• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Update: Congress Approval rating goes Lower

nonothing

Well-known member
aplusmnt said:
nonothing said:
Well mrs greg shortly after my 3rd year of college my dad past away,my brother and I then started a bricklaying company and took over payments for my mother's house as my father's his income stopped and my mother had a job that was more volunteer than anything eles.She sold the house and had enough to get a nice little condo about 2 years later.She has only that to her name to this day,and a few rrsp's left from when my father past..So to answer your question if love was help then i got alot of it but as far as money or a home,those i had to earn myself.

Did you finish college?

yes but had to do last year in stints over time
 

nonothing

Well-known member
aplusmnt said:
CattleArmy said:
I have to agree I think there is nothing wrong with kids having to make their way through school. I was raised in a very rural area and went away to college and knew when I did the expenses I had and made there were mine. I was very watchful of my spending and was fortunate to get scholarships that helped my college time.

As you said you were fortunate to get scholarships. Not everyone that wants to go to college is that fortunate.

I do believe that students that want to go to college can usually go if they work for it. But that does not change the fact that it also can have a sometimes unbearable cost. And we are talking about Student loans here, not some sort of hand out.

It is in the best interest of countries to do all they can to further the education of its youth. And that might mean customizing your financial assistance to fit the needs of the different citizens. Sometimes a cookie cutter system is not in the best interest of a country and its citizens.

We offer our children 13 years of free education, and even make it mandatory. Because we believe it is in the best interest of our Children and Nation. Why make it so hard to get 4 more years? If it was worth our tax dollars for the first 13 why not for the next 4? Besides the percentage of those WANTING those extra 4 years are the the motivated, the 13 years prior were required and not all that benefited even wanted it.

Many times tax dollars spent on education are wasted on a bad system. But College has the least risk of wasting money spent on education. Because you know every dollar goes towards those really wanting to learn.

Hey this arguing other countries problems is kind of fun, I see now why you guys do it. :wink: :lol:

point well said,i think all canadians should be given ample finiacial oppertunity to go to college.maybe the government should pick up the dorm tab to help out those that live from home.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
nonothing said:
point well said,i think all canadians should be given ample finiacial oppertunity to go to college.maybe the government should pick up the dorm tab to help out those that live from home.

I would think a fair compromise would be just to make available the necessary loans needed. If the person has to pay it back then you will weed out those lifetime students.

I went to school with an Indian kid that went to college for probably 10 years with out ever becoming anything, he was getting a free ride from the Indians, free everything including room and board. If he would have had to pay it back he might have took it more seriously.
 

Mrs.Greg

Well-known member
aplusmnt said:
nonothing said:
point well said,i think all canadians should be given ample finiacial oppertunity to go to college.maybe the government should pick up the dorm tab to help out those that live from home.

I would think a fair compromise would be just to make available the necessary loans needed. If the person has to pay it back then you will weed out those lifetime students.

I went to school with an Indian kid that went to college for probably 10 years with out ever becoming anything, he was getting a free ride from the Indians, free everything including room and board. If he would have had to pay it back he might have took it more seriously.
Ah Huh...this was my point. Because alot of rural kids cannot get loans because of the land value of thier parents,whether its paid for or not,I want the loans to be made more available because rural kids are not just paying tuition they are paying for everything that runs a home. In theory working along with going to school is an option but I know when my son went some of his classes were in evening,every day was different. Him and his girlfriend worked at jobs either at the Uof A or in the vicinity so the employers understood the time issues. And theres no way that these part time jobs can pay for everything,not in a city that refuses to cap rent increases,and some one bedroom apartments go for upward of 1800 a month.I do not want handouts I want the loans to be made more available to rural students.

NN,that post was directed to CRM not you,but thanks for answering it...kinda nice to know your human :wink:
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Mrs.Greg said:
aplusmnt said:
nonothing said:
point well said,i think all canadians should be given ample finiacial oppertunity to go to college.maybe the government should pick up the dorm tab to help out those that live from home.

I would think a fair compromise would be just to make available the necessary loans needed. If the person has to pay it back then you will weed out those lifetime students.

I went to school with an Indian kid that went to college for probably 10 years with out ever becoming anything, he was getting a free ride from the Indians, free everything including room and board. If he would have had to pay it back he might have took it more seriously.
Ah Huh...this was my point. Because alot of rural kids cannot get loans because of the land value of thier parents,whether its paid for or not,I want the loans to be made more available because rural kids are not just paying tuition they are paying for everything that runs a home. In theory working along with going to school is an option but I know when my son went some of his classes were in evening,every day was different. Him and his girlfriend worked at jobs either at the Uof A or in the vicinity so the employers understood the time issues. And theres no way that these part time jobs can pay for everything,not in a city that refuses to cap rent increases,and some one bedroom apartments go for upward of 1800 a month.I do not want handouts I want the loans to be made more available to rural students.

NN,that post was directed to CRM not you,but thanks for answering it...kinda nice to know your human :wink:

I always thought basing college loans, grants or scholarships on the assets of the parents is ridiculous. When a student goes to college they are now adults. Parents do not have an obligation towards them no longer. Maybe some parents could afford to send the kid to school but they choose not to. Why should the teen be punished because the parents won't help?

