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

politics

19148 readers
2055 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] toxic@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (4 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.

[–] DukeSilver@lemmy.world 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.

[–] axtualdave@lemmy.world 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?

[–] Chailles@lemmy.world 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?

[–] axtualdave@lemmy.world 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.

[–] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 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.

[–] DukeSilver@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 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.

[–] nieceandtows@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What solution do you propose?

[–] DukeSilver@lemmy.world 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.

[–] Sixofdiamonds@lemmy.fmhy.ml 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.

[–] bostonbananarama@vlemmy.net -1 points 1 year ago

Wait until you hear about PPP loans...

[–] 4am@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] wwaxwork@lemmy.world 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.

[–] hglman@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

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

[–] Zippy@lemmy.world 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.

[–] robgami@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Hurt is a strong word but other people would be paying for that benefit.

It's not hard to imagine someone who decided to miss out on college and take the career penalty of lacking a 4 year degree just to avoid debt feeling like it's a bit unfair to have to help pay for other peoples degrees. People who made the decision to take on the debt.

Maybe it's would be a societal good overall but it's not like there isn't another valid side to the debate. Personally I think that money could be better targeted towards those in poverty whether they have student debt or not.

[–] gramathy@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

That kind of thing gets subsidized all the time, just not in the form of loan relief

It’s also not hard to imagine that an educated populace benefits everybody

[–] Beetschnapps@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

Apparently it hard to imagine for some people.

it’s a weak argument that boils down to “I’m already paying for things via my taxes but I choose to whine about this instance of the Iraq wars… plural”

Trump gave billions to already rich billionares via tax cuts that were permanent for the upper class and temp for everyone else. Don’t get me started on the billions of fraudulent PPP loans that were forgiven and no one said a peep.

But college? For the working class? “What a waste of MY MONEY…”

[–] zouden@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

It's not like they got education for free. They're still paying a lot of money.

[–] Leer10@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago

I went that route and I still want debt relief for those who went through university

[–] Zippy@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I think it is down right greedy for those who will typically be the highest wage earners to get loan relief for the loans that will make them wealthy. Why not apply that to business loans as well?

It is particularly paid by those that will have lower wages so how can you say it hurts none?

[–] toxic@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s funny how we can print and print money for decades, we can “invest” in private industries, give them loans with favorable interest rates, billions in grants, look the other way with regards to regulations, not block anti-competitive practices, but the second we try to help actual people directly everybody loses their shit.

Want to help the economy? That $10,000 (or $20,000) for Pell grant recipients might allow someone to save $300 more a month towards a house, a car, or spend it on goods and services. After 3 years, that’s money back in the economy rather than back to bank that have gotten plenty of help in the best.

[–] Zippy@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But we can not print money for decades as inflation is now showing. And if you want to help the economy, why not give money to the poor instead of to people that will become some of the highest earners?

[–] bostonbananarama@vlemmy.net 2 points 1 year ago

What does our debt have to do with this inflation? Over half of inflation was caused by an increase in corporate profits. Most of the rest were supply chain issues and wage increases.

[–] onionbaggage@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Bruh. They literally just forgave all the PPP business loans.

[–] Zippy@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago

Two wrongs make a right? You ok with the next government taking bribes because Trump did it as well?

[–] Grangle1@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's never been a guarantee that a college degree will put someone in the highest class of wage earners, especially for anyone who's gone to school basically since the turn of the millennium. College tuition and fees have been rising far beyond inflation and wage growth throughout the 21st century so far, without corresponding increase in starting wages for college grads to meet that rise, and with that increase in tuition and fees, more and more students have needed larger and larger loans to pay that cost. Especially for those who went to college in the 2000s, 17-18 year olds could not have predicted that the economy would go to crap (the Great Recession) by the time they graduated, or that new grads would be most hurt by it as companies handed the jobs that would normally go to those new grads to experienced workers who had been laid off, preventing those new grads from gaining the valuable experience and connections that could get them into their industries. Since then the relative value of a college degree has only continued to drop, as those companies continue to shift to valuing experience over education in their hiring practices. New college students and grads can see that now and make better decisions, but back in the 2000s, when those loans that are out there now were taken out, could you really blame a high school kid for not being an expert economist or HR pro enough to figure that would happen? Too many people think of late millennial-Gen Z people when they think of student debt burden, but the largest portion of it is actually held by late Gen X-early Millennials who are paying for the education they got in the 2000s and essentially got shafted on those opportunities they were sold on when they went to the school everyone told them they HAD to go to. (Full disclosure, I am one of those early Millennials.) Biden made a dumb decision by trying to use a law aimed at mitigating COVID economic effects to solve a problem mainly caused by the Great Recession, but it's still a problem that needs to be solved to essentially prevent an American Lost Generation from forming.

[–] Zippy@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nothing is guaranteed but there is no question that people with post secondary educations on average will make significantly more money then their peers without over their lifetime. Multiple times more then the size of these loans. I am not crying when they got to pay them back.

This is money that you are investing to make yourself more money latter in life. No different than a business taking out a loan to expand their services. It is simply greed on the part of those that get this but have lower wages earners on the hook for it in either higher taxes or less money in social programs. Tell me one thing that I said that is not correct.

[–] Grangle1@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Over a LIFETIME, sure, they will make more. But especially in that past 20 years I've been mentioning, they start out with that debt holding them back, and it's been more difficult for an increasing amount of people over time, due to the economic difficulties and the rising balance and interest of those loans due to exponentially ballooning costs of that education plus inflation, to both pay that debt back and establish a career and stable life that makes that increased earning possible. Most of that increased earning comes later in life for many, and payment on those loans can only be deferred so far. Millions of borrowers are putting off auto and home purchases and even marriage and starting families because their student debt is causing them to not afford such life milestones, because even jobs that require degrees do not pay enough early in one's career to afford it; the increased earning is back-loaded, and really I would not be surprised if it's also weighted heavily towards those who were already wealthy and could afford to not have to take out loans for their education, even for advanced degrees that will add on even more to their income. Further, with the value of a degree dropping due to employers focusing on experience over education and the increasing labor market with degrees, that income gap is also likely to drop pretty fast, and that drop I'm value is also likely to hit the grads from lower-income backgrounds who had to take out large amounts of loans much more than the wealthy who likely already had the right connections to get around experience requirements on top of not having to go into debt for their degree. They're not the ones benefiting from this policy; it's the ones who struggle despite their degrees, who are possibly hampered economically even more than the folks who didn't go to college at least during the vital years when they should be able to establish themselves, who would be the main people who benefit.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

If they are the highest wage earners, they should also be the highest taxpayers. If we fixed both issues, they would be the ones paying for student loan relief themselves.

[–] june@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

You also had to be earning less than $125k/year today to get the forgiveness. The highest wage earners were never eligible.