EPTedit: As mentioned directly above me while I was typing.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3419
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
micronesia
United States24740 Posts
edit: As mentioned directly above me while I was typing. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15723 Posts
On December 26 2021 06:35 micronesia wrote: It seems like you are calling for making the system worse because you will benefit from it. If you think I am wrong that the system will be made worse by your initial proposal, then perhaps that would be a legitimate reason to proceed. Your addendum to install cost increase limits is interesting and perhaps worth investigating (likely it would require a lot of revision before it was ready for prime time) but it suffers from the same problem we are talking about where it will be hard to implement such rules in a short period of time. edit: As mentioned directly above me while I was typing. I’m almost positive Biden is able to instruct his education secretary to cut funding to schools who increase prices too much. There are an enormous number of ways the executive can do what they want if they are willing to break norms. As an example, Trump diverted funds from the military by saying the border is a matter of national security. We disagree that lowering interest rates can’t be done without making the situation worse. As I’ve said before, I am very fortunate to be in the position I am in and my family will thrive regardless of if I am making my very manageable payments or not. For me it is a matter of principle. My student loans were very oppressive when I first graduated for both my wife and I. But we are lucky to be where we are now and it’s not a big deal at all. Despite no longer suffering, I know a large number of people are. It’s the same reason the child tax credit is a completely mandatory thing to get my vote. I am not helped by the child tax credit. When I was growing up, the child tax credit would have completely changed my day to day life. Many nights my mom would just eat my brother and my leftovers because there wasn’t enough money for enough food. $300 per month is absolutely life changing for many people. I won’t vote for the level of depraved indifference that is necessary to let student loans and the child tax credit fall to the side. They directly impact people’s lives enormously. | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7384 Posts
This feeds the problem does not address it at all and is not equitable. The same amount of money given to all the people under a certain income would be better, hell a small amount to everyone is. Great, so can Biden do that without Congress? If so, then he should do that. Its pretty clear you know this and hence why you keep strawmaning and dodging my questions. You are also tge exact person on why they cant solve this too early every month or two you are postijg about how the sky is falling amd the dems are the worst, then whst ever complaint is fixed you are back again. Right, and Im the one strawmanning, lol. If it was a good solution not just people with current debt would like it. Parents would, grand parents would, intelligent thoughtful people who understand a better efuctaed populace is better for everyone. Yes, human beings are very rational beings, and Americans in particular are really good at telling what good and bad solutions to problems are, Americans are really well known for looking beyond their own problems and being able to tell whats best for others, lmao. Again though, as has been repeated ad infinitum, its not an ideal solution, but as someone has said before, "the perfect is the enemy of the good," why are you trying to make it perfect and obstructing a good for people? Giving the broken system a license to print money and be taken advantage of in thousands of different ways is just awful. Yes, because the broken system doesnt already have a license to print money and be taken advantage of by businesses lol. Can't let it extend to people, though! | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7384 Posts
On December 26 2021 06:35 Gorsameth wrote: Can Biden do that via executive decree? Because otherwise, again, its impossible with the current state of Congress. Its possible thats something Biden could actually do via the Department of Education. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15723 Posts
On December 26 2021 12:25 JimmiC wrote: As said at nausem this helps a small group of people once and not the most needy of people. That is not a straw man. Im not obstructing anyone from being helped, ive been suggesting it continued to be paused for short terms while looking for an actual solution. You writing as if Im saying something else is what strawmanning is, feel free to look it up. In your eyes, what % of voters need to be helped by spending? Am I correct in my understanding that you are saying Biden should not do anything about loans because the poorest folks don't benefit? | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18114 Posts
On December 26 2021 14:16 Mohdoo wrote: In your eyes, what % of voters need to be helped by spending? Am I correct in my understanding that you are saying Biden should not do anything about loans because the poorest folks don't benefit? What do you think helps a greater % of those in dire financial difficulty? Take 100bn (or however much it is) and cancel student debts with it, or give every American $300? That's the main argument, that cancelling student debt is government spending without helping as many of those in real need as the "dumbest" distribution of that money as possible. And without any reform of the education system to show for it either! | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7384 Posts
On December 26 2021 12:25 JimmiC wrote: As said at nausem this helps a small group of people once and not the most needy of people. That is not a straw man. Im not obstructing anyone from being helped, ive been suggesting it continued to be paused for short terms while looking for an actual solution. You writing as if Im saying something else is what strawmanning is, feel free to look it up. Again I've said that that sounds great, an actual solution that addresses higher education is needed but the problem is no amount of solution-looking is going to work out because it requires Congress and Democrats need god knows how many Democrats, a specific type of Democrat, to actually pass meaningful legislation through Congress given the deep roster of spoiler potentials. I also would love to see more money spent on poor people, but again, thats the sort of thing that you'd really need Congress for and we do not have that. We have Joe Manchin instead who basically hates poor people and thinks they shouldnt have money because theyll spend it all on drugs. Cancellation of student debt is grasping at straws because its one of the few things Biden doesn't need Joe Manchin's permission for. We'd really love something else, but this is about the only thing we think we could actually get. And Democrats HAVE to do something, Biden's primary piece of legislation looks dead in the water, he is not a well-liked president, Democrat-controlled Congress is screaming to people, "Democrats aren't worth voting for, even when they win they dont accomplish anything!" If the electoral system is going to have any part in preventing fascism in the US Democrats cannot afford to do what they're doing in the face of the fascist psychopathy of the modern day Republicans. They have to do something and the American people that Democrats are capable of delivering major changes when you give them the chance to do so. If not student debt cancellation I'd take something else, but this pissing about is just not it | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23460 Posts
On December 26 2021 16:55 Acrofales wrote: What do you think helps a greater % of those in dire financial difficulty? Take 100bn (or however much it is) and cancel student debts with it, or give every American $300? That's the main argument, that cancelling student debt is government spending without helping as many of those in real need as the "dumbest" distribution of that money as possible. And without any reform of the education system to show for it either! Everyone knows there are better ways to "spend" government money and help the most oppressed people than forgiving student loans. Forgiving student loans is something Biden could do himself so could be done tomorrow and helping people the next day if Biden even just wanted to stick to cancelling the $10k he campaigned on. People have repeatedly explained this already. I think most people knew Biden was lying about cancelling the $10k he campaigned on and would never cancel the $50k Warren's pushing for, let alone all of it (pretty much everything Democrats offer is means tested). The reason this all came up isn't Biden planning to cancel student debt or give every US citizen $300 though, it was him pushing for student loan payments to restart and making it a priority of his administration. People, organizations, and other less shitty Democrats pressured the hell out of him and got 90 more days of relief. No one in the Biden administration has a good (or any) explanation for their necessity of prioritizing restarting payments in February as he threatened, nor for why he only extended it 90 days. People have also rightly pointed out that it's piss poor politics independent of whatever economic rationalizations Biden may be keeping to himself. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Doc.Rivers
United States404 Posts
On December 26 2021 19:26 Zambrah wrote: Again I've said that that sounds great, an actual solution that addresses higher education is needed but the problem is no amount of solution-looking is going to work out because it requires Congress and Democrats need god knows how many Democrats, a specific type of Democrat, to actually pass meaningful legislation through Congress given the deep roster of spoiler potentials. I also would love to see more money spent on poor people, but again, thats the sort of thing that you'd really need Congress for and we do not have that. We have Joe Manchin instead who basically hates poor people and thinks they shouldnt have money because theyll spend it all on drugs. Cancellation of student debt is grasping at straws because its one of the few things Biden doesn't need Joe Manchin's permission for. We'd really love something else, but this is about the only thing we think we could actually get. And Democrats HAVE to do something, Biden's primary piece of legislation looks dead in the water, he is not a well-liked president, Democrat-controlled Congress is screaming to people, "Democrats aren't worth voting for, even when they win they dont accomplish anything!" If the electoral system is going to have any part in preventing fascism in the US Democrats cannot afford to do what they're doing in the face of the fascist psychopathy of the modern day Republicans. They have to do something and the American people that Democrats are capable of delivering major changes when you give them the chance to do so. If not student debt cancellation I'd take something else, but this pissing about is just not it I find it highly doubtful that the president has the power to cancel student debt. Congress authorized the executive branch to issue the debt, so did Congress really also authorize the executive branch to cancel that debt? (Presumably the president would require congressional authorization to cancel; the president does not have the Inherent power to do so. And the president must "faithfully execute" congress' laws.) | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21952 Posts
