Richard Murphy
logged in via Twitter
In reply to MikeL
The slavery crimes from the fact that changing the terms of this debt after sale is nigh on impossibleWithin the state sector it is possible
Debt owed to the state can have its terms changed. Debt owed under a simple contract is slavery.
That makes all mortgages somewhat suspect, no?
I don’t think I would be able to count the number of ways this is pure bollocks. Seriously: debt terms thatbcan’t be altered mean slavery; variable debt terms are not? For fuck’s sake.
If I borrow £1,000 fom the bank at 5% and I have to pay £20 a month but cannot change the contract, that’s slavery?
If only there was a Leftist organisation which could condemn him for “Slavery denial” or something.
I’m trying to work out his conflation of student debt & mortgages. Mortgages are assured by assets. In case of default, the lender gets the asset to use as his own. If the student is the asset…well, I keep thinking about all those, young nubile, long legged, pert breasted…..
How’ja get into this student loan business then?
Debt owed to the state can have its terms changed. Debt owed under a simple contract is slavery.
I don’t get his thinking here.
Debt, under simple contract can, if the debtee decides, be completely wiped out. Or, if both parties agree, the contract can be amended in any way.
Debt owed to the state can also be erased at the whim of the state, however, the terms of the contract can also be unilaterally changed at the whim of the government only. Including the option to make the terms more onerous on the debtor without the debtor’s consent.
As far as being free people entering freely into contracts, neither is slavery. But debt owed to the government comes with far greater danger of being enslaved than simple contract.
“I don’t get his thinking here.”
What thinking?
It just seems to be “State Good, Private Bad”.
No more loans. Too evil.
https://www.changingworld.com/media/catalog/product/G/I/GI-41_2_1.jpg
Am I detecting a hint of ‘trendy teacher’ in old Spud-U-Don’t-Like? Its odd that he’s suddenly banging on about student ‘debt’ (which as we all know isn’t real debt, its just a disguised graduate tax, which for some reason we can’t be seen to be having), could this be a attempt to curry favour with his students?
If Spud did work out that student ‘loans’ are really a tax, would he change his tune? He’s never met a tax he didn’t like so far. Could he even realise that if one can regard a graduate tax as debt slavery, then the same could be said for normal taxes…………..no, thats too much to hope for, what passes for his brain couldn’t make that logical conclusion, it might make the cognitive dissonance suppression system melt down under the extra load.
“Debt owed under a simple contract is slavery.”
Oh God, is he going to start raving about Jews and/or Freemasons next?
I’m sure the holders of greek debt that was defaulted on were quite happy that the state could change the terms.
Government defaulting on its debt is the only change that can be done. Which, from what I understand about this retard, is probably what he thinks about.
“well, I keep thinking about all those, young nubile, long legged, pert breasted…..How’ja get into this student loan business then?”
Problem is, for each of the above debtors, there is also a hormonal land-whale and two shaggy tossers. You need to get into derivatives.
Jim
I think you’re right: there’s an element of ‘ trendy teacher’ trying to curry favour with his students in Spud’s piece. Perhaps attendance at his lectures is falling?
And your point about student loans being a graduate tax is well made. “Cognitive dissonance suppression system melt down” is very good.
In future, only those who can afford their entire course, plus maintenance, in full will be permitted to go to university. Better?
“0% finance: my year of hell”
aaa: Better?
Yes, certainly better, given that “afford” allows for the sum to be borrowed in much the same way that one can afford something which one buys on credit.
As long as the thing being bought is worth the money – which in the sphere in which student loans operate is only occasionally.
He wants his class not to have to pay to listen to him. If they have to pay, they might think twice. Doesn’t like price signals.
Question: are university lectures in this country open to the public? When I was an undergrad in Oz in the 80s anyone could go – nobody checked who was enrolled. Is that the case here?
One of the problems with Student Loans is they are not discharged in bankruptcy, when the Government sells the loan to the private sector that dischargability should be reinstated and the loans priced accordingly.
I think you’ve added the (absurd) American bankruptcy thing to the English system. I could be wrong of course but I’m entirely unaware that UK student loans are not dischargeable in bankruptcy.
According to this UK government guide to bankruptcy you are not freed from liability to student loans by bankruptcy.
Hi Tim,
It is a UK thing.
‘If your student loan was taken out after 1st September 2004 then it can’t be written off. It will be treated as if the bankruptcy had never happened’
http://www.mckeagandco.com/student_loan_bankruptcy.htm
OK, so I’m wrong then. But it’s an idiot thing to do.
Tim,
‘But it’s an idiot thing to do.’
taking out a non-dischargable loan is indeed an idiot thing to do, fortunately they let idiots go to University these days so there are plenty of takers. The non-idiots going to Uni these days get themselves rich parents or scholarships.
Student loans are a stupid idea in the first place, only the top 10% of academically good students should be going to Uni and these should be paid to do so (through a system of grants) as these people will become high earners and payback the costs and more in the extra taxes they pay through their lifetime.
The majority of people getting student loans will not end up as high earners, most of them will be employed where their degree is unneccesary and some of their earnings will be taken from them to pay for their non essential education. Student Loans are make-work for otherwise unemployable mediocre lecturers and should be scrapped.
Right, so these student loans ‘repayments’ a) don’t have to be paid if you earn under a certain amount (like income tax), b) fall away after a certain period of time (like NI does post retirement) and c) can’t be extinguished by bankruptcy (like taxes).
Its a graduate tax. Why is it such a taboo to call it that?
Hush, Jim, ‘cos there used to be a thing called the graduate premium, and by getting everyone to have a degree, we would all magically earn that extra money and be as rich as Creosote. Or something.
Jim, the difference between the student loans and a graduate tax is that once the loan and interest are repaid, the graduate stops making repayments. A graduate tax would be unending.
“A graduate tax would be unending.”
It does end, even if you pay zero. It ends either when you’ve paid a certain amount OR if a certain period of time passes (25 years for students post 2005, age 65 for students before 2005). What debt can I take out elsewhere where I don’t have to pay anything if I’m poor, and it gets written off eventually anyway? I think a mortgage on those terms would be quite popular!
Its certainly far closer to being a tax than it is to being a debt.