Unless they put pretty low income caps on forgiveness eligibility, this is a bad idea. It would be a massive wealth transfer to the already well-off.

I think it would backfire politically too. Most student loan debt is from graduate degree seekers. They aren't the ones Dems need to be courting.


https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/27/administration-signals-student-loan-forgiveness-decision-may-come-soon.html

"The highest-income 40 percent of households (those with incomes above $74,000) owe almost 60 percent of the outstanding education debt and make almost three-quarters of the payments. The lowest-income 40 percent of households hold just under 20 percent of the outstanding debt and make only 10 percent of the payments. It should be no surprise that higher-income households owe more student debt than others. Students from higher-income households are more likely to go to college in the first place. And workers with a college or graduate degree earn substantially more in the labor market than those who never went to college."

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/10/09/who-owes-the-most-in-student-loans-new-data-from-the-fed/

Let's not pretend that a household income of $74,000 means these people are wealthy, at all, by any means.

They're doing fine. But having loans, especially those approaching or exceeding the six-figure mark, on a $74,000 annual salary, is pretty limiting and in some cases, crippling.


>"The highest-income 40 percent of households (those with
>incomes above $74,000) owe almost 60 percent of the
>outstanding education debt and make almost three-quarters of
>the payments. The lowest-income 40 percent of households hold
>just under 20 percent of the outstanding debt and make only 10
>percent of the payments. It should be no surprise that
>higher-income households owe more student debt than others.
>Students from higher-income households are more likely to go
>to college in the first place. And workers with a college or
>graduate degree earn substantially more in the labor market
>than those who never went to college."
>
>https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/10/09/who-owes-the-most-in-student-loans-new-data-from-the-fed/

The people who need help the most benefit very little

"The lowest-income 40 percent of households hold just under 20 percent of the outstanding debt and make only 10 percent of the payments"

... that article is painting $74,000 as "well off," when it isn't.

Add people who make $74,000 and below (and probably even a little bit higher than $74k) to the figure you cited, and now we've got much more accurately labeled data points.

and if i had to start paying 300-400 a month in loans, it's gonna be a burden FOR SURE.

shit, my RENT just went up $400 a month and somehow we got "lucky" cuz other people in our complex got increases of $700-1000.

we are by NO MEANS well off. so, please President Biden, send that relief MY way.

and if these loans kick in or one of us loses a gig (wife is going thru some bull right now) it puts us right back to working poor.

I mean.. “we just got money” - Mos Def

is because we both work regular jobs and i'm a sole proprietor in another w/ relatively low overhead. so i'm already hustling my ass off just to be here. if i'm not working, i'm working.

but my sole proprietor stuff? that shit could be random AF. last year i did 34K in revenue. this year i might do 20, who knows.

if I wasn't doing my side hustle? that rent increase itself would have hurt us BAD. we'd make it but it wouldn't be relaxing.

And Im not a donkey, mule, or jackass

Dems don't need the suburbs ?

Even if it were true that the majority of loan holders are upper class or already-wealthy people (it's not, even just per the below quote from the article you cited), "massive wealth transfer" isn't a term that would apply to this situation at all.

But anyway here's the quote from your article:
"Around 70% of relief from a theoretical $50,000 in student debt forgiveness would go to those in middle-income and low-income neighborhoods, according to a recent study by The Federal Reserve Bank of New York."


>Unless they put pretty low income caps on forgiveness
>eligibility, this is a bad idea. It would be a massive wealth
>transfer to the already well-off.
>
>I think it would backfire politically too. Most student loan
>debt is from graduate degree seekers. They aren't the ones
>Dems need to be courting.
>
>
>https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/27/administration-signals-student-loan-forgiveness-decision-may-come-soon.html

It shows that upper income benefit disproportionately. Upper income make up 25% of the population, but get 30% of the benefit. Middle and low income make up 75% of the population, but get 70% of the benefits.


>
>But anyway here's the quote from your article:
>"Around 70% of relief from a theoretical $50,000 in student
>debt forgiveness would go to those in middle-income and
>low-income neighborhoods, according to a recent study by The
>Federal Reserve Bank of New York."
>
>

It doesn't apply to this convo.

What you're referring to is who would *benefit* from this theoretical policy, which you accurately labeled in this response.

I'm picking nits but I think it's important because a "wealth transfer" is what happened during the pandemic w/billionaires vs. the rest of us. This is/would not be that, and not even close. So we shouldn't flippantly conflate the two.

I should preface this by saying, I used to be a financial aid director, in a previous career.

The statistics you see about student loan debt and who has it are all correct. What you don’t see it who is actually making monthly payments, and for how much. Even before the pandemic, no more than 50% of federal student loans were ever in repayment status. This means that a lot of the poor people who get fleeced by for-profit schools are not actively paying their loans. That means poor people, in general are not repaying their loans.

Debt forgiveness does provide a minor benefit to people who are not in repayment, but it does not change their material conditions. They have absolutely no more money to put towards their basic needs. If we forgave the debt of a working-class person making $125 payments loan forgiveness, it would make their life slightly less burdensome, but would not make that much of a change to their material conditions. However, if you give a young professional couple loan forgiveness, we’re talking about easily an extra $1500 in their bank account every month. This would dramatically increase America’s wealth inequality, and probably be the largest driver of gentrification this country has seen

Also take into account those that didn't go to college and their place on the income distribution. What are they getting?

To sum up, people with the most debt tend to be more highly educated (i.e. graduate and professional degrees), have higher incomes, and have the ability to repay. So let's give them the most money.

Sprinkle everyone else with some crumbs (or nothing at all).

Sounds like the Trump tax cuts, student loan edition

no.. just no.

you have a weird definition of wealth

Dude then cited $74,000 as the income level he considered "well off" which is ... welp.

I mean again, I'm not scoffing at $74k in a vacuum. But to lump people @ that income level with *actual* wealthy people is hilarious.

will it cover all student loans? would there be a distinction in the type of school you went to? what about loans the didn't come from the feds? what about the age of the loan?

I paid mine off in March. Gave them the last 19k that I owed. Happy it's behind me now and not handcuffing my income anymore.

Forgive upwards of 330K counting interest and people might be inclined to vote for Crime Bill Biden.

Mainly because as far as I can tell, the president doesn't have the authority to cancel school loans. Even if he does try it with an EO, it'll just get clogged up in the courts before it's overturned by our very conservative supreme court.

Instead use that political capital to modify the system of school loans, put a cap on the max amount entities can charge in interest and fees (both public and private but esp private), and force those very loud mouthed senators to write legislation for school loan forgiveness that'll actually pass a legal challenge.

(also for the record I'm not against school loan forgiveness, but I am against performative gestures that will do nothing but get overturned in court and give Republicans yet another talking point to use against Democrats)

While I support cancelling student loans, in the big picture it's just a bandaid that doesn't accomplish anything in terms of the root of the problem, which you described. I agree with everything you said in the quote below.


>Instead use that political capital to modify the system of
>school loans, put a cap on the max amount entities can charge
>in interest and fees (both public and private but esp
>private), and force those very loud mouthed senators to write
>legislation for school loan forgiveness that'll actually pass
>a legal challenge.
>
>(also for the record I'm not against school loan forgiveness,
>but I am against performative gestures that will do nothing
>but get overturned in court and give Republicans yet another
>talking point to use against Democrats)

would i love it happen? sure, especially on a personal level and for people who are in way worse situations than i am - where it would literally change their lives.

do i think it'll actually happen? seems doubtful unless Biden can do it w/out Congress which i'm not sure he can.

and, like you said, there's still issues plaguing our college/university systems when it comes to this stuff that doing this won't fix, unless it's part of some sweeping legislation that addresses those issues as well - which sort of leads me back to "as long as Congress isn't involved" cuz those guys are pretty much ASSHOLES and don't want to help anyone but themselves and their donors.

Most reasonable post in this.


A lot of folks haven't thought this through. You nailed the coming legal challenges, etc.


This will also backfire politically, imo. What about people with mortgage debt, small business debt, school debt that will start to accrue moving forward, people who just paid off their loans, etc etc.

Could potentially make inflation worse if the economy overheats.

And no matter what is forgiven, there will be some who will say its not enough.


Add to that the timing of this stunt...and the likelihood it won't go through anyway?

Nah.


Should spend this capital on something like permanent child tax credit, paid leave, or something.

Of course I'm happy that people will get loans paid and a lot of people will be helped by this, particularly black people.

Not convinced that it'll stand up to any court cases, particularly if it ends up in the Supreme Court.

As much as something like this should stimulate Dems, I'm not sure that it won't stimulate conservatives. They have a huugggee chip on their shoulders about entitlements, especially those that outsizedly help black people.

I guess we'll see in the coming months. I'll try to be positive, but it's hard not to be cognizant of the challenges something like this will face.

>Mainly because as far as I can tell, the president doesn't
>have the authority to cancel school loans. Even if he does try
>it with an EO, it'll just get clogged up in the courts before
>it's overturned by our very conservative supreme court.
>
>Instead use that political capital to modify the system of
>school loans, put a cap on the max amount entities can charge
>in interest and fees (both public and private but esp
>private), and force those very loud mouthed senators to write
>legislation for school loan forgiveness that'll actually pass
>a legal challenge.
>
>(also for the record I'm not against school loan forgiveness,
>but I am against performative gestures that will do nothing
>but get overturned in court and give Republicans yet another
>talking point to use against Democrats)

There we go...performative gestures are not my jam either. I get that politics is a sad, sick, and silly game sometimes, but throwing some lazy shit out just to check a box and say 'hey! I tried to throw ya'll some money! Vote for us again! We're all still rich and we're coming to help you someday!' ain't what's up. And really, it isn't exactly better than 'hey, keep making us rich and it will eventually make it down to yo broke azz..trust us! And Jesus!'.

And if you don't tackle at least parts of the system that creates these situations, then we're still not good to go and this is just going to happen again and again and again and again.

OR

Even worse, college will firmly go back to this thing that lots of people are priced out of. And the exact scumbags will go right on back to sending their kids to the very schools that they are trying to convince people to stop going to right the hell now. I can't believe their believers fall for this: 'yeah, college sux cuz it makes people hate white people and Jesus, and it doesn't have any mystique anymore' (because a lot of people who aren't wight now have degrees so wight people in power can't use lack of degree as an excuse to not hire women, black folks, and/or 'not straight' people).

SC voted against school loans and placed the onus on Congress to pass laws to cancel loans.

We'll see how heavily this will hurt Biden in the election.

put it out there and say we tried, but republicans...

i don't think Joe is that cynical, but i can see strategists or pelosi types floating it as a way to motivate turnout among people who aren't likely to vote repub, but likely to stay home.

"Biden ran on this and these moderate dems are not getting my vote if they can't keep campaign promises etc."

I've heard it verbatim

The timing is absolutely suspect but as you know, people's memories are ridiculously short

Given how poorly Biden is polling (which is crazy to me) they need a kick in the ass

can't afford a red wave right now

because joe's numbers are abysmal, and i assume approval for dems as a whole are similar or worse.

you're not gonna bring over the lets go brandon brigade, so your only real hope is higher turnout from disaffected lefties.

but will they actually try to do this in hopes it will happen, or put it out there then blame the usual manchin/sinema/repubs when it doesn't happen.. or keep it in the air as a way of saying it's never gonna happen if we get a red wave in november?

That was everyone else.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

He never said forgiveness outright

You don't have to tell me, you have to tell the hoards of disgruntled city employees in NYC lol

>"Biden ran on this and these moderate dems are not getting my
>vote if they can't keep campaign promises etc."
>
>I've heard it verbatim
>
>The timing is absolutely suspect but as you know, people's
>memories are ridiculously short
>
>Given how poorly Biden is polling (which is crazy to me) they
>need a kick in the ass

First, the country is completely fucked in general and never been this partisan. Anyone's ceiling after a honeymoon phase is probably 45-47% tops these days. Tops.

Second, the Biden admin has not done well on basically anything. Voting rights, abortion, immigration, COVID, climate change, inflation, etc. Etc etc.

Dems (rightfully) made a case of how terrible the Trump admin was, culminating with 1-6 being (rightfully) called a terrorist attack.

Then proceeded to...*checks notes*....respond by having Lin Manuel kick some rhymes.

Nah.

Literally every major thing Democrats said was awful under Trump is STILL HAPPENING.

You can't do that cycle after cycle.

They haven't succeeded on any of the major challenges that were placed in front of them. Challenges they themselves sold as important not even 2 years ago.

Not only are they giant hypocrites, but

If you care about any of the stuff I listed, you're probably disappointed.


If you are moderate or whatever, you are pissed that something like BBB was even considered.


In trying to half step everything to not piss off their donors....but keep the progressives engaged, etc...they have managed to piss everyone off.


Infrastructure isn't going to have an impact beyond the contractors for years. There is a reason some GOP were on board.


The approval numbers are not all that surprising to me and shouldn't be to anyone when you are honest about this situation.

>can't afford a red wave right now

The red wave is coming. Its done man.

Give him a chance/break

>put it out there and say we tried, but republicans...
>
>i don't think Joe is that cynical, but i can see strategists
>or pelosi types floating it as a way to motivate turnout among
>people who aren't likely to vote repub, but likely to stay
>home.

It cannot, and should not come before free public university tuition. The problem with student loan forgiveness, by itself, is that is not universal and also regressive. No one who has already paid their student loans benefits, but more importantly, no one who has yet to go to school received any benefits. Every high school senior in this country will be in the same position that current student loan debt holders are currently in. It is far more sensible to pay forward the next generation. Free college also benefits those people who elected not to go to college because they could not afford it . It can also benefit people who currently have student loan debt, because they could also go back to school. It is a truly universal benefit, as opposed to a bail out of college educated millennials and Gen Xers.

no shade but I don’t understand why the first thing people say is “but what about the broke people?”

