PDA

View Full Version : Thanks for helping me on my student loans gvmt.



sack316
10-21-2009, 04:49 PM
interest rate through my old private lender: 5.6%

Interest rate now through dept of ed.: 6.48%

Bottom line, and I'm not sure what rates apply to where along the process... such as if it's averaged out, or if my prior monies are held at that rate, or if it's adjusted, or what exactly... but personally over the term of what my entire approximate loan amount would be, I would spend $352 more dollars over 4 years under the government program. Thanks for "helping" me out.

Sack

pooltchr
10-21-2009, 06:03 PM
"I'm from the government, and I'm here to help!"

I'm afraid that's just the beginning. Wait until they get ahold of your healthcare.

They have already moved to take over the banking industry, and (REMEMBER, YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST) they are getting ready to take over the news media. They need to control what you hear and see. It's already in the works. Maybe you will hear their spin on it when they get ready to tell you.

Sorry for your being taken by the government, but we all need to get used to it.
BOHICA

Steve
Steve

wolfdancer
10-21-2009, 08:17 PM
I don't know nuthin 'bout no interest rates, but I do know rampant paranoia when I see it:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">(REMEMBER, YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST) </div></div>
And soon they will be coming after your first born, then the concentration camps....followed by the "Rat in the helmet" therapy

sack316
10-21-2009, 08:57 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't know nuthin 'bout no interest rates, but I do know rampant paranoia when I see it:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">(REMEMBER, YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST) </div></div>
And soon they will be coming after your first born, then the concentration camps....followed by the "Rat in the helmet" therapy </div></div>

Well I'm not sure about all that stuff. But I do believe tomorrow is the opening for discussions on stuff for the internet. Pretty interesting to read about (free broadband for everyone, and a quasi fairness doctrine of sorts for the web content). Hey, who knows... Gayle may even get to have a gov't subsidy for her blog! (reading that statement it sounds trite, but I don't mean it that way... in actuality I would be tickled pink to see her really set one up as I know it is something she has mentioned for some time... the triteness of the comment is directed towards what we may be heading towards, not at her).

Back to the topic at hand:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't know nuthin 'bout no interest rates</div></div>

Suffice to say, higher rate equals exact opposite of what was intended to happen. Granted, from what i've read the goal is to have the interest rate reduced gradually over the next few years (unfortunately 2010 will be my end of it and I likely won't see it). They may do it and be fine, but I think they'll find that as people pay less, get a few defaults, etc. that running finances such as that at a low rate that is supposed to be forthcoming, would be swimming in quicksand. But I guess I shouldn't say anything, as they now control my funding towards the education that I use to crunch numbers in the financial aspects of such things... were they to read that I disagree my aid may suddenly vanish /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Sack

pooltchr
10-22-2009, 10:24 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't know nuthin 'bout no interest rates, but I do know rampant paranoia when I see it:
</div></div>

Another of your attempts to deflect the issue.
Do yourself a little favor and try investigating an issue before you dismiss it out of hand.
The Columbia papers outline the plan to tax non-qualifying news outlets, in order to fund government supported local news. Those "non-news" outlets would be the ones with what the government determines is more editorial content than they approve. (Remember Obama's comment this week that Fox is not really a news organization? That simple comment may very well have been a planned statement to lay the groundwork)
Anyway, what the plan suggests is that each region or state would get one designated news outlet, probably your local PBS station that would receive massive government funding. The funding would come from taxes paid by other broadcasters, both tv and radio, internet taxes, and even a tax on your cell phone. So a news organization that isn't in on the government plan would effectively be funding their competition!

Now, since a government panel would decide which organizations would qualify, do you think that they would select organizations that are not supportive of the government? That means news stories like the recent ACORN stories would not be reported.

If you think this is paranoia, consider that a meeting to discuss the proposal with the FTC and the FCC has already been set up in the next few weeks.

And if all of this sounds just fine and dandy to you right now, do you think you would still like it if there were a Republican majority making those decisions????????

If the government controls the news media, we are pretty much washed up as a country!

Steve

Gayle in MD
10-22-2009, 11:36 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">interest rate through my old private lender: 5.6%

Interest rate now through dept of ed.: 6.48%

Bottom line, and I'm not sure what rates apply to where along the process... such as if it's averaged out, or if my prior monies are held at that rate, or if it's adjusted, or what exactly... but personally over the term of what my entire approximate loan amount would be, I would spend $352 more dollars over 4 years under the government program. Thanks for "helping" me out.

