Jump to content

Joe Biden 2022: Enter Dark Brandon


Longboard Horn

Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, GopherRock said:

"I suffered, therefore you should too" is not, and never has been, a good answer.

That is fair, but also having zero sympathy for others who did suffer and did the right thing and made painful sacrifices, whatever the situation not just this student loan situation, just had "bad timing" is also not a very emotionally healthy or empathetic approach.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

His term's trajectory seems to be following Clinton's.  Inherited a shit sandwich economy wise, things got worse for a bit then started kicking all sorts of ass.

I just hope Uncle Joe's Waco scene can be carried out at Mar-A-Lago.

Waco again would be fine.  What’s going to be missed, a bunch of ship lap?

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, UTGrad98 said:

Sorry but this rubs me the wrong way.  I have paid off 2 sets of student  loans in my life.  The first was for 40k back in early 2000s.  I took on a second job and paid off 2k a month for 20 months so I know people can pay these loans off. My family was poor as shit but I didn't want this debt hanging over me and my life so I did something about it.  If it wasn't for roe being overturned this would probably at the very least keep me from voting dem ticket this year and in 2024.  There is such a thing as personal responsibility.. Even in your 20s. 

Good for you. Glad your life worked out well so you could do that. I paid off over 120k in a couple of years of finishing my residency. Big weight off my shoulders

 

what we know about folks with around 10K of debt is that they are the group most likely to have

been the victim of a for profit college or trade program that didn’t ultimately translate into a well paying career (and many of these programs are defunct)

and / or not finished school (often unplanned pregnancy or having to take care of family members and never were able to go back, or just have no support system to cope w college’s challenges), and they can only get an hourly wage job where they are barely getting by. As the first person on my mom’s side to graduate high school, I know how daunting it can be to go off to college with no frame of reference. 
 

you help out 90% of the people in the above categories by capping repayment forgiveness at 10K, which is why that number was chosen. Also it is means tested

It is a lifeline for these folks. I’m happy they are getting it. And unless the stupid Twitter fucks want to pay back the principle and interest on their PPP money they need to STFU

 

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

And unless the stupid Twitter fucks want to pay back the principle and interest on their PPP money they need to STFU

I am not sure exactly what you are referring two on Twitter, but there are meaningful differences between the terms that were agreed to when we all took out student loans and the terms that were agreed to wrt the PPP money. We are changing the terms on the backend wrt student loan forgiveness.  Which is fine, compared to the other dumb fuck shit we spend money on as a country, this one is actually impactful to Americans on the day to day. But we can also just be honest about that, and also appreciate the fact that some people did all the right things, sacrificed in very meaningful ways to fulfill their obligations and commitments, and frankly some portion of those people are justified in being a bit put off.  They need to get over it.  But you can certainly understand where they are coming from. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i have never and can't imagine i would ever begrudge someone a policy or law that benefitted them in A Situation Now that i had to struggle through in the past. 

i don't know if i said that right...but you get the gist. i mean who cares if someone today is not going to have to face the same miserable or difficult circumstances or have more chances at something than i did b/c the government changed a policy on something? good for them. i have certainly benefitted in my life from things that have improved drastically since my parents were young. i just fundamentally don't 'get' that mindset.  

may the future continue to improve for all 🤘

besides...you could consider it a tradeoff for Roe. i had body autonomy most of my life that current and future generations will no longer have. not exactly a fair trade, but too bad. 😏

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I am not sure exactly what you are referring two on Twitter, but there are meaningful differences between the terms that were agreed to when we all took out student loans and the terms that were agreed to wrt the PPP money. We are changing the terms on the backend wrt student loan forgiveness. 

But there is no meaningful difference between the talking heads, podcasts, and people whose business revolves around political opinions who chirp about government handouts and talking shit about those who wanted debt forgiveness when almost all of them took massive PPP loans and never paid any of it back.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I am not sure exactly what you are referring two on Twitter, but there are meaningful differences between the terms that were agreed to when we all took out student loans and the terms that were agreed to wrt the PPP money. We are changing the terms on the backend wrt student loan forgiveness.  Which is fine, compared to the other dumb fuck shit we spend money on as a country, this one is actually impactful to Americans on the day to day. But we can also just be honest about that, and also appreciate the fact that some people did all the right things, sacrificed in very meaningful ways to fulfill their obligations and commitments, and frankly some portion of those people are justified in being a bit put off.  They need to get over it.  But you can certainly understand where they are coming from. 

Yes. I’m one of those people. Several things could have gone wrong along the way for me however and I could have ended up in the other group. That applies to every one on here whether they want to admit it or not

 

And every one of companies on Wall Street and in Detroit had their terms changed on the backend as well. 

