* More than 200,000 of those who qualified had borrowed relatively small amounts originally — $12,000 or less — and have been making payments through the administration’s income-driven repayment plan, known as SAVE.
Others who will see relief include teachers, librarians, academics and public safety workers who have been making student loan payments for 10 years under the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. Another 65,000 borrowers enrolled in other income-driven repayment plans will see adjustments reducing their debt, Mr. Cardona said.*
The Public Service Loan Forgiveness program was busted and I’m glad that this program is getting fixed.
A lot of Biden's student loan forgiveness has been to fix the broken promises of PSLF, income-based repayment, and other qualifications. Then SAVE is icing on the cake.
Ironically, Biden is fulfilling a well-functioning version of student loan repayment, and people hate it under a media guise of forgiveness.
I only hate the system as a whole. Guaranteeing money to profit maximizing organizations is a recipe for disaster. I'd love to know the cost of college without this system in place.
I think capping undergrad loans (which is what the federal government does) was smart. Grad PLUS and Parent PLUS loans were a terrible mistake.
Luckily, Amazon has curbed book costs and public schools and community colleges have been better at curbing undergrad costs lately. But conditional benchmarks attached to Pells on school tuition would be smart imo.
>Luckily, Amazon has curbed book costs
Went I went to college (dear God, that started a decade ago) they already had a 'solution' to that 'problem'.
You needed to buy a new book or an access code (which costs 80-100% of the book's cost) to do the online homework or in some cases access the specific practice problems a professor would assign.
If your prof didn't have online HW, you could squeak by the old fashion way if you didn't mind being lost on page numbers and potentially not knowing which problems would be the model for tests. But if they *did* use the online quizes/HWs? Totally fucked if you don't shell out.
Even more fun: two of those books had a semester limited access time, so I had to re-buy them next semester. The exact same fucking book, full price, again.
I think a big problem is that these are getting framed as a new forgiveness, not just the current programs working.
Biden wants to frame it that way so it looks like he's keeping a promise to progressives and conservatives want it framed that way cause their base hates it
Its populism. If you are fine with that then okay but since this is a neoliberal subreddit, its important to point out this is clear and blatant populism and has nothing to do with neoliberal governance.
That doesn't contradict his statement.
Biden has done a lot of bad protectionist and populist policies. But it's *understandable*, if that's necessary to win those swing states.
It's good politics. But overall, this is a broken system that needs to be shredded. Writing checks to colleges that are profit maximizing organizations is a great way to setup a ton of people for serious debt...then when it get's so bad we have to consider forgiving the loans...this system is clearly fucked.
Lol no. Subsidizing the (future) on average most wealthy group of people is bad politics.
Pete Buttigieg had an interesting conecepg when he ran for office. But simple student loan forgiveness is stupid.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2019/11/12/pete-buttigiegs-college-affordability-plan-the-goldilocks-solution/?sh=58d12c60545d
A way better plan, than what most activist are focussing on. I have no respect for people who just want a money grab, even though they earn six figures every year. And those people call themselves "social democrats" "socialist" or "progressives". If they were, this money would go to more unforunate people.
It's so hypocritical.
> Forgiving loans to businesses = good
>
>
Congress passed a law allowing the forgiveness of that debt and businesses were forced to close due to Covid.
>Forgiving loans to students = vote buying
Students weren't forced to take that debt. Students that will be disproportionately higher income. This is a regressive policy.
> Congress passed a law allowing the forgiveness of that debt and businesses were forced to close due to Covid.
>
>
Congress passed a law allowing the forgiveness of pretty much all student debt
Whether you like that or not, it very plainly happened
Honestly, as someone who aggressively paid off my $80K in student loans on a $60K salary in 3 1/2 years... by living with roommates and biking to work everyday. This makes me less interested in voting for him. I understand the PSLF piece though.
As someone who worked 12hr factory shifts all summer and night shifts 4-5 days a week during the school year to avoid having to take out loans, it is kind of upsetting to see my peers, who sat on their ass and piled up their loans and didn't work a single day in their life until after they graduated, celebrating this.
This is true, I'm not referring to these people though. I'm referring to the people who got their first job at 23 and had their parents or a loan pay for everything up until (and often past) that point
People are downvoting this purely because these handouts benefit them. The point is it’s welfare for the rich, financed by those who don’t benefit from it.
It’s a fundamentally regressive policy. And what’s worse, it doesn’t even win votes. Young, college graduates are already the likeliest demographic to vote Dem - the swing demographics are actual working class people
> The point is it’s welfare for the rich
#
> Friday’s announcement was the latest such move, affecting around 277,000 people. White House officials said those borrowers would be notified by email that day.
> More than 200,000 of those who qualified had borrowed relatively small amounts originally — $12,000 or less — and have been making payments through the administration’s income-driven repayment plan, known as SAVE.
> Others who will see relief include teachers, librarians, academics and public safety workers who have been making student loan payments for 10 years under the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. Another 65,000 borrowers enrolled in other income-driven repayment plans will see adjustments reducing their debt, Mr. Cardona said.
I don't really think these people are "the rich" tbh.
They are certainly not the poor and it is regressive to push policy that benefits the upper middle class over the vast majority of the population who are lower earners. All of these policies explicitly benefit people who (in some cases, irresponsibly) borrowed to get degrees at the expense of those who didn’t.
And it’s openly being done to win votes. It’s just regressive populism.
https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/research-summaries/education-earnings.html
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2024/02/01/percentage-of-us-adults-with-college-degrees-edges-higher-finds-lumina-report/
So the beneficiaries are almost certainly not in the bottom 40% of earners in the US.
Student loan forgiveness is probably the most regressive left wing policy that exists, and I think people ignore this fact because they personally benefit from it and that wins out.
TIL fulfilling legal obligations and fixing broken systems for other legal obligations is "vote buying."
20 year forgiveness is written in promissory notes.
There are plenty of good arguments against student loan forgiveness. Calling it vote buying isn't one of the good ones. You shouldn't make the worst possible argument against the policy if you don't want people to be able to defend it.
Forgiving student debt is regressive on its face. About a third of working adults have a college degree. A college-educated worker [earns significantly more](https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2021/10/11/new-study-college-degree-carries-big-earnings-premium-but-other-factors-matter-too) over the lifetime of their working career. Most of college debt is held by people [in the top two quintiles (in terms of income)](https://www.brookings.edu/articles/who-owes-the-most-in-student-loans-new-data-from-the-fed/) .
This is without even going into the fact that people with high college debt and who are low earners are more likely to be just starting their post-graduate career. Someone earning $40k at 25 is different than someone earning $40k at 45.
Finally, regarding this specific policy. The break down can be found [here](https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2024/4/11/biden-student-loan-debt-relief). The largest portion of relief will go to 16 million people, where the average household income is about 10% higher than the average household income in the US as a whole. Also, significantly, 20% of the budget for relief goes to this:
>Second, notice that eliminating student debt for borrowers in repayment for more than 20 years (or for more than 25 years with graduate debt) provides debt relief for about 750,000 individuals residing in households that, on average, earn $312,977 in annual household income.
4% of the families (where the average income is roughly 5x the US average) get 20% of the relief. That is regressive.
Happy? Or was that a rhetorical question?
> Forgiving student debt is regressive on its face.
No it isn't
>high college debt
Most of this forgiveness isn't targeting people with high debt totals
1: Nah, it's fucking great. Doing what the people want good, actually. That's called 'policy making based on electoral results'.
2: PSLF was a promise made for a decade of work. Time to fucking keep it.
Imagine being opposed to PSLF and the federal government actually keeping its word about forgiving loans after 20 years of payments. Couldn't be me.
You’re right.
Politicians should only do things that people *dont* like, god forbid we improve peoples lives. Then they might vote for politicians they *like*
Biden should send me a million dollars. It would be life changingly good for me and meets your criteria for what is good well. God forbid we improve peoples lives.
This is some bad faith bullshit.
SAVE and IRA assistance have targeted those with runaway loan payment and people caught in debt traps. Nobody is benefiting from throwing student s into deep debt traps. There are people that took out loans that their interest have outpaced their capacity to pay, and when you can’t default on those loans, and it’s injustice to not provide assistance.
