Personal Finance

3803 readers

1 users here now

Learn about budgeting, saving, getting out of debt, credit, investing, and retirement planning. Join our community, read the PF Wiki, and get on top of your finances!

Note: This community is not region centric, so if you are posting anything specific to a certain region, kindly specify that in the title (something like [USA], [EU], [AUS] etc.)

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

nieceandtows

[email protected]

should I pay off my student loans in full before intrest kicks in? (lemm.ee)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

General financials:

I can afford to pay them off in full and have plenty left over for general life needs

The interest rates on them should be 4.53% according to their chart of when it was awarded.

If I do hold onto the money and pay off monthly I can put everything into a CD but I'll still be losing .03% if I lock in the student loan money maybe I'll beat but .07-.43% so not a ton of upside unless there's sudden political will to actually follow through on student loan forgiveness.

Is there anything else I'm missing when considering this? I am leaning towards just pay off as I've been planning for this, but I want to make sure there isn't something else to do.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Interesting you say SCOTUS legislating from the bench in this case. Deferment and forgiveness were both "legislated" from the White House. Seems the only party not legislating here is the legislature.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

No, they weren't. Congress passed laws giving the executive that authority.

It was in fact legislated by the legislature.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think it's disingenuous to make it sound that simple.

If Congress supported forgiveness, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Whether they had implicitly given that power to the executive with previous legislation is controversial, thus the SCOTUS case. But it's not like SCOTUS was the first to question it. Pelosi and even Biden had previously stated it was not an executive power.

Again, it could be easily settled now by the legislature if they supported it, but they do not.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I think it's disingenuous to say it's not that simple. Because it is.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Under powers that were explicitly granted to the White House by the legislature. You can doubt their validity all you want, but they’re there—including the right of the secretary to “waive or modify”—WAIVE or modify—“the existing provisions.” It’s quoted in the majority opinion then ignored by the ruling.

That is the apple being legislated into a banana.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

I guess you must know more about law than Biden did 2 years ago when he publically talked about probably not having the authority: https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/17/student-loan-forgiveness-biden-469677

It's nowhere near that straightforward. And for a third time, if it was the intent of Congress, now would be the time for them to clarify that with direct legislation. But they are not.