Non-Discriminatory Lending

According to this article, the USG’s student loan portfolio is worth $1.2 billion trillion and is “the biggest pool of U.S. debt,” second only to government loans for mortgages.

The debt has soared for an obvious inflated reason: “The government writes loans for any student who enrolls in an institution eligible for federal aid.”

USG will fork over tens of thousands of dollars to the high-IQ individual accepted to Wharton as readily as it forks over tens of thousands of dollars to the low-IQ individual who demonstrates her low IQ by borrowing tens of thousands of dollars to earn an associate’s degree in Office Skills at Fly-By-Night Online College.

The outcome is predictable. The government cannot discriminate in regard to its investments and has thereby provided an amusing object lesson in the value of discrimination:

The Wharton grads are good to pay back their loans. The others are not. The Wharton grads are subsidizing those who have not paid back their loans as well as the fresh blood applying for student aid every year. Which would not be an issue if the government loan interest rates were as low as what private investors could offer. But they are not.

Chris Winiarz, a 31-year-old money manager with a Northwestern MBA, jumped at a student-loan deal of a lifetime.

A startup called SoFi offered to refinance his $45,000 in federal debt, slashing his interest rate to 2.69 percent from 6.55 percent. Winiarz will pay off his obligation three years early, saving about $9,500 and helping pay for an engagement ring for his girlfriend. The company even threw in a free bottle of artisan olive oil.

“I really should have done this a lot sooner,” said Winiarz, who helps oversee the University of California’s endowment and pension investments.

Where the government will not discriminate between borrowers, the private sector will:

In a growing refinancing boom, a new generation of private lenders — backed by hedge-fund billionaires and Silicon Valley royalty — is targeting successful graduates with professional degrees and student loans. For the borrowers, “it’s an uncashed lottery ticket,” said Brendan Coughlin, head of education finance for Citizens Financial Group Inc.

Private lenders have refinanced about $3 billion to $4 billion so far, according to Stephen Dash, chief executive officer of Credible.com, a website that compares refinancing rates.

That number is sure to rise, since better-quality borrowers have no logical reason to stay put and subsidize others, said Vince Passione, founder of Lendkey Technologies Inc., which connects students online with private student-loan lenders.

An exodus of loan-payers to private refinancing companies could leave the USG student debt portfolio with nothing but individuals who will never repay their loans.

~~~

To solve the problem, a good Keynesian would argue that the government should reduce its interest rates on the student loans. A good socialist would argue that the government should reduce the interest rates to 0%, asking nothing more of the poor decision makers than to repay the original amount of the loan over the next 60 years.

But, of course, America is a communist country, so other options are being explored:

For now, taxpayers will be funding a greater share of borrowers like Noelle Liptak, who lives near Akron, Ohio, and makes $40,000 a year as a marketing representative for a plastic-bottle manufacturer.

Liptak, 31, has almost $100,000 in federal student loans from college and an MBA from Point Park University in Pittsburgh. A government program currently lets her pay $46 a month, and her loans may be forgiven after 25 years.

“I don’t expect to ever pay them off,” Liptak said.

And from the comments to the article:

I saw what they did for my daughter, now in her early 30s. 2 BA degrees and one MA as long as she works for [a] non profit, of which she’s not making anything she can have this loan where she pays a small amount monthly for 10 year’s then the rest is “forgiven” (it’s not a small amount it’s 10 years worth of student loans).

~~~

So what have we learned here? We have learned that non-discriminatory investment should be an oxymoron, and that non-discriminatory investment by the government will lead to the good debt discriminating itself from the bad debt anyway. The government will be left only with the bad. What the government decides to do with this bad student loan debt will be an excellent test case for the AIACC thesis. If we may judge by these early indicators (which I have seen with my own academic eyes), the thesis will be proven true. The debt will be magically erased.

. . . but not forgotten, of course. Private actors who were audacious enough to make money on student loan debt or to pay off their loans will find themselves subsidizing the defaulters anyway. Some how, some way, the progressives will make sure of that. The show must go on and you’re going to pay for it, whether or not you want to see it.

Advertisements

12 responses

  1. Pingback: Non-Discriminatory Lending | Neoreactive

  2. Pingback: Non-Discriminatory Lending | Reaction Times

  3. Handle

    Seems to me that the administration doesn’t really care if most of the students pay back the loans or not; they’d have been happy to just give people the money in the first place like they do in most European countries, but because that hasn’t been possible yet, they nationalized the student loan system and can let problems build up and do it on the back end while simultaneously making political hay of it. I mean, that’s what I’d do if I were them.

    Ask yourself, who wins when it becomes a big crisis and the political issue du jour becomes whether to offer a jubilee of debt forgiveness to, say, the more hard-up half of the debt pool? “Something, something, oppression, something, bad luck and recessionary timing, something, racist, something, something …”

    Meanwhile they just bought themselves 90% of the entire literate class as eager clients.

    June 11, 2015 at 9:53 am

    • That’s a brilliant end-game analysis.

      June 29, 2015 at 5:31 pm

    • Yeah, socialism is all fun and games until you run out of other peoples’ money. Then one day the toilet paper runs out, and you run to the store and its closed and being guarded by the Army cause there are massive shortages. Then food riots, civil unrest, guerrilla warfare, death squads, military coups, Civil War.
      These idiots are playing with fire. People like Hillary and Obama and Sanders have never had a real job or really lived on a budget and made hard choices. Its idiots that cause these problems. You can argue with me, but you can’t argue with Math. One day you can’t pay the bills, and these idiots refuse to acknowledge the reality and make preparations or budget cuts. Numbers don’t lie, but they do. Reality is a bitch when you’re STUPID.

      February 6, 2016 at 5:17 pm

  4. $1.2 billion… WITH A “B”? (purdy sure that Trillion)

    June 11, 2015 at 8:16 pm

    • glopknar

      Agreed.

      I haven’t looked it up, but $1.2 billion sounds way too small.

      June 11, 2015 at 8:33 pm

    • Changed. Thanks. Should have caught that to begin with.

      June 29, 2015 at 5:32 pm

  5. Pingback: This Week in Reaction (2015/06/14) | The Reactivity Place

  6. Pingback: Lightning Round – 2015/06/17 | Free Northerner

  7. Anonymous

    It’s *definitely* 1.2 TRILLION dollars, not billion.

    June 18, 2015 at 4:17 pm

  8. Pingback: The Word From the Dark Side – October 17th, 2015 | sovietmen

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s