3 ms·

First, I was responding to your comment that debt relief was a good policy generally. It's not. Second, what about all of the other victims of crime. Are peopl

by D13Fd 6y ago

First, I was responding to your comment that debt relief was a good policy generally. It's not. Second, what about all of the other victims of crime. Are people who were defrauded by a private school more worthy of relief than carjacking victims? Arson victims? What about victims of other frauds? What about non-monetary crimes? Are people who were defrauded by private schools more worthy of relief than rape victims, or the families of murder victims? It's just not a role of government to provide monetary relief (as opposed to justice) to victims of crime. And even if it were, I see no reason why victims of private school fraud should receive relief before all others.

smnrchrds 6y ago
> Are people who were defrauded by a private school more worthy of relief than carjacking victims? Arson victims? What about victims of other frauds? Mortgage and car loan issuers always force you to purchase adequate insurance. If you are a victim of arson or carjacking, you won't still owe the lender the full amount of the loan—insurance will make both you and the lender whole. There is no insurance for education though. So someone has to lose money here. The question is, is it better for the student to be out of the money or the lender.