How does it feel to have your sweat equity go to buying votes for democrats? That's all Joe did..

YNWA.2013 said:

---

Just genuinely curious on everyone's thinking/reasoning on this topic.

---

It is theft. It is covetousness.

Both violations of the Ten Commandments, brought to you by a godless political party.

America, turn back to God!

It's a great talking point. Probably the most effective one in a while.

The bottom 40% of this country don't pay any income taxes at all. It's a nonsense talking point.

DarkBrandon0111 said:

---

It's a great talking point. Probably the most effective one in a while.

---

Only for non-thinking people. People who pay taxes get tax cuts. They PAID something. Not the case here at all. This is theft. By a president without constitutional authority to do so.

I was hoping he'd eliminate the interest - and can it going forward. US making money off of students?

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

YNWA.2013 said:

---

Just genuinely curious on everyone's thinking/reasoning on this topic.

---

It is theft. It is covetousness.

Both violations of the Ten Commandments, brought to you by a godless political party.

America, turn back to God!

---

Ain't happening.

It's just fundamentally deeply unfair. It's that simple.

Two kids get an ice cream cone. One drops theirs in the dirt. The parent takes the cone from the second kid and gives it to the one who dropped theirs. It is pretty much just like that level of unfair.

Okay? They are doing the work that allows the rich to pay their taxes. Simply by participating in the economy, they are providing tax dollars. Without that 40%, no one is rich it all.

rocky the dog said:

---

Quote:

---

And isn't it in the best interests of our society as whole to be as highly educated as possible? I am of the belief that the more educated we all are, the more informed decisions we can make, and the better we can all move forward.

---

---

This. Society was convinced that a college degree was the only way to make it in this world, no matter what the degree was just get it and you'll have a leg up! I can't tell you how many tears my momma cried when I dropped out of school. Now I make 10x what I was going to make a year if I had gone into the career I was going to school for.

So now, people are getting degrees to prove they are yes men in areas that make them feel entitled. So no real job skill, with an entitlement issue…there's a great combination. College is not a right, it's a privilege. If your parents cannot pay it in full, or you cannot get scholarships you better think long and hard before you just jump in. Loans need to be privatized again, and treat it exactly like a business loan. If you do not have an action plan with a clear outline of what you're going to be majoring in with a plan to pay back all the money loan gets denied plain and simple. It's not rocket science.

OP your whole argument assumes that people going to college have a right to be there acquiring debt no matter what.

DarkBrandon0111 said:

---

Okay? They are doing the work that allows the rich to pay their taxes. Simply by participating in the economy, they are providing tax dollars. Without that 40%, no one is rich it all.

---

So by giving the rich tax cuts, then that means the bottom 40% don't have to work as much for the rich to pay their taxes right?

Do you know how many businesses get bailed out every year? I don't remember anyone complaining about that because apparently

handouts for the rich = good

handouts for the poor = bad

YNWA.2013 said:

---

Just genuinely curious on everyone's thinking/reasoning on this topic. (I know I am starting the umpteenth thread on this topic, but wanted to attempt to have a civil conversation in one place. Difficult with the Zoo, I know). Just quickly glancing through the multiple threads on here, it seems the vocal majority are against this and I am curious as to why. Apart from the "Biden is a communist" comments which have no real merit and comments that "Congress should be doing this," which is a different conversation, I am trying to find a reasonable argument as to why this is a bad thing.

It seems that many of those against this graduated many moons ago (I graduated in 2013) and went to college at a very different time when tuition wasn't what it is today. The total federal student debt has more than tripled since 2007 when it was about $500 billion to the $1.6 trillion today. In the years since graduation, including my own, states continue to cut funding towards public college and education. So what's been done to combat this? Skyrocketing tuition and mountains of student debt.

[so what is the cause of this? Subsidizing tuition with free, easy, federal dollars results in skyrocketing tuition, as the universities realize the government will pay the tab no matter how high. So, as in health insurance, a third-party payer always skews the economics and results in increased prices. Gov't created this problem, and now we are stuck holding the bag. In a more civilized era, this would characterized as theft and helicopter rides would be in order.]

