In a 6-3 decision, the court’s conservative majority rejected President Biden’s plan to cancel more than $400 billion in student loan debt for millions of borrowers. It would have been one of the most expensive executive actions in U.S. history.
But it’s not more affordable education? It’s just funneling federal dollars into the education industry, which is such blatant corruption I don’t get why anyone was ever for it. If you want to make education more affordable then start by… reducing the cost of education?
There are plenty of campaigns against for-profit debt already making progress.
Besides, the data is already all out there, and that’s what I’m interested in spreading.
Costs less than a percent of the US budget to pay for free higher education, and in 2-8 years, the US would have a new productive generation of doctors, scientists, engineers and other professionals. It’s a pretty obvious win.
Some of the craziest conversations I have had are with libertarians.
“We don’t need a department of education, we just need to be friends with our neighbors and the neighborhood pools it’s money to hire teachers who come from somewhere that we all agree are great because in this fantasy I get along with all of my neighbors perfectly and our values are aligned and then we rent a building or we build a building or we use someone’s home and we just teach the kids there!”
Oh like public school? Like a public school with extra steps?
A ‘public’ school (or any institution) they imagine themselves dominating (and lets be real, abusing that power and potentially vulnerable individuals/children).
That’s the thing: Congress provided for waiving and modifying student debt in at least two laws. Biden based this action off the HEROES Act of 2003. There is also broad authority to do so in the Higher Education Act of 1965.
Not sure why the HEROES Act was used this time around, but Congress provided for debt forgiveness nonetheless.
Not sure what the “horrible precedent” is with acknowledging that.
Agree and disagree. They put the cart before the horse on this one for sure. If we solve the problem of unaffordable education, then we can talk about forgiving the student loans of people who didn’t get to benefit from the new system
Just forgiving the student loans of a seemingly random block of people makes no sense. The next generation and more importly the universities will expect us to do the same thing later. Guess what that means?
Schools will raise their prices even more and kids will take on even more debt. We can’t just slap a bandaid on this and pat ourselves on the back
yeah, not sure how unaffordable education gets fixed though… or if it should even get fixed - higher education has historically been for those that could afford it. prior to the interwar years (between WW1 and WW2), very few people actually attended college. over time, college became just one more step in the natural order of things, even if it was not a financially viable decision.
so here we are, where a large percentage of the population enters themselves into multi-decade debt because it’s expected of them, or because some occupations require significant investment into higher education (even if the person is unqualified to obtain that position - with or without education)
should the government hand colleges a blank check so people avoid debt? I dont see that passing through Congress. should the government step in and tell private educational systems how much they can charge? I dont see that happening, ever.
so you’re comparing apples and oranges? just because one country (or whatever the EU tries to structure itself as) does things one way, there’s no real reason why another country needs to do it a similar way. both ways clearly have merit - there are some really good European universities just as there are really good colleges in America.
presumably the EU’s tax rate is much higher in order to pay for all of the things they need to spend money on - one of which is higher education, apparently.
unsurprising, it was basically judged as setting a horrible precedent from the beginning.
go into debt? you pay your debt. full stop, end of discussion.
want to change that? get congress to change how laws work
"A horrible precedent of slightly more affordable education.
Born into indentured servitude? Work it off."
These are poor defenses of the current US debt system.
Cases of precedent affect legislation.
But it’s not more affordable education? It’s just funneling federal dollars into the education industry, which is such blatant corruption I don’t get why anyone was ever for it. If you want to make education more affordable then start by… reducing the cost of education?
deleted by creator
maybe you should start a grassroots campaign then.
There are plenty of campaigns against for-profit debt already making progress.
Besides, the data is already all out there, and that’s what I’m interested in spreading.
Costs less than a percent of the US budget to pay for free higher education, and in 2-8 years, the US would have a new productive generation of doctors, scientists, engineers and other professionals. It’s a pretty obvious win.
Some of the craziest conversations I have had are with libertarians.
“We don’t need a department of education, we just need to be friends with our neighbors and the neighborhood pools it’s money to hire teachers who come from somewhere that we all agree are great because in this fantasy I get along with all of my neighbors perfectly and our values are aligned and then we rent a building or we build a building or we use someone’s home and we just teach the kids there!”
Oh like public school? Like a public school with extra steps?
I love how folks like to pick political ideologies like their favorite sports team. Like you can only use one tool to build a house.
And the choice is often so remarkably ill-considered, if considered at all. Like buying a house based on the color of the mailbox.
A ‘public’ school (or any institution) they imagine themselves dominating (and lets be real, abusing that power and potentially vulnerable individuals/children).
That’s the thing: Congress provided for waiving and modifying student debt in at least two laws. Biden based this action off the HEROES Act of 2003. There is also broad authority to do so in the Higher Education Act of 1965.
Not sure why the HEROES Act was used this time around, but Congress provided for debt forgiveness nonetheless.
Not sure what the “horrible precedent” is with acknowledging that.
Agree and disagree. They put the cart before the horse on this one for sure. If we solve the problem of unaffordable education, then we can talk about forgiving the student loans of people who didn’t get to benefit from the new system
Just forgiving the student loans of a seemingly random block of people makes no sense. The next generation and more importly the universities will expect us to do the same thing later. Guess what that means?
Schools will raise their prices even more and kids will take on even more debt. We can’t just slap a bandaid on this and pat ourselves on the back
yeah, not sure how unaffordable education gets fixed though… or if it should even get fixed - higher education has historically been for those that could afford it. prior to the interwar years (between WW1 and WW2), very few people actually attended college. over time, college became just one more step in the natural order of things, even if it was not a financially viable decision.
so here we are, where a large percentage of the population enters themselves into multi-decade debt because it’s expected of them, or because some occupations require significant investment into higher education (even if the person is unqualified to obtain that position - with or without education)
should the government hand colleges a blank check so people avoid debt? I dont see that passing through Congress. should the government step in and tell private educational systems how much they can charge? I dont see that happening, ever.
deleted by creator
so you’re comparing apples and oranges? just because one country (or whatever the EU tries to structure itself as) does things one way, there’s no real reason why another country needs to do it a similar way. both ways clearly have merit - there are some really good European universities just as there are really good colleges in America.
presumably the EU’s tax rate is much higher in order to pay for all of the things they need to spend money on - one of which is higher education, apparently.
deleted by creator
You mean like by passing a law to allow the Secretary of Education to cancel loans?
Why just student loans? Why not all loans?