We are all Socialists Now Part II

A place for intelligent and well-thought-out discussion involving politics and associated topics. No nonsense will be tolerated at all.
User avatar
Cold_Zero
Posts: 6714
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2002 4:15 pm
Car: 2003 Nissan Altima SE 3.5
2005 Nissan Pathfinder

Post

http://money.cnn.com/news/news...69857
CNN wrote: Obama budget calls for major US student loan shiftWASHINGTON (Reuters) - The private-sector student loan industry would be dealt a major blow under the federal 2010 budget proposed by President Barack Obama Thursday.

Shares in Sallie Mae, the nation's largest student loan group, fell sharply on Obama's proposal to shift all federal student loans into the so-called direct-loan program administered by the U.S. Department of Education.

The budget for fiscal 2010, which begins on Oct. 1, said it would save more than $4 billion annually by ending "entitlements" for financial institutions that lend to students.

"Right now, the subsidies in the government-guaranteed student loan program are set by the Congress through the political process. That program has not only needlessly cost taxpayers billions of dollars, but has also subjected students to uncertainty because of turmoil in the financial markets," the budget document said.

The change, subject to review by Congress, could spell the end of the Federal Family Education Loan Program, a source of revenues for years for many student loan groups.

"President Obama proposes that, beginning in 2010-2011, all new student loans would be originated through the direct student loan program," said California Democratic Rep. George Miller, chairman of the House education committee, in a statement praising the president's proposal.

Shares in Sallie Mae, known formally as SLM Corp, were down $3.29 or 39 percent at $5.10 each in midday New York Stock Exchange trading after dipping as low as $4.72 earlier. (Reporting by Kevin Drawbaugh, editing by Gerald E. McCormick)
While it is true that shutting down FFELP will appear to save around $4 billion dollars in taxpayer money, what this article doesn’t tell you is that the budget for Direct Lending will have to be increased in order to meet demand for student lending. Right now Direct Lending has around 40 percent of the student loan share. Which means in order to meet the demand, Direct Lending will have to ask for more money from the Federal Government’s budget, since Direct Lending does not raise capital from private lending. All this means effectively we the tax payers of this country will have a higher tax burden and a government run student loan industry.

What this article is also not telling you (the taxpayer) is how much money will also need to be raised through the Federal Government’s budget to increase their capability to process, originate and service this new loan volume. So again, more money that the taxpayer will have to shell out.

Currently, the billions of dollars used in the FFEL program to subsidized student (Stafford) loans by 2 basis points on millions of loans. With this money eliminated from FFEL it will have to be used to subsidized 100 percent the student (Ford) loans that the Direct Lending originates, this will not be an effective way to use our money. That is right, Direct Lending’s business model is to leverage their relationship with the Federal Government to subsidize 100 percent of all loan volume that they originate. So you the tax payer are going from subsidizing student loans at 2 percent to 100 percent.

We have seen this type of thing back in 2007 with a Democrat controlled Congress. The Congress moved billions of dollars out of the FFEL program and put it into the Pell Grant program. I said back then that this was a bad idea because Pell Grants do not have to be paid back. So instead of subsidizing student (Stafford) loans at 2 percent, they just gave away the money at 100%. So again, I believe that Democrats only know one thing, throw/give money away.

I think we only need to look at the USPS as an example to show us that when the Federal Government acquires a monopoly on certain services that the American people are not better served. They keep raising the prices of stamps and services and are now talking about cutting back on delivery days (hours of operations). Further more they use their relationship with Federal government to retain a monopoly in letter delivery services, force out competition and tap the government for subsidizes.

It should also be pointed out that the Department of Education that administrates Direct Lending does not service their own portfolio and RFPs it out to private (usually FFELP) servicers, like they will run out of the Student Lending industry with this measure.

This is just the Obama Administration picking up the gauntlet of the Clinton Administration (who created Direct Lending) in order to move more political capital towards the federal government (a classic example of Socialism) and away from private markets. Guys if this goes through, I will not be there to defend any of you, when they move to take over your job/industry.


User avatar
Armelius
Posts: 628
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 5:49 am
Car: 95 Maxima, 01 Pathfinder and 1987 Pathfinder 4x4
Contact:

Post

I would also like to point out that Ronald Reagan did plenty to get students into a student loan program. He really set back the Republican party from a student's standpoint.

User avatar
Cold_Zero
Posts: 6714
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2002 4:15 pm
Car: 2003 Nissan Altima SE 3.5
2005 Nissan Pathfinder

Post

I need to add a correct, its a 25% to 75% split. Direct Lending has only 25% of the student loan market share.

User avatar
Cold_Zero
Posts: 6714
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2002 4:15 pm
Car: 2003 Nissan Altima SE 3.5
2005 Nissan Pathfinder

Post

Yahoo wrote:http://finance.yahoo.com/news/....html

Shares of student lenders fall on Obama proposal

NEW YORK (AP) -- Shares of SLM Corp. and other student lenders plunged Thursday after President Barack Obama proposed eliminating the role of private industry in the federal government's college loan program.

There are currently two parallel systems for college loans -- students can borrow directly from the government, or take out loans from banks and other private lenders that are subsidized by the government. In his budget proposal for 2010, Obama asks Congress to shift the entire system to direct government loans and eliminate subsidies to banks. The move would save more than $4 billion a year, according to the Obama administration.

The current system has "needlessly cost taxpayers billions of dollars" and has subjected students to "uncertainty because of turmoil in the financial markets," the proposal said.

Officials said private sector lenders would still be hired to service direct government loans.

Shares of SLM Corp., better known as Sallie Mae, sank $2.59, or 31 percent, to close at $5.80. Student Loan Corp.'s stock dropped $11.63, or 22 percent, to finish at $41.51. Nelnet Inc. shares slid 54 percent, or $5.83, to end at $4.91, having earlier reached a new 52-week low of $4.50.

In a statement issued Thursday, SLM noted it worked closely with the federal government last year to ensure students access to federal loans with no increase in cost to taxpayers.

"As more details emerge in the weeks and months ahead, we will continue to work with the administration and Congress to implement the best solution for students, schools and taxpayers," the Reston, Va.-based company said in the statement.

The Student Loan Corp., a unit of Citigroup Inc., also issued a statement saying it remains optimistic that Congress will recognize the importance of private sector involvement in higher education financing.

In an e-mailed statement, Nelnet disagreed with Obama's proposal and said it believes federal loans should maintain the benefits of choice and competition.

In a note to clients, FBR Capital Market analyst Matt Snowling questioned the government's ability to handle an additional $60 billion in student loans each year.

Even if the proposal doesn't become law, however, Snowling said it suggests Sallie Mae and other student lenders will face continuous threats under the Obama administration.

Snowling lowered his price target on SLM shares to $13, down from $20, to reflect the possibility that Sallie Mae could turn into a servicer and debt collector for the government. He kept an "Outperform" rating on the stock, which indicates he thinks it will perform better than shares of its peers in the next 12 to 18 months and that investors should buy the shares at its current price.

Last year, Congress made substantial cuts to student lender subsidies, but did not eliminate them.

The debate already has shifted in some ways. Experts point out that during the recent credit crisis, the government stepped in to prop up the subsidized lending program, so in practice the two programs already are merging.

Obama's first federal budget totals $3.6 trillion and lays out a far-reaching agenda. The proposal is already drawing fierce political opposition, but Democrats control both the House and Senate.

In addition to the changes in the college loan program, the budget includes ambitious initiatives concerning energy, health care and climate change.
Just when you think that you have weathered the storm of the Sub Prime Mortgage scandal, the Liquidity Crisis and the bad Economy, leave it to the Obama Administration to throw your stock in the craper. Thanks PBO.

User avatar
Cold_Zero
Posts: 6714
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2002 4:15 pm
Car: 2003 Nissan Altima SE 3.5
2005 Nissan Pathfinder

Post

Armelius wrote:I would also like to point out that Ronald Reagan did plenty to get students into a student loan program. He really set back the Republican party from a student's standpoint.
It appears that you are implying that student loans are bad? I fail to see how getting mroe students into student loans so that they can go to college and earn degrees to get better careers is bad for either the Students, the Republican Party or the United States of America.

I would think that Reagan opening up student loans to more students would be a good thing, especially for students. Since it is more important to do right by the American people than score political points.

User avatar
Armelius
Posts: 628
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 5:49 am
Car: 95 Maxima, 01 Pathfinder and 1987 Pathfinder 4x4
Contact:

Post

Good theory bad practice. When people can't afford to go to college then the price either goes down or the number of colleges drop. If they can afford to go through loans then the price will continue to rise and the number of students increase as well as the number of people who default on their loans.

Sort of like the mortgage crisis, no?

User avatar
audtatious
Moderator
Posts: 25014
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2002 5:31 pm
Car: 2017 Q60 Red Sport. Gone: 2014 Q50s, 2008 G37s coupe, 2007 G35s Sedan, 2002 Maxima SE, 2000 Villager Estate (Quest), 1998 Quest, 1996 Sentra GXE
Location: Stalking You
Contact:

Post

Anytime the Gov gets involved with crap like this it will go butt-up in a hurry. Standard direction of the left-wing of the Democrat party: Make more people rely on the Gov


Return to “Politics Etc.”