Canceling student loans

[TSOL]

10 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

MSN IS NOT EXACTLY RIGHT-WING MEDIA, but its front-page poll on Biden’s student loan proposal isn’t an endorsement:

 

 

 

 

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/?cvid=1dac231a968944aeb42cbce665f4e856&inst=1

 

 

Even an elementary school child can see that liberal government spending policy's, like the student debt forgiveness, is only going to increase inflation. 

 

 

[All_Pro_Bills]

The term moral hazard comes to mind here.  People are asking fundamental and legitimate questions.  What about me?  What about my debts?  And why should I subsidize people with degrees from places like Harvard and Yale?  Why aren't these universities with multiple billion dollar endowments pitching in a few pennies for paying off loans students took out for the sometimes worthless and high priced degrees these places are peddling?  Other questions about personal responsibility.  All legitimate questions.   

 

And just why is student debt more worthy of forgiveness than other types of debt?  What about home owners that are now underwater with their home loans?  Owing more than the home is now worth, shouldn't they be forgiven a portion of their debt?  Or car loan borrowers that are behind in their payments.  Shouldn't people that depend on their car to get them to and from work or school or transporting the kids get a break?  What about consumer credit card debt?  Shouldn't consumers strapped with big balances and monthly payments at onerous rates above 20% have a portion of their debt forgiven?  And while we're at it, why hasn't a presumed "progressive" majority proposed or passed legislation to cap obscene interest rate charges?

 

Joe has created more trouble than its worth here.  Because the freebie Genie's out of the bottle and there's no putting it back.  He'll end up placating a small minority of his base but pissing off and alienating almost everyone else.  Politically stupid right now, and economically a disaster.  At this point I'm wondering why any of us should have to service any loans or payments of any kind?  I mean, we "deserve" nice things too, right?  Let the government and the taxpayers take care of it.  Time to enjoy the good life for everybody!   

Edited August 29, 2022 by All_Pro_Bills

[Backintheday544]

40 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

The term moral hazard comes to mind here.  People are asking fundamental and legitimate questions.  What about me?  What about my debts?  And why should I subsidize people with degrees from places like Harvard and Yale?  Why aren't these universities with multiple billion dollar endowments pitching in a few pennies for paying off loans students took out for the sometimes worthless and high priced degrees these places are peddling?  Other questions about personal responsibility.  All legitimate questions.   

 

And just why is student debt more worthy of forgiveness than other types of debt?  What about home owners that are now underwater with their home loans?  Owing more than the home is now worth, shouldn't they be forgiven a portion of their debt?  Or car loan borrowers that are behind in their payments.  Shouldn't people that depend on their car to get them to and from work or school or transporting the kids get a break?  What about consumer credit card debt?  Shouldn't consumers strapped with big balances and monthly payments at onerous rates above 20% have a portion of their debt forgiven?  And while we're at it, why hasn't a presumed "progressive" majority proposed or passed legislation to cap obscene interest rate charges?

 

Joe has created more trouble than its worth here.  Because the freebie Genie's out of the bottle and there's no putting it back.  He'll end up placating a small minority of his base but pissing off and alienating almost everyone else.  Politically stupid right now, and economically a disaster.  At this point I'm wondering why any of us should have to service any loans or payments of any kind?  I mean, we "deserve" nice things too, right?  Let the government and the taxpayers take care of it.  Time to enjoy the good life for everybody!   

None of the debt you listed is held by the Federal government and therefore Biden wouldn’t have the ability to unilaterally cancel it.

 

If they were to do it through legislation, they’d need Republican support. Republicans could have done something like that in 2017 as the total cost of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which favored corporations and wealth Americans would have been close to the total US consumer credit card debt.

 

In addition, this was something Joe Biden ran on. It was a campaign promise.  And a record number of people voted for him. Elections have consequences.

[All_Pro_Bills]

2 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said:

None of the debt you listed is held by the Federal government and therefore Biden wouldn’t have the ability to unilaterally cancel it.

 

If they were to do it through legislation, they’d need Republican support. Republicans could have done something like that in 2017 as the total cost of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which favored corporations and wealth Americans would have been close to the total US consumer credit card debt.

 

In addition, this was something Joe Biden ran on. It was a campaign promise.  And a record number of people voted for him. Elections have consequences.

Frankly, I expect legal objections will be filling challenging the President's authority to "forgive" any of this debt.  Sure you can issue any executive order he fancies but can he modify contracts and agreements governed by legislation?  The argument will be this requires legislative action.  It should be interesting.

 

I don't think the Federal government "holds" the note on these debts.  On the Federal governments accounting books and accounts.  It could be large banks or some entity like Sallie Mae.  The Fed provide "guarantees" that would kick in if there was a default to pay these institutions and banks.  I don't know the specifics here, but I expect it would require the discharge of the debt through something like a bankruptcy filing.   What Biden is doing is paying off $10K or $20K of loan balances from people that are judged to be solvent or credit worthy.   

 

So what's going to happen here?  If I hold a student debt of $100K and Biden is forgiving $10K I'd have to be nuts to pay off the other $90K.  I'll wait until they forgive the rest.  Thanks Joe.  

[Backintheday544]

2 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Frankly, I expect legal objections will be filling challenging the President's authority to "forgive" any of this debt.  Sure you can issue any executive order he fancies but can he modify contracts and agreements governed by legislation?  The argument will be this requires legislative action.  It should be interesting.

 

I don't think the Federal government "holds" the note on these debts.  On the Federal governments accounting books and accounts.  It could be large banks or some entity like Sallie Mae.  The Fed provide "guarantees" that would kick in if there was a default to pay these institutions and banks.  I don't know the specifics here, but I expect it would require the discharge of the debt through something like a bankruptcy filing.   What Biden is doing is paying off $10K or $20K of loan balances from people that are judged to be solvent or credit worthy.   

 

So what's going to happen here?  If I hold a student debt of $100K and Biden is forgiving $10K I'd have to be nuts to pay off the other $90K.  I'll wait until they forgive the rest.  Thanks Joe.  

In order to sue, you need standing. To have standing, you need to show you are harmed. 
 

There is like no one harmed here to have standing. Fox News goes into it well here:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/state-ags-weigh-legal-challenge-against-bidens-500b-student-loan-handout
 

At the moment, finding someone that has been harmed by the decision looks difficult. 

 

The Supreme Court has already stated that taxpayers do not have standing to sue the government, and neither does Congress. Borrowers who already paid off their loans and therefore will not qualify for the handout are unlikely to have standing either since they are not directly injured by the White House's action. 

 

State governments similarly are viewed as not having standing since the student debt handout does not impose a burden on their finances or powers.

 

Legal experts say that loan services might have the best standing for a lawsuit since they will be directly impacted the handout. Loan servicers could argue that Biden overreached by issuing a blanket handout, instead of tailoring the proposal to individuals with proven economic hardship. 

Some federal courts, though, have refused in the past to allow government contractors to sue against regulations that hurt their profit margin. 

[OrangeBills]

22 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said:

In order to sue, you need standing. To have standing, you need to show you are harmed. 
 

There is like no one harmed here to have standing. Fox News goes into it well here:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/state-ags-weigh-legal-challenge-against-bidens-500b-student-loan-handout
 

At the moment, finding someone that has been harmed by the decision looks difficult. 

 

The Supreme Court has already stated that taxpayers do not have standing to sue the government, and neither does Congress. Borrowers who already paid off their loans and therefore will not qualify for the handout are unlikely to have standing either since they are not directly injured by the White House's action. 

 

State governments similarly are viewed as not having standing since the student debt handout does not impose a burden on their finances or powers.

 

Legal experts say that loan services might have the best standing for a lawsuit since they will be directly impacted the handout. Loan servicers could argue that Biden overreached by issuing a blanket handout, instead of tailoring the proposal to individuals with proven economic hardship. 

Some federal courts, though, have refused in the past to allow government contractors to sue against regulations that hurt their profit margin. 

 

You are (historically properly) adhering to concepts and rules of law

 

I think it's quite clear, those no longer matter anymore in the Leftist Era

[Backintheday544]

1 hour ago, OrangeBills said:

 

You are (historically properly) adhering to concepts and rules of law

 

I think it's quite clear, those no longer matter anymore in the Leftist Era

so your point is in the leftist era, the laws don’t matter and the leftists are going to allow someone without standing to sue to overturn the Secretary of Educations ability to forgive debt under the HEROS Act?

[OrangeBills]

21 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said:

so your point is in the leftist era, the laws don’t matter and the leftists are going to allow someone without standing to sue to overturn the Secretary of Educations ability to forgive debt under the HEROS Act?

