Are there no poor houses? Are there no workhouses?
http://countercurrentnews.com/2015/01/these-states-will-revoke-your-drivers-license-if-you-cant-pay-back-student-loans/
QuoteThese States Will Revoke Your Driver's License If You Can't Pay Back Student Loans
January 17, 2015 9:38 pm·
Most of the nation is unaware of it, but there are two states which will take your driver's license away if you do not pay your student loans.
Alums in both Montana and Iowa, face laws that allow the state to revoke driver's licenses if the individual is unable to pay back their loans.
This has obvious consequences for potential employment, as well as childcare, creating a downward spiral of self-perpetuating poverty.
The Montana Department of Justice says that those who default on their student loans face "indefinite suspension until student loan association notifies Motor Vehicle Division of compliance."
The Department of Motor Vehicles in Iowa parallels this legislation almost identically. The law says that the State will "suspend a person's driver's license upon receiving a certificate of noncompliance from the College Student Aid Commission in regard to the person's default on an obligation owed to or collected by the commission."
But the group Jobs With Justice notes that in October 2010, there were also 42 nurses in Tennessee who similarly had their licenses suspended for nothing other than falling behind on their student loans.
The irony of all of this is that taking away the ability to drive makes student loan defaulters even more certain to fall behind on payments.
In effect, this is little different than debtors prison, which, in a misguided effort to deter loan default, actually perpetuates it.
As one might expect from a site called countercurrentnews.com, this story is bullshit.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on January 19, 2015, 08:54:17 PM
As one might expect from a site called countercurrentnews.com, this story is bullshit.
Link me then, and I'll glady give a mea culpa.
To what? The bullshit is in the misleading story title. No one is revoking a license for "being unable to pay." They're revoking a license because borrowers are not calling up Student Loan Servicing to arrange deferments or forebearances or alternative repayment plans.
KICK HIS ASS YI. SWEEP THE LEG
Yeah, Timmay. There's a distinct difference between "being unable to pay" and "not paying". Go get 'em, Iowa and Montana.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on January 19, 2015, 09:30:34 PM
Yeah, Timmay. There's a distinct difference between "being unable to pay" and "not paying". Go get 'em, Iowa and Montana.
:lol:
Quote
The Montana Department of Justice says that those who default on their student loans face "indefinite suspension until student loan association notifies Motor Vehicle Division of compliance."
The Department of Motor Vehicles in Iowa parallels this legislation almost identically. The law says that the State will "suspend a person's driver's license upon receiving a certificate of noncompliance from the College Student Aid Commission in regard to the person's default on an obligation owed to or collected by the commission."
This doesn't seem to make a distinction between those who can pay and choose not to, and those who are unable to pay. :unsure:
It doesn't make a distinction between those who don't want to pay, and those who are unable to pay but can't be arsed to call a toll free number and ask for a forebearance, or an income based repayment plan.
I don't know what a forbearance is.
Quote from: Razgovory on January 19, 2015, 11:02:20 PM
I don't know what a forbearance is.
A forebearance means you don't have to pay for the time being. You don't go into default while in forebearance. You don't get threatening letters and you don't get your wages garnished. Interest keeps accruing.
After that, when you owe more in interest than the actual loan and can't pay it off, that's when your license gets suspended. So you see, Timmay, there's more to this story than what was in that article.
If the laws include private loans, then eternal forebearances and IBR/PAYE are not available.
Additionally, these laws may be unconstitutional. I vaguely remember something along the lines of states aren't allowed to do stuff like this, meddling in interstate commerce issues that are already governed by federal law outside of a clear nexus with state interests. Maybe I'm misremembering.
Either way, I'm curious how this involves the states whatsoever: the loan money is either private or (in almost every circumstance now) federal. Not state.
Quote from: Ideologue on January 20, 2015, 12:23:38 AM
Either way, I'm curious how this involves the states whatsoever: the loan money is either private or (in almost every circumstance now) federal. Not state.
It involves the state's conservative bases, who want to make people who can't pay, pay.
QuoteBut the group Jobs With Justice notes that in October 2010, there were also 42 nurses in Tennessee who similarly had their licenses suspended for nothing other than falling behind on their student loans.
I wonder if this is lost in translation. Revoking
professional licensure is a conventional punishment for non-payers, and is determined by the governing body: state bars will throw you out, and I believe medical boards will too. It's to keep the profession morally pure, I guess, purity being something lawyers and doctors are well-known for.
Quote from: Ideologue on January 20, 2015, 12:23:38 AM
Either way, I'm curious how this involves the states whatsoever: the loan money is either private or (in almost every circumstance now) federal. Not state.
My understanding is if a given educational institution (i.e., diesel automotive tech) builds up too high a default rate, its students are no longer eligible for student loans. So there's a possible nexus. Or lexus.
Ah, fair enough.
This seems bonkers. What's next? Debtor prisons?
Debtor's prisons would probably cost money. The great thing about this is that it punishes people without requiring the state to spend anything. They might as well just punch student loan defaulters in the stomach, at least then they could possibly still acquire work.
It's just insane. Pure animus.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on January 19, 2015, 11:04:28 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on January 19, 2015, 11:02:20 PM
I don't know what a forbearance is.
A forebearance means you don't have to pay for the time being. You don't go into default while in forebearance. You don't get threatening letters and you don't get your wages garnished. Interest keeps accruing.
Wouldn't entering negotiations to repay a loan assume you will be able to repay it at some point in future? If so, what's the point of doing this if you know that's not gonna happen either? It looks like a pure annoyance.
Besides, as a small government Republican, wouldn't an idea of a state (i) creating useless bureaucratic requirement, (ii) to enforce private debt, (iii) and taking away unrelated rights of the people if they fail to comply with the bureaucratic requirement be against your beliefs?
Quote from: Martinus on January 20, 2015, 04:05:23 AM
Wouldn't entering negotiations to repay a loan assume you will be able to repay it at some point in future? If so, what's the point of doing this if you know that's not gonna happen either? It looks like a pure annoyance.
Besides, as a small government Republican, wouldn't an idea of a state (i) creating useless bureaucratic requirement, (ii) to enforce private debt, (iii) and taking away unrelated rights of the people if they fail to comply with the bureaucratic requirement be against your beliefs?
As Ide has already pointed out, student debt is overwhelmingly publicly provided.
As to the first part, I'm not clear on what you're asking. The borrower knows he'll never be in a position to be able to pay a penny? The borrower knows he never *wants* to pay back a penny?
The fact that you owe a debt to a government body does not make it automatically a public due. Generally, only the likes of tarrifs, taxes and public fees are public dues. Where the state, acting through its bodies, enters into private transactions with individuals, the debts under such transactions are private debts.
If you buy a plot of land from the government and fail to pay the price, it is still a private debt and is enforced in the same way as any other private debt (i.e. through courts). Ancient Romans already understood this division and differentiated between what they called "imperium" (i.e. the state acting as a sovereign) and "dominium" (i.e. the state acting as a proprietor). It is considered a gross violation of due process and the rule of law if the state uses its imperium to protect its dominium.
Not here it isn't.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on January 20, 2015, 04:36:28 AM
Not here it isn't.
Can you link me to some evidence supporting this statement?
Do a google search on student loan garnishment.
Quote from: Ideologue on January 20, 2015, 02:13:01 AM
Debtor's prisons would probably cost money. The great thing about this is that it punishes people without requiring the state to spend anything. They might as well just punch student loan defaulters in the stomach, at least then they could possibly still acquire work.
Communities have come to depend on prisons for work the same way they used to depend on military bases. More prisons = more economic prosperity.
Quote from: Martinus on January 20, 2015, 04:30:03 AM
The fact that you owe a debt to a government body does not make it automatically a public due. Generally, only the likes of tarrifs, taxes and public fees are public dues. Where the state, acting through its bodies, enters into private transactions with individuals, the debts under such transactions are private debts.
If you buy a plot of land from the government and fail to pay the price, it is still a private debt and is enforced in the same way as any other private debt (i.e. through courts). Ancient Romans already understood this division and differentiated between what they called "imperium" (i.e. the state acting as a sovereign) and "dominium" (i.e. the state acting as a proprietor). It is considered a gross violation of due process and the rule of law if the state uses its imperium to protect its dominium.
So what happens in Poland if you owe the state money?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on January 20, 2015, 09:55:14 AM
So what happens in Poland if you owe the state money?
They garnish your pierogies. GET IT?
Lots of states already suspend people's licenses for failing to pay tickets or child support. It makes some sense to treat non-repayment of state loans similarly. Of course, in any of these situations, suspension of a license can often cause a vicious circle of increasing fines (and often jail time - Washington at least, driving with a suspended license is a criminal offense) and decreasing ability to pay, which means that there's very little chance some people will ever be able to get their licenses back.
Suspending driving privileges seems like a counterproductive way to get people to pay, since in most places it directly affects peoples' ability to make money. Especially places like Montana.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on January 20, 2015, 02:09:56 PM
Suspending driving privileges seems like a counterproductive way to get people to pay, since in most places it directly affects peoples' ability to make money. Especially places like Montana.
:yes:
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on January 20, 2015, 02:09:56 PM
Suspending driving privileges seems like a counterproductive way to get people to pay, since in most places it directly affects peoples' ability to make money. Especially places like Montana.
And Iowa. If you don't live in Sioux Center, there ain't squat without a half-hour's drive or more. Des Moine's probably the sparsest city I've ever been to.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on January 20, 2015, 02:09:56 PM
Suspending driving privileges seems like a counterproductive way to get people to pay, since in most places it directly affects peoples' ability to make money. Especially places like Montana.
I'm not in favor of suspending drivers licenses over student loans, but this is a quantifiable question and I suspect it would be highly effective. For many people, student loan payment priority would skyrocket to a bit above rent and just below food.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on January 20, 2015, 09:55:14 AM
Quote from: Martinus on January 20, 2015, 04:30:03 AM
The fact that you owe a debt to a government body does not make it automatically a public due. Generally, only the likes of tarrifs, taxes and public fees are public dues. Where the state, acting through its bodies, enters into private transactions with individuals, the debts under such transactions are private debts.
If you buy a plot of land from the government and fail to pay the price, it is still a private debt and is enforced in the same way as any other private debt (i.e. through courts). Ancient Romans already understood this division and differentiated between what they called "imperium" (i.e. the state acting as a sovereign) and "dominium" (i.e. the state acting as a proprietor). It is considered a gross violation of due process and the rule of law if the state uses its imperium to protect its dominium.
So what happens in Poland if you owe the state money?
If the debt is not "public", they sue you in civil court, like anyone else. My law firm does a lot of litigation for or opposite of the state treasury.
That being said we don't have student loans as state education is free. I guess if I lived in one of those barbaric states where access to health care or education was not guaranteed by our constitution, things would be different. :huh:
To be honest, whenever I read about problems with stuff like student loans, Obamacare, gun violence and the like in the US, I am reminded of an old Soviet era joke. The punchline was that the socialist system bravely and boldly faces problems that the rest of the civilised world has never encountered. It seems to me that the US has grown to be that "special"...
Great joke, Marti.
It's all in the delivery.
And one was... assaulted. Peanut. Ha. Ha ha.
The joke probably sounds better without any vowels.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on January 21, 2015, 12:40:09 PM
The joke probably sounds better without any vowels.
It's a consonant source of irritation for Polish comedians.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on January 21, 2015, 12:40:09 PM
The joke probably sounds better without any vowels.
I think you're halfway right. It sounds better without any vowels AND without the consonants.