Student Loans

Elizabeth Warren Wants Joe Biden To Deliver a Massive, Illegal Handout to the Well-Off

Student debt cancellation would disproportionately benefit college degree holders with higher earnings.

|

Sen. Elizabeth Warren likes to describe herself as someone who sides with working people. For example, in a recent New York Times op-ed, the Massachusetts Democrat warns, correctly, that her party is headed for disaster in this year's midterm elections. She then urges President Joe Biden "to use every tool of the presidency to deliver for"—you guessed it—"working people." This is the sort of thing that is designed to appeal to Biden's abiding sense that he's just a regular guy whose mission in life is to make life easier for other regular people. He's just an average Joe trying to help all the other average joes.

But Warren's first suggestion is a policy that would disproportionately benefit a group of people who are, economically speaking, already doing comparatively well. And Biden increasingly appears poised to act on that policy. I'm referring, of course, to canceling large amounts of student loan debt.

At a private meeting with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus yesterday, Biden was reportedly quite receptive to the idea of canceling some student debt, according to NBC News. Some reports suggest the administration is readying a plan to cancel $10,000 of student debt per borrower. But Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D–N.Y.) claims the figure could be higher. "We're getting closer and closer and closer on student loans. I've been working relentlessly on the president and his staff, and they seem more open to it now than ever before," he said this week. "There's nothing done yet, but I am really hopeful that the goal that we have had, $50,000 of student loans canceled, is getting more and more likely."

There may be other, smaller actions in the meantime, like this morning's announcement that the Biden administration will cancel $238 million worth of cosmetology school debt, but Schumer was laying out the end goal: canceling $50,000 of student loan debt per borrower.

First, it's worth noting that people with college degrees are more likely to both be employed and, on average, are better paid than those who never attended college. People who attend college are also more likely to come from comparatively affluent households in the first place.

Second, it's worth asking: Who has $50,000 worth of school loans? Not, for the most part, struggling dropouts from state schools. No, large student loan values are heavily associated with professional schools that produce graduates who, on average, go on to be fairly well-compensated.

The single largest source of student loan debt is MBA programs, as Brookings Institution Senior Fellow Adam Looney has noted, and MBA grads average more than $73,000 in earnings their first year out of school. "The five degrees responsible for the most student debt are: MBA, JD, BA in business, BS in nursing, and MD," Looney wrote in 2020. "That's one reason why the top 20 percent of earners owe 35 percent of the debt, and why most debt is owed by well-educated individuals."

Technically, it's true that well-paid professional school graduates fall into the category of "working people." But they are not the sort of working people Warren wants you to think of when she uses those words.

What Warren wants, and what Biden appears to be considering, is a massive program of government aid that would disproportionately benefit doctors, lawyers, well-paid medical specialists, and comfortably salaried individuals with advanced business degrees.

But for some reason, you don't hear Warren and Biden talking about their plan to give huge amounts of money to corporate lawyers and junior associates at hedge funds.

How much money would a program like this cost? Cost, of course, is slightly tricky to define here, since a student loan forgiveness program would not spend money so much as fail to collect it. But a program to forgive $50,000 per borrower would come in at around $950 billion, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. This would be in addition to the cost of the current pause on student loan repayment, which has already cost more than $100 billion.

Warren's pitch for a presidential program to help "working people" is a trillion-dollar bailout for the upper-middle class. They're just looking out for the little guy.

Here's another question worth asking that no one involved seems to want answered: Would a unilateral program of debt forgiveness like the one that is apparently under discussion be legal?

Actually, someone did answer that question. Specifically, that question was answered in 2021 by the Office of the General Counsel at the U.S. Department of Education. Lawyers for sprawling government agencies often like to defend the broad powers of their departments, declaring what they legally can do rather than what they legally can't. So it is noteworthy that the lawyers for the Education Department found that the secretary of education "does not have statutory authority to provide blanket or mass cancellation, compromise, discharge, or forgiveness of student loan principal balances, and/or to materially modify the repayment amounts or terms thereof, whether due to the COVID-19 pandemic or for any other reason." That sounds like a pretty firm no.

So it's not just a plan to give huge amounts of money to corporate lawyers and junior associates at hedge funds. It's an illegal plan to give huge amounts of money to corporate lawyers and junior associates at hedge funds.

In an interview with Politico this week, Warren recycled some of the "delivery" language of her Times op-ed. "If we do deliver," she said, "if we can get some tangible results that touch people's lives, then we can go to the polls in November with our heads held high."

Illegally funneling money to a well-paid, well-off cohort that just happens to vote increasingly for Democrats? Now that's something a champion of working people can really feel good about.

NEXT: Cops Find Suspected Murder Weapon After Years of Searching. It Was in Their Evidence Already.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Buying votes.

    1. More like renting them, as the recipients will find out in the next tax cycle when they have to report the debt forgiveness as income and then pay taxes on it.

      Then their children and grandchildren can pay for the rest years down the road.

    2. Finally got my loan back into repayments, only to get them cancelled again after 1 month, per the notice I received yesterday. Through August anyway.

      Now with this news, it seems like it could be a poor investment of time or money to go through the hassle of trying to get them to allow me to make payments again. If they would just tell us one way or the other, I could make an informed choice. This chaotic limbo situation where they push back dates - or maybe not - make it difficult to plan.

      That's not buying my vote.

      1. But you're actually planning on paying back your loans.

        1. Not if the rest of you beat me to it . . .

          . . . by force.

      2. You are not their target audience

    3. This cunt needs to go.

    4. Higher income earners don't carry large student loans.

      Reason is lying... As is usual...

      1. VendRetard is a low iq liar. As is usual.

        1. I have it muted. SQRLSY too. They’re both worthless offal. Or maybe something that oozed out of Liz Warren’s vag.

          1. You're confusing them with Kirkland. These guys are _______ , which is totally different.

            1. Kirkland is the most unoriginal of all.

              1. I didn't mute him because he was offensive. I did it because he was boring.

                1. I like to tell him how he’s going to be executed for treason. Just to Lisa’s him off. The funny thing is, at the rate the democrats are pushing the American people, he probably will end up with his back against a wall.

                  Which is just fine. Marxists like that deserve a firing squad as punishment for their treason.

                  1. Pinochet had some good ideas.

          2. Same - quickly noticed ZERO substance coming from that liar.

      2. That’s not true at all.
        I am a doctor, I went to university and medical school, I took out student loans, and I paid them back

      3. Fuck you, pay your own goddamned debts.

        -jcr

    5. Don't tell anybody, but College Degreed people do not have higher earnings than their non-college degreed counterparts. And these numbers don't adjust for the difference in intelligence of the average college graduate versus non-college graduate. And then you have to adjust for certified professions that non-college graduates have no access to as well.

      1. It's especially true when the grand college degree is one that end with the word "Studies" such as "Wymyn's Studies" or Gender Studies" or any other fake diploma that only guarantees the holder of said diploma to be able to obtain a job as a check out at a dollar store.

