Ron Paul Wants To Eliminate Federal Student Loans

All the student loans and grants are direct contributors to the huge costs of education. This should be cut and cut immediately. As soon as enrolment in colleges goes down tuition will as well. Most students get screwed over because of the loans. The rates per credit hour are enormously too high for the few hours of instruction you get. In addition you should not have to take any classes except for hands-on experience. If you can pass the exams you should get whatever credits you deserve. The universities are in the business to sell diplomas to anyone who can borrow enough to pay for one. That's why business grads work at 7-11 and at Speedway as cashiers.

yes, getting the fed out of education is a great idea. However it should have been pointed out that eliminating federal student loans is NOT part of his budget plan. Any part of student loans that may be included from the elimination of the department of education will just be handled by the states from now on. I think this article does not represent the plan accurately, and just wants to fool readers into thinking Ron Paul doesn't care about students. Whatever department that is cut just means that it will be the state's responsibility which it should be anyway. The federal parks, nuclear power plants… states. Look at all the things that the government handles that costs so much… the price of gas, health care costs, tuition. Now look at the things that the government doesn't touch: computers, cell phones. Which of these has continuing rising prices and which prices actually FALL? Ron Paul not only is the ONLY one with a REAL plan, he's the only one with a plan that's not just lip service.

Government has a HUGE hand in cell phones and the cost of manufacturing and acquisition has not fallen, in fact it has risen…cell phones are offered cheaper because wireless carriers have pushed up the cost of data plans which in turn has allowed them to offer 2-year contract subsidies….the government has a huge hand in cellular technology as well, the $30 a month 2GB data plan from AT&T comes after wireless spectrum needed for those technologies was auctioned off by the FCC….T-Mobile paid billions several years ago just to buy up some 1700 AWS spectrum….Computer prices are lower only when you look at base models because the base models offer less innovation then they use to, the cost of products they put in a basic dell has fallen not because of the government staying out but because the GPU, Processor and other technology on the lower end models could be spotted several years ago…higher end PCs still offer higher end pricing for innovation standards.

BTW, I was not tying in the educational aspect to his plan, in fact I said his Federal Student Loan cuts came a week after he announced that plan, in any case I added a small statement as to not confuse anyone who made that leap.

With Gov't guaranteei­ng these loans students are essentiall­y bidding these tuition prices higher. Universiti­es have no restraint, & have no incentive to lower tuition cause they know Gov't will foot the bill. If tomorrow Gov't Student loans were CANCELLED.­..students probably would not be able to borrow money. Does that mean Colleges would have empty classrooms­…NO! Colleges would have to react to this drop in demand & slash cost & overhead and lower tuition. Today it has been announced that college loans have surpassed $1 billion, surpassing credit card debt. This is real scary….y­ou thought the housing bubble was something.­…just look at the COLLEGE BUBBLE that is being created right in front of us.

OMG , My best friend , she just get a rich daddy who is the CEO of a MNC! they met via.
—–**ＳǔＧａＲＭiｎＧ Lё.￠_O_M **——-..it is the largest and best club for sugar daddy and sugar baby to chat online. …you don’t have to be rich there , but you can meet one , It's worthy a try. You do not have to be rich or famous.
-

James Allen Johnson Aren't you talking about "cell phone service" as opposed to "cell phones"? Cell phones are indeed a dime a dozen, most being thrown into a "cell phone plan" as a loss leader. Why? Lack of competition, since the government controls access to the frequencies used to communicate on them. That is the difference between "cell phones" and "cell phone service". One is regulated, one is not. It's the perfect example.

No, Ron Paul does not want to end them until economics change so students actually COULD work their way through school as he did. He moves student loans to a different department while ending the federal Dept of Ed. Here is the campaign response to the spin in the media: http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2011/10/24/ron-paul-is-not-ending-student-loans/.

Looks like he's backpedalling to me….. There goes his youth vote!

Louis Nardozi Cell Phones are not cheap as the original commenter said which was my point, they made it seem as if that was because the government doesn't regulate that they are $199 for an iPhone but as you pointed out it's because they are "loss leaders"….In fact the cost of wholesale unlocked devices have increased in many but not all cases (I worked as an International Product manager for a big player in the unlocked industry for years and in the telecom business for 15 years)…the government intervention in that case was just plain wrong since they said the phones were cheaper now because the government doesn't touch them which isn't why they are cheaper as you pointed out, if we never had subsidized loss leaders we would actually be paying more for many of the devices we see on the market right now.

