US Politics: We Don’t Need No Stinking Lawyers

[Larry of the Lawn]

36 minutes ago, Wade1865 said:

Providing student loans seems predatory, detracting from post-education success (buying homes, starting a family, etc.). Whereas, forgiving the loans seems exploitative, influencing student behavior (buying votes, minimizing individual responsibility, etc.). Overall, I’d say this dynamic will prove to be an (unintentionally) effective way to maintain control over a key subpopulation, through both coercion and influence.

Do you think that Republican voters with student loans are going to change their views because of this?  

As far as "minimizing individual responsibility" goes, it seems a strange focus.  Before the pandemic a large percentage of these loans were in default and not going to be collected anyway.  Many people have been paying for ten, twenty plus years and still owe more than they initially borrowed, and have been, to put it in right wing lingo, hardworking Americans.  

If you really want to find a policy that discouraged personal responsibility, look at the PPP loans, which were a handout to mostly the upper class, on the order of $700 billion or so.  But we never hear about how they don't have to pay back a loan they took out.  

I've seen the "vote buying" language thrown around a lot and I think it's misguided for a couple of reasons.  For one, our electoral politics are extremely transactional for voters and special interests alike   See Republican tax cuts, Joe Manchin getting $ for energy companies, etc.  I think the timing however is certainly intended to drive Dem turnout for the midterms.  But that happens with some issue anytime the midterms roll around.  

I'm curious, what is the sub-population you're talking about?  Student debt holders?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

50 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

I think the only sensible cap is $0, with a $100/semester administration fee.

I disagree. Tuition isn't a bad thing and it helps light a fire under a lot of people's asses. It just can't be what it is today. 

[Larry of the Lawn]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

The problem with this route though is it's only going to increase the cost of education going forward and future students will expect more bailouts. Just do the smart thing and cap what it costs to go to a public university.

Come on, you're a pragmatist- this has been an ongoing problem going back years and there's been no legislative will to adequately address it.  Reforming university costs would be great (and cutting out massive chunks of the administrative bloat).  

Think of this as "tuition" for reform- maybe it will light a fire under the legislatures' collective ass to fix the problem instead of ignoring it.  If they don't, they're not doing [their] job and just kicking the can down the road.  

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

The pragmatic thing to do is actually fix the problem, not to put breast implants on a corpse. 

[Mlle. Zabzie]

45 minutes ago, Larry of the Lake said:

Do you think that Republican voters with student loans are going to change their views because of this?  

As far as "minimizing individual responsibility" goes, it seems a strange focus.  Before the pandemic a large percentage of these loans were in default and not going to be collected anyway.  Many people have been paying for ten, twenty plus years and still owe more than they initially borrowed, and have been, to put it in right wing lingo, hardworking Americans.  

If you really want to find a policy that discouraged personal responsibility, look at the PPP loans, which were a handout to mostly the upper class, on the order of $700 billion or so.  But we never hear about how they don't have to pay back a loan they took out.  

I've seen the "vote buying" language thrown around a lot and I think it's misguided for a couple of reasons.  For one, our electoral politics are extremely transactional for voters and special interests alike   See Republican tax cuts, Joe Manchin getting $ for energy companies, etc.  I think the timing however is certainly intended to drive Dem turnout for the midterms.  But that happens with some issue anytime the midterms roll around.  

I'm curious, what is the sub-population you're talking about?  Student debt holders?

PPP loans were designed to be forgivable.  Like, that was actually built into the statute and at the time was meant to keep businesses propped up.  I mean, we can question the policy especially with 20/20 hindsight, and examine who got them, but this is not a good comparison.  

7 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

The pragmatic thing to do is actually fix the problem, not to put breast implants on a corpse. 

Hah!  And, in fact, part of the problem is that higher education has been subsidized by federal money which has caused its cost to inflate faster than inflation.  

[TormundsWoman]

9 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

The pragmatic thing to do is actually fix the problem, not to put breast implants on a corpse. 

YOU TELL THEM TYWIN!!! 
 

Also, while Wade is most likely a centrist with trolling tendencies, I agree: Definitely buying votes. Like with abortion, it’s become an instrument to use and run on in order to beat the other side. I sometimes wonder if these dudes realize there ARE people who still believe in ideals out there and believe in them to do the right thing because it is the right thing not because it’s time to use it.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

[tone of Ferris Buller’s Day off English teacher]

At what… point… will Trumpanistas… recognize… the bizarre philosophy they seem to be peddling is… riddled…  with logical contradictions?  And how their peddling of these  contradictions contribute… to the downfall of the Modern Republican Party?

[/tone of Ferris Buller’s Day off English teacher]
 

 

[Fez]

29 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

PPP loans were designed to be forgivable.  Like, that was actually built into the statute and at the time was meant to keep businesses propped up.  I mean, we can question the policy especially with 20/20 hindsight, and examine who got them, but this is not a good comparison.  

Exactly. You can argue that the PPP loans didn't fully function as intended in many cases, and led to a lot of fraud and waste. But the idea behind them was to get money to the employees; to keep them on business payrolls instead of going on unemployment insurance. Because the unemployment insurance systems (the literal admin systems) would collapse under the paperwork with that many people applying. And as an additional benefit, with everyone still on payroll it would be easier for businesses to re-open post-lockdowns. Businesses (and the banks issuing the loans) were simply meant to be the go-between for getting money to workers. The loan model was used to try to attach some strings for businesses, but in no way were the PPPs anything like traditional loans.

[Mindwalker]

The point was he posted "you take up loans, you pay them back" while he himself didn't.

***

Who is Barre Seid?

 

[Gorn]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

I disagree. Tuition isn't a bad thing and it helps light a fire under a lot of people's asses. It just can't be what it is today. 

Tuition is a way of maintaining a generational caste system and making sure that rich kids don't have to compete for jobs with the unwashed masses.

 

[Wade1865]

15 minutes ago, Larry of the Lake said:

Do you think that Republican voters with student loans are going to change their views because of this?  

As far as "minimizing individual responsibility" goes, it seems a strange focus.  Before the pandemic a large percentage of these loans were in default and not going to be collected anyway.  Many people have been paying for ten, twenty plus years and still owe more than they initially borrowed, and have been, to put it in right wing lingo, hardworking Americans.  

If you really want to find a policy that discouraged personal responsibility, look at the PPP loans, which were a handout to mostly the upper class, on the order of $700 billion or so.  But we never hear about how they don't have to pay back a loan they took out.  

I've seen the "vote buying" language thrown around a lot and I think it's misguided for a couple of reasons.  For one, our electoral politics are extremely transactional for voters and special interests alike   See Republican tax cuts, Joe Manchin getting $ for energy companies, etc.  I think the timing however is certainly intended to drive Dem turnout for the midterms.  But that happens with some issue anytime the midterms roll around.  

I'm curious, what is the sub-population you're talking about?  Student debt holders?

Larry of the Lake -- your thoughts are helpful, not unreasonable. I've been casually aware of the student loan dilemma for a year or so now, but am having trouble actively deciding on a position (i.e., I'm conflicted between sympathy and indifference). Hence, I'm trying a different approach (i.e., looking at it from the perspective of a young, inexperienced person subjected to power politics).

On affiliation, whether left or right wing, young and inexperienced, and holding steadily increasing interest risk undermining milestones like buying a house or starting a family or even a minimal degree of autonomy; free money would almost certainly be enough to disregard principles and ideology in exchange for free money.

Yet, even though I'm confident I'd willingly accept the loans if I were in their position, it strikes me as coercion (or a refined type of slavery); on loan forgiveness, it strikes me as influence (or a means of securing support). Coercion and influence are not good things when originating out of the hands of someone with power; e.g. a cop, banker, priest, Soldier, politician, et al. Thus, overall, my concern in this context would be the government undermining independence and agency.

On responsibility, if someone's gonna give me free money; or allow spending a substantial amount of money without repayment, I'm going to take it and feel no guilt. Then, I'll expect more in the future given the lack of consequence. Relieving me of responsibility would kill my drive and self-development, ultimately making me fragile. Thus, I'm wary of actions that disrupt this growth process.

On votes, if someone charismatic gave me resources, recognitions, and overwatch; I'm going to vote, support, and even fight for him. I know because I used this concept extensivley, to great effect, in support of my own worldly ambitions (and without regret). The young and needy are even more susceptible to this.

[Wade1865]

14 minutes ago, Gorn said:

Tuition is a way of maintaining a generational caste system and making sure that rich kids don't have to compete for jobs with the unwashed masses.

 

Gorn -- interesting, if you're being serious or toungue in cheek -- I'm not sure. I assume the caste system translates into a class system, in the US? If so, I'd admit I'm consciously positioning my family to be Kshatryia / Vaishya (both are comparable to me), most likely due to a lot of subconsious fears over how societies tend to evolve toward regardless of good intentions. God forbid they fall to Sudra or Untouchable once I'm dead, hahahaha. I don't want them playing soccer without shoes.

[LongRider]

16 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Rep. Cheap Liquor sees something wrong here:

Clowns. 

PPP loans, not a handout to rich people, no siree.    

[Martell Spy]

The claims of student debtors getting "free cash" are pretty dishonest. These are debtors, remember. If there was a certain amount of wealth or income possessed by the student loan holders the debts would likely already be paid off. If they had a rich relative it would already be paid off. And the government is not putting money into bank accounts.

These loans also don't behave like regular loans. For example there are income-based payment plans. And you can't file bankruptcy like a regular loan. None of this would be necessary if we simply allowed student loan debtors the right everyone else has: to go bankrupt.

 

 

 

[Wade1865]

1 hour ago, TormundsWoman said:

Also, while Wade is most likely a centrist with trolling tendencies, I agree: Definitely buying votes. Like with abortion, it’s become an instrument to use and run on in order to beat the other side. I sometimes wonder if these dudes realize there ARE people who still believe in ideals out there and believe in them to do the right thing because it is the right thing not because it’s time to use it.

TormundsWoman -- amusingly (and somewhat alarmingly), I had a passing thought on what seemed like creeping centrism, yesterday re abortion rights coupled with my uncertain feelings on the student loans dilemma. Seemingly (even to me), I was inching leftward; though, more likely, I'm just avoiding a position given my sympathies for women and youth who find themselves facing what I'd consider profound life challenges. If I'm being honest, though, outside of those two issues (and any yet-unexplored sociopolitical beliefs), I'm far right wing.

[Gorn]

31 minutes ago, Wade1865 said:

Gorn -- interesting, if you're being serious or toungue in cheek -- I'm not sure. I assume the caste system translates into a class system, in the US? If so, I'd admit I'm consciously positioning my family to be Kshatryia / Vaishya (both are comparable to me), most likely due to a lot of subconsious fears over how societies tend to evolve toward regardless of good intentions. God forbid they fall to Sudra or Untouchable once I'm dead, hahahaha. I don't want them playing soccer without shoes.

Dead serious. Insanely high tuition assures that smart poor kids are less likely to take places of mediocre rich kids, and that they remain subservient to their "betters" (where being "better" is a matter of birth, and not of personal merit).

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

59 minutes ago, Gorn said:

Tuition is a way of maintaining a generational caste system and making sure that rich kids don't have to compete for jobs with the unwashed masses.

 

Only if you make oppressive. Tuition should be manageable for most students. And just speaking from my personal experience, realizing I had to pay for school played a big role in me going from a B student in HS to an A student in college while most of the kids with the mentality that C’s get degrees had their tuition completely covered.

[Wilbur]

In the normal course of events, I would not support loan forgiveness to students.  My personal experience was that working summer jobs and putting some effort into loan avoidance was a good path to success.  And it seems irresponsible to allow people to just walk away from obligations of any kind, be it student loans or PPP loans.  Finally, as a deficit hawk I worry about spending of any kind.

However, I still have a kid in college, so I also have some very current anecdotal experience that runs counter to my personal inclinations.

First of all, the student loan business is straight-up predatory.  I cannot believe the ease with which an 18- or 19-year-old can rack up a hundred thousand dollars in debt, and how the lenders and the university makes it seem like a normal, even a good choice.  No bank on earth would loan a kid of that age $20,000 for a business loan, but five or ten times that for student debt?  You Bet!

If there was ever an industry that needs MORE regulation, it is student loans, based on what I see coming to my kid.  Anyone involved in the marketing of student debt to children should be ashamed of themselves, and the university administrations seem to have some real ethical blind spots, given the way they portray student loans.

Secondly, the work available to college kids today is very different than anything in my history.  For me, it made sense to get a forklift operator's certificate and work in an airfield warehouse, or cut tobacco, or build crates, or move furniture, or paint houses, etc. etc.  But today those jobs are not available as summer work for kids.  Instead, the service economy seems to be the only place that will hire college-age summer workers.  Obviously minimum wage is much higher, but the cost of tuition is as well, and service economy jobs don't really teach the workers any real useful skills.  It just seems much more difficult for a person in university to obtain an economically useful job that can make a dent in tuition, fees, room, fees, board, fees, and fees at school.

Anyways, that is a long rant, but considering the cost of college and the way the financial industry has greased the skids to debtor's hell for students, I am a lot less anxious about $10,000 in student debt relief as a plan to help people out.

[Zorral]

1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

At what… point… will Trumpanistas… recognize… the bizarre philosophy they seem to be peddling is… riddled…  with logical contradictions?  And how their peddling of these  contradictions contribute… to the downfall of the Modern Republican Party?

When will Scot recognize that ridding the world of logic, rationality and facts ARE THE POINT of ridding themselves of pesky everything from taxes to voting to even PARTIES, and the point is utter authoritarian rule by a very few of everyone else?  Or even the deaths of everyone else, if that's what it takes? 

~~~~~~~~~~~~

After Roe’s End, Women Surged in
Signing Up to Vote in Some States

In the first few months of this year, more than half of Kansans who registered to vote were men.

That changed after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/08/25/upshot/female-voters-dobbs.html

Quote

 

In the week after the court’s decision, more than 70 percent of newly registered voters in Kansas were women, according to an analysis of the state’s registered voter list. An unusually high level of new female registrants persisted all the way until the Kansas primary this month, when a strong Democratic turnout helped defeat a referendum that would have effectively ended abortion rights in the state.

The Kansas figures are the most pronounced example of a broader increase in registration among women since the Dobbs decision, according to an Upshot analysis of 10 states with available voter registration data. On average in the month after Dobbs, 55 percent of newly registered voters in those states were women, according to the analysis, up from just under 50 percent before the decision was leaked in early May.

The increase varied greatly across the 10 states — Kansas, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Oklahoma, Florida, North Carolina, Idaho, Alabama, New Mexico and Maine — with some states showing a pronounced surge in the share of new registrants who were women and others showing little change at all.

The total number of women registering to vote in those states rose by about 35 percent after the decision, compared with the month before the leak. Men had an uptick of 9 percent.

The increase offers rare concrete evidence that the Supreme Court’s decision has galvanized female voters, though the data gives little indication of whether the shift will be large enough, broad enough or persistent enough to affect the outcome of the midterm elections in November. The increase in registration has already begun to fade in most states. ....

.

 

 

[Fez]

59 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

The claims of student debtors getting "free cash" are pretty dishonest. These are debtors, remember. If there was a certain amount of wealth or income possessed by the student loan holders the debts would likely already be paid off. If they had a rich relative it would already be paid off. And the government is not putting money into bank accounts.

Not necessarily. Couples with $200k-$249k combined income (or less, potentially) might easily be able to pay off their student loans, but be in situations where it doesn't make financial to do so. E.g., they have investment opportunities where the annual return is greater than the interest rate on the student loans. In which case, the smart move is to pay the minimum possible amount on the loans.