Supreme Court to Hear Student Debt Forgiveness Case

[The_Foxer]

Supreme Court to Hear Student Debt Forgiveness Case (Published 2022)

The justices left in place an injunction blocking the Biden administration’s authority to forgive up to $20,000 in debt per borrower.

www.nytimes.com

The idea that A President would use executive powers to spend 400 BILLION dollars on a policy, completely bypassing the normal due process of the house and the senate, is very clearly not in keeping with the founding father's vision or basic democratic principles.

Aside from being fundamentally unfair of course. Millions had to work hard through difficult finanacial times to pay off their debt - how is it fair that they now be asked as taxpayers to pay these people's debt too, while these people still enjoy the benefit of their education?

For the sake of americans i hope the courts continue to shoot this down - neither side should have this kind of power. And as biden himself said, covid is over as a crisis.

 

[harrylee]

 

[harrylee]

 

[Taxslave2]

It would have been a lot smarter to only permit loans for courses that have a job at the end. Aside from that there should never have been interest on student loans in the first place.
I dont see making it retroactive, but quit charging interest going forward.

 

[The_Foxer]

It would have been a lot smarter to only permit loans for courses that have a job at the end. Aside from that there should never have been interest on student loans in the first place.
I dont see making it retroactive, but quit charging interest going forward.

I don't have a huge problem with 'no interest', but that does mean the tax payer has to pay the interest. The banks actually fork over the money under the gov't program (at least in canada, pretty sure it's the same in the states) so they'd need SOME compensation.

Having said that i don't believe Canadian students pay a cent in interest till something like 6 months after they're out of school (may have changed since last i looked), and i don't mind extending that considerably with a few caveats to prevent misuse.

 

[Dixie Cup]

The Court struck it down so Biden losses again. I can see it going to the Supreme Court now (unless there's another one to go to before the S.C. ????)

 

[Twin_Moose]

SCOTUS agreed to hear the case already

 

[Dixie Cup]

SCOTUS agreed to hear the case already

Yes, in the New Year from what I understand.

 

[Taxslave2]

I don't have a huge problem with 'no interest', but that does mean the tax payer has to pay the interest. The banks actually fork over the money under the gov't program (at least in canada, pretty sure it's the same in the states) so they'd need SOME compensation.

Having said that i don't believe Canadian students pay a cent in interest till something like 6 months after they're out of school (may have changed since last i looked), and i don't mind extending that considerably with a few caveats to prevent misuse.

I wouldn't involve the banksters. Government money administered through EI or perhaps one of the many other wealth redistribution schemes the government operates. Apprentices are eligible for EI when in school, so it shouldn't be too hard to administer.

 

[The_Foxer]

I wouldn't involve the banksters. Government money administered through EI or perhaps one of the many other wealth redistribution schemes the government operates. Apprentices are eligible for EI when in school, so it shouldn't be too hard to administer.

That would still be the taxpayer paying for it though. Our tax dollars would have to pay for the staff to administer it (gov't staff so you KNOW it's going to be bloated and inefficient) and of course we have to pay the tax dollars to fund it interest free or we pay the interest on the money the gov't borrows to fund it.

You'd have to really look at it but honestly i suspect the banks would be the cheaper way to do it. They'll take less profit than normal because they want the student's future business so they want the students to get 'used' to dealing with them, and it would probably be cheaper overall. Plus it's in place already.

But - either way taxpayers foot the bill. I don't mind paying a little to give the kids a chance to get a start in life though. I WOULD mind paying for their whole education. Especially here in Canada where we already pay for about 80 percent of it.

 

[Taxslave2]

That would still be the taxpayer paying for it though. Our tax dollars would have to pay for the staff to administer it (gov't staff so you KNOW it's going to be bloated and inefficient) and of course we have to pay the tax dollars to fund it interest free or we pay the interest on the money the gov't borrows to fund it.

You'd have to really look at it but honestly i suspect the banks would be the cheaper way to do it. They'll take less profit than normal because they want the student's future business so they want the students to get 'used' to dealing with them, and it would probably be cheaper overall. Plus it's in place already.

But - either way taxpayers foot the bill. I don't mind paying a little to give the kids a chance to get a start in life though. I WOULD mind paying for their whole education. Especially here in Canada where we already pay for about 80 percent of it.

Perhaps. But I was also looking at potential benefits to society as a whole by having recent grads not drowning in debt. Granted, loans would have to be regulated, so that only degrees with a prospect of a good paying job at the end get government money.

 

[The_Foxer]

Perhaps. But I was also looking at potential benefits to society as a whole by having recent grads not drowning in debt. Granted, loans would have to be regulated, so that only degrees with a prospect of a good paying job at the end get government money.

Yes, you're probably right. The smaller cost of eating the interest would likely be smaller than the benefit we'd get giving the kids a chance to get their feet under them when they get out of school.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

I think there should be automatic student loan forgiveness. But I would put on the following conditions:
-- degree/class loan is for will lead to future employment. Gender Studies of 14th Century Poets does not qualify.
-- student must maintain a solid grade point average. I would maybe scale -- if you maintain 80%+ you get 100% forgiveness, 70%+ then 90% forgiveness, etc.
-- student must obtain his/her degree. Droppout to backpack across Europe you pay it all back.

 

[The_Foxer]

I think there should be automatic student loan forgiveness. But I would put on the following conditions:
-- degree/class loan is for will lead to future employment. Gender Studies of 14th Century Poets does not qualify.
-- student must maintain a solid grade point average. I would maybe scale -- if you maintain 80%+ you get 100% forgiveness, 70%+ then 90% forgiveness, etc.
-- student must obtain his/her degree. Droppout to backpack across Europe you pay it all back.

That always sounds reasonable but in reality it just doesn't work. What about the kid who claims disability - he became disabled and couldn't study? Well.. obviously an exception right? Then what about emotional disability - the person claims depression? Well you can't discriminate against mental health so as long as they do that they're off the hook right? What if they felt they were being discriminated against by the school? Any non white person has an out. etc etc etc.

And you plan to discriminate based on performance btw? Did you know that marginalized groups tend to do worse in school as a result of the years of oppression, and now you're penalizing that? How dare you sir. How DARE you?

And your attack on programs like lesbian dance theory claiming that they're cut out just because you can't make money at it is nothing short of misogynistic, homophobic and racist.

It's not a bad idea. Those who work hard and do well in areas that will actually produce good jobs and complete their schooling get a walk on loans. But - it's not remotely practical in the real world. Very fast it would be everyone gets forgiven.

 

[Taxslave2]

That always sounds reasonable but in reality it just doesn't work. What about the kid who claims disability - he became disabled and couldn't study? Well.. obviously an exception right? Then what about emotional disability - the person claims depression? Well you can't discriminate against mental health so as long as they do that they're off the hook right? What if they felt they were being discriminated against by the school? Any non white person has an out. etc etc etc.

And you plan to discriminate based on performance btw? Did you know that marginalized groups tend to do worse in school as a result of the years of oppression, and now you're penalizing that? How dare you sir. How DARE you?

And your attack on programs like lesbian dance theory claiming that they're cut out just because you can't make money at it is nothing short of misogynistic, homophobic and racist.

It's not a bad idea. Those who work hard and do well in areas that will actually produce good jobs and complete their schooling get a walk on loans. But - it's not remotely practical in the real world. Very fast it would be everyone gets forgiven.

You haven't been reading the news lately. The only students being discriminated against are white. Much like government jobs.