Student Debt "Cancellation"

[TheTexan]

Here's an exercise for the reader: Who, if anyone, would federal courts recognize as having "standing" to sue over this issue - and for what kind of "relief"? (At least with the vaccine mandates, those directly subject to the mandates were easily recognized as having standing, and relief consisted of their not having to take the jab.)

What's ironic, is that if we sued them for theft, and miraculously won a judgement, they wouldn't have any money to pay us with.

Yet somehow, they magically can keep makin' it rain

[Invisible Man]

Serious question: Is there a silver lining here that cancelling these federal student loans will deprive the federal government of the revenue they would have gotten by the loans getting paid back?

Or does that not work?

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

Serious question: Is there a silver lining here that cancelling these federal student loans will deprive the federal government of the revenue they would have gotten by the loans getting paid back?

Or does that not work?

It matters not because in the end all wealth leads back to the government.

[ClaytonB]

[kahless]

There is not a week that goes by that the Biden admin is sending $$$ to Ukraine. What is the latest, 900 billion. That is just Ukraine alone, look at PPP loans and spending across the board. Barely a peep on the right about anything else but who does the right wing grifters go ape $#@! about, money to poor. It shows where their loyalties are.

There are battles to fight and there are battles that are not worth the fight like this one. The right is trying hard to lose in Nov. fighting this one as they remained silent about corporate welfare for the elites.

[CaptUSA]

There is not a week that goes by that the Biden admin is sending $$$ to Ukraine. What is the latest, 900 billion. That is just Ukraine alone, look at PPP loans and spending across the board. Barely a peep on the right about anything else but who does the right wing grifters go ape $#@! about, money to poor. It shows where their loyalties are.

What?! This is money FROM the poor!

This is another wealth transfer from the lower classes to the upper classes. Sorry if you missed that point. And yeah, I can deal with your "whataboutism", but I know lots of people who didn't go to college and have struggled mightily to make ends meet and to feed their families. They couldn't afford the debt and didn't think it was wise to take it on. I know others who scrimped and saved to pay off their loans because they didn't want that burden hanging them. But now, we're going to take those people's money to spend on the spoiled laptop class?! Yeah, sorry if this bothers me. This is the grasshoppers looting from the ants.

[ClaytonB]

Serious question: Is there a silver lining here that cancelling these federal student loans will deprive the federal government of the revenue they would have gotten by the loans getting paid back?

Or does that not work?

The great Student Loan Bailout is more of an insult than an injury.

Scene: Corleone sent a few of his thugs to tie you up, grope up your gal in front of you, gag you and then cut off your pinky finger and cauterize the wound, leaving you in blinding pain as your gal screams her brains out. After getting "the message", you're untied and, on the way out, the greenhorn that kept quiet the whole time because he's never seen anything like this in his life, spits on you. You know, to make his "contribution" to the ordeal. That's the Student Loan Bailout. It's an insult, to be sure, but compared to everything that came before, you won't even remember it tomorrow...

[acptulsa]

What?! This is money FROM the poor!

Even if they don't pay income tax, and only pay FICA tax, everybody is paying inflation tax these days.

[ClaytonB]

What?! This is money FROM the poor!

This is another wealth transfer from the lower classes to the upper classes. Sorry if you missed that point. And yeah, I can deal with your "whataboutism", but I know lots of people who didn't go to college and have struggled mightily to make ends meet and to feed their families. They couldn't afford the debt and didn't think it was wise to take it on. I know others who scrimped and saved to pay off their loans because they didn't want that burden hanging them. But now, we're going to take those people's money to spend on the spoiled laptop class?! Yeah, sorry if this bothers me. This is the grasshoppers looting from the ants.

I'm with kahless on this one.

The Fed is not a creature of the Democrat party, or the Left. The Fed is a creature of the Right. Really let that marinate and soak in... because the very people that conservative libertarians look to as their political allies (GOP right-wingers) are the very same people who are betraying them, certainly at the top levels, and many at the lower levels, as well. When the Fed is running the printing-press 24/7 to prop up the banksters and Wall Street zillionaires, you don't hear a peep out of the Republican Swamp, like McConnell and crew. But let Fed money be diverted from its usual destination in Wall Street/DC to middle-class folks -- some of whom are SJW weirdos, but most of whom are just aiming for a mid-level corporate job -- and an outcry will be raised in the right-wing that has not been equaled since the deaths of all firstborn in Egypt.

So yes, this is absolutely exposing how the Federal Reserve is the lynchpin of the class warfare being fought (and won) against the middle and lower-class by the ultra-wealthy elites in NYC, DC, and all around the world (the Fed is international).

Let me draw a diagram:

(a) Fed (infinity cash)
(b) Wall Street / DC plutocracy
(c) Middle management / "laptop class"
(d) Ordinary American workers
(e) The poor

(b) uses (a) to transfer real wealth from (c), (d) and, yes, even (e) to (b)

All other claimed combinations of redistribution are propaganda. (d) and (e) getting in a hoopla because a tiny drop of infinity-cash from (a) has been splashed away from (b) to (c) is the most naive case of falling for Wag-the-Dog class-warfare tactics.

KNOW THY ENEMY

[oyarde]

Serious question: Is there a silver lining here that cancelling these federal student loans will deprive the federal government of the revenue they would have gotten by the loans getting paid back?

Or does that not work?

As far as I know the feds probably have not been collecting revenue on these as before pre plague level because I think they suspended payment requirements to be deferred to later. In americas failure they have made the unproductive a protected class . Is the govt going to spend less ? I'm going with no .

[fcreature]

There are battles to fight and there are battles that are not worth the fight like this one. The right is trying hard to lose in Nov. fighting this one as they remained silent about corporate welfare for the elites.

Not sure. I see it the exact opposite actually. No one cares about sending money to Ukraine or the PPP loans. Nearly everyone who has paid back student debt, paid for college out of pocket, or didn't go to college is absolutely furious about this. This hits home in a very deep way, and is an easy issue to win on, but Republicans don't know how to fight.

[kahless]

Not sure. I see it the exact opposite actually. No one cares about sending money to Ukraine or the PPP loans. Nearly everyone who has paid back student debt, paid for college out of pocket, or didn't go to college is absolutely furious about this. This hits home in a very deep way, and is an easy issue to win on, but Republicans don't know how to fight.

That is what is moronic about it. No one cares about trillions to the elites and corporate welfare which is far more individually than paying off some student debt. Logically anyone can see this but the regular people get outraged because they are being led by the nose by right wing pundit grifters that do not have their best interests at heart. This provides another example for the entire country that the right is solely concerned about the best interests of Wall Street and satisfying the elites than the regular people. (even though you could say the same about the left it is just where the narrative is). It is a sure fire way to lose in November.

Those that are led by the nose by this do not realize their favorite pundits would love for Republicans they claim to support to lose in November. Simply because it will not be profitable for them to create outrage with a Republican majority. It is far more profitable when Republicans are a minority and when they can play victim status.

[Krugminator2]

That is what is moronic about it. No one cares about trillions to the elites and corporate welfare

Trillions doesn't go to elites in corporate welfare. You know where trillions does go? Lower and middle class people. It is an unpopular and correct view that NO ONE has the guts to say. I post the chart constantly showing two-thirds of the budget is entitlement spending so I won't do it for a 200th time. I would cut corporate welfare first even though it is peanuts compared to individual spending just so there wouldn't be any whataboutism like Biden used. But make no mistake, public sector pensions, social security and Medicare, and government employee incomes are where the biggest bloat is at. Everything else oil subsidies, whatever you think Wall Street is getting, defense contractors, etc is peanuts.

I find student loan forgiveness to be an issue that is a hill to die. I would impeach Biden over this. This is blatantly buying votes.

[Snowball]

Dems say page 637 of the Heroes Act gave Biden the right to do this.

[kahless]

Trillions doesn't go to elites in corporate welfare. You know where trillions does go? Lower and middle class people. It is an unpopular and correct view that NO ONE has the guts to say. I post the chart constantly showing two-thirds of the budget is entitlement spending so I won't do it for a 200th time. I would cut corporate welfare first even though it is peanuts compared to individual spending just so there wouldn't be any whataboutism like Biden used. But make no mistake, public sector pensions, social security and Medicare, and government employee incomes are where the biggest bloat is at. Everything else oil subsidies, whatever you think Wall Street is getting, defense contractors, etc is peanuts.

I find student loan forgiveness to be an issue that is a hill to die. I would impeach Biden over this. This is blatantly buying votes.

No doubt a part of that chart is what Americans paid into Medicare and SS, considered a handout.

So the the hill to die on is 500 billion to poor Americans, but not well over trillion to Ukraine and 800 billion in PPP. Got it.

Keep it up and it will be a Democrat party sweep in November.

[acptulsa]

Trillions doesn't go to elites in corporate welfare.

I think we'll never be able to agree on definitions. For example, I don't think you consider the money spent weaponizing the cold, developing the poison and selling the "emergency" to be anything but government spending on propaganda and buying vaccines. But in the end...



And, of course, you wouldn't dream of calling Ukraine corporate welfare for Raytheon or Burisma, either. Like I say, we just aren't going to agree on definitions.

[Invisible Man]

No doubt a part of that chart is what Americans paid into Medicare and SS, considered a handout.

Correct. That is a handout. Money is being taken from current wage earners and transferred to current Medicare and SS recipients, just as their money was taken from them back when they were wage earners and transferred to others.

So the the hill to die on is 500 billion to poor Americans, but not well over trillion to Ukraine and 800 billion in PPP. Got it.

1. How do you get this from what he said? He just said he would cut corporate welfare first?
2. Why not die on both hills?
3. I'm not sure where your 500 billion number comes from, but the portion of entitlements that goes to poor Americans is just a fraction of a much larger number in that's in the trillions going to Americans who run the gamut from poor to rich.
4. What trillion to Ukraine?
5. If at any time you are concerned that not enough of your money is being transferred to poor people, you can always donate more. You don't need the government to be the middle man. Cutting government handouts to the poor is an unmitigated good thing. There is no downside to it and a lot of upside.

[PAF]

I think we'll never be able to agree on definitions. For example, I don't think you consider the money spent weaponizing the cold, developing the poison and selling the "emergency" to be anything but government spending on propaganda and buying vaccines. But in the end...



And, of course, you wouldn't dream of calling Ukraine corporate welfare for Raytheon or Burisma, either. Like I say, we just aren't going to agree on definitions.

That's one helluva chart. I would say it deserves a thread of its own.


On a side note, I keep hearing political candidate commercials. Like always, one side complains about the other's lying. Back and forth, dem vs repup. But you never hear the candidate's detailed outlines on what or how they would specifically cut spending, improve trade, or talk about individuals rights to privacy. "Hey, vote for me because that candidate is lying, I approve this ad, paid for by xyz!"

[kahless]

Correct. That is a handout. Money is being taken from current wage earners and transferred to current Medicare and SS recipients, just as their money was taken from them back when they were wage earners and transferred to others.

1. How do you get this from what he said? He just said he would cut corporate welfare first?

True and do not disagree as Krugminator2 sees it. Except where I was replying to his quote, about a hill to die on.

I find student loan forgiveness to be an issue that is a hill to die.

2. Why not die on both hills?

Strategy. You have to pick your battles if you want to regain seats and power in November.

4. What trillion to Ukraine?

Over time and latest. I am going to go back and fact check this. Allot of fake news out there, maybe this one got me with the amounts being inflated in the spreadsheet I was looking at.

[nobody's_hero]

What?! This is money FROM the poor!

This is another wealth transfer from the lower classes to the upper classes. Sorry if you missed that point. And yeah, I can deal with your "whataboutism", but I know lots of people who didn't go to college and have struggled mightily to make ends meet and to feed their families. They couldn't afford the debt and didn't think it was wise to take it on. I know others who scrimped and saved to pay off their loans because they didn't want that burden hanging them. But now, we're going to take those people's money to spend on the spoiled laptop class?! Yeah, sorry if this bothers me. This is the grasshoppers looting from the ants.

Maybe he's talking about the poor colleges that are owed money. Those poor colleges with grossly inflated tuition costs and silly fees you have to pay, like to use the campus swimming pool even though you never use it once the whole time you are in college.

Because if they really wanted to help the poor, they would let graduates file bankruptcy and walk away from their debt.

But it is like the old saying, "if you owe the bank 10,000, you have a problem. If you owe the bank $10,000,000, the bank has a problem."

This is trying to solve the bank's problems.

[Invisible Man]

Over time and latest.

OK. Then you're not comparing apples to apples. You're comparing many years of aid to Ukraine with an amount in money transfers to the poor in one single year. If you compare like time periods, the latter is many times greater than the former.

[Occam's Banana]

https://twitter.com/MikeKBerg/status...69865560920066

[ClaytonB]

https://twitter.com/MikeKBerg/status...69865560920066

This makes me really mad! It's only 6-9 months of regular money-printing from the Federal Reserve, which I'm perfectly OK with, but this makes me really mad because I've never met the yacht-class zillionaires that regular inflation goes to, but I have met some of these laptop-class, college-loafer slobs and they're just going to blow this cash on Starbux and Chanel handbags!! If you're going to rip off the plumber-class, at least have the decency and sophistication to blow the money on coke, hookers and super-yachts in Dubai, or something!! What is this world coming to?!



So mad right now!!!

[ClaytonB]

Trillions doesn't go to elites in corporate welfare. You know where trillions does go? Lower and middle class people. It is an unpopular and correct view that NO ONE has the guts to say. I post the chart constantly showing two-thirds of the budget is entitlement spending so I won't do it for a 200th time. I would cut corporate welfare first even though it is peanuts compared to individual spending just so there wouldn't be any whataboutism like Biden used. But make no mistake, public sector pensions, social security and Medicare, and government employee incomes are where the biggest bloat is at. Everything else oil subsidies, whatever you think Wall Street is getting, defense contractors, etc is peanuts.

I find student loan forgiveness to be an issue that is a hill to die. I would impeach Biden over this. This is blatantly buying votes.

This is the same superficial analysis that the quants in government push ... in other words, it's propaganda.

Let's pretend for a moment there is no money at all. People just keep doing exactly what they do today, but without any explicit consideration of the "dollars". (This is similar to the Evenly-Rotating Economy thought-experiment in Austrian theory, but tweaked for this specific discussion.) Where are the real goods and services going? That's the real question. Are the real goods and services going to "the masses"? Obviously not, by definition. That's what makes them "the masses". So, by some strange magic, there is trillions of dollars being redistributed by the State to large numbers of lower-middle class and poor, yet the middle-class and poor remain non-holders of real assets. "That's why we redistribute money to them!" is the kind of head-up-assery that is the reason we are a decade+ past the financial point-of-no-return.

To understand who is really benefiting and who is really losing, the redistribution of wealth has to be tracked over time, and in terms of real goods (real assets), not numerical money (ledger balances). And the picture that emerges is crystal-clear: the primary victims of socialist redistribution are also its most vehement proponents (the middle-class), and the primary beneficiaries are the international plutocrats (American wealth is not staying in the US, it is migrating from the US middle class to the global political class around the world). So, the Fed is the central headquarters of a global political operation that is plundering the American middle-class like LA rioters running off with TVs and VCRs, all while the American middle-class is hypnotically approving of the very riot and plunder to which they are being subjected because they (falsely) imagine that these trillions are "going to the lower-middle class and the poor." It's an utter farce of Kafka-esque proportions...

[fcreature]

So the the hill to die on is 500 billion to poor Americans

It's not going to poor Americans. Most of the benefit will be had by rich Americans. This is literally waitresses bailing out lawyers.

but not well over trillion to Ukraine and 800 billion in PPP. Got it.

Keep it up and it will be a Democrat party sweep in November.

I'm really not understanding your perspective on the politics of it here. It seems much more likely that campaigning on Ukraine funding, which the general population is in favor of and is an issue that is not motivating at all for the voters who disagree with it, is the losing strategy.

On the other hand, bailing out rich kids who party for 8 years while obtaining a gender studies degree is extremely motivating for voters who disagree with it, and something that people are really pissed about. It crosses party lines. It's a winning message.

[Occam's Banana]

Here's an exercise for the reader: Who, if anyone, would federal courts recognize as having "standing" to sue over this issue - and for what kind of "relief"? (At least with the vaccine mandates, those directly subject to the mandates were easily recognized as having standing, and relief consisted of their not having to take the jab.)

https://twitter.com/KenGardner11/sta...16966084890628

[kahless]

It's not going to poor Americans. Most of the benefit will be had by rich Americans. This is literally waitresses bailing out lawyers.

I'm really not understanding your perspective on the politics of it here. It seems much more likely that campaigning on Ukraine funding, which the general population is in favor of and is an issue that is not motivating at all for the voters who disagree with it, is the losing strategy.

On the other hand, bailing out rich kids who party for 8 years while obtaining a gender studies degree is extremely motivating for voters who disagree with it, and something that people are really pissed about. It crosses party lines. It's a winning message.

I agree we should not be bailing out rich kids. Income of $125,000 single, $250,000 per couple has set the bar too low. Republicans would be better off rather than fighting it all, compromising down the income limits of less than 30k with means testing and allowing bankruptcy. The kids not working and can't declare bankruptcy is not worth the fight.

I know kids whose income is so low they could not afford food after wage garnishment and could not declare bankruptcy like other debts. There is another side to this.

I think allowing bankruptcy for the poor first and foremost R's should be speaking out about and Biden's role 17 years ago in that restriction. Going all in fighting it like an out of touch boomer is a recipe for failure come Nov. Makes for great rating and income for the grifters, but electorally a failed strategy.

[Invisible Man]

Going all in fighting it like an out of touch boomer is a recipe for failure come Nov. Makes for great rating and income for the grifters, but electorally a failed strategy.

If this is true, then it's a sign of how far and fast the Overton window has shifted to the left.

Prior to 2020 forgiving student loans was a fringe idea so far outside the mainstream that it wasn't taken seriously. Now I see people talking about it like most of its supporters are political centrists. And it's not just you.

This is disconcerting.

Hopefully, we start to see a drop-off in people every election who keep saying, "This is our last chance," as they realize our last chance came and went decades ago, if it ever existed at all.

[Krugminator2]

If this is true, then it's a sign of how far and fast the Overton window has shifted to the left.

Prior to 2020 forgiving student loans was a fringe idea so far outside the mainstream that it wasn't taken seriously. Now I see people talking about it like most of its supporters are political centrists. And it's not just you.

This is disconcerting.

Hopefully, we start to see a drop-off in people every election who keep saying, "This is our last chance," as they realize our last chance came and went decades ago, if it ever existed at all.

Wolfers is pretty far to the left. His wife/partner was a big part of the Obama administration. Here's what he said about in 2011:

Forgive Student Loans? Worst Idea Ever. https://freakonomics.com/2011/09/for...rst-idea-ever/

Here is what Obama's Chair of his council of economic advisors said about it

It is the worst policy imaginable because there is no upside to the proposal unless you are a Democrat and want to see people bribed to vote Democrat. It's inflationary, will raise tuition, will encourage people to be reckless with the hope of a future bailout, doesn't create any more college educated people because it is forgiving the debt of people who've already gone to school, and it is targeting people who should be making more than the average person in the country.

The whataboutism on this is unreal. It might not be the worst policy in history in absolute dollar terms but it is pretty darn close in terms of immorality and bad economics.

[CaptUSA]

I agree we should not be bailing out rich kids. Income of $125,000 single, $250,000 per couple has set the bar too low. Republicans would be better off rather than fighting it all, compromising down the income limits of less than 30k with means testing and allowing bankruptcy. The kids not working and can't declare bankruptcy is not worth the fight.

I know kids whose income is so low they could not afford food after wage garnishment and could not declare bankruptcy like other debts. There is another side to this.

I think allowing bankruptcy for the poor first and foremost R's should be speaking out about and Biden's role 17 years ago in that restriction. Going all in fighting it like an out of touch boomer is a recipe for failure come Nov. Makes for great rating and income for the grifters, but electorally a failed strategy.

Yeah, I see it a different way entirely. I don't think republicans should be compromising on this AT ALL. The blue collar working class does NOT like this. Veterans who had to go to war to pay for college don't like this. Most people who paid off their student loans don't like this. Anyone with a moral compass doesn't like this. The coalition opposed to this is broad and deep.

Compromising on the details is just weak sauce that will NEVER bear any fruit. I'm all for putting bankruptcy on the table as a way to handle those truly in dire straits that have taken on loans they can't pay back... But any blanket "forgiveness" of loans CANNOT be allowed to stand.

It makes me wonder how much student debt YOU have that you want us to pay for. Maybe it's some family members?? Whatever it is, this is completely immoral and there are a much bigger majority that are truly sickened by this move. Republicans would be wise to capture their narrative and make it the dominant one soon.