The Biden Presidency

Status
Not open for further replies.
acbytesla said:
Rich people play the system to squeeze every dollar they can out of the system so they too take out student loans. I'm not in favor of total loan forgiveness either. Yes, there are other areas that could be cut. So what? There are also numerous areas of need as well.
Click to expand...


If you can borrow money for less than you can earn on investments, you're foolish to turn it down. And federal student loans carry below-market interest rates and payments are deferred while you're in school. Low rates and no payments for as long as four years? That's a big incentive to borrow as much as you can.
 
Bob001 said:
If you can borrow money for less than you can earn on investments, you're foolish to turn it down. And federal student loans carry below-market interest rates and payments are deferred while you're in school. Low rates and no payments for as long as four years? That's a big incentive to borrow as much as you can.
Click to expand...

Yep. Low interest loans which allows people to defer payments as well. OPM is the first principle of the wealthy.
 
Bob001 said:
Wait a minute. In s society with as many and varied needs as ours, in the middle of a pandemic, when did 50K for college loans become some kind of progressive benchmark? A higher minimum wage, better health care, more money for the unemployed, voting rights protections, immigration reform, tax reform and more are much more important and will have much more social impact. Proposals to make college more affordable, including free community college and cheap or free undergrad, are also on the list.

But 50K for college loans is a just a giveaway. For starters, if people borrowed big bucks to attend private schools when they could have easily have paid for state schools, that's a choice of a luxury good, not a necessity. When people borrow big bucks to go to law school or get MBAs, they are buying tickets to prosperous, prestigious careers. Why should they be subsidized by taxpayers who maybe didn't even go to college? Some kids worked their way through school to avoid loans. Why don't they get 50K? Some prosperous families took out low-cost, low-interest college loans so they could keep their savings and investments and get better returns. Why should they get another benefit?

And then you have the broader issue that the easy availability of college loans has allowed college costs to rise much faster than inflation for decades. To some degree they have freed colleges from ordinary market forces.

There's an argument to be made for loan forgiveness in exchange for, say, public service work or tying repayments to income. But just wiping out college loans is one of Sen. Warren's worst pandering ideas. There's no reason for anybody else to swallow it.

And here's an argument that a 10K break would help the poorest students, and 50K would only help the wealthiest.


https://www.npr.org/2021/02/18/9683...giveness-hinges-on-2-numbers-10-000-vs-50-000
Click to expand...

Agree completely. For me the $15 min wage is a much more important thing to tackle.
 
Bob001 said:
Wait a minute. In s society with as many and varied needs as ours, in the middle of a pandemic, when did 50K for college loans become some kind of progressive benchmark? A higher minimum wage, better health care, more money for the unemployed, voting rights protections, immigration reform, tax reform and more are much more important and will have much more social impact. Proposals to make college more affordable, including free community college and cheap or free undergrad, are also on the list.
Click to expand...
None of those programs need be affected by this one. This is just the long version of the same faux austerity dodge that fallaciously assumes that any costs of this program is at the expense of other needed programs. Just not the case.
But 50K for college loans is a just a giveaway.For starters, if people borrowed big bucks to attend private schools when they could have easily have paid for state schools, that's a choice of a luxury good, not a necessity. When people borrow big bucks to go to law school or get MBAs, they are buying tickets to prosperous, prestigious careers. Why should they be subsidized by taxpayers who maybe didn't even go to college? Some kids worked their way through school to avoid loans. Why don't they get 50K? Some prosperous families took out low-cost, low-interest college loans so they could keep their savings and investments and get better returns. Why should they get another benefit?
Click to expand...
...and there is the appeal to envy. It is a giveaway? Sure. Will some people with money who maybe do not need it get a small windfall? Sure. Will this benefit some people more than others? Yup.

None of this matters. Just another part of the faux austerity dodge where we don't put money in the pockets of people who need it and/or will spend it in ways that stimulate growth because some people who don't might get a benefit. Which is sick, really.

We don't seem to have trouble giving tax breaks and other goodies to the well off in the name of economic stimulus, but want to draw a line when those benefits are available across the board?

