It's not human selfishness that is the problem, it's the short term outlook of their selfishness that is the problem. If human selfishness cared about their own selfish desires 10 years from now rather than the current, then there entire outlook on policy would be different. Things like all citizens having access to free higher education and healthcare payed through our tax system doesn't benefit society and therefore you immediately. It takes 10+ years to see the massive effects these type of programs have.
If I were in your shoes , I'd be making all the same arguments .... not kidding. I'm not , I won't be getting my college tuition back .... So I'm not buying it.
If everyone operated like you in terms of their selfishness being the direct and immediate kind, without principles moderating it, then the GOP, with it's trickle down economy thesis, would've never gotten the presidency. Better yet, just have yourself a good old anarchy. Makes me wonder if your parents suggested that your generation was the instant gratification kind due to having an especially flaky child. Sure, people are selfish but not the type of selfish you are suggesting/projecting - at least not a majority of people. Besides, I doubt that there is a significant swath of electorate that falls squarely into the category of "an unemployed college grad" and therefore unable to appreciate the fact that they will have to pay for that program with their own hard earned money like the employed grads can easily fathom. I for one think that easier access to higher education might do good things for the country overall and while the policy won't effect me directly it will benefit me in other ways. For instance, it will mean there will be less Trumpers out there with their immorally selfish ways, which is good for stability/health of our democracy. Democracy is based on a social contract and people like you don't seem to be capable of entering one, because for you argument is just an empty word, based on your own circumstances, designed to make you look good and has no substance behind it. (At least that's how I understand your recent responses to @fchowd0311 and to me)
Typical response to something you don't agree with - be insulting. Yeah , that explains why all the college kids with debt support Bernie doesn't it ? I think we are in agreement that access to higher education is a great thing , but lets cut to the chase here and throw in M4A for good measure - Who's paying for it all ? Even when you factor in Bernie's "The rich are gonna pay for it" - There's still a $20T shortfall in his plans. That's a 2 followed by 13 Zero's.$20,000,000,000,000 And lets ask another question - How does debt forgiveness solve the problem going forward ?! - It Doesn't! I much prefer Buttigieg or Klobuchar's education plans over Bernie's. Some of you need to step back and realize that our financial resources are not infinite.
See for yourself who has a better , more comprehensive , well thought out plan on education and a plan to pay for it. I'd have posted them both in their entirety but one wont fit in a single post .... You'll have to follow the link. The other is just a few lines so I'll post it. https://berniesanders.com/issues/
You are moving the goal posts @Corrosion for the argument was about people giving up on their ideals when their situation changes and also intellectual honesty (ie being flaky). I called you potentially flaky using your own argument that people use particular arguments only because they fit their circumstances. Hence, I don't think you could accuse me of insulting you when I suggested that you might be a flaky type. But if you feel like you have been insulted, I apologize. Edit: I stand by the opinion that flaky people are bad for democracy. Jonh Locke and Jean Jack Rousseau would agree.
I'm not flaky at all , I'm practical. We vote as a nation largely with our pocketbook / bank account in mind. That's a fact. That old saying "its the economy stupid" rings loud and clear just about every election. The fact is that the majority of Bernie's support is college kids and young people just out of college mostly based upon debt forgiveness. That's his base .... https://www.businessinsider.com/dem...going-to-be-a-major-factor-in-this-election-5 https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/11/bernie-sanders-exit-polls-new-hampshire-114294 I think the numbers support my original statement that you took exception to.
I don't know much about voting with pocket books - certainly wasn't the case for Trump (unless his blue collar base assumed that the trickle down economics and the wall will be better financial windfall than free education and health benefits that Democrats stand for. Your argument that many here took issue with was that people will change their mind as soon as they start earning more salary. I was just in the college myself for a course and those kids seem to me smart, kind and idealogic enough to stick to their beliefs long term and vote with the country in mind - at least the 30-40% of them that will vote. And you have made no solid factual argument to suggest that most of these "Burners" will flip and become moderates or right wing once they start paying taxes. Just because older people don't like change, have different values and perhaps feel less inclined to think of country's future (because they will die sooner - this is just for argument sake mostly), doesn't mean that young Burners will switch parties any time soon.
Debt forgiveness wasn't really part of his platform in 2016 when he became popular. Certainly "free shiit" in general was. But young people also tend to gravitate toward the counter-culture and the revolutionaries and that's what he is.
It was most certainly the case with Trump, he just used immigrants and the elites as the cause for pocket book issues. He never used trickle down economics he went with a populist message promising to bring back manufactoring jobs and coal mining. Bernie has seen his support drop just from 2016 and some of those went to more moderate candidates.
To your question in bold the answer is quite simple. It releases the hold these debts have on these people and they are actually able to move out for one thing. We have more young people living with their parents and these debts are why these generations are taking longer to actually start their lives. 30 is the new 20 because it's going to take a decade to work off your debt...at least...the average is double that...and of course we find out that minority students are hit harder by these debts because of course. https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfr...lennials-move-back-home-college/#3ccb94a0638a Nearly 30% of young Millennials will delay moving out of their parents' home and delay other important life milestones such as: Buying a home: 47% Saving for retirement: 40% Moving out of parent(s)’ home: 31% Getting married/civil ceremony: 21% Having children: 21% So, do you think any of those things have 0 affect on the future or the economy? These people need to be released from their debts so they can start their lives, buy houses, and become consumers and contributors. One thing I'm tired of is acting like this debt is normal, as if being hundred thousands in debt from college is just a normal thing every generation had to deal with...it isn't. This whole attitude of "Suck it up and move on" is exactly why these young people will vote the way they do.
That's a huge exaggeration to begin with. But that's typical , always worst case scenario. The average debt post graduation is about $37k. And lets be honest , it is quite possible to go to college and not walk away with a mountain of debt. My son is 21 , has one year left and has Zero debt , just moved out on his own - He made good choices and had a little help from his mother in getting into a solid job. He went to community college for the first two years and transferred to UH to finish his degree in risk management all while working full time. I've split the cost of it with him .... and it hasn't been the killer you all want to make it out to be , even with no grants or financial aid of any kind. It's a killer when you make poor decisions on where you go and what degree you pursue , or if you can't or won't work while going to school .... Secondly - How is this debt forgiveness fair to those who have already repaid their loans or people like us who have been responsible in our approach to college spending ? It isn't. What you are telling all of those people is a big fat F U. That's not going over well .... no way , no. A good example was the video that went viral with Warren - That's how the rest of us feel , despite the fact that we agree continued education needs to be more accessible. Thirdly - How does this fix the problem going forward ? Again , it doesn't. This is nothing but buying votes and doesn't at all appeal to most of us.
No it isn't exaggeration, you can check it out yourself, the average time to pay loan debt is around ten years. I don't care about anecdotal stories with all due respect. They mean nothing to the overall story of the thing or the stats I posted above about how more young people live with their parents because of this debt. Secondly, how is having large college debt fair when it wasn't always the case? 37K when you are just starting life is not some small amount to balk at. Your anecdotal evidence mentions how you help with the debt, how many kids have that assistance or any at all? We are talking about an America where people can go into debt with one bad trip to a hospital and you are balking at 37k of debt...along with the price of necessities, which means it makes sense why so many kids go back to live with their parents.. Double Secondly, the whole argument of "Well, I had to pay my debt, so they should to!" Is just a terrible argument, it's a fallacy that doesn't account for two things... 1 unless you are a millennial or went to college in the 2000s you paid LESS than students do now, a mathematical fact...so this is like bragging that you made 9/10 of your layups while the younger people are out there being forced to shoot 3s and 2 that just because you did something in the past everyone else should do something. This is called an appeal to tradition fallacy. Whenever you have an argument like this it is easy to apply it to any historical progress because no progress would be made if we used this logic. "Hey son, I was allowed to work in factories when I was 13, you should be able to as well! Now get out there and earn a buck!" I don't understand why people that have paid off their debt get mad at others getting off of debt? What does that have to do with you? It's easy to say others make bad decisions but every decision people make is in a vacuum, not everyone has a parent for instance that is able to help with their debt. Thirdly, I just explained what it fixes moving forward. It gets young people out of their parents houses and makes them contributors and it gets them to being actual adults instead of people that rely on their parents. They could actually go out and rent and buy their own houses, you think that would have no economic impact? Also, any plan with loan forgiveness is not just that it also focuses on just making college more affordable. Of course Bernie and Warren's plan both addressed that. While the story of your son is nice, it is anecdotal, and I could trot out a thousand stories of the opposite of kids crippled with debt so it proves nothing but your own bias here. As for your "Most of us don't want it..." please, poll numbers. It irks me when people go "Most of us..." without any data. Polls actually show that the majority of voters do WANT loan forgiveness, free college polls lower, but loan forgiveness is over 50. A few polls... I mean this one shows support even for those that have never had student loans... You can't then say education needs to be accessible but then be alright with these outstanding debts.
Yes trickle down economy implies less regulation (ie more coal/manufacturing jobs) and wall implies less immigrants competing for those jobs. The point is, compared to free education and free health care that a lot of democrats are offering, what Trump has done for the blue collar folks is much less of a financial windfall, and yet they are sticking with Trump anyway. I don't remember if Hillary was promising to build on Obama care - she certainly wasn't going to repeal it, the way GOP tried to do. I guess they don't use social safety nets in rust belt, that Trump has been busy in trying to cut. I'm not sure.. Maybe you are saying that Trump is better at selling people on his pocket book related promises? Could you provide supporting data to the claim about Bernie's support waning from 2016 toward moderate candidates please. That would be the best proof so far on the issue of flip flopping supporters that we've been having in this thread in the last few days. Thanks!
Not a word of what you said nor Bernie's plan really solves the problem going forward. It only caters to those people who currently have debt - damn the ones before and throws a cookie to those after with interest rates capped but still walking away with a pile of debt. You will never get me to buy into the idea that these people should be let out of their debt - They bought that education and you cant return it , now you don't want to be held to account for that decision be it good or bad. They earned that debt and they should be held to account. What I wouldn't be against is retroactively adjusting those rates to the 1.8% rate Bernie says he will cap student loans at but to me , outright loan forgiveness is out of the question. Nope , you wont change my mind and I wont vote for Bernie. First of all , you did exaggerate - "being hundred thousands in debt from college" is an exact quote from your post and it is an exaggeration Hundred Thousands is far greater than the average of $37k. Second - Not a word of what you said nor Bernie's plan really solves the problem going forward. It only caters to those people who currently have debt - damn the ones before and throws a cookie to those after with interest rates capped but still walking away with a pile of debt. You will never get me to buy into the idea that these people should be let out of their debt - They bought that education and you cant return it , now you don't want to be held to account for that decision be it good or bad. They earned that debt and they should be held to account. What I wouldn't be against is retroactively adjusting those rates to the 1.8% rate Bernie says he will cap student loans at but to me , outright loan forgiveness is out of the question. Those people didn't have to make those decisions , they made a choice to pile up that debt when there are ways to avoid doing so to that extent. Nope , you wont change my mind and I wont vote for Bernie.
What does this have to do with people that don't have debt? I don't understand why that is relevant personally. If I don't have a debt why would I be mad that others are clearing debts? What does that have to do with me? Bernie's plan and Warren's plan also includes plans to make college more affordable, it's not just a loan forgiveness plan, it's a make college more affordable plan. They bought that education because it is almost necessary to even be moderately successful in today's world. It's fine that I won't change your mind, I'm combating the notion though that 'most of us' agree with you. Did I say that was the average? No, I did not, but my example is already far too common. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/n...as-quadrupled-in-the-last-10-years-2017-04-03 Yes it does? Specifically, it gets rid of debt, which again is affecting home ownership and nifty that the article above has a graph for that. So that's a ton of markets related to home ownership that would be benefitted to people actually moving out into the world...and also specifically again, Bernie or Warren's plan isn't just loan forgiveness, it is making college more affordable as well. I don't know why you are repeating this...Even if I concede they made mistakes (I don't, College is almost a necessity today in the job market) the government loves to bail out big banks and corporations when they make mistakes, why can't it bail out its own citizens? But, I just wanted to counter your argument that focused on that just because you did it, others can too, not everyone has help from their parents...not shaming you for doing that, any parent would do so...but not all parents are capable of doing so if they are even around to do so... For some people going to college is their only way out and come from poor backgrounds and a new 30K debt isn't helping them move their life forward. I'm sorry, it just isn't. We shouldn't be punishing young people for doing exactly what we tell them to do. Comparing college prices from the 70s or 80s or whatever it just isn't the same economy. College wasn't as necessary as it is now AND it wasn't as expensive. These people are growing up in a different world and unless you try to see it from their POV you'll never understand it. So, I think I can also say that MOST of the people actually agree with me, even those that don't have a student loan to deal with, that this is an issue. Maybe Bernie's plan or Warren's plan isn't what will solve it, but ignoring it I can't understand.
I think @Corrosion brings up a good point in regards to forgiving the debt: what about the people who paid off their debt or worked their way through college to avoid debt? How is it fair to them if those with debt have it forgiven? They didn’t get to have the typical college experience, or may have made practical decisions instead of taking on loans to attend a more prestigious university, or even decided against certain degree programs because of financial reasons. While those folks aren’t in debt now, they did have to do things and/or make decisions that affected their earning potential while also paying off exorbitant tuition rates or loans that they’ll never get back. If we’re going to forgive those with debt, why wouldn’t we also give reparations to those without college loan debt? I imagine many of them could also use that money that they already paid. While I don’t disagree with forgiving the debt, I don’t think it goes far enough in fixing this generation’s, or the prior generations’, financial hardships created by college tuition.
Because sometimes when you are making progress you can't look back. When this country tried to fix its race issues it hardly ever looked back to repay those it was unfair to, it was just "Hey, you guys had it rougher, but at least we fixed it for the next generation." and that progress would likely have never been made if civil rights leaders also demanded their reparations then and there with an ultimatum of either they get reparations or nothing at all. To me that's what this argument sounds like, give everyone their tuition back or don't bother. Also, when we bailed out banks and businesses we didn't then reward the ones that didn't need bailing out with a bailout. It's certainly no magic pill to solve anything and everything but there isn't a policy that does that alone, without a doubt it'd help a huge chunk of the population immediately.
