Monday, October 19, 2015

Never Ascribe to Malice...

...that which can be ascribed to stupidity. Yes, I know the trope. However, I don't think this is stupidity:


First off, someone else in comments on FB pointed out that the interest rate on a student loan is something like a third of a percent more than the going rate for a car or mortgage. So right off the bat Sanders is being disingenuous - while, technically, what he said was true, it's rather misleading. Second, comparing *anything* to car loans is specious at best - I got a 0% rate on my new car, so by Sanders' "logic" pretty much *anything* is worse than that.

And, lastly, as thousands have already so rightly pointed out, he's comparing a loan that has no collateral vs. a loan with hard and fast physical objects. Um, duh. Of *course* the college loan is going to be a higher risk - there's literally nothing backing it up should the loan recipient default. I take out a car loan and stop making payments, the bank at least has a car. Ditto a mortgage. But if I get my degree, then default on my loan, what can the bank do? Sure, it can ding my credit and all, but it wouldn't stop me from working for the New York Times...

I don't think this is stupidity, though, or even ignorance. No, this smacks of the ubiquitous class warfare rhetoric that the Democratic party has been famous for spewing for, well, decades, if not centuries. Sanders is clearly targeting Millennials, who are watching the piles of student loan debt they accumulated in search of their "Fourteenth Century Art Appreciation" degree, are just ripe for the "Wealthiest One Percent" garbage the left so loves to spew (even if they are absolutely part of that one percent).

Sanders would have to almost literally be a drooling idiot to not know why a student loan would be a higher risk (therefore incurring a higher interest rate). He's obviously not, having managed to eke out a fairly good living as a politician -- he's been in public "service" for 34 years out of the 51 years since leaving college. Even if Sanders honestly does believe that a student loan should have a lower rate than a car loan, shouldn't he have an adviser or advisers who would say, hey Bernie, this is economic illiteracy here?

No, this is plain ol' class warfare, the likes of which we've seen since the turn of the century. The *last* century. Sanders is counting on the media not calling him on this BS and the message of "Bernie's looking out for the poor college students" coming through. Of course, no one's asking questions like "Gee, Bernie, why *are* college tuitions so high?" because then we'd have to risk the wrath of the ivory tower denizens and point out that, gee, maybe "professors" like Elizabeth Warren making a third of a million dollars a year teaching a single class might be the reason for that exorbitant college cost?

It's just *SOOOO* much easier to insinuate that somewhere, somehow, in a smoke-filled room, a bunch of eeeeeevil bankers have gathered to discuss ways to screw poor Millennial barristers with 14th Century Art History degrees...

That is all.

11 comments:

Ted said...

Judging by what passes as "art" it seems like there is a serious shortage of Art Historians, so they certainly should be able to find jobs.


......... Or maybe the glut of "art historians " is the source of the problem. I can never tell if the Art Critics are serious ..... Or very good at keeping a straight face as they keep finding greater fools to buy thier stuff.

Jake (formerly Riposte3) said...

"shouldn't he have an adviser or advisers who would say, hey Bernie, this is economic illiteracy here?"

He's a declared socialist, economic illiteracy is his defining feature.

abnormalist said...

Student loans are actually a really tricky practice. Back int he late 90s for example, there were the direct subsidized federal loans. Those were cuddly little kittens compared to the stuff out there these days.

Additionally, try to not pay back a student loan, things get interesting quickly

http://abovethelaw.com/2010/09/the-student-loan-racket-now-in-one-easy-to-understand-graphic/

The whole setup is a pretty screwed up racket, that does need revision.
If you want America to continue to be a world power anyways. If you dont care, well then thats a different scenario.

Anonymous said...

"poor Millennial barristers with 14th Century Art History degrees..."

Damn, getting a lawyer license has gotten way too easy.

Although swapping all the "barristers" with "baristas" would make for a much more amusing courtroom - do full sleeve tattoos and pink-frosted tips influence a jury more than nineteen facial/ear piercings and a split tongue?

Anonymous said...

All just a set-up for "free" tuition. The maximum irony would be for recipient "economics" majors to write their thesis on that.

Metulj said...

Student loans are fully backed by the federal government. If a default occurs, the bank is covered. There is zero risk. Never ascribe to malice ... AMIRITE?

Jay G said...

"Backed by" and "getting your money sometime in one's lifetime" are not always the same thing.

There's plenty of risk, even with "backed" loans.

Why doesn't the government garnish wages of folks who default on student loans? I mean, if the government is on the hook, it should collect, right?

Yeah. Zero risk. Pull the other one. It's got bells on it.

abnormalist said...

um, they do Jay

ProudHillbilly said...

"Federal government". I.e. me and you. If they default you and I pay for it each April 15.

The federal government backs nothing, produces nothing. It just takes money from citizens and redistributes it.

ProudHillbilly said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ProudHillbilly said...

"Federal government". I.e. me and you. If they default you and I pay for it each April 15.

The federal government backs nothing, produces nothing. It just takes money from citizens and redistributes it.