While you seem like a nice enough fellow, HB, I do not want to pay for your education. You may be excited about the prospect of having somebody "forgive" your debt, but many of those who would be paying for the government's "forgiveness" are angered at the prospect. It is your debt, not mine.

 

Once again, I'll bring up the military argument. Why aren't you upset that you are paying for many debts of people in the military?

4) I think basing your vote for the President based solely on this issue (relax, HB, I'm not directing this comment specifically to you) is short-sighted and selfish. If you truly think Hillary is the best overall candidate for President, then so be it. But if you disagree with just about everything she stands for and are simply enticed by her offer that she may absolve you of loans YOU should be paying back yourself, she should NOT be your choice for President.

 

Let me say this. I realize the last comment was not directed at me specifically, but I feel it is necessary to explain.

 

I have not made a decision who I am voting for. I simply have not done enough research, and I don't know which candidate would be the best one. I still might vote either way.

So it's okay for the military, but not okay for public service jobs? How?

 

First off, because we no longer have a draft, it is a way to entice people to enlist for a job that I assure you the vast majority of Americans do not want. There is not a similar recruitment issue for public service jobs. In fact, it's probably not an overstatement to say that you have the opportunity to be employed in public sector jobs because of the freedoms protected for by our military.

 

Second, military service has historically been a very low paying job. The GI Bill helps offsets this pay disparity by providing them with college benefits after they have provided their service to our country.

 

And lastly, while there are indeed many public service jobs that entail elements of hazard and danger, they are in no way comparable to the type of "life-on-the-line" duty provided by our men and women in the service. I'm not disparaging any profession - certainly not my own - but no profession can compare with the number of ultimate sacrifices made by our service personnel.

While you seem like a nice enough fellow, HB, I do not want to pay for your education. You may be excited about the prospect of having somebody "forgive" your debt, but many of those who would be paying for the government's "forgiveness" are angered at the prospect. It is your debt, not mine.

 

I think that all of us get that no one wants to pay for someone else's debt. That much is obvious.

 

The real questions are, do you want to attract the best and brightest minds to educate your kids? Or are you OK with the current state of affairs in KY education? Would you rather have the best trained policemen protecting your area of residence, or is the "cheap" version just fine by you.

 

More importantly, what if people decide that pursuing these professions is not a worthwhile cause due to the lack of pay? What does that say about our society? That pursuing money is more important than educating our youth and protecting our citizens?

First off, because we no longer have a draft, it is a way to entice people to enlist for a job that I assure you the vast majority of Americans do not want. There is not a similar recruitment issue for public service jobs. In fact, it's probably not an overstatement to say that you have the opportunity to be employed in public sector jobs because of the freedoms protected for by our military.

 

Second, military service has historically been a very low paying job. The GI Bill helps offsets this pay disparity by providing them with college benefits after they have provided their service to our country.

 

And lastly, while there are indeed many public service jobs that entail elements of hazard and danger, they are in no way comparable to the type of "life-on-the-line" duty provided by our men and women in the service. I'm not disparaging any profession - certainly not my own - but no profession can compare with the number of ultimate sacrifices made by our service personnel.

 

Education has historically been a very low paying job. As are social workers. What measure is being provided to these people to "offset the pay disparity"? Are these positons any less important than serving in the military? IMO, we cannot surivive without either.

Once again, I'll bring up the military argument. Why aren't you upset that you are paying for many debts of people in the military?

Apples and oranges. If people volunteered to risk their lives in the service of their country in exchange for a pay and benefit package, the government has already made the commitment to them. In your case, and in the case of others in your situation, you accepted a loan with an acceptable interest rate with the expectation of paying it back in full someday. Hillary is proposing to change the rules after the fact to buy the votes of you and other students to eat into Obama's huge lead among your age group.

 

The size of federal wage and benefits packages are now double those of the average person working in the private sector. Why should aspiring bureaucrats enjoy yet another benefit not offered to those who work in the private sector?

I think that all of us get that no one wants to pay for someone else's debt. That much is obvious.

 

The real questions are, do you want to attract the best and brightest minds to educate your kids? Or are you OK with the current state of affairs in KY education? Would you rather have the best trained policemen protecting your area of residence, or is the "cheap" version just fine by you.

 

More importantly, what if people decide that pursuing these professions is not a worthwhile cause due to the lack of pay? What does that say about our society? That pursuing money is more important than educating our youth and protecting our citizens?

I believe that most teachers and other government employees are already paid what they are worth (or more). The truly outstanding government sectory employees are no doubt underpaid because of the refusal of organizations like the NEA to allow government to base salaries on merit.

 

Just as it is in the private sector, if jobs are being filled at current pay rates and turnover is acceptablly low, compensation is adequate.

Education has historically been a very low paying job. As are social workers. What measure is being provided to these people to "offset the pay disparity"? Are these positons any less important than serving in the military? IMO, we cannot surivive without either.

Yes, those jobs are less important than military jobs. My job is also less important than the jobs of those who serve to provide national security. Without security, no job or American life is safe. If anybody is underpaid and under appreciated in this country, it is the young men and women who serve in our military.

The real questions are, do you want to attract the best and brightest minds to educate your kids? Or are you OK with the current state of affairs in KY education? Would you rather have the best trained policemen protecting your area of residence, or is the "cheap" version just fine by you.

 

More importantly, what if people decide that pursuing these professions is not a worthwhile cause due to the lack of pay? What does that say about our society? That pursuing money is more important than educating our youth and protecting our citizens?

 

So you're assuming that we are currently attracting lesser quality individuals in those professions??? People like myself? Who obtained my four-year degree and went into this profession despite knowing that I would have to pay back a substantial amount in student loans? I would strongly submit that paying for college education yourself means you are attracting those individuals that are truly interested and committed to pursuing and excelling in that field, as evidenced by the fact they are willing to take on substantial debts to do so. And, since I am in the law enforcement field and take a great deal of pride in my profession, I take a bit of umbrage at your insinuation that I am a "cheap" version of what you wrongly assume you could or should be getting.

 

Your last paragraph is so far off base it's hard to know where to respond. There are NOT currently, nor have there recently been, recruitment issues in any of these public service fields, regardless of any pay disparity issues you perceive there to be. No one has ever said it's not important to educate our youth. Only that if you want to obtain higher education, the burden of this cost should be on the student and not the government (with the exception of the military, which is a special case and well-deserving). Higher education is a privilege and not a right. Good Lord, where do you think the government will come up with all this money to pay for free education for all these people? From people like me, who paid for his own college education and went into this line of work DESPITE the fact that no one offered such a ridiculous entitlement to me.

 

Oh, one other thing, since you're so willing to hand over billions of dollars to pay for free education for these people BEFORE they actually enter into this line of work (as opposed to the GI Bill, which pays for education after a servicemen's discharge), how are you going to ensure that people actually enter into the profession for which they were freely educated? And exactly how long will they be required to work in that profession? A year? 2 years? 5 years? And since you feel these jobs are so incredibly low-paying, explain to me again why all these brilliants minds are going to be attracted to these fields? Simply because you are going to pay for their education? All these brilliant minds are going to gleefully accept these low-paying jobs because you saved them $20-30 K?

Education has historically been a very low paying job. As are social workers. What measure is being provided to these people to "offset the pay disparity"? Are these positons any less important than serving in the military? IMO, we cannot surivive without either.

 

No one has said or implied that public service positions are not important. They are hugely important. So are a bunch of non-public service positons - people like doctors and engineers and lawyers. You don't also propose to pay for their education, do you? But if you honestly need to have it explained why the military provides a very unique and special job for our country - all at a very low pay rate scale - that makes it worthy of rewarding them after their service by helping pay for their education, that's a real shame. I'm going to go out on the line here and guess you never served in the military?

Yes, those jobs are less important than military jobs. My job is also less important than the jobs of those who serve to provide national security. Without security, no job or American life is safe. If anybody is underpaid and under appreciated in this country, it is the young men and women who serve in our military.

If you don't think teachers are just as important, try to get in the military without a high school diploma.

If you don't think teachers are just as important, try to get in the military without a high school diploma.

I am not knocking teachers, but without a country, there would be no American schools. Soldiers would exist, with or without education, or the country itself would cease to exist. One might argue that an uneducated military would be unable to effectively protect us in a modern world, but one cannot deny that our enemies would invade if nobody was willing to put his life on the line to protect our way of life.

If you don't think teachers are just as important, try to get in the military without a high school diploma.

 

What earthly difference does having a high school diploma make as to the "value" of someone's job? I have a good friend that is a firefighter that has never seen the inside of a college classroom. Does he have an important job? (I going to go out on the line here and say "yes.) Ranking the value or importance of jobs is a pretty arbitrary and subjective process. But anyone who says that the jobs of our military men and women don't rank right at top of any such list need to contemplate on some of the freedoms and rights we enjoy in this country.

If you can get the military to pay for your student loans you acquire before joining you should do it. I may be wrong, but I don't think that is how it works. The State Police also have a program to assist in paying for college of their troopers, as do some other state agencies, also some local governments.

What you are talking about is the Federal government paying off loans students promised to pay yourself prior to their employment. These are two different issues.

I am not knocking teachers

 

I believe that most teachers and other government employees are already paid what they are worth (or more).

 

Teachers are overpaid? :sleep: