Online poker, and unpaid student loans…

[CountingMyOuts]

[ QUOTE ]
You sound like one of those morons that thinks that thinks that the First Amendment applies to non-governmental censorship. There is a huge difference between prohibition, entitlement and a loan contract.

Let me be clear, I am practically libertarian as far as governmental interference is concerned. But what you have here is the Goverment through its power to tax setting up a program to benefit society as a whole by making education available to those who otherwise could not afford it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Practically libertarian? Based on your response, I guess it's code for "dime store" libertarian.

Would a libertarian want to spend even more tax dollars policing college students and how they use their student loans? I don't think so.

[ QUOTE ]
Using student loans to gamble is indefenseable. You want to gamble, fine, just don't do it with tax-payer money earmarked for education. Using this money for gambling is tantamount to fraud, and is no different than misappropriating any other type of funding-- for which there are criminal consequences. It has nothing to do with being a Nanny state, or being responsible for oneself. It is about misappropriating money and putting a program at risk that is for the education of others.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did I try to defend college students spending their loans on gambling (or anything else other than the intended college expenses)?

Using college student loans for gambling has everything to do with being responsible for oneself. If you default on your loans because you gambled them away, then you pay the price.

College students are adults, like it or not. If they default on their loans, then they should be held responsible for their actions. Just don't spend my tax dollars policing them after they sign the papers and receive the loan money.

[ QUOTE ]
Not only does the government have EVERY right to take steps to see that the money it is lending for education gets USED for education, in the face of evidence that it is NOT being used for education, it has a responsibility to protect the taxpayers and the future generations that this program is intended to benefit.

[/ QUOTE ]

In the face of what evidence? Do you have statistics to back up this claim?

Again, don't spend my tax dollars policing these adults for every possible of misuse of their loans.

[ QUOTE ]
Frankly, gambling with borrowed money where the lender believes the money is being lent for some other purpose is about as unethical as it gets. I don't think anyone at 2+2, which is a site for responsible gamblers, should be condoning it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see where I said I condone college students using the loans for their online poker pursuits. I don't condone it and yes, it is unethical.

Still, they are adults. They are responsible for their decisions and their actions. Don't use my tax dollars to police them.

[ QUOTE ]
You can quibble all you want about whether the Gov. can realistically police this, (and I might agree) but don't try to pass off gambling with the Gov.s' education loans as something that the Gov. has no business interfering with.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not going to quibble about how realistic their ability is to police this, because it's not realistic.

However, if you want to make sure college students aren't gambling away their student loans, you may as well start making sure they are not using their loan money at bars, carryouts, strip joints, tobacco shops, internet porn for pay, etc. Spending the loan money on the activities is no less ethical. When does the policing end?

[Mendacious]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I fail to see the significance of your post. This is the Legislation forum. Are you proposing legislation to control how college students spend their loans? I don't think you'll find any support here (at least not from me) for adding to the government nanny state. I have no problem with adding a clause to the loan contract stipulating that the money won't be spent on illegal drugs, gambling, alcohol, prostitutes, or other items but, like UIGEA, this is just a feel-good measure.

Cheers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, that is pretty much what I was saying-- assuming OP's comments about loan defaults is true.

[Mendacious]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Or maybe they should just forego the loan contract altogether and just give away all the money to anyone for any reason.

[/ QUOTE ]

Loans are made semester-by-semester. They are dependent on the student staying current on bills and on passing classes. That's the ONLY interest government should have in the matter, IMHO.

[/ QUOTE ]


Not so sure about staying current on bills, that would be news to me, but in any event, that is short-sighted. These loans have to be self-sustaining over time. To the extent that the default rate goes up, it harms the ability of the program to loan in the future.

[ QUOTE ]

If students gamble it away, they'll only hurt themselves, as they will have to repay their loans with interest. The system protects itself without demanding students account for every dime.

[/ QUOTE ]


Again, short-sighted, in order for the program to be viable, it is imperative that an excessive number of students do not default-- and politically speaking it is pretty significant that they not default because they are gambling away their loans.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Frankly Engineer, I thought you were a little smarter.

[/ QUOTE ]


Now you're going to insult people who disagree with you? Frankly, you sound like one of the prohibitionists, arguing that adult college students cannot control themselves, and therefore require the federal government to do it for them. Sorry, but if they're old enough to die in Iraq, then they're old enough to handle their loans.



[/ QUOTE ]


Pretty sure you started the insults Engineer with your sarcasm and totally inappropriate comparisons to Stalin etc.


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It would be pretty stupid and irresponsible to ignore this as an issue if in fact it is prevelant.

[/ QUOTE ]

You sure do like to call people stupid. Also, you're using a Spencer Bachus-type argument in that you state the worst case, with no evidence of it being an issue, then put the onus on us to show that it is or isn't an issue.

[/ QUOTE ]



[/ QUOTE ]
Not really, I was responding to OP's original statement that this IS a problem. Assuming it is, I suggested it would be BAD for poker, and BAD for student loans generally, and should be addressed in the loan contract.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Not really, I was responding to OP's original statement that this IS a problem. Assuming it is, I suggested it would be BAD for poker, and BAD for student loans generally, and should be addressed in the loan contract.

[/ QUOTE ]

If there were ever a need for such a thing, I'd have no problem with that, so long as the list of prohibited items includes other legal "moneywasters" and includes all gambling (not just Internet gambling), and so long as it contains no enforcement provisions. I don't see it happening, really. After all, student graduate with tons of credit card debt today.

[Mendacious]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not really, I was responding to OP's original statement that this IS a problem. Assuming it is, I suggested it would be BAD for poker, and BAD for student loans generally, and should be addressed in the loan contract.

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming this were put in, I would want to see enforcement POST default only.

If there were ever a need for such a thing, I'd have no problem with that, so long as the list of prohibited items includes other legal "moneywasters" and includes all gambling (not just Internet gambling), and so long as it contains no enforcement provisions. I don't see it happening, really. After all, student graduate with tons of credit card debt today.

[/ QUOTE ]

[jackaaron]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This whole post was about 'unpaid' student loans, there being more of them than usual, the correlation that has to poker, and the impact it has on online poker proponents.

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't seen any stats showing that student loan delinquencies are up, but even if true, first, the economy is not all that great. Second, how can you possibly correlate delinquencies with online poker, for crying out loud? Do you know how many people have loans and how much money is outstanding? It must be tens or hundreds of billions.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never gave stats. I said, in the original posts, is this true, and if it’s true, what are the ramifications? I have seen a small sample of it, have others seen it, do you think it’s possible, if you think it’s possible, how does this impact our fight to legalize or regulate poker?

How do I correlate delinquencies with online poker…well, considering that my question was concerning people that borrowed additional student loans on top of the ones they use for tuition/books/rent/etc., I think there is at least some link there. And, I think that the news, whether they are right or wrong, would MOST CERTAINLY make that correlation, and that would most certainly hurt poker’s image in the eyes of non-poker players (and non-poker players are who we are trying to sway the opinion of).

I don’t see how you’ve included people that have loans for other things that don’t play poker when you say, “Do you know how many people have loans and how much money is outstanding?” I assume you’re talking about non-poker players who are not students, and who have borrowed for some other use, and not paid…that obviously has nothing to do with the original post.

[Mendacious]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You sound like one of those morons that thinks that thinks that the First Amendment applies to non-governmental censorship. There is a huge difference between prohibition, entitlement and a loan contract.

Let me be clear, I am practically libertarian as far as governmental interference is concerned. But what you have here is the Goverment through its power to tax setting up a program to benefit society as a whole by making education available to those who otherwise could not afford it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Practically libertarian? Based on your response, I guess it's code for "dime store" libertarian.

Would a libertarian want to spend even more tax dollars policing college students and how they use their student loans? I don't think so.

[ QUOTE ]
Using student loans to gamble is indefenseable. You want to gamble, fine, just don't do it with tax-payer money earmarked for education. Using this money for gambling is tantamount to fraud, and is no different than misappropriating any other type of funding-- for which there are criminal consequences. It has nothing to do with being a Nanny state, or being responsible for oneself. It is about misappropriating money and putting a program at risk that is for the education of others.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did I try to defend college students spending their loans on gambling (or anything else other than the intended college expenses)?

Using college student loans for gambling has everything to do with being responsible for oneself. If you default on your loans because you gambled them away, then you pay the price.

College students are adults, like it or not. If they default on their loans, then they should be held responsible for their actions. Just don't spend my tax dollars policing them after they sign the papers and receive the loan money.

[ QUOTE ]
Not only does the government have EVERY right to take steps to see that the money it is lending for education gets USED for education, in the face of evidence that it is NOT being used for education, it has a responsibility to protect the taxpayers and the future generations that this program is intended to benefit.

[/ QUOTE ]

In the face of what evidence? Do you have statistics to back up this claim?

Again, don't spend my tax dollars policing these adults for every possible of misuse of their loans.

[ QUOTE ]
Frankly, gambling with borrowed money where the lender believes the money is being lent for some other purpose is about as unethical as it gets. I don't think anyone at 2+2, which is a site for responsible gamblers, should be condoning it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see where I said I condone college students using the loans for their online poker pursuits. I don't condone it and yes, it is unethical.

Still, they are adults. They are responsible for their decisions and their actions. Don't use my tax dollars to police them.

[ QUOTE ]
You can quibble all you want about whether the Gov. can realistically police this, (and I might agree) but don't try to pass off gambling with the Gov.s' education loans as something that the Gov. has no business interfering with.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not going to quibble about how realistic their ability is to police this, because it's not realistic.