Sack </div></div>

Gee, Sack, how far along in your college classes would you be right now, if not for the government program?

G.

pooltchr
10-22-2009, 11:54 AM
Sounds like he was better off with a private lender rather than a government loan.
And until you refuse to take any tax deductions at all, you don't have much room to talk about someone else. At least his is a loan, which will be repaid. I wonder how many of the loans Obama has made to big business with our money will never be paid back.

Steve

sack316
10-22-2009, 07:04 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Gee, Sack, how far along in your college classes would you be right now, if not for the government program?

G. </div></div>

Just as far along as I am now

Sack

Gayle in MD
10-23-2009, 02:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Gee, Sack, how far along in your college classes would you be right now, if not for the government program?

G. </div></div>

Just as far along as I am now

Sack </div></div>

That's what I thought. Maybe your, "thanks" to the government, ought ot have some genuine appreciation included?

pooltchr
10-23-2009, 08:08 AM
I think the main point was that it was costing him less with a private loan that is will with the government loan. It kinda shows that government programs aren't always the best solution when it comes to providing services.

Steve

Deeman3
10-23-2009, 08:30 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think the main point was that it was costing him less with a private loan that is will with the government loan. It kinda shows that government programs aren't always the best solution when it comes to providing services.

Steve </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000">Wait until they get a load of the health care savings by going the government route! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

There was a piece in the WSJ showing the predicted costs of all government programs vs. the actual cost but I don't have a copy now. It covered everything from Social Security to the Prescription Drug Plan. Needless to say, the costs on all but one progrma were underestimated by a factor of many times.

Get ready, it is coming as with 77% of the American People clamoring for the public option and Obama at a 124% approval rating, it is bound to happen. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

</span>

pooltchr
10-23-2009, 09:30 AM
124% approval rating? Does that make us the nutty negative 76 percent? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Steve

Deeman3
10-23-2009, 09:45 AM
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

sack316
10-23-2009, 10:40 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Gee, Sack, how far along in your college classes would you be right now, if not for the government program?

G. </div></div>

Just as far along as I am now

Sack </div></div>

That's what I thought. Maybe your, "thanks" to the government, ought ot have some genuine appreciation included? </div></div>

What do you mean that's what you thought? Seems you thought that without the government my education would not be as far along as it is now. My answer means that with or without them, I'd be in the same place I am now.

The only difference is now I HAVE to go through the government for any aid I may need and I pay almost a point higher in interest for it. They didn't come to me and say "hey, we are providing you another option in the spirit of competition for you to choose from". They didn't say "We're tired to subsidizing private loans when we could just do it ourselves, so we're gonna do that part and you can decide if you wanna stick with them or go with us or a little of both". They did say (paraphrased): "hey, we got your loans now, we will continue to do them, oh and by the way it will cost more for you".

Oh, and one more difference... my first disbursement from my new lender was only 3 weeks late (impressive for a government run system). When talking to my financial aid office, asking where my money is at, the answer I got was:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...I apologize but the check will not be ready until this Friday. I am having trouble getting the funds with the two new systems we have to use... </div></div>

That was after 2 weeks of trying to find where it was. In the mean time I had rent and bills to pay (was still unemployed at this time). Formerly, I could contact my office or my private lender and would be granted an advance due to my situation. This time, they told me I had to show an eviction notice for rent and a shutoff notice for utilities, and then they would send that in and see if an early release of funds could be granted. How silly is that? Once there's an eviction or shutoff notice, I think it's a little too late to begin the process, ya know?

So what "genuine appreciation" am I supposed to show? For my interest rate being higher now? For my funds being 3 weeks late putting me in a bind? That I cannot use a private lender anymore that I have a longstanding relationship with whom I am satisfied with their service?

Of course, eventually I will indeed have to thank them, if nothing else because there is no other choice of someone to thank. Then again, were a private company to do this, they'd probably be in court for anti-trust stuff.

Sack

Gayle in MD
10-23-2009, 11:04 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Gee, Sack, how far along in your college classes would you be right now, if not for the government program?

