Current Events > It's official: Student loan payments will restart in October

(+) Yeah! (+)

pretzelcoatl posted...

I mean, PPP loans should be paid back too.

A lot of insanely wealthy people who had no business getting PPP loans in the first place basically got free money, it was a robbery.

But they got forgiven and the tax payers on the hook for the loans MTG, Matt Gaetz and etc took out

Will_VIIII posted...

But they got forgiven and the tax payers on the hook for the loans MTG, Matt Gaetz and etc took out

Yeah, it sucks. I don't disagree there. Im not a republican so this isn't some sort of "gotcha". One of the things I was hoping those additional IRS agents Biden was pulling for would do is go after PPP fraud and try to reclaim some of that money that was wrongfully spent.

Torgo posted...

Why not forgive the current loans since most of them are in debt to the government anyway?

I find your position to be strangely inconsistent. Seems like you'll say anything else in the moment, but all that matters for the topic is creating any justification for the conservative position.

This is like asking me to re-type all of the long posts I've made in this topic so far.....lol. I'm not going to do that. I've already thoroughly explained why.

TL;DR:

1. These people agreed to these terms. I take agreements to pay people back after they loan me money very seriously. Friends, businesses, doesn't matter. If I agree to take your money and pay you back, I'll pay you back. That's what any honest person would do.
2. This is giving a giant "fuck you" to anybody who took these loans and responsibly worked and paid them off. It's also (literally) financially punishing those people by increasing the costs of goods and inflation.
3. Worst of all, it's punishing the lower class who deliberately did not take these loans because they were responsible and knew they couldn't pay them off. It's insulting and punishing the people who have worked lower paying jobs for these years while their peers took these loans and secured higher paying jobs.

Forgiving these loans would only punish the people who did things the right way. It would make so many lose faith in the system. You forgive these loans, and the price of goods will rise for these responsible people. When you tell people that the $150,000+ in debt they were expecting to pay suddenly evaporates, that person/family is going on a spending spree, increasing demand, which increases the costs for everyone else.

So now, Sarah who decided not to take that loan because she knew she couldn't pay it back, and has been making 1/3rd the money of John who did take the loan and didn't pay shit, suddenly has to bear the cost of John's new windfall.

Ninjaluver posted...

This is like asking me to re-type all of the long posts I've made in this topic so far.....lol. I'm not going to do that. I've already thoroughly explained why.

TL;DR:

1. These people agreed to these terms. I take agreements to pay people back after they loan me money very seriously. Friends, businesses, doesn't matter. If I agree to take your money and pay you back, I'll pay you back. That's what any honest person would do.
2. This is giving a giant "fuck you" to anybody who took these loans and responsibly worked and paid them off. It's also (literally) financially punishing those people by increasing the costs of goods and inflation.
3. Worst of all, it's punishing the lower class who deliberately did not take these loans because they were responsible and knew they couldn't pay them off. It's insulting and punishing the people who have worked lower paying jobs for these years while their peers took these loans and secured higher paying jobs.
Forgiving these loans would only punish the people who did things the right way. It would make so many lose faith in the system. You forgive these loans, and the price of goods will rise for these responsible people. When you tell people that the $150,000+ in debt they were expecting to pay suddenly evaporates, that person/family is going on a spending spree, increasing demand, which increases the costs for everyone else.

So now, Sarah who decided not to take that loan because she knew she couldn't pay it back, and has been making 1/3rd the money of John who did take the loan and didn't pay shit, suddenly has to bear the cost of John's new windfall.

1.) Cemith posted...

This isn't a great take because normally people taking on these loans are 17-19 year olds. They don't understand the full gravity of their loans because they:

1.) Haven't even fully developed their brains yet
2.) Likely have been under the care of their parents, whom pressure them into taking loans out for college because that's what they did 20 odd years ago, as though it's even remotely the same economy.
3.) Aren't even entirely sure what they want to do. Switching majors halfway through can incur a major cost. Personally I didn't know what my career was "going to be" until 2/3 years after I graduated High School, which could have been two years of loans I'm on the hook for, for what is now superfluous coursework. And a lot of jobs, especially the necessary ones, don't pay nearly as well as they should so even if people's work is a net good on society, they can still get assfucked by student loans.

College should incur little or no cost to the student. The world would be better if we were all more educated.

2.) "A Giant Fuck You" isn't a baseline for how business and loans should be conducted. Me eating fast food at 3 dollars is cheaper than eating at Chipotle's for $13 isn't a good argument in favor of fucking over Chipotle's stock. That's purely an opinion and has no basis in fact.

3.) Punishing lower class people is entirely the point of people rushing to get loan's rescheduled. See my sentiment above, people can do everything right and still get assfucked because of any number of factors outside of their control. Especially when it comes to careers out of college.

4.) When you tell people that the $150,000+ in debt they were expecting to pay suddenly evaporates, that person/family is going on a spending spree, increasing demand, which increases the costs for everyone else. Yes, believe it or not, when people suddenly have access to more money, they tend to spend it. People spending is good for the economy, it's day one economics. Corps want people to spend money, people now have money to spend. It's only a net positive. Supply and Demand is malleable and any deficit would be filled and then some given some time.

Ninjaluver posted...

So now, Sarah who decided not to take that loan because she knew she couldn't pay it back, and has been making 1/3rd the money of John who did take the loan and didn't pay shit, suddenly has to bear the cost of John's new windfall.

John could have also not gotten a job due to the pandemic and have been screwed. Sarah could have been a nepo baby and not needed a degree to earn a good job. Hypotheticals are fun, huh?

Snakethief posted...

We coulda had Bernie *sighs*

No, we couldn't have. Both American parties are capitalist parties. They're not "the same," but they are both capitalistic.

Man I hate republicans

Helping one person is not a fuck you to another person. That person is in the same same position they always were and would have been in. By that reasoning, helping anyone ever is a fuck you to other people and shouldn't be done. This is nonsense logic.

As others have explained, it's not a typical arms length agreement. It's a lifelong "agreement" entered for huge sums as matter of course/right of passage/borderline necessity by people too young to rent a car. It's not the same as you personally borrowing money from your friends.

You have no evidence that loan forgiveness does or would spur inflation. There's a far more supportable argument that it would create a widespread economic boom due to reduced debt and increased spending power that would benefit everyone, regardless of whether they had loans forgiven.

Sarah didn't take that loan because she couldn't afford it. Both her and John should have been able to afford college without taking out a mortgage. Maybe John had to provide for his aging parents with no retirement plan and couldn't afford to be making a low wage for 40 years. The inflated cost of college and the anti-human economy is what's causing both Sarah and John's problems, not loan forgiveness, and loan forgiveness doesn't make that any worse. Sarah and John should unite together to solve that problem, rather than getting mad when one or the other temporarily has their suffering reduced.

legendary_zell posted...

Helping one person is not a fuck you to another person. That person is in the same same position they always were and would have been in. By that reasoning, helping anyone ever is a fuck you to other people and shouldn't be done. This is nonsense logic.

As others have explained, it's not a typical arms length agreement. It's a lifelong "agreement" entered for huge sums as matter of course/right of passage/borderline necessity by people too young to rent a car. It's not the same as you personally borrowing money from your friends.

You have no evidence that loan forgiveness does or would spur inflation. There's a far more supportable argument that it would create a widespread economic boom due to reduced debt and increased spending power that would benefit everyone, regardless of whether they had loans forgiven.

Sarah didn't take that loan because she couldn't afford it. Both her and John should have been able to afford college without taking out a mortgage. Maybe John had to provide for his aging parents with no retirement plan and couldn't afford to be making a low wage for 40 years. The inflated cost of college and the anti-human economy is what's causing both Sarah and John's problems, not loan forgiveness, and loan forgiveness doesn't make that any worse. Sarah and John should unite together to solve that problem, rather than getting mad when one or the other temporarily has their suffering reduced.