This forgiveness is good for society, just like those other things were. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

Rise-of-College-Tuition_Datastream-1.jpg

I'm fine with the forgiveness, I feel bad for the people who have recently paid off loans, anyone currently in school that has paid out of pocket and hasn't taken a loan out yet and people entering college this fall. I really dislike government programs that are a one time thing like this. Either make it a regular thing or don't do it at all. I do wish this was tied more to the overall cause of the increase in tuition. I think the end result of this is the graph above having a spike in it as more money is going in the pot for current students.

When I was at UT in the late 80's it was pretty hard to get a student loan. After getting out of the Navy in 95 it seemed like they were giving out loans like candy. More money/easier loans -> schools figure they can raise tuition -> kids get more loans and the viscous cycle continues. 

Either make loans harder to get or allow them to be discharged by bankruptcy and I think the graph above would level out or go down.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 “The older brother became angry and refused to go in. So his father went out and pleaded with him. 29 But he answered his father, ‘Look! All these years I’ve been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders. Yet you never gave me even a young goat so I could celebrate with my friends. 30 But when this son of yours who has squandered your property with prostitutes comes home, you kill the fattened calf for him!’

31 “‘My son,’ the father said, ‘you are always with me, and everything I have is yours. 32 But we had to celebrate and be glad, because this brother of yours was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’”

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, blacklab said:

When I was at UT in the late 80's it was pretty hard to get a student loan. After getting out of the Navy in 95 it seemed like they were giving out loans like candy. More money/easier loans -> schools figure they can raise tuition -> kids get more loans and the viscous cycle continues. 

And government policy decisions sit at the center of that cycle. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

After posting that bible quote, I have to ask myself

Delicious cabrito or prostitute? 

Tough choice.

Well-made cabrito all day. There are plenty of whores out there, but a well cooked cabrito is becoming more and more rare. RIP El Azteca. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, UTGrad98 said:

Sorry but this rubs me the wrong way.  I have paid off 2 sets of student  loans in my life.  The first was for 40k back in early 2000s.  I took on a second job and paid off 2k a month for 20 months so I know people can pay these loans off. My family was poor as shit but I didn't want this debt hanging over me and my life so I did something about it.  If it wasn't for roe being overturned this would probably at the very least keep me from voting dem ticket this year and in 2024.  There is such a thing as personal responsibility.. Even in your 20s. 

Just to be clear, I didn't neg this because you disagree with loan forgiveness. I think some legitimate arguments can be made against this particular loan forgiveness (although I find them unconvincing). "I had to do it so should everyone else" is not one of them. That's a shit attitude that I expect from small children. Anyone over the age of 8 should know better. 

1 hour ago, Incredulity said:

Got it.

Do you have any sources for the latest on payouts vs. contributions? Googling is pretty futile.

Unfortunately, I don't have one readily available. I do know there have been a number of studies and government reports on this over the years. 

49 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I am not sure exactly what you are referring two on Twitter, but there are meaningful differences between the terms that were agreed to when we all took out student loans and the terms that were agreed to wrt the PPP money. We are changing the terms on the backend wrt student loan forgiveness.  Which is fine, compared to the other dumb fuck shit we spend money on as a country, this one is actually impactful to Americans on the day to day. But we can also just be honest about that, and also appreciate the fact that some people did all the right things, sacrificed in very meaningful ways to fulfill their obligations and commitments, and frankly some portion of those people are justified in being a bit put off.  They need to get over it.  But you can certainly understand where they are coming from. 

I disagree. I may understand why they are put off. But they aren't justified in feeling that way. Cue Chris Rock meme. 

Edited by Dahobbs
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is this even controversial, I second blacklabs opinion wish this wasn't just a one time bonanza and was aimed more towards curbing the issue with relief instead of solving it with policy. 

I'm glad whoever gets 10k gets it. Just like I was happy with whoever getting stimulus checks getting them. I received no benefit at all, but I know it helps tons of people out. 

PPP was a fucking shameful injection to the bottom line of already profitable companies. I was disgusted when the company I was working for took it even though business was BOOMING when we took the loan, which was eventually forgiven. Essentially giving us a cash infusion we didn't need for no equity at all. Straight up wild shit. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

“You know, they didn’t have treatments for this kind of cancer when I had it. I had to beat it myself. Therefore you shouldnt be able to use this treatment either” seems like a questionable perspective. We should walk because previous generations didn’t have cars, too. 

Edited by SydneyCarton
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

“You know, they didn’t have treatments for this kind of cancer when I had it. I had to beet it myself. Therefore you shouldnt be able to use this treatment either” seems like a questionable perspective. We should walk because previous generations didn’t have cars, too. 

Thousands of Americans got shot on D-Day. Therefore the rest of us should be shot during a massive amphibious assault too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. That's a lot of winning for one week.

 

Quote

 

Biden administration moves to formalize DACA and shield it from legal challenges

The Biden administration on Wednesday finalized a rule to transform the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) immigration policy for more than 600,000 so-called "Dreamers" into a federal regulation, a move aimed at protecting the program from legal challenges that imperil its existence.

The 453-page rule by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is set to take effect on Oct. 31 and will codify the Obama-era program, which has been governed by a 2012 memo for a decade, into the federal government's code of regulations.

Since its inception, DACA has allowed hundreds of thousands of unauthorized immigrants who arrived in the U.S. as children to live and work in the country legally without fear of deportation. As of March 31, 611,270 immigrants were enrolled in DACA, government data show.

While technical in nature, the change announced Wednesday is designed to address some of the Republican-led legal challenges against the DACA, which a federal judge in Texas last year closed to new applicants.

Unlike the 2012 DHS memo that created DACA, the new regulation underwent a months-long rulemaking process that was open to comments from the public, steps that the federal judge in Texas said the Obama administration should've undertaken before implementing the policy.

"Today, we are taking another step to do everything in our power to preserve and fortify DACA, an extraordinary program that has transformed the lives of so many Dreamers," Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said in a statement to CBS News. "Thanks to DACA, we have been enriched by young people who contribute so much to our communities and our country."

The regulation will maintain the longstanding eligibility rules for DACA, which include requirements that applicants prove they arrived in the U.S. by age 16 and before June 2007; studied in a U.S. school or served in the military; and lack any serious criminal record.

DACA recipients will continue to be eligible for work authorization under the new rule, as well as considered to be "lawfully present" in the U.S. for the purposes of other immigration applications.

Even with the regulation, however, DACA will remain in legal jeopardy. U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Hanen, who closed DACA to first-time applicants in July 2021, ruled that the policy itself violates federal immigration law, as Texas and other Republican-led states have argued in a lawsuit.

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which held a hearing in July on the Biden administration's appeal of Hanen's ruling, is expected to issue an opinion on DACA's legality later this year. The conservative-leaning appeals court is expected to side with Republican state officials who argue that DACA is unlawful. The Biden administration could appeal such a ruling to the Supreme Court.

The ongoing litigation could keep DACA closed to new applicants and even lead to its complete termination, a scenario that would bar the program's beneficiaries from working in the U.S. legally and render them eligible for deportation, though they would likely not be prioritized for arrest under the Biden administration.

Such an outcome would also reignite legislative efforts to place DACA recipients on a path to U.S. citizenship. Despite bipartisan support for Dreamers, Congress has repeatedly failed to create such a path amid more than 20 years of gridlock over other immigration issues, including U.S. border policy.

Congress' failure to pass these so-called "Dream Act" proposals prompted the Obama administration in 2012 to create DACA, which utilizes a longstanding immigration policy known as "deferred action" to shield beneficiaries from deportation and render them eligible for work authorization.

Former President Donald Trump's administration tried to end and scale back DACA, calling it illegal. Its efforts, however, were halted by federal courts, including the Supreme Court, which in June 2020 said officials had not followed the proper procedures to terminate the program.

A DHS official said the Biden administration will continue to defend DACA against lawsuits. In the event of another adverse court ruling, the administration will "assess our response and our options for continuing to protect the program," the official added.

In his statement Wednesday, Mayorkas urged lawmakers to provide "an enduring solution for the young Dreamers who have known no country other than the United States as their own."

A recent poll by the liberal group Immigration Hub and Democratic polling outfit Hart Research showed that 65% of surveyed voters in states with competitive congressional elections this November would want Congress to grant relief to DACA recipients if the program is struck down in court.

Approximately 80% of DACA recipients were born in Mexico, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) statistics show. Immigrants from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Peru, South Korea, Brazil, Ecuador, Colombia and Argentina make up the other top 10 nationalities enrolled in the program. 

Nearly 70% of the 611,270 immigrants enrolled in DACA as of March 31 were 30 or younger, including 17,070 recipients under the age of 21, the USCIS data show. 

Flavia Negrete, a DACA beneficiary who came to the country as a 4-year-old, expressed frustration that her fate has been dictated by a "chess game" among politicians in Washington, D.C. The Maryland resident hopes to attend medical school to study gene therapy, but those plans could be derailed if DACA is shut down. 

"I don't want someone in Congress debating whether I can work tomorrow, or whether I can go see a doctor tomorrow," Negrete told CBS News on Wednesday. "I think that these are two things that belong to me, rightly so. And I'd like to take ownership over that."

