News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Judge rules that student loan debt is dischargeable in ba... by dragonwriter on Sunday January 12, 2020 @06:09PM (#22030359)
> The reason is so that these loans are low risk (no risk?) to those providing the loans.

They aren't, particularly; they are low risk to those buying the loans, not to the issuer (even with the difficulty on discharging them) who is, after all, the guarantor.

Well, except in the sense that the issuer can literally just fiat dollars into existence whenever it chooses, so essentially all dollar- denominated debt is zero-risk.

Re:Judge rules that student loan debt is dischargeable in ba... by roenxi on Sunday January 12, 2020 @06:25PM (#22030471)
Printing money still represents a risk; the taxpayers provided real resources to people who then aren't going to pay them back resources back. If they are happy with that it is because they don't understand it rather than that the situation is acceptable.

If the American government is going to print money so people can go to college, why not print money for everything? The idea is much worse than an income tax because with money printing nobody knows who is losing out. We know by raw balance equations that someone who would have gotten something real now isn't but there is no way to identify who or what.

That level of confusion can't possibly be a good idea. "Just print money and solve the problem" is a dangerous approach and really better dropped from the conversation. Playing word & number games to pretend something real didn't happen is a bad direction to take politics.

Re:Judge rules that student loan debt is dischargeable in ba... by ethbro on Sunday January 12, 2020 @06:23PM (#22030460)
It's an interesting point...

Hypothetically, there's no reason the US government couldn't structure its loan program thusly:

(A) Originate loans for existing fiscal year, (B) bundle multiple loans together / blind desired loan details (e.g. lendee race, etc), (C) auction off loans on the open market, (D) require budgeting for next fiscal year loan program on the basis of previous year's auction.

You'd get the benefit of price / cost discovery while controlling for unfairness as desired?

There'd need to be some legal papering to deal with the outcome lag, but it seems more responsive than the tossing money down a well we do now.

Re:Judge rules that student loan debt is dischargeable in ba... by godelski on Sunday January 12, 2020 @08:26PM (#22031111)
This sounds eerily similar to what happened with mortgages before the recession. This may be naive, but what's the difference here and why would your suggestion not be as dangerous as the tranches sold previously. My understanding is that the system fell because these were being falsely rated, under the presumption that everyone pays off their mortgage. But the issue was that people were taking out mortgages that they could never repay (though they were being sold that they could). This definitely sounds similar to student loans to me.
Re:Judge rules that student loan debt is dischargeable in ba... by ethbro on Monday January 13, 2020 @12:11AM (#22031995)
(Finance isn't my primary job, so happy to be corrected)

Firstly, leverage. A lack of rules and enforcement allowed unreasonable amounts of capital to amass around mortgage bets. Without the crazy leverage via derivatives, the mortgage crisis would have been "A lot of loans go bad and some people get fired." Limit via regulation.

Secondly, capital requirements. My understanding is that mortgage-backed securities are treated preferentially in terms of where a bank legally can allocate capital. Consequently, as they had to find returns somewhere, they constantly needed to plow huge amounts of money into the market. Inflows of money >> smart money meant that price discovery broke down: those who cared were drowned out. You'd need to avoid structuring taxes, etc to artificially force capital into this scheme.