|
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 |
On January 18 2022 17:45 Nick_54 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2022 17:31 EnDeR_ wrote:On January 18 2022 17:22 Nick_54 wrote:On January 18 2022 17:04 gobbledydook wrote:
Is it fair to cancel student debt? What about those who decided to pay their fees and not incur debt? What about those who decided not to go to college because of the debt?
Is it fair that university administrators, professors, and staff make obscene salaries while 18 year old students are forced take on life changing debts at an age they don't know what they're getting into. They're fucking crooks and the main problem as far as I'm concerned along with forgiving the debt. The issue has to be corrected for generations going forward. Very sure that the majority of university administrators, professors and staff do not make obscene salaries. There are some eyewatering salaries, true, but these are exceptions, not the norm and tend to be the really senior staff. You included university staff in your list which also includes sanitation staff as well as catering staff or even campus police -- I'd be surprised if any of those are much above minimum wage. The cost of education has little to do with the salaries of the people running the place. You should do your homework. It's a bit like the poster a couple pages back that argued they could cut school budgets by 50% by cutting salaries of overpaid staff... Obviously I'm not talking about the staff making minimum wage. Campus police should be severely defunded if not eliminated entirely. I'm talking about the public servants making hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars. Football and basketball coaches making million up millions. The cost of university needs to go down as well the debt forgiveness to not put the next generation in this spot. I've done enough homework to know that teenagers racking up 6 figure debts to pay 6 and 7 figure salaries to go along with golden parachutes for the elite isn't right. I'm not saying it would solve the cost problem entirely, but its a start.
Certainly one can reduce the cost of education by removing services.
I'm not going to defend the exploitation of college students for profit (which I find abhorrent -- they should be paid) but I think it is arguable that having a top-tier team brings in more value than it costs in the form of sponsorships, advertising, investments, etc. and effectively making your education actually have higher value for the cost. In other words, removing them arguably would not make your education cheaper because that's not why your education costs are so stupidly expensive.
|
On January 18 2022 19:34 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2022 18:29 Gorsameth wrote:On January 18 2022 18:22 Velr wrote:
Forgiving debt whiteout any plan to solve the underlying issue still seems moronic to me. I don't get how people are still pushing for this obviously stupid idea or how it ever got any traction among "educated" people (aside from purely egoistical reasons). Because they want something and solving the underlying issues requires Congress which is as useless as usual. I think this is pretty much the reason. It is a bad fix, but it is something that is possible. Sadly, in the US congress can not do things.
A 'fix' which makes the problem actively worse. Let's not kid ourselves this college educated people asking for a massive government handout. There are multiple ways to help people in financial trouble due to student debt without blanket loan forgiveness.
|
On January 18 2022 21:32 EnDeR_ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2022 20:25 Zambrah wrote:On January 18 2022 18:57 gobbledydook wrote:On January 18 2022 18:39 Zambrah wrote:On January 18 2022 17:35 EnDeR_ wrote:On January 18 2022 17:26 Zambrah wrote:On January 18 2022 17:04 gobbledydook wrote:
Is it fair to cancel student debt? What about those who decided to pay their fees and not incur debt? What about those who decided not to go to college because of the debt?
Is it fair to abolish slavery? What about all of those who lived their lives in slavery? Is it fair to those who have been slaves for twenty years? Stop thinking in these vindictive terms, “someone might not suffer like other people have had to suffer, would that be fair to people who have suffered?” is such a crappy way to think. You can't really compare being forced into slavery with choosing to get into debt to get an education. I do believe the point is a valid one, a large number of people did the financially responsible thing and not took on debt they couldn't afford and missed out on the benefits. It is certainly vindictive, but it also needs to be addressed. I doubt the decision for many was done out of financial responsibility, the last generation had it hammered into them that higher education was the ticket to a good life, you HAD to go to college or youd wind up a loser. When you hammer that into a bunch of teenagers and then saddle them with immense amounts of debt that they have no conception of because again, theyre teenagers, is fucked up. Young people went to college because society promised them a good life for doing so, in return they got crap wages, exorbitant cost of living, and debt many aren't going to be able to pay off in their life time because the have crap wages and exorbitant cost of living. College debt is 100% a trap, but that wasnt the narrative we were fed til recently. Its obviously not literally slavery, but this idea of "X group had to suffer so Y group also has to suffer or its not fair to X group," is fucking stupid. I do believe the US is in dire need of some significant (re)distribution of resources, but I'm not convinced student loan forgiveness is a particularly good way of achieving this goal. I'm also reading that while your average american graduate has something like $40k student loans, the median for medical school is between $200k and $250k. However, doctors actually make loads, too - even though they incur massive debts, they might