 

Well, good distinction.  I think I have two points:  1)  Laws no longer matter in the Leftist Regime/Era;  2)  The Leftists are in control, so they are going to do pretty much whatever they want (Means To An End Party).

 

Good point, there will be no over-turning this or any other Leftist spending pattern

[Chef Jim]

On 8/26/2022 at 4:34 PM, SoCal Deek said:

This may have been asked and answered but is this a one time forgiveness or are they proposing that EVERYONE from now on gets a free $10,000 head start on college? 

No just this year.  It will likely be “readdressed” in 2024 for some reason or another. 🙄

Again this does as good a job of making college more affordable (which is the actual issue) as the ACA made healthcare more affordable. 
 

Those cheering this on as something good are either partisan hacks, not very bright, very gullible or a combination of the three. 

[Tiberius]

So happy for those who got bailouts! 

 

[Doc]

45 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

No just this year.  It will likely be “readdressed” in 2024 for some reason or another. 🙄

Again this does as good a job of making college more affordable (which is the actual issue) as the ACA made healthcare more affordable. 
 

Those cheering this on as something good are either partisan hacks, not very bright, very gullible or a combination of the three. 

 

They don't care.  They're fine with the Dems delaying the release of the vaccine until after the election, just so Trump would lose.  Why should this bother them?

[SoCal Deek]

2 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

No just this year.  It will likely be “readdressed” in 2024 for some reason or another. 🙄

Again this does as good a job of making college more affordable (which is the actual issue) as the ACA made healthcare more affordable. 
 

Those cheering this on as something good are either partisan hacks, not very bright, very gullible or a combination of the three. 

This does nothing to make FUTURE college more affordable. In fact, it will have the exact opposite effect. These loans were already taken and the college courses were already consumed and/or wasted. 

[Chef Jim]

4 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

This does nothing to make FUTURE college more affordable. In fact, it will have the exact opposite effect. These loans were already taken and the college courses were already consumed and/or wasted. 

And as I’ve mentioned in the past those loans have long been spent by the universities on Champagne and Caviar.  People that say “we are stuck paying for these loans!!” are idiots too. Paying for them?  What?  No one’s paying for them. They are just being wiped off the Fed’s Accounts Receivable. It’s all ***** Monopoly money.  Those of you with children yet to go to college?  YOU however should be ***** livid!  

[SoCal Deek]

13 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

And as I’ve mentioned in the past those loans have long been spent by the universities on Champagne and Caviar.  People that say “we are stuck paying for these loans!!” are idiots too. Paying for them?  What?  No one’s paying for them. They are just being wiped off the Fed’s Accounts Receivable. It’s all ***** Monopoly money.  Those of you with children yet to go to college?  YOU however should be ***** livid!  

You’ve only scratched the surface of the people who should be livid. How about those that paid off their debt? How about those who paid for their college in full? How about those who chose not to go to college because of the cost? And contrary to your assessment, how about those who’s taxes either have or will pay for this? (It is NOT Monopoly money.)

[Doc]

Of course we're paying for it.  Who else is?  

[Chef Jim]

1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

You’ve only scratched the surface of the people who should be livid. How about those that paid off their debt? How about those who paid for their college in full? How about those who chose not to go to college because of the cost? And contrary to your assessment, how about those who’s taxes either have or will pay for this? (It is NOT Monopoly money.)

I paid off my loan. I’m not pissed. Rules and laws change all the time. 
 

So what. Some people will now have $100 or more a month to spend. Big deal.  Good for them.  It’s those that come after.  “What about us?!?!”   Just wait.  You’ll get yours in 2024.

 

I just laugh at those that gobble this up as some great thing.   

Edited August 30, 2022 by Chef Jim

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

2 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

No one’s paying for them. They are just being wiped off the Fed’s Accounts Receivable. 

And what’s replacing that canceled revenue stream? 

 

[Chef Jim]

Just now, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

And what’s replacing that canceled revenue stream? 

 

Seriously?  You think the government has or cares about accounts receivable?  
 

😂😂😂😂😂😂

[aristocrat]

 

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

11 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

Seriously?  You think the government has or cares about accounts receivable?  
 

😂😂😂😂😂😂

Oh absolutely…. When taxes are cut to reduce how much of our money the government steals, they have no compunction about calling it a cost to be paid for.