If fairness to the rich is really at issue, we just tax them to pay for everything and don't worry if they get some of it back.
And then you have the broader issue that the easy availability of college loans has allowed college costs to rise much faster than inflation for decades. To some degree they have freed colleges from ordinary market forces.
Click to expand...
Yes, there needs to be dramatic reforms in how college is paid for. Right now we are having 18 year old kids taking on six figure loans that they cannot discharge even in bankruptcy because they are told that education is so important and going to a good school is essential. Which is the sort of predatory lending that would justify writing off all student debt, really.

There's an argument to be made for loan forgiveness in exchange for, say, public service work or tying repayments to income. But just wiping out college loans is one of Sen. Warren's worst pandering ideas. There's no reason for anybody else to swallow it.

And here's an argument that a 10K break would help the poorest students, and 50K would only help the wealthiest.


https://www.npr.org/2021/02/18/9683...giveness-hinges-on-2-numbers-10-000-vs-50-000
Click to expand...


We make the rich pay, and not worry if they get a bit back. Trying to be surgical about this stuff is more trouble than it is worth.

Again, a stimulus that would target mostly younger people struggling in the job market. The obsession with fairness is misplaced.
 
Suddenly said:
None of those programs need be affected by this one. This is just the long version of the same faux austerity dodge that fallaciously assumes that any costs of this program is at the expense of other needed programs. Just not the case.
Click to expand...
Ummm... "Faux austerity dodge"?

The U.S. is trillions of dollars in debt. Needed infrastructure has gone unattended. Covid-19 is still wrecking havoc on the economy (and may require more economic stimulus). Millions more people need health care coverage.

And believe it or not, money is not an infinite resource. Somewhere along the line, some tough decisions have to be made.

We aren't talking about kicking the elderly out of their homes, or sticking all of the poor people on ice flows in the middle of the ocean. We are talking about potentially giving $10,000 to huge numbers of college graduates, that will completely wipe out the debts of many, and make a huge dent in the debts of others, and you're saying "wah! Its not enough!"

None of this matters. Just another part of the faux austerity dodge where we don't put money in the pockets of people who need itand/or will spend it in ways that stimulate growth because some people who don't might get a benefit. Which is sick, really.
Click to expand...
But that's the issue, isn't it... whether people "really need" relief of $50k.

You would assume that many/most people who go to college end up with a higher income because of skills they learned.
We don't seem to have trouble giving tax breaks and other goodies to the well off in the name of economic stimulus, but want to draw a line when those benefits are available across the board?
Click to expand...
Except the United States did have trouble giving tax breaks to the wealthy... because it ended up adding billions of dollars to the debt.

The tax breaks were a foolish policy... really really dumb. But just because the republicans were fiscally irresponsible doesn't necessarily mean that the democrats should likewise run around and think that "the debt don't matter".

And furthermore... according to the republican plans, some tax cuts aimed at the lower/middle classes are set to expire, while those aimed at the wealthy were to continue. One of the things the Democrats might need to do is reverse that, so that the poorer/middle class people don't get hit by the planned tax increases. That means even less money available to spend on student loan relief, health care, infrastructure, and covid, even with an increase in taxes on the wealthy.
 
Suddenly said:
.....
None of this matters. J
.....
The obsession with fairness is misplaced.
Click to expand...


None of this matters? Fairness doesn't matter? Then why do anything for anybody? Let everybody take whatever they can get. The fact is that all public expenditures are paid for by taxes. You can have all kinds of debates about who pays and who collects. The Trump tax breaks for the wealthiest were wrong. All kinds of tax breaks and incentives for corporations, farms and wealthy families distort the economy and deserve to be reformed. No disagreement.

But in this particular case, wiping out $50K in existing college loans does nothing to help people without any loans, who are likely to be worse off financially, and whose taxes will be paying for the giveaway. It does nothing to help current and future college students, who might make choices today based on the notion that down the road they will get their debts cancelled too. It makes no distinction between people who borrowed money to get BAs from state schools, and people who borrowed to get professional degrees from private schools that enhance their income for their entire lives. If none of that matters, why not just send $50K to everybody? Or everybody under 25? Or 30? Or 40? Or everybody who earned less than $100K last year? Tying a giveaway specifically to college loans owed seems especially unfair.
 