        1. Who do you think is staffing all of the university and corporate DEI departments?

      2. It's still true overall. But you make an important point that it doesn't follow that anyone who goes to college and gets a degree will make more money. Probably has the causation backwards. People with the ability to go into the most lucrative fields are much more likely to choose more higher education.

  2. As odious as I find this, speaking as someone who paid off my student loan debts in my 30s, I'll note that this would have been a lot less likely if the government didn't bail out banks that committed securities fraud, global automakers, airlines, and other corporate bigwigs.

    Let these guys fail, and it becomes a lot harder to make an argument that a bunch of wine-sipping, six-figure earning neoyuppies should get a $50K windfall.

    1. But there is something borderline criminal about demanding a high school grad bail out a doctor.

      If he does it, Republicans need to seize endowments. All of them. Every penny. And write legislation putting universities on the hook for student loans.

      1. I agree. Where is the culpability of the universities?

        1. Yep...colleges and scum bags like Schumer pushed this. Look for a politician who pushes federal student loans, and you will find a friend or spouse who magically is making a ton of money at a university.

        2. So 18 year “adults” are smart and mature enough to make sound decisions when it comes to voting but dumb and immature when it comes to signing on the dotted line for loans? Paying off loans of the irresponsible is a direct slap in the face of those who scrimped and saved to pay off theirs - but Dems like Pocahontas don’t care, as long as those getting slapped are people not likely to vote for them. Although I’m not a big fan of many (most, actually) current Republicans, almost all current Dems are total pieces of sh**!

      2. I'm fine with them cornholing college endowments, but a lot of this shit would be mitigated if we just made it easier to declare bankruptcy for student loan debt. We have those laws for a reason, and I don't have a problem with college students having their debt record wiped clean if it nerfs their credit rating for a few years.

        1. Fuck no. They spent $500k getting a gender studies masters so let them live with the consequences of their actions. You want to limit it to something like the first $20k, fine, that covers in state tuition loans but beyond that why is their stupidity my problem?

          1. Let’s cancel their student loans, and harvest their own organs to cover the liability. Totally win-win.

            1. Now that makes sense. And the MDs with loans can get a portion of their loans cancelled for every organ harvested.

              1. Now THAT is a plan!

        2. If they declared bankruptcy, college loans backed by the Federal Government would have to be paid off by the government. So, similar to taxes, you cannot bankrupt against debts owed to or guaranteed by the Federal Government. As for private-only student loans, I totally agree - they should be under the same rules as any other private loan.

      3. I agree, however on average the high school grad isn't doing much bailing out compared to people making more money and paying more taxes. But it also would be criminal that the high school grad is bailing out banks and car makers.

      4. Higher income earners don't carry large student loans.

        Reason is lying... As is usual...

        1. They graduate with high debt but wouldnt need 50K support to get rid of it. See my comment above. Youre an expert at missing the point, moron.

    2. Same here Red = paid off my student loans. My question is: Do I now get a 'rebate'? 🙂

      This would be means tested, I am sure. The MBAs, MDs and JDs are fucked in that scenario.

      1. The MBAs and all are a major part of their base. They're going to forgive ALL of it.

        Which, I bet, won't kill them with the non-college educated for a long, long time.

      2. The total we both paid, with interest, was probably about $75,000.

        1. I've seen a compromise bandied about of making interest 0%. I'd be willing to entertain that. But the schools need to have skin in the game. They are misleading students (I know from experience).

          1. Not a bad compromise solution, provided there is a fixed timeframe to pay off the loan.

            1. And provided that I get to take a $50,000 loan at zero percent interest even though I currently don't carry any college debt.

              Note, that's not a student loan. It's a loan. You give me $50K right now, no interest. I'll pay it back to you over 20 or 30 years, $140 a month or whatever it is.

              If that's not the deal, than no. I don't back your compromise. Because I didn't go into debt for a fancy college degree, making the trade off of not having something like an MBA or CS degree which would have elevated my lifetime employability and earnings. If I'd known I could just have my college debt cancelled, or borrowed it at zero percent, I would have made a very different choice rather than less education and more years to get it while working to pay for it.

              You can't change the rules of the game after game has started and make it "fair" in any sense. And, as usual, giving people freebies somehow fucks me over in the process, so no. Fuck that. They agreed to terms, they can pay under those terms.

              1. ^^^ this

      3. Same here. Paid mine off in my 20's. Also had taken out loans in 2011 at a stupid 8+% rate when prevailing rates were much lower, only to have congress the next year pin student loan rates to the market and saw the rate drop by like half. I was wishing for a rebate then.

      4. In lieu of a rebate, just kick in the door to Fauxcahontas’s house and take all her valuables. Since she wants to take other people’s shit she shouldn’t have a problem with that.

    3. True, but at least the bailouts you mention were supposedly to save the economy, which “helps everyone.” I don’t like that rationale, but at least it’s an attempt at a rationale. What’s the rationale for forgiving student debt?

      1. They've given it--Millennials and Zoomers don't have enough money to buy a house, are putting off on starting families, can't start businesses, can barely cover rent, etc.

        What they really mean is "People holding student loan debt aren't acting like the consoooooooooooooomers we need to keep the economy strong," but this stuff related to "income insecurity" is their primary rationale.

        The funny thing is that Pete Buttigieg, of all people, came out against this during the 2020 campaign for precisely the reason outlined in the article--that it's actually a bailout for a bunch of well-off, privileged people who are already pretty responsible with their finances.

        1. The ones they really want to help are the Millennials and Zoomers who have useless degrees like woke grievance studies or purely academic degrees that won't qualify you any job that doesn't involve asking customers if they "want fries with that".

          However admitting that by explicitly targeting that group would be a political problem.

          1. And it would call attention to the very fact that all this wokeness is just as worthless as the degrees the universities sell to naive high school grads. The schools are to blame. If there is to be some sort of debt forgiveness, let the schools pay for it.

            1. Colleges and universities have become "for profit diploma mills".
              Would you hire someone with a degree in "Woke Grievance Studies" to mind the check out at a dollar store?

          2. This x 1000

          3. I hate this assumption that it’s all just art majors and grievance study majors. This article and many people’s attitudes about this topic completely gloss over a very real thing that happened. There are a lot of people with MBAs and particularly JDs who did NOT have any meaningful chance to pay off their loans when they graduated. Anyone who graduated in about 2008-2010 is either in this boat or knows many who are. That complete economic crash really, really screwed an awful lot of people who entered school in 2004-06, got the grades, did the work, were not marginal overreaching dreamers, and then got completely screwed by coming out of school with a traditional respected higher degree in law or similar and could not do anything but work at a restaurant and that interest piles up real quick, and many have never recovered.

            This article (and popular opinion) unfairly conflate(s)that group with people who took huge loans on comparatively silly or more niche degrees.

            1. I hate this assumption that it’s all just art majors and grievance study majors.

              Funny, I didn't mention anything about this, but your own grievance complex is clearly the size of fucking Grand Canyon.

              I don't give a single fuck about people who had the "bad luck" to get a hyper-expensive degree that's SUPPOSED TO MAKE THEM MORE FINANCIALLY SECURE IN THE LONG RUN. If they couldn't do shit with that degree, that's on them, and they don't deserve a bailout, either.

    4. Well said. Big business and the those that make armaments have gotten a lot more than 1.7 trillion over the last 20 years

    5. This is an excellent point. “Free market” enthusiasts were all about bailing out banks that blew it all on a bad bet, but have no sympathy for those of us unfortunate enough to go to grad school for traditionally success-linked programs like law or medicine in the period between 2005-2010.

      1. There is literally nothing "Free Market" about bailing out anything.

        If it fails, for whatever reason, it fails. The market has spoken in letting you die. THAT would be free market.

  3. Hey, I'll take it. Been paying these stupid loans for what feels like forever. Won't be enough to get me to register to vote though.

    1. "Hey, I'll take it." <------ There it is; The criminal mentality of the left.
      Running around instructing Gov-Guns to ARMED STEAL anything they want.....

      Can anyone guess what the end result of such massive criminal-gang acts will be???? There's a reason the Constitution never granted authority for wealth redistribution. (i.e. Communism/Socialism)...

      1. That's a pretty retarded take on what I wrote. If someone offers to pay off my debt I'd be stupid to say no. That's all I meant. Take a sedative already.

        1. lol... "If someone offers to pay" ... I'm not offering so I'm not sure where Warren gets off offering me for it.

          1. Did you sent your stimulus checks back?

            1. I got very little, and I sure as hell laid for those through my taxes and Biden’s inflation. We don’t all live in piss soaked alleys using refrigerator boxes for shelter and subsist of hobo wine paid for with more of my tax dollars (your welfare check).

            2. Yes... I did.

              1. So you voluntarily gave more money to the US government than you had to? I'm not sure that helps.

                1. No. I voluntarily rejected their pay-off for Nazi-Regime support.

      2. So, you would refuse it if you had student loans outstanding?

        My take is always that if they are handing out money, you'd be a fool not to take it.

        1. I feel the same way about my my social security pass through check every month. Always must remember to thank all of you working stiffs for part of my retirement. No, I won’t turn down my part of the ponzu scheme.

    2. Sarc when I got out of school I paid off 30k for an advanced degree making 15$ in 5 years (living with roommates), in response to your comment but not directed at you it's tough for me to feel sorry when I made it possible by not needing a lot of the stuff people think they deserve.

      1. When did you go to school? Probably back when a person delivering pizza's could pay for much of the cost for school

        A problem is that student loans have driven up tuition, books and fees to unsustainable levels.

        1. A problem is that Nazism has driven up costs unsustainable levels.
          Nothing speaks that louder than our current inflation rate on everything.

          Stealing resources doesn't make new resources magically appear.

          1. Execute all the Nazis. Problem solved.

            1. And by Nazis, I mean Marxist democrats.

        2. There are copies of the textbooks at the library, in all likelihood. Or, if not, the professor may be able to have made available. Fees and tuition are due to administrative bloat, which is much like the issues the nation faces with governance. There are too many useless, faceless bureaucrats drawing a paycheck; they create more work for themselves but nothing else.

      2. If I want sympathy I'll look in the dictionary between shit and syphilis.

        Just saying that if they want to pay off my loans I won't say no. And yes it is totally unfair to those who paid off their loans on their own. I get it. But I'm not going to say "Hey, no thanks. I'll pay off that twenty five grand on my own." That would be dumb.

        1. So you’re a collaborator. I figured as much. “Hey, someone was going to turn in that Jew teen hiding in the attic, I may as well be the one to get the free deutche marks.” Or maybe, “Hey, that bitch who was getting gang raped on the pinball machine at that bar was already getting fucked, so why I may as well fuck her too instead of jacking off while trying to pass out in that piss soaked alley where I live.”.

        2. Sarc, I’m waiting for your witty response. What happened to you?

      3. I know exactly how long it took me to pay for my daughter to not need a loan. 18 years. And guess what, because I had been saving for 18 years she was ineligible for lots of scholarships and aid since the family had a lot of money in savings. The irony isn't funny.

        1. Democrats always create perverse incentives. Democrats are also proverbial malignant tumors.

  4. Buying votes, that all this is.

    Every poll in the last several years shows an OVERWHELMING support for democrats from college educated white females. it is in fact the ONLY cohort that is strongly D, with higher educated white males showing a slight preference for D. (pun intended)

    Without that cohort of voters the Democrats will be destroyed, utterly.

    1. Almost all non-white minorities are overwhelming democrat. Did you just act like they don't matter? Are you a closet Trumpist?

      1. Are you a closet idiot? Well, in that case I think you forgot the closet.

        1. Yes, an idiot, and a pretty clearly a progressive/left-leaning fuckwit w/ that handle, which it no doubt believes is clever.

        2. Oh, he’s probably in a closet alright.

      2. This is no longer true, particularly among Hispanics.

        Even large portions of the solid D voting black community took a rather large step off the Democrat plantation and voted for trump in 20.

        The only demographic team blue still holds with an iron fist are college educated women and suburban wine moms.

        1. Even large portions of the solid D voting black community took a rather large step off the Democrat plantation and voted for trump in 20.

          And it's getting harder to continue to ignore that black people in America in particular are the single most religious, socially-conservative demographic in the country. The Democrats of today are really losing their appeal among those folks.

        2. You keep relying on that narrative lol.

        3. The bitches who actually like those god awful Kim Crawford ads? Ugh…..

      3. "Almost all non-white minorities are overwhelming democrat."
        It's humorous you don't pay any tribute to the Democratic party for EMPOWERING **exactly** that color of skin (i.e. racism)...

        I mean good grief; It's not like they keep it a secret...
        Their only "secret" is the deception of projection. (i.e. call everyone else racist before we pitch our racist bills)...

      4. "Are you a closet Trumpist?"

        We have a new TDS-addled pile of shit!

    2. Every poll in the last several years shows an OVERWHELMING support for democrats from college educated white females. it is in fact the ONLY cohort that is strongly D

      No, while that figure is rising, black women have long been the most kept constituency in the Democratic Party, and have been for decades. They vote for the party at around a 95% clip, and no one else is even close.

      What white women with degrees have done in recent years is help swing elections to the Dems, but they're nowhere near as monolithic of a block as black women, or blacks as a whole. In fact, one reason that the Dems are looking at getting shellacked this year is due to them losing support among Hispanics, which have been growing as a percentage of the electorate for a while now. And the Dems' sperging out about schools being their de facto territory is turning off quite a few of the white college-educated women as well this cycle, mainly due to class differences more than anything else ("Why does a teacher fresh out of college with a bachelor's think she knows more than someone with Master's degree about what my child needs?").

      1. Asians have also been in the mid-upper 60s for Dems for a while, although that's obviously a broad umbrella to put so many ethnicities under. But 2nd and 3rd-generation Asians especially tend to be lockstep Democrats after spending time in American public schools learning about how evil white people are.

        1. Asians especially tend to be lockstep Democrats after spending time in American public schools learning about how evil white people are

          There was a good article in the Atlantic in recent years about how what's really going on here is immigrants realizing that bitching about the evils of white people is how you ingratiate yourself to upper class white people.

          1. Pretty much the only Hispanics that use "Latinx" are in academia or the entertainment industry, and it's primarily to suck up to the white people in charge of the places.

          2. It is nessisary to secure one of those sweet sweet 500k jobs in California or New York.

      2. the Dems' sperging out about schools being their de facto territory is turning off quite a few of the white college-educated women as well this cycle

        ^

        A big driver there is the "you owe it to us to keep your kid in the shitty school" attitude. That's not as winning an argument among parents as they seem to think.

  5. Warren has another group of supporters in mind: people who earn money working at colleges. If there is no practical limit to what a student can pay because someone else is paying, there is no limit to what a university can charge.
    It can not have escaped out attention that the support for Warren and the squad is greatest on campus. They live in a different universe from the rest of us and see the money as free, coming either out of the air or from some unnamed billionaires. That students currently paying loans are given a gift is just icing on the cake to them.

    1. "see the money as free" -- that money the people worked for????
      Now; wouldn't that be interpreted as free-labor (i.e. Slavery)?

    2. Good observations Mr. Dinkle. Lots of college administrators and support functions, who never even cross paths with the students they are supposed to serve, are becoming veritable fiefdoms.

  6. If you haven't gotten a grasp on it yet, Inclusion™ has to be taken to the fullest. I know that you have no moral compass and therefore think it's ok to exclude the wealthiest 10% of the population from our handouts. But if you do this, this might have a detrimental, disaffecting impact on their attitude towards The Democrat Party™. And then nobody would get this kind of money anymore. Is THIS really what you want? Do you even care about racism and stuff?

  7. I am 100% convinces Joe will undo 10-20k of student debt to make him and dems more popular and not lose so big in the fall. I don't understand Americans replacing ineffectual democrats with Trumpians who aim to overthrow democracy but I guess it is what it is.

    1. "I don't understand Americans"

      This is all one needs to know about you, loser.

      1. ^EXACTLY THIS.....

        The USA is a Constitutional Union of Republican States.

        Democratic [WE] mobs trying to vote Nazism(National Socialism) into the USA is why the USA is broken... Holy crap it's like Pre-Nazi Germany to a T..... Get over this idea that the USA is but an unlimited Democracy because IT ISN'T!!!! That's what Germany was BEFORE NAZISM took over.

    2. Also, how about you finally fix your broken Latin?

      1. "People called Romani, they go house?"

        1. People called Rizzo, they go yard.

    3. The FBI alteady overthrew democracy.

    4. "...Trumpians who aim to overthrow democracy but I guess it is what it is."

      Stuff your TDS up your ass, shitpile; your head is asking for company.

      1. Trump is a low grade moron, as are all who support him.

        He is mentally ill as diagnosed by at least two dozen psychiatrists and something that is clear for every rational, thinking person to see.

        1. You spelled Biden wrong.

          Also, anyone who wants to issue a remote diagnosis and then call themselves an “expert” is doing it for the low iq audience. Like VendRetard.

  8. Are there any libertarians out there? This is what a libertarian rag should be writing about …The Department of Homeland Security is setting up disinformation units with your tax dollars, yes, Disinformation Units. Cornered fucking fascist rats.

    1. Led by someone who denied the veracity of the Hunter laptop story.

    2. If this was a new story, it would warrant coverage but Reason has ran almost the same story for years now, almost weekly.

  9. "Elizabeth Warren Wants Joe Biden To Deliver a Massive ... Handout to the Well-Off"

    What?!

    Democrats are behaving like the "party of the rich"? Who could have predicted this??????

    #OBLsFirstLaw
    #LibertariansForWarren

    1. Higher income earners don't carry large student loans.

      Reason is lying... As is usual...

      1. VendRetard is so intellectually impotent that he resorts to copy and paste. He has never heard of people being in debt after graduating.

        The point is that these prospective high income people graduate with high debt but would be able to pay that off on their own so they don’t need the 50K support you fucking moron.

        But then, youre not even from the US, so, not sure why you keep envy-posting here, loser.

        1. Where is that faggot from?

  10. How about federal mortgage forgiveness? Everyone deserves a house.

    How about auto loan forgiveness for SUVs? Everyone deserves safe, comfortable transportation.

    How about credit card debt forgiveness? That would really help the poor people Dems pretend to care about.

    1. Mortgage forgiveness- the future is government union defined benefit pension managers own every housing unit and collect rent.

      Transportation- Public transportation only, no parking, no cars, no roads. And for goodness sakes, NO fossil fuels or nuclear.

      Credit cards- Rationing everything does away with a need for credit. Think Covid- Shanghai 4/22.

    2. Income tax forgiveness.

  11. The whole idea smacks of trying to drive up young voter turn-out enthusiasm in advance of what is generally regarded as a pending butt whippin' in the midterms for Democrats. If Biden tries to push it through it'll get challenged immediately, and based on the quote in the article from the Education Department's legal beagles it won't pass legal muster in court. What a waste of time.

    1. Even if it is stopped, the move can be effective as both a pretend handout and the drive to point at the other side for not passing it.

  12. No word from Reason on Biden's Disinformation Board,
    but Trump was an authoritarian according to Reason. Will Reason wmention this board, will Reason call Biden what he is a Totalitarian?
    Will Reason run a fowl of the Disinformation board, or will Reason print only the approved Government propaganda?

    1. No

    2. Trump was and still is an authoritarian at heart. Every move he made was to disenfranchise people after he loss. He doesn't care about democracy at all. I am surprised that so many libertarians believe his horse shit. They eat it up like biscuits and gravy like grandma used to make. Dems are bad, republicans are bad, but Trumpism is bad for everyone other than Trump and his cult.

      1. You keep relying on that narrative lol.

        You know some people know categories beyond just “good” and “bad”. They think in terms of “better” or “worse”. TDS addled clowns can’t do that though.

        Trumps policies weren’t so bad after all. Ask anyone who used a gas pump recently 😀

      2. "Trump was and still is an authoritarian at heart..."

        In Canis Credimus is a TDSs addled shitpile in brain .

      3. List the authoritarian stuff Trump did. We'll wait. I didn't vote for him but he was not even close to being an authoritarian. That's such horseshit.

        1. You can always tell a fascist, because the first thing they do is limit the size and power of government.
          Or so we are told these days.

    3. Will Reason run a fowl of the Disinformation board, or will Reason print only the approved Government propaganda?
      Yes! Reason will chicken out.

      1. Bunch of turkeys.

  13. Even if it only went to the poorest of the poor it would still be bad. Reason doesn't have a single person that can argue a libritarian point anymore

    1. "Even if it only went to the poorest of the poor it would still be bad." Well, 99% of all welfare in US history has gone to the already-rich, the political donor class. How about carried interest for the hedge-funders? For Private Equiteers, destroyers of jobs and competition? We subsidize the rich, and EVERY major government spending plan, from Medicare to COVID relief, has been seized upon by this same professional-profiteer class. Dubya wanted to give Social Security to Wall Street on the cusp of its collapse. Imagine if he'd succeeded! But he DID succeed in protecting Big Pharma against Medicare drug price negotiation. Please tells us (I frankly don't know), how good a job is Reason doing in making the libertarian argument against welfare for the RICH?

      1. They don't. Because they don't have libritarian writers

  14. Of course, any action on forgiving the victims of these evil, unbearable, unconscionable loans will only come after the government stops making them.

    Right?
    Right?

  15. Physicians and lawyers have a lot more than $50,000 in debt. I would suggest for many physicians it's in the $200,000 or more range

    I support erasing the debt for those that work for charitable organizations or for the government.

    1. No, the loans were not made based on your post Collage employment. If you go to med school, rack up 200k in debt, then do doctors without boarders, you still owe 200k.

    2. Or, they could cut back on a few niceties and actually pay off the loans, like the rest of us. There is no reasonable argument as to why anybody deserves to have their student loans forgiven. Reduced ability to work can mean payment plans or in time, loan forgiveness, but sweeping forgiveness for all is little more than favoritism and vote purchasing.

  16. It's a classic case of bad policy. At best it is a band-aid on a festering wound. If they forgive loans en masse it will turn off independents like myself from the party. It makes no sense. As someone with a child about to go off to college we have to make a decision. Go to a public school and have small loans or go to a private school and get big loans. That's a choice we have. How many people with large debts had that same choice? Why should we give them money when their peers made the choice to go to a more economic school? Where's their check?

    1. I have one about to go and one that just graduated. We started saving for college the year each was born. So I have zero sympathy for the sob stories about what they could do if student loan debt was forgiven. I could have done a hell of a lot with the 200 or so I was saving every month.

  17. I support erasing the debt for those that work for charitable organizations or for the government.

    If those "charitable organizations" can afford to by $6 million homes, they should probably pay off their employees debt for them.

    Government workers already have a 10-year debt forgiveness program, if they're willing to take a tax hit the year it gets paid off.

    1. Why would any rational person give a bigger subsidy to either of these groups. They are, by and large, politically to the left, and that is a good part of why they made the career choices that they did.

      1. Why would any rational person give a bigger subsidy to either of these groups. They are, by and large, politically to the left,

        You basically answered your own question here.

  18. Sen. Elizabeth Warren likes to describe herself as someone who sides with working people.

    While even she doesn't believe that, I bet she's so sociopathic that she could pass a polygraph.

  19. My two kids worked their asses off to graduate on time and debt free this year, one with an engineering degree and the other a degree in geology. I helped them as much as I could, as any parent would, but if the family would have been better off taking out debt -- or is it free money? -- then I feel like an idiot. But at least it was only money for me: for them it was time they could have been out with their friends who were living their best debt-fueled "college experience". SMH

  20. I went to the article, and can't find many of the stats quoted by Suderman. I even looked at all of the links provided in Looney's article, and still can't find any place where debt by degree program is listed.

    If I were still teaching college, I'd tell Suderman to go back and check his sources : -)

  21. Biden's DHS forms a Ministry of Truth. That is all!

  22. then we can go to the polls in November with our heads held high."

    Do it, you'll be much easier targets. Fuck the moral hazard and fuck all of us who paid our loans off or paid cash.

    Could a journalist be troubled to ask any of these cretins where the constitution they took an oath to empowers them to try to do this?

  23. Clearly a consequence of the MASSIVE FAILURE of the Department of Education. Education is too expensive for its value, and is leaving kids without the tools to succeed.

    Not leading kids away from wasted liberal arts degrees, and to productive educations; paying one-half the cost of universities to administration vs teachers;

    Wipe the Dept of Education clean, and start over. Don't bail it out and leave it to fail again.

  24. So student loan debt forgiveness would disproportionately benefit higher-income degree holders relative to -- whom? The genuinely rich who could afford education out of their own (parents') pockets? Not relative to the non-degree or worthless-degree-holding, defrauded victims of for-profit fake collegemeisters like Betsy DeVos, who made zillions fleecing the student loan program -- the ACTUAL INTENDED BENEFICIARIES OF THE WARREN PROGRAM. And not relative to those lacking the interest, aptitude, or fortitude to undertake higher education at all, most of whom pay no income tax owing to the EITC, and therefore subsidize nobody.

    1. So student loan debt forgiveness would disproportionately benefit higher-income degree holders relative to -- whom?

      Maybe if you deadbeat coomers didn't expect your every whim to be fulfilled, and possessed a single ounce of future-time orientation and the ability to exercise some delayed gratification, you might not be in a position to beg President Hair-Sniffer to wipe out the loans YOU FREELY SIGNED UP FOR.

      I can't blame you entitled pricks completely, because your parents and teachers failed to instill any kind of personal responsibility within your character, and you're a gaggle of emotionally stunted wrecks as a result. But that doesn't mean a plumber with a trade certificate or people who actually fulfilled their responsibilities should have to pay THEIR loans, and YOUR loans, too.

      Try acting like a fucking adult and pay your own goddamn bills, you manchild.

      1. How do you know the plumber with the trade certificate doesn't owe $20k in debt to DeVos Fake University? Or that Warren's program would exclude trade school debts? "Freely signed up for" -- 18-year olds in free exchange with professional fraudsters? I don't think so. Ever hear of contracts of adhesion? And how dare you call total strangers "deadbeats," "entitled pricks," "emotionally stunted wrecks?" Paid off MY student loans, took me ten years. Am I beating the "moral hazard" or "equity" pots like some of those here? No. Because in my time, college was affordable and there was no such thing as "for-profit universities." Selective, means-tested student loan forgiveness is step one. Adopting Free College/Trade School for All (who want it and who earn admittance) is step two.

        1. How do you know the plumber with the trade certificate doesn't owe $20k in debt to DeVos Fake University? Or that Warren's program would exclude trade school debts?

          Because I don't deal in hypotheticals, you doofus.

          "Freely signed up for" -- 18-year olds in free exchange with professional fraudsters? I don't think so.

          The vast majority of student loan debt is with traditional universities. And those 18-year-olds are grown-ass men and women who made grown-ass choices to take on that debt. If you want to argue that they weren't in a position to make a mature choice on debt at the age of 18, then let's talk repealing the 26th Amendment, because they damn sure aren't mature enough to vote in that case, either.

          Ever hear of contracts of adhesion? And how dare you call total strangers "deadbeats," "entitled pricks," "emotionally stunted wrecks?"

          Because they're demanding that they be saved from the consequences of their own decisions.

          Paid off MY student loans, took me ten years. Am I beating the "moral hazard" or "equity" pots like some of those here? No. Because in my time, college was affordable and there was no such thing as "for-profit universities."

          In "your time," colleges were far more selective about who they admitted, and even back then, people were griping that it was too expensive. That was the whole point of LBJ implementing federal student loans to begin with.

          If you can't make enough money with your college degree to pay off your student loans, then a college education is no longer worth the return on investment.

          Selective, means-tested student loan forgiveness is step one. Adopting Free College/Trade School for All (who want it and who earn admittance) is step two.

          Haha, no. There are already more individuals with degrees out there than there are "elite" jobs for them to fill, and college is already 13th-16th grade as it is for precisely the reason that we've attempted to shove every single high school graduate into a degree program. And the last thing that will lower the college is expanding enrollment even further, which will require an even greater expansion of administrative positions that's helped drive up costs to begin with. Do you really not understand the limits of scale?

          1. Only now saw this one, so I'll be brief.
            (1) You don't deal in hypotheticals, and I'm a "doofus" for thinking otherwise? Everything is hypothetical until actual legislation is adopted and takes effect. If > then. You know, the form of the standard hypothetical syllogism. Aristotle gave it that name, I didn't.
            (2) All the rest can be collapsed on our agreement that student loan debt should be dischargeable in bankruptcy, that there are many more graduates than jobs, that there are 10x more university administrators than could be justified in any rational universe, and that college isn't for everybody.

            1. You don't deal in hypotheticals, and I'm a "doofus" for thinking otherwise? Everything is hypothetical until actual legislation is adopted and takes effect. If > then. You know, the form of the standard hypothetical syllogism. Aristotle gave it that name, I didn't.

              If you're employing an example that doesn't actually exist, then your example doesn't have merit.

    2. So student loan debt forgiveness would disproportionately benefit higher-income degree holders relative to -- whom?

      Relative to people who didn't go to or finish college. On average people with degrees make more over their lifetimes than those who do not.

      1. This would be true only if there were some comparable government-enabled debt program for those who never entered college. I know of none, do you? Further, it would be true only of those who WANTED to go, AND were academically qualified to go, but forsook specifically BECAUSE they were afraid of student debt. Again, how many do you suppose fall into this category? In my experience, <1%. Apples to apples, please.
        As for those who didn't finish, THESE ARE PRECISELY THE INTENDED BENEFICIARIES -- those deeply in debt with nothing to show in exchange. The forgiveness plan "disproportionately benefits" student loan debtors relative ONLY to those with college degrees and NO debt -- whether because they incurred no debt or because they paid if off before the program took effect.
        Moreover, "disproportionate benefit" is a bogus argument against every worthwhile policy change, since late is better than never and circumstances change over time. Obama ended the credit card predators' practice of applying payments first to the lowest interest debt segment. Well, those who suffered through and paid off BEFORE Obama's credit reforms got no retrospective benefit, but that was no reason to punish EVERYBODY. Every policy change which creates a new benefit, or relieves an old burden, "disproportionately burdens" those coming before. Abolish capital punishment and this sure as hell disproportionately burdens those previously put to death -- but that's no argument against ending the death penalty.

        1. Moreover, "disproportionate benefit" is a bogus argument against every worthwhile policy change, since late is better than never and circumstances change over time.

          So basically, "somebody needs to do something" regardless of the long-term consequences of said action.

          Abolish capital punishment and this sure as hell disproportionately burdens those previously put to death -- but that's no argument against ending the death penalty.

          Christ, I knew shitlibs were bad at analogies, but this is something else.

          1. If the long-term harms of a policy change outweigh the short-term benefits, then it's not a "worthwhile policy change," as I specified. Whether they do or don't is a reasonable subject of debate. But however that debate pans out, "disproportionate benefit" is no part of it. Can we please stay on topic?

            Also, can we please cut out this puerile, juvenile name-calling of total strangers? WTF is a "shitlib" anyhow? As for analogies, I'll put my SAT and LSAT results up against anybody's, anytime. This particular one is a rhetorical device intended to make a point with particular emphasis by invoking an extreme case -- judicial murder being the most extreme of all state-sponsored civilian activities.

            1. If the long-term harms of a policy change outweigh the short-term benefits, then it's not a "worthwhile policy change," as I specified. Whether they do or don't is a reasonable subject of debate. But however that debate pans out, "disproportionate benefit" is no part of it. Can we please stay on topic?

              The topic is whether or not the government should just write off over $1.7 trillion in debt, when we've been hearing arguments for decades that college graduates make more money than non-graduates.

              If they make more money, they can practice some delayed gratification and pay off those loans like adults, or demand that student loan debt be treated the same as credit card debt for bankruptcy purposes.

              Also, can we please cut out this puerile, juvenile name-calling of total strangers? WTF is a "shitlib" anyhow?

              If you can't handle strong language on an internet board, fuck off to somewhere that's friendlier to your more priggish sensibilities.

              This particular one is a rhetorical device intended to make a point with particular emphasis by invoking an extreme case -- judicial murder being the most extreme of all state-sponsored civilian activities.

              It's a stupid analogy that has no relation to the subject of the article. "Can we please stay on topic," indeed.

              1. Well, well. A step in the direction of civilized discussion beats ten steps the other direction.
                (1) You frame the issue as whether the government should write off a category of debt. The article frames it as unfairness to non-borrowers. But Warren correctly frames it as the renunciation of debts which government wrongly, for the purpose of enriching the Betsy DeVoses of the world, induced young people to incur. I share Warren's framing, though her solution is not the optimal one.
                (2) You falsely assume that those with student loan debt are all holders of real degrees from real colleges having real jobs providing real income. Based on what? Imaginary stereotyping, that's what. This plan is designed not to help those you imagine -- as an earlier comment noted, debt relief would be means-tested for taxpayer protection -- but to help those who either dropped out or earned worthless "degrees" from now-shuttered fraud shops.
                (3) Yet all of the above is moot, since we agree that making student debt dischargeable in bankruptcy is long overdue and is the correct, responsible, proportionate response to the problem. Let's go find a coalition of congresspersons ready and willing to sponsor THAT in lieu of the Warren program. Who here wouldn't be on board with that one, and why not?

                1. But Warren correctly frames it

                  Begging the question.

                  I share Warren's framing

                  What a shock.

                  What you said: You falsely assume that those with student loan debt are all holders of real degrees from real colleges having real jobs providing real income.

                  What I actually wrote:

                  The vast majority of student loan debt is with traditional universities.

                  You seem to be assuming that all student loan debt is with "for-profit" colleges, because you've been parroting that line your entire poasting career so far.

                  since we agree that making student debt dischargeable in bankruptcy is long overdue and is the correct, responsible, proportionate response to the problem.

                  But you're not making that argument, and you never did.

                2. Student loan debt IS dischargeable in bankruptcy, by the way. It's a pain in the ass, but it can be done. I simply want it to go back to being treated like normal debt, where the person declaring bankruptcy has their credit rating nerfed for several years.

                  1. Fine -- if, and only if, the debt was incurred to a genuine, accredited institution granting real degrees. If not, debt discharged with no penalty whatever.
                    All this outrage that those whom -- you project -- are "demanding" forgiveness. Student loan debtors are powerless to demand anything. Where's the outrage at "Trump University?" At Betsy DeVos on no forgiveness of real debt to fake colleges? Or must ed-fraud victims, too, succumb to the logic of the Tucker Carlson Libel Defense Position: "No reasonable person would believe my entertaining lies"?

                    1. Jesus, you're desperately flailing here.

            2. I give zero fucks about your test scores. The bottom line is that the federal government has no business canceling contracts at will. But then, they also have zero business starting a federal department that acts as a censorship board to ensure no dissent from their narrative either.

              So fuck off with your bullshit.

      2. I wonder if that really is the case anymore? Take engineering out and not sure that holds up (maybe for teachers as they are paid more than their market worth by unions).

        Colleges enriched themselves and should have some responsibility. They failed in what they sold the kid. Colleges are probably the worst form of grift out there today, bigger than BLM and the Department of Defense.

  25. I'm not sure what this article is selling. Is loan forgiveness bad because democrats are hypocrites, because rich people bad, because its blatant bribery, or because it's bad fiscal policy? All of the above?

    1. Bingo. It's a silly article, unfocused, hastily written, and ill-considered.

    2. Because it steals from people who were not party to the decision another adult made for the benefit of the other adult.

      Suppose "all of the above"

      1. "Steals?" Maybe in the imaginary abstract universe of the Ayn Rand novel, where all prior transactions, from genocides to chattel slavery to every form of dictatorship and kleptocracy, were perfectly sanitary, and everybody can choose their parents, and where people without medical care dying in the streets is merely Justice Writ Large.

        1. Odd.
          One person goes to school, and another person pays. Seems like either slavery or theft.
          This is a Libertarian site, right. Not really interested in explaining the basics of fiscal freedom to a Socialist-ideologist.

          1. In your make-believe two-dimensional linear universe, "one person goes to school, another person pays." Wrong. The one who goes to school is a taxpayer. Assuming they got a real degree and hold a real job with real earnings, they pay more than your hypothetical victim. BTW, who IS the person disadvantaged by student loan forgiveness? Not the rich ones who needed no loans. Not the low earner who pays no taxes anyhow. Meanwhile, how about the victims of Donald Trump's serial bankruptcies? Where's the caring for THOSE victims of theft? Make-believe libertarians, crony capitalists in here. Bet I was a libertarian before many of you were born.

            1. I did not bring up bankruptcy law, and it is completely irrelevant.

              Ad hominum is the argument of desperation.

              Clearly the people disadvantaged by loan forgiveness are the people paying for the loans. There is nothing complicated about this. No 4-D chess, or other distracting slight of hand. Just like forcing another person to pay for one's night at the movies. Inappropriate. College is an investment. Don't make it if it won't pay back. If you are dumb enough to buy a Film degree, live with it. Just like one lives with an investment in Netflix today.

              So the difference between this and buying a lemon car is exactly what?

              This discussion has devolved into an person angry with a bad decision they made, flailing at the world to absolve them. Live with it and move on.

              1. Now do people who busted their ass and good top grades and entered law school (which everyone agreed was a dependable solid career choice) around 2004-06 and graduated between 2007-2010 and also passed the bar but couldn’t make any money because everything crashed hard in 2008 and they still have 6 figure debt 12 years later because the first few years of interest ballooned so hard that they now owe more than they borrowed even after making payments for years.

                Were they dreamers taking silly classes? Should they have “known better” and been able to foresee the crash? Imagine telling your parents in 2006 “I think in two years the economy will completely tank so I am getting out of law school now before I incur more debt.” You’d have been laughed out of the room and chastised.

                1. Oh, shut the fuck up. Just because you went in to six figures of debt at some TTT law school doesn't mean you deserve to have your student loan debt paid off.

                  Law school has been fucking expensive for decades, and any law grad worth a shit is able to find work.

                  I finished grad school right after the dotcom bubble popped. Guess what I did in ten years? Paid off all my fucking student loans.

                  1. Not a TTT law school, and I was top 7% LSAT and top third of my class and got the highest grade in my most specific class, and passed the bar first try in a hard state. So maybe you should take down the vitriol a notch.

                    “Grad school” generally does not equal law school and is decidedly less competitive on average, so sorry, swing and a miss there trying to flame me.

                    “Any law school grad worth a salt is able to find work” was demonstrably not true in 2008-10. I’m not going to do the reading for you but it’s well-documented if you care to Google it.

            2. The victims of loan forgiveness are the people who forewent loans. I used no loans when getting my higher education. I forewent additional schooling because it didn't make financial sense to do so. Why should be people who made irresponsible decisions be absolved of their bad decision making on my dollar while I am given nothing for my prudent budgeting except a larger bill?

            3. You show little indication of being a libertarian other than your claim, so your bet will garner you the silence and derision you richly deserve. As for your harping on about 'enriching DeVos' and the 'victims of trump's serial bankruptcies,' you'll find that delusional bias isn't held in high esteem here, except by the paid shills.

            4. So in your mind, since I having saved 50 to 100 dollars for my daughter's education for 18 years such that she needed no loans are rich and not victims. But the same middle class from next door that didn't save and took out student loans now deserves to not have to save a 50 to 100 every month because they were poor planners.

  26. So, if they cancel the debt, what happens with next year's students? Are they going to continue to work two jobs to pay for their education like my wife and I did?
    I suspect a great many will assume that any loans they take out will not need to be repaid, so cost will be no object.
    Why live in a dorm, or a drafty old house with six room mates? Get a nice loft in the city. Really, live the high life. It is all free from now on.
    With thrift being out of style, I am sure the colleges will raise their rates to match.

    1. See below. Make colleges back stop 50% of federal loans. Tuition would drop like a rock

      1. Any incentive to drive education costs down gets my vote. Right now the prices are to the moon due to Dept of Ed meddling, and there are zero incentives for colleges to really compete for their customers. Therefore, the cost just grows. Paying it off, will just relieve the pressure and the cost will grow again.

        Your idea of assigning the dept to the colleges is a great incentive. Make it forgivable... by the colleges.

    2. Plus the universities are going to start jacking tuition up again. Democrats are so fucking stupid.

  27. First end the problem by simply having colleges who accept federal insured student loans to back stop 50% of them. Tuition will drop like a rock and all these "bs" departments and degrees will disappear overnight (getting rid of "woke" majors is great byproduct). And the college might actually try and place the kid.

    I disagree with the author..if the kid is a higher earner why can't they pay their loan? Here is the truth (I have two kids in the early 20's so I have personal experience). Unless you have an engineering or comp sci degree, business or a "vocational" type like nurse, your 4-year degree in whatever is not worth the paper it is printed on. (Exceptions include family contacts or if you go to an Ivy where you can be a gender studies major and you get a gig at Goldman or McKinsey). For 99% of kids if you are not majoring in engineering, comp sci and maybe business..your degree was a bad investment. One of my kids went to a "highly ranked" and expense private eastern college..three years out he still can't get a job in his field (Film Production) and is heavily in debt. The other went to a small university that has to compete with state schools and finished with a BS in Business, a job and no debt.

    The scum bags in all of this are colleges and the politicians who knew that federal insured loans would only enrich the academics. The educational complex is right up there with the military industrial and racial grifter complex as totally corrupt. The DOJ should sue colleges for fraud.

    1. If you (or he) thought a degree in Film Production (art, poly sci, literature, et al) was going to be pay off, fraud is not the problem.

      Someone needs to compile an disseminate this information (I suspect they already do), and people can make decisions on their investments. It is that simple.

      https://www.glassdoor.com/blog/50-highest-paying-college-majors/

      https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2021/10/11/new-study-college-degree-carries-big-earnings-premium-but-other-factors-matter-too/?sh=5da8366335cd

      1. They have the most humongous spreadsheet, which breaks it down by university and degree. Used it to convince my son to go for "Computer Engineering" vs "Computer and Information Sciences", although we already knew the "Engineering" in the title opened all sort of doors.

        However, notice a buttload of degrees, even at state colleges, have a negative lifetime ROI. [There is an article showing in nauseating detail where the author got the figures, and what methodology he used, but I can't be arsed to look that up for you.]

    2. Think you're right. Liberal arts & humanities are moving online along with merchandise sales. And Big Ed will dry up by one means or another, whether or not colleges must lend at their own risk. Just another dated paradigm.

      1. Getting trained in such areas as the technical arts ie; welding, computer tech, A&P(airframe and powerplant) or even as a commercial pilot will become much more in demand as those currently holding those jobs are retiring.
        There is going to be a huge demand for those with technical skills versus those with useless degrees in social studies.

  28. If we're not going to get our loans paid back, we should immediately stop issuing them.

  29. Liawatha meet Desperado.

  30. Will good ol' lunchpail Joe from Scranton, PA be implementing a student loan reparations program?
    You know, for those of us who suffered from historical student loan payments?

  31. What the article doesn't state is how all this debt came about in the first place.
    Bill Clinton. This is the clown who pushed through the easy money programs so that anybody could attend the indoctrination school of choice. So as it stands now, America's colleges and universities have become nothing more than for profit diploma mills handing out degrees is useless subjects as Wymyn's Studies, Gender Studies what ever other greivance related rubbish some professor whose office is in the basement of faculty building.
    So now there exists a generation of young people highly in debt with little to no employment prospects because they have NO marketable skills and a worthless piece of paper that means nothing to an employer.
    Mean while the young person who decides instead to attend a tech or vocational school or local community college that actually provides an education and training that can practically guarantee employment. Training in HVAC, plumbing, welding, auto tech, training in aircraft maintenance(A&P), even training new pilots are proving to be more valuable than one with a degree in some grievance studies. That's for sure.
    I read about it over and over. A young person gets trained in some skill such as welding and then cane barely keep up with the demand. While he or she is making $80,000+ /year the poor sap with the useless degree is either unemployable or only making minimum.
    America is running out of plumbers, electricians, HVAC techs and other skilled trades. That's where the biggest rewards will be as companies seeking to attract those with the training and skills will be forced to offer higher wages.

  32. Ms. Warren - canceling student debt is government spending. If you want it to happen, get one of your leftist house mates to draft the law, pass it there, send it to the Senate, pass it there, and then have the President sign it.

    That is how government money is properly spent in this country! Not by Presidential fiat!

  33. Fuck that. They signed a contract, they can damn well pay it off on their own.

    1. Not so simple. On Feb. 17, DOE relieved $415 million in student loan "contracts" to fraudulent "for-profit universities" such as DeVry. Surely you're not saying -- as Betsy DeVry said when she was Sec of Ed -- that victims of student loan fraud should be forced to pony up anyhow? If Donald Trump can take a dozen shell-corporation bankruptcies, leaving investors, financers, and legions of carpenters, roofers, painters, etc. in the lurch, paying nothing, why should student loan debtors in a jam not get equal protection of bankruptcy law? I'll tell you why. Because we live in a country where, for 200+ years, ordinary folk have subsidized the wealthy.

    2. And where does the government derive the authority to unilaterally cancel contracts? Not that it matters to a bunch of lawless Marxists.

      1. The government is a party to these contracts and, as a creditor, can forgive debts any time. Republican administrations too have forgiven debts of all kinds. Moreover, a Marxist believes in a dictatorship with public ownership of the means of production. American liberals hate both ideas. So calling them Marxists only shows your stupidity.

  34. Lieawatha is hoping that if she can nag Biden into this, her fellow lefturds will forgive her for stealing a professor job from a real Indian.

    -jcr

  35. Sure--right after I finish repaying my $200,000 "not being black tax," they're going to forgive student loans. Yeah--right before I burn the entire world down to the ground.

    1. Can you explain what is meant by your "$200,000 not being black tax?" I'm not black, and I'm paying no tax that could be vaguely so described. If this is this somehow related to student loan forgiveness, can please elaborate? "Burning the entire world down to the ground" seems a bit extreme, whatever the provocation. The only person I know who is seriously discussing "burning the world to the ground," and who actually controls the means of doing so, is Vladimir Putin.

  36. If there is to be relief from college debt, a better way to do this is to make college loan debt dischargeable in bankruptcy. Such relief would only apply to those whose debt was crushing. Thus, relief would apply only to those who really need it. Furthermore, such relief would be more equitable: the Biden proposal only applies to federal loans, whereas persons suffering under the weight of debt to private lenders would not be eligible for relief under that proposal. And it would treat student loan debt just like any other debt.

  37. Re this article's claim: "Much of the backlash to proposals for student debt relief is based on a false premise: the belief that Americans who have gone to college are, in general, members of the economic elite.

    The falsity of this proposition is obvious for those who were exploited by predatory for-profit institutions that encouraged them to go into debt to get more or less worthless credentials. The same applies to those who took on educational debt but never managed to get a degree — not a small group. In fact, around 40 percent of student loan borrowers never finish their education.

    But even among those who make it through, a college degree is hardly a guarantee of economic success. And I’m not sure how widely that reality is understood." -- Paul Krugman, today

    1. Get off this kick, you moron. The vast majority of student loans are held by those who went to regular colleges, not the degree mills.

      The fact you take Mr. Housing Bubble himself seriously shows what a fucking useless parrot you actually are.

  38. I have reservations about our first native American senator. DOH!

    1. She want heap wampum for student loan bail out!

  39. Remember Biden models himself after FDR; “BIG government is back”. A Roosevelt re-election tactic. Give aways prior to elections to gain votes. As I recall this worked for his presidential campaigns but not it worked for congress. After all these are presidential “decrees” not legislative actions.

  40. After all Elizabeth Warren is working class folk. https://youtu.be/sWehvtOL_VI

  41. This is going to be a boom for colleges! "Hey, go ahead and enroll here and get a degree! You can later whine and your debt will be forgiven (transferred to the taxpayers--who didn't go to college)! Plus, since a failing grade may hurt your feelings, you will receive a passing grade in all classes. No need to even go to class or turn in any work"

    Free degrees for everyone! You are going to love your new doctor, attorney, or accountant. They graduated from the best schools. The best, I say!

  42. No one should pay federal taxes until the house, senate, executive, and supreme court, submit to random drug tests, twice weekly. For public review mind you.

    Btw folks, there's two ways to stop a trump 2024 campaign.

    The demonicrats should get onboard for this easy, right?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.