Who the fuck cares what canada does?Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
Canada allows encarcerates felons to vote.Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
https://youtu.be/yPT_efsecYE
Who the fuck cares what canada does?Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadlyCanada allows encarcerates felons to vote.Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
https://youtu.be/yPT_efsecYE
I have a particular leftist Facebook friend who LOVES Elizabeth Warren, and is 100% behind this tuition loan forgiveness plan.
She has tons of SJW friends who love to jump on me every time I post a dissenting opinion.
These said SJW friends have also repeatedly demanded to her in PM that she delete me because I'm "ignorant", "bigoted", "a Nazi" (lol), and other colorful names. Echo chamber and all that, you see.
Anyway, here's a selection of some of their responses to me today:
Quote:
I'm probably going to regret engaging, but....
This is a great example of the right-wing id. If someone benefits it must mean someone else is getting "screwed." It's a zero-sum, juvenile law-of-the-jungle world, right?
Someone else getting student-loan forgiveness hurts people who paid off their loans (or didn't have them) how exactly?
Am I getting screwed if my neighbors call the fire department to put out a fire? Why should my taxes go to extinguish a fire I didn't start, right?
What a stupid and sad way of looking at the world.
Quote:
You said, "Forgiving student loans does indeed SCREW those who spent REAL money paying back their loans -- and going without many things in life they probably wanted/needed. It also screws people who decided to forego college because they were responsible and didn't want student loan hanging over their heads that they current afford."
How does that SCREW those people? You simply saying it does is not an explanation. Be specific.
Quote:
The direct beneficiaries of this plan would be those whose academic (not economics) get them into the college system. Your academics performance is something you have much more control over than your family's ability to pay for college. This plan is actually to move towards a less arbitrary distribution of opportunity. As it is now, your family's economic situation is a) essentially a matter of luck to a high school student (i.e. arbitrary) and b) a major factor in who gets an education. This plan lets academically gifted students go to school when they might not otherwise be able to.
Quote:
Todd is the guy who complains he's getting screwed when the new version of his phone is released because he spent $800 on the one he has just last year.
Any advancement is going to have a demarcation line before and after the implementation. It's not reasonable to go back through all recorded history and repay everyone who ever paid for college and those who fall just before that line may feel screwed. Too bad. Your selfish feelings are not a reason to halt progress anymore than you owning an old phone should stop the developers from ever releasing new ones.
Suck it up and take solace knowing that you benefit by proxy when society as a whole improves.
Quote:
What a simple-minded idea. If we had always had this attitude there wouldn't be public schools, clean municipal water, or fire departments. Some group was the first to benefit from all of these. Was that unfair to those who came before?
Quote:
Let’s say a politician in Massachusetts in 1634 said “Starting this year, the government will start paying the equivalent of $10,615 a year to allow children to attend public school. $127,380 over a 12 year education. This will be funded by public taxes which are proportionally higher on the rich.”
Cause that’s exactly what happened and led to the US now having over 80% of its populace receiving an education. That, in turn, powered innovation and led us to become the global superpower we are.
Should we have not done that because it screwed everyone who paid to educate their child in 1633? Thank God our ancestors weren’t as selfish as you.
Quote:
You're totally right, Todd. Making education more accessible and equitable and introducing more liquidity and buying power in the lower and middle classes is a poor use of public funds. History is rife with examples of how societies with an angry, dumb and poor proletariat and super-concentrated wealth works out for everyone.
</sarcasm>
Virtually every single thing you've said is a dodge and/or empirically wrong.
Quote:
It’s an arbitrary line. Given that current student loan debt is egregious to the point where we expect it to implode like housing loans did anyway and most of it is entered into originally when you’re too young to really understand the consequences, I see no problem with drawing the line in the past, freeing those citizens from the financial burden and letting them flourish like folks who are lucky enough to be on the other side of the line.
Folks who already paid off their loans don’t benefit, but they aren’t harmed. Folks who partially paid off theirs get partial relief. New students get full relief. Our society has more liquidity for the economy quicker and a more educated populace over time.
Quote:
Todd is only concerned about political correctness when it comes to the rich and when poor people get something the rich don’t.
Quote:
Todd’s going to be here arguing for keeping non-violent weed offenders in jail for decades after it’s legalized too.
