Once again I didn’t respond because this is nothing but double talk around the fact that whether they defer what you owe to next year, next decade, whatever, if you’re loans are “waived, forgiven”, etc. the money owed doesn’t just magically disappear. It’s a can kicked down the road, which apparently is fine for you since you wouldn’t have to pay it. But since your loans are your personal responsibility, I don’t want me if my kids to have to pay it. You pay it.
Here’s a better way to give people more money to spend , cut out useless, bloated institutions like the Department of Education which is the main reason why school tuition is as high as it is , because they give out loans to anyone for almost any amount, and lower everyone’s taxes. Then LN7, maybe it will be easier for you to pay your bills.
That’s rich hearing you don’t want your kids to pay for it... would be nice if that statement applied to every other tax deferral we are all eligible for, or long term effects of climate change etc., but I digress.
Anyways, you don’t seem to understand the national budget, friend. Who do you think is paying for this bailout? The people. You. You’re paying for it. So am I. I’m not getting a dime, are you? Genuine question, are you? I want to know. Because I sure as fuck don’t want to pay for your bailout.
Anyways. Back to understanding the budget. The money for student lending is and has already been... appropriated. I don’t agree that the DoEd is “bloated” per say, but I would agree to the notion that it shouldn’t be a lender. The government shouldn’t be competing with industry. The government lending (typically at the same rates!) is an overreach if its function. Like Obamacare, it’s a bandaid to a broken system, but that bandaid actually still has a festering wound under it. The government offering, as you say, “giving out loans to anyone for almost any amount” is because the price of education in this country is ludicrous, because instituons simply grow grow grow rather than focus on providing cost efficient educations. Because being “not for profit” doesn’t mean a thing regarding the price point a consumer pays, and ultimately institutional growth is how these universities stay competitive.
Anyways I keep going on tangents. National budget. The money was already appropriated for the DoEd for FY20. In all likelihood that means there will be a surplus due to coronavirus and lack of desire for young adults to leave home and borrow money this year. So instead of borrowing money from the tax payers that wasn’t budgeted ($2 trillion), they’re borrowing out of a pool of already appropriated money. Want to fight to cut the DoEd’s budget for FY21? Great. We can work something out. Help me fight runaway costs in higher ed, help guide young people away from universities if they don’t need to be there, and we can take the govt lender out of the picture. Sounds like a bipartisan plan to me. But yes, utilizing already appropriated funds is a wiser decision than trying to find out how to cover $2 trillion on the spot.
PS, don’t have any issue paying my bills bud. Trying to help out my parents, who lost their business, and both of my sisters, who lost their businesses. You’re too busy with some ideological “I hate millennial rah rah rah I’m not paying for ur education rah rah rah” and in that cloud of ideological anger, you’re missing a strategic deferral of a financial crisis on our hands. Much like “flattening the curve” for the sake of public health, we should be flattening the financial borrowing our government is doing in order to save us. If you’re fiscally conservative you would agree with this, but I guess you’re not.
