Student Loan Forgiveness thread

[Raptorpat]

DOE did a beta launch of the application webpage, so you can fill it out now before it formally goes live: https://studentaid.gov/debt-relief/application

[Raptorpat]

 

[1pooh4u]

4 minutes ago, Raptorpat said:

 

I’m shocked I wonder why? 

[Raptorpat]

You can't unwind longstanding SCOTUS precedent that taxpayers don't have standing to sue the government by virtue of being taxpayers, otherwise 200 million people would suddenly empowered to use federal courts to individually sue the government because they don't like what it's doing with their tax dollars - the remedy for that is supposed to be elections.

The program was specifically crafted in such a conservative manner (taking a year and a half to internally debate the legality of it, cutting out private loans at the last minute, etc.) because they wanted to ensure there was no one with standing to sue.

[Raptorpat]

Quote

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett has, for the second time, rejected an emergency request to block President Joe Biden’s student debt relief, even as legal uncertainty from other cases hangs over the program days before the midterm elections.

Barrett on Friday turned down a bid to stop the program by two Indiana borrowers who claimed they were in line for Biden’s debt relief but would be left worse off because of the state tax consequences.

Barrett, who handles emergency matters coming from the 7th Circuit, rejected the request without comment or any indication that she referred the matter to the full court. She last month denied a similar effort by a Wisconsin taxpayer group, which claimed it should have the ability to challenge the program on behalf of taxpayers who it said would be harmed.

The latest decision has no immediate effect because the Biden administration is already prohibited by the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals from discharging student loans under its debt relief program. The appeals court temporarily halted the debt relief on Oct. 21 while it weighs an emergency request by six GOP states to block the policy.

That case, which is being led by Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson and Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, is likely the next to head to the Supreme Court. The states have already said in court filings they intend to ask the high court to intervene if they lose their request for an injunction against the debt relief program.

Biden has vowed to continuing fighting in court to defend his debt relief program, which offers up to $20,000 of loan forgiveness to individuals earning under $125,000 and families earning under $250,000.

The White House this week has pushed the message that Republican officials are standing in the way of debt relief for millions of Americans.

Biden announced on Thursday that his administration would approve the applications of some 16 million Americans by the end of the week — but that the relief is on hold because of the GOP-led lawsuit.

“Republican members of the Congress and Republican governors are doing everything they can, including taking us to court, to deny the relief and even to their own constituents,” Biden said Friday during remarks at a community college in Albuquerque, New Mexico. He decried GOP opposition to the plan as “simply wrong” and “hypocritical” because some Republican lawmakers benefited from a pandemic loan forgiveness program for small businesses.

The Biden administration has continued accepting and processing debt relief applications even while it’s barred from discharging the loans.

The Education Department has already sent millions of approved applications to its contracted student loan servicers as of Friday, according to people familiar with the matter. The agency has directed the companies to hold off on actually applying the relief to borrowers’ accounts because of the court order.

Nearly 26 million borrowers, in total, have now provided “the required information to be considered for debt relief,” the White House said. The Education Department estimates that roughly 40 million Americans are eligible for the relief if they apply for it.

The legal challenge rejected by Barrett on Friday was brought by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a libertarian group, which argued that Biden’s debt relief was an illegal abuse of authority. The lawsuit had argued that debt relief will leave two borrowers in a worse financial position because Indiana plans to tax loan forgiveness.

After the lawsuit was originally filed, the Biden administration announced that borrowers in line for automatic debt cancellation would be allowed to opt-out of the student debt relief program if they don’t want the relief.

But lower courts ruled that the Indiana borrowers did not have any injury because the Biden administration won’t actually be canceling their loans.

“None of their debt will be cancelled, and they will not be subject to a tax on a reduction of indebtedness,” a three-judge panel of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals wrote in a unanimous decision last week. “It follows that the program does not injure them and that they lack standing to sue.”

Caleb Kruckenberg, an attorney at Pacific Legal Foundation, said after Barrett’s decision that the group would “continue to fight this program in court.”

“Practically since this program was announced, the administration has sought to avoid judicial scrutiny. Thus far they have succeeded,” he said in a statement. “But that does not change the fact that this program is illegal from stem to stern.”