Quote:
According to Todd, Mr. Scrooge should have told Bob Cratchit that he'd love to give him a Christmas Turkey but that would be unfair. It'd be screwing over all the people that had to go hungry last Christmas.
:lol
I also asked these people if they would support a plan where everyone born between 1973 and 1980 gets $100k from the government, while everyone else gets nothing. I said that it could come from taxing wealth of the super-rich. After all, like they keep saying, it doesn't hurt everyone else, right? It just helps empower a certain segment of the population, right? So what if it's arbitrary?
None of them can answer this, nor can they explain how it's any different than the college loan forgiveness plan.
Instead they keep going back to the, "If you oppose college tuition loan forgiveness, you must also oppose any other progress where people beforehand didn't get it" line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
I'm willing to wager that these folks are going to benefit from such a policy. Lullz. America is getting what she deserves. Funny (or not so funny) thing is that the policies that led us here are those of our parents and perhaps a generation of ahead of them- none of whom are going to have to pay the freight.
The people making those comments are mostly middle-class and upper-middle-class white SJWs in their 30s and 40s.
Most of them had their tuition paid by their parents and feel guilty about it, and think they're "helping the less fortunate" by backing this loan forgiveness, and then of course taxing the super-wealthy to pay for it.
When you point out how arbitrary and unfair this plan is to other working people who acted responsibly, they flip out and start hitting you with tons of strawmen and false equivalences.
but honestly, i'm looking at voting for trump for no other reason than to cancel out mumbles' vote.
Ok Mr. Know-It-AllQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
It's true. I'm talking about the people I'm specifically arguing with, not generalities.Quote:
Originally Posted by duped_samaritanOk Mr. Know-It-AllQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
But in general, I find that SJW leftists tend to be from one of two groups:
1) Middle-class or above white college students supported by their parents, who don't understand how the world works yet.
2) Middle-class or above white adults (past college age) who feel guilty that they are doing well while others suffer, yet they aren't willing to put the time and effort into actually doing something to tangibly help the poor and downtrodden. Instead, they feel that supporting leftist causes and voting Democrat is enough, and therefore absolves them of the guilt of their success.
If im the RNC I'm just running Facebook and tv ads pointing out the diversity of the DNC field and then showing all the white people polling up top and putting some question at the end aimed at women and blacks and asking how long they’re are going to be taken for granted? Won’t flip them red, but just suppression. And I think the women and minority candidate kind of stink tbh, but I saw this dynamic forming a few months ago and was thinking it was going to be a problem and it seems to be a problem.
That would actually be a good idea. Maybe you should go apply for a job at the RNC.Quote:
Originally Posted by BCR
I am happy that the college loan forgiveness thing came up, because that's yet another thing which will anger working class swing voters, and also an easy thing for Trump to counter if it were to come up in debate.
Democrats seem to be engaging in an exercise of, "How can we make ourselves come off really out-of-touch to everyone besides the solid left?", and they're doing a great job of it.
Then Trump will win again and they'll scream, "OMG OMG OMG how did this happen?!"
That’s such a weird ass issue I have a hard time fleshing our the real world implications of it. I don’t know the math behind it, insofar as politics are concerned. I know the math of it in economic terms would be a staggering bailout.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffThat would actually be a good idea. Maybe you should go apply for a job at the RNC.Quote:
Originally Posted by BCR
I am happy that the college loan forgiveness thing came up, because that's yet another thing which will anger working class swing voters, and also an easy thing for Trump to counter if it were to come up in debate.
Democrats seem to be engaging in an exercise of, "How can we make ourselves come off really out-of-touch to everyone besides the solid left?", and they're doing a great job of it.
Then Trump will win again and they'll scream, "OMG OMG OMG how did this happen?!"
I know republican parents who would vote for a democrat to get their kids loan forgiven. I know 30 year olds who just got done paying off their loans who would be pissed and are liberal as fuck. I honestly think rent in desirable urban areas makes that a super weird issue given most of those areas are blue. Like imagine you’re 30, finally paid off $125k in loans, and can finally move into the cool neighborhood in any desirable city USA. New college graduates being able to instantly compete would artificially raise the rent in their neighborhoods immediately. I haven’t thought about it enough, or studied it enough. I just think on a guttural level if you actually paid back a loan and spent the last 5 years couch surfing or living in some shit apartment you’re heated that some 22 year old insta has your life and is looking at the same $3500/month loft that you’ve been waiting to move into as soon as your loans are paid. I don’t pretend to understand these millennials and younger though, so maybe they’re all for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffThat would actually be a good idea. Maybe you should go apply for a job at the RNC.Quote:
Originally Posted by BCR
I am happy that the college loan forgiveness thing came up, because that's yet another thing which will anger working class swing voters, and also an easy thing for Trump to counter if it were to come up in debate.
Democrats seem to be engaging in an exercise of, "How can we make ourselves come off really out-of-touch to everyone besides the solid left?", and they're doing a great job of it.
Then Trump will win again and they'll scream, "OMG OMG OMG how did this happen?!"
This is a variation on a YouTube ad idea I had related to college football recruiting like a decade ago that I ran by fellow Buckeye fans. Obviously the SEC gets many of the great players. I wanted to make an ad of all those people at Alabama and Ole Miss turning the fire hoses on young black kids back in the day and the scroll the SEC logo across the end. I wanted every recruit signing up there to feel like an uncle tom.People are like fuck no man, you’re crazy, you’ll get sued and have a million rednecks pissed at you. All is fair in love, politics, and college football imo
It’s possible I missed my calling as a psyops guy. I recall reading stories of guys at war getting leaflets dropped on their head talking about how their wives were at home getting laid by hippies and thinking it was both cruel and genius. Hearts and minds. I’m big on any type of battles from actual battle to political battles or whatever being lost or won between the ears, when one side makes the other lose interest or become disheartened. Lately actual wars have been battles of exactly how long can public support last. It’s why those wars in the Middle East aren’t about who is killing who. We’re always killing 500 of them for every one of ours, but they’ll keep going forever until we get disheartened. The psyops element of it always intrigued me. Steve Bannon would probably have a place for me if my politics were different. I think voter suppression is intrinsic for Trump, lack of enthusiasm, and as it currently stands, I can’t help but think black voters and women are going to be thinking, 3 white guys, for real? I’d be looking to give voice to that internal dialogue.
Time to flip the script using a tried-and-true argument that I’ve heard countless conservatives use when a government policy that overwhelmingly benefits the financially savvy over the financially “responsible”.Quote:
Originally Posted by BCRThat’s such a weird ass issue I have a hard time fleshing our the real world implications of it. I don’t know the math behind it, insofar as politics are concerned. I know the math of it in economic terms would be a staggering bailout.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
I know republican parents who would vote for a democrat to get their kids loan forgiven. I know 30 year olds who just got done paying off their loans who would be pissed and are liberal as fuck. I honestly think rent in desirable urban areas makes that a super weird issue given most of those areas are blue. Like imagine you’re 30, finally paid off $125k in loans, and can finally move into the cool neighborhood in any desirable city USA. New college graduates being able to instantly compete would artificially raise the rent in their neighborhoods immediately. I haven’t thought about it enough, or studied it enough. I just think on a guttural level if you actually paid back a loan and spent the last 5 years couch surfing or living in some shit apartment you’re heated that some 22 year old insta has your life and is looking at the same $3500/month loft that you’ve been waiting to move into as soon as your loans are paid. I don’t pretend to understand these millennials and younger though, so maybe they’re all for it.
Case in point: Trump was able to walk away from $900 million in debt owing no taxes due to a loophole that existed until about the middle 1990s. After that, such debt forgiveness was treated as unearned income and subject to income tax. Countless conservatives have justified Trump being able to own no taxes on that debt forgiveness because he was financially “savvy”, hence his now famous self-congratulatory statement that he made in one of the presidential debates with Hilldawg of “I’m smart”.
Well, guess what? Paying off student loans early is NOT always a financially savvy thing to do. Why? Because unlike other debts, student loans, at least ones taken out through federal programs, are not liabilities by the surviving estate. Meaning, the debt dies with the former student. That is not so for other types of debt. The downside is that student loan debt can’t be expunged by bankruptcy, but the worst that can happen if defaulting on the student debt is Social Security benefits can be garnished, but your wages can’t be garnished by a civil action.
