Tag Archives: Dependence

News

Obama to nationalize student loans, how does that work in New Zealand?

3 Comments

Story from CNS News. (H/T Gateway Pundit)

Excerpt:

A bill currently before the Senate would empower the Obama administration to nationalize the student lending industry, eliminating the federally subsidized private loans millions of university students rely on to finance their educations

The Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act – currently being considered by the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee – would eliminate the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) program. FFEL loans are federally subsidized and make up approximately 80 percent of the student lending industry.

According to the Department of Education, 14.3 million of the 17.5 million student loans were federally subsidized for the 2009-2010 fiscal year. Under Obama’s plan, the government would consume the entirety of this industry – a total of $103 billion in 2009-2010.

I wrote about the situation in New Zealand before. In New Zealand, they have a government-run system.

Excerpt:

Thousands of people with student loans are defaulting on payments, leaving the Government to chase hundreds of millions of dollars.

More than one in five borrowers – or 114,000 people – have overdue payments and thousands of students are leaving tertiary education with no qualification and big bills.

The Education Ministry’s student loan scheme annual report shows that $306 million in payments is overdue, a $100m increase from a year ago.

The substantial growth includes a big rise in the level of payments owed by people now living overseas, more than doubling to $114m.

New Zealand University Students Association co-president Sophia Blair said it was not surprising that students with loans were heading overseas and letting the bills mount. “You can earn higher wages [overseas].”

[…]Total student loan debt had reached $10.2 billion and is predicted to grow by an average of $875m a year to more than $20b by 2022.

The report also showed about 39 per cent of students who left tertiary education with a loan did so without achieving a qualification.

About 8000 students with loans who left study in 2005 had nothing to show for it by 2007.

Why can’t Obama take into account how radical leftist policies have worked in other countries? Let the free market work. Let people be responsible for their own decisions. Giving people things for free doesn’t make them take their education seriously. When someone pays out of pocket, they try harder, and they take serious courses to earn the money back. When a bank makes a loan, they actually care about getting the money back, so they may insist that students actually perform. On the other hand, the government is notoriously wasteful – it’s not their money. It’s your money.

News

Government now pays the rent for 1 out of every 5 homes in Britain

1 Comment

Story from the Daily Mail. (H/T Weasel Zippers via ECM)

Excerpt:

Four in ten households in some parts of the country have their rent paid for by the state, Whitehall figures revealed yesterday.

They showed, on average, one in five homes is supported by housing benefit, the taxpayer handout which covers the rent for those on low incomes.

And in London, the figures revealed nearly a quarter of households are now reliant on the benefit.

The figures, disclosed in the Department of Work and Pensions’ spending tables, also show that in the North-East, the North-West and Scotland around one in four receive the benefit.

The payout, which was first introduced in 1992 to bring clarity to state rent payments, cost £14.7billion when Labour came to power in 1997.

That figure has since risen by 18 per cent to £17.4billion and is expected to reach almost £21billion next year.

I’m currently reading Theodore Dalrymple’s “Life at the Bottom”, which describes how the UK government promotes irresponsibility and immorality among the poor. I think we really need to be careful about moving in the same direction as the British. Things don’t seem to be working out to well for them. They seem to believe in taxing people who work hard and live morally in order to reward the most irresponsible people in society.

News

Does Obama’s stimulus bill discriminate against men?

4 Comments

Check out this story from Hans Bader of the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

It turns out that the $800 billion stimulus bill (porkulus-1) was altered in order to discriminate against the blue-collar men who are losing the lion’s share of jobs in the Democrat-caused recession.

Excerpt:

Christina Hoff Sommers points out that “of the 5.7 million jobs Americans lost between December 2007 and May 2009, nearly 80 percent had been held by men. . . .Men are bearing the brunt of the current economic crisis because they predominate in manufacturing and construction, the hardest-hit sectors, which have lost more than 3 million jobs since December 2007. Women, by contrast, are a majority in recession-resistant fields such as education and health care, which gained 588,000 jobs during the same period.”

But when the Administration floated the concept of “an ambitious . . . stimulus program to modernize roads, bridges, schools, electrical grids, public transportation, and dams” as a way of “reinvigorating the hardest-hit sectors of the economy,” “Women’s groups were appalled,” asking “Where are the New Jobs for Women?” and denouncing what they called “The Macho Stimulus Plan.”

And what did Obama do in response to this feminist pressure?

The Obama Administration quickly knuckled under to this pressure, replacing its recovery package with an $800 billion stimulus package that instead “skews job creation somewhat towards women” by spending money instead on social services like welfare that are administered mostly by female employees.

“A recent Associated Press story reports: ‘Stimulus Funds Go to Social Programs Over ‘Shovel-ready’ Projects.’ A team of six AP reporters who have been tracking the funds find that the $300 billion sent to the states is being used mainly for health care, education, unemployment benefits, food stamps, and other social services.” Or, as another AP report put it, “Stimulus Aid Favors Welfare, Not Work, Programs.”

The stimulus package also repealed welfare reform…

Read the whole thing. I think this is very interesting given the fact that it was these blue-collar unions who helped to get Obama elected. If there is a silver-lining to Obama’s socialism, this has to be it.

I think the most interesting question to ask about this story is: do single women, who voted for Obama 60-35, expect to find husbands and fathers for their children? Or will they all marry the government?