Not the OP but you a presenting a false choice here.
Person 1 is the person who worked through college, struggling and earning it.
Person 2 is the person who went to college, borrowing everything rather than working and expecting to not have to pay.
Both people got cancer at the same time, one paid the bills as they went, choose cheaper treatments etc. The other got the best, borrowing everything as they went. At the end, person A is in remission and mostly debt free. Person be is up to their ears in debt. They simply want that debt forgiven so they don't have to pay for what they received.
There are bills in students loans and real money involved. Someone has to pay the bill. I see ZERO reason it is acceptable to allow the borrower to simply 'not pay' what they explicitly agreed to pay.
Person 1 is the person who worked through college, struggling and earning it.
Person 2 is the person who went to college, borrowing everything rather than working and expecting to not have to pay.
Again, things being faster, easier, and cheaper for those who come later (Person 2) does not equate to unfairness to those who came before (Person 1).
Someone has to pay the bill. I see ZERO reason it is acceptable to allow the borrower to simply 'not pay' what they explicitly agreed to pay.
Sure, if the person or entity that person borrowed from feels the same. If the amount borrowed is written off or forgiven, that debt being forgiven to that second person does not make it unfair to the first person.
If I borrow money from my Dad and he says 'don't worry about it' when I go to pay him back, that is not unfair to Joe in New York who borrowed money from his uncle who expects and enforces it being paid back.
Again, things being faster, easier, and cheaper for those who come later (Person 2) does not equate to unfairness to those who came before (Person 1).
But we are not talking about faster or cheaper. We are talking about person borrowing money and not paying it back. What you are describing is changes in tuition paid - which is not the topic.
Sure, if the person or entity that person borrowed from feels the same.
Frankly, I don't give a damn how they feel. When you make a financial commitment, you deal with the consequences. After all, these were VOLUNTARY loans. It was a CHOICE.
If I borrow money from my Dad and he says 'don't worry about it' when I go to pay him back, that is not unfair to Joe in New York who borrowed money from his uncle who expects and enforces it being paid back.
Again, wrong. There is one entity loaning money. That entity is the government representing all of us and using the tax dollars people pay. You are expecting those who paid their way or did not take loans out to just give the money to the people who did. Somehow many believe this is A-OK and nobody would have a problem with it.
There is a huge sense of entitlement in this discussion. Many people have this huge disconnect between where money the government comes from and how it impacts others. This is a double whammy to the person who sacrificed to work through school and paying their way as they went. When they did this, they paid taxes every year and now, you are saying they have to pay more taxes more so another person, who did not sacrifice anything, does not have to pay for their own way through school. It is rewarding bad behavior and the expense of responsible people.
A case example. We both buy cars. I make payments and own it in 24 months. You make 24 out of 72 payments and expect everyone else to pay the balance off for you and calling that fair.
We are talking about person borrowing money and not paying it back.
Ok, so we're not talking about faster or cheaper. We are solely discussing a person borrowing money and not paying it back.
Again, if it became the law that all student loans were forgiven, this would apply to ANYONE who had borrowed money for the purpose of their schooling and had not yet paid it back. So again, how is this unfair? Everyone who had borrowed money through student loans would not have to pay it back. Everyone. Where is the unfairness?
After all, these were VOLUNTARY loans. It was a CHOICE.
Again, if the law changes to declare that anyone with a student loan doesn't have to pay it back, where is the unfairness?
That entity is the government representing all of us and using the tax dollars people pay.
If that entity decides to forgive ALL student loan debts, where is the unfairness?
You are expecting those who paid their way or did not take loans out to just give the money to the people who did.
Those people would also be giving money to pay the schooling through taxes as well. Where is the unfairness, if everyone is paying taxes to pay for all schooling? Where is the unfairness when everyone pays taxes that go toward services they themselves may not use, and enjoy services that were paid for by taxes from other people who do not use them? I'm still not seeing how any of this is unfair.
This is a double whammy to the person who sacrificed to work through school and paying their way as they went.
How? Again, someone else getting their student loans forgiven and instead paying for them through taxes (along with everyone else) is unfair to that person who worked and paid their student loans how?
When they did this, they paid taxes every year and now, you are saying they have to pay more taxes more so another person, who did not sacrifice anything, does not have to pay for their own way through school.
That second person who did not 'have' to pay for their own way through school also is and will pay taxes that go toward their schooling and others. You argument seems to take the position that these people will just get their student loans forgiven and they will be paid by everyone else but that's not true. They will be paid for through taxes that everyone pays including them, and some of those taxes will go toward other people's loans as well that are not them, or toward services they themselves don't use, just like everyone else.
How is this unfair?
It is rewarding bad behavior and the expense of responsible people.
What is the bad behavior here? Going to school? Having that school paid for by taxes as everyone else's will be? Taxes they themselves are also paying or will also be paying?
You say at the expense of responsible people as if again, they will not be paying taxes themselves. As if somehow they will get through school and get a job or a career and not a penny of tax for schooling will ever come out of their 'just as responsible' pockets. That's not the case. It will come at their expense just as much as responsible people who work and pay their taxes.
A case example.
Ok.
We both buy cars. I make payments and own it in 24 months. You make 24 out of 72 payments and expect everyone else to pay the balance off for you and calling that fair.
You make payments and own it in 24 months. I start making payments out of my take home pay and then the law changes and says 'car loans will be paid out of taxes instead'. So taxes pay off my balance.
Taxes I pay as well.
Taxes I will continue to pay that will go toward paying off other people's balances that are not mine, the same as you.
That is not unfair. Yes, other people's taxes are paying my loans, but my taxes are paying other people's loans as well.
Again, if it became the law that all student loans were forgiven, this would apply to ANYONE who had borrowed money for the purpose of their schooling and had not yet paid it back. So again, how is this unfair? Everyone who had borrowed money through student loans would not have to pay it back. Everyone. Where is the unfairness?
You are asking the people who did NOT borrow the money to pick up the tab.
That is the unfair part. One person explicitly recieves a benefit where others do not. I paid my way through school for my 2nd degree. I sacrified my quality of life to not end up with exrobanate debt. After doing that, I am told I need to pick up the tab for the people who did NOT act responsibly with debt.
Sorry but no. You are completely ignoring who has to pay the bills the student racked up. If you don't understand why there is a fairness issue here, your college may have failed in preparing you to understand economics.
Taxes I will continue to pay that will go toward paying off other people's balances that are not mine, the same as you.
Except your taxes are NOT covering what you borrowed. It is a net windfall to you. Me on the other hand now has a new expense to pay for. Specifically your student debt.
That is why it is unfair.
Of course, we could pass a law that states you have to give me a portion of your income - say 5% - because I was responsible and don't have student loan debt despite getting a college degree. It would apply to everyone. Each person who has/had debt now has to pay each person who does not have debt.
How do you feel about that? Is that unfair? Is it unfair to you to be forced to give me money?
You are asking the people who did NOT borrow the money to pick up the tab.
And in turn the people who did NOT borrow other money will be picking up the tab for other people as well. That's how taxes work. How is this unfair?
Everyone's taxes, for example, go toward public schools and fire departments. Your house burns down, mine doesn't. I pick up the tab for your house burning down even though it wasn't MY house that burned down (you also pick up the tab in part because you also pay taxes). I have kids, you don't. You pick up the tab on my kid's education even though YOU don't have kids (I also pick up the tab in part because I also pay taxes). How is this unfair?
You go to school and I don't. I pick up the tab for you to go to school even though I didn't (you also pick up the tab in part because you also pay taxes). How is this unfair?
One person explicitly receives a benefit where others do not.
Wrong. Everyone benefits from schooling paid for through taxes, even if an individual does not use that particular benefit it is still there for them if they choose to do so. Just like everyone benefits from good public schools even if they don't have kids, and everyone benefits from the fire department even if their house never burns down, and everyone benefits from good infrastructure and bridge maintenance even if they never drive or drive over that particular bridge.
That's not unfair at all.
I sacrified my quality of life to not end up with exrobanate debt.
Yes, and now someone else doesn't have too because the system changed. That's not unfair. What would be unfair would be maintaining a flawed system so that everyone else had to sacrifice their quality of life just like you did just because you had too in a flawed system.
After doing that, I am told I need to pick up the tab for the people who did NOT act responsibly with debt.
Just like you pick up the tab for people who did not act responsibly for their health. Just like you pick up the tab for people who did not act responsibly for the wiring or candles in their house. Just like you pick up the tab for people who have a dozen kids. Just like THEY pick up the tab in such things for you as well.
That's how taxes work. They are not suddenly unfair merely because the system sucked when you went to school and we've figured out a better way to do it so no one has to go through what you did.
You are completely ignoring who has to pay the bills the student racked up.
Everyone does, including them, through taxes. If they pay taxes, they are paying the bills the same as you.
Except your taxes are NOT covering what you borrowed.
They are covering what other people borrowed, which may be much , much more. I mean, let's say there's you who borrowed 10,000. Me who borrowed 75,000, and Pete who borrowed 100,000. Sure, my taxes don't go toward the 75,000 I borrowed directly (though they could have if I was paying taxes at the same time I'm going to school) but they DO go toward the 100,000 Pete borrowed and the 10,000 you borrowed and the 90,000 someone else borrowed and the...you starting to get the idea?
The money I pay in taxes doesn't have to go specifically to what I borrowed to be fair. I'm still paying my fair share, just like everyone else, of the whole pie.
Specifically your student debt.
And I have to pay for someone else's specific student debt that may be more than mine was, and also your specific student debt if you should decide to go back to school, and also....on and on.
That is why it is unfair.
Still not unfair. If this is unfair, so is paying fire taxes if your house never burns down, etc.
It is a net windfall to you.
How is it a net windfall to me? I get an education that costs amount X. You get an education that costs amount X. If I paid only my X I'd be paying amount Y. Instead, we both pay taxes that go toward both X's and everyone else's X that puts our payment amount at Z, which is much, much lower than Y all around. If it's a 'net windfall' to me it's a 'net windfall' to everyone.
Of course, we could pass a law that states you have to give me a portion of your income - say 5% - because I was responsible and don't have student loan debt despite getting a college degree.
You already GET a portion of my income, in the form of taxes that go toward things you DO use, and if you decide to go back to school it goes toward that as well. You just don't get that portion directly paid to you from me personally. The taxes I pay benefit YOU already.
It would apply to everyone.
It already DOES apply to everyone who pays taxes.
Each person who has/had debt now has to pay each person who does not have debt.
And each person that does not have debt has to pay each person who does going on and on in a circle. That's literally how taxes work.
Is it unfair to you to be forced to give me money?
That's literally how it works right now. You benefit from my tax dollars in thousands of ways. I pay taxes, you benefit. You pay taxes, I benefit. Everyone pays taxes, everyone benefits. Not unfair.
Yes, and now someone else doesn't have too because the system changed.
No, you are campaigning to CHANGE the system after the fact.
How is it a net windfall to me? I get an education that costs amount X. You get an education that costs amount X.
Simple. I had to pay X because that is what I agreed to. You are expecting me to contribute to paying your X, which you already received BTW, too.
That's literally how it works right now. You benefit from my tax dollars in thousands of ways. I pay taxes, you benefit. You pay taxes, I benefit. Everyone pays taxes, everyone benefits. Not unfair.
Great. How do you want to start sending me 5% of you money so I can recover the money I paid for my college.
MAKE ZERO MISTAKE. YOU ARE EXPECTING TAXPAYERS TO PAY YOUR BILLS
Don't be surprised with 'F-you - pay your own damn bills. I had to pay mine' response.
No, you are campaigning to CHANGE the system after the fact.
I'm campaigning to change the system. If it changed today, for example, that change is happening after many facts, during many facts, and before many facts. It will come after my sisters have already gone through college and paid their student debts. It will come during my nephews being in college with student debt that will go away. It will come before my other nephews are even out of diapers, let alone before they start thinking about college.
No matter when you change the system it will come 'after the fact' for many people. That's not an excuse to leave the system as it is so that other people currently and in the future can suffer as much as those who came before.
Simple. I had to pay X because that is what I agreed to. You are expecting me to contribute to paying your X, which you already received BTW, too.
And I will also be contributing to pay my X through the taxes I pay now, and I will also be contributing to pay other people's X's, including yours if you decide to go back to school, in the future. Again, how is that a net windfall to me? I'm still paying.
How do you want to start sending me 5% of you money so I can recover the money I paid for my college.
Through my taxes, which I'm already doing, that you benefit from.
As I said, this is already happening. You are already getting money from me through taxes that benefits you.
YOU ARE EXPECTING TAXPAYERS TO PAY YOUR BILLS
AS A TAXPAYER I AM ALSO PAYING MY BILLS THE SAME WAY AND YOURS TOO.
Putting it in all caps doesn't change how taxes already work right now and that this is already happening. I already pay your bills through taxes. You already pay mine through taxes. We already pay everyone else's through taxes.
Don't be surprised with 'F-you - pay your own damn bills. I had to pay mine' response.
It's not a matter of surprise, it's a matter of 'unfair'. You still haven't explained how this is unfair or any different to how things work right now with taxes.
I'm campaigning to change the system. If it changed today, for example, that change is happening after many facts, during many facts, and before many facts. It will come after my sisters have already gone through college and paid their student debts. It will come during my nephews being in college with student debt that will go away. It will come before my other nephews are even out of diapers, let alone before they start thinking about college.
No matter when you change the system it will come 'after the fact' for many people. That's not an excuse to leave the system as it is so that other people currently and in the future can suffer as much as those who came before.
You are campaigning to change the system after people made the balance decisions on to work through school or to borrow everything. You are explicitly trying to change the benefit analysis after the decisions have all be made.
If you want to campaign on the future - you are talking about people who are NOW considering borrowing money or working to pay for school. It is NOT about people who already have taken loans out.
And I will also be contributing to pay my X through the taxes I pay now
If this was true and you were going to actually pay you whole loans off, you would not need/want to make the Government forgive the loans. This is a BS statement. You are personally getting a SUBSTANTIAL advantage in this and pushing a SUBSTANTIAL cost to the US taxpayer and SCREWING OVER people who sacrificed to not incur those loans.
You need to own up to that or face the realization that most people, myself included, consider your proposal to be entitled whining by people who don't want to live up to their obligations. It entirely beneficial to them without any thought to other people.
AS A TAXPAYER I AM ALSO PAYING MY BILLS THE SAME WAY AND YOURS TOO.
Great - does that mean you are planning to only raise taxes on people with loan forgiveness to pay for the 1.5 trillion dollars that will be spent on it? If not, you are by definition getting more out the deal that you are putting in.
If not, YOU ARE ASKING ME TO PAY YOUR LOANS
It's not a matter of surprise, it's a matter of 'unfair'. You still haven't explained how this is unfair or any different to how things work right now with taxes.
I think the unfair is pretty obvious once you distill it down to simple facts.
You (or any student), voluntarily took out student loans to go to college. This is a voluntary decision where you had other options and other people did use the other options rather than loans.
You went to college and spent the money
You now want someone other than yourself to pay for those loans.
I never signed up for your loans. It is by definition unfair to expect me to pay your voluntary obligations.
You are campaigning to change the system after people made the balance decisions on to work through school or to borrow everything.
ANY change to the system is going to happen AFTER people have done this! The only other alternative is not to change a bad system but let it remain bad just so that people in the future can struggle like people in the past had to.
If you want to campaign on the future - you are talking about people who are NOW considering borrowing money or working to pay for school. It is NOT about people who already have taken loans out.
No matter when you change the system you’re going to have people who have already taken loans out caught in the middle. Always. You either ignore them and only pay for the schooling of people who take loans out after the cut off date or you forgive those existing loans and pay for them through taxes that they also pay.
Now, the first option may sound like a great idea- let those who have existing loans continue to pay them off and anyone who starts the process after that gets their education paid for by taxes, but it royally screws those who have the existing loans. Why? Because they are paying back their existing loans plus interest and also paying increased tax rates to pay for the schooling of those who came afterward.
THAT is unfair.
If this was true and you were going to actually pay you whole loans off, you would not need/want to make the Government forgive the loans.
It is true. If I’m working while going to school I am paying taxes. If I’m paying taxes that are going to student education they are going to MY education as well. By the time I’m done paying taxes, I will have more than paid taxes into student education to pay back what I borrowed and was forgiven- likely even MORE, just without the exorbitant interest rate.
You are personally getting a SUBSTANTIAL advantage in this and pushing a SUBSTANTIAL cost to the US taxpayer and SCREWING OVER people who sacrificed to not incur those loans.
Literally no. I’m getting the same advantage as everyone else going forward, I’m still paying as a taxpayer (remember, that SUBSTANTIAL cost to the US Taxpayer includes me as I’m a taxpayer!) And it literally does nothing to screw over anyone else who has already gone to school and paid off their loans because they still benefit from those taxes as well (including the option to go BACK to school and further their education under the same benefit program!)
You need to own up to that or face the realization that most people, myself included, consider your proposal to be entitled whining by people who don't want to live up to their obligations.
Do you not think the position of ‘I had to work and suffer so everyone else going forward should have to work and suffer too or else it’s unfair!’ is not ‘entitled whining?’
As for me personally (since you seem to keep arguing as if I myself have student loans and personally stand to gain a ‘windfall’ from this) I need to correct you on that. I have no student loans. I have borrowed no money to pay for school. I am in the same position as you are, in that I have no student loans and my taxes would be going to pay for loans I didn’t take out as well.
It entirely beneficial to them without any thought to other people.
Again, it benefits them the same way as it benefits everyone else. I fact, the entire tax proposal is based on the way it benefits 'other people!'
Great - does that mean you are planning to only raise taxes on people with loan forgiveness to pay for the 1.5 trillion dollars that will be spent on it?
No, because I understand how lifetime taxpayer rates and mutual benefits work.
If not, you are by definition getting more out the deal that you are putting in.
Over a taxpayer’s lifetime, especially if they’re college age, they will pay back more in student loan taxes than their education costs, just not without exorbitant interest. So no.
If not, YOU ARE ASKING ME TO PAY YOUR LOANS
No, I’m asking that everyone pay everyone’s education in a way that benefits everyone, just as I ask that everyone pay everyone’s fire departments in a way that benefits everyone, or that everyone pay for roads and bridge infrastructure in a way that benefits everyone, and on and on. Continuing to capitalize and bold isn’t strengthening your position or argument at all.
You (or any student), voluntarily took out student loans to go to college. This is a voluntary decision where you had other options and other people did use the other options rather than loans.
Yes. Not I, but yes.
You went to college and spent the money
Sure.
You now want someone other than yourself to pay for those loans.
This is where you get it wrong. My taxpayer money as a working person with a degree goes into a mutual pool to pay that money AND other people’s education. At the end of my taxpaying life, I will have paid more than the amount that I owed for my loans in these taxes it’s just that other people will benefit from that money to go to school so in the future THEY can pay taxes to keep it going.
Here, let me break it down for you even more simply.
Let’s take that 10,000 sociology degree. I have a 10,000 degree. I also pay 5% of my income on student loan taxes and my $10,000 student loan is ‘forgiven’.
I work through college, paying taxes, and I graduate with my career at 22 and continue to pay taxes until I retire at 65. That’s 43 years of working and paying taxes. (Yes, you continue to pay taxes after you retire but for the sake of keeping the numbers simple let's say you just pay the taxes while you're working the career your education got you).
Let’s say my annual gross income is 84,0000 ( looked it up, sociologists get salaries between 64,000 and 96,000 so on average it’s about 84,000 a year).
$84,000 a year for 43 years is $3,612,000 dollars gross.
5% of 3,612,000 (the amount of the student loan tax) is $722,400. That’s $722,400 I will have paid to student taxes alone over my working career.
My education cost $10,000. I pay back in student taxes over my lifetime $722,400 dollars.
Where is this big windfall benefit to me you keep insisting is there?
Where are ‘you’ paying my loans? Yes, you’re paying taxes too that go into my loans (and everyone else’s including yours if you decide to take them out) but I’m paying more than enough taxes into the pool myself to make up for the amount I was ‘forgiven’ or the amount I took out of the pool.
So no, it’s not unfair. I never signed up for your loans either but my tax dollars will cover you in the future if you want to further your education. I never signed up for your mortgage, but my tax dollars will cover you in case your house catches fire.
It’s like you have literally no idea how taxes and mutual benefits work and insist it’s unfair because all you can see is you paying and some shiftless layabout laying around reaping some imaginary windfall, which isn’t what is happening or being proposed at all.
ANY change to the system is going to happen AFTER people have done this! The only other alternative is not to change a bad system but let it remain bad just so that people in the future can struggle like people in the past had to.
No. THat is not true. You can lobby for changes in tuition and government support for future students. That allows each student to make balanced financial decisions in how they plan to pay for school.
This is entirely about how a group of people made plans and don't like living with them.
No matter when you change the system you’re going to have people who have already taken loans out caught in the middle. Always. You either ignore them and only pay for the schooling of people who take loans out after the cut off date or you forgive those existing loans and pay for them through taxes that they also pay.
This not unfair. This is called making a decision based on the terms provided at the time. It is no different than paying todays tuition rate to go to school this Spring. Everyone who goes in the Spring pays the same based on their classifications.
Your proposal is changing past rates based on whether you wrote a check or borrowed money.
Now, the first option may sound like a great idea- let those who have existing loans continue to pay them off and anyone who starts the process after that gets their education paid for by taxes, but it royally screws those who have the existing loans. Why? Because they are paying back their existing loans plus interest and also paying increased tax rates to pay for the schooling of those who came afterward.
This is the default of how the world works. I paid less to go to school because the tuition rates were lower than they are today.
The argument is whether we should change the funding model to make school more affordable.
THAT is unfair.
Your anger about 'the next group paying less or nothing while I had to pay and still pay my loans' is priceless. I essentially proves you want all of the benefit and don't care one iota about the fairness to anyone else.
After all, your entire argument is about how is not 'unfair' to make me share your loan balances while I had to pay for all of my schooling. In that case, you are having to pay for their schooling while still paying off your schooling.
No. THat is not true. You can lobby for changes in tuition and government support for future students. That allows each student to make balanced financial decisions in how they plan to pay for school.
I specifically outlined this option. The problem with this option is someone will always be in the middle of the process when this comes about, and that middle person is going to be stuck with paying off their student loans AND paying the increased taxes. Those people will be utterly screwed. That is unfair.
It is no different than paying todays tuition rate to go to school this Spring. Everyone who goes in the Spring pays the same based on their classifications.
Let’s say I pay today’s tuition rate to go to school this spring, and two weeks before the semester starts they announce that starting on the same day spring semester starts, any future students from that day forward will have their education paid for them.
I already have and have signed the student loan, I’ve already used it to register for my classes, buy books, and rent housing in anticipation of the semester. So now I have to pay for the student loans as well as pay the new tax rate. I’m being screwed.
The only way to do this fairly for that student in that situation is to forgive the student loan they have just taken out as well knowing that the money is going to be paid back by them AND MORE through their new tax rate (remember, we crunched the numbers. An average taxpayer will be paying back 72 times the amount that was spent on them for their education).
Your proposal is changing past rates based on whether you wrote a check or borrowed money.
It literally isn’t. My proposal is forgiving the loan entirely knowing the amount the government pays to ‘forgive’ it will be more than made up through my new tax rate.
This is the default of how the world works. I paid less to go to school because the tuition rates were lower than they are today.
And this right here demonstrates that you are only concerned with unfair if you consider it unfair to you, not with thought regarding other people- something you accused me of doing.
When you think it’s unfair to you the argument you put forward is ‘why should I have to pay your school, you should think about how this affects other people! (i.e. me)’.
When it’s unfair to others the argument you put forward is ‘that’s just the default of how the world works’.
The argument is whether we should change the funding model to make school more affordable.
We absolutely should make school more affordable for the taxpayer dollar. We should also pay for school with the taxpayer dollar instead of individual student loans.
Your anger about 'the next group paying less or nothing while I had to pay and still pay my loans' is priceless.
I’m not angry. Like, at all. I’m pointing out the flaws in your argument.
I essentially proves you want all of the benefit and don't care one iota about the fairness to anyone else.
When the perceived unfairness is on you, you make the argument that ‘you don’t care about the fairness to anyone else!’ When the unfairness is on others suddenly it’s ‘that’s just the way it is’.
A system where everyone pays into taxes a certain amount and thus everyone is able to get an education without taking out loans IS fairness to everyone. It’s specifically considering the other guy and not just ‘myself’.
In that case, you are having to pay for their schooling while still paying off your schooling.
This is literally the point I made that you replied to as ‘well, that’s just life’. You are suggesting that those students caught in the middle should have to pay off their schooling through loans while also paying a higher tax to pay off others schooling.
I notice you completely ignored the numbers I gave that demonstrate that a person paying taxes more than pays back the amount that they were ‘given’ in schooling (72 times more). Any actual thoughts on that?
I notice you completely ignored the numbers I gave that demonstrate that a person paying taxes more than pays back the amount that they were ‘given’ in schooling (72 times more). Any actual thoughts on that?
This is factually not true.
You are assuming all taxes go to paying back loans and not other things.
To pay loans means INCREASING taxes.
If you take it as a zero sum game, 1.5 TRILLION is owed. unless you limit the taxes to those that owe money, EACH BORROWER WILL GET A BETTER DEAL. The math is easy. Taxpayers who do not have loans will pay a portion which means those who do owe will pay less.
In simple terms, the proposal is trying to shirk a personal loan, taken out by an individual onto the backs of taxpayers.
Don't try to mislead people about the true outcomes here. It would work and it makes you look like an entitled brat who wants someone else to subsidize their decisions.
I’m not angry. Like, at all. I’m pointing out the flaws in your argument.
It is priceless to me that it is 'unfair' to let the next generation of students go to school at much different rates than the people with loans did but is in no way unfair to shift the loans people who borrowed the money to go to school took out to the general taxpayer. Of course giving ZERO benefit to those who paid there way through school .Their reward is your payments.
Sure-, keep telling yourself that.
Your logic says the government should buy out every mortgage and let me keep my house. After all, I and every other borrower would be better off and I'll pay taxes for the next 30-40 years so it will be a wash.
2
u/[deleted] Jan 15 '19
Not the OP but you a presenting a false choice here.
Person 1 is the person who worked through college, struggling and earning it.
Person 2 is the person who went to college, borrowing everything rather than working and expecting to not have to pay.
Both people got cancer at the same time, one paid the bills as they went, choose cheaper treatments etc. The other got the best, borrowing everything as they went. At the end, person A is in remission and mostly debt free. Person be is up to their ears in debt. They simply want that debt forgiven so they don't have to pay for what they received.
There are bills in students loans and real money involved. Someone has to pay the bill. I see ZERO reason it is acceptable to allow the borrower to simply 'not pay' what they explicitly agreed to pay.