Ok, the point being made here is that the free market as a whole does better with less or no GOV involvement incase you missed it. Everyone knows the topic of any article should convey the total essence of what you are going to write about, here is an example.
Recent article, 50% of the people walk out of Ron Paul’s speech in Iowa caucus. The reader is now left with that thought as he/she reads; as opposed to say Ron Paul in Iowa got 50% of the people to give him a standing ovation after his speech. Same numbers different result as you read but then you already know this. Then you try to credit yourself at the end by saying; by the way he would not cut student loans now. You could have also written what his actual plan really is but that would have made too much sense.
Note if you missed it, yea get GOV out of as much as possible except to say where the constitution requires it.

Sheila Lechner
You should try to find out what backpedalling means before you use the word. If the youth have been on his side then they understand exactly what Ron Paul is all about ……."There goes his youth vote"
yea right

The first cell phone cost around $4,000. and today they can be given away for free with some services. Printers are given away free with computer purchases. A 10 megabite Hardrive cost $10,000 at one point. I don't know ANYWHERE that government has a big hand in where the same can be said. NOT medicine or education or the price at the pump. You never hear anyone say, "I remember when the cost of tuition was soooo high back in the day." BTW, the cost of the first iPhone has gone down alot. It's only new versions that cost so much, like video game systems. The more government has a hand is something by subsidizing, it's less likely prices will go down.

Paul Michael Prices haven't gone down on Cell Phones for wholesalers, they are just heavily subsidized. Yes with the exception of $4,000 cell phones when they were released, but that was based on the fact that cell towers were being built and there was a very smaller user base…If you have enough towers to cover entire urban areas but only 10,000 users the cost for hardware and plans will be greatly higher (it use to cost thousands of dollars a month to use a cell phone too) When I was buying HTC devices for wholesale 5 years ago (with Windows OS on them) some were 400 some were 500 and now some of those unlocked devices are actually more expensive to procure with smaller margins for sellers (unlocked, not as a loss leader). As far as the old versions of iPhones going down in price that has to do directly with supply and demand, as newer devices come out the cost of older units drop..Apple spends less than $200 to manufacturer their devices by some analysts reports (quite a few actually) and with millions of new iPhone's available the value of older units go down…under your thought process I can buy a Commodore 64 for really cheap it doesn't mean it's a good deal, it just means a lot of other computers have been created since then with better standards….When comparing "generally accepted" technology with mainstream appeal the cost doesn't go down based on innovation, it actually increases, you can just buy outdated equipment (such as the iPhone or iPhone 3G) for cheaper, which makes sense since it's not using the most innovate processors, GPS tech, software, etc….but if you want something new you will pay more or company's will pay more and therefore push up the cost of data to cover the loss leader cost (AT&T unlimited data use to be $30 and now users get 2GB…etc). But yes I do agree with you that when NEW tech is being adapted it is very expensive but you can't compare that type of early adopter technology to market trends based off wholesale and retail spend levels.

I will say that part of rising costs are due to demand for certain cellular hardware parts, for example several years ago Apple bought up a huge chunk of the flash memory market which in the process caused flash memory to increase exponentially for other manufacturers. For example Kingston SDHC memory cards with 16GB increased by nearly 75% at one point and that cost was also passed onto other cell phone manufacturers who pushed up prices, this has nothing to do with Government intervention and everything to do with market variables based on Supply and Demand which in turn pushed up production costs, while other variables (weather conditions in Japan) and other issues have caused price issues on a negative span.

James Allen Johnson , I hear you on the economics of supply, and don't wish to imply that price's sole influence is by government. My contention is that when a subsidy is given to any industry, that sets the bar for prices at a certain (although not fixed) rate before supply and demand start to take effect. Giving guarenteed incomes, especial in a fractional reserve based monetary system, is best shown to be deeply flawed by the outcome of the debts of the recipients. everyone has to get loans because prices are so high although these subsidies are supposed to bring prices down so many can afford them, thus forcing more and more people to rely on the credit system in order to afford things like health care, education and even food. All these programs are very well intentioned i.e. health care, education, etc., but where they ease burdens in the short term, they create goliath sized problems in the long term. How much are we really saving the poor, middle class and small businesses when each person is nearly $50,000 in debt as soon as they are born?