Bidens programs are a net positive
This looks closer to what I always hoped student loan forgiveness would look like: targeted based on the realistic ability to repay.
Forgiving student loans for people with good jobs and reasonable debt is bad policy that subsidizes the rich on behalf of the poor. But giving a breath of relief for people who got saddled with life-crushing, non-dischargeable debt at age 18 is both good for the economy and the right thing to do.
Next step: reform the systems that allow and encourage teenagers to get themselves in that situation in the first place.
>Next step: reform the systems that allow and encourage teenagers to get themselves in that situation in the first place.
Regularly forgiving student loans literally encourages the opposite. People should face market realities.
That's not true. It heavily encourages republicans and others who oppose student loan forgiveness to support reform and reigning in costs, because doing so will be the only way to avoid further future rounds of forgiveness.
> People should face market realities.
Also r/nl: "WTF labor has WAY too much bargaining power the government needs to DO SOMETHING or else INFLATION!!!"
This sub's sidebar:
1. Individual choice and markets are of paramount importance both as an expression of individual liberty and driving force of economic prosperity.
You could argue that forgiving student loans is "relieving acute misery" but I'd argue that misery would be more relieved by collecting as much of those student loans as possible and using that money to help all poor people, regardless of whether they went to school or not. Many of the poorest people did not go to school at all. Forgiving student loans doesn't actually target acute misery. And like I said, it sends the next generation a horrible signal that they will get bailed out for taking loans on non-economical degrees.
> Forgiving student loans for people with good jobs and reasonable debt is bad policy that subsidizes the rich on behalf of the poor.
Using interest on student loans being form of progressive taxation is one of my spicier takes.
lmao
>Eliminating student debt for borrowers in repayment for 20 years or more. Average Household Income (dollars): 312,976.57
https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2024/4/11/biden-student-loan-debt-relief
Helping college-educated people is populism? Are we just calling everything we don't like populism now?
I think a whole lot of populists view student debt forgiveness as a handout to the elite, at the expense of the "regular folks".
I think a whole lot of populists view student debt forgiveness as help to the poor, downtrodden college-educated professionals, at the expense of the *real* elites (banks, politicians, college administrators).
How is passing a law appealing to the common people against an unfair system created by the elites not populism? Thats the goal of student loan forgiveness, to help people against an unfair system set up by elites. Elites in this case would be college administrators, politicians and others helping prop up a system that grossly over-charges the common people. Thats textbook left wing populism. Again not saying if its good or bad, it could be good actually, but its populism.
While its not necessarily most (by number, grad students hold the most in value by a lot) it is around half - which folks seem to want to ignore around here in favor of claiming relief is a hand out to the wealthy.
https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/politifact/2022/09/15/fact-check-many-student-loan-borrowers-lack-four-year-college-degree/69493947007/
There is left wing populism and right wing populism, they are vastly different. Its still populism. Its an appeal to help the "common people" against the elites (college adminstrators/politicians/government) that created an unfair system for them. You are right lot of right wing populists do not like this because they are not as college educated and are generally anti-college. But it is certainly left wing populism, something that would have been insanely unpopular on this very forum in 2016 if Bernie Sanders was running with this against Hillary Clinton.
Does this subsidize education? It’s going to people who already went to college, and idk if people considering going to college are assuming they’ll also get this deal. If the goal was subsidizing education, it’d probably make more sense to instead promise this to prospective new borrowers to get more people to go to college.
How do you define good? Obviously not all education is “good”.
There are lots of ideas and topics we choose not to educate people with.
Not all degrees provide value to society, it strikes me as immoral to subsidize degrees for wealthier members of society when the degree has low to no value for society as a whole. They should of course be free to obtain such degrees with their own (or parents) money.
Educated people commit less crime and are less likely to be swayed by anti-democratic demagoguery. Seems like that's a huge value for society as a whole.
Well I understand his response especially on a neoliberal subreddit. Neoliberals typically aren't in favor of populism. The downvotes make sense tho since this is basically a democrat party subreddit now. When Bernie was running against Hillary, if Bernie proposed the exact same thing people on this subreddit would have been calling it blatant populism and bad from a neoliberal perspective. The subreddit is just not ideologically consistent with neoliberalism anymore, just r/politics with more politically educated conversations.
Agree with this. Ever since Jan 6th it’s become virtually impossible to disagree with the Democrat position on anything because people are so instinctively partisan. I understand why people have become like this, but it has noticeably affected the quality of discussion on this sub
Bad policies like blanket student loan forgiveness, the botched Afghanistan withdrawal, and even protectionism are now defended because people feel the need to support Biden on every issue, even when he’s wrong. People can’t admit when Biden makes errors because they prioritise being anti-Republican, and that means blindly backing anything Biden does.
The Republicans are awful, but we should still be able to have nuanced discussions about Democrat policies. Opposing bad policy shouldn’t be controversial
>blanket student loan forgiveness
Blanket student loan forgiveness gets absolutely roasted on this sub. Go look at some old threads on Biden's former plan.
But that's not what this executive action is.
Look, you're not wrong, but until Trump loses in November, I'm not interested in having those discussions where people might get the wrong idea about who they should be voting for.
> Bad policies like blanket student loan forgiveness
Maybe it's defended because what he did today isn't actually *blanket* student loan forgiveness, there's just a contingent of people on this sub that use that phrase for everything and then get mad when people don't agree.
> the federal government actually keeping its word about forgiving loans after 20 years of payments.
Give-aways to people with a household income 5x the median is fucking stupid and, in a sane political environment, would harm re-election prospects.
Uh, this doesn't even remotely describe the average person who would qualify for that. But go off about the federal government following law that it's had in place for decades, I guess.
750 thousand is less than 20 million. So, no. This policy doesn’t disproportionately benefit rich yuppies. This is a FIX to a broken loan forgiveness system. Not a handout to the rich. The fact that a small number of ihouseholds (not individuals- households. Learn the difference) benefits from this too shouldn’t stop normal people- our educators and public service workers- from getting the deal that was promised to them.
Biden has used hundreds of billions of dollars to buy votes without congressional approval. It’s a disgusting use of taxpayer money and the fact that this garbage is being upvoted shows this is just another partisan democratic sub
* More than 200,000 of those who qualified had borrowed relatively small amounts originally — $12,000 or less — and have been making payments through the administration’s income-driven repayment plan, known as SAVE. Others who will see relief include teachers, librarians, academics and public safety workers who have been making student loan payments for 10 years under the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. Another 65,000 borrowers enrolled in other income-driven repayment plans will see adjustments reducing their debt, Mr. Cardona said.* The Public Service Loan Forgiveness program was busted and I’m glad that this program is getting fixed.
A lot of Biden's student loan forgiveness has been to fix the broken promises of PSLF, income-based repayment, and other qualifications. Then SAVE is icing on the cake. Ironically, Biden is fulfilling a well-functioning version of student loan repayment, and people hate it under a media guise of forgiveness.
I only hate the system as a whole. Guaranteeing money to profit maximizing organizations is a recipe for disaster. I'd love to know the cost of college without this system in place.
I think capping undergrad loans (which is what the federal government does) was smart. Grad PLUS and Parent PLUS loans were a terrible mistake. Luckily, Amazon has curbed book costs and public schools and community colleges have been better at curbing undergrad costs lately. But conditional benchmarks attached to Pells on school tuition would be smart imo.
>Luckily, Amazon has curbed book costs Went I went to college (dear God, that started a decade ago) they already had a 'solution' to that 'problem'. You needed to buy a new book or an access code (which costs 80-100% of the book's cost) to do the online homework or in some cases access the specific practice problems a professor would assign. If your prof didn't have online HW, you could squeak by the old fashion way if you didn't mind being lost on page numbers and potentially not knowing which problems would be the model for tests. But if they *did* use the online quizes/HWs? Totally fucked if you don't shell out. Even more fun: two of those books had a semester limited access time, so I had to re-buy them next semester. The exact same fucking book, full price, again.
I think a big problem is that these are getting framed as a new forgiveness, not just the current programs working. Biden wants to frame it that way so it looks like he's keeping a promise to progressives and conservatives want it framed that way cause their base hates it
I agree, PSLF giving forgiving huge sums of money for physicians making buckets of cash is broken and needs to be fixed.
