US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3767

On August 26 2022 10:01 WombaT wrote:

Where is the disconnect?

X individual publicly advocates against debt forgiveness on grounds of personal responsibility/the government isn’t a nanny. X person takes a loan they don’t need that is subsequently written off.

It’s unbelievably hypocritical, there’s no way you don’t recognise this.

Again, as I said. If you have a brick and mortar business that was shut down by government diktat, you’re entitled to commensurate compensation. You may indeed feel that student debt forgiveness is a bad idea, but you take that government loan.

You’re not a hypocrite in that scenario because the cessation of your business was foisted upon you. It’s that or go bust.

If your business is, let’s say a basically entirely online media concern, lockdowns aren’t affecting your bottom line to near the same degree. Indeed they may help your bottom line, more of a captive audience.

So yeah, you’re a giant fucking hypocrite if you’re taking money from the government while lecturing about it on the airwaves.

That said I still don’t think this is good policy, at best it’s a vote winning bandaid. It’s laying on a bunch more on to the national debt and giving temporary relief while dealing with none of the actual issues. And there doesn’t seem much prospect of the actual issues being dealt with.

College costs too much, and we’re approaching a Catch 22 level where for many jobs a degree is both a pre-requisite, nor a proof of qualification as so many people obtain degrees knowing they’re required for so many jobs that don’t need them.

I mean this fixes none of the structural problems in American tertiary education, it alleviates some crippling financial pressure which is better than nothing but it’s a complete band aid measure.

On August 26 2022 17:54 Gorsameth wrote:
A government paying to help a person get an education is not a hand out, its an investment in the future. Educated people get better jobs, earn more money, that is then taxed, and require less government assistance later in life.

If they 'pay' 10k to a student now they will make that 10k back many times over throughout that persons life.
Most of the world figured this out years and years ago.

On August 26 2022 16:09 Broetchenholer wrote:
Shouldn't we all agree, that at the start of an adult life, humans should have the ability to find an education and then a job without also deciding on how much debt they will have to take for it? If participating in life has a price tag on it, that's bad policy that needs to stop. Is that a point of agreement in the thread?

On August 26 2022 16:09 Broetchenholer wrote:
Shouldn't we all agree, that at the start of an adult life, humans should have the ability to find an education and then a job without also deciding on how much debt they will have to take for it? If participating in life has a price tag on it, that's bad policy that needs to stop. Is that a point of agreement in the thread?

On August 26 2022 18:29 BlackJack wrote:


I don't think any of the Ben Shapiro types are lecturing/criticizing people for accepting loan forgiveness or government handouts for the sake of personal responsibility. They are criticizing the government for giving the loan forgiveness in the first place. There's an important difference there. Personally I don't agree with this loan forgiveness and I don't agree with the PPP loan forgiveness either but you bet your ass I would jump on a free $10k that the government is giving out and I would advise anyone else to do the same. I don't think that makes me a hypocrite. I don't think people should have to personally hamstring themselves by refusing a government benefit they are entitled to just because they oppose the government offering the benefit in the first place. Especially if you're a citizen whose tax dollars are contributing to that benefit.

But just fyi the Ben Shapiro thing is fake news. The PPP loan actually went to another Ben Shapiro that is a real estate agent in California

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ben-shapiro-get-ppp-loan-forgiveness/

On August 26 2022 22:49 KwarK wrote:

The objection is due to the poorly structured provision of that education that causes it to be so expensive. Let’s say an incompetent water utility company lost most of the water due to poor management and maintenance. Due to this it charged a shitton for household water and it was hurting families. One solution would be to split the bill with the taxpayer so that the cost to households would be less. Another would be to deliver water in a less inefficient way. But as long as the taxpayer is paying the tab there is no incentive for the utility to be less wasteful.

I think almost everyone (some conservative circles think it’s a conspiracy to destroy religion) agrees that education is a public good and that taxpayer dollars spent on education pay for themselves. But if education costs grow to be the maximum the market can bear then adding taxpayer funds is simply increasing the amount the market can bear without meaningfully changing the problem. It’s a half measure, government funding without government management.

I’d like to see the government money coupled with government intervention into cost control, especially given how online learning options have changed the costs. I’d like to see an end to the McGraw Hill bullshit and the million other ways in which students get fucked.

Some conservatives also hate that stuff but believe that the best way to get rid of it is by reducing the spending power of consumers so that they can’t be gouged as much. I disagree but ideologically that’s the conclusion they draw.

This is the worst of both worlds and justifiable only in the context of providing immediate relief while working on the bigger issue. It’s not really a gift to students, it’s a gift to the people robbing them. Cost control is required. It’s also probably required in primary and secondary education, the amounts spent per child per year are often obscene, especially given how little is spent elsewhere. A family existing on food stamps, housing assistance and a single earner minimum wage earner may have a disposable income below $10k but $50k of public money spent educating their kids (assuming 4) each year. A stable place to live and a minimum wage increase would do far more for educational outcomes than more funding for education.

On August 27 2022 13:42 StasisField wrote:
I saw an interesting point made about the affadavit: The affadavit had a letter from Trump's counsel attached to it, and in that letter Trump's counsel raises the point of the President's ability to declassify information. The judge saw that letter, read the argument from counsel, was aware of that argument before issuing the warrant, and issued the warrant anyway. Even though it was already pretty apparent this argument didn't hold water, since the crimes being investigated do not require the documents to be classified, it's still nice to see a judge decide against Trump in a situation where that argument was used.

On August 26 2022 16:09 Broetchenholer wrote:
Shouldn't we all agree, that at the start of an adult life, humans should have the ability to find an education and then a job without also deciding on how much debt they will have to take for it? If participating in life has a price tag on it, that's bad policy that needs to stop. Is that a point of agreement in the thread?

On August 27 2022 21:23 plasmidghost wrote:
No idea what happened in the past few weeks but Biden has turned into Dark Brandon and it's been great to finally see Dems not compromise in the naive hope of bipartisanship

On August 26 2022 22:38 oBlade wrote:

The value of the education is presumably in the education itself, not in whether the government or the student pays. If a student can make many times more than 10k over the course of their life, that would be more than enough to repay $10k of loans, which is the purpose of a loan to begin with, to buy something now that you will be able to pay for easier later over time because you aren't liquid. $10k is not so far removed from the US national average debt a student graduates with, $25k.

And your statement, you might agree, is not independent of the market. For example, a $2 million education might not earn back its value many times over the course of someone's life, you'd expect, right? Or if you believe that example is too outlandish, perhaps a real estate course lasting several days costing thousands or tens of thousands of dollars, should that education fall to the government's tab? Real estate can be quite lucrative.