@averagejoe1 saidYour argument does not make sense using any other terminology. We can use any of thousands of examples where the government treats different people differently.
"Good Idea"?????? You need a little more legal-eze to weigh in on this subject. I don't think that phrase has ever been uttered in those hallowed halls.
The purview of SCOTUS is to ensure 'equal justice under the law', so that phrase alone knocks the legs out from under all positions on this thread. Ain't nothing equal about it. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it.
@wildgrass saidYes,and every one is thoughtfully reasoned. My granddaddy will be 65 tomorrow, can’t work anymore, and his wife can’t work in a 7/11 anymore due to arthritis . The Government had huge meetings a while back and decided that 65 would be the best age to roll over into government funded Medicare and retirement programs, fit to suit what they have put into the government for 40 years.
Your argument does not make sense using any other terminology. We can use any of thousands of examples where the government treats different people differently.
An example of those ‘treated differently “. For good reason, but you have yet to give a reason why the horrible money grabbing smart grad student gets this windfall. For what reason does he get a windfall, but lawnmower man is treated like chopped liver? You see
Note how you squeamish libs dance around this. Most peculiar . Hell, you won’t answer this one,so while your time by asking me a question.
@AverageJoe1
Finish this sentence. The retirees at 65 get that money because they are older than people who can still work and make their own money. The college graduates should get their loans paid off with no consideration of anyone else having loans paid off because_______________________.
You can do this.
@no1marauder saidThe “ finish the sentence query‘ applies here as well.
Jesus, you're a stubborn idiot.
There is no requirement in law that every government program or law treat everyone exactly the same. People over 65 get Medicare; people under 65 don't as one example among thousands.
@averagejoe1 saidRight. Again, the SCOTUS shouldn't be involved in whether or not the particular use of funds were good decisions.
Yes,and every one is thoughtfully reasoned. My granddaddy will be 65 tomorrow, can’t work anymore, and his wife can’t work in a 7/11 anymore due to arthritis . The Government had huge meetings a while back and decided that 65 would be the best age to roll over into government funded Medicare and retirement programs, fit to suit what they have put into the government fo ...[text shortened]... this. Most peculiar . Hell, you won’t answer this one,so while your time by asking me a question.
To answer your question, the lawnmower man didn't get his student loan repayed because he did not have a student loan.
@wildgrass saidIt really isn’t a question. It is a ‘finish the sentence. “ The college graduates should get their loans paid off with no consideration of anyone else having loans paid off, because_____________.”
Right. Again, the SCOTUS shouldn't be involved in whether or not the particular use of funds were good decisions.
To answer your question, the lawnmower man didn't get his student loan repayed because he did not have a student loan.
Can you finish this sentence as it is written?
It’s OK, you liberals have been proven on this forum to constantly want to twist sentences and positions and premises around. Can you just finish the sentence?
@wildgrass saidSorry, really weak here. A proper answer is that. “You got a point Joe. I realize lawnmower man has other debt , maybe not college, but he owes money like college grad does. So Joe, you are asking why THAT debt of lawnmower man wasn’t selected to be paid off as well.”
Right. Again, the SCOTUS shouldn't be involved in whether or not the particular use of funds were good decisions.
To answer your question, the lawnmower man didn't get his student loan repayed because he did not have a student loan.
Am I right? Your take?
@averagejoe1 saidNo you asked me a specific question.
It really isn’t a question. It is a ‘finish the sentence. “ The college graduates should get their loans paid off with no consideration of anyone else having loans paid off, because_____________.”
Can you finish this sentence as it is written?
It’s OK, you liberals have been proven on this forum to constantly want to twist sentences and positions and premises around. Can you just finish the sentence?
@wildgrass saidUh oh everyone. W grass is out of ammo, we will lose him from this thread. I asked the question in more understandable form and it blew his cork. No ammo. We all know the question. Here is another simple way to ask it, not that it will bring WGrass back…we’ve lost him. Libs like silly grammar games,,,,,,”you didn’t ask me right,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Right?”
No you asked me a specific question.
So here it is, Why the grads, but not other people with debt.?
1 edit
@averagejoe1 saidBecause "Congress said the Executive Branch could waive or modify student loan debt during a national emergency" is all the answer the SCOTUS should require (besides the fact that none of the plaintiffs have standing to challenge the action under rules conservative judges have crafted).
It really isn’t a question. It is a ‘finish the sentence. “ The college graduates should get their loans paid off with no consideration of anyone else having loans paid off, because_____________.”
Can you finish this sentence as it is written?
It’s OK, you liberals have been proven on this forum to constantly want to twist sentences and positions and premises around. Can you just finish the sentence?
And plenty of other debt has been forgiven by the government, so the question is a non sequitur. In fact, other debts are easily dischargeable in bankruptcy while student loan debt isn't - how's that for your "equality under the law" argument?
@averagejoe1 saidWhether you or Chief Justice Roberts or other judges think Program A is "thoughtfully reasoned" and Program B isn't has no bearing on either's constitutionality.
Yes,and every one is thoughtfully reasoned. My granddaddy will be 65 tomorrow, can’t work anymore, and his wife can’t work in a 7/11 anymore due to arthritis . The Government had huge meetings a while back and decided that 65 would be the best age to roll over into government funded Medicare and retirement programs, fit to suit what they have put into the government fo ...[text shortened]... this. Most peculiar . Hell, you won’t answer this one,so while your time by asking me a question.
"Notwithstanding any other provision of law, unless enacted with specific reference to this section, the Secretary of Education (referred to in this part as the "Secretary"😉 may waive or modify any statutory or regulatory provision applicable to the student financial assistance programs under title IV of the Act [20 U.S.C. 1070 et seq.] as the Secretary deems necessary in connection with a war or other military operation or national emergency to provide the waivers or modifications authorized by paragraph (2)."
https://uscode.house.gov/view.[WORD TOO LONG]
Whatever happened to "strict constructionist" conservative judges?
@no1marauder saidYou are dancing. You and I are sitting chatting at a coffee table."Hey, No1, why has the executive branch of government decided to erase the debt of college graduates, but has not decided or thought about erasing other debts of other citizens?" "I know Exec Branch was told they can help people in a national emergency (in this case an emergency hurting Everybody), but why are they not helping everyone, maybe somehow spreading this help around?"
Because "Congress said the Executive Branch could waive or modify student loan debt during a national emergency" is all the answer the SCOTUS should require (besides the fact that none of the plaintiffs have standing to challenge the action under rules conservative judges have crafted).
And plenty of other debt has been forgiven by the government, so the question is a ...[text shortened]... n bankruptcy while student loan debt isn't - how's that for your "equality under the law" argument?
@averagejoe1 saidYou started a thread about a legal case but now don't want to talk about the law but about what you think is "fair".
You are dancing. You and I are sitting chatting at a coffee table."Hey, No1, why has the executive branch of government decided to erase the debt of college graduates, but has not decided or thought about erasing other debts of other citizens?" "I know Exec Branch was told they can help people in a national emergency (in this case an emergency hurting Everybody), but why are they not helping everyone, maybe somehow spreading this help around?"
Anyway, everyone knows there were all kinds of government programs that financially aided people during the pandemic.
@averagejoe1 saidIs it better to help absolutely no one if they can't help everyone?
but why are they not helping everyone
If a firefighter can't save everyone from a burning building, should he not save anyone?