If a student gets a college loan it is them that has to pay it back, the parents are not liable for it. So why should the parents assets be the deciding factor in the student qualifying?
 

CattleArmy

Well-known member
aplusmnt said:
Mrs.Greg said:
aplusmnt said:
I would think a fair compromise would be just to make available the necessary loans needed. If the person has to pay it back then you will weed out those lifetime students.

I went to school with an Indian kid that went to college for probably 10 years with out ever becoming anything, he was getting a free ride from the Indians, free everything including room and board. If he would have had to pay it back he might have took it more seriously.
Ah Huh...this was my point. Because alot of rural kids cannot get loans because of the land value of thier parents,whether its paid for or not,I want the loans to be made more available because rural kids are not just paying tuition they are paying for everything that runs a home. In theory working along with going to school is an option but I know when my son went some of his classes were in evening,every day was different. Him and his girlfriend worked at jobs either at the Uof A or in the vicinity so the employers understood the time issues. And theres no way that these part time jobs can pay for everything,not in a city that refuses to cap rent increases,and some one bedroom apartments go for upward of 1800 a month.I do not want handouts I want the loans to be made more available to rural students.

NN,that post was directed to CRM not you,but thanks for answering it...kinda nice to know your human :wink:

I always thought basing college loans, grants or scholarships on the assets of the parents is ridiculous. When a student goes to college they are now adults. Parents do not have an obligation towards them no longer. Maybe some parents could afford to send the kid to school but they choose not to. Why should the teen be punished because the parents won't help?

If a student gets a college loan it is them that has to pay it back, the parents are not liable for it. So why should the parents assets be the deciding factor in the student qualifying?


Come on people if your child doesn't qualify for federal grants then somewhere somehow on some piece of paper you are making money. :shock:
 

Mrs.Greg

Well-known member
CattleArmy said:
aplusmnt said:
Mrs.Greg said:
Ah Huh...this was my point. Because alot of rural kids cannot get loans because of the land value of thier parents,whether its paid for or not,I want the loans to be made more available because rural kids are not just paying tuition they are paying for everything that runs a home. In theory working along with going to school is an option but I know when my son went some of his classes were in evening,every day was different. Him and his girlfriend worked at jobs either at the Uof A or in the vicinity so the employers understood the time issues. And theres no way that these part time jobs can pay for everything,not in a city that refuses to cap rent increases,and some one bedroom apartments go for upward of 1800 a month.I do not want handouts I want the loans to be made more available to rural students.

NN,that post was directed to CRM not you,but thanks for answering it...kinda nice to know your human :wink:

I always thought basing college loans, grants or scholarships on the assets of the parents is ridiculous. When a student goes to college they are now adults. Parents do not have an obligation towards them no longer. Maybe some parents could afford to send the kid to school but they choose not to. Why should the teen be punished because the parents won't help?

If a student gets a college loan it is them that has to pay it back, the parents are not liable for it. So why should the parents assets be the deciding factor in the student qualifying?


Come on people if your child doesn't qualify for federal grants then somewhere somehow on some piece of paper you are making money. :shock:
:roll: :roll: :roll: Honestly,you make NO sence at ALL...they're NOT,I reapeat NOT federal grants...they are LOANS,that the students PAY BACK,this helps them get credit ratings :roll: :roll: You talk about negativity,you come on here and scout out where and who you can be negative to...go back and read you holier then thou posts and come back and debate me on this issue :roll: :roll:
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
CattleArmy said:
aplusmnt said:
Mrs.Greg said:
Ah Huh...this was my point. Because alot of rural kids cannot get loans because of the land value of thier parents,whether its paid for or not,I want the loans to be made more available because rural kids are not just paying tuition they are paying for everything that runs a home. In theory working along with going to school is an option but I know when my son went some of his classes were in evening,every day was different. Him and his girlfriend worked at jobs either at the Uof A or in the vicinity so the employers understood the time issues. And theres no way that these part time jobs can pay for everything,not in a city that refuses to cap rent increases,and some one bedroom apartments go for upward of 1800 a month.I do not want handouts I want the loans to be made more available to rural students.

NN,that post was directed to CRM not you,but thanks for answering it...kinda nice to know your human :wink:

I always thought basing college loans, grants or scholarships on the assets of the parents is ridiculous. When a student goes to college they are now adults. Parents do not have an obligation towards them no longer. Maybe some parents could afford to send the kid to school but they choose not to. Why should the teen be punished because the parents won't help?

If a student gets a college loan it is them that has to pay it back, the parents are not liable for it. So why should the parents assets be the deciding factor in the student qualifying?


Come on people if your child doesn't qualify for federal grants then somewhere somehow on some piece of paper you are making money. :shock:

Point is not all parents are willing to pay a Students way, so why should a kids grants or loans be based on parents income? By the time you go to college you are 18 or over, you are now an adult and your parents are not responsible for you.

There should be some other basis for loans and grants other than the parents assets. College grants and loans are the only thing I know of were an 18 year is denied based on his parents information.
 

Latest posts

Top