09-13-2019, 04:52 PM
(09-13-2019, 01:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Meaning the private lender was out 3% of the principle owed. Why do you think private lenders were getting out prior to 2010. Because you cannot make money recouping only 97% of your principle. You lose money. Private lenders were figuring this out. Now here's where 2012 comes in. The government made it easier to qualify for loans that were already being shown to cost money.
Let's use your Maxine Water's source . . .
https://freebeacon.com/politics/waters-unaware-the-federal-government-nationalized-student-loans-in-2010/
Quote:Waters then changed the subject small business, asking CEOs why they have not lent more to small businesses since the financial crisis.
There was this thing called a financial crisis of 2007-2008 which directly led to this other thing called the Great Recession caused by these private lenders knowingly making bad loans and knowingly selling derivatives based upon these bad loans which led to them being bailed out by the government. What happens to credit during a recession? It dries up. At that time, they were lending less money across the board because they screwed up not just the lending business, but the whole global economy.
In 2008, Bank of America and Citigroup each received a $20 billion government bailout while JP Morgan Chase received a $12 billion government bailout. Kinda hard for those private lenders who were flat broke and on the verge of collapse to loan students money and tell them to be responsible for their debts while simultaneously receiving a Welfare check from the government because they themselves weren't responsible for their debts. If you're wondering why I chose those three check your Maxine Waters link.
Now, I need to see where you're getting that 97% figure. Just like I needed to see where the WSJ's info came from about student loans paying for Obamacare which ultimately proved to be completely false. There has been enough misleading or out right false information coming out of this WSJ article that I need to see evidence to believe otherwise.
And . . . explain nationalizing the market?