In a capitalist society, like the one we live in, providing financial aid to a large group of people does affect others who aren't in that group. I don't know if you guys are expecting me to give you the basic course of economics, but I'm not willing to type out a 60-page reply to these posts. I've tried to dumb it down as much as possible.

People have more money = people spend more = demand goes up = costs go up.

That's the most dumbed down version I could possible give. The thing is, only a certain group gets more money in this situation; the people who took these loans and couldn't afford to pay them off. So the people who made reckless and irresponsible decisions get to benefit while everybody else who played by the rules gets punished.

EDIT: Sorry, I just saw the last couple paragraphs.

We agree on that part. I want Sarah and John to have kids in a world that doesn't offer these choices. I know you obviously haven't read all the posts in the topic (wouldn't expect you to), but my position has always been that we need to change the current system drastically. Education should be free or borderline-free for all.

Ninjaluver posted...

In a capitalist society, like the one we live in, providing financial aid to a large group of people does affect others who aren't in that group. I don't know if you guys are expecting me to give you the basic course of economics, but I'm not willing to type out a 60-page reply to these posts. I've tried to dumb it down as much as possible.

People have more money = people spend more = demand goes up = costs go up.

That's the most dumbed down version I could possible give. The thing is, only a certain group gets more money in this situation; the people who took these loans and couldn't afford to pay them off. So the people who made reckless and irresponsible decisions get to benefit while everybody else who played by the rules gets punished.

Just to be clear here, you are saying wanting to get an education for better job opportunities is reckless and irresponsible.

Heineken14 posted...

Just to be clear here, you are saying wanting to get an education for better job opportunities is reckless and irresponsible.

I'm saying agreeing to sign a contract to borrow money that you don't know you can pay back according to the terms is reckless and irresponsible.

Ninjaluver posted...

I'm saying agreeing to sign a contract to borrow money that you don't know you can pay back according to the terms is reckless and irresponsible.

You literally said getting a student loan is reckless and irresponsible.

So...

Heineken14 posted...

You literally said getting a student loan is reckless and irresponsible.

Let me try to highlight the word "if" as much as possible.

It is irresponsible to take student loans at their current rates IF you do not believe that you have the ability/means to pay them back under the terms that you're intending to agree to.

For me, I took a lot of student loans. I already gave my story. I lied to my school so I could work more hours. I missed out on a social life (for law school at least). I knew I would have to work my ass off to pay off the (approximately) $74,000 I paid off. I did it. For me, it was not an irresponsible decision because I knew what I had to do, and I did it.

Pay your debts you bums

Cemith posted...

1.)

2.) "A Giant Fuck You" isn't a baseline for how business and loans should be conducted. Me eating fast food at 3 dollars is cheaper than eating at Chipotle's for $13 isn't a good argument in favor of fucking over Chipotle's stock. That's purely an opinion and has no basis in fact.

3.) Punishing lower class people is entirely the point of people rushing to get loan's rescheduled. See my sentiment above, people can do everything right and still get assfucked because of any number of factors outside of their control. Especially when it comes to careers out of college.

4.) When you tell people that the $150,000+ in debt they were expecting to pay suddenly evaporates, that person/family is going on a spending spree, increasing demand, which increases the costs for everyone else. Yes, believe it or not, when people suddenly have access to more money, they tend to spend it. People spending is good for the economy, it's day one economics. Corps want people to spend money, people now have money to spend. It's only a net positive. Supply and Demand is malleable and any deficit would be filled and then some given some time.

John could have also not gotten a job due to the pandemic and have been screwed. Sarah could have been a nepo baby and not needed a degree to earn a good job. Hypotheticals are fun, huh?

Wow, I think you did a better job addressing his "not republican" talking points than I would have.

What he is doing, is tossing up a bunch of emotional arguments about "fairness" and then applying them to hypothetical anecdotes while ignoring the real world ramifications of these economic policies.