However, if you want to make sure college students aren't gambling away their student loans, you may as well start making sure they are not using their loan money at bars, carryouts, strip joints, tobacco shops, internet porn for pay, etc. Spending the loan money on the activities is no less ethical. When does the policing end?

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said anything about policing this whatsoever. What I am envisioning is the potential if this is a problem to put terms in the agreement that prohibit gambling, and penalties (perhaps even criminal) if the loan is defaulted and the money was spent on gambling. We can agree to disagree on whether that is appropriate, I simply proposed that it should be a consideration if the problem is bad enough.

PS I am libertarian as in I voted for Ed Clark.

[laeelin]

[ QUOTE ]
Is this true, or false?

[/ QUOTE ]

False.

People that would do this would have spent the money in other ways. Beer, Girls, Drugs, a widescreen HDTV, what diffrence does it make. Either way, the money is gone with nothing to show for it.

I'll never forget the day I walked into a gas station and overheard a conversation that the girl behind the counter was having with her friend (that also worked there)... It was payday and they both had just got paychecks. They cashed them at the bank next door and ran back to the gas station to decide which scratch off tickets they would spend it (all of it) on.

/sigh

Some people are stupid. Nothing to do about it. If you try to stop them it doesn't help. The only thing that will help them is growing up. The faster they grow up the less pain they will suffer. Using the goverment as a "mommy" makes that take more time, not less.

I believe the best thing that can happen to an addicted gambler is to run into a good pro that can take his money hand after hand. At least that way he has a chance of realiseing he needs help.

And either way he will lose the money

[jackaaron]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They should also post federal marshalls outside of student loan recipients' dorms to ensure said students don't stay out too late, and to ensure they're in class on time. They can also ensure recipients don't attempt to go to Vegas. After all, adults cannot be trusted to make their own decisions. Government should do that. Just ask Stalin, Mao, or Kyl.

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't specifically for the post I'm quoting, but I hope that my orig post isn't meant to be a dig at college students using loans for poker.

I really was just wondering about the repercussions over the next several years.

I realize that those same students could be using the money for other things entirely if online poker didn't exist.

But, when a fun trend emerges (such as online poker), I think that you have not only the students that would normally use student loans for things other than tuition, books, rent, BUT a large group of people borrowing for online poker ADDED ON to that first group.

We're not talking like a few thousand...most of us know that you can get additional loans over the course of your 4 years that total more than 20k (maybe more), and that's completely separate from your tuition, books, etc. loans. I'm not talking overage here.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a free country, and college students are adults. They borrowed money and they have an obligation to repay it.

I fail to see the significance of your post. This is the Legislation forum. Are you proposing legislation to control how college students spend their loans? I don't think you'll find any support here (at least not from me) for adding to the government nanny state. I have no problem with adding a clause to the loan contract stipulating that the money won't be spent on illegal drugs, gambling, alcohol, prostitutes, or other items but, like UIGEA, this is just a feel-good measure.

Cheers.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that this is a free country, and college students are adults. They can borrow, and they can do whatever they want.

That is completely missing the point of the discussion.

Aren’t we trying to better poker’s image?

I’m merely wondering what ramifications could arise as a result of the situation I described, I’m not asking for a police state…lol.

You are correct, this is the legislation forum. In it, we could possibly talk about things that could affect/enact/reverse/etc legislation. Could the situation I described have ramifications with regard to new or old legislation? If not, then obviously someone would say, “Jack, I see that this could possibly be a problem based on your very small sample, however, I don’t think this will affect our current efforts to better the image of online poker because of the following points…”

Sorry for the template, I probably just don't make my original posts very clear (with regard to my intention), and as a result, I have to explain what I'm trying to get at over and over. I promise to work at that over time. Maybe I'll get an English degree or something, and get a little extra for my Stars account [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[jackaaron]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is this true, or false?

[/ QUOTE ]

False.

People that would do this would have spent the money in other ways. Beer, Girls, Drugs, a widescreen HDTV, what diffrence does it make. Either way, the money is gone with nothing to show for it.

I'll never forget the day I walked into a gas station and overheard a conversation that the girl behind the counter was having with her friend (that also worked there)... It was payday and they both had just got paychecks. They cashed them at the bank next door and ran back to the gas station to decide which scratch off tickets they would spend it (all of it) on.

/sigh

Some people are stupid. Nothing to do about it. If you try to stop them it doesn't help. The only thing that will help them is growing up. The faster they grow up the less pain they will suffer. Using the goverment as a "mommy" makes that take more time, not less.

I believe the best thing that can happen to an addicted gambler is to run into a good pro that can take his money hand after hand. At least that way he has a chance of realiseing he needs help.

And either way he will lose the money

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent. Thank you for your opinion.