Manchin a No on Neera Tanden, because of her "overtly partisan statements."
He mentions mean tweets directed at Mitch McConnell and Bernie Sanders.

Manchin voted Yes for Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Grenell, and Bill Barr.

Grenell had to delete hundreds of rude tweets.

Grenell, who once served the Bush administration as U.N. Ambassador John Bolton’s spokesman, was forced to delete hundreds of sexist, rude comments from his Twitter feed in 2012, during his brief tenure as foreign affairs spokesman for Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign.
...
In addition to mocking the physical appearance of female political figures, Grenell has frequently used his Twitter account to harass journalists, relentlessly accusing them of partisanship for any reporting that challenges the far-right ideas he promotes.

https://theintercept.com/2018/05/09...bassador-germany-immediately-offends-germans/
Click to expand...


https://twitter.com/alanhe/status/1362871991133499393?s=19
 
Last edited:
Segnosaur said:
Ummm... "Faux austerity dodge"?

The U.S. is trillions of dollars in debt. Needed infrastructure has gone unattended. Covid-19 is still wrecking havoc on the economy (and may require more economic stimulus). '
Click to expand...

I can think of a way to stimulate the economy by putting more money in the pockets of people in the middle of the economic spectrum who generally don't benefit from a lot of other programs but are in a position to use the money in a way that spurs growth.

The national debt is so bad that people are lining up to lend the US government money at preposterously low rates. Using big scary numbers doesn't change that.
 
Bob001 said:
If you can borrow money for less than you can earn on investments, you're foolish to turn it down. And federal student loans carry below-market interest rates and payments are deferred while you're in school. Low rates and no payments for as long as four years? That's a big incentive to borrow as much as you can.
Click to expand...
It is if you are realistic about your ability to pay it back.

I'm reminded of a discussion we had in a town political board not too long ago, in which the argument was whether or not the town should borrow money for equipment or save a surplus and buy later. Borrowing at current interest rates, taking into account maintenance of old equipment and inflation, was a good bit better deal than accruing cash at nearly zero interest and waiting. It goes against some people's sense of responsibility, but the financial world is upside down.

The realism issue, in this case, is getting taxpayers to support a scheme in which rates depend on what you're actually spending, and not some imaginary line in the sand. Ultimately, even if they pay less over all, it's hard to convince them not to consider the lowest possible rate as the fixed standard.
 
Bob001 said:
But in this particular case, wiping out $50K in existing college loans does nothing to help people without any loans, who are likely to be worse off financially, and whose taxes will be paying for the giveaway.
Click to expand...
Most people get nothing from most programs. They don't see much farm subsidy money and on top of it being their tax money that makes their food more expensive.

Really most whining about it comes from people making 40K/yr who think that makes them poor.
If none of that matters, why not just send $50K to everybody? Or everybody under 25? Or 30? Or 40? Or everybody who earned less than $100K last year? Tying a giveaway specifically to college loans owed seems especially unfair.
Click to expand...

I mean, my whole point is that liberals hamstring themselves with worrying about fine points of fairness so if it works why not. It isn't limited to this issue. Harris's idea of student loan breaks for people who start businesses in certain neighborhoods was a classic of the genre.

The $1T it would take for forgive up to 50K would effectively be an ongoing stimulus program targeting young adults who drive an awful lot of our spending.


(If we are going fairness then wipe out all student debt and cut private schools totally off the government teat while making state schools free. If the privates can't finance themselves, then too bad. The states will probably looking for satellite campuses and faculty anyway)
 
Suddenly said:
This assumes that Biden isn't one of the ghouls.

A well mannered more competent less racist ghoul who for political reasons has to play lip service to progressive ideas, but he's still going to side with business interests and wring his hands about assistance maybe falling into the hands of people who aren't desperate for it as an excuse to avoid progressive goals.

Lets see: 50K student loan forgiveness? He objects because it might help people who went to Yale and because early childhood ed is more important. Which is standard nonsense when any sort of real assistance comes up. Suggest it will help rich people (as if they have loans in the first place) and that the money will come from the mouths of children even when assuming the federal budget is an overall static number there are way other areas that could be cut.