In the end, each of these emotional appeals and appeals to "fairness" are the exact ones I've heard on conservative media - which is meant to appeal to an audience receptive to broad narratives condemning the younger generations and the working class

Homeless shelters are a fuck you to people who pay for a place to live!!!

voldothegr8 posted...

Pay your debts you bums

And reverse the PPP loan forgiveness right?

pretzelcoatl posted...

I mean, PPP loans should be paid back too.

A lot of insanely wealthy people who had no business getting PPP loans in the first place basically got free money, it was a robbery.

And yet again, the people whining about the student debt forgiveness now, were silent when the PPP loan forgiveness dropped for the rich.

I didn't say expressing ones oh so convenient concerned now when the hypocrisy is pointed out. I said expressing concerned when the PPP loan forgiveness FIRST dropped.

Simps for the rich only care about the poor accepting responsibility, and pulling themselves up by the bootstraps. "ThAts SoCiAlIsM!"

Complete crickets when it's welfare checks, handouts and debt forgiveness for the rich who completely lack accountability and responsibility for their business failings.

That is until the hypocrisy is pointed out, and then simps "temporarily" agree to only go back to simping for people like Elon Musk again moments later.

Torgo posted...

Wow, I think you did a better job addressing his "not republican" talking points than I would have.

What he is doing, is tossing up a bunch of emotional arguments about "fairness" and then applying them to hypothetical anecdotes while ignoring the real world ramifications of these economic policies.

In the end, each of these emotional appeals and appeals to "fairness" are the exact ones I've heard on conservative media - which is meant to appeal to an audience receptive to broad narratives condemning the younger generations and the working class

The funny part is the real world ramifications of your proposal are so much worse than what is currently in place. You want to make the lives of poor people miserable in exchange for the middle class getting some debt relief.

It will never cease to amuse me that only on GameFAQs am I labeled a "conservative" despite my actual far-left position that's probably too far-left for most of you to digest.

Heineken14 posted...

Like anytime right wing hypocrisy is favoring the ultra wealthy, no one says anything at the time only to say they super duper totally don't support it well after the fact.

Exactly.

Will_VIIII posted...

And reverse the PPP loan forgiveness right?

Yes. Reverse the PPP loan forgiveness. Yes. 100x Yes.

Is that what you needed to hear to see the light? Yes, the PPP loan forgiveness was bullshit to stimulate the market so the administration would look better. It should have never been done, and it should be reversed.

Student loans should not be forigven. PPP loans should not be forgiven. There. You have your answer.

Ninjaluver posted...

In a capitalist society, like the one we live in, providing financial aid to a large group of people does affect others who aren't in that group. I don't know if you guys are expecting me to give you the basic course of economics, but I'm not willing to type out a 60-page reply to these posts. I've tried to dumb it down as much as possible.

People have more money = people spend more = demand goes up = costs go up.

That's the most dumbed down version I could possible give. The thing is, only a certain group gets more money in this situation; the people who took these loans and couldn't afford to pay them off. So the people who made reckless and irresponsible decisions get to benefit while everybody else who played by the rules gets punished.

EDIT: Sorry, I just saw the last couple paragraphs.

We agree on that part. I want Sarah and John to have kids in a world that doesn't offer these choices. I know you obviously haven't read all the posts in the topic (wouldn't expect you to), but my position has always been that we need to change the current system drastically. Education should be free or borderline-free for all.

If it's so basic and elementary and beneath controversy, please post reputable peer review studies indicating that your claim (student loan forgiveness will lead to inflation, resulting higher costs for goods and services for non-beneficiaries, not outweighed by any positive effects to them or others) is correct.

That's a novel claim. You've said you're a lawyer, not an economist and as a lawyer, I know this: lawyers don't know shit about economics.