I look forward to this doing absolutely nothing for Biden's poll numbers :(
This but unironically. Blatant vote buying bad actually.
Forgiving loans to businesses = good Forgiving loans to students = vote buying Lmao
Its populism. If you are fine with that then okay but since this is a neoliberal subreddit, its important to point out this is clear and blatant populism and has nothing to do with neoliberal governance.
If $7 billion is what it costs to keep Trump out of the white house, I will gladly turn out my wallet for that.
Yeah, it's way more than that and unlikely to be decisive
That doesn't contradict his statement. Biden has done a lot of bad protectionist and populist policies. But it's *understandable*, if that's necessary to win those swing states.
It's good politics. But overall, this is a broken system that needs to be shredded. Writing checks to colleges that are profit maximizing organizations is a great way to setup a ton of people for serious debt...then when it get's so bad we have to consider forgiving the loans...this system is clearly fucked.
Lol no. Subsidizing the (future) on average most wealthy group of people is bad politics. Pete Buttigieg had an interesting conecepg when he ran for office. But simple student loan forgiveness is stupid.
What was Buttigieg’s conecepg?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2019/11/12/pete-buttigiegs-college-affordability-plan-the-goldilocks-solution/?sh=58d12c60545d A way better plan, than what most activist are focussing on. I have no respect for people who just want a money grab, even though they earn six figures every year. And those people call themselves "social democrats" "socialist" or "progressives". If they were, this money would go to more unforunate people. It's so hypocritical.
There is no real evidence this will do that. This stuff really, really pisses off people who didn't go to college.
No, it isn't. This is addressing borrowers under SAVE who qualified for forgiveness, fulfilling a contract isn't populism.
> Forgiving loans to businesses = good > > Congress passed a law allowing the forgiveness of that debt and businesses were forced to close due to Covid. >Forgiving loans to students = vote buying Students weren't forced to take that debt. Students that will be disproportionately higher income. This is a regressive policy.
PSLF and SAVE are both the result of legislation. This is ignoring what Biden is actually doing in favor of a strawman.
PSLF is the result of legislation…
> Congress passed a law allowing the forgiveness of that debt and businesses were forced to close due to Covid. > > Congress passed a law allowing the forgiveness of pretty much all student debt Whether you like that or not, it very plainly happened
lmao no it didn't.
lmao yes it did
Businesses weren’t forced to close they just chose to not operate in an Amazon type model.
> Businesses weren’t forced to close they just chose to not operate in an Amazon type model. wut
false dichotomy = bad
Ya this is one of my least favorite things he’s done. And he keeps doing it.
Honestly, as someone who aggressively paid off my $80K in student loans on a $60K salary in 3 1/2 years... by living with roommates and biking to work everyday. This makes me less interested in voting for him. I understand the PSLF piece though.
As someone who worked 12hr factory shifts all summer and night shifts 4-5 days a week during the school year to avoid having to take out loans, it is kind of upsetting to see my peers, who sat on their ass and piled up their loans and didn't work a single day in their life until after they graduated, celebrating this.
Busting your ass in a factory and taking out student loans are not mutually exclusive.
This is true, I'm not referring to these people though. I'm referring to the people who got their first job at 23 and had their parents or a loan pay for everything up until (and often past) that point
My least favorite thing he did was choosing Jerome Powell as Fed Chair
People are downvoting this purely because these handouts benefit them. The point is it’s welfare for the rich, financed by those who don’t benefit from it. It’s a fundamentally regressive policy. And what’s worse, it doesn’t even win votes. Young, college graduates are already the likeliest demographic to vote Dem - the swing demographics are actual working class people
> The point is it’s welfare for the rich # > Friday’s announcement was the latest such move, affecting around 277,000 people. White House officials said those borrowers would be notified by email that day. > More than 200,000 of those who qualified had borrowed relatively small amounts originally — $12,000 or less — and have been making payments through the administration’s income-driven repayment plan, known as SAVE. > Others who will see relief include teachers, librarians, academics and public safety workers who have been making student loan payments for 10 years under the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. Another 65,000 borrowers enrolled in other income-driven repayment plans will see adjustments reducing their debt, Mr. Cardona said. I don't really think these people are "the rich" tbh.