"Do you believe that cutting out the federal student loan program is a smart decision or should the U.S. government work on lowering tuition costs so the amount of loans required by students are lessened?"

Yes I do believe it is a smart decision in the long run to end the student aid program, and no I think the government would just make things worse in trying to lower tuition costs as I believe it has been governments involvement in education which has given us lower standards and higher costs. However, I think a better question would be, "Is there any Constitutional authority for the federal government to get involved in education?" Knowing WHY something is done, is all important. I don't believe the ends justify the means. The objective good done the student does not justify the wrong done in taking the money from another. This may simply be a philosophical difference between you and I, but I think it is best to state it as such if so.

so does herman cain.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/10/herman-cain-opposes-federal-student-aid/

Now Ron Paul made a mistake. Ron Paul cannot lower cost of tuition for private schools and cannot lower cost of education in at least 2 years-impossible in years..He wants to cancel loans which students must pay. He is telling students not to go to college if you not afford it. Student can not pay their debts because they cannot find jobs. The administrators of education made cost of education so high. This is not 1955 nor 1995.In 2011, technology dominated world student needs money to have a much higher education such as loans which they payback with interest( scholarships are limited and not enough to cover all expenses). It is a crucial mistake for Paul to make a statement like that for students whose vote will determine who will be our next president. Paul should look for ways to help students to pay their debts such as transferring money from a trillion dollar cut to help out students. Good bye Paul. WE enjoyed him. There is reason we need government – help us out in time of crises and Paul wants to get us away from government toward to private companies which sounds like -we going into mouth of madness if he is the president. Come on— privatizing social security, student loans and home loans- we will be back to Somalia if he is the president. US government is the best and ego of our generation to make us the number one in the world and Paul wants to destroy it.

Now Ron Paul made a mistake. Ron Paul cannot lower cost of tuition for private schools and cannot lower cost of education in at least 2 years-impossible in years..He wants to cancel loans which students must pay. He is telling students not to go to college if you not afford it. Student can not pay their debts because they cannot find jobs. The administrators of education made cost of education so high. This is not 1955 nor 1995.In 2011, technology dominated world student needs money to have a much higher education such as loans which they payback with interest( scholarships are limited and not enough to cover all expenses). It is a crucial mistake for Paul to make a statement like that for students whose vote will determine who will be our next president. Paul should look for ways to help students to pay their debts such as transferring money from a trillion dollar cut to help out students. Good bye Paul. WE enjoyed him. There is reason we need government – help us out in time of crises and Paul wants to get us away from government toward to private companies which sounds like -we going into mouth of madness if he is the president. Come on— privatizing social security, student loans and home loans- we will be back to Somalia if he is the president. US government is the best and ego of our generation to make us the number one in the world and Paul wants to destroy it.

Its disheartening to see so many propagandized people choose to regurgitate the MEDIA's SPIN and playdown the true DANGER of what's happened to the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT in the last CENTURY (slow boiled frogs). The very agencies UNCONSTITUTIONALLY placed Under the GUISE of caring for us are now all working in tandem to control us drain OUR ECONOMY put us and are unborn in dept(SLAVERY BY USERY) and give us thier ONE flavor of thinking and living "SOCIALISM".ANY TIME THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TAKES CONTROL OVER ANY PROPERTY , INTELECTUAL , WELFARE INTEREST , MEDICAL , ENERGY YOU NAME IT…..IT IS AN INSTANT MANDATED MONOPOLY AND destroys many rights and free market opportunity in these areas.EVEN MORE DANGEROUS IT INFERS DICTITORY POWERS AND UCERPTS THE CHECKS AND BALANCES OF THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTION while setting up the seat for a dictatorship with dangerous new power laying at the threshold of the door to the oval office so why would some propaganda spoonfed zombie want to say how crazy it would be to eliminate these federal agencies and leave these concerns to the states and the people.

Hmm I just cant really say , I just know any free thinking American with faculties intact should be and is INSULTED!
Listening to people talk about fixing them makes me ill.

you know I hardly ever use caps but sheeez!

Now all I need is some pinhead to chime in and tell us all how the free market has failed lets try SOCAILISM lol