It was meant to illustrate the kind of political warfare and rhetoric we can expect to see in the future.
It was meant to illustrate the kind of political warfare and rhetoric we can expect to see in the future.
In ~40 minutes, I felt this podcast did a great job of unwinding the economic, moral, political and legal viewpoints of this issue:
https://www.theringer.com/2022/8/30/...resident-biden
If this EO was challenged in court, the interviewee wasn't optimistic it would hold up.
Some interesting high-level facts from Axios
https://www.axios.com/2022/08/29/stu...f-who-benefits
I mean, if you’re concerned about the distributional impacts of this policy because too much is going to people who are well off, or because too much of the financial burden is going to be carried by the lower class, and therefore you’re going to vote GOP, boy do I have some news for you about the distributional impacts of their policies!
Who cares about what the test tube baby of tucker and ann coulter has to say after this:
https://relevantmagazine.com/faith/c...good-actually/
j'ai des grands instants de lucididididididididi
A prime example of why we cannot have an open dialogue anymore.
Out of all the posts here I don't really recall seeing much of that viewpoint. Those questioning this program (I am one) tend to support the idea that higher education has gotten far too expensive but that this program doesn't address that and is being rushed as if this is an immediate crisis or emergency.
Its not and if we do go in this direction we should do our damnedest to get it right instead of using it as yet another example in 2 years of how the students were given a subsidy so why not the next boondoggle?
I have been in this State for 30 years and I am willing to admit that I am part of the problem.
"Happiest years of my life were earning < $8.00 and hour, collecting unemployment every spring and fall, no car, no debt and no responsibilities. 1984-1990 Park City UT"
Look, I was asking questions and getting bullshit for answers. I’m all in on having a quality discussion about the cost of higher education. I’m of the opinion that this EO isn’t intended to address that, it’s a credit much like all the credits handed out during the pandemic and going back to 2008. It’s for immediate relief for some lower middle class debt holders. Maybe it will free up some money to be spent in this faltering economy. Is it perfect? No. Will anyone other than those benefiting from notice anything other than hurt feelings, no. Just don’t start talking about average Joe making less than $75k a year shouldering the burden because it’s not true.
Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!
Please show me where I have ever written such a thing?Just don’t start talking about average Joe making less than $75k a year shouldering the burden because it’s not true.
What you call a credit WILL have to get made up somewhere and sometime even if we just add it to the Debt. I won't ever feel it, you won't either but someone will have to eat the cost.
A 1/2 a trillion here a 1/2 trillion there and pretty soon it adds up.
![]()
I have been in this State for 30 years and I am willing to admit that I am part of the problem.
"Happiest years of my life were earning < $8.00 and hour, collecting unemployment every spring and fall, no car, no debt and no responsibilities. 1984-1990 Park City UT"
Absolutely. The reason tuition is so high of the loans available to everyone. If you look at a chart of college tuition, you see that it started to go up faster when the loan program started.
So why was this program started?
Not to help students, but to give banks a surfé of income that is risk free, because student loans cannot be discharged.
Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk
Or. If you’re being kind, it could have been to help marginal students (poor credit or poor academics) qualify for loans.
And yet those are the exact same people that need BK to escape bad life choices.
So yeah. It’s the bankers yet again.
Instead of $10k across the board, why not bring back BK and use the trillion to repay creditors at some percent of losses?
That way the funds are used by those few that take the plunge. And they would get full relief.
Remember it is 1/2 trillion over 10 years. A quick google search showed that the Afghan war cost us around $50 billion/year towards the end of the conflict, which happens to be about what this program costs annually.
Also, this will hopefully spur more economic activity as some of the debtors can now maybe pay for a mortgage or have children or seek deferred medical care or buy avocado toast, which they couldn't before because they couldn't even keep up with the interest on their student loans.
Bookmarks