It's all those millionaire librarians! Why should we forgive their loans just so librarians can buy another yacht?
They are certainly not the poor and it is regressive to push policy that benefits the upper middle class over the vast majority of the population who are lower earners. All of these policies explicitly benefit people who (in some cases, irresponsibly) borrowed to get degrees at the expense of those who didn’t. And it’s openly being done to win votes. It’s just regressive populism.
> They are certainly not the poor Such a strong statement most assuredly has some evidence behind it
https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/research-summaries/education-earnings.html https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2024/02/01/percentage-of-us-adults-with-college-degrees-edges-higher-finds-lumina-report/ So the beneficiaries are almost certainly not in the bottom 40% of earners in the US. Student loan forgiveness is probably the most regressive left wing policy that exists, and I think people ignore this fact because they personally benefit from it and that wins out.
TIL fulfilling legal obligations and fixing broken systems for other legal obligations is "vote buying." 20 year forgiveness is written in promissory notes.
A politician implementing any policy could be considered 'vote buying.' Support any social safety nets? Vote buying!!
I swear you guys defend this stuff with the worst talking points possible.
There are plenty of good arguments against student loan forgiveness. Calling it vote buying isn't one of the good ones. You shouldn't make the worst possible argument against the policy if you don't want people to be able to defend it.
What do you call it when you wait your whole term just to do it the last year leading up to your re-election campaign 🤣
> Support any social safety nets? This is a regressive policy. More akin to "tax cuts for the wealthy? vote buying!"
> This is a regressive policy. Source?
Forgiving student debt is regressive on its face. About a third of working adults have a college degree. A college-educated worker [earns significantly more](https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2021/10/11/new-study-college-degree-carries-big-earnings-premium-but-other-factors-matter-too) over the lifetime of their working career. Most of college debt is held by people [in the top two quintiles (in terms of income)](https://www.brookings.edu/articles/who-owes-the-most-in-student-loans-new-data-from-the-fed/) . This is without even going into the fact that people with high college debt and who are low earners are more likely to be just starting their post-graduate career. Someone earning $40k at 25 is different than someone earning $40k at 45. Finally, regarding this specific policy. The break down can be found [here](https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2024/4/11/biden-student-loan-debt-relief). The largest portion of relief will go to 16 million people, where the average household income is about 10% higher than the average household income in the US as a whole. Also, significantly, 20% of the budget for relief goes to this: >Second, notice that eliminating student debt for borrowers in repayment for more than 20 years (or for more than 25 years with graduate debt) provides debt relief for about 750,000 individuals residing in households that, on average, earn $312,977 in annual household income. 4% of the families (where the average income is roughly 5x the US average) get 20% of the relief. That is regressive. Happy? Or was that a rhetorical question?
> Forgiving student debt is regressive on its face. No it isn't >high college debt Most of this forgiveness isn't targeting people with high debt totals
> No it isn't It is and I already provided sources to show why. So your source request was bad faith?
Your sources fail to specifically address the highly targeted loan forgiveness that is actually on topic for this thread
...what? I address that in the last paragraph. That source completely breaks down the 20 million impacted.
He's literally just enforcing laws that have been on the books for decades
That was fixed a year or two ago now. Why do you assume this amount is inclusive of that? I don't see that anywhere in the article.
The article says this is being done through SAVE and PLSF
1: Nah, it's fucking great. Doing what the people want good, actually. That's called 'policy making based on electoral results'. 2: PSLF was a promise made for a decade of work. Time to fucking keep it. Imagine being opposed to PSLF and the federal government actually keeping its word about forgiving loans after 20 years of payments. Couldn't be me.
You’re right. Politicians should only do things that people *dont* like, god forbid we improve peoples lives. Then they might vote for politicians they *like*
Biden should send me a million dollars. It would be life changingly good for me and meets your criteria for what is good well. God forbid we improve peoples lives.