Lastly, as with periodic tax holidays on repatriated foreign earnings that US corporations have enjoyed over the decades, there is always the possibility that the government would relax its policies towards extant borrowers with debt forgiveness or debt service reduction programs. As such, the financially savvy student loan borrower is usually better off delaying paying back their federal program student debt to increase likelihood of reduced or eliminated financial burden given all of those possibilities. Meaning, the financially “responsible” borrower per Druff’s strawman example is, in Trumpian language, “not smart”, a “chump”, a “sucker”. In more nuanced language, financially unsavvy.
Sorry, Druff. Unless you are ready to demand that Trump pay the income tax he avoided from using that debt forgiveness loophole, and hundreds of billions of repatriated foreign earnings during tax holidays are retroactively subjected to the normal corporate federal income tax rate absent those tax holidays, don’t be preaching here about how a student loan forgiveness program punishes the financially “responsible” student loan borrowers who paid their loans off early. The truth is those borrowers were just plain dumb by not delaying paying off their student loans as long as possible. And conservatives *love* to explain how smart folks shouldn’t have to suffer because of the mistakes of the dumb.
agreed on the bolded, but cant imagine (millennial or not) that you go up to somebody and propose the student loan scenario that you described and saying to that person they'd have an extra $125K+ in the bank if they were born a few years later or didn't take care of their responsibilities by living below their means etc and I'd be willing to bet you'd get a shitton of very pissed off 20somethings...like $125K in damn near all of the country is a down payment on a fucking house or a nice chunk of the way there in the big cities/burbs...Quote:
Originally Posted by BCRThat’s such a weird ass issue I have a hard time fleshing our the real world implications of it. I don’t know the math behind it, insofar as politics are concerned. I know the math of it in economic terms would be a staggering bailout.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
I know republican parents who would vote for a democrat to get their kids loan forgiven. I know 30 year olds who just got done paying off their loans who would be pissed and are liberal as fuck. I honestly think rent in desirable urban areas makes that a super weird issue given most of those areas are blue. Like imagine you’re 30, finally paid off $125k in loans, and can finally move into the cool neighborhood in any desirable city USA. New college graduates being able to instantly compete would artificially raise the rent in their neighborhoods immediately. I haven’t thought about it enough, or studied it enough. I just think on a guttural level if you actually paid back a loan and spent the last 5 years couch surfing or living in some shit apartment you’re heated that some 22 year old insta has your life and is looking at the same $3500/month loft that you’ve been waiting to move into as soon as your loans are paid. I don’t pretend to understand these millennials and younger though, so maybe they’re all for it.
my african american sources are telling me that warren won all of the black women votes tonight
I am much more hardline about british politics because then Overton window is so much further left I wouldn’t ever vote for a centre-left candidate to lead the party. However, in the US, I think the democrats need to forget ideological purity and just focus on who can actually beat Trump. Let Congress worry about the other stuff.
unfortunately our primary system forces our candidates to take ridiculous positions so that they could go farther left or farther right than the other candidates. primary voters in the US are crazier than the independent voters in the general election. this causes our candidates to get tripped up over meaningless issues that would hurt them with independent voters (eg, bernie sanders and his inmates must be permitted to vote stance).Quote:
Originally Posted by MrTickle
guys like mumbles, for example, would always choose the most progressive candidate regardless of electability
im sure your parents would love the money they paid dokie you to go to college only to become a poker player lmao i mean at least they got their money's worth by paying for your Dr brother and lawyer sister.
fuckin' black sheep. im sure they're very proud of their son who won't marry his long time baby mama because you're scared to possibly lose half your money.
:wtf2Quote:
Originally Posted by dwai
If Biden wins the D nomination, and frankly it's his to lose, I'll vote for him.
If it's Sanders or Warren I'm probably, begrudgingly voting for Trump. Warren is off her rocker with this preposterous student loan debt plan.
If it's pretty much anyone else I'm withholding my presidential vote or will vote for a 3rd party.
This is all subject to change but that's how I feel today.
Biden/Buttigieg looks like a winner.
Lastly this debate over prisoner's voting is indicative of the political ineptitude of the far left. A losing issue that absolutely no one gives two shits about.