Yes that’s what the wealthiest and most connected have been selling for years. Meanwhile they have convinced the poor and middle class to blame each other for the reason they don’t have more.
I don’t often see corporate welfare or a tax code that is easily manipulated by wealthy people attacked. But talk about raising the minimum wage at all and out come the floodgates of “that will ruin the economy and these aren’t meant to be careers” type stuff. Largely shared and discussed by people who don’t have much.
It’s one of the most brilliant cons of all time. Money towards average Joe’s and Jane’s is just the oddest thing to hate when looking at all the aspects of the economy that are skewed towards the ultra wealthy.
I think it is common to think “I will be wealthy one day”. It isn’t true in almost all cases, but many people still think it, and don’t want to be taxed when it happens. I think that is part of the explanation of why this line of thinking occurs.
I think often the people who are actually on track to be wealthy realize that their fate is likely much different than most people. Oddly these are often people advocating helping the poor. The ultra wealthy are perhaps not often in this group though.
It is like both parties want what is not in their best interest.
Hey we only gave them like 700 or so billion and let them play an instrumental role in fighting future legislation that may prevent the need to do that again. The issue isn’t that though the issue is if someone got 5,000 dollars in student loan forgiveness and I don’t it’s the most unfair thing ever and the country ceases to matter.
But at least individuals at the top of those institutions didn’t get enormous bonuses for almost bankrupting their companies and relying on tax payer dollars to keep them open.
The real travesty is the 18 year old kid from Nebraska or something that went to college and then jobs in that field dried up and he isn’t getting as much as he anticipated is struggling with the bills. Or the girl who spent two years in college and got pregnant with twins and had to put college on hold to earn money for the kids. Who maybe never finishes because of it.
These are the people that should be the target of everyone’s venom. They should have known better. Those poor bankers had no idea.
I was being sarcastic about the travesty part but I still maintain that I often see “anger” towards poor and middle class people from poor and middle class people whenever we talk about monetary benefits for them. And not so often at what (IMO) are far bigger deals.
Are loan principles the problem, or is it the interest payments? Maybe a better solution would be to reduce/eliminate interest on student loans? If there was a legal avenue to do so I’d likely be in favor of eliminating interest on student loans from lenders who received a bailout in 2008.
I believe (someone correct me) is that the people saddled with high debt, and stagnating wages are not contributing to our economy in a growth promoting manner. this is especially true with folks who graduated just before or duing the great recession who essentially put their career earnings on hold for a decade.
Forgiving or lightening the burden of the loans (and associated interest) will allow people to contribute more to the economy by buying homes, cars, consumables, start businesses etc. We bailed out big business and the rich after the great recession, but expect the people who invested in a college degree and then saw their ability to earn drop away from them to just buck up and deal with their decisions.
ideally, unsaddled with this debt, these people would be able to fully contribute to our economy and grow it because theoretically what they purchased with their loan was a marketable skill to help the economy, which would then pay dividends on on the intial investment of loan forgiveness.
An investment on by the economy / society for the economy / society. Many educated people produce much more value for the economy than they are compensated. The difference is helping the economy / society. Since we know that on average paying for these people’s education produces more value for society than the cost of the education, then doesn’t it make since to pay for said education. It is an investment, not a handout.
Schools are required to apply for the loans from banks, and then students apply to the school for their loans. bank rate and schools loan rate must match. if the student cannot payback the loan to the school, the school would still have to pay back the loan to the banks and would thus have a much more vested interest in producing graduates who can pay back the loans.
Given that students are paying for a lot of things on campus that have nothing to do with education, they are funding that bloat with their debt. Why would a university want to ruin a good thing?
The schools dont have to like it, they just have to do it. public schools shouldnt be for profit, and should be beholden to the taxpayers… thus, i am saying that the schools would be forced to do this by having it legislated into law.
Hell, going this route and making loan repayment in the vested interest of the school might make basic finance classes general ed requirements.