I don't think many 17-18 year-olds fully understand what they are signing up for when they apply for federal student loans. [So this is predatory lending, for which the lender should be sued, prosecuted, and bankrupted. No problem. Or, if this kids do not have the capacity to understand their loan terms, the ban student loans for students under 21 years old. I am fine with that as well.] Interest alone can oftentimes be a killer. [Interest on federally backed student loans is currently less than 5%, which is lower than most home mortgage rates.] I have many peers who have never missed a payment and owe more now than they initially did when they graduated because of these interest rates and not being able to pay towards the principal. [That is because of their decision to make minimum or interest only payments. Not a smart move if you want to pay off debt. Private lenders without government backing would never permit such repayment terms.] According to the US Department of Education, about 60% of people with federal student loans owe <$40,000. Which I know may not seem like a lot, but to those making under $80,000 (these include your nurses, your kids' teachers, their coaches, your physical therapists, your social workers, your reporters), it make take many years to get out of. [Most mortgages are 30 years. Should we cancel those as well?] And if you're spending so much time and money paying off these loans, you are not buying other goods and services and not investing your money which keeps you in this spiral for longer. Not to mention that this disproportionately affects minorities as they borrow an average of $25,000 more and make about $5,000 less (but we can save this discussion for another time.)

The other sentiment that I don't quite understand is "Well, I worked hard to pay off my loans, my wife's loans, my Cousin Joe's loans." This is a wonderful achievement and should be celebrated. But the thought of these high loans has deterred many people from seeking higher education. [Good. Reduced demand for expensive, useless education is a good thing, and should result in decreased prices if the free market were allowed to work. Fed gov will never allow that, as politicians are in the pocket of the higher education behemoth.] And isn't it in the best interests of our society as whole to be as highly educated as possible? [No. It is the best interest of society to allow individuals to be the best contributor they can be in whatever field they choose. Right now, "society" is in desperate need of mechanics, electricians, plumbers, etc. We do not have a shortage of the over-educated and under-employed.] I am of the belief that the more educated we all are, the more informed decisions we can make, and the better we can all move forward.

"But how will we pay for it" and "It is just going to add to the national debt." It's funny how these arguments only come about when trying to help the lower and middle classes. [If you think loan forgiveness benefits the lower and middle class, you are woefully misinformed. This benefits the college educated only, which statistically does not make up a large percentage of the lower classes. In fact, this is the greatest transfer of wealth from the lower to the upper class in history.] None of this gets brought up when we go to war, when multibillion dollar corporations get another tax cut, etc. I don't know about you, but I would rather my taxes go toward education, veterans' benefits, etc that actually helps my fellow Americans and pushes us forward. [You are free to start a scholarship fund to benefit college students, veterans, etc. You are not free to compel others to share your compassion by taking their assets.]

None of this addresses the root cause of the problem, which I think is the increasingly high tuition that schools charge that is primarily taken on by individuals. Public schools should be primarily funded by the government. Your taxes pay for your local elementary, middle, and high schools. [See above re: market inflation due to third party payer problem.] Why does this not include higher education too if it is basically mandatory to have if you want a decent paying job? [It isn't. Entry level trade jobs pay more than entry level jobs for the over-educated and underemployed.]

Now these are just the thoughts of a thirty-something millennial and proud Aggie who was fortunate enough to have financial and emotional support from his parents, scrapped for as many scholarships as I could, went to graduate school, and still had a lot of loans to pay. I was also lucky enough to be able to move in with my parents after graduation for two and half years to live rent-free and make a sizeable dent on my loans before venturing out on my own. My wife and I are on track to pay off all student loans by the end of the year. I worked hard and am proud of how far I have come, but it should not be this difficult or this expensive to seek higher education and make a better life for yourself. I want my kids to do even better than I have done, but I would like for the deck to not be stacked against them or anyone else trying to better themselves or society.

I hope my thoughts come across as reasonable and understandable as they did in my head. I welcome any and all discussion points as I would like to understand all sides of whatever argument you may have.

Thanks & Gig'Em

---

DarkBrandon0111 said:

---

Do you know how many businesses get bailed out every year? I don't remember anyone complaining about that because apparently

handouts for the rich = good

handouts for the poor = bad

---

He says, as he talks about how great it is that student debt relief is sent largely to the top 25% of the country.

DarkBrandon0111 said:

---

Do you know how many businesses get bailed out every year? I don't remember anyone complaining about that because apparently

handouts for the rich = good

handouts for the poor = bad

---

People keeping more of the money they earned =/= handouts
People receiving money they did not earn = handouts

Don't be a thief. Everyone hates a thief.

cageybee77 said:

---

I was hoping he'd eliminate the interest - and can it going forward. making money off of students?

---

This would make sense to address the compound interest problem. However even this doesn't address the root issue of skyrocketing school costs. Lower interest just means they can borrow more, and therefore schools can charge more.

I'm convinced the whole thing is a money laundering scheme.

Government controls the schools.

Government controls the loan programs.

The message is "you gotta go to college to have a better life".

So you get a huge loan, you get some bull**** degree that doesn't have any real world value, you can't get a decent paying job, some politician says you should get paid a higher minimum wage to do your crappy job to get your vote, they get elected and drive the ****ing country into the ground, the price of everything goes up, you can't pay back your loan, then another politician says they'll forgive your debt to get your vote, they get elected and drive the ****ing country further into the ground, you STILL can't pay back the rest of your loan.

At the end of the day, you're just a ****ing slave barely getting by while the politician, who came from a family with money and was supported by other families with money, makes more money and makes the policy that runs your life.

How is that better?!?

DarkBrandon0111 said:

---

Do you know how many businesses get bailed out every year? I don't remember anyone complaining about that because apparently

handouts for the rich = good

handouts for the poor = bad

---

Not nearly as many as you would like to think. Before you roll this BS out, give us data. Businesses employ people, and they vary greatly in size, and in legal structure, and they don't really pay taxes, they transfer taxes from investors, customers, and employees to through pricing and wages and returns.

YNWA.2013 said:

---

Just genuinely curious on everyone's thinking/reasoning on this topic. (I know I am starting the umpteenth thread on this topic, but wanted to attempt to have a civil conversation in one place. Difficult with the Zoo, I know). Just quickly glancing through the multiple threads on here, it seems the vocal majority are against this and I am curious as to why. Apart from the "Biden is a communist" comments which have no real merit and comments that "Congress should be doing this," which is a different conversation, I am trying to find a reasonable argument as to why this is a bad thing.

It seems that many of those against this graduated many moons ago (I graduated in 2013) and went to college at a very different time when tuition wasn't what it is today. The total federal student debt has more than tripled since 2007 when it was about $500 billion to the $1.6 trillion today. In the years since graduation, including my own, states continue to cut funding towards public college and education. So what's been done to combat this? Skyrocketing tuition and mountains of student debt.

I don't think many 17-18 year-olds fully understand what they are signing up for when they apply for federal student loans. Interest alone can oftentimes be a killer. I have many peers who have never missed a payment and owe more now than they initially did when they graduated because of these interest rates and not being able to pay towards the principal. According to the US Department of Education, about 60% of people with federal student loans owe <$40,000. Which I know may not seem like a lot, but to those making under $80,000 (these include your nurses, your kids' teachers, their coaches, your physical therapists, your social workers, your reporters), it make take many years to get out of. And if you're spending so much time and money paying off these loans, you are not buying other goods and services and not investing your money which keeps you in this spiral for longer. Not to mention that this disproportionately affects minorities as they borrow an average of $25,000 more and make about $5,000 less (but we can save this discussion for another time.)

The other sentiment that I don't quite understand is "Well, I worked hard to pay off my loans, my wife's loans, my Cousin Joe's loans." This is a wonderful achievement and should be celebrated. But the thought of these high loans has deterred many people from seeking higher education. And isn't it in the best interests of our society as whole to be as highly educated as possible? I am of the belief that the more educated we all are, the more informed decisions we can make, and the better we can all move forward.

"But how will we pay for it" and "It is just going to add to the national debt." It's funny how these arguments only come about when trying to help the lower and middle classes. None of this gets brought up when we go to war, when multibillion dollar corporations get another tax cut, etc. I don't know about you, but I would rather my taxes go toward education, veterans' benefits, etc that actually helps my fellow Americans and pushes us forward.

None of this addresses the root cause of the problem, which I think is the increasingly high tuition that schools charge that is primarily taken on by individuals. Public schools should be primarily funded by the government. Your taxes pay for your local elementary, middle, and high schools. Why does this not include higher education too if it is basically mandatory to have if you want a decent paying job?

Now these are just the thoughts of a thirty-something millennial and proud Aggie who was fortunate enough to have financial and emotional support from his parents, scrapped for as many scholarships as I could, went to graduate school, and still had a lot of loans to pay. I was also lucky enough to be able to move in with my parents after graduation for two and half years to live rent-free and make a sizeable dent on my loans before venturing out on my own. My wife and I are on track to pay off all student loans by the end of the year. I worked hard and am proud of how far I have come, but it should not be this difficult or this expensive to seek higher education and make a better life for yourself. I want my kids to do even better than I have done, but I would like for the deck to not be stacked against them or anyone else trying to better themselves or society.

I hope my thoughts come across as reasonable and understandable as they did in my head. I welcome any and all discussion points as I would like to understand all sides of whatever argument you may have.

Thanks & Gig'Em

---

Specifically addressing your comment, "I don't think many 17-18 year-olds fully understand what they are signing up for when they apply for federal student loans," 18-year-olds may legally bind themselves to contracts. A student loan is like any other contract --- it requires an offer, acceptance, and consideration. Even a younger borrower can understand these very basic principles and may seek advice to clarify any uncertainties or ambiguities that may exist BEFORE signing that contract. Once signed, the contract is binding, regardless of whether the borrower fully understands what he or she is signing. Not fully understanding all parts of the contract and not seeking advice is the risk borrowers take, and that risk should not --- in any way --- be borne by the lender. A 17-year-old, on the other hand, cannot bind himself or herself under contract law. That's why people of that age must obtain a co-signer (a request made by the lender to ensure that the loan will, in fact, be repaid). Any excuses made by younger borrowers are legally invalid. And they should NEVER be used for the purpose of forgiving student loans.

Never make only the minimum payment.

Looks like i'm eligible for more debt relief. Thinking about taking out another $10,000.

Gunna take a vacation to europe and buy some chai tea lattes.

Thanks y'all for paying for this. Really appreciate it.

/s

pic.twitter.com/OtarNZf4m1

— Logan Hall (@loganclarkhall) August 24, 2022

YNWA.2013 said:

---

...states continue to cut funding towards public college and education. So what's been done to combat this? Skyrocketing tuition and mountains of student debt.

---

Just my casual observation.... Have you seen the amount of construction on the TAMU-College Station campus for the past 30 years? Where is that money coming from?

You can say donations.

However, if someone else wasn't paying for millennial/netgen women's studies degrees, that donor money could have been used to endow more professors of engineering and other STEM degrees instead of building memorials to BMAs who probably did very little to improve the human condition, especially when compared to Earl Rudder or even Sul Ross or the 8 medal of honor winners who attended A&M.

DarkBrandon0111 said:

---

Do you know how many businesses get bailed out every year? I don't remember anyone complaining about that because apparently

handouts for the rich = good

handouts for the poor = bad

---

You're right, and we should all empathize for the 'poor' households earning $249,999 annually who will benefit from this plan.

DarkBrandon0111 said:

---

which is why college should be 100% nationalized. The government cannot support and compete simultaneously with a hungry profit monster.

---

You didn't respond to my question.

YNWA.2013 said:

---

I hope my thoughts come across as reasonable and understandable as they did in my head. I welcome any and all discussion points as I would like to understand all sides of whatever argument you may have.

Thanks & Gig'Em

---

Nope

DarkBrandon0111 said:

---

which is why college should be 100% nationalized. The government cannot support and compete simultaneously with a hungry profit monster.

---

Sack up and just come rob my house.

DarkBrandon0111 said:

---

which is why college should be 100% nationalized. The government cannot support and compete simultaneously with a hungry profit monster.

---

Are you a college graduate?

It is just insane reading what some of you write.

You signed the contract, took the money, so it is your debt and up to you to pay. This is theft to the tune of ~$300 billion dollars and it doesn't fix a single thing. Student loans are still being handed out like candy, institutions keep charging more, and nobody cares to do basic qualification.

A person who can't qualify for a home or car loan can somehow qualify for $250k in student loans. Makes sense.

1. Student loans should be 100% private business (zero government funds)
2. Private lenders should do what private lenders do. Base loans on risk and ability to pay. (not everyone gets one, nor do they get the same amount. Different degrees, different earning potential)
3. In case of default, the government, by way of the taxpayers, owe nothing. No bailouts, nothing.
4. Discharging of the debt becomes the responsibility of the Student, the Bank, and the Institution.

You'll see on Reddit and other left-leaning forums that this is similar to curing cancer and that everyone should be grateful that someone is benefiting. Problem with that analogy is let's say a person sadly gets diagnosed 5 years from now, oops, that was just a one-time cure, so you're SOL.

Look, I don't blame anyone for being happy about free cash. But people need to stop the virtue signaling and call it for what it is; an obvious attempt to buy votes.

Bird Poo said:

---

Is it "reasonable" to give big banks 300 Billion? Because that is what happened.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/081216/who-actually-owns-student-loan-debt.asp

---

Is it "reasonable" to give Ukraine 40 Billion?

We fixed the keg said:

---

It is just insane reading what some of you write.

You signed the contract, took the money, so it is your debt and up to you to pay. This is theft to the tune of ~$300 billion dollars and it doesn't fix a single thing. Student loans are still being handed out like candy, institutions keep charging more, and nobody cares to do basic qualification.

A person who can't qualify for a home or car loan can somehow qualify for $250k in student loans. Makes sense.

1. Student loans should be 100% private business (zero government funds)
2. Private lenders should do what private lenders do. Base loans on risk and ability to pay. (not everyone gets one, nor do they get the same amount. Different degrees, different earning potential)
3. In case of default, the government, by way of the taxpayers, owe nothing. No bailouts, nothing.
4. Discharging of the debt becomes the responsibility of the Student, the Bank, and the Institution.

---

No no no, the imaginary social contract in this country you figuratively signed by being born overrides the legal contract they literally signed.

DarkBrandon0111 said:

---

which is why college should be 100% nationalized. The government cannot support and compete simultaneously with a hungry profit monster.

---

Suuuure. That'll fix it.