Comments about ‘How will students pay for soaring debt? Tax the rich, Senator Warren says’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, March 11 2014 6:15 p.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Salt Lake City, UT

@cjb " In the 1970's it was. It was possible at that time for a student who was living at home to work all summer and use that money to completely pay for books and tuition the following academic year. Between then and now something has changed. Identify in detail what those changes are so we can go back to the way it was then."

It's pretty easy to explain. Most higher ed is public. States has steadily lowered their subsidy of higher ed. Sallie Mae, the agency which makes student loans was sold off to commercial banks which made it a profit center. And this whole process was compounded by a stagnant real wage from the late 1970's 'til now - this makes the educational expense really bite. There you have it - a perfect storm for young people. See "Inequality for All." for more details.

Ernest T. Bass
Bountiful, UT

Whats foolish is that student loans have interest rates of at least 8% while the government loans billions to banks at less than 1%.
If anyone wants to talk about something foolish, try to justify that.

Saint George, UT

What fools! Here is my challenge! If what all the progressive socialists say is true, then let's just confiscate all their wealth, nationalize all corporations and by law equalize every wage in the country! Surely, surely, then everyone will be happy and peace will reside in the heart of every man, women, and child, but especially the liberal progressives!

St. George, UT

What is preventing Buffett and Gates from paying more in taxes? They should just pay 90% of their earnings every year. Stop whining about it and do it. All of the other liberals should raise their own taxes too. That way we wouldn't have to hear the constant complaining from them. I say use the same funding system as God does and tax everyone at a flat rate. Lets say 15%. That would work. Seems to work for the LDS church.

Salt Lake City, UT

@Al Thepal "Most millionaires and billionaires have earned their money." They "work" at protecting and expanding their fortunes. But they don't sweat like us of the middle class. They can hire any sort of expertise they need to protect themselves. An interesting example is sugar. Why do we have to put up with fructose corn syrup in our pop, while the rest of world gets to drink real pop with sugar? The big sugar billionaires of Florida have paid both the major parties to keep sugar tariffs high. So sugar is artificially expensive in the U.S. This is just one example among many.

It's important to understand the difference between the world of high finance and the one most of us live in. It has a bearing on everything including the student loan disaster.

Centerville, UT

There must be an election coming because the Democrat machine of class warfare is ramping up again.

Boise, ID

Let me simplify her thinking for everyone. "So we need more money to spend. Hey, those guys have money. Let's take money from them because they have some and I want it. We deserve their money because they have more." The end.


A lot of interesting responses here. If there are circumstances where Millionaires pay less tax than middle class folks, that should be examined. So she might have something here. Of course its a politician saying it so the claim should be looked into.

Salt Lake City, UT

@David "There must be an election coming because the Democrat machine of class warfare is ramping up again." You mean we actually have "classes," like in class struggle like in Marx?

Salt Lake City, UT

Unfortunately, Elizabeth Warren learned the wrong lesson from Robin Hood. As Ayn Rand put it:

"It is said that [Robin Hood] fought against the looting rulers and returned the loot to those who had been robbed, but that is not the meaning of the legend which has survived. He is remembered, not as a champion of property, but as a champion of need, not as a defender of the robbed, but as a provider of the poor. He is held to be the first man who assumed a halo of virtue by practicing charity with wealth which he did not own, by giving away goods which he had not produced, by making others pay for the luxury of his pity."

Senator Warren, please don't use the money that I have earned and achieved myself to pay for your pity.

Ogden, UT

I worked in the evenings during school year (2 jobs in the summer), served in the church, and had a small family with no debt. My wife and I both graduated the same day. Now we have a business with 300+ employees. Takes hard work and sacrifice but can be done. Worth the effort. Frustrated with government's proposed solutions - an indication of how far off track this country is.

