The Biden Administration May Illegally Cancel Student Debt This Week, Lawsuit Claims
A coalition of Republican-led states allege that Education Secretary Miguel Cardona has directed loan servicers to start forgiving student debt as soon as this week.

A new lawsuit filed by a coalition of Republican-led states has alleged that the Biden administration has illegally directed student loan servicers to begin canceling student loans. The suit, filed Tuesday, claims that Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona is attempting to enforce new changes to the federal student loan program that have yet to be finalized. If true, these actions would constitute a brazen violation of federal law—and show just how desperate the Biden administration is to enact mass student loan forgiveness, despite legal constraints.
"This is the third time the Secretary has unlawfully tried to mass cancel hundreds of billions of dollars in loans," the complaint reads. "Courts stopped him the first two times, when he tried to do so openly. So now he is trying to do so through cloak and dagger."
Joe Biden has spent much of his presidency pushing mass student loan forgiveness. In 2022, he announced an ambitious plan for one-time student debt forgiveness of up to $20,000 per borrower. That plan was struck down at the Supreme Court. Another key element of Biden's forgiveness agenda—an income-driven repayment plan called the SAVE plan that would have allowed many borrowers to receive forgiveness after paying back only a small portion of their loans—was blocked by several federal courts in June and July.
However, these setbacks haven't seemed to deter the Education Department. In April, Cardona released a set of proposed rules that would effectively usher in mass student loan forgiveness. The rules would target specific groups for forgiveness: borrowers whose balances have grown due to unpaid interest, borrowers who would be eligible for forgiveness had they enrolled in an income-driven repayment program like SAVE, borrowers who have been in repayment for decades, borrowers experiencing "hardship," and borrowers who enrolled in "low-financial value" programs.
According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, these changes are estimated to cost nearly $150 billion—though the cost would likely be much higher if the SAVE plan remains blocked.
The lawsuit claims that Cardona has already instructed loan servicers to imminently forgive student loans under these new rules. The problem is that the rules are yet to be finalized—and federal law requires that changes like these not be implemented for at least 60 days.
The suing states—Missouri, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, North Dakota, Arkansas, and Ohio—have "obtained documents proving that the Secretary is implementing this plan without publication and has been planning to do so since May," the suit reads. "Those documents instruct third-party organizations that service federal loans to begin canceling hundreds of billions of dollars beginning potentially this week."
The complaint theorized that this approach was due to the particularly weak nature of this latest attempt at student loan forgiveness, especially given that, after a battery of legal setbacks, it's highly unlikely that these rules would survive a legal challenge.
"All this explains why the Secretary now is trying to quietly rush this rule out too quickly for anybody to sue," the complaint reads, adding that states are not able to reverse loan forgiveness once it's been handed out. Therefore "it does not matter how many rules he breaks in the process, so long as he forgives billions of dollars in debt before the courts stop him."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
It is so weird they keep at this.
Nobody is for it. Well, nobody that wouldn't vote D no matter what is for it, though even a lot of team D is against it.
And they keep at it. I just don't get why this is the hill to die on.
Anyone who wants to get rid of student loans – and thus college cost inflation – should be 100% in favor of this loan forgiveness. Just combine the two.
Get rid of all new student loans – and forgive all existing ones. It could have been done over the summer. It’s the ONLY way to get rid of student loans and college inflation. It is the student loans that are the problem. And if R's were ever interested in doing anything other than blaming someone else for their moral failings, it would have been done a long time ago
Only a Marxist could claim that forgiving trillions in current student loan debt balances out not allowing future student loan debt.
Tell you what, bub: you loan me $100K, and then you can let that slide at the same time you promise to not loan me anything more.
The fucking FACT is that you cannot eliminate future student loans without forgiving past student loans. Because those past student loans and future student loans change the cost of college – but the loans are fixed. PERIOD. When future student loans are eliminated, the cost of college will drop by a lot. But the debt on past college will remain stuck at those past high college costs - forever. All you are doing is trying to blame, basically kids, for their moral failings in being unable to predict a job market multiple years into the future. The ENTIRE purpose of student loans is to enslave kids to an obscene debt load at the beginning of their career. To extract rent on all future income before they can possibly understand what that means. YOU don’t understand what that means.
Or maybe you do. You R assholes are the very definition of slavers. And you want to enslave your own children. Which makes perfect sense since you assholes also continually support a monstrous public debt load on those same kids instead of EVER cutting spending. You people are evil and your economic ‘philosophy’ (including this shit rag of a website) is more rotten than a week old used diaper.
You don’t even WANT to understand the economics of what is happening here – with student loan impact on college costs or debt enslavement or loan forgiveness or the college cost v future income v future income tax rates game. This is all just some constipated morality lesson to you.
Fuck you. The fed can right now say no more loans, and you need to honor your contract
Yeah yeah yeah. Another R who has no fucking idea what they are actually saying. No concept of actual consequences of that. Because - as is always the case - you people are just yapping like a drunk on a bar stool. You have no interest in seeing anything done - or understanding anything at all. You just want to pose like you have virtue. It's total bullshit.
Lots of retarded statist projection by the resident authoritarian here.
Yes, yapping about a "need" to forgive all student loan debts (not mortgage debts, mind you, just student loans) will, somehow, NOT lead to massive inflation of college pricing.
You seem to miss my main point - which is that all new student loans stop. No more. The entire higher education system has to reorganize in order to fund itself in other ways than student loans.
Forgiving the existing student loans is just the way to clear the ledger so in Thomas Jefferson's words The earth belongs to the living. The dead have no rights or powers over it. Existing student loans are paying for dead parrots.
You seem to be a statist pile of lefty shit. FOAD, asshole.
J, buddy, I know you’ve heard this before, but…
Everything Is So Terrible And Unfair!!!!!
Haha. What a doosh.
Retarded Marxists make all sorts of retarded defenses for their retarded ideas. Like.... not letting unvaccinated people into hospitals if hospitals are slightly busy.
Are you going to pay me back the money I paid for my college education? For the loan I took out and paid back in full?
Seriously, people like you are why this country is circling the drain.
Your argument is a giant appeal to emotion and should be treated as such. The fact is that the people signing loans are legally adults. If these adults didn't understand that loans are expected to be repaid, then they were idiots. If these adults thought "Hey, I'll get a degree in Thinly Veiled Marxism and make a million dollars a year" then they are also idiots.
Stop teaching kids to be idiots. Stop rewarding kids for being idiots. You might wind up with fewer idiots.
How have you gotten dumber?
It's just his troll. He's trying to get a reaction, so say the dumbest, most illogical and contrary shit possible and people will just rage and argue.
It's the comment section version of the enshittification of the internet.
His 50th vaccine.
Coming out in favor of ex post facto law that would shutter a wide range of financial institutions is hilarious.
The FedGov is there to enforce contract law, not destroy it.
Shutter a wide range of institutions? 91% of all student loans are federal govt. 7% are private – 88% for undergraduate not graduate (11%).
Private student loans are not a real business. Before loans took over higher education - private loans were very small 'character' loans. Not now. Many of them are tied to for-profit scam schools or other kickback schemes and/or base their business model on the ‘can’t discharge in bankruptcy’ flaw (which equates to a roughly 7% credit-risk-free return for the lender). Further – many of the loans are international students (who can’t get federal loans). In the past, they didn’t even discharge the debt in the event of death or disability – but demanded full immediate repayment in the event of death of the co-signer. The largest of them (Sallie Mae) was once a federal government-sponsored enterprise – and others are basically state govt affiliated (MOHELA, etc).
Thanks Obama! One of your favorite presidents.
Is there an abuse of the constitution by Dems you won't endorse?
It’s because some of the people actually running this administration would personally benefit.
The government workers in DC love it. That's who they are targeting.
Millions of rich, elite Democratic party voters want welfare too. If you’re going to pay for the poors cigarettes, why not $100k for some trust-fund baby’s Gender Studies diploma?
Hey, baristas can't afford purple hair dye, piercings, and tattoos, let alone cigarettes, AND make student loan payments. Don't you want to support small businesses?
The problem with saying it costs money is that they aren't paying the debt now. Sure, some it might get paid back. But I'm guessing most won't.
We need actual reform, making the colleges partially liable for the debt.
Maybe 15% will end up getting paid in full. Of course, almost all student loan borrowers have paid back far more than they borrowed already. Their debt becomes impossible to pay off due to compounding interest and penalties.
This doesn’t even make sense.
I’d agree that if you took everyone’s loan payments and put it into a pile, the sum of principals gets covered or nearly covered in any given year, but the idea that “almost all” can pay off 100% of the principal in 10 yrs. but can’t pay off the 6% or whatever penalties on the 7% interest doesn’t make sense and even makes the ‘student loan crisis’ seem like more of a ‘I don’t wanna!’ tantrum.
Maybe you mean the majority of degree holders pay off the principal and the number of degree holders who won’t pay off the principal is fractional, but that’s not “almost all” borrowers. Even at that, you’re still playing some rather dishonest “penalties on unpaid principal balances don’t count as ‘fair’ debt.” or "money is completely fungible but only in the way *I* say it is." games.
A common tactic in student loans is to offer a sucker's solution. Behind on you loans ? Don't worry, we can work with you ... by setting your status to "current" but capitalizing interest.
Hmm. I paid off every loan I ever signed onto. And I don't even have a college degree. Searching for a nice way to say this... Nothing comes to mind so I'll just leave you with this. These assholes can fuck right off.
I paid off every loan I ever signed onto.
That's great—for you. But, if your life had gone differently and you had ended up in growing debt that you would never be able to pay off, you could have declared bankruptcy and made a fresh start. Let's give student loan borrowers the same opportunity.
Gee, it's terrible to be a constant victim, isn't it? The world is just not fair! Everybody's out to get you, right?
Pay your bills and STFU, asshole.
If someone can't pay their mortgage, the house is foreclosed on. If someone can't pay their car loan, the car gets repossessed. If someone can't pay their student loans, their degree should be revoked, and they should no longer be able to claim attendance to that school on a resume without being liable for fraud.
Sound fair?
No. If someone is bankrupt in part because of unpayable student loans, their case should be handled the same as bankruptcy pleas for any other reason. Bankruptcy is not the same thing as a foreclosure or a repossession.
You realize you don't have to take that deal, right? What is with you and your demands that nobody be accountable for their actions?
capitalizing interest
Hey retard, when I say the statement "almost all student loan borrowers have paid back far more than they borrowed" can't be mathematically true 'tricks' to increase the amount of the principal borrowed don't make it more true or believable.
19% of people in their 40's have an average of $45,000 in student loan debt. 13% of people in their 50's have an average of $45,000 in student loan debt. 11% of people in their 60's and older have an average of $31,000 in debt.
This is a rentier scam. It is not 'paying for school'. It is paying rent on the supposed 'lifetime earning difference of people who have a degree'. THAT is what schools have been basing their price increases on for decades. It is why colleges have a shit ton of professors in garbage disciplines that bamboozle students into believing that their courses will help students earn an income just like other professors in the class next door. It is why companies no longer pay for much training (individual courses) and can instead force students to pay for their own training (degree). Why those for-profit scams popped up to extract future rent among the laid-off.
How many of those people have a 40k car?
Amazing how people can pay a car off in 5 to 7 years but are incapable of paying off student loans.
What the fuck is wrong with you and your ignorance excuse making?
19% of people in their 40’s have an average of $45,000 in student loan debt. 13% of people in their 50’s have an average of $45,000 in student loan debt. 11% of people in their 60’s and older have an average of $31,000 in debt.
*cough*Bullshit*cough* Maybe 19% of students who took loans and attended school out of state for $50,000 a year and majored in Gender/Race Studies.
"19% of people in their 40’s have an average of $45,000 in student loan debt. 13% of people in their 50’s have an average of $45,000 in student loan debt. 11% of people in their 60’s and older have an average of $31,000 in debt."
Sounds like a raging case of "your problem".
I paid my loans. It is bullshit that I get fucked so some cunt who "will make so much more than a non-college grad will make" demands fucking non-grads pay their debts.
Fuck them. And fuck you, you regressive taxation supporting dolt.
I paid my loans. It is bullshit that I get fucked
If you are honest, your complaint is two elements.
One (the unstated element) is ‘when I went to school it was so expensive that I needed to take out a loan to pay for it’
Two is ‘and I paid off my loan’
The first element is entirely a consequence of student loans. Eliminate student loans and the price of college will drop so much that loans/debt will no longer be needed to purchase it. They are not all going to go out of business just because there is no source of created money (debt) to pay for the product. Rather they will start charging the cost of delivering the product rather than charging rent on purported future income that you receive by taking those courses. THAT is the important part of what I am saying. And THAT is what you are implicitly objecting to. The notion that the price of college will drop so massively.
It is exactly the same rationale that is used for house prices. No one wants house prices to drop. I took out a mortgage when house prices were high and I’m paying off my mortgage. So fuck you and your lower house prices where I can’t even fully pay off my mortgage if I sell now. Hey presto – every time there is an economic threat of lower house prices, everyone wants the Fed to manipulate the lending system and the price of money so that house prices will never drop.
Your numbers are nonsense.
I relied on Forbes for student loan data, and the US Census Bureau for US age demographics. Sadly, the age ranges don't line up, but we can make some easy conclusions.
US Census Bureau shows that 16.8% of the population is 65+, or about 56 million people. There's about 4 million people per year-cohort in the 62-64 age range. Only 2.4 million people age 62+ carry student loan debt. That means <4% of the population age 62+ carries any student loan debt. (~3.5%)
So no, 11% of people 60+ do not carry an average of $31k in debt. (And the difference in age ranges in our data can't explain it. You'd need to find about 5 million more borrowers in the '60' and '61' age-cohorts, but there's only 6.4 million borrowers in the 50-61 age range. If 5 million of them are '60' or '61', your '50s' numbers are *way* off.)
But let's assume your averages are true for a moment. How does someone in their 60s carry a $31k student loan balance?
Your representation that this is rent on lifetime earnings assumes that they went to college when they were ~20, so ~1984 at the latest.
Average undergrad tuition, room, and board in 1984 was ~$4500. So they should have started with ~$18,000 in loans. And somehow, despite inflation shrinking the comparative value of that loan over time relative to their wages, they've managed to nearly double what they owe? This doesn't pass the smell test.
My guess is several things are going on here which make your narrative less persuasive. The people still carrying student loan debt in their 60s likely fall into at least one of a couple categories:
1. Didn't just take out loans for an undergraduate degree.
2. Took out loans much more recently for some sort of educational program
3. Are extending loan repayment to their benefit (loan payments are less than interest and dividends on their stock portfolio, say).
It's likely also the case that the median balance is less than the average balance - a few individuals with exceptionally high loan balances are likely dragging the average up. (This is true for every age range. The median student loan debt is much lower than the average student loan debt).
I don't feel much pity for a Doctor in his 60s who borrowed 150k+ for an MD and makes 6 figures, but who has taken his time paying off his loan for sound financial reasons.
I assume that someone in their 50's or 60's carrying student loan debt had to pay for school after they got laid off at some point. That this is a second slug of debt incurred decades after the first one at 18-23. At which point - there aren't many years of income to pay the loan and much higher likelihood of continuing layoffs and zero corporate funding of education for that older age group.
This sort of continuing education - funded uniquely in the US by student loans - really messes up the economic notions put forward by Michael Spence (who won a Nobel in 2001 for it). Basically - employers no longer pay for employees education. They just look for credentials - the more expensive and recent the better. Employees pay for education/credentials as a way to signal to prospective employers that they are smart and hard working and such. But since they don't understand that this game is not about skills but about signalling - they get surprised mid-career when they have to get more schooling because they got laid off (which means the older schooling ceased to provide value).
In some ways, this reinforces myths about aging/work as well. I've been hearing for decades - and believed - that the solution for SS is just 'raise the eligibility age'. Well that's all fine and dandy - but for a ton of jobs (and for that older age group as a whole) - employers ain't going to hire people for longer. Once many of them get laid off - they fall WAY off the pay scale and into low wage land. All of a sudden people in that older age group find that their skills are relics, they can't incur yet more debt to get more skills, employers will see them as both a flight risk and a larger medical expense.
Any evidence that's what's happening, vs. it being people who got expensive post-secondary education with good and continuing wage potential like Lawyers and Doctors who attended top schools?
Because the problem is that average debt isn't very good data for telling us what's actually going on, especially when most of that debt is held by very few of those debtors. (median << mean, which is a notable feature of student loan debt.)
Are we pretending future and present value of money doesn't exist?
Are we pretending the situation we find ourselves in doesn't exist, and we can wave a magic wand and make all student loan borrowers able to service their loans?
Are we pretending that everyone is a pathetic whiner like you?
Are we pretending the situation we find ourselves in doesn’t exist
I'm not pretending. The situation you described above *cannot* exist whether you find yourself there or not. Whether waving a magic wand at it will resolve it is a "you problem" not a "Common reality we all exist in." problem.
The fact of the matter is, most student loan borrowers *are* servicing their debt, and the already low frequency of default has gotten significantly lower over the last 5 years. (We're talking <1 million people who are in default on their student loans, and another ~half million who are a little behind but not in default yet. Of over 46 million borrowers.)
We need actual reform
More yappy bullshit from R's.
I'm glad you've gone full dem statist. Sit in the corner with shrike, sarc, and Jeff.
Nobody yappy-er than you around here, j. All you do is whine and cry.
Actual reform = seizing the entire endowments of the universities and providing zero federal funding to them ever again.
We need to end the subsidies for university, that will check the prices of college back to what's marketable and feasible.
They keep trying to cancel what's left of my student loan debt, I keep trying to pay it. And if I had been ALLOWED to pay it during the pandemic, I'd already be done.
There is a bill going through Congress right now tondo that. Guess which party Is against it?
https://thefederalist.com/2024/09/02/congress-should-make-universities-pay-for-handing-out-useless-degrees/
Abolish the department of education.
Transfer loan collections to the Treasury, and just drop the rest of it.
Completely.
At this point, accept some loss and sell the student loan debts to private collection companies. And maybe some to Vinny.
So many borrowers are so hopelessly under water that private collection companies wouldn't be interested.
And us responsible people should pay for their intentional actions.
Have you seen the studies of what people did when student loans were forgiven? They went immediately back into debt buying shit to replace those payments.
Fuck off.
I'm good with violating Libertarian principles here and forcing a sale of the debt to the originating Universities and let them deal with some of the consequences of what they unleashed on society.
I agree. And process the student loan administrators at universities for fraud. It is their actual legal duty to make sure loans go only to specific expenses. But they encourage max loan amounts without tracking where it is spent.
So weird seeing the Biden DoJ go after For Profit colleges for useless degrees, but then bail out public and private colleges for useless degrees.
It has been happening continuously throughout his administration. I've seen the letters telling people the administration wiped their student debt. The SC decisions might have paused or slowed the rate of the actions, but this administration has been actively defying Supreme Court decisions the whole time.
But I've been told by true libertarians here that Joe recognizes the constitution.
Make student loans dischargable under bankruptcy. That will solve most of the problem without resorting to extraordinary measures.
This is correct.
Or they could work it off in a lithium mine. Seems fair to me.
This is false as the loans have no collateral. Economic illiteracy is real.
These dumb kids wouldn't get the loans if not backed by government to not be dispersed in bankruptcy.
If you want this system make Universities the guarantors.
I've seen no one here suggest that they "want this system".
Make student loans dischargable under bankruptcy.
Since the enactment of the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 the Federal Government, via the Department of Education, has made virtually all student loans. Making these loans dis-chargeable in bankruptcy, is effectively loan forgiveness, and forcing taxpayers who did not take out the loans to pay for them, with the minor inconvenience that the borrower can’t get a credit card for 7 years.
The student borrowed the money, not me. The student can pay it back, not me.
But most of them can't pay it back—or, rather, they can't pay off what they currently owe, with compounded interest and penalties added. Nearly all student loan debtors pay back the principal that they borrowed.
Fuck you. Pay your bills, asshole.
Fuck you. Pay your bills.
It's time to (illegally) cancel the Department of Education!
Why (illegally)? Are we all democrats here?
Just pass legislation that eliminates it. In its entirety.
Impossible.
The moderate Biden promised the most transparent administration ever.
A question nobody has asked is why is the government counting on the
slave laborindentured servitude of its young population to pay billions of dollars of revenue to keep itself afloat ? And why do conservatives want to keep doing it ? Isn’t the standing mode of thought in Ivory Tower politics to keep doing something , no matter how harmful it is, as long as it is profitable ? … so yank the profitability out from under it and watch the whole thing collapse like a house of cards.Fuck off. Sign a contract, e.g. a loan agreement, be an honorable adult (not a liberal) and fulfill your side of the deal.
For most student loan debtors, that's just not going to happen because they aren't going to earn the money. Treat them like any other debtors and allow them to discharge the debt through bankruptcy.
The government is perfectly willing to let private citizens lose their investments to bankruptcy but they're way too smart and greedy to include the government in that scheme.
No. They weren't acquired like any other loan. Tell the universities to pay them off or face theft charges for selling fraudulent degrees in place of valuable degrees. If a used car salesman sold a Yugo claiming it was a Cadillac, isn't that theft by fraud?
So people with college degrees don't earn money? Wow. Maybe they should have checked into that before they signed the note.
Some people with degrees earn good money. Some don't. Some who go to college get degrees, some don't. No one who is a teenage high school graduate is competent to make life decisions of such import.
But the ones who earn good money get the same debt forgiveness as the ones who don't. And the taxpayers cover it all. That seem fair to you?
No, that would not be fair, which is why I have repeatedly suggested that the loans be made dischargeable under bankruptcy. Let a judge look at the evidence and determine if the debtor can afford to continue servicing the loans, like with any other debt. And bear in mind that the taxpayers are made whole as soon as the principal is paid off, which most borrowers do. "Forgiving" compounded interest and penalties is just foregoing a future revenue source, not subsidizing the original amount borrowed.
Fuck you. Pay your bills, asshole.
Stop being retarded. These students wouldn't get these loans if not for being subsidized and backed by the feds. Private companies wouldn't guarantee the loans if not for these causes.
Have you ever taken a simple economics course?
But they did get the loans, and now we have to deal with the current situation.
"Have you ever taken a simple economics course?"
Yes, as a freshman, and then additional courses up to 300-level business law. Why do you ask?
"For most student loan debtors, that’s just not going to happen because they aren’t going to earn the money..."
In which case, do not borrow more than you can repay, steaming pile of lefty shit.
If a corporation on Wall Street can declare bankruptcy and get a clean slate , why can't Joe Plebian on Main Street ?
If the government is handing out corporate bailouts for billions / trillions of dollars, why isn't it handing out citizen bailouts for thousands ?
Either way it goes, pick a side ; but "austerity for thee, yet corporate socialism/communism for me (and my cronies)" is unacceptable.
If a corporation on Wall Street can declare bankruptcy and get a clean slate , why can’t Joe Plebian on Main Street ?
When a corporation on Wall Street declares bankruptcy and gets a clean late, the bond holders who made the conscious decision to loan the money take the hit.
When Joe Plebian on Main Street declares bankruptcy and has his student loan, issued by the federal government, get a clean slate, the taxpayer, who made no such conscious decision to loan the money, take the hit and get to pay for it.
If the government is handing out corporate bailouts for billions / trillions of dollars, why isn’t it handing out citizen bailouts for thousands ?
I have a better option: Nobody gets a taxpayer funded bailout.
The decision to make the student loans was made by the elected representatives of the taxpayers. The taxpayers could have voted them out in favor of representatives who wouldn't do that. The taxpayers are not innocent victims.
What utter ignorance. Voters don't vote on who gets the loan or what degree is qualifies for dumbass.
They vote for the representatives who make those decisions, and are therefore ultimately responsible.
Were you born a lying ignoramus, or have you spent years learning to be one?
They vote for the representatives who make those decisions, and are therefore ultimately responsible.
No elected representatives (or senators) are involved in the loan decision process. They may have voted to approve programs or someshit that another FedGov bureaucracy manages, but they are not involved in the individual decisions to approve or deny student loans. Unelected bureaucrats and government employees are making those decisions.
Yes, they voted to approve the programs. They could vote to end them. The voters could choose representatives who would do that. That's the point.
Tell is you know nothing about bankruptcy without telling us.
When a corporation goes bankrupt their assets are dispersed to debt holders dumbass. If a corporation is high risk, they won't get the loans. Their assets are the collateral.
This is not true of student loans retard.
That's why we shouldn't extend any more government student loans. But we did in the past, and now have to deal with the current situation. Wishing we hadn't done that is not helpful.
Tell is you know nothing about bankruptcy without telling us.
When a corporation goes bankrupt their assets are dispersed to debt holders dumbass.
I sure hope this wasn't directed at me, because while a lot of corporate bonds/debt is secured by some kind of asset, there can also be unsecured bond/debt holders and they are usually left holding the bag, along with the existing equity holders, when I corporation goes bankrupt and there also multiple types of corporate bankruptcy, including
Re-organization, where equity holders are wiped out and the debt holders, more or less, get ownership of the re-organized company.
Liquidation, where the equity holders are wiped out, the assets sold and the debt holders paid out based on the proceeds of the liquidation, often at rates less than $1 for $1, especially as you move down the hierarchy of the types of debt holders.
So, yes, corporate lenders can be left holding the bag, and they should as they made the informed decision to lend the money to the corporation/business.
"why is the government counting on the slave labor indentured servitude of its young population to pay billions of dollars of revenue to keep itself afloat"
I thought that you guys were importing millions of illegals to be your slaves?
And how does paying off some trust fund baby's Harvard Degree help?
All you guys are doing is giving yourselves a giant payoff.
Why is the government doing loans? Obama. It was one means to "pay" for Obamacare.
As to why we keep doing it, we shouldn't we should stop issuing new loans and seize endowments to pay for the loans academia created and now demands be forgiven.
Who forced these kids to take out huge loans dumdum?
Yes, they were kids. Dumb kids. Who were under extreme pressure to get a college education, convinced they faced a lifetime in the working poor if they didn't. Who were subjected to high pressure sales tactics from schools and "schools" who were using them to get that government money. No, that shouldn't have been done, but it was. Now, we need to clean up that mess. All student borrowers paying off their notes in full is not on the table. Most cannot. You can hold your breath until you die if you like, but that doesn't solve anything.
Poor, poor, VD! Stupid shit and shilling for stupid shits.
Fuck you; pay your bills.
Fuck Joe Biden, his cabinet, and that joy woman. Hell, fuck all Democrats.
Then get a series of penicillin shots?
"Hell, fuck all Democrats."
This is exactly what Sarcs been hoping for.
Yeah that's just some crazy ass shit right there. But thank god that sweet FAFSA cash is still rolling in. Right Emma? Right Emma!?!
Fear not. The looter Kleptocracy will still kick in your door, shoot your dog, confiscate your home, vehicle and bank account over plant leaves, right? If the economy collapses, that's just theory! And if someone you know dies of drug mislabeling, birth control banned by Christian National socialism or is stabbed or shot for Allah while legally disarmed to please the Kleptocracy, at least that's better than voting libertarian and going on record as having the guts to go after what you want, right? Vote lesser looter INSTEAD of freedom.
Sometimes you need a strongman.
Counter proposal:
Seize the endowments.
Joe Biden is a Tyrant!
Biden also raped his daughter, which I hear is also illegal... Unless there's a d next to your name
Enter a repeat of history.
That day Hitler ruled that he himself was above and beyond the nations laws. (Case #2; Case #1 being censorship)
You can't take the totalitarianism/authoritarianism out of the [Na]tional So[zi]alist; but you might persuade the Nazi out of a person.
and show just how desperate the Biden administration is to enact mass student loan forgiveness
Correction: desperate the Biden/Kamala administration is to buy votes by crippling the economy worse than it already has.
Perhaps we should let them completely collapse the economy? I'm not sure that whatever takes power after a collapse would be better and fear that it could be much worse.
We'll be finding out. It's too late to avoid going over the cliff.