lkf725

I agree with the parental responsibility called for by 2by2. It's tough to say "no", but sometimes you just gotta do it. I know that we felt terrible when we didn't send our son to his first choice college. But H pulled up lists of earnings for BS engineers and proved to us that son would not make substantially more income graduating from the $45K school than the $20K school. We could afford the $20K school. As neither the parents nor the son were willing to take on that much debt for the dream college, the decision was made. Now, three years later, we are all quite relieved that we made the choice we did. Graduating debt free gives the student many options in life.

Dusty, we crossed posts, but I just wanted to comment that I would think that somebody who had lived in situations of harsh financial reality would be exactly the person who would make realistic decisions. H grew up with no financial support - zero - and that's why he is now so careful about every dollar. The thought of $100K debt would push him (and me too) over the edge!

mojojojo69

how could his parents say no to him wanting an education? Is it not the nations responsibility for a PUBLIC school to be an affordable college? were the parents mislead into believing it was affordable based on the belief that a public education is meant to be affordable? certainly.

UCBChemEGrad

Student loan/college cost reform is needed. This student loan industry is beginning to look like the mortgage industry during the last boom cycle.

Vulnerable students are being preyed upon by private loan companies and given huge loans at interest rates they don't have a chance to repay.

When you are saddled with a huge debt burden, and are unable to find a job, this situation is very corrosive to self esteem.

I wish Jason had seeked help for his situation instead of deciding to end it as he tragically did. He seemed to have a good head on his shoulders...how many people go on to get masters degrees in chemistry? Unfortunately, his potentially bright future was clouded with a financial burden he thought he could not escape.

It is likely Jason got larger student loans to cover additional expenses, perhaps on-campus housing and textbooks.

2by2

EVerybody wants to blame somebody, the point is that I am sure that some responsibility lies with everyone- however to say the loan companies caused the young man to kill himself is just the problem.

And Mojo- there are schools that are not only affordable but free- they usually aren't the ones that people want to go to. My husband went to a lowly city college, lived at home- the reason he chose to save for the kids education was because he wanted them to be able to have choices he didn't. He could have taken out loans, had no support from family but chose not to. Opportunity is there but you do have to work for it and sometimes you have to humble yourself and take jobs or go to schools that you may not deem worthy of your intellect. I think the point is the article is misleading in the fact that there was more to this young mans story than just repaying loans that the evil loan companies "tricked" him into taking out. He was not a stupid person- he just made bad choices. Every choice we make has consequences!!!!

mojojojo69

You cant blame him for his choices because resources were not available to him (since he is/was poor). If you are not educated, then how can you know of the "available choices" let alone in a place like illinois, i mean, do you think that he could have found a free college in illinois? lol. c'mon now...lets be real.

what are you talking about? he did take jobs. He was temporarily employed! did you not read the article!

eva10127

another sad story. RIP

07DAD

mojojojo69--you don't seem to grasp that many people EARN their way through college and graduate/professional school and do so without loans.

My father paid for his college and professional school without one cent of help from "the nation," his parents (who had nothing) or loans. He'd work for awhile and attend school for awhile. I recall him talking about being at a free dance and worrying that his date might ask for a coke because he didn't have any money.

I paid every penny of professional school from money I earned. Once again, no government handouts or loans.

I have three friends all in their very early 30s. All three paid every penny of college. One lived at home and went to CC while he saved to afford to finish at a 4 year college. No government subsidies or loans.

My S is currently in college. HE could not afford several of the colleges where he got accepted. So, he's not attending those colleges. When we discussed some government loan offers HE decided that he's figure out another way to do it so that he didn't have that debt.

Hard work, doing only what you can afford and when you can afford it and refusing to put yourself in debt is an option available to everyone who wants an education.

You seem to think Yoder couldn't figure these things out. It is not like Yoder was ignorant. He obviously had a high school education before college and a college degree before his master's program. He had to apply for admission to the schools he attended. He had to apply for the loans. Foolish? Maybe yes. But, "duped"? Not hardly.

Also, other than sending out resumes, the article only says that he helped his mother open her tea room. There is not one other indication in the article that Yoder worked during those 12 years other than to assist his mother in this limited way.

He took out loans just like many people do for a variety of purposes. Is it a lender's "fault" that you borrowed money if you end up losing a car or house you financed because you don't pay back the money? Of course not.

The lender may have made a risky loan and to my way of thinking should not expect any government assistance when the defaults occur, but that doesn't mean that the borrower should be pitied.

The problem with loans for education is that the "product" (the education) is not collateral that can be repo-ed and sold. Yoder got his education on other people's money. They have a right to get it paid back.

We will never know what all was going on in his head, but the larger issues are easy to identify. It is the solution that is more illusive. Yours seems to be have "the government" or "the nation" guarantee everyone an "affordable" college education.

I assume you mean that public college should be available to all citizens and free regardless of whether the citizen can afford to pay for it. Otherwise, all you are suggesting is that "poor" people should get a free ride at the expense of others.

Just who do you think is going to pay for that "right"? The professors don't work for free. The utility companies don't give it away. If the government is to pay for it, that means there is going to have to be taxes paid to fund it.

I suggest that those who believe that "we, the people", i.e., the government, should pay for this go ahead and find a needy student and give them the money for college. In other words, put their personal money where their mouth is. Then, they can suggest that the rest of us help pay for this "right."

tokenadult

He already had that K through 12.

mojojojo69

07 dad, you make me laugh.

