Don't know what all the fuss is about. If you voted for Biden, then you also voted for this. He is just keeping a campaign promise.
Excellent. Let's go Brandon! After all, we all know that colleges are for-profit rip-offs with huge endowments.
Kids can't get enough scratch together to even start on the idea of home ownership.
I would've gone for forgiving all interest payments, but this'll do in a pinch. The only people that complain about it are either 1) backed by big-money sponsors, 2) reflexive complainers in the GOP looking for every illogical reason to clutch their pearls, or 3) selfish Americans who hate that others have gotten a break and they didn't. Where were they when tax laws changed to give a break to the wealthy? Answer: they weren't being prompted by the rich to complain, like they are now.
I don't think there is any way to associate student debt with lifestyle or commitment... but this will give rise to all kinds of stories.
"I worked 500 hours of overtime last year to pay my wife's medical bills, and that pushed us over the $250k income threshold. In effect, I worked 300 hours so I could continue to owe my student loans from the 1980's"
Fix the program and lower costs... but don't randomly forgive debts that people took on because they haven't been successful. It rewards the wrong things...and will become a "defund the police" opportunity for the right.
rgio, I am just ranting away because it seems like many I knew spent lots of time in the bar and going out 3 or 4 nights a week. I reckon most who have built up big debts received bad advice, do not understand finance, and have little understanding of the labour market. Then, the American socialist state often bails out large corporations who screwed up so..... there is that precedent.
As for the medical bills...... maybe, just maybe a basic, universal public health care system might solve some of those problems. Then US voters appear to oppose using the monopsony power of the government to bring down drug costs. In the name of freedom?
In the meantime, the US public debt/GDP ratio keeps growing. And forgiving student debt will not solve thorny deep structural economic issues. Nor will it fix the inherent volatility introduced into the US economy by the employment mandate of the US Federal Reserve.
I would've cancelled student loan interest. Staves off all those "but I paid my debt off!" complaints.
Except for Trump, of course; he just declares bankruptcy and screws over his lender.
Not sure why this kind of student should cross-subsidize people who partied their way through school and racked up huge debts.
I don't think there is any way to associate student debt with lifestyle or commitment... but this will give rise to all kinds of stories.
"I worked 500 hours of overtime last year to pay my wife's medical bills, and that pushed us over the $250k income threshold. In effect, I worked 300 hours so I could continue to owe my student loans from the 1980's"
Fix the program and lower costs... but don't randomly forgive debts that people took on because they haven't been successful. It rewards the wrong things...and will become a "defund the police" opportunity for the right.
This is a mistake, both in the overall concept and the implementation.
The program as described forces those who didn't attend college, and those who paid for college out of savings instead of borrowing money, to pay a portion on behalf of those who borrowed money. Since 2/3rds of Americans didn't attend college, and many didn't borrow to attend, it will get a lot of negative pushback from a majority of Americans.
The idea that $125k is the threshold ($250k married) seems a bit high.
......
Agreed. Student loan money is some of the softest loan money available. Nobody has yet to explain to me why working folks with no college or university education should pay for the education of college and university graduates.
Many of us worked hard and lived very frugally during our university years and kept living frugally after we graduated in order to pay off the student loans as quickly as possible. Not sure why this kind of student should cross-subsidize people who partied their way through school and racked up huge debts.
This is a mistake, both in the overall concept and the implementation.
The program as described forces those who didn't attend college, and those who paid for college out of savings instead of borrowing money, to pay a portion on behalf of those who borrowed money. Since 2/3rds of Americans didn't attend college, and many didn't borrow to attend, it will get a lot of negative pushback from a majority of Americans.
The idea that $125k is the threshold ($250k married) seems a bit high.
It also doesn't address the private loans, and the ridiculous interest rate that people have been paying (7% when I looked a few years ago, while the fed rate was under 1% and mortgages were at 3.5%).
another bad idea (this should be in the Election thread)
p.s., and this is from someone who's kids will benefit.
Does this reverse the inflation reduction act from last week? Seesaw
This is a mistake, both in the overall concept and the implementation.
The program as described forces those who didn't attend college, and those who paid for college out of savings instead of borrowing money, to pay a portion on behalf of those who borrowed money. Since 2/3rds of Americans didn't attend college, and many didn't borrow to attend, it will get a lot of negative pushback from a majority of Americans.
The idea that $125k is the threshold ($250k married) seems a bit high.
It also doesn't address the private loans, and the ridiculous interest rate that people have been paying (7% when I looked a few years ago, while the fed rate was under 1% and mortgages were at 3.5%).
Totally love someone's suggestion that the President should sign the bills with a giant "LET'S GO BRANDON!" banner behind him. That would immediately tank all the opposition's signs.
And it would be evil, which is my primary reason for liking it.
Pretty sure that ship has sailed but would have been a good response.
Totally love someone's suggestion that the President should sign the bills with a giant "LET'S GO BRANDON!" banner behind him. That would immediately tank all the opposition's signs.
And it would be evil, which is my primary reason for liking it.
I don't think he was being sarcastic. I am pretty sure Westslope sees Russia as the victim of US warmongering / NATO expansionism and is completely innocent of any aggressive intent towards its neighbours. Not sure how he can think that, given the historical evidence, but I am pretty sure that is what he thinks.
I would really love to hear his view on Finland & Sweden joining NATO and who was responsible for that.
I'm guessing he will spin it as aggressive NATO expansionism forced on those two countries... instead of what it really is... to try and protect the sovereignty of those nations from a nation that demonstrates it clearly doesn't respect that.
Yep, his inability to acknowledge that small nations have any agency is kind of hilarious, given that he usually champions the rights of minorities and the undertrodden.
I don't think he was being sarcastic. I am pretty sure Westslope sees Russia as the victim of US warmongering / NATO expansionism and is completely innocent of any aggressive intent towards its neighbours.
I would really love to hear his view on Finland & Sweden joining NATO and who was responsible for that.
I'm guessing he will spin it as aggressive NATO expansionism forced on those two countries... instead of what it really is... to try and protect the sovereignty of those nations from a nation that demonstrates it clearly doesn't respect that.
WTF? Where is the lie and what anti-data are you even talking about?
he was being sarcastic, me thinks
I don't think he was being sarcastic. I am pretty sure Westslope sees Russia as the victim of US warmongering / NATO expansionism and thinks Russia is completely innocent of any aggressive intent towards its neighbours.
