WSJ argues student debt cancelation is bad as it will ruin military enlist

[PartySick 172,484]

1 minute ago, bionic said:

I agree but it is a two-step solution. Doing them simultaneously as (legislate -> cancel) rather than (cancel -> legislative -> cancel) will save millions in administrative costs.

For sure. And it should have already been done years ago

1 minute ago, bionic said:

Which is why it needs to be done through an Act of Congress rather than a risky (in terms of constitutionality) executive order. 

Does an executive order even have the power to absolve millions of debt?  what happens when another president gets in office and tosses that order out? Would the debt just magically reappear? 'Cause then an EO isn't really cancelling debt, it's just (temporarily) absolving you of the responsibility to pay it...

Idk, the moral here is eat the rich, go to school, f*ck the government

[bionic 50,111]

5 minutes ago, PartySick said:

Does an executive order even have the power to absolve millions of debt?  

Its a hot topic, and the answer is probably not. There is legislation which gives the Secretary of Education some authority, but the legislation also can be interpreted that they can only exercise that authority on the specific instruction of Congress (i.e. it has been used to forgive loans where Congress legislated that debtors who were defrauded by their colleges should be relieved).

It would definitely be challenged and for the Courts to decide. A preliminary injunction would be put in place meaning that the executive order could not be enforced (i.e. debts not cancelled) until the court has decided. Likely it would go all the way to the conservative-majority Supreme Court.

11 minutes ago, PartySick said:

what happens when another president gets in office and tosses that order out? Would the debt just magically reappear? 'Cause then an EO isn't really cancelling debt, it's just (temporarily) absolving you of the responsibility to pay it...

Unless Biden/whoever did it is total idiot, the order would be framed as a once-and-done cancelation and not a procedural eternal pause on repayments. Only the latter could see the debt reinstated. 

[gabeoz 7,915]

52 minutes ago, PartySick said:

For sure. And it should have already been done years ago

Does an executive order even have the power to absolve millions of debt?  what happens when another president gets in office and tosses that order out? Would the debt just magically reappear? 'Cause then an EO isn't really cancelling debt, it's just (temporarily) absolving you of the responsibility to pay it...

Idk, the moral here is eat the rich, go to school, f*ck the government

It's an extremely gray area that no one will say for sure. As @bionicsaid, there is some power given to the secretary of education, but any kind of action without congressional involvement would be decided by the courts. 

[PartySick 172,484]

53 minutes ago, bionic said:

Unless Biden/whoever did it is total idiot

Let us not put faith in a US president to not be stupid

[ALGAYDO 35,083]

I love how they’re not even trying to be subtle here. “We need desperate people to exploit” 

[Morphine Prince 109,654]

We been knew. 

They love poverty because they can exploit these people into expanding the military industrial complex around the world. 

They give them free education and benefits (something we should all have). 

This is why the US is so against universal healthcare and free higher education. 

[Oriane 22,749]

8 hours ago, PartySick said:

The amount of times I've heard my peers who joined the military use the term "red mist" is concerning.

What's this? All I found was some SpongeBob creepypasta

[AsleepOnTheCeiling 6,948]

7 hours ago, bionic said:

In no particular order...

• No legislative framework in place to avoid student debt rebuilding. You wipe it to 0 and it will start to build again from the next day, bringing you back to square one. A sustainable model should be in place (whatever form that may take) before cancelation is considered.
• Debtors who can afford to pay will avoid paying
• Will this only cover federal government-backed loans? Approx 12% have private bank loans (valued at approx 133 billion) – having these loans wiped out will hugely affect bank stability as they will lose decades of interest in a moment. The global financial system is fragile enough as it is. Social argument that the government should not intervene in private contracts between individuals and private entities.
• Further to above, a sizable portion of 'debtors' used loans that will be indistinguishable from any other financial loan, and these people will slip through the net. This accounts for about 2% of debtors.
• Increased government spending when the federal government is already in $30 trillion debt.
• Student loan forgiveness is not 'fair' when relief for rural business owners and workers is frozen and/or cut
• If it were that big a deal, why isn't Congress (who has unrestricted spending power) passing it? Why do certain representatives always try and push the president into it?

please be aware i do not necessarily agree with most of these but i think they are understandable even if i don't agree with the point of view. i don't entertain cray cray nonsense like what the thread is about.

If we can bail out banks, we can bail out our own citizens. It's that simple. Banks have had next to no consequences over the last 15 years in regards to their behavior while people with student loans are forced into indentured servitude for decades. And there's no justification for it. People will readily say that those bank bailouts saved and stimulated the economy, but we were already on the verge of an economic crisis before covid. People are still exploited by these banks through predatory loans, and student loans are one such example. 

6 hours ago, bionic said:

I agree but it is a two-step solution. Doing them simultaneously as (legislate -> cancel) rather than (cancel -> legislative -> cancel) will save millions in administrative costs. 

Which is why it needs to be done through an Act of Congress rather than a risky (in terms of constitutionality) executive order. 

Again, I don't really have any strong feelings about this at all, but call me Chris Evans because these are the arguments and it is A Starting Point™

Not sure why I quoted this, please disregard. 

6 hours ago, PartySick said:

For sure. And it should have already been done years ago

Does an executive order even have the power to absolve millions of debt?  what happens when another president gets in office and tosses that order out? Would the debt just magically reappear? 'Cause then an EO isn't really cancelling debt, it's just (temporarily) absolving you of the responsibility to pay it...

Idk, the moral here is eat the rich, go to school, f*ck the government

I think even if a president could rescind the order, I don't think there's any way they could reinstate the wiped debt. Simply because of how large the program is. 

[Economy 52,844]

On 4/14/2022 at 5:23 PM, PartySick said:

Like what? Genuinely curious

I don't see any benefit in keeping young working class Americans crushed by debt

Well, for starters if u do a 1 time random debt cancellation it can send a message to future students that they don't need to try too hard to keep debt as low as possible as some could reason if they forgave debt once they could do it again. In the long term it could

 

Not to mention a loan is a loan. I don't think it's the best message to send people that debts aren't to be payed unless this is part of a major restructuring or change to education system

 

I do see massive benefits to cancelling student debt as well tho... but in order to minimize the long term unintended consequences I think such a measure ideally needs to also come with reforms to lower the cost of tuition in the first place

 

If education isn't made more affordable I feel like this will just be a costly short term bandaid. Because it doesn't go to the root of the problem (expensive tuition) in a few years the problem will just be back again and possibly worse

 

Selecting a random lucky generation to wipe off the debt of to me is just giving the lucky ones a 1 time lottery. Your not actually solving a structural problem

 

[Debithius 6,056]

I am sure people don't go to uni only to enroll in the military lol

[AsleepOnTheCeiling 6,948]

1 hour ago, Debithius said:

I am sure people don't go to uni only to enroll in the military lol

You using the term uni gives me the impression you're not American. People enlist in the military because a benefit is free college. 

[AsleepOnTheCeiling 6,948]

2 hours ago, Economy said:

Well, for starters if u do a 1 time random debt cancellation it can send a message to future students that they don't need to try too hard to keep debt as low as possible as some could reason if they forgave debt once they could do it again. In the long term it could

 

Not to mention a loan is a loan. I don't think it's the best message to send people that debts aren't to be payed unless this is part of a major restructuring or change to education system

 

I do see massive benefits to cancelling student debt as well tho... but in order to minimize the long term unintended consequences I think such a measure ideally needs to also come with reforms to lower the cost of tuition in the first place

 

If education isn't made more affordable I feel like this will just be a costly short term bandaid. Because it doesn't go to the root of the problem (expensive tuition) in a few years the problem will just be back again and possibly worse

 

Selecting a random lucky generation to wipe off the debt of to me is just giving the lucky ones a 1 time lottery. Your not actually solving a structural problem

 

Don't agree that a "loan is a loan". Generally yes, but in this circumstance, kids have been conditioned to believe they MUST go to college in order to make it in the world. Standardized tests every 1-2 years, grading methods, instructional structures, etc.. 18 year olds are cleared to take $10,000s worth of debt every year yet wouldn't be able to qualify for more than $1,000-$2,000 for any other loan. The system and the government know this, yet do nothing about it. This is nothing other than predatory. 

[Economy 52,844]

37 minutes ago, TortureMeOnReplay said:

Don't agree that a "loan is a loan". Generally yes, but in this circumstance, kids have been conditioned to believe they MUST go to college in order to make it in the world. Standardized tests every 1-2 years, grading methods, instructional structures, etc.. 18 year olds are cleared to take $10,000s worth of debt every year yet wouldn't be able to qualify for more than $1,000-$2,000 for any other loan. The system and the government know this, yet do nothing about it. This is nothing other than predatory. 

Hence why I'm saying the system needs to be reformed at its core.

 

Simply forgiving a group of people's debt now doesn't solve any structural or root problem. It's a costly bandaid short term solution that in a few years we will be right back where we are now when the next generation of students get their debts too

 

Again, I'd be more pro forgiving the debt if the system that created it was also changed with it. Otherwise ur just selecting a lucky few who don't have to pay it back while not solving the problem and ensuring the problem will occur again

[phantasmas 12,366]

i just want free school and health care 

and in my onion, people that took out loans for either of those things should be the first to get a clean slate  

 

[Debithius 6,056]

5 hours ago, TortureMeOnReplay said:

You using the term uni gives me the impression you're not American. People enlist in the military because a benefit is free college. 

I am not American and I know the benefit is free education, I just think that potentially paying with your life to get out of debt is not something people are going to college for.