This is 2007, schools have enough endowment to help students out without loans. You are definately not 07dad, more like '48Dad.

Ever heard of UVa (public), Harvard, Princeton, or even Emory university? All of them cap their loans and provide families with an income below the poverty line with all grants, covering their tuition, room, and board.

Its time for more schools and even the nation to reform loans!

UCBChemEGrad

We don't know all the facts. 07DAD raises good points.

Perhaps Jason Yoder did not start his college career until later in his life.

A tragedy happens and blame can be placed in a lot of places:
1. Mr. Yoder took out those loans...he had an obligation to pay them back.
2. Mr. Yoder's family and friends for not obtaining proper assistance for a troubled person.
3. Mr. Yoder's university for providing him access to a lab approximately one year after graduation in which he utilized nitrogen to asphyxiate himself.
4. Businesses for not hiring a qualified candidate.
5. Finally, the student loan company/government for providing too large and expensive of loans to be paid back, and for not providing adequate options for financial distress relief.

goaliedad

Uh, just because he got a masters in a scientific field doesn't mean he is educated enough to make sound financial decisions concerning financing an education. Especially considering that the early decisions were made with little more than a high school education.

Reminds me of a story about a chemical engineering major ex-roommate of my college roommates. He was a brilliant chemist. Had a perfect 4.0 GPA at one of the country's top schools. Had a half dozen patents to his name while working summer jobs for Eastman Kodak. Didn't figure out that he had to remove the plastic wrapper and box from the frozen pizza and almost burned the apartment down.

Point here is that what you and I assume is common sense (don't get yourself in debt up to your neck for a college education), isn't necessarily common sense to some very educated people.

Personally, if they are going to continue to run the college loan business the way they are (see my earlier post on why this is a moral hazard), they darn well better make sure they educate high school seniors on college financing including presenting a financially sound plan for how they plan to budget to pay back the loans they take BEFORE the student is allowed to sign the first bank loan.

The current system as it is set up is defective in that it allows financially unsound loan practices with the force of air-tight bankruptcy laws to punish unsophisticated young people with a lifetime of debt for a financial decision they truly do not understand the ramifications of. We've made much more protective consumer oriented rules in other lending (yet some people get in way over their heads) because they don't understand the papers they are signing. But at least these people can walk away from these bad decisions and not ruin their lives. It makes the risk of failure a shared risk between loan holder and borrower. Can't say that much for student loans.

I'm not trying to assign blame. Blame is useless. I'm just saying from an analytical perspective that the process creates a financial failure because of certain missing factors (education of borrowers and a perceived (by lender) elimination of risk through tough bankruptcy rules). This combination will continue to lead the unsophisticated down the path to disaster until it is changed.

Unfortunately in this case, the mental health of the individual involved was not factored in to this either leading to a very sad ending beyond most. Let's face it, not everyone can handle the stress of being in such a situation. It is a foreseeable thing from a statistical perspective.

sixshot1

there are some horrible people on this website...

Majesa

This article has been bugging me all day. I have so many friends that, in just their freshman year, are pulling out 15k, 20k, one even 30k. Parents just signed on the dotted line so they could go to their dream schools, and I don't know...just irks me to think about the fact that they don't even care about it. Most of them aren't even going to think about it until 4 years from now or next year when it's time for the next loan.

It's not completely the fault of the loan companies, but I don't think any of them care at all about student debt. I understand it's a business, but the interest rates are incredibly high to be any form of aid. 14.75% on 15k isn't cute in the slightest, and at some point the government should step in. I'm sweating at the thought getting a loan now.

07DAD

The non-dischargeability of student loans has been an aspect of bankruptcy law for a long time. It substantailly pre-dates the 2005 amendments to the Bankruptcy Code that made Chapter 7 more difficult to qualify for.

A student loan is un-collateralized. Therefore, since the future income of the student is to provide repayment the loan is risky by definition. The interest rates reflect that risk.

So far, the posters have suggested that (1) the schools expend their endowment funds to allow students to attend and (2) let the government "fix" the problem.

Nobody seems to dispute that the government "fix" is nothing more than spending tax dollars to subsidize college for only a portion of the citizens.

The use of endowments assumes that the private college sufficiently values a particular student with substantial need. So long as the demand for the slots at that school from those who can pay is sufficiently high, they are not going to do that as a matter of course although they may for the "exceptional" student. And, guess what? They already do this.

It seems clear that what we are really debating is what to do with those that are needy, but not sufficiently exceptional. Well, I cannot come up with any other enterprise where one could rationally suggest the enterprise give away its services unless it saw a value in doing so.

Majesa-- your instincts are good. Avoid loans if you can. I would point out that you referred to loans as "aid." Loans are not aid, they have to be paid back and the interest charged is ALWAYS a consideration. I want to compliment you. Several posters have indicated that high school students need special education to understand the risk of debt financing of education. You appear to have "gotten it" without special ed.

lkf725

I'm with you Majesa. I don't really care too much about people who choose to take huge loans to attend the dream school. That's their business. But it does really annoy me that colleges send the financial aid packages and include loans as part of their financial aid. HA! I can take out loans on my own, thank you very much. Don't tell me I can borrow and call it "aid". The only aid is money that is free.