Right now borrowers are incentivized to keep low income jobs and avoid settling down (they can’t buy houses anyway) which isn’t exactly excellent from a state perspective.
That kind of sounds like when people say that anyone on welfare could be doing better but chooses not to so they can keep their benefits. Of course there will always be people right on the cusp who determine that the little extra money they'd make by working more hours or trying to get a slightly better job won't make up for what they'd lose (either in benefits or in savings from a lower student loan payment), but anyone who can afford to do significantly better generally tries to do that for a lot of reasons.
Sure but right now you can essentially defer forever under 60k, 60k vs 120k I absolutely agree, but that usually happens in steps and $60k to $70k you might not see a benefit.
Not factoring in the borrowers that still have student loans from a decade or two or three ago and can’t just upend their now-established lives by halting payment. They’ll be forced to keep paying and keep that turd floating, not by choice, mind you.
borrowers are incentivized to keep low income jobs
I don't believe this at all.
I used to calculate garnishments in a previous job. There is a minimum take home pay that you have to get.
A low income job does mean less garnished wages, because you don't make enough to get over the threshold.
It's a similar method that some dead beat parents do to game the system out of having to pay child support. Sometimes they supplement with work under the table so they aren't living crappy lives and sometimes they just live crappy lives. You can live a long time off of spite.
Right now borrowers are incentivized to keep low income jobs and avoid settling down (they can’t buy houses anyway) which isn’t exactly excellent from a state perspective.
That kind of sounds like when people say that anyone on welfare could be doing better but chooses not to so they can keep their benefits. Of course there will always be people right on the cusp who determine that the little extra money they'd make by working more hours or trying to get a slightly better job won't make up for what they'd lose (either in benefits or in savings from a lower student loan payment), but anyone who can afford to do significantly better generally tries to do that for a lot of reasons.
Sure but right now you can essentially defer forever under 60k, 60k vs 120k I absolutely agree, but that usually happens in steps and $60k to $70k you might not see a benefit.
Not factoring in the borrowers that still have student loans from a decade or two or three ago and can’t just upend their now-established lives by halting payment. They’ll be forced to keep paying and keep that turd floating, not by choice, mind you.
I don't believe this at all.
I used to calculate garnishments in a previous job. There is a minimum take home pay that you have to get.
A low income job does mean less garnished wages, because you don't make enough to get over the threshold.
It's a similar method that some dead beat parents do to game the system out of having to pay child support. Sometimes they supplement with work under the table so they aren't living crappy lives and sometimes they just live crappy lives. You can live a long time off of spite.