Eagle Mountain, UT


What you failed to mention about Robin Hood is that he was not stealing from the rich - he was stealing oppressive tax money back from the oppressive government and returning it to the over taxed people. He was exactly the opposite of a social justice crusader. He would have been throwing tea in Boston Harbor.

Marxist - Conservatives want everyone to have the opportunity to attain any "class" in society (ie. no classes). Liberals are trying to create the classes and keep everyone there.

USS Enterprise, UT

To "marxist" I will agree to restore the 1950's tax rates if we can also revert the entire tax code to teh 1950's.

Salt Lake City, UT

I agree with you. The problem is not Robin Hood, but the lesson that Democrats have learned from him. Please reread the quote. To Elizabeth Warren, Robin Hood was not a champion of property (as you suggest), but a champion of need. And therein lies the problem!

Goodyear, AZ

Some have argued that the rich should "pay their fair share" in taxes. What is their "fair share"?

The top 10% currently pay 70% of federal income tax, even though they earn only 45% of income. 70% isn't fair? What is fair? 80%? 90%? Should the top 10% of earners pay all of the taxes?

Seriously, liberals keep using the term "fair share" but never tell us what that is.

USS Enterprise, UT

Oh, I forgot to mention. After you read this article, read the article "Borrowers using student loans for cash, not a degree", also in today's news.

Now tell me why we should make it easier for people to get quick cash, and then make it cheaper to pay back?

West Jordan, UT

Agreed on the Flat Tax comment. This is the only real way to do taxes in the first place. This would be a progressive tax already, and fair to the lowest income earners (there is a poverty level income where nothing is taxed and everything else above that is taxed at the same rate).

There is a great book on this called The Flat Tax, a must read for any serious student of tax changes.

Federal Way, WA

The proposal is not foolish. Millionaires get rich off of others who pay for their products or work for them. Since the Reagan years, the trickle down theory began and since then, prices have skyrocketed. It does NOT work.

It used to be affordable back in the 70's. Find out why and go back to those days on how colleges were funded. Also colleges are not being built like they used to. So many colleges are filled up and hence the reason it is costly. It's a paradox isn't it?

There is a Sales Tax where it will be put in place and no more will we have federal taxes. It will become the pay taxes as you go. It's a good plan and gaining momentum. The Fair Tax Organization is pushing for this and it's looking good.

Bottom line is students are paying way too much for college on the average part. To blame the student is illogical. The student is trying to work hard towards graduation and looks forward to doing good work. It is hurting our nation when our average students are forced to go into deep debt.

Eagle, ID

@AllBlack and like-minded. I believe those who are using terms like "bad idea",etc., ARE offering up ideas. But progressives don't acknowledge such. One such idea is to not focus on hitting the rich with more of their "fair share" when what is "fair" has not been fully defined; and when you actually look at it the top 10% pay %70 of the taxes already. This student dept (or government debt) issue has multiple causes, but it is guaranteed that further taxing the rich (however good that makes the non-rich feel) as a means of addressing the underlying problem will not solve the problem. In fact, Warren's proposal would actually make it worse. Part of the problem with ever rising tuition costs is the loan program itself. You can research that if you care. Personal responsibility and accountability (or lack thereof) is another contributing factor. Fixing loopholes in the current tax code would help. Pursuing degrees that don't lead to an income stream sufficient to support oneself and pay back the loans is a problem. Gov charging 8% interest is yet another issue. Why is it that higher taxes and more spending is usually the only progressive solution?

Houston, TX

I think calling it the Buffet rule is appropriate, because liberals see higher taxes as a Dinner Buffet, where they can keep funding new entitlements.

First stop: Use taxes on millionaires to fund loans for higher education.

Next stop: you can choose a "public option" for lower cost education if you go to a liberal school, or you can pay "Gold Level" tuition rates if you go to a conservative university. Social engineering at its finest. That would buy lots of Democrat votes.

Final stop: a single payer system for education, all funded by the federal government. Of course, the government would totally dictate what is taught.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments