Chas_P, on 2022-August-28, 18:54, said:
LZ Granderson writing for the LA Times makes the argument that people in Arizona should be responsible to help people in Kentucky recover from devastating flooding. I agree with him. The people in Kentucky had no choice about being flooded. He then goes on to ask, "But what of the effect of having 45 million borrowers grappling with $1.6 trillion in student loan debt? What of the societal and fiscal cost of those millions of Americans stymied in their futures?" The difference, in my mind, is that those 45 million borrowers had a choice, unlike the people in Kentucky who had no choice about getting flooded. The 45 million chose to take out a loan and "loan" means "loan"; I "lend" you some money, I expect you to pay me back....with interest. I, like Ken, am a great believer in higher education. But what about the guy or gal who went to trade school and learned to be an electrician, carpenter, plumber, hospice nurse, is now earning an honest living but is now expected to pay for those who got a college degree in liberal arts and is now an intern at the White House? And what about those who took out college loans and actually repaid them? The whole scheme reeks of politics (vote-buying) in my opinion. And it sets an awful precedent. What's next? You take out a home mortgage or automobile loan that you can't repay and the government says, "Don't worry about it; you made a bad decision, but we've got your back."? I think it stinks.
You do understand that a whole bunch of folks who owe college debt went to trade schools right?
And a whole bunch of those trade schools - places like DeVry "University" engaged in outright predatory behavior?
They saddled their students with enormous amounts of debt, less than a third of their students ended with degrees, and those degrees are pretty much worthless.
I readily agree that the higher education system in the US needs enormous reform. And a very big part of this is helping people make better decisions about whether or not to take on large amounts of debt. (I was lucky growing up. I had a strong family with two college educated parents who were able to help me through this process)
I see nothing wrong with providing relief to those in very real need.
Can I nit pick about some elements of the plan?
Sure
Are there ways in which there might have been more selective targeting?
Yeap.
Am I going to get aggrieved because things are a bit rough around the edges?
Nope