not be the ones most in need of student loan debt relief. Given staffing issues in US healthcare further disincentivizing people to become doctors seems like a bad idea. In any case though, just means test it, are you making more than like 300K or whatever large number where you can reasonably expect to pay off your debt quickly, then youre fine, are you making less? Bam, its gone. "The rich might benefit!" is not a real argument because the rich either have their debts paid off or are very easy to exclude from any benefits of student loan forgiveness. Abolishing slavery cannot be compared to this at all. For one, abolishing slavery didn't, for example, involve the government paying former slaves restitution. Here we are talking about taking the taxpayer money, that those people who didn't borrow money to go to college paid, and paying those who did borrow money. How is it fair to them for their money to be spent in such a way? Its obviously not literally slavery, but this idea of "X group had to suffer so Y group also has to suffer or its not fair to X group," is fucking stupid. Tax payer money being allocated in a way that benefits some but not all?! Egads! This is the same shit from people who argue that universal healthcare is bad because you're healthy and why should you pay taxes to subsidize healthcare for other sick people! We should be okay spending tax money on higher education because an educated society is a better off society. Just like its good to have universal healthcare because a healthy society free of obscene medical debt is a better off society. Feel free to want general higher education reform as well, so that people who didnt feel able to go to college can go to college and not be financially ruined, but this "Its not fair for this group not to suffer because other people did suffer!" shit is a crap mentality. Note that I agree with you on most points. I just don't think considering debt forgiveness in a vacuum is going to get us anywhere, you still need to address the university funding model. I do think that some level of debt relief is necessary at this point in time. As drone mentioned, interest rates on these loans are exorbitant and abolishing that doesn't sound like such a complicated short-term fix, certainly much more palatable than completely forgiving the loan. You could also muck about with thresholds so people who can't afford pay less of their loans back. I think we can all agree that this is a shitshow and something needs to be done. Addressing the university funding model does not need to be that complicated. For instance, a graduate tax could certainly be brought in to subsidize students that need it. Implementation can be tricky, but it is certainly a viable option and it would not really affect those that made the choice to not go to university.
Youre right in that the myriad possibilities for solutions can be simple and effective, whats not simple is that Congress is basically a Do Nothing Hellscape where things go to die to Joe Manchin, Kristen Sinema, or Mitch McConnell.
People latch onto debt forgiveness because its something the executive can do on it's own, I think people would generally be amenable to any solution they could get.
We're not going to get any change to higher education at any point in the foreseeable future until either all debt is forgiven and the government is absolutely forced to tackle it, or until Congress is completely controlled 70 - 30 by Democrats.
I'd certainly settle for something like, 0% interest rate and all accumulated interest being forgiven.
|
On January 18 2022 21:59 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2022 21:32 EnDeR_ wrote:On January 18 2022 20:25 Zambrah wrote:On January 18 2022 18:57 gobbledydook wrote:On January 18 2022 18:39 Zambrah wrote:On January 18 2022 17:35 EnDeR_ wrote:On January 18 2022 17:26 Zambrah wrote:On January 18 2022 17:04 gobbledydook wrote:
Is it fair to cancel student debt? What about those who decided to pay their fees and not incur debt? What about those who decided not to go to college because of the debt?
Is it fair to abolish slavery? What about all of those who lived their lives in slavery? Is it fair to those who have been slaves for twenty years? Stop thinking in these vindictive terms, “someone might not suffer like other people have had to suffer, would that be fair to people who have suffered?” is such a crappy way to think. You can't really compare being forced into slavery with choosing to get into debt to get an education. I do believe the point is a valid one, a large number of people did the financially responsible thing and not took on debt they couldn't afford and missed out on the benefits. It is certainly vindictive, but it also needs to be addressed. I doubt the decision for many was done out of financial responsibility, the last generation had it hammered into them that higher education was the ticket to a good life, you HAD to go to college or youd wind up a loser. When you hammer that into a bunch of teenagers and then saddle them with immense amounts of debt that they have no conception of because again, theyre teenagers, is fucked up. Young people went to college because society promised them a good life for doing so, in return they got crap wages, exorbitant cost of living, and debt many aren't going to be able to pay off in their life time because the have crap wages and exorbitant cost of living. College debt is 100% a trap, but that wasnt the narrative we were fed til recently. Its obviously not literally slavery, but this idea of "X group had to suffer so Y group also has to suffer or its not fair to X group," is fucking stupid. I do believe the US is in dire need of some significant (re)distribution of resources, but I'm not convinced student loan forgiveness is a particularly good way of achieving this goal. I'm also reading that while your average american graduate has something like $40k student loans, the median for medical school is between $200k and $250k. However, doctors actually make loads, too - even though they incur massive debts, they might not be the ones most in need of student loan debt relief. Given staffing issues in US healthcare further disincentivizing people to become doctors seems like a bad idea. In any case though, just means test it, are you making more than like 300K or whatever large number where you can reasonably expect to pay off your debt quickly, then youre fine, are you making less? Bam, its gone. "The rich might benefit!" is not a real argument because the rich either have their debts paid off or are very easy to exclude from any benefits of student loan forgiveness. Abolishing slavery cannot be compared to this at all. For one, abolishing slavery didn't, for example, involve the government paying former slaves restitution. Here we are talking about taking the taxpayer money, that those people who didn't borrow money to go to college paid, and paying those who did borrow money. How is it fair to them for their money to be spent in such a way? Its obviously not literally slavery, but this idea of "X group had to suffer so Y group also has to suffer or its not fair to X group," is fucking stupid. Tax payer money being allocated in a way that benefits some but not all?! Egads! This is the same shit from people who argue that universal healthcare is bad because you're healthy and why should you pay taxes to subsidize healthcare for other sick people! We should be okay spending tax money on higher education because an educated society is a better off society. Just like its good to have universal healthcare because a healthy society free of obscene medical debt is a better off society. Feel free to want general higher education reform as well, so that people who didnt feel able to go to college can go to college and not be financially ruined, but this "Its not fair for this group not to suffer because other people did suffer!" shit is a crap mentality. Note that I agree with you on most points. I just don't think considering debt forgiveness in a vacuum is going to get us anywhere, you still need to address the university funding model. I do think that some level of debt relief is necessary at this point in time. As drone mentioned, interest rates on these loans are exorbitant and abolishing that doesn't sound like such a complicated short-term fix, certainly much more palatable than completely forgiving the loan. You could also muck about with thresholds so people who can't afford pay less of their loans back. I think we can all agree that this is a shitshow and something needs to be done. Addressing the university funding model does not need to be that complicated. For instance, a graduate tax could certainly be brought in to subsidize students that need it. Implementation can be tricky, but it is certainly a viable option and it would not really affect those that made the choice to not go to university. Youre right in that the myriad possibilities for solutions can be simple and effective, whats not simple is that Congress is basically a Do Nothing Hellscape where things go to die to Joe Manchin, Kristen Sinema, or Mitch McConnell. People latch onto debt forgiveness because its something the executive can do on it's own, I think people would generally be amenable to any solution they could get. We're not going to get any change to higher education at any point in the foreseeable future until either all debt is forgiven and the government is absolutely forced to tackle it, or until Congress is completely controlled 70 - 30 by Democrats. I'd certainly settle for something like, 0% interest rate and all accumulated interest being forgiven.
What makes you think congress will act if debt is forgiven (assuming the supreme court wouldn't simply overturn that E.O. as executive overreach)?
Won't they just do nothing in exactly the same way they have done nothing for the last 20 years or so, until in another 10 years there's a bunch more generation nexters complaining that their older brothers' debt was forgiven but they are needing to pay off theirs, and all the problems in the workplace that is creating (someone a few years older is willing to work for cheaper despite having more experience, because no student debt to pay off)?
Enter more forgiveness, more future tax payers money down the drain and no fix to anything except some middle class mohdoos having more disposable income?
|
I think forgiving debt would be enough of an event to have Congress actually get off their asses and do something. Not a guarantee or anything, American politicians are absolutely awful enough to just make that the new norm with no interest in actually fixing the system, but its at least a possibility that they try to avoid having to constantly repay college debt over and over every decade or so.
Id probably argue that in the case of one generations debts being forgiven the government is going to be very pressured to repeat that forgiveness and that enough pissed off Gen Z+1ers would have the sway to actually get something done on student loans, especially given theyre probably going to be more incentivized to get higher education in this situation. More educated populace, more at stake in government action, I think it lends itself to some sort of action on the higher education shituation.
Incidentally, I am not super sympathetic about the cost given how much money the government funnels at businesses, especially given the propensity for the economy to shit its pants and for companies to receive huge bailouts when it does. Not to mention the many trillion dollar military budget. The government is very happy to spend colossal sums of money, just not so much on Americans themselves.
|
On January 18 2022 20:25 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2022 18:57 gobbledydook wrote:On January 18 2022 18:39 Zambrah wrote:On January 18 2022 17:35 EnDeR_ wrote:On January 18 2022 17:26 Zambrah wrote:On January 18 2022 17:04 gobbledydook wrote:
Is it fair to cancel student debt? What about those who decided to pay their fees and not incur debt? What about those who decided not to go to college because of the debt?
Is it fair to abolish slavery? What about all of those who lived their lives in slavery? Is it fair to those who have been slaves for twenty years? Stop thinking in these vindictive terms, “someone might not suffer like other people have had to suffer, would that be fair to people who have suffered?” is such a crappy way to think. You can't really compare being forced into slavery with choosing to get into debt to get an education. I do believe the point is a valid one, a large number of people did the financially responsible thing and not took on debt they couldn't afford and missed out on the benefits. It is certainly vindictive, but it also needs to be addressed. I doubt the decision for many was done out of financial responsibility, the last generation had it hammered into them that higher education was the ticket to a good life, you HAD to go to college or youd wind up a loser. When you hammer that into a bunch of teenagers and then saddle them with immense amounts of debt that they have no conception of because again, theyre teenagers, is fucked up. Young people went to college because society promised them a good life for doing so, in return they got crap wages, exorbitant cost of living, and debt many aren't going to be able to pay off in their life time because the have crap wages and exorbitant cost of living. College debt is 100% a trap, but that wasnt the narrative we were fed til recently. Its obviously not literally slavery, but this idea of "X group had to suffer so Y group also has to suffer or its not fair to X group," is fucking stupid. I do believe the US is in dire need of some significant (re)distribution of resources, but I'm not convinced student loan forgiveness is a particularly good way of achieving this goal. I'm also reading that while your average american graduate has something like $40k student loans, the median for medical school is between $200k and $250k. However, doctors actually make loads, too - even though they incur massive debts, they might not be the ones most in need of student loan debt relief. Given staffing issues in US healthcare further disincentivizing people to become doctors seems like a bad idea. In any case though, just means test it, are you making more than like 300K or whatever large number where you can reasonably expect to pay off your debt quickly, then youre fine, are you making less? Bam, its gone. "The rich might benefit!" is not a real argument because the rich either have their debts paid off or are very easy to exclude from any benefits of student loan forgiveness. Abolishing slavery cannot be compared to this at all. For one, abolishing slavery didn't, for example, involve the government paying former slaves restitution. Here we are talking about taking the taxpayer money, that those people who didn't borrow money to go to college paid, and paying those who did borrow money. How is it fair to them for their money to be spent in such a way? Show nested quote +Its obviously not literally slavery, but this idea of "X group had to suffer so Y group also has to suffer or its not fair to X group," is fucking stupid. Tax payer money being allocated in a way that benefits some but not all?! Egads! This is the same shit from people who argue that universal healthcare is bad because you're healthy and why should you pay taxes to subsidize healthcare for other sick people! We should be okay spending tax money on higher education because an educated society is a better off society. Just like its good to have universal healthcare because a healthy society free of obscene medical debt is a better off society. Feel free to want general higher education reform as well, so that people who didnt feel able to go to college can go to college and not be financially ruined, but this "Its not fair for this group not to suffer because other people did suffer!" shit is a crap mentality.
The question of whether the government should subsidize future college tuition is different from the question of whether it should subsidize past college tuition. If tomorrow the government decided to subsidize future tuition people can react to that and go to college. That's not true for past tuition fees.
It's also disingenuous to suggest that my attitude is a other people suffered so they should suffer mentality. I have no problem if the next generation does not need to suffer through crippling college debt. I am against people, having already made their choice, now get bailed out in favor of other people who you could argue had made a better decision.
|
On January 18 2022 22:46 gobbledydook wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2022 20:25 Zambrah wrote:On January 18 2022 18:57 gobbledydook wrote:On January 18 2022 18:39 Zambrah wrote:On January 18 2022 17:35 EnDeR_ wrote:On January 18 2022 17:26 Zambrah wrote:On January 18 2022 17:04 gobbledydook wrote:
Is it fair to cancel student debt? What about those who decided to pay their fees and not incur debt? What about those who decided not to go to college because of the debt?
Is it fair to abolish slavery? What about all of those who lived their lives in slavery? Is it fair to those who have been slaves for twenty years? Stop thinking in these vindictive terms, “someone might not suffer like other people have had to suffer, would that be fair to people who have suffered?” is such a crappy way to think. You can't really compare being forced into slavery with choosing to get into debt to get an education. I do believe the point is a valid one, a large number of people did the financially responsible thing and not took on debt they couldn't afford and missed out on the benefits. It is certainly vindictive, but it also needs to be addressed. I doubt the decision for many was done out of financial responsibility, the last generation had it hammered into them that higher education was the ticket to a good life, you HAD to go to college or youd wind up a loser. When you hammer that into a bunch of teenagers and then saddle them with immense amounts of debt that they have no conception of because again, theyre teenagers, is fucked up. Young people went to college because society promised them a good life for doing so, in return they got crap wages, exorbitant cost of living, and debt many aren't going to be able to pay off in their life time because the have crap wages and exorbitant cost of living. College debt is 100% a trap, but that wasnt the narrative we were fed til recently. Its obviously not literally slavery, but this idea of "X group had to suffer so Y group also has to suffer or its not fair to X group," is fucking stupid. I do believe the US is in dire need of some significant (re)distribution of resources, but I'm not convinced student loan forgiveness is a particularly good way of achieving this goal. I'm also reading that while your average american graduate has something like $40k student loans, the median for medical school is between $200k and $250k. However, doctors actually make loads, too - even though they incur massive debts, they might not be the ones most in need of student loan debt relief. Given staffing issues in US healthcare further disincentivizing people to become doctors seems like a bad idea. In any case though, just means test it, are you making more than like 300K or whatever large number where you can reasonably expect to pay off your debt quickly, then youre fine, are you making less? Bam, its gone. "The rich might benefit!" is not a real argument because the rich either have their debts paid off or are very easy to exclude from any benefits of student loan forgiveness. Abolishing slavery cannot be compared to this at all. For one, abolishing slavery didn't, for example, involve the government paying former slaves restitution. Here we are talking about taking the taxpayer money, that those people who didn't borrow money to go to college paid, and paying those who did borrow money. How is it fair to them for their money to be spent in such a way? Its obviously not literally slavery, but this idea of "X group had to suffer so Y group also has to suffer or its not fair to X group," is fucking stupid. Tax payer money being allocated in a way that benefits some but not all?! Egads! This is the same shit from people who argue that universal healthcare is bad because you're healthy and why should you pay taxes to subsidize healthcare for other sick people! We should be okay spending tax money on higher education because an educated society is a better off society. Just like its good to have universal healthcare because a healthy society free of obscene medical debt is a better off society. Feel free to want general higher education reform as well, so that people who didnt feel able to go to college can go to college and not be financially ruined, but this "Its not fair for this group not to suffer because other people did suffer!" shit is a crap mentality. The question of whether the government should subsidize future college tuition is different from the question of whether it should subsidize past college tuition. If tomorrow the government decided to subsidize future tuition people can react to that and go to college. That's not true for past tuition fees. It's also disingenuous to suggest that my attitude is a other people suffered so they should suffer mentality. I have no problem if the next generation does not need to suffer through crippling college debt. I am against people, having already made their choice, now get bailed out in favor of other people who you could argue had made a better decision.
Wait, wait, youre telling me that if the government promised to forgive all future student loans youd just be... okay with that?...
Im going to set that aside because of how asinine and arbitrary it is to deem current student debt holders as worthy of suffering but not the future generations for... reasons?
It's also disingenuous to suggest that my attitude is a other people suffered so they should suffer mentality. I have no problem if the next generation does not need to suffer through crippling college debt. I am against people, having already made their choice, now get bailed out in favor of other people who you could argue had made a better decision.
Man I hope youre willing to put some consistency to this, "noone should have to pay into anything that doesnt entirely benefit them in a society" shtick. I can presume you also think universal healthcare is bad because thats bailing out the people who eat badly and have heart attacks, and I presume you dont like things like food stamps for bailing out the poor and food insecure? How about roads that you don't drive on, youre bailing out the people who use those roads, but you choose not to so why should you have to pay to maintain them?
This is all ignoring the brutal realities of how badly this generation is doing when it comes to wealth, but yes, we should let everyone languish, after all, when they were 18 society pressured them into getting a college education and they signed up for colossal debt with no understanding of what that actually means because, again, they were fucking teenagers. Did what society told you to do and then society went, "Psyche!" but dont worry, society won't help you out because thats unfair to... people without debt?...
|
|
|
On January 19 2022 00:34 JimmiC wrote:The guy can just not stop his very public grifting. Nothing like using tax dollars to promote his golf course, and doing it on MLK day. He seems to have figured out that if you just consistently and consitently break all the ethics rules of public office the outrage becomes a dull roar and as a republican there are zero consequences. The outrage might even help his popularity. https://ca.yahoo.com/news/trump-under-fire-using-presidential-142454604.html
Without the outrage and hyperbole he would be much easier to manage. Taking away his social media presence has made him frail. Poor little guy. I hope he manages to run in 2024 which would be the final stake.
“Why are you running for a position you already lost?” - Nikki Haley.
|
I'm not sure trumps opponents should be eager for him to run. That lesson should have been learned in 2016. He may still have the fundamental appeal (to people who aren't republican partisans) of his new (and unique) ideas and anti establishment stance. Of course there's January 6, and the fact that his lack of interest and knowledge and skill prevented him from implementing his new ideas, so I'm not sure.
|
On January 18 2022 21:44 EnDeR_ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2022 17:45 Nick_54 wrote:On January 18 2022 17:31 EnDeR_ wrote:On January 18 2022 17:22 Nick_54 wrote:On January 18 2022 17:04 gobbledydook wrote:
Is it fair to cancel student debt? What about those who decided to pay their fees and not incur debt? What about those who decided not to go to college because of the debt?
Is it fair that university administrators, professors, and staff make obscene salaries while 18 year old students are forced take on life changing debts at an age they don't know what they're getting into. They're fucking crooks and the main problem as far as I'm concerned along with forgiving the debt. The issue has to be corrected for generations going forward. Very sure that the majority of university administrators, professors and staff do not make obscene salaries. There are some eyewatering salaries, true, but these are exceptions, not the norm and tend to be the really senior staff. You included university staff in your list which also includes sanitation staff as well as catering staff or even campus police -- I'd be surprised if any of those are much above minimum wage. The cost of education has little to do with the salaries of the people running the place. You should do your homework. It's a bit like the poster a couple pages back that argued they could cut school budgets by 50% by cutting salaries of overpaid staff... Obviously I'm not talking about the staff making minimum wage. Campus police should be severely defunded if not eliminated entirely. I'm talking about the public servants making hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars. Football and basketball coaches making million up millions. The cost of university needs to go down as well the debt forgiveness to not put the next generation in this spot. I've done enough homework to know that teenagers racking up 6 figure debts to pay 6 and 7 figure salaries to go along with golden parachutes for the elite isn't right. I'm not saying it would solve the cost problem entirely, but its a start. Certainly one can reduce the cost of education by removing services. I'm not going to defend the exploitation of college students for profit (which I find abhorrent -- they should be paid) but I think it is arguable that having a top-tier team brings in more value than it costs in the form of sponsorships, advertising, investments, etc. and effectively making your education actually have higher value for the cost. In other words, removing them arguably would not make your education cheaper because that's not why your education costs are so stupidly expensive.
I highly disagree with the top-tier pay, even if it brings it a top-tier team having good value. Obviously if it had value there wouldn't be a bunch of broke graduates in debt right now.
|
On January 19 2022 00:34 JimmiC wrote:The guy can just not stop his very public grifting. Nothing like using tax dollars to promote his golf course, and doing it on MLK day. He seems to have figured out that if you just consistently and consitently break all the ethics rules of public office the outrage becomes a dull roar and as a republican there are zero consequences. The outrage might even help his popularity. https://ca.yahoo.com/news/trump-under-fire-using-presidential-142454604.html So what would it take to revoke the money normally gifted to a former presidents office? I'm going to assume it requires Congress and that Republicans will continue to lick Trumps ass.
|
On January 19 2022 01:00 Doc.Rivers wrote:
I'm not sure trumps opponents should be eager for him to run. That lesson should have been learned in 2016. He may still have the fundamental appeal (to people who aren't republican partisans) of his new (and unique) ideas and anti establishment stance. Of course there's January 6, and the fact that his lack of interest and knowledge and skill prevented him from implementing his new ideas, so I'm not sure.
Unfortunately for him, he lost the popular vote by 10 million, and this was BEFORE the election stolen nonsense which was topped off by Jan6. Any moderates or independents won’t push him over the edge like they did in 2016. Had even one state been overturned legally, (if there was actual fraud,) he might have had a shot. But going 0-60 in court cases combined with the unwillingness to accept defeat will forever cage his presidential aspirations. Anti establishment sentiment only works one time, but he became said establishment. He’s toast, and I can taste it.
I’ve said it before but he will only be able to make his own social media / news network from here on out and maybe pull some candidates support and keep in the limelight that way.
|
On January 19 2022 00:20 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2022 22:46 gobbledydook wrote:On January 18 2022 20:25 Zambrah wrote:On January 18 2022 18:57 gobbledydook wrote:On January 18 2022 18:39 Zambrah wrote:On January 18 2022 17:35 EnDeR_ wrote:On January 18 2022 17:26 Zambrah wrote:On January 18 2022 17:04 gobbledydook wrote:
Is it fair to cancel student debt? What about those who decided to pay their fees and not incur debt? What about those who decided not to go to college because of the debt?
Is it fair to abolish slavery? What about all of those who lived their lives in slavery? Is it fair to those who have been slaves for twenty years? Stop thinking in these vindictive terms, “someone might not suffer like other people have had to suffer, would that be fair to people who have suffered?” is such a crappy way to think. You can't really compare being forced into slavery with choosing to get into debt to get an education. I do believe the point is a valid one, a large number of people did the financially responsible thing and not took on debt they couldn't afford and missed out on the benefits. It is certainly vindictive, but it also needs to be addressed. I doubt the decision for many was done out of financial responsibility, the last generation had it hammered into them that higher education was the ticket to a good life, you HAD to go to college or youd wind up a loser. When you hammer that into a bunch of teenagers and then saddle them with immense amounts of debt that they have no conception of because again, theyre teenagers, is fucked up. Young people went to college because society promised them a good life for doing so, in return they got crap wages, exorbitant cost of living, and debt many aren't going to be able to pay off in their life time because the have crap wages and exorbitant cost of living. College debt is 100% a trap, but that wasnt the narrative we were fed til recently. Its obviously not literally slavery, but this idea of "X group had to suffer so Y group also has to suffer or its not fair to X group," is fucking stupid. I do believe the US is in dire need of some significant (re)distribution of resources, but I'm not convinced student loan forgiveness is a particularly good way of achieving this goal. I'm also reading that while your average american graduate has something like $40k student loans, the median for medical school is between $200k and $250k. However, doctors actually make loads, too - even though they incur massive debts, they might not be the ones most in need of student loan debt relief. Given staffing issues in US healthcare further disincentivizing people to become doctors seems like a bad idea. In any case though, just means test it, are you making more than like 300K or whatever large number where you can reasonably expect to pay off your debt quickly, then youre fine, are you making less? Bam, its gone. "The rich might benefit!" is not a real argument because the rich either have their debts paid off or are very easy to exclude from any benefits of student loan forgiveness. Abolishing slavery cannot be compared to this at all. For one, abolishing slavery didn't, for example, involve the government paying former slaves restitution. Here we are talking about taking the taxpayer money, that those people who didn't borrow money to go to college paid, and paying those who did borrow money. How is it fair to them for their money to be spent in such a way? Its obviously not literally slavery, but this idea of "X group had to suffer so Y group also has to suffer or its not fair to X group," is fucking stupid. Tax payer money being allocated in a way that benefits some but not all?! Egads! This is the same shit from people who argue that universal healthcare is bad because you're healthy and why should you pay taxes to subsidize healthcare for other sick people! We should be okay spending tax money on higher education because an educated society is a better off society. Just like its good to have universal healthcare because a healthy society free of obscene medical debt is a better off society. Feel free to want general higher education reform as well, so that people who didnt feel able to go to college can go to college and not be financially ruined, but this "Its not fair for this group not to suffer because other people did suffer!" shit is a crap mentality. The question of whether the government should subsidize future college tuition is different from the question of whether it should subsidize past college tuition. If tomorrow the government decided to subsidize future tuition people can react to that and go to college. That's not true for past tuition fees. It's also disingenuous to suggest that my attitude is a other people suffered so they should suffer mentality. I have no problem if the next generation does not need to suffer through crippling college debt. I am against people, having already made their choice, now get bailed out in favor of other people who you could argue had made a better decision. Wait, wait, youre telling me that if the government promised to forgive all future student loans youd just be... okay with that?... Im going to set that aside because of how asinine and arbitrary it is to deem current student debt holders as worthy of suffering but not the future generations for... reasons? Show nested quote +It's also disingenuous to suggest that my attitude is a other people suffered so they should suffer mentality. I have no problem if the next generation does not need to suffer through crippling college debt. I am against people, having already made their choice, now get bailed out in favor of other people who you could argue had made a better decision. Man I hope youre willing to put some consistency to this, "noone should have to pay into anything that doesnt entirely benefit them in a society" shtick. I can presume you also think universal healthcare is bad because thats bailing out the people who eat badly and have heart attacks, and I presume you dont like things like food stamps for bailing out the poor and food insecure? How about roads that you don't drive on, youre bailing out the people who use those roads, but you choose not to so why should you have to pay to maintain them? This is all ignoring the brutal realities of how badly this generation is doing when it comes to wealth, but yes, we should let everyone languish, after all, when they were 18 society pressured them into getting a college education and they signed up for colossal debt with no understanding of what that actually means because, again, they were fucking teenagers. Did what society told you to do and then society went, "Psyche!" but dont worry, society won't help you out because thats unfair to... people without debt?...
The idea that student loans shouldn't be cancelled is asinine to me.
They shouldn't even exist and it's unconscionable to insist people be stuck with them because of rank government incompetence.
No one who supports canceling student loans objects to more comprehensive solutions. The only reasonable conclusion is that people in opposition to forgiving student loans want the people who used them to be forced to endure paying them because of their sense of "justice".
There's a whole host of policy congress should be obligated to enact (universal background checks with 90%+ of public support is an example) including many addressing the costs of getting an education. Congress passing a more comprehensive solution would be grand. Unfortunately Schumer can't even muster the capacity to protect voting rights they managed to get through 1960's America.
Hence why I understand the only conscionable position to be supporting Biden using his capacity to eliminate student debt without congress.
|
On January 18 2022 17:04 gobbledydook wrote:
Is it fair to cancel student debt? What about those who decided to pay their fees and not incur debt? What about those who decided not to go to college because of the debt?
Is it fair to have food stamps, child tax credit and welfare? What about people who already make enough money to survive? Shouldn’t we give them money too? And shouldn’t we give non-parents the child tax credit as well?
Is it fair to have farming subsidies? What if you’re an engineer? Shouldn’t you also be subsidized?
This entire line of thinking is silly because it pretends nothing has any reason to be funded other than directly giving money with no other thoughts whatsoever.
Is it fair to send aid to Pakistan? Shouldn’t we also send aid to Norway?
Using the logic you are putting forth, we should never fund something we previously did not fund. If I paid for school, my grand kids should also pay for school and so should their grandkids.
By your logic, we never should have created public schools for children. We should have made sure we only ever give children what children had 900 years ago. This entire line of thinking is incredibly short sighted and lacks ambition. It’s also vindictive.
|
United States24740 Posts
Food stamps are not as arbitrary as cancelling student debt for people today, but not yesterday or tomorrow. I of course don't mind providing food assistance to people who have trouble affording food, even if I don't derive any direct financial or food benefit from that program. I also don't mind reducing interest rates for student loans to zero on a go-forward basis provided the other details are worked out (we had some discussion on this in the past). I also don't mind having the government fund more of the post-secondary educational process as long as some common sense limitations are put in place (e.g., you can't just stay in school earning degree after degree for "free" for 50 years with no intention of earning money any other way).
I would mind if the day after I submitted a 10K check to pay off my student debt, all student debt was suddenly cancelled, and then my friend who took on student debt a few days after that never got their student debt cancelled. This unfair treatment would be arbitrary from the perspective of the borrowers, even if it's the result of the political system which we all agree is rather dysfunctional here. "I had to pay back my ridiculous student loans" is not a good argument for "you should have to pay back your ridiculous student loans." I think we all agree there. Arbitrary action (even considering the limitations of what Biden can do from his current situation) is the issue here.
|
On January 19 2022 02:13 micronesia wrote:
Food stamps are not as arbitrary as cancelling student debt for people today, but not yesterday or tomorrow. I of course don't mind providing food assistance to people who have trouble affording food, even if I don't derive any direct financial or food benefit from that program. I also don't mind reducing interest rates for student loans to zero on a go-forward basis provided the other details are worked out (we had some discussion on this in the past). I also don't mind having the government fund more of the post-secondary educational process as long as some common sense limitations are put in place (e.g., you can't just stay in school earning degree after degree for "free" for 50 years with no intention of earning money any other way).
I would mind if the day after I submitted a 10K check to pay off my student debt, all student debt was suddenly cancelled, and then my friend who took on student debt a few days after that never got their student debt cancelled. This unfair treatment would be arbitrary from the perspective of the borrowers, even if it's the result of the political system which we all agree is rather dysfunctional here. "I had to pay back my ridiculous student loans" is not a good argument for "you should have to pay back your ridiculous student loans." I think we all agree there. Arbitrary action (even considering the limitations of what Biden can do from his current situation) is the issue here.
No one advocating cancelling student loans has any desire for them to continue existing for future students.
|
On January 19 2022 02:13 micronesia wrote:
Food stamps are not as arbitrary as cancelling student debt for people today, but not yesterday or tomorrow. I of course don't mind providing food assistance to people who have trouble affording food, even if I don't derive any direct financial or food benefit from that program. I also don't mind reducing interest rates for student loans to zero on a go-forward basis provided the other details are worked out (we had some discussion on this in the past). I also don't mind having the government fund more of the post-secondary educational process as long as some common sense limitations are put in place (e.g., you can't just stay in school earning degree after degree for "free" for 50 years with no intention of earning money any other way).
I would mind if the day after I submitted a 10K check to pay off my student debt, all student debt was suddenly cancelled, and then my friend who took on student debt a few days after that never got their student debt cancelled. This unfair treatment would be arbitrary from the perspective of the borrowers, even if it's the result of the political system which we all agree is rather dysfunctional here. "I had to pay back my ridiculous student loans" is not a good argument for "you should have to pay back your ridiculous student loans." I think we all agree there. Arbitrary action (even considering the limitations of what Biden can do from his current situation) is the issue here.
I would hardly see a problem with having a back-pay grace period tbh. It hasn't been fair for anyone to deal with the student debt they've had to deal with, if its feasible to back pay peoples interest or the entirety of their loan, I'm 100% on board with that.
|
United States24740 Posts
On January 19 2022 02:18 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2022 02:13 micronesia wrote:
Food stamps are not as arbitrary as cancelling student debt for people today, but not yesterday or tomorrow. I of course don't mind providing food assistance to people who have trouble affording food, even if I don't derive any direct financial or food benefit from that program. I also don't mind reducing interest rates for student loans to zero on a go-forward basis provided the other details are worked out (we had some discussion on this in the past). I also don't mind having the government fund more of the post-secondary educational process as long as some common sense limitations are put in place (e.g., you can't just stay in school earning degree after degree for "free" for 50 years with no intention of earning money any other way).
I would mind if the day after I submitted a 10K check to pay off my student debt, all student debt was suddenly cancelled, and then my friend who took on student debt a few days after that never got their student debt cancelled. This unfair treatment would be arbitrary from the perspective of the borrowers, even if it's the result of the political system which we all agree is rather dysfunctional here. "I had to pay back my ridiculous student loans" is not a good argument for "you should have to pay back your ridiculous student loans." I think we all agree there. Arbitrary action (even considering the limitations of what Biden can do from his current situation) is the issue here. No one advocating cancelling student loans has any desire for them to continue existing for future students.
That's most likely true. However, what us in this thread desire or specifically don't desire, and what action we in this thread are currently calling for from Biden, are two different things. The action should be appropriate regardless of whatever else we do or don't desire.
|
What we currently call for Biden to do is dictated by the circumstances though, we all want the obvious solutions that involve Congress but Congress is dead and is almost definitely going to be dead for a very long time. Advocating for solutions that involve Congress in that situation is just advocating for doing nothing, because thats what Congress is willing/able to do until Democrats somehow earn an ultra-majority.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
