Seriously, how much debt are people graduating with to qualify for these adjusted repayment policies. I graduated with 80k and even as the only working body in a 3 person household I don't even come close. Standard repayment plan is not really a struggle
The deal's changed so much. This isn't our generation's problem. The current generation's average debt is $160k, with a high average at UCSF of $230k (and UMN not that much less). That's not terribly burdensome except for the spouse, 2.2 children, and the white picket fence, and then they see their average plumber and electrician be able to provide a higher standard of living then they themselves can provide without the life skills of our parents' generation. And if I remember correctly, npage did a PhD at poverty rates (certainly NIH pre-Doc stipends qualify you for food stamps in most states).
@Zelda840 ,
@npage148 of all people could justify having higher debt than that, so it's not unrealistic to hold debt levels to <$100k if they really are living at poverty wages. But have you been in student housing lately? The rec center? I joke that my students have a better quality of life than we faculty do.
@BMBiology, this fairness issue isn't viewed as a substantial problem internally in government and definitely the pharmacy market is irrelevant to them. It's a problem specifically for pharmacy as non-profit pay rates caught up with chain pharmacies, which really was not the case even a decade ago. Kaiser used to have major problems recruiting and retaining, so they've actually had to up their game to even get reasonable people to work for them although now that there's an overage, they're trying to screw everyone out of the benefits package.
Most people think VA when they think about federal civil service, but I can assure you that the majority of pharmacists do not work for VA, they work for either the uniformed services (which pays astonishingly stingy rates even given their benefits package) or HHS with the General Schedule pay is about 20-30% less than the prevailing wage everywhere else. VA's pay had to go up substantially due to how bad the conditions were (and are) comparatively to a normal hospital. The majority of state civil service plans (including academic) pays beneath the General Schedule such that I can't understand at times why anyone would work for them besides an easy job.
So, pay, fairness, and all that other philosophical crap aside, a benefits program should be taken advantage of for legitimate purposes. If it meant that one has to structure their life to take advantage of it, so be it. The risk of structuring a life for that program is always whether or not there is enough political will to see the program through to get the payoffs. We'll protect our own though. We are monitoring the situation, because in case DoE doesn't pay, Title 38 (VA) and Title 42 (HHS) will assume that responsibility for our own. It always has, and our stautory authority allows us to spend discretionary funds on this and we will.
The curious question is whether benign neglect will see this program through, or the Boomers screw the Millenials again through the program being neutered for future attainments. Elections have consequences, and any dependence on the government for any reason, politics is the price you have to pay for that dependence. Otherwise, how many of us knowing how it's turned out wouldn't become TANF/LIHEAP/FS recipients? You wonder if the addicts have it right in the end, that it doesn't matter.
