Biden's student loan forgiveness plan

Started by NemeBro4 pages

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
My point is that a single income for a person with only a high school education used to be enough to comfortably sustain a family with 3+ children whilst buying a property. Now a couple both with university level educations could barely afford to rent a 1 bed apartment due to cost of living outstripping earnings by an enormous amount.

Having private debt written off or paid for by the taxpayer will just encourage those institutions who are owed the debt to continue their practices because they'll think the government will always cough up regardless. This exact scenario is playing out right now in the banking industry. It also means that employers won't get any pressure into paying employees a fair rate because they know the government will step in to help. This exact situation is currently playing out in the UK where energy bills are skyrocketing and the government is giving households money to pay their bills and low and behold the energy companies have already announced that bills are to double again in January. The energy price cap now having gone from £1,300 in March 2022 to £3,549 yesterday and expected to go as high as £7,700 buy April 2023 and so long as the government keeps stepping in to pay people's bills I wonder what will keep happening to the prices.

While true, how would you suggest fixing the problem of the cost of living outstripping earnings?

I have a mortgage I would like paid off. Or even 20k on the principle would be nice. I paid off my own 24k in student loans... I think this is an unfair plan. I also think it's ridiculous, because the government is currently still making loans, knowing they will never be repaid under this plan.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
My point is that a single income for a person with only a high school education used to be enough to comfortably sustain a family with 3+ children whilst buying a property. Now a couple both with university level educations could barely afford to rent a 1 bed apartment due to cost of living outstripping earnings by an enormous amount.

Having private debt written off or paid for by the taxpayer will just encourage those institutions who are owed the debt to continue their practices because they'll think the government will always cough up regardless. This exact scenario is playing out right now in the banking industry. It also means that employers won't get any pressure into paying employees a fair rate because they know the government will step in to help. This exact situation is currently playing out in the UK where energy bills are skyrocketing and the government is giving households money to pay their bills and low and behold the energy companies have already announced that bills are to double again in January. The energy price cap now having gone from £1,300 in March 2022 to £3,549 yesterday and expected to go as high as £7,700 buy April 2023 and so long as the government keeps stepping in to pay people's bills I wonder what will keep happening to the prices.

This argument is equivalent to conservatives arguing that raising minimum wage is bad because it increases inflation. Institutions are jacking up their prices regardless of whether the government bails out debt holders or not because they know that college education is borderline mandatory to get a non trade-cuck career, and thus they have the leverage to charge whatever the market will bear. Do you know what else drives up the cost of tuition? The existence of loans to begin with. If you couldn't borrow money to pay for tuition, then the demand for admission would drop and institutions would be forced to lower their prices to make admission more accessible. Most people would not assert that student loans should be done away with altogether, though (most would assert that higher education should be free, but that's an entire separate ballgame).

It is not logical to assert that you shouldn't operate on someone with a bullet wound because they never should have been shot in the first place. The shooting happened, the victim is bleeding out. The number one priority should be to stop the bleeding.

Originally posted by truejedi
I have a mortgage I would like paid off. Or even 20k on the principle would be nice. I paid off my own 24k in student loans... I think this is an unfair plan. I also think it's ridiculous, because the government is currently still making loans, knowing they will never be repaid under this plan.
It's not fair that my tax dollars should pay for the emergency open heart surgery of some chainsmoking fat **** who had a heart attack when I work so hard to be healthy and fit, and to have health insurance. Should hospitals therefore be allowed to let people who choose to live unhealthy lifestyles and who have no health insurance just ****ing die?

Originally posted by NemeBro
While true, how would you suggest fixing the problem of the cost of living outstripping earnings?

Take your pick

1. Above inflation pay rises

2. Non executive remuneration in line with executive renumeration including bonuses and share options. If bosses want to award themselves 20% yearly salary increases with 100% bonus and/or share options then their workers get a matching %

3. A ring fenced % of shareholder dividends set aside for workers.

4. Build more houses to increase supply to keep house price rises in line with earnings rises so an average mortgage is no longer ever increasing multiples of average salaries. To give an example of what I mean. The average house price in the UK in 1995 was 2.8x the average salary. It is now 7x the average salary and 11x in London. Meanwhile the number of houses being built every year has dropped steadily since the 1970s but the population increase has accelerated.

Originally posted by Tzeentch

It is not logical to assert that you shouldn't operate on someone with a bullet wound because they never should have been shot in the first place. The shooting happened, the victim is bleeding out. The number one priority should be to stop the bleeding.

It's not fair that my tax dollars should pay for the emergency open heart surgery of some chainsmoking fat **** who had a heart attack when I work so hard to be healthy and fit, and to have health insurance. Should hospitals therefore be allowed to let people who choose to live unhealthy lifestyles and who have no health insurance just ****ing die?

They aren't stopping the bleeding, they are giving the gunmen permissions to shoot more people, since they will all be patched up. Why not stop the bleeding of everyone in debt? Why focus on student loans? Anyone and everyone in debt is in the same boat. Credit card debt is more crushing than student loans, mortgages last longer, speaking of medical bills, they are even more inescapable than student loans... Why pick student loans? I ascertain they did it to let colleges charge even more.

Also, I don't know where you live, but I live in America: your tax dollars aren't covering anyone's health care who didn't have insurance. Other than keeping them from dying on the table, they aren't doing anything for someone without insurance. They will have crippling medical debt for the rest of their lives, for sure going to lose everything. Not having health insurance in America is a death sentence.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
This argument is equivalent to conservatives arguing that raising minimum wage is bad because it increases inflation. Institutions are jacking up their prices regardless of whether the government bails out debt holders or not because they know that college education is borderline mandatory to get a non trade-cuck career, and thus they have the leverage to charge whatever the market will bear. Do you know what else drives up the cost of tuition? The existence of loans to begin with. If you couldn't borrow money to pay for tuition, then the demand for admission would drop and institutions would be forced to lower their prices to make admission more accessible. Most people would not assert that student loans should be done away with altogether, though (most would assert that higher education should be free, but that's an entire separate ballgame).

It is not logical to assert that you shouldn't operate on someone with a bullet wound because they never should have been shot in the first place. The shooting happened, the victim is bleeding out. The number one priority should be to stop the bleeding.

I don't disagree with any of that. None of it addresses people with current debts and none of it permanently fixes the issue of people being unable to pay (other than making education free). If you don't agree that having the government bail out loans doesn't fix the underlying problem then I'll point you in the direction of the bank bailouts of 2008. Have the banks eliminated dangerous practices that led to their instability and near collapse? No they have not. And they will be conveniently having another enormous crisis very soon and once again they'll be bailed out to the tune of trillions. And they'll continue to do it over and over.

It's a start, but the big issue is the tution prices you have to pay to attend higher education in the U.S.

In Sweden tuition is tax-funded (and therefore heavily regulated by the government to prevent unnecessary expenses) in fact you even recieve a small grant that covers public transport, food, and books. But if you want to live in a student apartment you can complement it with a loan, but it's fairly modest compared to those in the U.S.

As far as I know it works perfectly fine. Even drop-outs can pay off their loans fairily easily.

Originally posted by NewGuy01

Yeah ridiculous and frankly butthurt argument.

They could at least appreciate there will be less to save up for their children's education. And no you don't need children yourself to appreciate that.

Sky News Australia believe this will screw the Democrats in the midterms.

Originally posted by NewGuy01

lol i was considering posting the boomer trolly problem, but you beat me to it

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Yeah ridiculous and frankly butthurt argument.

They could at least appreciate there will be less to save up for their children's education. And no you don't need children yourself to appreciate that.

How is cancelling the debt without fixing the source of the debt anything other than stupid?

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Take your pick

1. Above inflation pay rises

2. Non executive remuneration in line with executive renumeration including bonuses and share options. If bosses want to award themselves 20% yearly salary increases with 100% bonus and/or share options then their workers get a matching %

3. A ring fenced % of shareholder dividends set aside for workers.

4. Build more houses to increase supply to keep house price rises in line with earnings rises so an average mortgage is no longer ever increasing multiples of average salaries. To give an example of what I mean. The average house price in the UK in 1995 was 2.8x the average salary. It is now 7x the average salary and 11x in London. Meanwhile the number of houses being built every year has dropped steadily since the 1970s but the population increase has accelerated.


You can do that and also cancel the student debt though.

What exactly are you arguing here?

Originally posted by truejedi
How is cancelling the debt without fixing the source of the debt anything other than stupid?

Because it's all they can do at the moment. The system doesn't get overturned in one night homie.

Originally posted by truejedi
They aren't stopping the bleeding, they are giving the gunmen permissions to shoot more people, since they will all be patched up. Why not stop the bleeding of everyone in debt? Why focus on student loans? Anyone and everyone in debt is in the same boat. Credit card debt is more crushing than student loans, mortgages last longer, speaking of medical bills, they are even more inescapable than student loans... Why pick student loans? I ascertain they did it to let colleges charge even more.

I mean, students loans are the only thing you mentioned that can't be discharged by filing bankruptcy.

It's definitely more inescapable than the other things.

And they've included provisions to prevent colleges from jacking up prices in response. We could discuss how best to craft those policies, but implying they should not cancel the debt is silly. This is a good thing that Biden did.

The data is showing that around 50% of Latinos and 25% of Black people with student loans will have their loans completely wiped away by this move: https://www.businessinsider.com/who-benefits-most-student-debt-forgiveness-millennials-pslf-black-borrowers-2022-8

Now you see why the Rightist are buttmad.

Cuck poo, Nob hard!

Originally posted by Astner
It's a start, but the big issue is the tution prices you have to pay to attend higher education in the U.S.

In Sweden tuition is tax-funded (and therefore heavily regulated by the government to prevent unnecessary expenses) in fact you even recieve a small grant that covers public transport, food, and books. But if you want to live in a student apartment you can complement it with a loan, but it's fairly modest compared to those in the U.S.

As far as I know it works perfectly fine. Even drop-outs can pay off their loans fairily easily.

I don't care about private universities, they can charge what they want. But public universities here should be like that, government regulated to the point they're affordable and you don't graduate with a debt you can't pay off.

Originally posted by NewGuy01

👆 Exactly.

The idea that "They didn't pay for me, so they shouldn't pay for anyone" is ridiculous.

Originally posted by Astner
It's a start, but the big issue is the tution prices you have to pay to attend higher education in the U.S.

In Sweden tuition is tax-funded (and therefore heavily regulated by the government to prevent unnecessary expenses) in fact you even recieve a small grant that covers public transport, food, and books. But if you want to live in a student apartment you can complement it with a loan, but it's fairly modest compared to those in the U.S.

As far as I know it works perfectly fine. Even drop-outs can pay off their loans fairily easily.


👆

This should be the end goal. It's only because of American brain-rot that this is even a controversial issue here. We already have public education at other levels, yet we go full derp when it comes to universities.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
Style time is spot on re: a fair days pay for a hard day's work. When I was young almost everyone in the UK believed that.

Yep. It seems the anti-worker brainwashing has infected both our countries. People were tricked into defending and glorifying the same people exploiting them. Fortunately, we've seen pushback recently. This is why we got a renewed wave of unionization efforts in both places. Even Canada is experiencing it.

People are sick of the record profits generated by their excess labor-value getting almost completely consumed by executives.

Originally posted by StyleTime
You can do that and also cancel the student debt though.

What exactly are you arguing here?

.

But they're not doing both, are they. That's the point.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
But they're not doing both, are they. That's the point.

Right. But, the correct response is to continue fighting/voting for further positive change.

Not arguing against the good thing they did do.

But it's not a good thing in isolation. All it does is encourage higher costs and bigger debts for other people later on because the government will just keep stepping in every so often to bail people out. Not only does it not fix the underlying problem, it actively makes it worse down the line. Like I said, exactly the same situation with the bank bailouts.