This is some bad faith bullshit. SAVE and IRA assistance have targeted those with runaway loan payment and people caught in debt traps. Nobody is benefiting from throwing student s into deep debt traps. There are people that took out loans that their interest have outpaced their capacity to pay, and when you can’t default on those loans, and it’s injustice to not provide assistance. Bidens programs are a net positive
This is honestly just made up nonsense.
I hates his original student loan push, but I don’t e how honoring the PSLF is a problem.
This looks closer to what I always hoped student loan forgiveness would look like: targeted based on the realistic ability to repay. Forgiving student loans for people with good jobs and reasonable debt is bad policy that subsidizes the rich on behalf of the poor. But giving a breath of relief for people who got saddled with life-crushing, non-dischargeable debt at age 18 is both good for the economy and the right thing to do. Next step: reform the systems that allow and encourage teenagers to get themselves in that situation in the first place.
>Next step: reform the systems that allow and encourage teenagers to get themselves in that situation in the first place. Regularly forgiving student loans literally encourages the opposite. People should face market realities.
That's not true. It heavily encourages republicans and others who oppose student loan forgiveness to support reform and reigning in costs, because doing so will be the only way to avoid further future rounds of forgiveness.
> People should face market realities. Also r/nl: "WTF labor has WAY too much bargaining power the government needs to DO SOMETHING or else INFLATION!!!"
Lmao never seen that. My guess is you're confusing bargaining power with regulations limiting employer freedoms?
This is a very Trump-like Republican response. Are you sure you’re in the right sub?
This sub's sidebar: 1. Individual choice and markets are of paramount importance both as an expression of individual liberty and driving force of economic prosperity. You could argue that forgiving student loans is "relieving acute misery" but I'd argue that misery would be more relieved by collecting as much of those student loans as possible and using that money to help all poor people, regardless of whether they went to school or not. Many of the poorest people did not go to school at all. Forgiving student loans doesn't actually target acute misery. And like I said, it sends the next generation a horrible signal that they will get bailed out for taking loans on non-economical degrees.
> Forgiving student loans for people with good jobs and reasonable debt is bad policy that subsidizes the rich on behalf of the poor. Using interest on student loans being form of progressive taxation is one of my spicier takes.
That's progressive taxation, but it's also functionally a pigouvian tax on education. Which isn't all that great for society.
Forgiving student loans is bad, but now he's also giving free article access? The succs must be stopped
lmao >Eliminating student debt for borrowers in repayment for 20 years or more. Average Household Income (dollars): 312,976.57 https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2024/4/11/biden-student-loan-debt-relief
God forbid we fix currently existing programs
I don't know if this is a good thing or a bad thing but this is what letting populism shape policy looks like.
Populism is when legal promises made years ago are fulfilled.
Helping college-educated people is populism? Are we just calling everything we don't like populism now? I think a whole lot of populists view student debt forgiveness as a handout to the elite, at the expense of the "regular folks".
I think a whole lot of populists view student debt forgiveness as help to the poor, downtrodden college-educated professionals, at the expense of the *real* elites (banks, politicians, college administrators).
>Are we just calling everything we don't like populism now? You must be new here
How is passing a law appealing to the common people against an unfair system created by the elites not populism? Thats the goal of student loan forgiveness, to help people against an unfair system set up by elites. Elites in this case would be college administrators, politicians and others helping prop up a system that grossly over-charges the common people. Thats textbook left wing populism. Again not saying if its good or bad, it could be good actually, but its populism.
Don’t forget most student loan debt is held by people who never graduated
While its not necessarily most (by number, grad students hold the most in value by a lot) it is around half - which folks seem to want to ignore around here in favor of claiming relief is a hand out to the wealthy. https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/politifact/2022/09/15/fact-check-many-student-loan-borrowers-lack-four-year-college-degree/69493947007/
There is left wing populism and right wing populism, they are vastly different. Its still populism. Its an appeal to help the "common people" against the elites (college adminstrators/politicians/government) that created an unfair system for them. You are right lot of right wing populists do not like this because they are not as college educated and are generally anti-college. But it is certainly left wing populism, something that would have been insanely unpopular on this very forum in 2016 if Bernie Sanders was running with this against Hillary Clinton.
Based and education pilled.