There's nothing reckless and irresponsible about taking out a loan to go to college. Whether or not you can pay back your loan depends on how much the loan is (completely out of the teen borrower's control as the cost has been skyrocketing for decades), how much money you already had (completely out of the borrower's control), and what job you pick/the economy (partially in their control, but at the time they make the decision, they have no idea what the conditions will be when they graduate in 2-8 years)

You shouldn't have had to break your back and reduce your quality of life to do a pro-social activity like going to school. The fact that you had to do that is not a reason not to give loan forgiveness. The alternate reality where you balked at the high cost of education and were stuck working a crappy job is not a reason not to do loan forgiveness. The things that you're saying don't make sense, except according to some sense of personal bitterness and moral indignation.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


I actually take offense to that because Elon is a fucking moron.

Would Elon vote for AOC? I would.

Ninjaluver posted...

It will never cease to amuse me that only on GameFAQs am I labeled a "conservative" despite my actual far-left position that's probably too far-left for most of you to digest.

https://imgur.com/RffLxxD.gif

If only college guaranteed a job... College is basically gambling...

Heineken14 posted...

https://imgur.com/RffLxxD.gif

You're right, man. Caucusing for Bernie in 2016, voting for Hillary in the general, and voting for Biden in 2020 definitely make me right-wing. I'm just a conservate that happens to check the wrong boxes every time.

Ah yes, the well known far leftist tendency to insist that there are no systemic issues with the American higher education/student loan system, that people should pay all debts regardless of systemic exploitation in their inception, and to insist that all people should be locked into their current misery rather than even some people receiving help.

Exactly what Marx and Kropotkin would say on the subject!

legendary_zell posted...

Ah yes, the well known far leftist tendency to insist that there are no systemic issues . . .

Most of the people arguing against forgiveness have said we need to make systemic changes first instead of literally throwing cash at the problem in perpetuity.

legendary_zell posted...

Ah yes, the well known far leftist tendency to insist that there are no systemic issues with the American higher education/student loan system, that people should pay all debts regardless of systemic exploitation in their inception, and to insist that all people should be locked into their current misery rather than even some people receiving help.

Exactly what Marx and Kropotkin would say on the subject!

Quite literally the exact opposite of what I said. Nice to see you didn't actually read my posts. I have said from the very beginning that I support completely socializing education and making it free so that future students don't even have to incur these loans.

Nice try though.

Ninjaluver posted...

Quite literally the exact opposite of what I said. Nice to see you didn't actually read my posts. I have said from the very beginning that I support completely socializing education and making it free so that future students don't even have to incur these loans.

Nice try though.

Yeah but he wants free money so fuck having a honest debate or integrity.

Anarchy_Juiblex posted...

Most of the people arguing against forgiveness have said we need to make systemic changes first instead of literally throwing cash at the problem in perpetuity.

A lot of changes were made when the forgiveness was announced to prevent people paying their loan amount multiple times over due to interest

Ninjaluver posted...

Quite literally the exact opposite of what I said. Nice to see you didn't actually read my posts. I have said from the very beginning that I support completely socializing education and making it free so that future students don't even have to incur these loans.

Nice try though.

That's completely incongruous with the arguments you've made in this topic. You're now saying that future students shouldn't have to pay these costs at all. But you've repeatedly said that current students should have to pay them for economic and moral reasons. What justification is there to make current students pay the costs of a broken system, while future students benefit from a fixed system? Shouldn't we try to minimize the damage until we can get to a socialized system?

The loans are unjust and shouldn't exist, but the people who currently have them should pay them regardless because....reasons?

I love how all the chuds itt going on about paying up continue to ignore the PPP loan forgiveness

Anarchy_Juiblex posted...

Yeah but he wants free money so fuck having a honest debate or integrity.

You of all people talking about honesty or integrity in debate is laughable. You've strawmanned me in this very post, while having an article about steelmanning in your sig. You've never done that once in the years you've posted here. I'm paying my loans. I don't expect loan forgiveness, other than what I'm already entitled to by law.

Ninjaluver posted...

This is like asking me to re-type all of the long posts I've made in this topic so far.....lol. I'm not going to do that. I've already thoroughly explained why.

TL;DR:

1. These people agreed to these terms. I take agreements to pay people back after they loan me money very seriously. Friends, businesses, doesn't matter. If I agree to take your money and pay you back, I'll pay you back. That's what any honest person would do.
2. This is giving a giant "fuck you" to anybody who took these loans and responsibly worked and paid them off. It's also (literally) financially punishing those people by increasing the costs of goods and inflation.
3. Worst of all, it's punishing the lower class who deliberately did not take these loans because they were responsible and knew they couldn't pay them off. It's insulting and punishing the people who have worked lower paying jobs for these years while their peers took these loans and secured higher paying jobs.
Forgiving these loans would only punish the people who did things the right way. It would make so many lose faith in the system. You forgive these loans, and the price of goods will rise for these responsible people. When you tell people that the $150,000+ in debt they were expecting to pay suddenly evaporates, that person/family is going on a spending spree, increasing demand, which increases the costs for everyone else.

So now, Sarah who decided not to take that loan because she knew she couldn't pay it back, and has been making 1/3rd the money of John who did take the loan and didn't pay shit, suddenly has to bear the cost of John's new windfall.

I paid off my loan and I don't care if I have to pay more taxes so nobody had to work the ungodly hours I had to.

Will_VIIII posted...

A lot of changes were made when the forgiveness was announced to prevent people paying their loan amount multiple times over due to interest

Is anyone arguing against limiting interest on these loans?

I'm comfortable with tax payers eating the opportunity cost on this (as long as we fix the issue going forward) but when it comes to eating the actually principal, "fuck you pay me."

I think this article sums up all the changes announced at the same time the forgiveness plan was announced

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2023/01/10/new-student-loan-repayment-changes-announced-heres-what-borrowers-need-to-know/?sh=e0a48847dd8a

legendary_zell posted...

You of all people talking about honesty or integrity in debate is laughable. You've strawmanned me in this very post,

I made implications about your motives. I didn't strawman you.
Strawmanning requires misrepresenting your argument, that post did have any arguments in it.

legendary_zell posted...

That's completely incongruous with the arguments you've made in this topic. You're now saying that future students shouldn't have to pay these costs at all. But you've repeatedly said that current students should have to pay them for economic and moral reasons. What justification is there to make current students pay the costs of a broken system, while future students benefit from a fixed system? Shouldn't we try to minimize the damage until we can get to a socialized system?

The loans are unjust and shouldn't exist, but the people who currently have them should pay them regardless because....reasons?

For starters, don't say "Now you're saying..." as if I didn't make my position clear from the start. I've always been clear that I'm for complete socialization of education. It's not my fault you didn't read the earlier posts.

Yes, current students who agreed to a specific agreement, should have to abide by those terms. There is no incongruency there. The system should be far, far better than it is now. I want that to change ASAP. But for the people who chose to agree to the terms that were offered to them, those people should have to abide by the terms they chose to agree to. That's basic sense.

You're not actually minimizing damage by forgiving those loans. I've already explained this. You're just passing off the cost to the lower class and to those of the middle class who already paid their loans.

You're just saying "Hey, fuck you" to the lower class who didn't accept those loans because they knew they couldn't pay them off, as well as the middle class who worked and paid off those loans already. It's not just a symbolic "fuck you" either. You're doing real financial harm to these people because you're injecting a shit ton of more capital into the hands of the people who took these loans but didn't pay them. That means higher costs for everbody else which means punishing the lower class and the portion of the middle who paid off their loans.

Again you can save a lot of time by just saying fuck you got mine

Ninjaluver posted...

For starters, don't say "Now you're saying..." as if I didn't make my position clear from the start. I've always been clear that I'm for complete socialization of education. It's not my fault you didn't read the earlier posts.

Yes, current students who agreed to a specific agreement, should have to abide by those terms. There is no incongruency there. The system should be far, far better than it is now. I want that to change ASAP. But for the people who chose to agree to the terms that were offered to them, those people should have to abide by the terms they chose to agree to. That's basic sense.

You're not actually minimizing damage by forgiving those loans. I've already explained this. You're just passing off the cost to the lower class and to those of the middle class who already paid their loans.

You're just saying "Hey, fuck you" to the lower class who didn't accept those loans because they knew they couldn't pay them off, as well as the middle class who worked and paid off those loans already. It's not just a symbolic "fuck you" either. You're doing real financial harm to these people because you're injecting a shit ton of more capital into the hands of the people who took these loans but didn't pay them. That means higher costs for everbody else which means punishing the lower class and the portion of the middle who paid off their loans.

I think most people would agree that this is a nonsensical stance. If literal children "agree" to a fundamentally unfair, unjust, and unconscionable agreement, there's no justification for holding them to it when the problem is solved. An unconscionable agreement extracted under duress or otherwise unfairly isn't worth the paper its printed on. The only way to decide otherwise is to simultaneously ignore the systemic unfairness in the agreement, while elevating agreements and contract to an absurd level.

A kid who signs a contract to perform child labor should not have to honor that "agreement" when we ban child labor. A black potential homeowner should not have to keep paying without receiving equity when they enter an "agreement" to contract buy. Asserting so destroys the importance of recognizing that something is unfair.

Middle class people are not the only ones who benefit from loan forgiveness. Working class black and brown people benefit disproportionately from loan forgiveness at all levels of the higher education system.

I asked you for evidence to support that last paragraph and you haven't posted it. Until you do, that's nothing more than morally motivated economic theorizing.

legendary_zell posted...

I think most people would agree that this is a nonsensical stance. If literal children "agree" to a fundamentally unfair, unjust, and unconscionable agreement, there's no justification for holding them to it when the problem is solved. An unconscionable agreement extracted under duress or otherwise unfairly isn't worth the paper its printed on. The only way to decide otherwise is to simultaneously ignore the systemic unfairness in the agreement, while elevating agreements and contract to an absurd level.

A kid who signs a contract to perform child labor should not have to honor that "agreement" when we ban child labor. A black potential homeowner should not have to keep paying without receiving equity when they enter an "agreement" to contract buy. Asserting so destroys the importance of recognizing that something is unfair.

Middle class people are not the only ones who benefit from loan forgiveness. Working class black and brown people benefit disproportionately from loan forgiveness at all levels of the higher education system.

I asked you for evidence to support that last paragraph and you haven't posted it. Until you do, that's nothing more than morally motivated economic theorizing.

That's the weirdest thing about the stance he's given. He can both recognize that the system is flawed and causes widespread problems, so he's okay with overhauling it. But at the same time the people exploited by that same system (and yes, that's what student loans are doing, exploiting) are on the hook because they signed a contractually flawed and broken agreement?

This guy's logic: slavery is bad and should be abolished for future people, but those already enslaved should just deal with it because it wouldn't be fair or some shit idk

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Uhh no. You should save them. There might be a super boss in the post game content.

Will_VIIII posted...

And reverse the PPP loan forgiveness right?

The thing is, right wingers are groomed in fascist style debate - they will say they agree to making the rich pay back PPP loans now when it doesn't matter and no one in congress is considering legislation related to it.

But really... They don't care except for people like MTG and statutory-Gaetz getting to keep theirs because it pisses off the libz.

Torgo posted...

The thing is, right wingers are groomed in fascist style debate - they will say they agree to making the rich pay back PPP loans now when it doesn't matter and no one in congress is considering legislation related to it.

But really... They don't care except for people like MTG and statutory-Gaetz getting to keep theirs because it pisses off the libz.

This person agrees with me on one thing but doesn't agree with me on another - they must be a fascist!

wanderingshade posted...

What happened to that bullshit about adding extra interest because of the pause?

That would be insanity. Restarting loans sure, but retaliatory interest rates are a ridiculous concept.

What happens if you just straight up stop paying your student loans