Fair enough, that was poorly written. Trying to cram into 280. -Interest is a huge burden. Forgiving it is less expensive than forgiving the entire loan and would help many many people -I find charging interest on these loans incredibly objectionable given the predatory -
-
-
Your whole argument has been based on an initial mistake (you thought private companies owned the loans) that you tried to finesse by diverting to a complaint about third party processors that has very little to do with the loan crisis. Fairly poor command of the subject! :-)
-
And to be honest, this has all been a consistent theme in your tweets to me. Really, a very poor performance over an extended period of time.
-
Please. We have had many positive exchanges, and two disagreements. But whatever.
-
I feel like it's been quite a bit more than that, but maybe my memory fails me. In any case it's not worth checking.
-
That I agree with. I genuinely enjoy your posts, learn a lot from you. We disagreed about some nonsense about Classical Liberalism - not much on substance, just on the nature of the ideology. And then this.
-
Stop fighting Mom and Dad
-
hahahahahaha
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It depends on what you mean by that. They aren't driving the problem, that's a massive, broad societal issue that involves states taking on more health care expenses, cutting educational funding... But they are a source of misery for millions and millions of borrowers.
-
No they're not the source of misery. They're merely the implementation of the misery. Less "predatory" processors that allowed people to de-facto default on their loans without harassment would be fine, but there's a reason the govt. doesn't hire or create such processors.
-
I sinderely don't follow. They are actively engaging in damaging practices. The Consumer protection board found this. States have filed lawsuits. Obama era protections limited some of the behavior, then Trump admin pulled back and the complaints are up.https://www.consumerreports.org/student-loans/student-loan-servicers-complaints-mount-as-protections-erode/ …
-
Yes. The point is, hiring (or creating) processors that don't do shitty things to harass people to repay their loans is basically letting people de-facto default. Which is fine, though not nearly as good as formally letting people default. There's a reason neither has been done.
-
You're complaining about this big mean dog that's biting your leg, and you want the dog's owner to get a nicer friendlier dog. But there is a reason the dog's owner got a mean dog and sicced it on you in the first place! The govt. wants its money back!
-
Right, but this point is undercut by the fact that: 1) Abuse was bad 2) Obama era protections, Consumer protection board caused a drop 3) Elimination/Restriction of those things caused abuses to leap up again It means that there is something wrong with the way its being done.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.