On December 27 2021 06:15 Doc.Rivers wrote: Cancel, maybe not. Suspend? apparently he can or I'm sure the Republicans would be shouting about it already.I find it highly doubtful that the president has the power to cancel student debt. Congress authorized the executive branch to issue the debt, so did Congress really also authorize the executive branch to cancel that debt? (Presumably the president would require congressional authorization to cancel; the president does not have the Inherent power to do so. And the president must "faithfully execute" congress' laws.) | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15723 Posts
1) In order to receive federal funding, universities may not increase tuition more than inflation % per year. 2) All loans set to 0% interest 3) All balances reset back to original balance. All payments previously made are applied to that original balance | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45034 Posts
On December 27 2021 06:44 Mohdoo wrote: For those of you against forgiveness, what about this? 1) In order to receive federal funding, universities may not increase tuition more than inflation % per year. 2) All loans set to 0% interest 3) All balances reset back to original balance. All payments previously made are applied to that original balance I'm not against student loan forgiveness, but random question: If loans are set to 0% interest, then wouldn't the loaners lose money on giving their loans, due to inflation? Giving $10K now is worth more than receiving $10K back in 10 or 20 years, right? They wouldn't even break even? What incentive would they have to give loans, if not to eventually make more money back? | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15723 Posts
On December 27 2021 09:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I'm not against student loan forgiveness, but random question: If loans are set to 0% interest, then wouldn't the loaners lose money on giving their loans, due to inflation? Giving $10K now is worth more than receiving $10K back in 10 or 20 years, right? They wouldn't even break even? What incentive would they have to give loans, if not to eventually make more money back? Governments have millions of reasons to subsidize this and take a hit. Plenty of countries have already realized charging citizens to go to college is stupid. Many countries even pay for their students to travel to the US to attend university. | ||
|
micronesia
United States24740 Posts
| ||
BlueBird.
United States3889 Posts
On December 27 2021 09:22 micronesia wrote: Under your system, what is the penalty if someone isn't making minimum payments towards their loans? Is there some fee structure, but separate from an interest-based cost? I'm not sure what the best way is to disincentivize people from delaying paying back their loans as long as possible. They didn't say that the current penalties will go away. Credit loss, wage garnishment, etc all exist as methods of getting people to pay their loans. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21952 Posts
On December 27 2021 09:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: yes the loaners technically loses money on the loan. But if the loaner is the government the return is a productive educated citizen which over his/her lifetime will make the government much more money then it would make on the loan.I'm not against student loan forgiveness, but random question: If loans are set to 0% interest, then wouldn't the loaners lose money on giving their loans, due to inflation? Giving $10K now is worth more than receiving $10K back in 10 or 20 years, right? They wouldn't even break even? What incentive would they have to give loans, if not to eventually make more money back? The goal of students loans shouldn't be to make money through interest payments, but an investment into the countries future. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15723 Posts
On December 27 2021 09:22 micronesia wrote: Under your system, what is the penalty if someone isn't making minimum payments towards their loans? Is there some fee structure, but separate from an interest-based cost? I'm not sure what the best way is to disincentivize people from delaying paying back their loans as long as possible. In addition to what bluebird said, this sort of fringe case where people just go to school forever is silly and non-real. I’m sure some small number of people would just go to school as long as they can, but currently undergrad and grad loans each have maximums. You can’t just take out 400k in loans lol If 1% of students used 0% interest rates to be irresponsible and end up with garnished wages eventually, that should not make you say the system isn’t worth it. It is possible that you lack perspective on how many portions of the military, large businesses, and government don’t quite work in fringe situations. It isn’t an argument against any of these things. Asking for a system that doesn’t allow for any fringe abuse is a silly expectation that you can’t find anywhere in practice anywhere in the world where we are dealing with huge numbers of people. The goal is to make an improvement, not some goofy theoretical perfect utopia of policy. This utopia of policy, again, does not exist anywhere. | ||
|
micronesia
United States24740 Posts
Your springboard into a lecture about why you shouldn't look at fringe situations for the viability of a system is neither warranted nor appreciated. | ||
| ||