G. </div></div>

Just as far along as I am now

Sack </div></div>

That's what I thought. Maybe your, "thanks" to the government, ought ot have some genuine appreciation included? </div></div>

What do you mean that's what you thought? Seems you thought that without the government my education would not be as far along as it is now. My answer means that with or without them, I'd be in the same place I am now.

The only difference is now I HAVE to go through the government for any aid I may need and I pay almost a point higher in interest for it. They didn't come to me and say "hey, we are providing you another option in the spirit of competition for you to choose from". They didn't say "We're tired to subsidizing private loans when we could just do it ourselves, so we're gonna do that part and you can decide if you wanna stick with them or go with us or a little of both".


<span style="color: #000066">Actually, Sack, our Representatives were talking about doing just that, and doing it partly in order to bring down the interest rates on the loans, and thay are still having discussions about that, and guess who is outraged! </span>


They did say (paraphrased): "hey, we got your loans now, we will continue to do them, oh and by the way it will cost more for you".

Oh, and one more difference... my first disbursement from my new lender was only 3 weeks late (impressive for a government run system). When talking to my financial aid office, asking where my money is at, the answer I got was:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...I apologize but the check will not be ready until this Friday. I am having trouble getting the funds with the two new systems we have to use... </div></div>

That was after 2 weeks of trying to find where it was. In the mean time I had rent and bills to pay (was still unemployed at this time). Formerly, I could contact my office or my private lender and would be granted an advance due to my situation. This time, they told me I had to show an eviction notice for rent and a shutoff notice for utilities, and then they would send that in and see if an early release of funds could be granted.
How silly is that?

<span style="color: #000066">Well, it seems to me that the right is always saying that government aid programs are corrupt, but when they tighten up, and require proof, I guess we have to understand, that is how they avoid fraud. </span>


Once there's an eviction or shutoff notice, I think it's a little too late to begin the process, ya know?

So what "genuine appreciation" am I supposed to show? For my interest rate being higher now? For my funds being 3 weeks late putting me in a bind? That I cannot use a private lender anymore that I have a longstanding relationship with whom I am satisfied with their service?

Of course, eventually I will indeed have to thank them, if nothing else because there is no other choice of someone to thank. Then again, were a private company to do this, they'd probably be in court for anti-trust stuff.

Sack </div></div>


<span style="color: #000066">Seems to me that other "Private Companies" "Banks" have already cost all of us a hell of a lot more, than some added interest...get my drift? </span> /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

LWW
10-23-2009, 11:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't know nuthin 'bout no interest rates, but I do know rampant paranoia when I see it:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">(REMEMBER, YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST) </div></div>
And soon they will be coming after your first born, then the concentration camps....followed by the "Rat in the helmet" therapy </div></div>

And you will be cheering them on.

LWW

LWW
10-23-2009, 11:40 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="color: #000066">Seems to me that other "Private Companies" "Banks" have already cost all of us a hell of a lot more, than some added interest...get my drift? </span> /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif </div></div>

True.

They followed government mandates instead of taking a stand against the madness.

LWW

sack316
10-23-2009, 11:40 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<span style="color: #000066">Actually, Sack, our Representatives were talking about doing just that, and doing it partly in order to bring down the interest rates on the loans, and thay are still having discussions about that, and guess who is outraged! </span> </div></div>

I see a lot of just that... talk. In the mean time, actual results are the opposite of what is intended.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="color: #000066">Well, it seems to me that the right is always saying that government aid programs are corrupt, but when they tighten up, and require proof, I guess we have to understand, that is how they avoid fraud. </span> </div></div>

You'd have a point were this a grant, or a handout. But this is a loan, already processed, already done that I'd have to pay back regardless. How can I defraud someone out of money that is already promised to me that I have to pay back anyway?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="color: #000066">Seems to me that other "Private Companies" "Banks" have already cost all of us a hell of a lot more, than some added interest...get my drift? </span> /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif </div></div>

True enough. No wonder the government wants to get in on the racket! Maybe we will reduce the deficit after all!

Sack

Gayle in MD
10-23-2009, 12:00 PM
Do you ever think your government is ever trying to do any good for it's citizens?

Their intention was to protect students from being exploited by the banking industry. Republicans had a fit over it.

I will promise you one thing, Democratics are going to bring it back up, and when they do, the interest rates on college loans will be cut.

G.

pooltchr
10-23-2009, 01:49 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you ever think your government is ever trying to do any good for it's citizens?
<span style="color: #FF0000"> Personally, I would think that is the exception and not the rule. Government does what it thinks will expand their power and control.</span>

Their intention was to protect students from being exploited by the banking industry. Republicans had a fit over it.
<span style="color: #FF0000">Were you there for the discussions? How do you know what the intention was? </span>

I will promise you one thing, Democratics are going to bring it back up, and when they do, the interest rates on college loans will be cut.
<span style="color: #FF0000"> Your promises are even worth less than your opinions.</span>

G. </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Do you ever think about what you are saying, or do you just automatically disagree with certain people on the forum?

Steve</span>

sack316
10-23-2009, 09:17 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you ever think your government is ever trying to do any good for it's citizens?</div></div>

Yes. I actually, and possibly naively, believe that for the most part, the intentions are usually good.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Their intention was to protect students from being exploited by the banking industry. Republicans had a fit over it.</div></div>

And you don't dare question why? Just saying "they are the party of no" is good enough for you, without ever wondering exactly what the reasoning is. "Do you ever think your government is ever trying to do any good for it's citizens?" (republicans are part of government too, ya know). Which BTW, I never said anything about party in this thread.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I will promise you one thing, Democratics are going to bring it back up, and when they do, the interest rates on college loans will be cut.

G. </div></div>

They are not outrageous now. I even feel the current rate is fair. Point is that under the government fingertips, right now it is higher than it was... the effects currently are entirely opposite of the intent.

Sack

Gayle in MD
10-23-2009, 11:54 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you ever think your government is ever trying to do any good for it's citizens?</div></div>

Yes. I actually, and possibly naively, believe that for the most part, the intentions are usually good.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Their intention was to protect students from being exploited by the banking industry. Republicans had a fit over it.</div></div>

And you don't dare question why?

<span style="color: #000066">I don't have to question why, I watched them all trying to make their perspective cases, live, on C-Span, during the open floor time debate, and heard all their reasons. the same as usual, pro corporate fascist pigs, anti consumers. </span>



Just saying "they are the party of no" is good enough for you, without ever wondering exactly what the reasoning is.

<span style="color: #000066">I would say that If I was not the kind to question "Why" I would not be watching C-span, nor would my home be bulging with books. I do not rely on pundits, cable news, or the opinions of others to explain the issues for me, I study them for myself.

There isn't a person on this forum who can match my library of information, people come here to research, because it's more comfortable than the library, and I can assure you, I question everything.</span>

"Do you ever think your government is ever trying to do any good for it's citizens?" (republicans are part of government too, ya know). Which BTW, I never said anything about party in this thread.

<span style="color: #000066">You need to watch more live coverage on C-span, IMO. </span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I will promise you one thing, Democratics are going to bring it back up, and when they do, the interest rates on college loans will be cut.

G. </div></div>

They are not outrageous now. I even feel the current rate is fair. Point is that under the government fingertips, right now it is higher than it was... the effects currently are entirely opposite of the intent.

Sack </div></div>


<span style="color: #000066">OIC, so you're nit picking AGAIN! </span> /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

Sev
10-24-2009, 07:29 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">interest rate through my old private lender: 5.6%

Interest rate now through dept of ed.: 6.48%

Bottom line, and I'm not sure what rates apply to where along the process... such as if it's averaged out, or if my prior monies are held at that rate, or if it's adjusted, or what exactly... but personally over the term of what my entire approximate loan amount would be, I would spend $352 more dollars over 4 years under the government program. Thanks for "helping" me out.

Sack </div></div>

Gee, Sack, how far along in your college classes would you be right now, if not for the government program?

G. </div></div>

Personally I paid from my education out of pocket.
Aside for 1 small 400.00 PELL grant my first semester no government help for me.

Not everybody needs the government tit to succeed.

pooltchr
10-24-2009, 08:22 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
There isn't a person on this forum who can match my library of information, /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif </div></div>

I love these outrageous claims that have absolutely no basis in fact. You have no idea what anyone else on this board does or does not have.

But, based on the content of your posts, I would be willing to accept a statement that you might have more Archie and Veronica comic books than anyone else!

Steve

Sev
10-24-2009, 08:33 AM
HAHAAHHHAAHAAHH!!!