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/immigration-daca-biden-federal-regulation-dreamers/

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, immamac said:

I second blacklabs opinion wish this wasn't just a one time bonanza and was aimed more towards curbing the issue with relief instead of solving it with policy. 

hasn't the .gov under biden been cracking down on many of the abuser "colleges" out there?  or am i misunderemembering things?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

 

Again, there’s 2 kinds of socialism. Corporate and individual. They are a-ok with their corporations (aka, themselves under an LLC) getting forgivable loans. But people? WOAH NOW

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blacklab said:

I'm fine with the forgiveness, I feel bad for the people who have recently paid off loans, anyone currently in school that has paid out of pocket and hasn't taken a loan out yet and people entering college this fall. I really dislike government programs that are a one time thing like this. Either make it a regular thing or don't do it at all. I do wish this was tied more to the overall cause of the increase in tuition. I think the end result of this is the graph above having a spike in it as more money is going in the pot for current students.

When I was at UT in the late 80's it was pretty hard to get a student loan. After getting out of the Navy in 95 it seemed like they were giving out loans like candy. More money/easier loans -> schools figure they can raise tuition -> kids get more loans and the viscous cycle continues. 

Either make loans harder to get or allow them to be discharged by bankruptcy and I think the graph above would level out or go down.

You make good points. Ultimately I wouldn't want the perfect to be the enemy of the good. And I hope this starts a real conversation about tuition and non-dischargeability reforms.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To solve the issues with higher ed, the taxpayer is gonna need to spend more. Period. Or we need to fundamentally and systemically change how education works.

But none of that matters for the multiple generations buried with debt that's stalling their start of adulthood. How can you afford to save a down payment when rent has nearly doubled in the last decade? Many can't even afford to live on their own, or choose to live with family just so they can actually scrape some savings together. 

There's been too much profit taking and tax cutting and the variety of problems we see are all symptoms of that. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Mole said:

My wife went to school on a Pell grant and had a bit under 20k remaining on her loans. Today’s a good day.

i'm in the same boat but have a little over 20k remaining (i think it's about $26k).  definitely a good day, i just wish that others who have much higher balances were feeling it on the same level that your wife and i are.  

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sawbonz said:

Yes. I’m one of those people. Several things could have gone wrong along the way for me however and I could have ended up in the other group. That applies to every one on here whether they want to admit it or not

 

And every one of companies on Wall Street and in Detroit had their terms changed on the backend as well. 

This forgiveness is good for society, just like those other things were. 

Exactly. I grew up very lower middle class so I rejected my dream school in favor of UT on a full ride plus stipend. Similar story for law school (less $). I still had some significant law school loans which I repaid promptly. In many ways I put aside my dreams to do the responsible thing. Instead of sour grapes over not qualifying for this extremely limited loan forgiveness here, I instead reflect back on what my life was like during OCI interviews, where hiring for big firms was on life support at the time. I had fantastic grades and was very personable. I also had a good connection with the hiring manager at one of the firms. I got the job, many of my similarly-situated classmates (also great grades and very personable) did not and were given starting salaries that were half of what mine was. I was a fantastic hire, but I was also incredibly lucky and privileged to have that connection. I would take that outcome and salary over the past ~decade over the ability to avail myself of a 10k forgiveness package any day.
 

Instead of morality scolding the less fortunate, perhaps this is a good occasion to reflect on how often luck plays a tremendous part of our lives and be grateful for our good fortune.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Or we need to fundamentally and systemically change how education works.

This please. I’d like to see High School adequately prepare about 75% of the workforce. That’s the most equitable and cost effective way to lower the cost of higher education.

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Captainant said:

To solve the issues with higher ed, the taxpayer is gonna need to spend more. Period. Or we need to fundamentally and systemically change how education works.

But none of that matters for the multiple generations buried with debt that's stalling their start of adulthood. How can you afford to save a down payment when rent has nearly doubled in the last decade? Many can't even afford to live on their own, or choose to live with family just so they can actually scrape some savings together. 

There's been too much profit taking and tax cutting and the variety of problems we see are all symptoms of that. 

https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/state-higher-education-funding-cuts-have-pushed-costs-to-students

 

Quote

Overall state funding for public two- and four-year colleges in the school year ending in 2018 was more than $6.6 billion below what it was in 2008 just before the Great Recession fully took hold, after adjusting for inflation.[1] In the most difficult years after the recession, colleges responded to significant funding cuts by increasing tuition, reducing faculty, limiting course offerings, and in some cases closing campuses. Funding has rebounded somewhat, but costs remain high and services in some places have not returned.

 

Quote

 

Between school years 2008 to 2018, after adjusting for inflation:[2]

  • 41 states spent less per student.
  • On average, states spent $1,220, or 13 percent, less per student.
  • Per-student funding fell by more than 30 percent in six states: Alabama, Arizona, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Pennsylvania.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...