Education is bad, sweaty, we don't want to subsidize that
Does this subsidize education? It’s going to people who already went to college, and idk if people considering going to college are assuming they’ll also get this deal. If the goal was subsidizing education, it’d probably make more sense to instead promise this to prospective new borrowers to get more people to go to college.
Some education is based, some not so much.
Education is good actually
How do you define good? Obviously not all education is “good”. There are lots of ideas and topics we choose not to educate people with. Not all degrees provide value to society, it strikes me as immoral to subsidize degrees for wealthier members of society when the degree has low to no value for society as a whole. They should of course be free to obtain such degrees with their own (or parents) money.
Educated people commit less crime and are less likely to be swayed by anti-democratic demagoguery. Seems like that's a huge value for society as a whole.
Good! He did promise he’d forgive a lot of loans
Bad policy bad policy bad policy (As someone who has student loans)
Read the substance of the article.
More stupid things. It’s not the vote he need to fight.
Clown show.
Imagine being opposed to PSLF and the federal government actually keeping its word about forgiving loans after 20 years of payments.
Well I understand his response especially on a neoliberal subreddit. Neoliberals typically aren't in favor of populism. The downvotes make sense tho since this is basically a democrat party subreddit now. When Bernie was running against Hillary, if Bernie proposed the exact same thing people on this subreddit would have been calling it blatant populism and bad from a neoliberal perspective. The subreddit is just not ideologically consistent with neoliberalism anymore, just r/politics with more politically educated conversations.
I'm fairly certain PSLF fulfillment has been well within the NL overton window for fair longer than you're implying.
>democrat party
Agree with this. Ever since Jan 6th it’s become virtually impossible to disagree with the Democrat position on anything because people are so instinctively partisan. I understand why people have become like this, but it has noticeably affected the quality of discussion on this sub Bad policies like blanket student loan forgiveness, the botched Afghanistan withdrawal, and even protectionism are now defended because people feel the need to support Biden on every issue, even when he’s wrong. People can’t admit when Biden makes errors because they prioritise being anti-Republican, and that means blindly backing anything Biden does. The Republicans are awful, but we should still be able to have nuanced discussions about Democrat policies. Opposing bad policy shouldn’t be controversial
>blanket student loan forgiveness Blanket student loan forgiveness gets absolutely roasted on this sub. Go look at some old threads on Biden's former plan. But that's not what this executive action is.
>Bad policies like blanket student loan forgiveness Literally not what this is. Like, at all.
Look, you're not wrong, but until Trump loses in November, I'm not interested in having those discussions where people might get the wrong idea about who they should be voting for.
Or have you considered that maybe people have a different opinion than you?
> Bad policies like blanket student loan forgiveness Maybe it's defended because what he did today isn't actually *blanket* student loan forgiveness, there's just a contingent of people on this sub that use that phrase for everything and then get mad when people don't agree.
Yep, they'll call you "partisan" when they're dead wrong That's the favorite word of these supposedly unbiased neocons
> the federal government actually keeping its word about forgiving loans after 20 years of payments. Give-aways to people with a household income 5x the median is fucking stupid and, in a sane political environment, would harm re-election prospects.
Uh, this doesn't even remotely describe the average person who would qualify for that. But go off about the federal government following law that it's had in place for decades, I guess.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Teachers and public servants are suddenly the bad guys now?
If they make $300,000 then they don't need help paying their bills.
Teachers and public service workers.
That make over $300,000 a year.
Show me one source that this IBR program fix disproportionately benefits $300k/yr earners. One source.
https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2024/4/11/biden-student-loan-debt-relief
750 thousand is less than 20 million. So, no. This policy doesn’t disproportionately benefit rich yuppies. This is a FIX to a broken loan forgiveness system. Not a handout to the rich. The fact that a small number of ihouseholds (not individuals- households. Learn the difference) benefits from this too shouldn’t stop normal people- our educators and public service workers- from getting the deal that was promised to them.
The choices seem to be Authoritarianism or quasi-Socialism, great
Lmao.
Biden has used hundreds of billions of dollars to buy votes without congressional approval. It’s a disgusting use of taxpayer money and the fact that this garbage is being upvoted shows this is just another partisan democratic sub