Taxes at Lowest Levels in 60 Years
- Thread starter spike
- Start date
spike
New Member
catocom
Well-Known Member
I guess Laws don't matter, if they make something part of a new law then huh?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law
"we are a nation of Laws, that are only selectively enforce"
hmm, that path doesn't seem to be working out too good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law
"we are a nation of Laws, that are only selectively enforce"
hmm, that path doesn't seem to be working out too good.
spike
New Member
This doesn't really apply.
That’s because the biggest change is in who administers student loans. Instead of private banks issuing loans guaranteed by the government, the government will now become the originator of the loan.
“That’s very important for students, but it isn’t going to be very visible for them,” says Sandy Baum, an independent policy analyst for the College Board, a New York-based nonprofit that tracks and promotes college attendance.
The change will eliminate private banks as “middlemen” in the loan process and will save the US government about $68 billion dollars over 11 years, according to the White House.
But for students, the loans will look largely the same – same terms, same fees, same interest rates.
The benefits to students will mostly be in the lending process, says Mark Kantrowitz, publisher of FinAid.org and FastWeb.com, which offer information on scholarships and student aid.
Students could see a “smoother origination process,” says Mr. Kantrowitz, because instead of shopping for a private lender, they’ll simply go to their school’s financial aid office. And because the government has contracted four of the largest lenders to service the loans, that part might go more smoothly, too.
If you can cut out the middlemen and save the taxpayers a bunch of money that seems like a good thing. Why would anyone want to waste taxpayer money on this?
"Let us stop here and recall how the current loan system works:
1) Federal government provides private banks with capital.
2) Federal government pays private banks a subsidy to lend that capital to students.
3) Federal government guarantees said loans so the banks don’t have any risk.
And now, the proposed reform:
1) The federal government makes the loans.
Wow. You really do wonder why nobody came up with this idea before."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/17/opinion/17collins.html
I didn't even realize there was any controversy over this.
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
THIS ^^^ is what the liberals actually believe. Dog and pony shows.Looks like we're getting most of it back, the recession wasn't nearly as bad as it could have been, and they're currently working on finance reform to make sure it doesn't happen again.
Good stuff.
GM is paying off their loans years early.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aslBomXvnd_E&pos=7
GM Could Be in Hot Water With FTC Over Truth in Advertising FOXNews
General Motors is running ads on all the major networks this week claiming it has repaid its bailout from the taxpayers "in full." But the claim isn't standing up to scrutiny from lawmakers and government watchdogs who have found that the automaker was able to repay the bailout money only by dipping into a separate pot of bailout funds.
So it's not that Government Motors is doing good business, its cutting shit and not making a profit.
Good night sweet prince.
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
Did General Motors Really Repay Its Taxpayer Bailout
General Motors announced this week that it repaid its multibillion-dollar taxpayer-backed TARP loans. GM even bragged that it was able to “repay the taxpayers in full, with interest, ahead of schedule, because more customers are buying [GM] vehicles.” There was great fanfare, including expensive, around-the-clock GM TV commercials nationwide. But, the hype is not the reality. In fact, GM did not repay the loans with money it earned from selling cars. Instead, GM repaid the TARP loans with money it withdrew from another TARP fund at the Treasury Department.
spike
New Member
I didn't say anything similar to that. Here's the breakdown again.
Old system:
1) Federal government provides private banks with capital.
2) Federal government pays private banks a subsidy to lend that capital to students.
3) Federal government guarantees said loans so the banks don’t have any risk.
And now, the proposed reform:
1) The federal government makes the loans.
So the question is what exactly did you find better about the old system where the taxpayers paid way more money for the same thing?
That's a weird jump. If the government can simply cut out middlemen that offer nothing and save the taxpayers money I'm all for efficiency. There's no reason for them to own all business. In the student loan case they were already part of that business but the taxpayers were getting ripped off.
I don't know what you're saying here. Do you want more regulation on something? What is it?
catocom
Well-Known Member
Looks like we're getting most of it back, the recession wasn't nearly as bad as it could have been, and they're currently working on finance reform to make sure it doesn't happen again.
Good stuff.
GM is paying off their loans years early.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aslBomXvnd_E&pos=7
ah oh....
back that thang up.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/23/gm-hot-water-ftc-truth-advertising/
So, has ANY of the money been return to the treasury?
The correct answer is NO.
spike
New Member
Show you why it makes sense to cut out middlemen that cost the taxpayers billions? Seems pretty obvious.
spike
New Member
No, that would be incorrect. Even if what your article claims was true they could be keeping the money they are returning for several more years. They could keep that money AND the other money. But no, they are paying back much of it.
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
third world nation on the rise
Again you failed to make a point other than you do not understand the COTUS. Why do hate America and its COTUS?
Yuo really need to find some place that suits you, the United States just doesn't fit your ideaologies.
Again you failed to make a point other than you do not understand the COTUS. Why do hate America and its COTUS?
Yuo really need to find some place that suits you, the United States just doesn't fit your ideaologies.
spike
New Member
Re: third world nation on the rise
I love and understand the COTUS. I'm not sure why you hate America and it's COTUS though.
The United States fits my ideologies great. I think you'd be happier if you found a country with a more fascist feel to it though. I'll come up with some recommendations if you like.
I love and understand the COTUS. I'm not sure why you hate America and it's COTUS though.
The United States fits my ideologies great. I think you'd be happier if you found a country with a more fascist feel to it though. I'll come up with some recommendations if you like.
spike
New Member
We ended the middlemen.
Most of America is happy about it.
http://collegesavings.about.com/b/2...majority-back-obamas-student-loan-reforms.htm
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
Don't worry Spike, well clean up the mess come November 2nd. -- Pucker time1