this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2023
12 points (87.5% liked)

politics

18917 readers
3618 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (18 children)

Not every piece of legislation needs to benefit you. It’s okay if others benefit and you don’t get hurt in the process.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

That’s not the only reason to oppose this.

All Bidens solution does is take money from the tax payers to pay off the predatory lenders.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Predatory lenders? Biden’s plan largely targeted federal loans. That shit was pretty regulated and had very low interest rates. A pay day loan it was not.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Very low interest rates, yet nobody can pay them off.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Well, consider that we also live in a world where American school districts, in major metro areas, are literally opening up low income housing dorms for teachers, so teachers can afford to subsist on a teacher’s salary.

Low interest doesn’t mean much when you can’t even pay your rent with a job that requires a college education.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Who owns the debt for federal student loans?

I'll wait while you learn the answer is, "Department of Education."

Is the Department of Education a predatory lender?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not super familiar with how it's suppose to work, but do they even need "taxpayer's money?" Couldn't they just decide the debt is paid (or like remove $10,000) and then call it a day?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You're right. The debt is owned by the Dept. of Education. Forgiving a loan is just as easy as it sounds. They just.. change some ledger somewhere and subtract $x from what Bob Student owes.

There's no money transferred. The only real cost is the loss of interest payments in the future, but those are interest payments made by the student to the servicer (private organization that handles the day-to-day operations, like, collecting payments, sending statements, etc.).

But that potential revenue happens in the future. If the future revenue is less than expected, it's exactly the same situation you see if say, Congress were to lower taxes. The revenue we expect to get in the future is now lower than thought it would be.

It's the exact opposite of spending.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What solution do you propose?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Cut off the interest and have borrowers pay back the initial loan.

Predatory lenders get shafted for being pieces of shit. Students get a huge break. The rest of the country doesn’t feel taken advantage of.

But that’ll never happen because profits > people.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Reep what you sow and pay your fucking loan back at the agreed terms at the time of signing.

Personal responsibility is a bitch. Only irresponsible people want loan forgiveness.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

Wait until you hear about PPP loans...

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What does this even mean lol

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It means the people fighting against it are only fighting against it because they don't get anything from it and that maybe they need to stop and consider that not every piece of legislation needs to benefit them and them only.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Ok, ok, let's just give everyone enough to pay off the largest student loan debt.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

I am fighting against it because it only supports those that will become some of the wealthiest sector in the country at the cost to a segment that will be in the lower end of wealth. It is simply greed.

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (6 children)

The problem is that everything is now legislated through the courts which is now how this system was designed.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Republicans propose and pass blatantly unconstitutional stuff that there base wants right before elections all the time, then gets mad when courts overturn it right after the election. I'm glad Biden finally got rid of the "legal high ground" concept and started to do some of these "the worst they can say is no" measures.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Good, because the next best option was probably to get together and burn down the Aidvantage headquarters

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

That's not off the table

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Its seems as though the sentiment among the high middle class and up is:

  1. College is important to advance in our societal hierarchy. It is not absolutely necessary but generally you are rewarded for having a higher education in more prestegious institutions.

  2. People can afford college because they have been saving up generational wealth. Naturally, increasing costs of living shouldnt be an issue.

  3. College should be about merit not affirmative action. Giving spots for less fortunate makes us less competitive as a nation.

If you cant see how the issues in these statements affect lower classes then i believe you are part of the problem.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›