- Joined
- 03 Feb 07
- Moves
- 214767
Originally posted by sh76You know, my ideas will make you puke, as I do think we need to take responsibility for people who make bad decisions. Not total responsibility, but I do think that we would do much better with a system that doesn't reward success so disproportionately to the actual social contribution, and doesn't reward failure so harshly. I think other countries have struck better balances, and I think we can benefit from their examples.
These kinds of ideas make me angry. While my political opinions are closer to the Democrats right now than to the Tea Party, I can't sympathize with the left because they so often generate this sort of rubbish that passes for "ideas." This idea says IGNORE personal responsibility. You made a bad decision? No sweat. Papa and Mama Government will wipe your slate ...[text shortened]... le people. After all, you're "entitled" to a free ride.
Ugh. I think I'm gonna puke.
But this isn't even a case of "bad decisions." These kids went to school with a reasonable expectation that the floor wouldn't collapse underneath them for reasons that are clearly not their fault. I mean, maybe they should have read up on Paul Krugman and Calculated Risk (who predicted the crash back in 2007, and were dismissed as crackpots) to know what banking deregulation and the resulting widespread fraud would do to an economy already on shaky grounds due to trade agreements which favor near slave labor and the drain of jobs from our country. But that's a lot to expect.
To summarize, I'm perfectly willing to make you puke. But your puke threshold shouldn't be reached on this particular issue.
Originally posted by KunsooThis is your idea? I though it was moveon's.
You know, my ideas will make you puke, as I do think we need to take responsibility for people who make bad decisions. Not total responsibility, but I do think that we would do much better with a system that doesn't reward success so disproportionately to the actual social contribution, and doesn't reward failure so harshly. I think other countries have str ...[text shortened]... make you puke. But your puke threshold shouldn't be reached on this particular issue.
In any case, regardless of what their expectations were, I really don't see how it makes sense to reward the people whose decisions turned out to be bad at the expense of the people whose decisions turned out to be good.
Also, forgiving all student loans is a mighty broad brush and will do a heck of a lot more than just relieving those few who were victimized by circumstance. It will also relive those who chose private schools they couldn't pay for and chose useless majors.
1 edit
Originally posted by Hugh GlassPersonally, I think food should be free also. Come to think of it, I'm tired of buying those pretty much everything. I say everything should be free. If it were not for the Tea Party and those pesky corporations I think everything would be free.
socialist...... I'm or it too.... call me a softie...
- Joined
- 03 Feb 07
- Moves
- 214767
Originally posted by sh76So we can have a set amount of forgiveness, kind of like the standard deduction. Everything would help.
This is your idea? I though it was moveon's.
In any case, regardless of what their expectations were, I really don't see how it makes sense to reward the people whose decisions turned out to be bad at the expense of the people whose decisions turned out to be good.
Also, forgiving all student loans is a mighty broad brush and will do a heck of a lot more ...[text shortened]... l also relive those who chose private schools they couldn't pay for and chose useless majors.
And I really do think we should distinguish between a "bad decision" and a "decision which turned out to be bad." Students aren't finding jobs right now. For the most part, it's not their fault.
1 edit
Just because a decision turns out to be bad doesn't mean you shouldn't try to fix it. NAFTA was an awful idea, it doesn't mean we shouldn't try to bring jobs back on shore.
The kids took out loans to increase their skills to get jobs that require an education. Those jobs don't exist, doesn't mean we shouldn't try to find jobs for them.
The problem with the idea isn't that it's trying to help the kids. It's that this idea doesn't create jobs for them.
Originally posted by sh76It's like the home mortgage interest deduction. A dubious idea but one I won't complain too much about. 🙂
That has got to me moveon's dumbest idea of all time; and that's saying something. It's the ultimate antithesis of personal responsibility.
So, now, if you were stupid enough to go into debt 6 figures to choose to go to University of Florida to drink and party for 5 years and majored in Greek architecture that qualifies you to work at Starbucks, you get this ...[text shortened]... t, most morally reprehensible economic stimulus idea I have ever heard.
No exaggeration.
We only have to try it once!
Originally posted by sh76Besides which it will allow tuition to rise still higher, making the problem even worse.
This is your idea? I though it was moveon's.
In any case, regardless of what their expectations were, I really don't see how it makes sense to reward the people whose decisions turned out to be bad at the expense of the people whose decisions turned out to be good.
Also, forgiving all student loans is a mighty broad brush and will do a heck of a lot more ...[text shortened]... l also relive those who chose private schools they couldn't pay for and chose useless majors.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungHanding out free money is always popular. But it is unfair to the people who made better decisions and have no debt.
That would make life a LOT easier for me.
So basically you reward bad judgement and punish good judgement. What does that result in? People "learn" that bad judgement is profitable -- "It's OK to go into massive debt; as long as everyone else is doing it with me, the government will bail us all out."
There is a bathtub effect here -- eventually the sloshing back and forth will spill over and you have a mess. Bailing out the banks was the same thing. They have "learned" that risky loans are not punished.
1 edit
Originally posted by spruce112358Getting my education was not poor judgement.
Handing out free money is always popular. But it is unfair to the people who made better decisions and have no debt.
So basically you reward bad judgement and punish good judgement. What does that result in? People "learn" that bad judgement is profitable -- "It's OK to go into massive debt; as long as everyone else is doing it with me, the governmen out the banks was the same thing. They have "learned" that risky loans are not punished.
EDIT - However, I am not particularly in favor of this policy. I'm just saying it would be very convenient if those loans would go away.
Originally posted by spruce112358I think it's actually easier to get into a Finnish university, as long as you're enlisting in a Master's course (for which you also get paid here). The Bachelor degrees do require knowledge of Finnish.
American universities have let in large numbers of foreigners whose tuition is paid by their respective governments. This has driven costs through the roof. The average American student cannot compete with the government of Taiwan.
State colleges in the US should admit predominantly Americans to their programs -- exactly like the vaunted Finnish syst ...[text shortened]... equires them to speak Finnish -- very few do.) Then the US system can go back to being low-cost.
Although I disagree with the practise of asking tuition fees for public colleges and universities, this particular plan is a bad one because it doesn't necessarily encourage new students to enroll, it's just a handout to those who already have a degree, in particular those who spent a lot of their time partying.
Originally posted by spruce112358"Moral hazard" arguments can be raised against every single government measure which seeks to add to aggregate demand by raising the spending of individuals.
Handing out free money is always popular. But it is unfair to the people who made better decisions and have no debt.
So basically you reward bad judgement and punish good judgement. What does that result in? People "learn" that bad judgement is profitable -- "It's OK to go into massive debt; as long as everyone else is doing it with me, the governmen ...[text shortened]... out the banks was the same thing. They have "learned" that risky loans are not punished.
It's hard to see how pursuing higher education is exercising "bad judgment" even if you have to go into debt to do so. The "better judgment" those exercised who didn't run up debt was generally to have parents with higher income levels. Trotting out the "unfair" canard while ignoring this fact is rather disingenuous.
There's little doubt that mass forgiveness of student loan debt would put a lot of spending money in the hands of consumers. Is this not desirable considering the state of the economy? Is it "fairer" for society to accept mass un- and underemployment?
I think in general it's a good idea though perhaps a moratorium on payments with some income ceilings would be more politically acceptable.