of whether a high priced education is worth it....

you're just fighting some kind of banker terf war over deciding everyone's fate.
 
both of you are avoiding the topic of whether a high priced education is worth it....

I haven't avoided that. Yes, high-priced education is generally worth it. On average, it boosts productivity enough to more than pay for itself. However, while that's true at the average, that doesn't mean it's true for every individual. Some, through a combination of bad decisions and bad luck will wind up with educations that cost more than they'll ever be worth to them, and when that's done through loans, they'll wind up being in a pitiable state. My idea is meant to serve as a mercy for the unfortunate minority who get into that situation.
 
I haven't avoided that. Yes, high-priced education is generally worth it. On average, it boosts productivity enough to more than pay for itself. However, while that's true at the average, that doesn't mean it's true for every individual. Some, through a combination of bad decisions and bad luck will wind up with educations that cost more than they'll ever be worth to them, and when that's done through loans, they'll wind up being in a pitiable state. My idea is meant to serve as a mercy for the unfortunate minority who get into that situation.

LOL>

lies. lies and more lies.
 
this assumes that your wages keep pace with inflation.

If your wages do not keep pace with inflation, then you are becoming poorer.

Actually, most people get richer over their lifetimes, so their wages do better than keep up with inflation.

that's become a pipe dream in prison planet.

Sorry to hear that you have been getting poorer as you get older, and you feel you live in prison.
 
If your wages do not keep pace with inflation, then you are becoming poorer.

Actually, most people get richer over their lifetimes, so their wages do better than keep up with inflation.



Sorry to hear that you have been getting poorer as you get older, and you feel you live in prison.

most people get richer?

you got a link?
 
Yet, presumably even you would accept there comes SOME level where it's worth it, right?

No. I have no idea how much growth there will be in the next 70 years, but it could be a great deal. We could very well pass through the Technological Singularity, and have near infinite growth. We have had similar situations twice before: the industrial revolution, and the neolithic agricultural revolution. Both saw sudden exponential increases in growth to levels unimaginable before they happened. We are due for another one.

More accurately, I would be very careful about giving away permanently any of my income. Obviously, you mention a very good deal (wiping out $100k of debt for a 0.1% tax increase), but even that would scare me. Infinite, adjusted for inflation payments just worry me.

So, I think it's just a question of fine-tuning the amounts.

See that is the problem. To make it acceptable to me, you would have to make it so bizarrely beneficial that it would be a huge mistake for the government to make the deal. And even then, I would have trouble recommending it.

You keep asking people to risk the rest of their lives. The flow of history is that people are working to get the opposite from government. Social Security is a good example. People want to know that even if they mess up, the government will keep them from poverty in old age. Unemployment is another example, where the government will help you out if you lose your job.

People do not want a government that penalizes their bad luck.
 
do people pay you for planning?

I worked for a charity, so no they did not. Even the charity did not pay me, because it was volunteer work. If they felt like it, and had the money, they often donated some money to the charity, but I did not get it.

I have not done that work in nearly ten years, so it is not in the present tense.
 
I worked for a charity, so no they did not. Even the charity did not pay me, because it was volunteer work. If they felt like it, and had the money, they often donated some money to the charity, but I did not get it.

I have not done that work in nearly ten years, so it is not in the present tense.

singularity based accounting.

sounds niche.
 
No. I have no idea how much growth there will be in the next 70 years, but it could be a great deal. We could very well pass through the Technological Singularity, and have near infinite growth.

Or we could have a period of almost no growth. I'd take the bird in the hand. If we go through a technological singularity with near infinite growth, you'll be fine even with a somewhat higher tax rate. But, the benefit of my plan is it's a voluntary opt-in. Someone would, of course, be free to spend a lifetime toiling to pay down a massive student debt, in order to preserve the possibility of higher take-home pay if the Singularity arrives.
 
Or we could have a period of almost no growth. I'd take the bird in the hand. If we go through a technological singularity with near infinite growth, you'll be fine even with a somewhat higher tax rate. But, the benefit of my plan is it's a voluntary opt-in. Someone would, of course, be free to spend a lifetime toiling to pay down a massive student debt, in order to preserve the possibility of higher take-home pay if the Singularity arrives.

technological singularity with infinite growth?

what the actual fuck are you talking about?

you have no place planning the future of humanity.
 
Last edited:
technological singularity with infinite growth?

what the actual fuck are you talking about?

you have no place planning the future of humanity.

Walt brought up the singularity, and I was just responding to that. If you're interested, though, it's a concept that's been explored by futurists, borrowing by analogy from physics to describe a theoretical technological/sociological tipping point where suddenly things get vastly more productive, representing a complete reworking of civilization, generally by way of AI:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity

A related concept is the "accelerando" -- which is the point at which you suddenly accelerate towards that hypothetical singularity:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerando

Anyway, of course I have a place planning the future of humanity. All humans do. If what you mean to say is that my ideas make you uncomfortable, feel free to say so. But one way or the other, we are all planning the future every minute. It's just a question of whether we do it deliberately and with foresight, or whether we do it haphazardly, stumbling from one decision to the next.
 
Walt brought up the singularity, and I was just responding to that. If you're interested, though, it's a concept that's been explored by futurists, borrowing by analogy from physics to describe a theoretical technological/sociological tipping point where suddenly things get vastly more productive, representing a complete reworking of civilization, generally by way of AI:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity

A related concept is the "accelerando" -- which is the point at which you suddenly accelerate towards that hypothetical singularity:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerando

Anyway, of course I have a place planning the future of humanity. All humans do. If what you mean to say is that my ideas make you uncomfortable, feel free to say so. But one way or the other, we are all planning the future every minute. It's just a question of whether we do it deliberately and with foresight, or whether we do it haphazardly, stumbling from one decision to the next.

but somehow it figures into conversation about student debt?

you tell me.

in an infinite growth scenario we're all winners?

is this the participation trophy writ large?
 
but somehow it figures into conversation about student debt?

you tell me.

Will do. The argument he was making was that it would NEVER be a good idea to trade a one-time student-loan-debt reduction for a permanent tax increase, regardless of the values of each. Even if, say, you got $100,000 worth of debt forgiven, and only paid and extra 0.01% tax for that, it would be a bad decision (according to him). Sure, over the short term, you'd be coming out way ahead (e.g., if you earn $50,000, a 0.01% additional tax on the year only costs you $5. So, at that rate, you'd need to work 20,000 years before your extra taxes would be greater than the value of the debt forgiveness.) However, if we have something in the future akin to the Technological Singularity, then maybe some day your earnings will really be the equivalent of $10 million.... or maybe we'll vanquish death so you really will live to be over 20,000 years old. So, in the long run, you could still be setting yourself up for paying more in extra taxes than the value of that loan forgiveness justifies.

My argument is that it wouldn't make sense to factor in such far-fetched hopes for future economic/technological accelerations, not just because chance are you'll be dead before it happens, but also because even it does happen in your lifetime, you'd wind up so prosperous, notwithstanding that little extra taxation, that you wouldn't exactly be kicking yourself for the net loss... you'd probably still see it as having been well worth getting yourself relief when you most needed it.
 
Will do. The argument he was making was that it would NEVER be a good idea to trade a one-time student-loan-debt reduction for a permanent tax increase, regardless of the values of each. Even if, say, you got $100,000 worth of debt forgiven, and only paid and extra 0.01% tax for that, it would be a bad decision (according to him). Sure, over the short term, you'd be coming out way ahead (e.g., if you earn $50,000, a 0.01% additional tax on the year only costs you $5. So, at that rate, you'd need to work 20,000 years before your extra taxes would be greater than the value of the debt forgiveness.) However, if we have something in the future akin to the Technological Singularity, then maybe some day your earnings will really be the equivalent of $10 million.... or maybe we'll vanquish death so you really will live to be over 20,000 years old. So, in the long run, you could still be setting yourself up for paying more in extra taxes than the value of that loan forgiveness justifies.

My argument is that it wouldn't make sense to factor in such far-fetched hopes for future economic/technological accelerations, not just because chance are you'll be dead before it happens, but also because even it does happen in your lifetime, you'd wind up so prosperous, notwithstanding that little extra taxation, that you wouldn't exactly be kicking yourself for the net loss... you'd probably still see it as having been well worth getting yourself relief when you most needed it.

you just lose me as treating you seriously as a person when you factor "vanquishing death" into to your economic world.
 
Back
Top