Yeah, they will remain broke.. sorry, its the truth.

because this aint about making broke people unbroke. Its about giving working poor and middle class folk some relief which will stimulate the economy.

not providing student loan relief aint making none of those broke folk richer..

so how about we chill on the faux concern for broke folk

Why use student loans as the vehicle to get money in people's hands? Especially when we know the living conditions of most people with student loan debt is vastly greater than others in this country?

It doesn't make any sense.

At my socioeconomic status, If I found myself with an extra $500/mo, it wouldn’t go into the economy. I would just increase my savings. The same is true for most of my peers. All of our needs are met, as are most of our wants.

it will happen

While you say $500 will go to savings every month that shit is a lie..

you will spend some of that money.

And if it is, we could accomplish economic stimulus by just sending money to everybody. The goal is to deal with the unaffordability of higher education, and student loan forgiveness would do nothing but funnel money to a self-selecting population made up of one or two generations.

it wasn't enough.... though it will be far more than any other President has ever offered.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

when a new batch of folks with student loan debt emerges?

Are we just going to continue to forgive debt over and over making taking on student loans a means to going to college for free?

Or are the ones who get their loans forgiven this go around just the lucky bunch?

At what point do we acknowledge the real problem is the cost of college getting completely out of hand and giving 18-22 year olds tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of dollars of debt a terrible idea?

There's no point in focusing on an effect when the real effort should be addressing a completely fixable cause.

Debt forgiveness has to come with free tuition

Full disclosure: I graduated with ~$30k in student loan debt in 2010. Between tuition/room and board my school after scholarships cost about $80K total. Every penny saved through jobs and coops before and throughout college went to school and I was lucky enough to have parents who could contribute. I certainly was one of the lucky ones, though my choice of a more expensive education was simply due to knowing I was getting a degree (Computer Science) that would afford me the ability to easily pay them off. I paid them off within 3 years. My friends who I graduated with weren't so lucky and carried anywhere from $50k-$100k+ of debt, but still, they got degrees that afforded them above-average incomes and none of them are struggling to pay.

I'm not on some "I paid them off, you should to" soap box, but I don't have much sympathy for people who decided it was a good idea to go to private school in a HCOL city for a degree that wasn't worth close to that money. (Sidenote: should schools start charging different amounts for different credits? a humanities class with low return on investment shouldn't cost the same as an engineering class)

The student loan debt situation was a bubble/crisis when I graduated over a decade ago and kids are *still* making these dumb decisions knowing that (and parents are letting them). One of my best friend's little sister decided to go to an uber expensive private school in NYC (Fordham, I think?) knowing damn well she was going to take on debt she's *never* be able to afford to pay off unless she got SUPER lucky. But she laughs it off and is probably out screaming for student loan forgiveness with a "you should feel sorry for me" attitude knowing full damn sure she knew what she was getting herself into.

I'm sorry for folks who are being anchored by their student loan debt but what's done is done, we can focus on you *after* we figure out a way to temper the rising costs of state college and stop allowing kids to fuck up their future.

Lets say debt is forgiven this summer...what about people starting school in the fall?

Its crazy that THIS is the lefty fantasy the Biden admin is going to work on...actually it is the most likely to backfire so now that I think about it it makes complete sense.

Much less big, important things. Fixing the effect of a broken college system seems like the most ambitious thing we're capable of. So, the point is much simpler than you're permitting here:

It would improve a huge amount of people's lives, at little cost, and it's something that can be done easily.

>It would improve a huge amount of people's lives, at little
>cost, and it's something that can be done easily.

that discuss this in greater detail? I probably won't read them soon to be honest because I'm slowly reading The Power Broker right now, but college/university costs constantly increasing is a fairly interesting subject.

so even if you declare bankruptcy you still owe. The educational lending system in our country is a form of indentured servitude. So even if that degree you bought turns out to be bullshit, or markets shift and the skills are no longer in demand. Fuck you pay me, or just go die.

The penalties and fines for default and late payment can compound and stack up pretty quickly and actually become a bigger part of your debt than the actual money/principle than you borrowed.

That also creates a perverse incentive for schools to increase tuition and financial institutions to loan money to whoever the fuck because it's virtually impossible to default.

So i'm very much in favor of forgiving debt (even though i said fuck it and paid off my own debt recently), but to your point without some serious structural changes we'll be back in teh same spot 10 years from now. My first move would be to make it easy to erase college loan debt through bankruptcy.

Is because it’s an unsecured debt that was never credit-based. With the exception of medical debt, which is incurred because they legally have to give you medical treatment, every other form of debt comes from someone deeming you credit-worthy and/or securing collateral. Back when they were issuing FFEL loans, which were a public private partnership, lenders lenders would not have stayed in the business if they didn’t have that guarantee.

and saddles them with a lifetime of debt that can never be escaped ever. And it creates a situation where tuition costs can spike with zero risk to the institutions charging higher tuition and subsequently those debts become even riskier. And all of the burden is being carried by people least capable of carrying that risk. It's fucked.

while wiping away these loans..

and I would be mad af if I just sent a lump sum to pay them off tho.. lol

What if you never went to college, but you have a solid blue collar job? You're subsidizing people who went to college, even though you couldn't or chose not to. How is that fair?

Cause the debt forgiveness will fall on the average taxpayer. Trust and believe that money will be paid by someone. Working class citizens who have just made their way in life and will never see the type of money college grads do will obviously (and rightfully) be like WTF?
______________________________________________________________________________

"To Each His Reach"

but.....

Fuck aliens.

Why should I have to subsidize their cash aid, food stamps, and medical coverage?

Hell, why should my tax dollars go to pay for the staff who administer those programs?

And then, they do drugs and get their kids put into foster care.

Why should I have to pay to subsidize those foster care payments and social worker salaries to deal with the consequences of someone else’s decision?

Why should I have to pay for people who receive low cost housing through section 8?

The typical college graduate has a higher standard of living than people who usual receive assistance.

And those with graduate degrees (i.e. those who would benefit the most from forgiveness) definitely have a much higher standard of living on average.

>The typical college graduate has a higher standard of living
>than people who usual receive assistance.

So?

>And those with graduate degrees (i.e. those who would benefit
>the most from forgiveness) definitely have a much higher
>standard of living on average.

And?

Higher is relative.

Higher doesn’t mean balling, and higher can- and often does- still mean paycheck to paycheck existence, with little room to break out of it.

Nothing you said constitutes a strong argument against loan forgiveness.

...

from whatever group isn't directly benefiting.

and there's enough easily manipulated people who would still find a way to be mad about even something everyone including themself would get.


That's a very effective tool for ensuring nothing ever improves

for folks applying for PSLF under TEPSLF

Education, Military, and nonprofit workers paying regularly for decades
should have had loans forgiven since the Obama admin plan was in place…
but goalposts were moved and interest doubled and payments were not counted properly
(there is a great ep of Patriot Act on netflix dedicated to this among other coverage over the years)

obviously this is part of why people do not believe in gov programs

without giving up too much personal info, I can say that TEPSLF is real and works for those
with fed loans who have been paying 10+ years

sorry for those with other types of loans, maybe that is what Biden is working on

with respect to tuition going forward, of course there are affordable education models
like California’s and New York’s public university systems but they can be just as
competitive as the “ivy” options… and parents with money can always use 529 plans

parents/students without - hope for employment that is not based on the label of the institution but skills and job performance, covid changed what work means

and if you are one of the few people of color at your job or there are few women at your job you have to realize not everyone with a loan-funded degree is getting the opportunity
to pay it off

"I'm not considering $50,000 in debt reduction," Biden said during a speech in the Roosevelt Room at the White House. "But I am in the process of taking a hard look at whether or not there will be additional debt forgiveness. I'll have an answer on that in the next couple of weeks."

The president's comments are likely to disappoint advocates and some Democrats, including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York, who've been pushing him to cancel $50,000 or more per borrower.



https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/28/biden-says-hes-not-considering-50000-in-student-loan-forgiveness-.html

and call it a day. At this point the inconsistent messaging and policy strategy of the democrats gonna be a problem in the midterms.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/04/education-department-forgives-loans-of-over-110000-in-public-service-.html

Temporary changes to the troubled Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program have resulted in more than 110,000 people with student debt getting around $6.8 billion in relief.

The new figures from the U.S. Department of Education show how many borrowers are benefiting from the policy fixes announced by the Biden administration last year. Hundreds of thousands more could still see their debt discharged as part of the effort. The average amount of debt reduction per borrower is close to $60,000, according to the Education Department.

The public service loan forgiveness was signed into law by then-President George W. Bush in 2007, and allows nonprofit and government employees to have their federal student loans canceled after 10 years, or 120 payments. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau estimates that one-quarter of American workers could be eligible.

However, the program has been plagued by problems, making people who actually get the relief a rarity.

Borrowers often believe they're paying their way to loan cancellation only to discover at some point in the process that they don't qualify, usually for confusing technical reasons. Lenders have been blamed for misleading borrowers and botching their timelines.

The reforms under the Biden administration include reassessing borrowers' timelines and counting some payments that were previously ineligible because, say, a borrower was unwittingly in a nonqualifying repayment plan.

How can I benefit from the new rules?
To begin, you want to act quickly, said Mark Kantrowitz, a higher education expert.

That's because the Biden administration's new rules for public service loan forgiveness are slated to expire on Oct. 31.

If you have either a Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) or a Federal Perkins Loan, which don't normally count for public service loan forgiveness but now temporarily do, you'll need to consolidate those into direct loans with your servicer.

Hey that Sallie Mae loan you got, well it's actually a Navient loan now, and the program you've been paying into for 10 years has a 99% rejection rate anyways

Good luck

who said she will have loans until she dies... LOL! so one way or the other taxpayer are going to pay for it anyway.

Since it says "up to $10,000", I wonder if it phases out as income increases? I hope so.



https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/biden-cancel-10k-federal-student-loan-debt-certain-borrowers-20k-pell-rcna42422

WASHINGTON — The Biden administration announced Wednesday that it will cancel up to $10,000 in student debt for borrowers who earn $125,000 a year or less and up to $20,000 for recipients of Pell Grants.

Couples who earn $250,000 a year or less and file taxes jointly will also qualify for cancellation of up to $10,000 for each partner.

The administration is also extending the payment pause on federal student loans for a final time through Dec. 31.

In a tweet, President Joe Biden said that he would provide further details on the announcement Wednesday afternoon.

Biden had come under criticism from student debt relief advocates for waiting until just days before the Aug. 31 deadline to announce an extension of the loan payment moratorium, leaving millions of borrowers unclear about whether they would have to start making payments for the first time in more than two years.

Although the president made good on his campaign promise to address student debt, his announcement Wednesday fell short of the $50,000 in cancellation that some Democrats were calling for.

The narrow scope of the cancellation is also likely to frustrate student debt relief advocates who were pushing for broader action. Some advocates warned that means testing would make implementation more challenging and have argued that extending the payment pause for a few months would not be enough time to make adjustments to borrowers' balances.

“While this announcement is a major win for many, it is important to stress that $10,000 will leave many others still crushed by debt, and important details will determine who has access to much-needed relief,” said Natalia Abrams, the president and founder of the Student Debt Crisis Center.

Roughly 45 million Americans have student debt. The Federal Reserve estimated that in the second quarter of 2022, Americans owed more than $1.7 trillion in student loans.

While most student borrowers owe less than $20,000, people with smaller amounts of debt often have a harder time paying it off because they might not have completed their degree or have degrees with lower earning power compared to those with more debt.

Studies also show that students of color are more likely to take on student debt and struggle disproportionately to pay it back. The highest default rates are among students who attended for-profit institutions.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/08/24/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-student-loan-relief-for-borrowers-who-need-it-most/

going through it now for details

As stated above, this all started because of the Pandemic. He's able to seize on it and help the situation.

you know damn well Allstah exist

>you know damn well Allstah exist

(but you got a good point lol)

We would hurt the fuck up in 2008 and that would’ve offer seriously relief for people.

Not buying that excuse.

Obama could’ve moved on this.

i gotta give it to this admin.

theyre so slick with the legislation and anticipating legal challenges against it.

earlier in the admin they had relief targeted specifically to black farmers (who trump gave the shaft when he was handing out welfare to the agri industry). thats been held up and challenged in court by repubs for 'racial bias' (and you know where the far right supreme court majority is gonna come down).

this student loan relief plan is basically upping the relief to black people (who carry a disproportionate amount of debt to white folks)...because black people are disproportionately receiving pell grant assistance. so directing more funds to black people while also having a higher chance of passing legal muster.

just like in the climate part of the last landmark...there was language tucked in their that essentially nullified the supreme courts decision circumventing the supreme courts decision striking down the authority of the epa to regulate carbon as a green house gas.
https://twitter.com/chrisconry/status/1562192521865768961

pretty nifty for the few of us who still care about actual policy lol.

And a requirement that you cant pay more than 5% of your income per month.

i dont see how anyone can complain about this not being enough except for the folks that just wanted a handout and their entire debt wiped out for a loan they signed to voluntarily.

It says unpaid interest, most of my payment goes to interest so I don't know if they're going to force payments to go to the principal instead.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/08/24/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-student-loan-relief-for-borrowers-who-need-it-most/

Cover the borrower’s unpaid monthly interest, so that unlike other existing income-driven repayment plans, no borrower’s loan balance will grow as long as they make their monthly payments—even when that monthly payment is $0 because their income is low.

--


I'm pretty sure I have pell grants but my federal loans are privately held??? I know I didn't qualify for the pause on payments so I'm expecting I won't qualify for the forgiveness but fingers crossed. Trying to log into my student loan site and its noping me out lol

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fa74eiAWAAELV6t?format=jpg&name=medium

cant take advantage of the relief lol.

its mostly white 'progressives' on twitter tho.

in any other admin...a president simply pausing payments for a full 2 years would have been lauded by everyone...including the performative left.

but now they have to constantly take the most extreme positions just to pretend dems arent 'doing anything'.

I mean people are fucking complaining about $10,000!!!! WTF! CEO of the NAACP already has an op-ed about it not being enough.

The complaints *are* mainly the whites, but the Nina Turner wing of party is also on that shit. It's so selfish and embarrassing and entitled.

I know what you mean though

but the people I talk to that are BIPOC, lefty kind of say it's the bare minimum he can do since he promised it during his campaign (he didn't promise outright)

The 'any other admin would have been lauded for less' take you may be able to attribute to the pressure from progressives and the 'performative left' that has made the scope of what an administration should be doing to work towards a more financially secure future for young working people so much larger over the last five years or so.

Just being honest I defend Biden a lot to progressives too but your language sounds a little reactionary

the same folks who praise their 'progressive' allies for pushing the dem party further left on medicare for all...

...despite the fact dems overperformed in 2 election cycles running *away* from medicare for all, obamacare has increased in popularity and was the key litmus test for dem swing elections, medicare for all (when the actual policy is detailed) has dropped in popularity, and it has virtually disappeared from the mainstream policy debate/discussion table.

this is what i mean by the performative left. its all cherrypicked hypothetical opinion polls, twitter threads, thinkpieces, tiktok rants, etc...and very little credence to the actual human beings who are benefiting, voting, etc (2020 presidential primary was clear evidence of this).

and the 'reactionary' folks would actually the be folks who are perpetually angry at the reforms taking place by the large majority/mainstream (pretty much the textbook definition of reactionary lol). like the folks pissed about student debt relief, the largest climate investment in history, bipartisan gun law, etc (whether they come from the left or right).

'they didnt go far enough' is inherently a reactionary position as much as 'they went too far'.

Medicare 4 all has remained popular for a damn decade with between 59% and 53% of people supporting it. Opposition to it has been been between 47% and 42%. Even at it's lowest, it's very popular.

It's insane that someone who does nothing but spam the board with Biden/DNC cheerleading using tweets as his evidence (look at how many tweets in this very thread), has an issue with leftist tweets.

And you and everyone else knows the 2020 Dem primaries were about Trump. Biden was seen as the candidate with the best chance of beating him, nothing more. It certainly wasn't his fucking policy positions that won a damn thing.

When Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi (obv so revered by leftists) are saying it's not enough, it's clearly just the perpetually angry contrarians being "perfomative"

but couldnt win a single county in michigan.

medicare for all is popular but nobody who needs to win a competitive race is running on it.

make it make sense baby bro.

why is the narrative so divergent from the reality?

why has there been such little self reflection and readjustment from the people who have continually fallen short of their agenda?

as far as the other shit...

when i post tweets...theyre listing facts/stats...you should try looking at them from time to time.

and if 2020 was all about who people thought could beat trump...then what happened in 2018 when every seat (gov, senate, house) that flipped from red to blue...but 1...was won by people *not* running on medicare for all?

once again...how come the math aint mathing fam?

https://jacobin.com/2022/08/new-york-socialists-victory-local-elections-dsa/

in terms of relief amount and popularity.

https://twitter.com/NavigatorSurvey/status/1562467572691308545

youll notice who is more in favor of relief and who more relief is targeted towards.

its a reminder that these dem admins tend to be populated with smart folks who largely know what theyre doing.

republicans really think their path to electoral success is running against popular policies like this...but it only really plays in their right wing bubble.

and im legit surprised at the amount of people saying this cancels out all or most of their debt, or they appreciate for whatever theyre getting, etc.

i thought there would be more complaining about it didnt go far enough, trump would have done more (always weird to see black people saying this), biden just wants our votes, etc.

i think as much as the debate rages on social media from people 30,000 feet above an issue...the actual people on the ground who are most affected by it are truly grateful for any help they can get.

https://twitter.com/SenatorRomney/status/1562473525335961600

thats basically conservative code for him knowing it will help the working class.

90% of debt cancellation benefits will go to people making less than $75k.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fa8dS_4WAAQU788?format=jpg&name=small

Dying @ "bribe for voters." That's kinda the point isn't it. Do popular things that help people/voters, and they'll vote for you.

What a concept !

meanwhile trump was sending out checks literally with his name and face on them like 'vote for me!' and none of these republicans had a problem with it (even the supposedly 'good' ones).

Joe's all good in my Book at this point

>RE: *Logs into Navient, cancels pending payment*

They dont want folks canceling pending payments

https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/1562552892392759297

extra points for the interracial couple.

that's "you're rich."

i'm just sitting back laughing at some of this stuff.

BIG MAD.

>i'm just sitting back laughing at some of this stuff.
>
>BIG MAD.

‘Look at these people who aren’t as good as you getting stuff that you didn’t get! Ooga booga! They’re gaining on you and it’s not fair!’ And people are falling for it.

Imagine how hard rich folks of any political alignment are laughing about the average Mfer being up in arms over 10k..knowing how much money they’ve gotten out of paying into Murrica’s tax systems. And it’s a great show of manipulation to be able to easily steer people into being broken up over the idea of someone ‘getting something’ that they might not. And 10k? It’s not nothing but c’mon now!

Personally, I went to college forever ago, didn’t take on a crazy amount of debt cuz I was horrified of not being able to pay it, and I paid my shit off at least a decade ago. Also, I picked a school based heavily on cost for the same reason. I didn’t want student loans following me around until my 40s cuz fuck that. And I felt that way at 15..almost to the degree that I was okay with not going to college if it came down to it. But A Different World, decent grades/test scores, Blackness, and my parents not making a lot of money came together like Voltron and landed me a good scholarship and a student job. So I got hooked up more than well enough BEFORE college. And I tried to handle my biz to do it justice.

But I’m not gonna be broken up over 10k cuz why!? And really, if you’re screwed with student loan debt, you’re probably not 10k away from being aight.

And really, I’m most interested in future stuff. Aka how do we not end up with another generation of people with ‘fuck up your life’ amounts of student loan debt and interest?

AND

How will this 10k somehow fuck up something down the road in our silly ass political landscapes?

>
>But I’m not gonna be broken up over 10k cuz why!? And
>really, if you’re screwed with student loan debt, you’re
>probably not 10k away from being aight.
>
>And really, I’m most interested in future stuff. Aka how do
>we not end up with another generation of people with ‘fuck
>up your life’ amounts of student loan debt and interest?

Given the situation, the way the admin went about it seems right (though I wish Democrats didn't love means testing as much as they do)

Even if they put it at say 400k married it would make sense, but I don't know. I'd hate to make 130k in San Diego or somewhere and still miss out.

Politically it seems like same damage control (125k v 200k)

But my biggest question in all of this is...what happens to kids starting school this week? Or next year?


I think this is a great step...and much smarter than 100% forgiveness because that would have absolutely backfired...but the real issue is the system now and moving forward.

Having limits on paybacks is huge but I don't know if that goes far enough.

I was hoping there would be more. More money. No means testing, etc. But this country is developing a really antagonistic position towards making people's lives better so it's a relief (see what I did there) that our mostly out-of-touch and passively corrupt ruling class got their shit together and did something, kind of. If making some working people's lives somewhat better is good, so is more - obviously. And since it's possible legally, politically, and economically, declining to do it is kind of sad.

But good things are good, so the one remaining "more" is that it would be excellent to see liberals own this in a way that wasn't just to discipline their left flank. Own it to the right as well. Get Biden in a room with a teacher or a nurse or a social worker - somebody who actually makes this country *work* - and let that person tell their story of why they pursued their education. Why their career came from that. Why that career is *good* for all of us. It would be incredibly appealing and would show some willingness to address our national culture of spite. Predictably, I see a lot of people hammering Bernie Sanders here but he's excellent at this. See his 2020 campaign stop in that South Carolina town with rotten water - he barely says anything, just let's working people talk about their lives and how there are political solutions to their problems.

https://twitter.com/transscribe/status/1562469646057771009

They are fucking insufferable today. Nina Turner complaining that the relief is systematic racism despite the fact that 72% of Pell Grants borrowers are AFRICAN AMERICAN. Meaning we will receive the $20,000 in relief. Meaning AFRICAN AMERICANS benefit the MOST.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

https://nces.ed.gov/programs/raceindicators/indicator_rec.asp

"The percentage of students who received Pell Grants was highest for Black students (72 percent) and lowest for Asian (36 percent) and White (34 percent) students."

this wasn't that silly Fox News rhetoric


https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/8/24/biden-administration-to-cancel-at-least-10k-in-student-loan-debt

“Canceling $10,000 in student debt when the average white borrower is $12,000 in debt, while Black women hold on average over $52,000 isn’t just unacceptable, it’s structural racism,” said progressive activist and former Ohio state senator Nina Turner.


“Canceling $10,000 of student debt after ‘considering’ it for more than a year and a half is like waiting on hold for 6 hours only to get a 5% refund,” the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) advocacy group said on Twitter.

“If we could afford to cancel hundreds of billions in loans to business owners in their time of need, please do not tell me we can’t afford to cancel all student debt for 45 million Americans,” Senator Bernie Sanders tweeted.

Structural racism in the reasoning behind white women taking out less in student loans than black women, the systemic reasoning behind it. Forgiving nearly half of debt isn't structural racism.

Ignoring the cancelation of $20,000 in student loans for black women, because white women take out less, reeks of agenda.

Forgiving nearly half for Blacks, as white get more then that is structural racism. Similar to white women and Affirmative Action.

?

what what? (no noreaga)

It's that and the amount forgiven.

i think everyone should have ALL their shit forgiven that's just me.

but something is better than nothing which is what they could have done, so stop bitching.

and, they did do more. they gave Pell borrowers an EXTRA 10K. and Pell borrowers tend to be people on the poorer side of the spectrum so awesome, give them something more because they probably need it more.

i'm not saying there's NO good points to be made by the people critiquing, but to say THIS is somehow systematic racism feels like a BIG reach.

TO ME, the best thing they are doing is actually making the payments REASONABLE. you shouldn't be paying luxury car note payments for student loans.

You don't like it too bad. You can worship and praise crumbs all you want but that doesn't stop anyone from calling it out, when it's not enough.

Extra crumbs with a caveat is a start, it's not more.

Reinforcing systematic racism is racism. Review the Affirmative Action law history, then come back with the reach argument.

They can do way more than making payments reasonable.

lol.

have a good day.

"but something is better than nothing which is what they could have done, so stop bitching."- You

take care.

So if Biden gives less then enough it has nothing to do with racism ?

If you're saying whites getting a larger percentage of their loans relieved because they had to borrow less...THE STRUCTURAL PART IS WHITES NEEDING TO BORROW LESS.

I dont know how else to explain this to you for it to make sense

but if the student loan disparity is the result of structural racism and Biden is helping whites more than Blacks when he can do more, it is reinforcing structural racism. Like Affirmative Action and white women.

look at the PPP loans that Brady, JayZ and others received that were totally forgiven..

they could’ve done a lot more IMO.

I’ll take it tho… lol.

I'm not saying turn it down. I just believe some of the people complaining made good points. Like the examples you listed.

in PPP loans or whatever. I think he is a scumbag regardless so i havent bothered to verify whether the trending figure is accurate or not

them from the jump.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

?

grants, not that 72% of Pell grant borrowers are black. But even still, that's alot either way.

"African Americans were 22.7 percent of all Pell grant recipients. More than two-thirds of all African American Pell grant recipients also took out student loans with an average debt of $7,200."

I'd be shocked if it's above 20%.

This shit don't help the Black masses at all.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/survey-student-loan-holders-are-likely-women-people-color-rcna13962

Your logic doesnt make sense either way. This relief is targeted at student debt, therefor people that went to college. You dont look at the "black masses" you look at people who went to college. Black folks have the highest average student debt when graduating college. Therefor, it benefits the "black college masses."

successfully harnessing what was an insult and making a great, fun meme that makes Biden look good.

$10,000 is something but it should be 20K+.

3 Strikes Crime Bills Biden is trying everything to stave off the inevitable.

>$10,000 is something but it should be 20K+.
>
>3 Strikes Crime Bills Biden is trying everything to stave off
>the inevitable.

Show your work on how to get there.

On the low end closing the carried interest loophole saves $139.37875 million. That's the small estimate.

Kill the rest of the tax loopholes to add another, small estimate, $300 billion. Tax executive payments at a higher rate for even more savings.

Obviously bills have to be written and pass both houses.

Dems won't take any of these steps because they're cowards.

then Krysten Sinema's DINO bitchass came thru and ripped it back open?

She likes to pretend to be the voice of black folks.

>On the low end closing the carried interest loophole saves
>$139.37875 million. That's the small estimate.
>
>Kill the rest of the tax loopholes to add another, small
>estimate, $300 billion. Tax executive payments at a higher
>rate for even more savings.
>
>Obviously bills have to be written and pass both houses.
>
>Dems won't take any of these steps because they're cowards.

So that didn't work.

Do another and show your work.

I'm ready to tweet them to my representative.

If 72% of African Americans have or had pell grants that means 72% of African Americans get 20K in relief.

I’m just glad it’s based off last year tax returns lol

not sure if mine will qualify and can't login to see details. according to nerdwallet they might.

https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/loans/student-loans/biden-cancels-10k-in-student-debt-heres-who-gets-it

What if I have an FFEL loan?
Borrowers with Federal Family Education Loan debt owned by the government will see $10,000 in cancellation. But if your FFEL loan is commercially owned by a private company, it’s unclear if your loan will be eligible. Contact your loan servicer to determine which type of debt you have.

i know for PSFL you would need to consolidate the FFEL loans to qualify. i wonder if itll be the same deal.

https://twitter.com/whitehouse/status/1562916200866267138?s=21&t=6fCyn47O76Q_Qf9GbTfX0Q

Biden fed up, LOL.

https://twitter.com/AhmedBaba_/status/1562925969249390593?t=ZwgsZZS7cfIKf43zpbpLaQ&s=19

gotta love this shit

but these were some brilliant retorts.

I'm hoping the info divulged there will get brought up by mainstream news media sites/TV broadcasts.

Pretty wild folks in Congress get so much free government money, muchless that it benefitted members of the party that argues for smaller government.

Has both sides of the horseshoe furious right now

Totally new team.

https://www.npr.org/2022/09/29/1125923528/biden-student-loans-debt-cancellation-ffel-perkins

In a remarkable reversal that will affect the fortunes of millions of student loan borrowers, the U.S. Department of Education has quietly changed its guidance around who qualifies for President Biden's sweeping student debt relief plan.

At the center of the change are borrowers who took out federal student loans many years ago, both Perkins loans and Federal Family Education Loans. FFEL loans, issued and managed by private banks but guaranteed by the federal government, were once the mainstay of the federal student loan program until the FFEL program ended in 2010.

Today, according to federal data, more than 4 million borrowers still have commercially-held FFEL loans. Until Thursday, the department's own website advised these borrowers that they could consolidate these loans into federal Direct Loans and thereby qualify for relief under Biden's debt cancellation program.

On Thursday, though, the department quietly changed that language. The guidance now says, "As of Sept. 29, 2022, borrowers with federal student loans not held by ED cannot obtain one-time debt relief by consolidating those loans into Direct Loans."

I get the argument made by the loan holders, but I can see this turning into a firestorm

feel dumb for waiting

that said, might as well still consolidate right? why keep giving these private banks their interest payments.

out of Biden.

Fuck that POS for changing shit up.

The original poster left that part out, conveniently. Biden didn't just get up one morning and say "hey, I changed my mind."

Was this court ordered somewhere?

The idea that they had legal authority to forgive student loans without congressional authority was always somewhere between shaky and ridiculous. (From what I remember, the whole idea literally started from a Twitter thread.) And given the nature of our current supreme court even 'shaky' isn't good enough. Once the supreme court considers the program, the whole thing comes crashing down, not just this small fraction of it.

The only way they can get away with it is if nobody has standing to sue. This was a way to take away something that might have constituted standing to sue.

Note: you've been trying to push the silly idea that the Democratic party is more interested in fundraising than in delivering results. If that were the case, they would have stuck to their guns, claimed to be defenders of the people, let the SC chop the whole thing down, and then run on that through 2024 and beyond. Instead, they're taking a significant political hit to keep this 'progressive' idea afloat.

was as legally tight as possible then, no?

This is giving me BBB vibes. Where the admin initially pleasantly surprises folks with what they are driving for, then the shit is trimmed back.

Of course with BBB, we got to see the ins and outs of pure incompetence and corruption party-wide.

So you almost end up with the worst of both worlds, politically. Again, this is a very trimmed down version of that.


BBB aside, with all the time they spent deliberating this you'd think they'd have this air tight out of the gate.

I know your boy got his marching orders/tweet echo chamber notes to say "this is only 10% of borrowers!" but that still leaves a lot of folks frustrated/betrayed/etc.

A lot of people are going to respond like Legs.


>
>Note: you've been trying to push the silly idea that the
>Democratic party is more interested in fundraising than in
>delivering results. If that were the case, they would have
>stuck to their guns, claimed to be defenders of the people,
>let the SC chop the whole thing down, and then run on that
>through 2024 and beyond. Instead, they're taking a significant
>political hit to keep this 'progressive' idea afloat.

This is an unforced political hit, but you cheerleaders won't see it that way.

One of your problems (in addition to being an arrogant asshole) is that you think you know where folks are going to land on an issue because you put people in a box. Like when you were convinced I was a Bernie Bro for a loonnng time.

I've always thought student loan forgiveness was a political risk- and it doesn't do shit do address the actual problem. That said, I gave the Biden admin praise on how they did this initially...seemed like they hit the sweetspot.

They could have avoided this blowback by making it air tight upfront. They had plenty of time for that.

And if you don't think they are going to raise money off of this, I don't know what to say...

Then again, the world isn't always as neatly predictable as it is for you looking in retrospect for every possible way to fulfill your preconceived notions about who's "good" and who's "bad."

Also, interesting that you bring up BBB. You know very well that if they had started out with a more cautious bill, like the one we eventually got. You and every 'progressive' knowitall from twitter to TikTok to instagram to snapchat to The Nation would have been ranting about how they were undercutting themselves by "pre-negotiating" away everything they should have demanded from the start. We saw how that went with Obamacare and progressives are still complaining that they should have demanded more to start with so that they could be forced back to something better.

>
>was as legally tight as possible then, no?
>
>This is giving me BBB vibes. Where the admin initially
>pleasantly surprises folks with what they are driving for,
>then the shit is trimmed back.
>
>Of course with BBB, we got to see the ins and outs of pure
>incompetence and corruption party-wide.
>
>So you almost end up with the worst of both worlds,
>politically. Again, this is a very trimmed down version of
>that.

Worst of both worlds, maybe because people like you are personally invested in confirming your article of faith that the Democrats are as bad as the Republicans. No matter what they do, you will find a way to claim it was a mistake.



>BBB aside, with all the time they spent deliberating this
>you'd think they'd have this air tight out of the gate.


I think you're misunderstanding what happened here. Nobody thinks that the federal government could possibly have the authority to forgive *private* student loans. What happened here was that, entirely separate from any action from the white house, staffers in the Department of Education initially presumed that such borrowers would be able to transfer those debts to federal accounts to then be forgiven. You're right: those low- and mid-level staffers hadn't fully thought through the tax implications of this, and so they had to clarify their guidance on the website. This wasn't a change in the "bill" (there is no bill), this wasn't something outlined in any executive order. This was a technical subtlety that applies to a small fraction of the loan debt for an estimated 800,000 people, a tiny fraction of the people eligible for loan forgiveness. And many of those people already have more than $10k of government-held debt as well, so it makes essentially no difference at all for them.

Yes, this is a story that's been blown way out of proportion by a media (and media watchers like yourself) who are more obsessed with which party is "winning" and which party is "losing" than in what actually happens for those borrowers, the vast majority of whom will see absolutely no practical difference over this minor technical change.

>I know your boy got his marching orders/tweet echo chamber
>notes to say "this is only 10% of borrowers!" but that still
>leaves a lot of folks frustrated/betrayed/etc.
>
>A lot of people are going to respond like Legs.


A lot of people respond in all sorts of uninformed ways. It doesn't change the objective reality of what this executive action does for the borrowers.


>>Note: you've been trying to push the silly idea that the
>>Democratic party is more interested in fundraising than in
>>delivering results. If that were the case, they would have
>>stuck to their guns, claimed to be defenders of the people,
>>let the SC chop the whole thing down, and then run on that
>>through 2024 and beyond. Instead, they're taking a
>significant
>>political hit to keep this 'progressive' idea afloat.
>
>This is an unforced political hit, but you cheerleaders won't
>see it that way.


Don't you complain day after day after day that people won't stop talking about politics like it's a sport? I've also seen you complain many times about how Democrats were supposedly more interested in looking good losing than in actually winning. This is what psychologists call "projection."

Why are you so obsessed with "unforced political hits"? If you're wondering whether the Biden administration would like to be talking about this one month before the midterm election, then no, they wouldn't. Congrats on your masterful powers of political game theory.


>One of your problems (in addition to being an arrogant
>asshole) is that you think you know where folks are going to
>land on an issue because you put people in a box. Like when
>you were convinced I was a Bernie Bro for a loonnng time.

You absolutely were a Bernie Bro for a very loonnng time, and you really still are in a lot of ways. I don't know or care whether you ever supported the guy (you did say about a thousand times, though, that there should be "real primaries," which was a code phrase back then for "progressive activists should be given more weight than Democratic voters"). The same naive sense that there are no truly difficult problems in politics, just insufficiently dedicated leaders, infects your political thinking just as much as it does Bernie's or any one of his Bro's.


>I've always thought student loan forgiveness was a political
>risk- and it doesn't do shit do address the actual problem.
>That said, I gave the Biden admin praise on how they did this
>initially...seemed like they hit the sweetspot.

And they still hit that sweetspot. Again, practically speaking, this change affects very few people, and it affects most of them minimally.

>They could have avoided this blowback by making it air tight
>upfront. They had plenty of time for that.

Honestly, speaking in my vaunted role as an arrogant asshole, you really haven't thought this through at all. Nothing that the white house ever explicitly promised has changed by one iota. Now, they are simply clarifying these extremely minor technical points before these trials hit a judge. You're talking like they cut the program by 30% or something. Because fundraising, or whatever.

>And if you don't think they are going to raise money off of
>this, I don't know what to say...

You post up a fundraising email where they say a single word about an "unforced political hit" and I'll pay off your student loans myself before Joe can even get around to it.

this pertains to a select set of privately held loans. less than 10% of previously eligible borrowers. they would have had to consolidate those loans (subject to credit worthiness) to receive student loan relief in the 1st place.

you think they just arbitrarily changed the guidance just to be shady and fuck over likely dem voters right before midterms?

something something they'd have to apply anyway! something something evil Republicans!



** They debated this shit for nearly two fucking years. They didn't think they'd get sued? They make this part of the original message, people would be disappointed but not feel betrayed a month out from the midterms.


Can't say shit about Saint Joe though. Like 4 million just had the rug pulled from under them. 3000 people dying a week from COVID still.

"Blue no matter who, then you push him to be better!"

**Points out basic things he could be doing better

"Shut the fuck up, its only 4 million people and the bodies piling up are on Republicans Joe is doing his best"

Unconditional stannery- especially in politics- is a bitch

Is it that this change is a sign of corruption? Sign that they never intended for the loans to be given?




**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

to qualify for student loan relief in the 1st place.

and yes...this was done to lower the likelihood the whole relief plan was thrown out in court.

the same reason they changed guidance to allow borrowers to opt out of relief too (repubs were suing for this).

They will keep going after it.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3667028-republican-states-target-biden-student-loan-forgiveness-plan-in-new-lawsuit/

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/09/student-loan-relief-lawsuit-biden-opt-out.html

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/08/biden-student-debt-relief-legal-supreme-court.html

prohibit future relief...

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/19/house-gop-debt-limit-block-bidens-student-loan-agenda-00092934

nm

but, no suprise there.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Friday invalidated President Joe Biden’s student loan debt relief plan, meaning the long-delayed proposal intended to implement a campaign trail promise will not go into effect.

The justices, divided 6-3 on ideological lines, ruled in one of two cases that the program was an unlawful exercise of presidential power because it had not been explicitly approved by Congress.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/30/supreme-court-biden-student-loan-forgiveness-plan.html

They done fucked up with third party bs in the past allowing that dude to come in and allow him to place his far right federal judges and Supreme Court judges

Calling out republican congress members that pushed for this to fail yet they themselves took out PPP loans over $70k and had them forgiven.

Also that republicans are trying to make Trumps tax cuts permanent even thought they never paid for those tax cuts and are complaining about people making under $75k getting $10/$20k forgiven.

He also said that they already had 16 million people approved for forgiveness and that republicans snatched that away from them.

As far as what they are doing after this decision this is what I recall.

Extend the payment paus...No it's not that. They are going to implement a 12 month program where you will not be punished if you don't make payments or can't make full payments. It won't hurt your credit. You will accrue interest though. This kind of makes sense and also feels like a shot at republicans.

He also said they are lowering income repayment plan payments to 5% (currently 10%) of your discretionary (?) income. Basically after taxes and all necessities are paid off.

They are going to push forward with student debt relief through the HEA. That it's a longer process but that it aligns with todays decision.

I thought it was a good effective speech that actually laid out a plan. I don't really watch him speak often. It did start half an hour later than promised and for some reason he decided to take the bait on an Afghanistan question.

I'm hoping they shorten the amount of time you need to be making payments to get your loan forgiven. I think they already changed it so that payments go to the principle now right? I think a combination of capping payments, making sure loans don't balloon due to interest and shorter time needed on making payments to get loans forgiven would be a reasonable solution.

I would definitely take some instant forgiveness though

Let's make it happen.

Sorry… we’re still going to be fucking

He makes a lot of promises
Tells you about all the fun places he’s been and gonna take you next
But he either doesn’t show up at all
OR
Gets into an argument with your mom then leaves all huff so you know she’s the problem

https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/biden-harris-administration-provide-804000-borrowers-39-billion-automatic-loan-forgiveness-result-fixes-income-driven-repayment-plans

Doesn't apply to me (yet at least) but cool.

I’ll be c71 on steroids, handle on coke.. I’ll fight anyone who slanders that great white mans name if my shit is erased.

I’m 7’4” Vegas Spurs security if anyone speaks ill of these 2 beautiful Democratic Leaders.

>I’ll be c71 on steroids, handle on coke..

Is he not on coke? What's the explanation then?

I’ll fight
>anyone who slanders that great white mans name if my shit is
>erased.

I'm crying

>
>I’m 7’4” Vegas Spurs security if anyone speaks ill of
>these 2 beautiful Democratic Leaders.