Frankly, it's not the right situation for you. And it sucks that everything eventually falls back on taxpayers but that is unfortunately how America works. All of us, at one point or another, have had our taxes used for things that we dont like and think are stupid but if we dont pay, we go to jail. I like the alternative
8,000,000 Apply for Student Loan Forgiveness
- Thread starter mrhotdice
- Start date
It's no wonder our country is in the shape it's in. So your standard of how tax money should be used is basically no standard at all. If some politician wanted to pay off people's mortgages you would just say well tax money gets used for things all the time we don't like. Is that really the standard you hold government to?
with the way our presidents use executive action nowadays, yes that is exactly the standard i hold government to. our system has a lot of flaws.
That attitude is what is allowing it to happen. How do you expect it to change if you take that attitude. When politicians do crap like that it should spell the end of their career, not a reaction of "the optics look good". You need to realize you are the problem with what is happening with politicians because you react favorably.
every president regardless of party overuses executive action. whenever he does, the other party gets upset. and the cycle continues as presidents change. me being upset about has no impact one way or another, the precedent has already been set for them to do these things.
I would actually be ok with the student debt relief but not at the expense of the tax payers. The burden would fall to the universities who have been gouging students with higher tuition rates since the federal govt took over the student loan industry and gave anyone and everyone these loans.
A good percentage of these loans never get paid off regardless as outstanding balances are forgiven after 20 years and in some cases 10 years depending on profession. Monthly payments are ridiculously low with income based repayment plans that yield a $0 payment in a good portion of these loans. Student loans are not hampering that many people financially and if so it is on their own accord in an effort to pay them off.
A good percentage of these loans never get paid off regardless as outstanding balances are forgiven after 20 years and in some cases 10 years depending on profession. Monthly payments are ridiculously low with income based repayment plans that yield a $0 payment in a good portion of these loans. Student loans are not hampering that many people financially and if so it is on their own accord in an effort to pay them off.
The issue is "the other party gets upset". Everyone should get upset. It should be the end of that politicians career. But if the politician has the correct letter beside his name it is celebrated as "the optics look good". You are the problem with politics in this country because your reaction to what a President does is based on the letter beside his name, or whether what he does puts money in your pocket, and not whether it is right or wrong.
Don’t know why you continue to say that I’m the problem, we can play the “should’ve” game when it comes to how people should react but at the end of the day, our government is based on a two party system where we can no longer work together. I would like it if we can all get to a place where both sides can be fully objective on every single issue but we have to live in some kind of reality. If someone with an R next to their name said they would cancel $20,000 in my student debt, I would support that as well. Just so happens to be the person who is on the same side of the aisle as me that first introduced it
You made my point. Thanks. The letter or putting money in your pocket takes precedent over right and wrong.
Respectfully, not having to pay $20,000 definitely takes precedent over your personal view of right and wrong.
It's not a personal view of right and wrong. You borrowed the money and received the benefit of the money. Forcing someone else to pay off the loan that benefited you is wrong. Period. Your only defense is taxes are spent on things we all don't like. That's not an argument why it's not wrong.
I'm not trying to argue whether or not it is right or wrong. You think it's wrong for you and I agree, it shouldn't have to come down on taxpayers. I think it's right for me because I wouldn't have to pay it. I can only sit here and be the beneficiary of the plan if it goes through.
Not sure if it’s been mentioned but CNBC said 26 million have applied now and 16 milllion have been approved (not received money just approved to receive it). Say only that that 16 million receive the 10K, not the possible 20K and no one else gets it, that’s 160 billion handed out. Don’t forget that 100 billion was straight up stolen by gangs and foreign countries from the Covid relief money. If you don’t think they’ll figure out a way to do that again you’re crazy. This is economic insanity.
Plus, 10K won’t even put a dent in most peoples student debt. It needs to be capped at a certain percentage, not just have money thrown at it. This is not a solution at all.
Plus, 10K won’t even put a dent in most peoples student debt. It needs to be capped at a certain percentage, not just have money thrown at it. This is not a solution at all.
There is no wrong for me and right for you. The concept of forcing someone else to pay off another person's loans is either moral and ethical or it's immoral and unethical. In other words, it's either right or wrong. It can't be right for one person and wrong for another. That's like saying if I kill someone because I thought my girlfriend might be interested in him that it was right for me but wrong for him. It's an absurd idea. An action is either right or wrong. You seem to be saying that if you had to pay my car loan off it would be wrong for you but right for me. No. It's wrong period because you didn't take out the loan and you derived no benefit from the car. Forcing you to pay it is unethical and morally wrong.
now we're getting into topics of ethics and morality and that is a completely different and complex topic. there is no such thing as absolute right and wrong when there are so many different viewpoints on any one topic. you live in a world of only black and white when it should be applied as a wide spectrum between the two. we have established that is a wrong for you, obviously, but there are hundreds of millions of Americans who have a wide range of viewpoints on how right/wrong it is.
you caught me...every Democrat who disagrees with you is secretly trans and once government hand outs. nice one-liner though, big win
do you expect me to say no to not having to pay $20,000? let's live in reality
Not true at all. Some actions are objectively wrong and immoral/unethical. Government should act in an ethical/moral way. Being forced to pay off someone's debt is objectively wrong. Murdering someone that is not threatening you or someone else is objectively wrong.
If nothing is objectively wrong then how do you determine the line on what Government can do, or what citizens can ultimately do? Is it okay for Government to collect taxes from people to pay for your mortgage, car loan, game system, etc.? Where is the line and how do you determine it. Your way of looking at the world, and specifically government, does not work. Our Government is supposed to protect individual liberty. How is liberty protected when Government can force people to pay the debt of individual citizens? If you really believe what you are saying, I would suggest you haven't thought very deeply about the subject.
If you have integrity yes. I would expect you to speak out against the program as inappropriate. If it passes anyway, then you have at least taken a stand for what is correct.
Doesn't mean you don't take the money. My kids will take the money if it passes, but both are against it because it is wrong. By definition, if you are about "taking the money" then you lack integrity. Don't start with this "the way you want" nonsense.
what nonsense? you are presenting this expectation that everyone should think in the way that you feel is right and it doesn't work that way. if this is so wrong then why wouldn't you have the "integrity" to say no to receiving the money if it did happen to pass? actively advocating to want to end the program and then benefitting from the program itself seems a bit hypocritical, no?
You keep arguing things are only right or wrong based on point of view. That is none sense. You have yet to explain how the act of forcing a person to pay the debt of another is the right thing to do. Until you can justify that, you are speaking none sense.
first of all, the phrase is nonsense. second, a while back in this conversation I said that I would prefer that taxpayers weren't on the hook for this. we agree that it's not fair for every taxpayer to have to pay for this. i'm arguing about your concept of "integrity" compared to mine
Well if you want the US to blow 160 billion plus on this and throw the economy further into a spiral then you should for sure take it…
Nothing says, “I’m a winner” more than paying for things that you don’t necessarily have to.
Well don’t worry buddy, you won’t be given that option anyway. It was a way to try and buy votes from dipshits and worked, and there is a high probability they won’t even be given it.
We don’t have to agree to disagree, one of us will be correct and one won’t. If you get your 20,000 I will be back here to eat my crow. We’ll find out soon enough
Yeah but you didn’t know that going into it. Glad big brother is trying to hand you our money because you’re not fiscally responsible.
Been paying off the principal of my loan since I received it so the interest wouldn’t hurt me as much so I feel like I’ve been at least a little responsible. My tax money is paying for this program too it’s not just people who don’t like the program. Wasn’t anticipating getting loans forgiven but if it happens, I’m not going to say no
Integrity is about doing the right thing, is it not? If we agree that the act of forcing someone to pay the debt of another is wrong, then integrity would dictate that a person speak out against such an action. Instead you have praised the optics and criticized those trying to stop the action that we apparently agree is wrong. You are doing this all because it puts money in your pocket. What about that indicates integrity?
I highly doubt you pay more in taxes than you cost the government. You meant Hank's tax money (and the tax money of others that actually cause a net income to government).