Most borrowers must fill out an application to obtain relief. But the pair of Indiana borrowers are among several million borrowers for whom the Education Department is able to automatically provide debt relief because it already has their income information.

The agency has already sent out notices to those borrowers with instructions on how they can turn down any loan forgiveness, if they want to, by a Nov. 14 deadline.

James Kvaal, a top department official, said in a court filing that only 102 borrowers had availed themselves of the opt-out option, as of Oct. 17. It’s not clear how much higher the number is now.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/11/04/barrett-student-debt-relief-00065257

[Raptorpat]

 

[Raptorpat]

https://www.npr.org/2022/11/22/1138724532/with-student-loan-relief-tied-up-in-court-biden-extends-repayments-a-few-months

[Raptorpat]

Quote

• A federal appeals court rejected the Biden administration's attempt to pause a Texas judge's order blocking its student loan debt cancellation plan from going into effect, leaving the potential relief in jeopardy. The White House is expected to ask the Supreme Court to weigh in. (Reuters)

 

[1pooh4u]

The SCOTUS will say “no it’s not legal” imagine this is happening cuz some bitches, at least one that already was given, and forgiven a ppp loan, complained that they didn’t qualify for student loan forgiveness or only partially qualified 

https://theintercept.com/2022/11/09/student-debt-relief-lawsuit-ppp-myra-brown/

[Raptorpat]

Quote

Respondents were asked to what extent they blame the following for postponing President Biden’s plan to cancel student loan debt:

 

Survey conducted Nov. 18-21, 2022, among a representative sample of 4,421 U.S. adults, with an unweighted margin of error of +/-1 percentage point. Figures may not add up to 100% due to rounding.

Fortunately we know who is taking the blame.

[1pooh4u]

50 minutes ago, Raptorpat said:

Fortunately we know who is taking the blame.

I think the dumb ass that had a 49k ppp loan forgiven except for $6 that allowed a right wing group to convince them to go to court over this should be to blame 

What happened to the POTUS can EO anything that he wants?  That’s what Trump supporters said. Congress was never going to do this. SCOTUS will side with the right. Joke hack court 

[SwimModSponges]

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/05/supreme-court-tackles-biden-student-loan-plan.html

Well it was a nice idea.

[Raptorpat]

Does anyone know whether the gov preserved the right to argue against standing? I don't actually know where that all ended up, but that's where they should focus to preempt an argument on the merits.

[Raptorpat]

oral arguments now: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx

[Raptorpat]

The debt ceiling deal will put an end to the pause, 60 days after signing, into statute. I don't recall off the top of my head when it was originally set to terminate. SCOTUS going to ruin everyone's hopes and dreams within the next month anyhow.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4024194-mccarthy-student-loan-payment-pause-gone-under-debt-ceiling-deal/

[1pooh4u]

I’m sure the poorest among us will be getting fucked over to make this happen.  

[MasqueradeOverture]

So I do have to fork up $6k after all?

At least they waited until I paid off my car, but fucking hell. 

[Master-Debater131]

1 minute ago, scoobdog said:

Everyone already knows the SCOTUS's ruling is imminent.  On the off chance they don't kill the loan forgiveness, the pause itself becomes moot.  It's likely that Biden's Administration and the progressives are already in discussions about what to do if the ruling comes back striking it down.  However you look at it, though, there isn't much anyone can do until that ruling comes down. 

Thats fair. I would have expected that to get more attention though if only for the political aspects of it. If Congress had not included this provision then they could claim its an activist court going against popular will. With it included that eats into that narrative a bit.

Student Loans are a bit of an albatross for Biden as it is. He promised a lot of things around them, and he likely does not have the ability to follow through. The one thing absolutely within his power, ending interest on the loans, is never discussed either. If he were to end interest on the loans, and have all payments be for the principal of them only, then that would get a lot of support. I dont support forgiveness, but I would be able to support interest free loans. Theres very likely a lot of people like that out there. Not for full blown forgiveness, but want to make it more fair somehow.

[scoobdog]

5 minutes ago, Master-Debater131 said:

Thats fair. I would have expected that to get more attention though if only for the political aspects of it. If Congress had not included this provision then they could claim its an activist court going against popular will. With it included that eats into that narrative a bit.

