• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Conservative justices seem skeptical of Biden's student loan forgiveness plan

Galactic Spin said:
I'm all ears.

How? Thoughts and prayers?
Click to expand...
Compassion
Counseling to the few people I know in that predicament.
Try to help them make the right choices from the choices that are available (and ignore the choices that aren’t available)
Lobby my representatives to permit bankruptcy as a choice

But I won’t bail anyone out. They made a bad choice. Unfortunately they will have to live with that choice. In this world when you make your bed you usually have to sleep in it. It’s called “personal responsibility”. Accountability. I have made poor choices in my lifetime and I never once asked someone for a handout to negate that choice. I just chose the best options available to me. These people will need to make some difficult choices too because the Lone Ranger isn’t riding in on a white horse to save them-ever.
 
Ethel2 said:
Try to help them make the right choices from the choices that are available (and ignore the choices that aren’t available)
Click to expand...
The right choice is to make the payment you can afford. Right?

See those negatively amortizing student loans? 64% of them, at last count. Nearly every one of those borrowers is paying the payment they can afford.

This isn't going away. You aren't going to counsel people with student loan debt anywhere but to bankruptcy and default. Either they make the payment they can afford, as determined by mathematics (not by special pleading or thoughts and prayers), or they start to fall out of the economy to one degree or another and forego savings, retirement, consumer spending, generational wealth, etc.

So, you would urge them to pay more than they can afford? That isn't counseling. That's just bad advice. Which is what makes student loans especially nasty. Mortgages like that are illegal. Same for credit cards. And there is a good reason for that.

So you see the dilemma your solution of "changing not a goddamn thing" leaves us in.
 
Galactic Spin said:
The right choice is to make the payment you can afford. Right?

See those negatively amortizing student loans? 64% of them, at last count. Nearly every one of those borrowers is paying the payment they can afford.

This isn't going away. You aren't going to counsel people with student loan debt anywhere but to bankruptcy and default. Either they make the payment they can afford, as determined by mathematics (not by special pleading or thoughts and prayers), or they start to fall out of the economy to one degree or another and forego savings, retirement, consumer spending, generational wealth, etc.

So, you would urge them to pay more than they can afford? That isn't counseling. That's just bad advice. Which is what makes student loans especially nasty. Mortgages like that are illegal. Same for credit cards. And there is a good reason for that.

So you see the dilemma your solution of "changing not a goddamn thing" leaves us in.
Click to expand...
I’d find a solution that doesn’t involve a transfer of THEIR obligation to the TAXPAYERS. They may be paying their loans back for a very long time-but that’s the price they might have to pay for signing a binding contract to receive money for their education.
Hopefully they learned an important lesson about what life is really like.
I posted a link earlier that proved that loan balances are decreasing and that most students are handling their obligations in a responsible manner. There’s absolutely no need to bail these people out.
No bailouts.
Sorry
 
Ethel2 said:
I’d find a solution that doesn’t involve a transfer of THEIR obligation to the TAXPAYERS.
Click to expand...
Okay, let's get started. I am seriously all ears. I just like things that work.

First, who pays for the loan forgiveness? I thought everyone paid taxes. So would you now suggest transferring that debt to fewer taxpayers, instead of all of them?
 
Last edited:
Galactic Spin said:
Okay, let's get started.

First, who pays for the loan forgiveness? I thought everyone paid taxes. So would you now suggest transferring that debt to fewer taxpayers, instead of all of them?
Click to expand...
There is not going to be loan forgiveness-so no one but the students will pay. Unless they declare bankruptcy.
 
Galactic Spin said:
Then no change. We are back to not changing a thing or solving the problem.

Figures.
Click to expand...
No “solution” is needed. The people who signed for the loans will have to pay them back-unless we can get Congress to permit bankruptcy.
Under no circumstances am I willing to stick the taxpayers for loans they didn’t take out.
I have no idea how you think that’s fair.
 
Ethel2 said:
No “solution” is needed.
Click to expand...
Gotcha.

So exactly what I already thought.

Like I said, everyone is entitled not to give a shit. And that's what "no solution" means. It either means there is no problem, or it means fk it, it's terminal. Nothing can be done.

Which is it for you? I am betting that you go with "terminal". Nothing can be done (there exists no solution). Which is silly, because that's obviously false, as something CAN, indeed, be done. We have been going back and forth about it for a while. But "not giving a shit" = "there is no problem that needs a solution" seems a bit of a repulsive idea to you.

Which is it? There is no solution, or there is no problem?
 
I found a solution. You take out a loan, you are responsible for it. NO ONE ELSE IS. Be a man (or woman), take responsibility!
 
Anthony60 said:
I found a solution. You take out a loan, you are responsible for it. NO ONE ELSE IS. Be a man (or woman), take responsibility!
Click to expand...
That's not a solution. That is just saying "fk 'em".
 
Galactic Spin said:
Gotcha.

So exactly what I already thought.

Like I said, everyone is entitled not to give a shit. And that's what "no solution" means. It either means there is no problem, or it means fk it, it's terminal. Nothing can be done.

Which is it for you? I am betting that you go with "terminal". Nothing can be done (there exists no solution). Which is silly, because that's obviously false, as something CAN, indeed, be done. We have been going back and forth about it for a while. But "not giving a shit" = "there is no problem that needs a solution" seems a bit of a repulsive idea to you.

Which is it? There is no solution, or there is no problem?
Click to expand...
Sure
I’ll bite
There’s a problem and the solution absolutely doesn’t involve sticking it to the taxpayers. Extend the length of the loan-and I don’t care if fulfilling their obligation takes a lifetime. I don’t care if these students have to rent an apartment with five other people and eat rice and beans. Renegotiate the interest rate. Work to get congress to allow bankruptcy.
You figure it out if you want a solution-but don’t you dare try to stick it to people (taxpayers) who are in no way responsible for the predicament the loan recipients are in. They (the students) have no right to impose upon people who had nothing to do with your mistake without their permission.
 
Galactic Spin said:
So now the average price of all used cars is for a luxury car.

And $40,000 is less than the average price for a new car. But that's a luxury car too.

Fascinating stuff. Do you know what year it is?


You really are handicapped by your emotions. You say stupid things and have weird little tantrums.

A new Lexus does not cost $40,000. That's a Kia Sportage with options.

Second, your vile depictions reflect on you as being someone who doesn't know anything about going to college and who actually holds contempt for them and for people who go there.

Third, what I suggest will help 10s of millions of Americans. It will improve society, raise the standard of living, and help more people participate in the economy and build generational wealth. Ad that's why I suggest it.

So you can take your whiny little strawman and stick it.
Click to expand...

Wow, you're really flailing now, aren't you, obsessing over the minutia of my comments while dodging the main points? And you can't even get THAT right.

New 2023 Lexus UX 250h in Memphis, TN

Looking for a 2023 Lexus UX 250h located in 2023 Lexus UX 250h Memphis, TN
www.lexusofmemphis.com www.lexusofmemphis.com

I have to give you credit, though, it took you bit longer than I expected to whip out that idiotic "emotions" crutch. Pretty ironic considering all the seething in your own comment.
 
Last edited:
ClaraD said:
used cars frequently cost as much or more than new cars now.
Click to expand...

Yes, a used Lamborghini frequently costs more than a new Toyota. But the cheapest readily available new cars are now around $20k, and you can get MANY used cars for far less than that.
 
ClaraD said:
again....with no job and only financial aid...do you think they can afford rent? I didn't say rentals weren't available...I said that they were not accessible to a full-time student without financial aid.
Click to expand...

Student loans ARE financial aid. Anyone can get them. They're what we're talking about here - it's literally the topic of the thread.
 
Tlrmln said:
Wow, you're really flailing now, aren't you, obsessing over the minutia of my comments while dodging the main points?
Click to expand...
That's more what you are doing. My point is that student loan borrowers are saying what they can afford, while necessities like cars get more and more expensive. And the relevance there was the focus on the loans required for this, and that wages have stagnated while prices have not.

You have completely dodged this point to talk about car prices and to accuse me of wanting free ivy leagues college for my children.

Try to focus.

This is an actual problem. I am not interested in your pedantic quibbling over car prices. $40,000 new car is not a luxury car, for American families. Not interested in this nonsense. sorry.

The problem is crushing student loan debt.

Focus.
 
Galactic Spin said:
That's more what you are doing. My point is that student loan borrowers are saying what they can afford, while necessities like cars get more and more expensive. And the relevance there was the focus on the loans required for this, and that wages have stagnated while prices have not.

You have completely dodged this point to talk about car prices and to accuse me of wanting free ivy leagues college for my children.

Try to focus.

This is an actual problem. I am not interested in your pedantic quibbling over car prices. $40,000 new car is not a luxury car, for American families. Not interested in this nonsense. sorry.

The problem is crushing student loan debt.

Focus.
Click to expand...

Focus? If you were focusing, you wouldn't think that $20,000 is a "crushing" amount of debt, especially for households making as much as $250,000. If you really wanted focus, then you'd demand that the proponents of this program FOCUS it where it's actually most needed and deserved, or revamp it entirely to provide rational incentives, rather than blanket vote-buying.

I haven't dodged anything. Rather, I've pointed out why your entire position on this issue is ideologically bankrupt. And you've made it easy for me.
 
I'm sure it's been stated in this thread, but anyone that doesn't realize that this is an obvious attempt to buy votes, is politically brain dead and has no business being in this discussion.

It may be the the most blatant attempt ever at using taxpayer money to buy votes. But, that's how the Democrat party survives.
 
Anthony60 said:
I'm sure it's been stated in this thread, but anyone that doesn't realize that this is an obvious attempt to buy votes, is politically brain dead and has no business being in this discussion.

It may be the the most blatant attempt ever at using taxpayer money to buy votes. But, that's how the Democrat party survives.
Click to expand...
The democrats don’t have a monopoly on buying votes. Both parties do it through prioritizing where they think the available money should be allocated.
 
Tlrmln said:
you wouldn't think that $20,000 is a "crushing" amount of debt, especially for households making as much as $250,000.
Click to expand...
Well, good thing that's not most people we are helping. I mean, you can cherry pick examples if you like. We both know this is time wasting anyway, as you wouldnt give a shit if the household made 60K and had 60K of debt.

So you're just gainsaying, at this point.

I understand. I promise I do. I understand the arguments against.

Yes it's crushing. Because most loans are increasing in balance. Roling 10 or 20K off the top makes a big difference in that, because of the logarithmic math of amortization. It's not just about this month's budget. It makes a lot more difference than just $10K over a lifetime.
 
Anthony60 said:
I'm sure it's been stated in this thread, but anyone that doesn't realize that this is an obvious attempt to buy votes, is politically brain dead and has no business being in this discussion.

It may be the the most blatant attempt ever at using taxpayer money to buy votes. But, that's how the Democrat party survives.
Click to expand...
I know it looks pretty foreign to a Trumper when a politician fights hard to keep his promises.
 
Galactic Spin said:
Well, good thing that's not most people we are helping. I mean, you can cherry pick examples if you like. We both know this is time wasting anyway, as you wouldnt give a shit if the household made 60K and had 60K of debt.

So you're just gainsaying, at this point.

I understand. I promise I do. I understand the arguments against.

Yes it's crushing. Because most loans are increasing in balance. Roling 10 or 20K off the top makes a big difference in that, because of the logarithmic math of amortization. It's not just about this month's budget. It makes a lot more difference than just $10K over a lifetime.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I guess an extra $100/month (read as: "a 10 hour per week part time job working checkout at Kroger) in loan payments is crushing for a college grad working at Starbucks, who thinks she needs a $40,000 car instead of a $15,000 car (or a bus pass).

I'm not "just gainsaying." I've provided perfectly valid evidence showing how a responsible person can get a college degree and still pay off their loans. We should neither encourage nor reward irresponsibility.

If the purpose of this program was just to help people who really need it, it wouldn't apply to households earning as much as $250k/year. Not even close. It's pure vote-buying, plain and simple.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom