US student loans grotesquely high

[Toni]

Law training???? Less need for it???

Exactly which century are you living in? The 18th or the 19th???

As overlawyered as US is, the job market for lawyers can't absorb all the law school graduates.

It really depends on what kind of law you intend to practice---or if you decide to practice law.

Please note: public defenders (something I am certain you do not approve of) are generally very overworked, and carry a high case load. It's less a question of whether or not there is need for more public defenders than why we aren't more dedicated to funding public defenders' offices sufficiently.

And, of course, it is expensive to hire a lawyer and usually not something most people budget for, which is one reason that small town/city lawyers often struggle financially. Lots of DUIs, domestics, etc. and lots of people who don't qualify for public defenders but also don't have the means to pay for their own attorney.

 

[laughing dog]

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "The fact that Biden has the power to provide student debt relief to millions, had to be forced into extending the eviction moratorium,& has yet to aggressively campaign against the filibuster shows us he has more power than he’s using.
It’s time to take off the gloves & govern." / Twitter

Why should people who take out loans not be expected to repay them? Especially people who went to expensive private colleges and took out huge loans to pay for it?
And why should landlords not be able to evict renters who refuse to pay rent? The eviction moratorium turned out to be a bad policy that was abused by many deadbeat renters. Why revisit it?

Your response sounds like a bad Andy Rooney bit from 60 minutes.

I happen to think that some sort of loan mitigation targeted towards those who are having real issues with repayment is a good idea. I don't think there ought to be distinctions between the types of debt. Educational loans are partly taken to increase future earnings or returns, just like loans for homes or investment property.

Families Party on Twitter: "Canceling up to $50,000 of student loan debt per borrower would immediately increase the wealth of Black Americans by 40%." / Twitter

Because black people are the only ones who matter? Again, why should taxpayers pay off people's student loans?

Pointing out a policy will increase the wealth of Black Americans says nothing about any positive effects on others.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "With BBB delayed, Child Tax Credits will expire and student loans will restart within a matter of weeks. Working families could lose thousands of $/mo just as prices are rising.

People who have no children (and thus no child tax credit payments) or student loans will also suffer with increasing prices/inflation. Do they not matter? Better to have policies to fight inflation instead of more and more expensive entitlements programs for some.

It is easier to observe and measure the direct effects of a targeted policy than to observe and measure the direct effects of a more general policy like fighting inflation. In addition, the expense (or foregone tax revenue) or costs of a targeted policy is likely to be much smaller than one for fighting inflation.

 

[Jarhyn]

Derec, I think you took my "don't bash the kids" comment too seriously. That's why I put the smiley after the rest of the statement. But, I do think that we should help support children from low income homes. It's certainly not their fault that their parents are in need of help or their parents didn't do a good job of family planning. I agree that the amount of income one can make to receive benefits could certainly be lowered. My own son and dil have received the extra money for their two children this past year and my son is a programmer/developer. On the other hand, I suppose part of the reason why the income level was as high as it was, is to include a lot of the middle class families, who often receive little or no federal benefits. Either way, it's not going to turn me into a Republican. That's for sure.

Anyway, I seriously doubt that 50K in college loan debt is going to pass. It has less than 50% approval from the voters and there is a lot of resentment from people who never had the opportunity to attend college as well as from people who paid off their school loans. I've discussed this with friends who worked hard all their lives and never went to college. They don't support the loan forgiveness and resent the idea that those who usually have the ability to make a much higher income compared to themselves, might be given loan forgiveness. The current programs that allow one to work in a needed area in exchange for loan forgiveness are limited and problematic, if what I read about them a few weeks ago is true. Of course, that could be improved. There's a huge shortage of teachers right now. There are or used to be programs where one could teach while also obtaining the credentials to be certified in teaching. I would fully support such a program in return for loan forgiveness. A person should be willing to put in some effort in exchange for loan forgiveness. That's my point.

I say fuck those that resent others being free of the challenges they have had to weather.

Should we bow to the resentment the ex-slave holds for the man born free and enslave all free men? Or should we rather give the one so wronged something for their trouble perhaps after making sure all are free today?

I would see that we have done our level best to make all slaves free and all free born thence after, and after this great work, then after, focus on reparations.

this logic applies pretty much 1:1 with student loans too.

 

[Metaphor]

Derec, I think you took my "don't bash the kids" comment too seriously. That's why I put the smiley after the rest of the statement. But, I do think that we should help support children from low income homes. It's certainly not their fault that their parents are in need of help or their parents didn't do a good job of family planning. I agree that the amount of income one can make to receive benefits could certainly be lowered. My own son and dil have received the extra money for their two children this past year and my son is a programmer/developer. On the other hand, I suppose part of the reason why the income level was as high as it was, is to include a lot of the middle class families, who often receive little or no federal benefits. Either way, it's not going to turn me into a Republican. That's for sure.

Anyway, I seriously doubt that 50K in college loan debt is going to pass. It has less than 50% approval from the voters and there is a lot of resentment from people who never had the opportunity to attend college as well as from people who paid off their school loans. I've discussed this with friends who worked hard all their lives and never went to college. They don't support the loan forgiveness and resent the idea that those who usually have the ability to make a much higher income compared to themselves, might be given loan forgiveness. The current programs that allow one to work in a needed area in exchange for loan forgiveness are limited and problematic, if what I read about them a few weeks ago is true. Of course, that could be improved. There's a huge shortage of teachers right now. There are or used to be programs where one could teach while also obtaining the credentials to be certified in teaching. I would fully support such a program in return for loan forgiveness. A person should be willing to put in some effort in exchange for loan forgiveness. That's my point.

I say fuck those that resent others being free of the challenges they have had to weather.

Should we bow to the resentment the ex-slave holds for the man born free and enslave all free men? Or should we rather give the one so wronged something for their trouble perhaps after making sure all are free today?

I would see that we have done our level best to make all slaves free and all free born thence after, and after this great work, then after, focus on reparations.

this logic applies pretty much 1:1 with student loans too.

What on earth are you saying here? Who are the "slaves" in your analogy?

 

[Metaphor]

Forgiveness of all or part of student loans using taxpayer money is a problematic policy that creates a moral hazard. southernhybrid lists some of the reasons why it is problematic in post #180.

 

[Jarhyn]

Derec, I think you took my "don't bash the kids" comment too seriously. That's why I put the smiley after the rest of the statement. But, I do think that we should help support children from low income homes. It's certainly not their fault that their parents are in need of help or their parents didn't do a good job of family planning. I agree that the amount of income one can make to receive benefits could certainly be lowered. My own son and dil have received the extra money for their two children this past year and my son is a programmer/developer. On the other hand, I suppose part of the reason why the income level was as high as it was, is to include a lot of the middle class families, who often receive little or no federal benefits. Either way, it's not going to turn me into a Republican. That's for sure.

Anyway, I seriously doubt that 50K in college loan debt is going to pass. It has less than 50% approval from the voters and there is a lot of resentment from people who never had the opportunity to attend college as well as from people who paid off their school loans. I've discussed this with friends who worked hard all their lives and never went to college. They don't support the loan forgiveness and resent the idea that those who usually have the ability to make a much higher income compared to themselves, might be given loan forgiveness. The current programs that allow one to work in a needed area in exchange for loan forgiveness are limited and problematic, if what I read about them a few weeks ago is true. Of course, that could be improved. There's a huge shortage of teachers right now. There are or used to be programs where one could teach while also obtaining the credentials to be certified in teaching. I would fully support such a program in return for loan forgiveness. A person should be willing to put in some effort in exchange for loan forgiveness. That's my point.

I say fuck those that resent others being free of the challenges they have had to weather.

Should we bow to the resentment the ex-slave holds for the man born free and enslave all free men? Or should we rather give the one so wronged something for their trouble perhaps after making sure all are free today?

I would see that we have done our level best to make all slaves free and all free born thence after, and after this great work, then after, focus on reparations.

this logic applies pretty much 1:1 with student loans too.

What on earth are you saying here? Who are the "slaves" in your analogy?

I don't think I'm going to bother anymore with obtuse questions. Either you are smart enough to figure it out, or you insult yourself.

 

[Metaphor]

Derec, I think you took my "don't bash the kids" comment too seriously. That's why I put the smiley after the rest of the statement. But, I do think that we should help support children from low income homes. It's certainly not their fault that their parents are in need of help or their parents didn't do a good job of family planning. I agree that the amount of income one can make to receive benefits could certainly be lowered. My own son and dil have received the extra money for their two children this past year and my son is a programmer/developer. On the other hand, I suppose part of the reason why the income level was as high as it was, is to include a lot of the middle class families, who often receive little or no federal benefits. Either way, it's not going to turn me into a Republican. That's for sure.

Anyway, I seriously doubt that 50K in college loan debt is going to pass. It has less than 50% approval from the voters and there is a lot of resentment from people who never had the opportunity to attend college as well as from people who paid off their school loans. I've discussed this with friends who worked hard all their lives and never went to college. They don't support the loan forgiveness and resent the idea that those who usually have the ability to make a much higher income compared to themselves, might be given loan forgiveness. The current programs that allow one to work in a needed area in exchange for loan forgiveness are limited and problematic, if what I read about them a few weeks ago is true. Of course, that could be improved. There's a huge shortage of teachers right now. There are or used to be programs where one could teach while also obtaining the credentials to be certified in teaching. I would fully support such a program in return for loan forgiveness. A person should be willing to put in some effort in exchange for loan forgiveness. That's my point.

I say fuck those that resent others being free of the challenges they have had to weather.

Should we bow to the resentment the ex-slave holds for the man born free and enslave all free men? Or should we rather give the one so wronged something for their trouble perhaps after making sure all are free today?

I would see that we have done our level best to make all slaves free and all free born thence after, and after this great work, then after, focus on reparations.

this logic applies pretty much 1:1 with student loans too.

What on earth are you saying here? Who are the "slaves" in your analogy?

I don't think I'm going to bother anymore with obtuse questions. Either you are smart enough to figure it out, or you insult yourself.

I am cautious enough to not respond with my understanding of your analogy. I am not interested in putting words in your mouth or strawmanning.

Either you can explain your analogy after somebody has sincerely requested an explanation, or you can choose to call the question 'obtuse' and deliberately fail at communication.

Either way, however, I cannot imagine an explanation that rescues your analogy from being grossly offensive.

 

[Jarhyn]

Derec, I think you took my "don't bash the kids" comment too seriously. That's why I put the smiley after the rest of the statement. But, I do think that we should help support children from low income homes. It's certainly not their fault that their parents are in need of help or their parents didn't do a good job of family planning. I agree that the amount of income one can make to receive benefits could certainly be lowered. My own son and dil have received the extra money for their two children this past year and my son is a programmer/developer. On the other hand, I suppose part of the reason why the income level was as high as it was, is to include a lot of the middle class families, who often receive little or no federal benefits. Either way, it's not going to turn me into a Republican. That's for sure.

Anyway, I seriously doubt that 50K in college loan debt is going to pass. It has less than 50% approval from the voters and there is a lot of resentment from people who never had the opportunity to attend college as well as from people who paid off their school loans. I've discussed this with friends who worked hard all their lives and never went to college. They don't support the loan forgiveness and resent the idea that those who usually have the ability to make a much higher income compared to themselves, might be given loan forgiveness. The current programs that allow one to work in a needed area in exchange for loan forgiveness are limited and problematic, if what I read about them a few weeks ago is true. Of course, that could be improved. There's a huge shortage of teachers right now. There are or used to be programs where one could teach while also obtaining the credentials to be certified in teaching. I would fully support such a program in return for loan forgiveness. A person should be willing to put in some effort in exchange for loan forgiveness. That's my point.

I say fuck those that resent others being free of the challenges they have had to weather.

Should we bow to the resentment the ex-slave holds for the man born free and enslave all free men? Or should we rather give the one so wronged something for their trouble perhaps after making sure all are free today?

I would see that we have done our level best to make all slaves free and all free born thence after, and after this great work, then after, focus on reparations.

this logic applies pretty much 1:1 with student loans too.

What on earth are you saying here? Who are the "slaves" in your analogy?

I don't think I'm going to bother anymore with obtuse questions. Either you are smart enough to figure it out, or you insult yourself.

I am cautious enough to not respond with my understanding of your analogy. I am not interested in putting words in your mouth or strawmanning.

Either you can explain your analogy after somebody has sincerely requested an explanation, or you can choose to call the question 'obtuse' and deliberately fail at communication.

Either way, however, I cannot imagine an explanation that rescues your analogy from being grossly offensive.

Ah! Now you care about gross offense!

Be offended! Stamp your little feet, and huff your little tantrum over the fact, the undeniable fact, that it is idiotic and immature to complain about others being free of things you hated going through.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Student Loan Debt Forgiveness is a wealth transfer from the poor to the middle class. Of course Democrats support upward wealth transfers.

 

[Metaphor]

Derec, I think you took my "don't bash the kids" comment too seriously. That's why I put the smiley after the rest of the statement. But, I do think that we should help support children from low income homes. It's certainly not their fault that their parents are in need of help or their parents didn't do a good job of family planning. I agree that the amount of income one can make to receive benefits could certainly be lowered. My own son and dil have received the extra money for their two children this past year and my son is a programmer/developer. On the other hand, I suppose part of the reason why the income level was as high as it was, is to include a lot of the middle class families, who often receive little or no federal benefits. Either way, it's not going to turn me into a Republican. That's for sure.

Anyway, I seriously doubt that 50K in college loan debt is going to pass. It has less than 50% approval from the voters and there is a lot of resentment from people who never had the opportunity to attend college as well as from people who paid off their school loans. I've discussed this with friends who worked hard all their lives and never went to college. They don't support the loan forgiveness and resent the idea that those who usually have the ability to make a much higher income compared to themselves, might be given loan forgiveness. The current programs that allow one to work in a needed area in exchange for loan forgiveness are limited and problematic, if what I read about them a few weeks ago is true. Of course, that could be improved. There's a huge shortage of teachers right now. There are or used to be programs where one could teach while also obtaining the credentials to be certified in teaching. I would fully support such a program in return for loan forgiveness. A person should be willing to put in some effort in exchange for loan forgiveness. That's my point.

I say fuck those that resent others being free of the challenges they have had to weather.

Should we bow to the resentment the ex-slave holds for the man born free and enslave all free men? Or should we rather give the one so wronged something for their trouble perhaps after making sure all are free today?

I would see that we have done our level best to make all slaves free and all free born thence after, and after this great work, then after, focus on reparations.

this logic applies pretty much 1:1 with student loans too.

What on earth are you saying here? Who are the "slaves" in your analogy?

I don't think I'm going to bother anymore with obtuse questions. Either you are smart enough to figure it out, or you insult yourself.

I am cautious enough to not respond with my understanding of your analogy. I am not interested in putting words in your mouth or strawmanning.

Either you can explain your analogy after somebody has sincerely requested an explanation, or you can choose to call the question 'obtuse' and deliberately fail at communication.

Either way, however, I cannot imagine an explanation that rescues your analogy from being grossly offensive.

Ah! Now you care about gross offense!

Be offended! Stamp your little feet, and huff your little tantrum over the fact, the undeniable fact, that it is idiotic and immature to complain about others being free of things you hated going through.

My feet are not little, Jarhyn.

I am not stamping my feet over your analogy because I am not confident I understand it. The reason that I am not confident I understand it, is because the most obvious interpretation I can think of would mean your thinking is unbelievably unethical and desperately childish and hopelessly myopic, and I hope that perhaps I am mistaken.

 

[Toni]

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "The fact that Biden has the power to provide student debt relief to millions, had to be forced into extending the eviction moratorium,& has yet to aggressively campaign against the filibuster shows us he has more power than he’s using.
It’s time to take off the gloves & govern." / Twitter

Why should people who take out loans not be expected to repay them? Especially people who went to expensive private colleges and took out huge loans to pay for it?
And why should landlords not be able to evict renters who refuse to pay rent? The eviction moratorium turned out to be a bad policy that was abused by many deadbeat renters. Why revisit it?

Your response sounds like a bad Andy Rooney bit from 60 minutes.

I happen to think that some sort of loan mitigation targeted towards those who are having real issues with repayment is a good idea. I don't think there ought to be distinctions between the types of debt. Educational loans are partly taken to increase future earnings or returns, just like loans for homes or investment property.

Families Party on Twitter: "Canceling up to $50,000 of student loan debt per borrower would immediately increase the wealth of Black Americans by 40%." / Twitter

Because black people are the only ones who matter? Again, why should taxpayers pay off people's student loans?

Pointing out a policy will increase the wealth of Black Americans says nothing about any positive effects on others.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "With BBB delayed, Child Tax Credits will expire and student loans will restart within a matter of weeks. Working families could lose thousands of $/mo just as prices are rising.

People who have no children (and thus no child tax credit payments) or student loans will also suffer with increasing prices/inflation. Do they not matter? Better to have policies to fight inflation instead of more and more expensive entitlements programs for some.

It is easier to observe and measure the direct effects of a targeted policy than to observe and measure the direct effects of a more general policy like fighting inflation. In addition, the expense (or foregone tax revenue) or costs of a targeted policy is likely to be much smaller than one for fighting inflation.

There is considerable difference between student loans and car loans, home mortgages, and credit card debt. The most salient differences are that student loans are typically taken out by 18 year olds who would not be able to secure a car loan, a mortgage or a credit card at ages 18-22 under most circumstances.

The other major difference is that unlike the other types of debt, student loans are never dischargeable through bankruptcy. The only ways that I know that one may discharge student debt are if one seeks employment in certain fields generally serving underserved areas ( generally with otherwise poor compensation), or through death ( ! ) and sometimes, disability.

Think of it: Congratulations! Here’s your diploma. You now owe more money than I paid for any house that I have ever bought. Good luck!

In most states, the share of the cost of a college education born by students has dramatically increased.

Why does this matter? Students who are hampered by student debt are less likely to pursue graduate degrees or professional degrees, meaning that we will, over time, have a less well educated population. This means fewer doctors, architects, engineers, researchers and yes, college professors.

Being saddled with enormous student debt forces young adults to postpone or forego home ownership and/or having children. It also creates a higher paid class of wage slaves and along with that, the societal and negative health repercussions that come with it. That’s a very heavy burden for someone to take on at an age so young they could not rent a car or most hotel rooms or legally drink alcohol.

 

[Metaphor]

Why does this matter? Students who are hampered by student debt are less likely to pursue graduate degrees or professional degrees, meaning that we will, over time, have a less well educated population. This means fewer doctors, architects, engineers, researchers and yes, college professors.

The population already has too much formal tertiary education. It's why employers can now ask for employees to have a degree for jobs that do not require a degree and did not require a degree in decades prior.

Also, as long as the fields you mention continue to pay well, there will not be a shortage of people in them. In fact, too many people want to be college professors right now, which is why universities can afford to do what they do to young aspiring academics.

 

[lpetrich]

Student Loan Debt Forgiveness is a wealth transfer from the poor to the middle class.

Evidence: {}

Of course Democrats support upward wealth transfers.

Evidence: {}

 

[Toni]

Why does this matter? Students who are hampered by student debt are less likely to pursue graduate degrees or professional degrees, meaning that we will, over time, have a less well educated population. This means fewer doctors, architects, engineers, researchers and yes, college professors.

The population already has too much formal tertiary education. It's why employers can now ask for employees to have a degree for jobs that do not require a degree and did not require a degree in decades prior.

Also, as long as the fields you mention continue to pay well, there will not be a shortage of people in them. In fact, too many people want to be college professors right now, which is why universities can afford to do what they do to young aspiring academics.

Ah, yes. Why should anyone know or understand , much less appreciate or enjoy something that they or better yet, their employers cannot turn a dime on? Anything more might give workers ideas. Everyone knows that ideas are dangerous things. Better to drink than to think! Let’s all just be comfortably numb.

You are confusing education with job training.

 

[Metaphor]

Why does this matter? Students who are hampered by student debt are less likely to pursue graduate degrees or professional degrees, meaning that we will, over time, have a less well educated population. This means fewer doctors, architects, engineers, researchers and yes, college professors.

The population already has too much formal tertiary education. It's why employers can now ask for employees to have a degree for jobs that do not require a degree and did not require a degree in decades prior.

Also, as long as the fields you mention continue to pay well, there will not be a shortage of people in them. In fact, too many people want to be college professors right now, which is why universities can afford to do what they do to young aspiring academics.

Ah, yes. Why should anyone know or understand , much less appreciate or enjoy something that they or better yet, their employers cannot turn a dime on? Anything more might give workers ideas. Everyone knows that ideas are dangerous things. Better to drink than to think! Let’s all just be comfortably numb.

You are confusing education with job training.

I'm not doing any such thing.

If somebody wants to pursue a degree for leisure, that's their business. But taxpayers should not pay for other people's expensive leisure pursuits.

 

[Toni]

Why does this matter? Students who are hampered by student debt are less likely to pursue graduate degrees or professional degrees, meaning that we will, over time, have a less well educated population. This means fewer doctors, architects, engineers, researchers and yes, college professors.

The population already has too much formal tertiary education. It's why employers can now ask for employees to have a degree for jobs that do not require a degree and did not require a degree in decades prior.

Also, as long as the fields you mention continue to pay well, there will not be a shortage of people in them. In fact, too many people want to be college professors right now, which is why universities can afford to do what they do to young aspiring academics.

Ah, yes. Why should anyone know or understand , much less appreciate or enjoy something that they or better yet, their employers cannot turn a dime on? Anything more might give workers ideas. Everyone knows that ideas are dangerous things. Better to drink than to think! Let’s all just be comfortably numb.

You are confusing education with job training.

I'm not doing any such thing.

If somebody wants to pursue a degree for leisure, that's their business. But taxpayers should not pay for other people's expensive leisure pursuits.

Taxpayers should pay for an employer’s job training? Please. Business gets plenty of tax payer support already.

Taxpayers, after all, are…people. Human beings who surely have the right to learn as much as they can and desire to learn.

What are you afraid of? A population who can think?

 

[Metaphor]

The United States ought not use taxpayer money to forgive student debt.

• People who entered into student debt entered it like any other debt: knowing they had a moral obligation to repay the debt. Forgiving this debt just because it is student debt creates a moral hazard of future debts being entered into with no intention or expectation of repayment.
• Student debt is debt entered into in the expectation that a graduate can pursue work that pays more than options without a degree. It is an investment in personal capital. Why should debt that went to build personal capital be forgiven but debt going to build other capital not be forgiven by government bailout? If I lost $50,000 on a capital investment it is not the government's job to forgive that debt.
• Forgiving students who have not paid back their debt, using taxpayer money, is giving extra money to the already privileged. People who never went to university and never got the product of a degree ought not pay for people who choose to go to university and incur a debt.
• People who went to university, and chose a degree that results in a well-paying career, and chose to make their repayments ought not be paying for people who did not choose a degree that results in a well-paying career, or people who do not pay back the loans they promised to pay back. It is unfair for people who got the same product and paid back their debt in full to not receive the same benefit (of free money) given to people who got the same product but did not pay back their debt. If anybody deserves the free money, it's the people who kept their promise to pay back their debts.
• Even if there was a case for a federal government to subsidise tertiary education, it would be a policy going forward, not a piecemeal policy that gives taxpayer money to the people who least fulfilled their promise of paying back their debts.

 

[Metaphor]

Why does this matter? Students who are hampered by student debt are less likely to pursue graduate degrees or professional degrees, meaning that we will, over time, have a less well educated population. This means fewer doctors, architects, engineers, researchers and yes, college professors.

The population already has too much formal tertiary education. It's why employers can now ask for employees to have a degree for jobs that do not require a degree and did not require a degree in decades prior.

Also, as long as the fields you mention continue to pay well, there will not be a shortage of people in them. In fact, too many people want to be college professors right now, which is why universities can afford to do what they do to young aspiring academics.

Ah, yes. Why should anyone know or understand , much less appreciate or enjoy something that they or better yet, their employers cannot turn a dime on? Anything more might give workers ideas. Everyone knows that ideas are dangerous things. Better to drink than to think! Let’s all just be comfortably numb.

You are confusing education with job training.

I'm not doing any such thing.

If somebody wants to pursue a degree for leisure, that's their business. But taxpayers should not pay for other people's expensive leisure pursuits.

Taxpayers should pay for an employer’s job training? Please. Business gets plenty of tax payer support already.

No. Can you can point out where I said or implied that?

Taxpayers, after all, are…people. Human beings who surely have the right to learn as much as they can and desire to learn.

What are you afraid of? A population who can think?

What on earth are you talking about?

Are you suggesting that failing to give taxpayer money to people who failed to pay back debts they promised to pay back shows that I am afraid of a population that can 'think'?

 

[southernhybrid]

Student Loan Debt Forgiveness is a wealth transfer from the poor to the middle class. Of course Democrats support upward wealth transfers.

I don't believe that the majority of Democrats support loan forgiveness without having those who receive forgiveness giving something back to society. But, you do have a point and that is why so many people who either paid back their loans or never had the opportunity to go to college don't support loan forgiveness. That is why I suggested that forgiveness could be possible in return for working in an area where there is a dire need. The best example I can think of this morning is teaching in the public schools. There is a serious shortage of teachers and we desperately need to improve our public schools. If a person has a large amount of debt and they need help paying it back, let them pay it back by teaching for a number of years or doing something else that is vitally important to society. The possibilities are endless.

Of course there should be exceptions, but that should be decided via an application as to why a particular person needs help paying off their debt. There are plenty of ways to help people who have made poor decisions when it comes to debt. If our government can't come up with better ideas than mine, or better ideas than simply giving everyone loan forgiveness, then we really do have a very incompetent government. Imo, one of the biggest problems is that one party refuses to even discuss things like this and seems very unwilling to compromise. Actually, some on both sides need to learn to compromise. It used to work that way to some extent when I was much younge. I'm not optimistic that we can return to a more reasonable society. We can't keep hating each other and refusing to listen or even consider each other's points and expect to have a successful country. Maybe it's too late for that, but I hope not.

 

[ZiprHead]

How about just removing the No Bankruptcy clause? That way those that need assistance can get it without the huge expense of a blanket forgiveness program.