So, yeah, it was critical to get Trump out of office, but this guy has always sucked and will always suck. When they run into trouble in the midterms they will blame progressives as usual.
Click to expand...

I think you're right, calls to bipartisanship are just a convenient excuse for the fact that conservative Democrats like Biden don't actually want to do these things.
 
Firestone said:
Manchin a No on Neera Tanden, because of her "overtly partisan statements."
He mentions mean tweets directed at Mitch McConnell and Bernie Sanders.

Manchin voted Yes for Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Grenell, and Bill Barr.

Grenell had to delete hundreds of rude tweets.




https://twitter.com/alanhe/status/1362871991133499393?s=19
Click to expand...

The denial of Tanden is right for the wrong reasons. Her belligerent Twitter account isn't really anything I care about, but her neoliberal politics are pure poison.

It's pretty funny watching her grovel to Sanders though, given her history.
 
Bob001 said:
when did 50K for college loans become some kind of progressive benchmark? A higher minimum wage, better health care, more money for the unemployed, voting rights protections, immigration reform, tax reform and more are much more important and will have much more social impact.
Click to expand...
OK, then let's judge Biden by how he's doing or even trying to do or acting like he ever even intends to try to do on those other benchmarks instead.

...Same result.

Dr. Keith said:
The moderates.

But I don't think they make it up out of whole cloth, they are just susceptible to conservative lies about both-sides-are-bad.
Click to expand...
...and about what kind of Democrat is most likely to win in general elections against Republicans.

Segnosaur said:
believe it or not, money is not an infinite resource. Somewhere along the line, some tough decisions have to be made.
Click to expand...
We are currently nowhere near that point on the line. As soon we start to get anywhere near it, then it will be time to start paying attention to this argument.
 
Suddenly said:
....
The $1T it would take for forgive up to 50K would effectively be an ongoing stimulus program targeting young adults who drive an awful lot of our spending.
Click to expand...

Believe it or not, people with BA degrees, let alone professional and graduate degrees, are a privileged class. 70 percent of Americans don't have degrees. If you want to help young adults who can't find jobs, maybe education and training for those people should be a priority.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
The denial of Tanden is right for the wrong reasons. Her belligerent Twitter account isn't really anything I care about, but her neoliberal politics are pure poison.

It's pretty funny watching her grovel to Sanders though, given her history.
Click to expand...

She's very close to both Clintons. Maybe it's time to move on from Clintonites running things.
 
I don't think the federal minimum wage is a good place to look for solving income equality.

A federal minimum wage that is a flat value (say $15/hour) is going to yield very different results in each state.

Maybe that is why it is so low now?

In Silicon Valley, Cali, $15 an hour is barely enough to rent a bedroom from somebody, if it is at all. You are struggling and living paycheck to paycheck, and you better have no kids. If you need any car repairs at all you are in trouble.

In some other areas of the country that same wage goes a whole lot farther. Even some areas in Cali are very different.

Rent is half price just 2 hours from here. The businesses in areas where the dollar goes farther won't be able to pay that $15 amount.

The various economies are too different for a federal minimum wage that is anything but very low.

The states need to take care of their people. Either that or have an adjustable federal wage that allows for different local economies. A $15 minimum wage wouldn't change anything in California. In my area the minimum is actually slightly higher than that.
 
To poke at a couple bits of news...

AOC raises $2M for Texas relief, heads to Houston after blasting Cruz for Mexico trip
The New York lawmaker said she will travel to Houston on Friday evening to distribute supplies.

AOC, continuing to prove how overwhelmingly much better she is than... pretty much any national Republican politician.

Sen. John Thune says Trump's GOP allies are engaging in 'cancel culture'
The Senate’s No. 2 Republican made the comments in his first interview since voting to acquit the former president in his impeachment trial.

Republicans engaging in cancel culture? Oh the shock. Admittedly, I'm a bit more curious about whether the guy would be willing to acknowledge that the Republican Party's been engaging in "cancel culture" extensively in the last four-some years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom