Politics & News

Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Government relief of US college debt...

Have we reached the point predicted two hundred years ago where Congress has figured out how to bribe the American people with the people's own money??

We raise taxes (the people's money) and use it to subsidize everything from cheap oil and computer chips to bankrupt banks and auto makers. We use it to provide economic stimulus payments in down times and now to pay off student debts.

I know I've posted in the past about my support for access to abortion services and my support of marriage equality and transgender acceptance so many of you might consider me to be quite liberal across the board. And it's true that I support many liberal/progressive issues. But when it comes to economics and individual responsibility I tend to the fairly extreme right side of politics.

I don't support government subsidies. Period.

I think oil companies should pay fair market value for the land they drill on.
I think coal companies should pay the full life cycle cost of their ore.
I think solar electric should also should pay its full life cycle costs.
Same with wind.

If your car company can't make a profit, then maybe the guy who buys your factory from the bankruptcy court can.

If your bank is too big to fail, then take better care of it. Don't come to me with your hands out when you screw up.

And, if you borrow money to buy a home or get an education, then have a plan to pay it back.

It's called capitalism and, until it is replaced by something else, it is the system we have in place.

Let me tell you a story about one of my cousins. He's a couple years younger than I am. He's really a second cousin or maybe third, I'm not quite sure how all that works. In any case, he came to me when I was in my second year at university because he wanted to go to college and it wasn't looking possible for him. So we talked about it.

He wanted to go for the traditional four year bachelor's degree. He was really into theater arts and stage lighting and audio production. I asked him a simply question ... In that world would a bachelor's degree impact his income? In other words, how many years would it take for the increased income take to pay off the cost of a four year degree? A simple "return on investment" conversation (and no, I wasn't a business major).

He looked into it. What he found was stunning to us both. In that world, people with a degree and people without a degree made essentially the same money. It was crazy. He decided to take the savings he was able to blow on a first semester and instead bought some equipment. If I remember right, it was a trailer to cart stuff around and a bunch of lights and cables and speakers and some kind of board to control audio ... and he started going around to various venues and bars and clubs and offered to run events for them. He was 18.

My grandfather provided a lot of really good business advice and today he is 26 and has three crews running around Boston doing corporate events during the day and evening events at bars and clubs. No degree, no debt.

My point in bringing him up in this conversation about education debt is because he did assess (at my urging) what the debt of a four year degree would end up costing him and whether the benefit of that degree would support that debt. In his field it would not.

For other's the calculation may be different, but it is a basic calculation that anyone taking on any kind of debt (education, real estate, car, etc) should and could run. This is not advanced calculus.

So when I hear that people are strapped with huge debt and can't make their payments, I do feel bad. But I think it is fair to ask how they got into that situation and whether it is due to matters beyond their control or not.
- Took on loans and then got sick and couldn't finish school? Okay, legit issue and maybe some relief should be offered.
- Took on loans without thinking of payback and now don't make enough to support the debt? We have a process to handle this already in place. It is called bankruptcy. It comes with consequences, but it works and is fair to borrower and lender.

Am I too harsh here? Are we responsible for our decisions?

Edit: I became aware through the comments below and some personal research that student debt cannot be eliminated through bankruptcy. This is crazy. The concept of bankruptcy is critical to the smooth functioning of a capitalist economy. If someone truly took on too much debt through poor planning, then bankruptcy should be available to them and the federal guaranty would kick in and make the lender whole.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

CorvusBlackthorne · 100+, M

https://similarworlds.com/politics/4232675-I-am-confused-At-what-age-in-a-humans-life-does

1-25 of 41

sarabee1995 · 26-30, F

@CorvusBlackthorne Sorry .. what are you confused about??

CorvusBlackthorne · 100+, M

@sarabee1995 Did you read the post in my link, or are you being deliberately obtuse?

LordShadowfire · 46-50, M

@CorvusBlackthorne Deliberately obtuse.

ShadowSister · 51-55, F

@CorvusBlackthorne Seems like your point was implied but not explicitly stated, leaving the reader to infer the body of the argument itself. If someone else doesn't follow your logic, particularly when it's someone who is approaching the question from an entirely different perspective, I find that it is more helpful to spell out the argument itself rather than jump to assumptions about the other person's motives. I consider you all friends, so it pains me to see you talking past each other like this.

sarabee1995 · 26-30, F

@CorvusBlackthorne No, actually I didn't click the link at all. I just read the link address where it said "I am confused" ... I'm traveling for work this week and don't really have a lot of time for SW and clicking on reading suggestions. 🤷‍♀️

sarabee1995 · 26-30, F

@CorvusBlackthorne Okay, just clicked it for you and read it:

I am confused. At what age in a human's life does free education cease being a right and become a socialist plot?

I can't comment directly on your question because I disagree with your premise that it is EVER a "RIGHT".

Something that is the product of another's labor cannot be my right. My rights are those natural rights that I am born with as a natural and free person (see John Locke). Now, in a civilized modern society, there are many services that we would choose to offer to all citizens and some degree of education may be among these, but it is not a "RIGHT".

CorvusBlackthorne · 100+, M

@ShadowSister

Seems like your point was implied but not explicitly stated, leaving the reader to infer the body of the argument itself.

Really? I thought it was rather obvious that I was being sarcastic. Perhaps I need to rephrase.

@sarabee1995

No, actually I didn't click the link at all. I just read the link address where it said "I am confused"

It seems no one understands my sarcasm. I was aware you had not clicked the link from your response.

I can't comment directly on your question because I disagree with your premise that it is EVER a "RIGHT".

So you do not feel that children have the right to a primary school education? You do not consider high school education to be a right? You think that education should not be free at any level? Then you and I will never agree on anything, because you are advocating for a multi-tier society wherein the poorest classes are unable to be educated in order to escape their lot in life.

sarabee1995 · 26-30, F

@CorvusBlackthorne I cannot imagine any modern, civilized, pluralistic democracy existing without providing things like access to healthcare and K-12 education (I'm even open to the suggestion someone added here about including two-year community college) and much more, but these things aren't "rights" ... They are services that society can decide to provide.

A "RIGHT" in the current American system of jurisprudence is derived from the philosophy espoused by John Locke and immortalized in our Declaration by Jefferson:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident,
- that all men are created equal,
- that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
- that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.-
- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..."

Our Rights are something we are born with. They include the Right to Privacy. The Right to Self-Defense. The Right to Free Thought and Expression. And on and on. Rights cannot be granted by or taken away by governments. They belong to you the moment you take your first breath and are unalienable and inviolate.

CorvusBlackthorne · 100+, M

@sarabee1995 You cannot simultaneously be in favor of and opposed to free education. Choose a side.

sarabee1995 · 26-30, F

@CorvusBlackthorne Where did I ever say that I opposed some level of free education? I'm a huge advocate of education.

CorvusBlackthorne · 100+, M

@sarabee1995 Quite literally every time you say that it is not a right, that means you think it is a privilege to be taken away. Just because you choose to redefine the word right, that does not mean that the definition has actually changed.

sarabee1995 · 26-30, F

@CorvusBlackthorne I'm not redefining the word right. John Locke defined the concept of rights in the development of Western thought and philosophy. Look him up.

Services like healthcare and education cannot be "rights". That doesn't mean I don't think society should provide them.

I'm a huge advocate for universal access to healthcare services. That doesn't make healthcare a right. It is a service that I believe our modern wealthy industrialized society should provide to all citizens.

Education is the same. And it is a valid discussion in a pluralistic democracy to discuss what level should be provided by the state and what level should be left to individuals to pay for. If it were a right, then this discussion could not take place because the government cannot infringe on our rights. Do we provide just k-12? Maybe pre-k - 12? Maybe include community college as someone suggested. Legitimate discussion. Not a "right".

LordShadowfire · 46-50, M

@sarabee1995

Services like healthcare and education cannot be "rights".

So they should be privileges, then? That's the only two options.

CorvusBlackthorne · 100+, M

@sarabee1995

It is a service that I believe our modern wealthy industrialized society should provide to all citizens.

Then it is a right.

sarabee1995 · 26-30, F

@LordShadowfire They are among the MANY services that governments around the world provide to citizens.

The product of one person's or one group of people's Labor cannot be the "right" of another person.

Governments cannot give you rights. Rights are the natural possession of the natural person. You are born with them.

The right to free expression.
The right to self-defense.
The right to freedom of thought and belief.
The right to privacy.

These are rights.

Healthcare and education are services.

CorvusBlackthorne · 100+, M

@sarabee1995 If they are not rights, then they are privileges, and can be taken away.

sarabee1995 · 26-30, F

@CorvusBlackthorne Exactly. I'm glad you understand the distinction.

Congress (and the States) can make no law infringing on my pre-existing right to free speech. I'm a free person and the government cannot have an opinion on the words that come out of my mouth.

But the government most certainly can decide whether pre-K should or should not be included in the level of education they wish to provide.

They can decide if community college should be provided.

They can decide if unproven experimental cancer treatments should be provided.

Healthcare and education and a million other things are government provided services. They are not rights.

CorvusBlackthorne · 100+, M

@sarabee1995 So you are in favor of the government choosing to take away healthcare and education, but you are afraid to directly state such.

sarabee1995 · 26-30, F

@CorvusBlackthorne No! Absolutely not. Please don't try to put words in my mouth. I am in favor of exactly what I said. Nothing more, nothing less.

You don't believe in democracy? You don't believe that we the people can gather in our legislative bodies and shape what level of government services we wish to fund?

CorvusBlackthorne · 100+, M

@sarabee1995 The fact remains, if you are adamant that the government should provide both healthcare and education, then you believe that they are human rights.

sarabee1995 · 26-30, F

@CorvusBlackthorne There are lots of things that I believe the government should provide. Absolutely NONE of them are "rights"... Rights do not come from the government. Again, I refer you to John Locke or to our Declaration of Independence.

I believe the government should provide safe roads. But roads are not a human right.

I believe the government should ensure the planes I get on are operated safely. But aviation regulation is not a human right.

There are lots of things that I want the government to do and to provide. But NONE of them are rights. Our rights do not come from the government.

Our rights are pre-existing and unalienable.

I think we've beaten this topic into a pulp. You and I disagree on the definition of what a "right" is. I side with John Locke, Thomas Jefferson, the US Declaration of Independence and 200+ years of jurisprudence. You subscribe to a new age concept of government services somehow being human rights. I'll give you the final word here, but I think we understand each other.

ShadowSister · 51-55, F

@sarabee1995 So I'm seeing you carve out this area between "rights" and "privileges," that are not really either. These are things that the government "ought" to do for us, things like primary and secondary education. They are not rights, but neither are they privileges which may be taken away. Have I understood you correctly?

To my mind, there seems to be very little practical difference between a right and a government-service-that-we-all-agree-ought-to-be-provided. I'm wondering if this is just semantics? Corvus started the conversation by asking at what age does education stop being a right and become a socialist plot; you're objecting to the "rights" language on Lockean grounds. But now you've said that you are okay with this category of the-government-ought-to-provide-it (or whatever label you give this category). So fine, restructure Corvus' argument in those terms then. At what age does education stop being a the-government-ought-to-provide-it and start becoming a socialist plot?

Your dilemma, as I see it, is that your philosophy does not rightly allow the government to provide for ANY social needs. And yet, you capitulate that the government providing at least SOME social programs is a good thing. This whole conversation about the meaning of the word "rights" is an unrelated tangent.

If you object to student loan forgiveness on the grounds that it's not a "right," then you must ALSO reject public education on the same grounds. But you do not reject public education. Therefore, you cannot rely on your definition of "rights" to do the heavy lifting on this one.

Have I missed something?

sarabee1995 · 26-30, F

@ShadowSister "Rights" are a big deal. Rights are not granted to us by some transient power in Washington. Rights are not even granted to us by something as temporary as our Constitution (and if you read it, even the Constitution agrees with me here).

Rights are bestowed upon you as a natural person simply by the fact that you took your first breath. Every human being in existence has the right to free thought and expression, the right to self defense, the right to be secure in their person and possessions, the right to peaceably assemble with others of their choosing, and so much more.

Those are rights. Now, when we gather together and institute among ourselves governments, the primary purpose of those government is to preserve these rights, these liberties. That is why it is written so many times that "Congress shall make no law infringing upon the right..." Congress does not have the power to grant us a single right. Our rights were ours before Congress existed. And we, through our Constitution, have prohibited Congress from infringing on our rights.

It's not a small distinction. And it is Constitution 101.

Now among the many secondary purposes of government is to provide for the general welfare (of the people). This is where we gather (through our representative democracy) and decide what kind of society we want to live in.

Do we want people sick and dying in the streets? Or do we want to show compassion as a civilized people and care for our fellow Americans?

Do we want to ensure continued economic growth and prosperity by educating future generations of Americans?

And how much do we need to educate the next generation to ensure continued success as a society? If we want to extend beyond the twelve or thirteen years most jurisdictions provide today, should we extend it in the early years (pre-K) or the later years (community college)??

These are all legitimate questions for public discourse, but they are not "rights". Along with the need to provide safe roads, safe skies, safe medicines, common defense, and so much more, these are simply government services that through our representative democracy we have decided to provide.

LordShadowfire · 46-50, M

@sarabee1995

There are lots of things that I believe the government should provide. Absolutely NONE of them are "rights"

Then why should the government bother to provide them?

Oh, and prove the existence of your god, or stop bringing him into it.

sarabee1995 · 26-30, F

@LordShadowfire

prove the existence of your god, or stop bringing him into it.

Did I mention God in this conversation? If I did, it was not intended. I am a person of faith, but this is not a discussion of religious beliefs.

Then why should the government bother to provide them?

Why? Well first, the government is us. If you and I agree that we should educate the next generation of Americans (which we do) and we get a majority of our fellow citizens to agree (which they do), then we the people ("the government") will see that it is done. It's called democracy and it's a beautiful thing.

1-25 of 41