Anonymous #1 5w

And those limits to take our loans are helpful to jobs we need like nurses?! Because I don't think so

10

Anonymous OP 5w

No they’re stupid

0

Anonymous #1 5w

They’ve been defacto professional degrees for 18 years then. Why change that

12

Anonymous #2 5w

Well, they haven’t, actually. Again it just hasn’t mattered until now. The issue isn’t wether they’re considered professional degrees or not, the issue is the federal government is deciding to limit borrowing capacity knowing how predatory private lenders are, and knowing their involvement is what made upper education unattainable without loans. The issue is limiting borrowing, not their label (bc again, professional degrees have a cap too. It’s just not as bad as non professional).

0

Anonymous #2 5w

This will inevitably cause larger shortages in these fields, because they’re all necessities, already facing shortages from lack of pay and ability to afford degrees and shit treatment, and it is incredibly unfair they are being targeting more so with this stupid fucking bill. But the narrative that they’re being removed from professional degrees is just flat wrong, not the issue, and believe it or not was started by ChatGPT (yay, ai misinformation!)

1

Anonymous #1 5w

If it hasn’t mattered until now and if people largely viewed these degrees as professional degrees then that’s what made them defacto professional degrees. If these changes are made, then the issue IS that they’re not being classified as professional degrees when they very much should be, according to the established standards of what makes a professional degree. The headline of being excluded from list of professional degrees is accurate, “removed” is shaky but still true enough

8

Anonymous #2 5w

No, it’s not. They were not removed. They were never there. It was not defacto, it was colloquially. Which is a bit of a difference. I misspoke a bit when I said it didn’t matter until now, because it *technically* did, it just didn’t matter to the majority of Americans/people trying to get these degrees (mostly mattered for visa purposes/international students and for accreditation/regulation purposes) because the loan caps weren’t as limiting as they are now.

1

Anonymous #2 5w

Like yes, they are excluded from the list, always have been. The difference in borrowing caps have always existed too, so no, they were not defacto. There are differences in federal regulations. Colloquially vs legal understanding is the gap in awareness here (which is fair bc what average person needs to know what the federal gov legally considers professional). The new extreme limits on borrowing and the further difference between the caps for professional and non are the issue

1

Anonymous #3 5w

while this is true, they’ve already damaged themselves by voting for him in the first place

6

Anonymous #4 5w

damaged themselves? wdym

0

Anonymous #3 5w

their reputation; by voting for him, they’ve already ruined their reputation as republicans, even if most of them regret voting for him now

5

Anonymous #4 5w

it’s not about a reputation, it’s about doing what you believe is best for the country. people make mistakes, and if anyone hates someone else for making a mistake, or even for their beliefs, then they do not subscribe to the american freedom we all take for granted

6

Anonymous #4 4w

well I didn’t vote for him but he flipped on a lot of things. nobody should be surprised when a politician rug pulls them, but he completely abondanded MAGA and AF ideals

1