Student Loans are a bit of an albatross for Biden as it is. He promised a lot of things around them, and he likely does not have the ability to follow through. The one thing absolutely within his power, ending interest on the loans, is never discussed either. If he were to end interest on the loans, and have all payments be for the principal of them only, then that would get a lot of support. I dont support forgiveness, but I would be able to support interest free loans. Theres very likely a lot of people like that out there. Not for full blown forgiveness, but want to make it more fair somehow.

It's important to remember that the vast majority of these loans represent a fraction of what the individual student borrowed and that for all but the most recent borrowers the "principal" amount would have already been paid.

[Master-Debater131]

And thats why I am fine with eliminating the interest on student loans. The interest charges on these loans should not be more than the loan itself. Just make them interest free and get on with it.

[scoobdog]

48 minutes ago, Master-Debater131 said:

And thats why I am fine with eliminating the interest on student loans. The interest charges on these loans should not be more than the loan itself. Just make them interest free and get on with it.

I’m pretty sure the lenders servicing those loans would disagree with that plan.

[Master-Debater131]

2 minutes ago, scoobdog said:

I’m pretty sure the lenders servicing those loans would disagree with that plan.

Well, to be quite honest, I don't care what the lenders think.

 

Having student loans be interest free is the reasonable balance between outright forgiving loans and continuing to fuck people with predatory policies. Same with the payday loans that charge interest so high that it puts people into a permanent debt trap.

[katt_goddess]

1 hour ago, scoobdog said:

It's important to remember that the vast majority of these loans represent a fraction of what the individual student borrowed and that for all but the most recent borrowers the "principal" amount would have already been paid.

I paid the 'principle' about 3x by the time I had everything paid off. And that was even with paying in extra at every opportunity because I wanted to be responsible and going without food on occasion. 

I paid my crap off and am rapidly reaching the age in ND where I could take one college class per semester for free and I'm still for killing the bloated loan monster. 

[scoobdog]

43 minutes ago, Master-Debater131 said:

Well, to be quite honest, I don't care what the lenders think.

 

Having student loans be interest free is the reasonable balance between outright forgiving loans and continuing to fuck people with predatory policies. Same with the payday loans that charge interest so high that it puts people into a permanent debt trap.

If it was just on popularity, it would have been done the minute Biden took office.  No matter what part is "forgiven," the loan provider will take on at least part of the burden for that forgiveness, as in the federal government isn't just going to pay all of the interest.  It's a far tougher sell to these providers and the various entities that back them financially if this change means that people who already have paid multiple-times-over the principal get that money applied to the principal amount.  Interest isn't just profit; it's funding other loans and it pays for overhead.  Losing even the profit part of it when negotiating the loan forgiveness can still have a ripple effect.

That isn't to say this can't be worked out with them.  It's just to point out that trying to set the loan amount to just the principal changes very little of the financial math involved and, consequently, the political headwinds.  Once the SCOTUS makes a ruling, we'll see how the Administration responds.

[Raptorpat]

Quote

WHEN, EXACTLY, WILL BIDEN RESTART FEDERAL STUDENT LOANS? After more than three years, the federal government’s pandemic-related suspension of student loan payments and interest is officially coming to an end.

— “Student loan interest will resume starting on September 1, 2023, and payments will be due starting in October,” an Education Department spokesperson confirmed in a statement to POLITICO. “We will notify borrowers well before payments restart.”

— The deal President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy reached to raise the debt ceiling earlier this month cemented into law the termination of the payment pause that’s been in place since March 2020.

— But the text of the deal, the Fiscal Responsibility Act, left borrowers with something of a mathematical word problem on the timing: “Sixty days after June 30, 2023,” the law says, the suspension of student loan payments and interest “shall cease to be effective.”

— That language somewhat mirrors the administration’s previously-announced policy of resuming payments 60 days after either the Supreme Court rules on its sweeping student debt cancellation program or June 30, whichever comes first.

— The provision has sparked some confusion over precisely when borrowers would face interest charges and student loan bills. A range of lawmakers and press reports have described the policy as ending the payment pause on slightly different days.

— The difference of a few days when it comes to interest accrual on the massive federal student loan portfolio amounts to hundreds of millions of dollars for borrowers. The Education Department has estimated that the pause saves borrowers approximately $5 billion in interest each month, so that’s roughly $167 million of interest that typically accrues each day.

— The Biden administration’s confirmation that interest will now resume Sept. 1 and payments in October is consistent with what POLITICO previously reported the administration had been planning before the debt ceiling deal.

— Looming over the restart of payments is whether the Supreme Court will in the coming weeks allow the Biden administration to move forward with its plan to cancel up to $10,000 or $20,000 of debt for tens of millions of borrowers. Many progressives blasted the administration’s agreement with Republicans to codify the end of the payment pause into the debt ceiling deal. They’re worried that the administration has locked itself into restarting payments regardless of whether tens of millions will receive debt relief after the Supreme Court’s ruling.

— Is there any more leeway? An Education Department spokesperson described the latest debt ceiling law as “preventing further extensions of the payment pause.” White House officials have described the agreement as a relatively narrow one, noting that it ends only the current payment pause. They’ve noted, for example, that it would not prevent the Education Department from pausing payments in response to future national emergencies or if it’s otherwise justified under existing law.

— Education Department officials are looking at ways to ease borrowers back into repayment, including offering a grace period for the first several months in which borrowers wouldn’t be penalized for missing required payments, though interest would continue to add up. The department also says its plans to proactively reach out to borrowers who it identifies as being at high risk for delinquency.

— “In spite of our opponents’ best efforts to sabotage our work to support student borrowers, we are fully committed to helping borrowers successfully navigate the return to repayment with the pandemic now behind us,” the Education Department spokesperson said.

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/weekly-education/2023/06/12/biden-admin-will-resume-interest-on-federal-student-loans-sept-1-monthly-payments-due-in-october-00101431

[Raptorpat]

There were actually two cases that SCOTUS decided:

• in case #1, the private plaintiffs had no standing: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-535_i3kn.pdf
• in case #2, the state plaintiffs had standing and the court threw out the program 6-3: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-506_nmip.pdf

Whelp, back to the drawing board.

[Master-Debater131]

The Student Loan ruling isn't a surprise, and its absolutely the correct ruling. Presidents are not Kings. They don't have the power to simply dictate policies like this. Congress holds the power of the purse and that must be respected. Even Democrats knew that this wasn't going to work.

 

It was a nakedly political move at the time to try and win votes in the mid-terms. And now Biden has to live with another huge loss at SCOTUS.

[MasqueradeOverture]

[Raptorpat]

 

[Raptorpat]

Biden's gonna do an afternoon address

[Master-Debater131]

Not really sure hat he has planned. He cant try to wipe the debt away again, and he cant pause payments because he just signed a law saying he cant.
Biggest thing he could do would be to lower the interest rate to 0%. If every payment moving forward was applied to principal and not interest that would be a massive game changer. And that is absolutely within his power to do.

[scoobdog]

8 minutes ago, Master-Debater131 said:

Not really sure hat he has planned. He cant try to wipe the debt away again, and he cant pause payments because he just signed a law saying he cant.
Biggest thing he could do would be to lower the interest rate to 0%. If every payment moving forward was applied to principal and not interest that would be a massive game changer. And that is absolutely within his power to do.

Just out of curiosity, what says it is in his power to do that?

[Icarus27k]

If John Roberts gets hit by a bus tomorrow, I'll celebrate. 

 

 

 

[matrixman124]

2 hours ago, Master-Debater131 said:

The Student Loan ruling isn't a surprise, and its absolutely the correct ruling. Presidents are not Kings. They don't have the power to simply dictate policies like this. Congress holds the power of the purse and that must be respected. Even Democrats knew that this wasn't going to work.

 

It was a nakedly political move at the time to try and win votes in the mid-terms. And now Biden has to live with another huge loss at SCOTUS.

I don't think Biden has the power to do this either and this definitely feels like a short term move that wasn't fully thought out.

The GOP was going to block this in Congress no matter what and the right wing majority Supreme Court was not going to let him extend his executive power.

Politics fucking suck.

[Master-Debater131]

21 minutes ago, scoobdog said:

Just out of curiosity, what says it is in his power to do that?

Its part of the student loan laws, as well as something that a lot of legal scholars have debated since this entire thing started. POTUS has the ability to modify student loans, but not totally alter them. That was even affirmed in this ruling. POTUS, if he wanted, could modify how the loans are currently handled. He could change things like payment amounts or interest rates just fine.

There are rumors popping up that he is going to roll out a new income-based payment program. He actually could solve a lot of the student loan problem if he said that mandatory payments are capped at a % of income and lower, or even eliminate, interest rates. Lowering payment without addressing interest rates wont actually do anything.

[scoobdog]

17 minutes ago, Master-Debater131 said:

Its part of the student loan laws, as well as something that a lot of legal scholars have debated since this entire thing started. POTUS has the ability to modify student loans, but not totally alter them. That was even affirmed in this ruling. POTUS, if he wanted, could modify how the loans are currently handled. He could change things like payment amounts or interest rates just fine.

There are rumors popping up that he is going to roll out a new income-based payment program. He actually could solve a lot of the student loan problem if he said that mandatory payments are capped at a % of income and lower, or even eliminate, interest rates. Lowering payment without addressing interest rates wont actually do anything.

But, what specifically says he can do that?  It would seem to me that if he can't cancel the loans, that includes any part of the loan as well.

[katt_goddess]

5 hours ago, Master-Debater131 said:

 

t was a nakedly political move at the time to try and win votes in the mid-terms. And now Biden has to live with another huge loss at SCOTUS.

 

As long as the so-called conservative 'majority' of SCROTUS consists of unethical creatures and unqualified push-throughs, that's all he has to do - point at the unethical creatures and unqualified push-throughs. 

[Raptorpat]

Skip to 6:30 if you just want to hear what the Plan B is.

Edited June 30, 2023 by Raptorpat

[1pooh4u]

Can someone explain to me like I’m 5, why were PPP loans acceptable but student loan forgiveness, not?  It wasn’t even forgiving the entire loan, or for all students. With the PPP loan, as long as a percentage went to your payrolls it was forgiven. How many wealthy people do you suppose took out PPP loans and the payroll was the wealthy jerkoff and a small handful of friends.  My brother worked at a corporate owned restaurant. They got 2 PPP loans but only looked out for the employees on the first one. 

[Icarus27k]

It's not acceptable, but hypocritical. But I've long since given up on expecting consistency and decency from the center-right to right-wing. 

[katt_goddess]

22 hours ago, 1pooh4u said:

Can someone explain to me like I’m 5, why were PPP loans acceptable but student loan forgiveness, not?  It wasn’t even forgiving the entire loan, or for all students. With the PPP loan, as long as a percentage went to your payrolls it was forgiven. How many wealthy people do you suppose took out PPP loans and the payroll was the wealthy jerkoff and a small handful of friends.  My brother worked at a corporate owned restaurant. They got 2 PPP loans but only looked out for the employees on the first one. 

Because rich people are used to being rich and anything less than that is in direct violation of god's personal will that they always be rich.

Poor people deserve to be poor forever if they dare to dream past their caste. 

I wish I was being 100% sarcastic but that's basically the breakdown of 'prosperity gospel'. 

[1pooh4u]

1 hour ago, katt_goddess said:

Because rich people are used to being rich and anything less than that is in direct violation of god's personal will that they always be rich.

Poor people deserve to be poor forever if they dare to dream past their caste. 

I wish I was being 100% sarcastic but that's basically the breakdown of 'prosperity gospel'. 

It’s like what Seight said “privatize profits and socialize losses” a lot of wealthy people had several college educations forgiven, seriously some had loans in the hundreds of thousands 

[Blackrose321]

On 6/30/2023 at 8:53 PM, 1pooh4u said:

Can someone explain to me like I’m 5, why were PPP loans acceptable but student loan forgiveness, not?  It wasn’t even forgiving the entire loan, or for all students. With the PPP loan, as long as a percentage went to your payrolls it was forgiven. How many wealthy people do you suppose took out PPP loans and the payroll was the wealthy jerkoff and a small handful of friends.  My brother worked at a corporate owned restaurant. They got 2 PPP loans but only looked out for the employees on the first one. 

I'll never stop bitching about Nancy Bass Wyden. Her husband worked on the PPP loans, said he was worried about theft/fraud while his asshole wife stole 7 figures from taxpayers.

[1pooh4u]

41 minutes ago, Blackrose321 said:

I'll never stop bitching about Nancy Bass Wyden. Her husband worked on the PPP loans, said he was worried about theft/fraud while his asshole wife stole 7 figures from taxpayers.

I guess that’s why he was so worried about it cuz his wife was busy doing just exactly that. 

[Raptorpat]

Quote

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden’s second attempt at student loan cancellation began moving forward Tuesday with a round of hearings to negotiate the details of a new plan.

In a process known as negotiated rulemaking, 14 people chosen by the Biden administration are meeting for the first of three hearings on student loan relief. Their goal is to guide the Education Department toward a proposal after the Supreme Court rejected Biden’s first plan in June.

The negotiators all come from outside the federal government and represent a range of viewpoints on student loans. The panel includes students and officials from a range of colleges, along with loan servicers, state officials and advocates including the NAACP.

In opening remarks, Under Secretary of Education James Kvaal said the student debt crisis has threatened to undercut the promise of higher education.

https://apnews.com/article/student-loans-debt-cancellation-college-7c8d3736578eb799e2f976d2f8feee79

[Raptorpat]

In personal news, I just dropped $15K from the payments I withheld during the COVID pause in one targeted shot to wipe out the entire principal balance of one of my high interest rate Grad PLUS loans.

This sucker accrued like $98 per month in interest on top of all my other student loans. On the bright side, it's one less accrual stream that I have to worry about over the next 15 years. But the downside is that even with knocking this one out, I still owe more on my student loans than on my mortgage. And it won't practically impact my minimum monthly payments, its share is just redistributed amongst the rest and puts a minimum payment slightly closer to breaking even on total interest.

Which frankly is the whole problem, and why simply changing the rules prospectively isn't enough. If you didn't make enough money the moment you finish school, yeah you'd be in compliance making those minimal income-based payments, but you're drowning in interest by the time you had the means to actually make meaningful payments. This was literally the first and only time I made a payment that actually applied to this specific principal instead of just its interest. Prior to this special one-off thank-you-covid payment, I probably paid a collective $40K back on student loans but only about $120 of it actually touched a principal balance (of the smallest and lowest-interest subsidized loan).

[rpgamer]

I need to investigate the new SAFE repayment plans or whatever they are, see if they can knock me down a touch. Despite an ever-increasing income as I've moved along, inflation/cost of living has nearly been out-pacing me, definitely don't have the free budget to pay as much off as they'd like.

At least now there's a small glimmer of hope, if I work for this non-profit for 10 years, it can get wiped....

[Raptorpat]

I perfunctorily looked into it, which is to say I went on the website and clicked on the "what will cost me the least money in the long run" button and it kept me in the old IBR program.

[Raptorpat]

So apparently my new servicer won't let me edit my auto-payments because I'm in an IDR repayment program (even though my pre-COVID servicer let me), and it didn't automatically reallocate that whopping $55.38 minimum monthly payment I saved amongst the other six loans. If I want to pay anything more than the minimum, I have to manually assign a payment each month which is kind of weird? I just assumed it would have been absorbed into the other loan payments, especially given none of the minimums even match the interest accrual per month.

Maybe they never anticipated someone would actually pay off an IDR loan to begin with so it's not programmed to readjust?

[katt_goddess]

16 hours ago, Raptorpat said:

So apparently my new servicer won't let me edit my auto-payments because I'm in an IDR repayment program (even though my pre-COVID servicer let me), and it didn't automatically reallocate that whopping $55.38 minimum monthly payment I saved amongst the other six loans. If I want to pay anything more than the minimum, I have to manually assign a payment each month which is kind of weird? I just assumed it would have been absorbed into the other loan payments, especially given none of the minimums even match the interest accrual per month.

Maybe they never anticipated someone would actually pay off an IDR loan to begin with so it's not programmed to readjust?

More like it's not set up to automatically reallocate stuff because that way they can keep charging interest on all the things that aren't getting touched. 

I honestly feel like those student loan places enjoy screwing with the people that actually are doing everything they can to pay things off more than they enjoy screwing with the ones that decide to dodge both them and Columbia House for all eternity.