In response to:

The Bad News Behind the Student Loan Debate

Rumi Wrote: Jun 25, 2012 10:06 AM
"While this happened mostly in the background, the obvious result is that students are able to take out loans at below-market rates—in effect, a government subsidy for their education." Private banks were making loans guaranteed by the government, and making a profit. What would you rather subsidize, bankers or higher education?
restoreliberty Wrote: Jun 25, 2012 2:12 PM
bankers of course - they hire more people and those folks aren't overpaid for not having to produce results
shubi_ Wrote: Jun 25, 2012 10:18 AM
Hey rumidummy, if the government sells loans at a loss it is stealing our tax money.
Commies are so stupid!
Rumi Wrote: Jun 25, 2012 11:01 AM
"if the government sells loans at a loss it is stealing our tax money."

Who's "selling loans at a loss"? How exactly do you sell a loan anyway? Is that like securitized mortgage bonds?
ppmstudios Wrote: Jun 25, 2012 12:03 PM
"How do you sell a loan anyway?"

Mortgage companies have been doing it for years....
DB07 Wrote: Jun 25, 2012 10:14 AM
Neither! And BTW, profit isn't a dirty word...profit funds everything.
Rumi Wrote: Jun 25, 2012 11:00 AM
"And BTW, profit isn't a dirty word."

Of course it isn't. Did I say it was? I just think that it's a little odd to see a site that's forever screaming "socialism!" doesn't see anything wrong with the government guaranteeing loans that a private bank makes.

There’s a booming electoral business of pandering to college-educated young voters—and it spells bad news for America.


From Townhall Magazine's July feature, "Student Groans," by Kevin Glass and Daniel Doherty:

Barack Obama’s win in the 2008 presidential election was boosted by a truly historic youth vote. While young voters have often swung more heavily to Democratic presidential candidates than the general population, the margin by which they preferred Obama in 2008 over his Republican rival John McCain was tremendous. The 18-29...