President’s Pay As You Earn (PAYE) Repayment initiative to all qualified borrowers.

The CCRAA of 2007 established the Income-Based Repayment (IBR) plan, which capped

monthly loan repayments to help make them affordable based on borrowers’ income and family

size. All Stafford, Grad PLUS, and Consolidation Loans made under either the Direct Loan or

Federal Family Education Loan programs are eligible. Non-Federal loans, loans currently in

default, and Parent PLUS Loans are not eligible for the IBR plan. The IBR program lowers

monthly payments for borrowers who have high loan debt and modest incomes, but it may

increase the length of the loan repayment period, accruing more interest over the life of the loan.

Under CCRAA, monthly payment amounts under IBR were set at 15 percent of a borrower’s

discretionary income, can never be more than the amount required under the 10-year standard

repayment plan, and any outstanding balances remaining after 25 years of IBR repayments are

forgiven.

To further ensure that student debts are manageable, in 2010, SAFRA reduced monthly

payments in IBR from 15 percent to 10 percent, and reduced the maximum length of repayment

from 25 years to 20 years, after which any remaining balance is forgiven. SAFRA makes these

more generous benefits available for new borrowers beginning July 1, 2014. In October 2011,

the Administration announced an initiative—Pay As You Earn—to accelerate these features for

qualified borrowers who were new borrowers as of October 1, 2007, and had received a Direct

Loan disbursement on or after October 1, 2011. Qualified borrowers could apply to participate

starting in December 2012.

The Budget proposes to extend this PAYE plan, starting in FY 2014, to all qualified borrowers

regardless of when borrowers obtained their loans, or became new borrowers, thereby

harmonizing various income-based repayment options available to borrowers.

http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget14/justifications/s-loansoverview.pdf

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24672737)

The 2014 Budget

proposes to extend this plan to all qualified borrowers beginning in FY 2014, regardless of when

borrowers obtained their loans.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24672780)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24673014)

PAYE isn't even on GOP's radar screen. And even if it is, they won't cut from a sympathetic group (students). They need to pick their battles.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24672992)

Lol at this. For the GOP it's all about that final budget number. PAYE will be sacrificed early so that neither party will go after any sacred cow.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24673004)

i wasn't sure if it had passed yet. you think anyone will take issue with the student loan modifications?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24673086)

http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=2251973&mc=147&forum_id=2

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24673082)

I've got a bridge to sell you.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24673200)

*guy who got all the breaks in life: rich parents, good genes, good schools at the right times*

*guy who makes 350K*

fuck you, earl

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24673624)

I didn't have SAT or LSAT tutors or classes.

I dont think taking out $200K in loans to go to Fordham was any smarter then than it is now.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24673683)

and how poor were you exactly? my parents made $45k combined. student loans were my only way out and it turned out to be a bullshit promise. don't give me that shit about being a deadbeat. unlike boomer administrators i wasn't the one trying to rip anyone off.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24673713)

I got an almost full ride to go to high school and stanford, which I am eternally grateful for. Which is why I donate money now to my HS and Stanford and not to those greedy NYU pricks.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24673756)

finally, i'll just note that fordham in 2006 really didn't cost $200k. this mortgage-sized debt issue is really just a millennial thing.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24673830)

And only 1 post I made could possibly be construed as outing, and that was because of the thread title and because everyone already knows your name, dumbfuck.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24673929)

this also needs to be coupled with reduced federal funding to certain/all schools based on their allocation of costs, expected student outcome, and other factors. then, once schools don't receive enough federal student loans dollars, tuition costs will eventually go down and plans like PAYE may not be necessary.

The problem as it stands now is that grad school is unaffordable for all but the already rich, and students shouldn't be kept out just because they aren't rich. This is why PAYE is currently necessary. They gov't fubared the system, which is what led to PAYE being necessary.

I agree that keeping it as an ongoing plan, without more, only encourages bad behavior from schools. Fed gov't needs to set up stringent conditions on continued receipt of student loan dollars and/or set certain limits on tuition. Then they could still keep PAYE, but then costs would/should remain relatively constant. Right now, there's still no incentive to keep costs down.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24673731)

Nobody should be getting a useless masters degree now in anything.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24673768)

useless masters should be culled in the longterm through enacted restrictions on availability of fed loans due to costs as they relate to expected outcomes and availability of other programs

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24673799)

I think the PAYE supporters can acknowledge that this policy will cause tuition to keep going up, enrich useless boomer academics, and incentivize people to waste time, money and resources on useless education. It's not ideal. It would be better if tuition was like 10k and we could pay for it with a summer job like boomers did. A better solution to that end would be to stop loans altogether and allow bankruptcy, forcing higher education to offer degrees that people can actually pay for.

On the other hand PAYE haters should realize that the current situation demands a different approach in the short term. The government fucked everyone over by offering loans and enabling tuition to be so high. Law schools fucked people over by lying. The market fucked over T14 grads who went from 80% biglaw to 40%. You can't make debtors pay money that they don't have. In any other segment of lending, everyone would declare bankruptcy on their 200k debt. For thousands of years, bankruptcy has been considered a sound economic and social practice. No entity should be going around making idiotic loans that don't make sense--if you do that, expect to take a hit. However, suddenly allowing bankruptcy may seem like an unfair windfall in this case, so with PAYE you are still making them pay for 20 years.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24673974)

"The budget agreement only solves part of the problem. While it sets spending levels, it doesn't actually allocate the money and doesn't specify how the money can be spent.

That battle will begin immediately.

Appropriations Committee members must agree before January 15 -- the deadline set by Congress in October for a new spending plan to be in place -- on how to divvy up the money.

For instance, Republicans will want more money for the military. Democrats will want more money for Head Start programs."

http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/18/politics/budget-congress-stability/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24674376)

Democrats hope to maintain or add small amounts of money for the program they say will provide insurance for millions of previously uninsured people.

As is the case with all spending bills in a deeply divided Congress, there are plenty of other disagreements besides the Obamacare funding level.

Among the most difficult will be money for the Internal Revenue Service, the nation's tax collector; funds for western wildfire fighting and for the Yucca Mountain, Nevada, nuclear waste repository.

Separate battles also could be waged over policy proposals that House Republican leaders are likely to attach to the funding bill.

These could include forcing the Obama administration to approve a controversial Keystone oil pipeline from Canada to the U.S. Gulf of Mexico.

There also could be moves to stop the Environmental Protection Agency from enforcing carbon emissions regulations that the coal industry hates and to block federal money for building a California high-speed train.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/18/us-usa-fiscal-idUSBRE9BF1FW20131218

Not mentioned: PAYE. YNY

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24674394)

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/12/house-budget-deal-vote-101091.html

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24698290)

DOE is saying that they expect paye expansion to be revenue neutral.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24720837)

Where are you getting this? This makes no sense.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24720842)

http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget14/justifications/s-loansoverview.pdf

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2446384&forum_id=2#24720855)