WASHINGTON PROPOSES $1 TRILLION BAILOUT FOR DELINQUENT STUDENT LOANS

A possible $1 trillion bailout is coming—and soon.

America’s now-nationalized student loan industry just reached a value of $1 trillion, according to Citigroup, growing at a 20 percent-per-year pace. Since President Obama nationalized the industry (a tacked-on provision of the Obamacare bill), tuition has gone up 25 percent and the three-year default rate is at a record 13.4 percent.

Ron discussed this problem last night with Larry Kudlow:

With many young people unable to pay their loans (average graduating debt is about $29,000), Citigroup and others are speculating that this industry might be ripe for a bailout.

To pay off all the current defaults, Citigroup says it would cost taxpayers $74 billion. However, this number doesn’t include those who will default in the coming years, and, when the government rewards the defaulters, it will encourage more borrowers not to pay their debts.

And liberals in Congress have proposed forgiving all student loans via “The Student Loan Forgiveness Act 2012,” costing taxpayers $1 trillion.

Adding another $1 trillion dollars to the national debt isn’t exactly “forgiveness” for young people—it’s prolonging the payoff. In fact, student loan bailouts are a catch-22 for young people because they’re going to be held accountable for paying off the national debt and interest payments.

A student loan bailout will also be rewarding higher education bureaucrats for a diminished product. A college degree used to mean that a person would add on average $1 million to their income over their lifetime. Today a college degree only guarantees an average $300,000 in added income over a lifetime.

The answer isn’t a bailout. The student loan industry must to be returned to the private sector. Would a private lender ever invest $100,000 of their money in a student that had no plan? No.

It’s not about limiting access to college; it’s about making sure students have a well-thought out plan for their future before investors put a $100,000 stake in their education. College should be about specializing in a trade rather than defaulting to general studies that won’t lead to a job.

A civics education is important, but why would an employer hire someone with no applicable work skills, especially in a slow economy?

If we wish to end the incentives for bailouts, we need to hit higher education in the purse. Endless government money and bailouts won’t get our students jobs, and it won’t fix the problem.

Ron Meyer is the press secretary and a spokesman for American Majority Action. Celia Bigelow is the Campus Director for the same organization. Learn more at AmericanMajorityAction.org.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

CONGRESSMAN: OBAMA'S TAX INCREASES FUND GOVERNMENT FOR EIGHT DAYS

President Barack Obama has proposed raising taxes on the rich to put America's fiscal house in order, but critics say federal spending is so massive that the wealthy don't have enough money to cover the nation's unprecedented debt.

In an interview with MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell, Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) said President Barack Obama's plan to raise taxes on the wealthy would only generate enough revenue to fund the federal government for eight days.

"The president’s plan to increase taxes on the upper two percent covers the spending by this federal government not for eight years, not for eight months, not for eight weeks but for eight days. Eight days only," said Mr. Price. "It’s not a real solution. So, again, I’m puzzled by an administration that seems to be more interested in raising tax rates than in gaining economic vitality."

The problem is that the rich don't have enough money to put so much as a dent in America's $16 trillion national debt. "If the IRS grabbed 100 percent of income over $1 million, the take would be just $616 billion," writes John Stossel. "That’s only a third of this year’s deficit. Our national debt would continue to explode."

Still, Mr. Obama's supporters persist in proposing tax hikes on the wealthy. On Sunday, billionaire Warren Buffett proposed a minimum tax for America's top earners. "We need Congress, right now, to enact a minimum tax on high incomes. I would suggest 30 percent of taxable income between $1 million and $10 million, and 35 percent on amounts above that."

There's just one problem with such an approach, says author Mark Steyn:

If you took every single penny that Warren Buffett has, it'd pay for 4-1/2 days of the US government. This tax-the-rich won't work. The problem here is the government is way bigger than even the capacity of the rich to sustain it. The Buffett Rule would raise $3.2 billion a year, and take 514 years just to pay off Obama's 2011 budget deficit.

Indeed, even Mr. Buffett seems to concede that he and the president's "soak the rich" proposals are more an act of political theater designed to generate an emotional response than serious solutions: Mr. Buffett told Matt Lauer he believes his proposal would boost the "morale of the middle class." 

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

ObamaCare's Insurance Exchange Nightmare

When the Supreme Court upheld ObamaCare as a tax last summer, President Obama may have thought he could breathe a little easier. But now with the implementation of the law, Obama is just beginning his war with the states that refuse to implement ObamaCare exchanges needed for the legislation to work properly or at least, quickly.

The Obama administration faces major logistical and financial challenges in creating health insurance exchanges for states that have declined to set up their own systems.

The exchanges were designed as the centerpiece of President Obama’s signature law, and are intended to make buying health insurance comparable to booking a flight or finding a compatible partner on Match.com.

Sixteen states — most of them governed by Republicans — have said they will not set up their own systems, forcing the federal government to come up with one instead.

Another five states said they want a federal-state partnership, while four others are considering partnerships.

It's a situation no one anticipated when the Affordable Care Act was written. The law assumed states would create and operate their own exchanges, and set aside billions in grants for that purpose.

Essentially, states denying the exchanges forces the feds to do the work, as they should considering it is a federal law that balloons state budgets.

The work of beginning to implement the exchanges comes just in time for the fiscal cliff. Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor have hinted ObamaCare may be on the table as a negotiating piece for a deal.

The president’s health care law adds a massive, expensive, unworkable government program at a time when our national debt already exceeds the size of our country’s entire economy. We can’t afford it, and we can’t afford to leave it intact. That’s why I’ve been clear that the law has to stay on the table as both parties discuss ways to solve our nation’s massive debt challenge.

Meanwhile, the majority of Americans still despise ObamaCare and want it repealed.

Fifty percent (50%) of Likely U.S. Voters favor repeal of President Obama’s national health care law, while 44% are opposed to repeal, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

Via: TownHall

Continue Reading...