4 ms·

Not sure why you are down voted, everyone (when it benefits them) takes credit for the “greatest economy the world has ever seen” and “record stock market”, sim

Not sure why you are down voted, everyone (when it benefits them) takes credit for the “greatest economy the world has ever seen” and “record stock market”, simultaneously they ignore record wage stagnation, record income gaps, record homelessness, record student loan defaults, record debt defaults of nearly every kind, record young people living at home to record high ages…I’d say record high unemployment, to which someone would inevitably point to the unemployment numbers and claim it’s actually record low unemployment, which, to your point highlights the farce and disconnect from reality. The FED is sitting on trillions of taxpayer bailout money from the CARES Act, yet if you took about 1/8th of that money, government could wipe the entire student loan debt, but then you’d hear the media talking point screaming how we can’t afford it.

adflux 5y ago
Cancel a debt and you won't immediately see "number go up". Hence probably even less attractive from a political standpoint
jandrewrogers 5y ago
Canceling debt creates a taxable event for the person with the debt under the tax code. Transferring money to a person and then voiding the liability is indistinguishable from unearned income, and is taxed as such. People aren't going to be very happy when they get hit with an unexpected $10k tax bill due immediately. Similarly, the people with the largest student loan debt tend to be affluent. Gifting the affluent more money than a poor person who could not afford school may be able to save in their lifetime is a bad look politically, and would be deeply unfair.
- cwkoss 5y ago
  > Similarly, the people with the largest student loan debt tend to be affluent. I question this. I'd assume the largest student loan debts are held by the middle class, because the affluent didn't take out loans because they paid for their education with cash.
  - jkhdigital 5y ago
    > the affluent didn't take out loans because they paid for their education with cash Not if they didn't become affluent until after going to college and getting a high powered career... case in point, I took out almost $70k in student loans to get an MBA and paid it back within three years of graduation. I actually screwed up by paying it off so quickly, because the interest rate after refinancing was less than 3% and I would have been better off using that money to load up my IRA (which presumably would earn better than 3% on average, as well as provide a tax break).
- throwawaycities 5y ago
  > Canceling debt creates a taxable event for the person with the debt under the tax code. Under the current tax code, a forgiven debt isn’t always taxable. I have represented student loan holders and had their student loans forgiven (6 figure debts), and they had no tax liability. And if student loans were forgiven it would be through the passing of a law, and it would be pretty trivial to include a provision that would remove any tax liability from student loan forgiveness. And if people had a $10k tax bill due immediately (which you completely made up), they would not be mad if they had $100k or $200k in loan forgiven. It’s funny how the $10k tax bill is your concern on one hand then you shift to saying it would be deeply unfair because the people with the biggest loans tend to be affluent. Affluent people don’t have student loans because their parents pay for their school. Otherwise the people with the most amount of debt are the biggest victims of the poorly designed system intended to indebt them for their entire lives.
imtringued 5y ago
Student loans increase the supply of money. If those students don't take on loans then the government would have to do it. It's very deliberate. And no, someone has to take on those loans. It's just the way things are.
- throwawaycities 5y ago
  > It's just the way things are. No, it’s not “just the way things are”. Student loans are official government policy codified into law. There is certainly a much better way for the system to have been designed, instead it was designed to allow tuition to be completely unrelated to market conditions. The government could have easily placed a cap on tuition prices/increases to protect students, instead the government allowed universities to set any tuition they want while supplying the loans to the detriment of students.

adflux 5y ago

Cancel a debt and you won't immediately see "number go up". Hence probably even less attractive from a political standpoint

jandrewrogers 5y ago

Canceling debt creates a taxable event for the person with the debt under the tax code. Transferring money to a person and then voiding the liability is indistinguishable from unearned income, and is taxed as such. People aren't going to be very happy when they get hit with an unexpected $10k tax bill due immediately. Similarly, the people with the largest student loan debt tend to be affluent. Gifting the affluent more money than a poor person who could not afford school may be able to save in their lifetime is a bad look politically, and would be deeply unfair.

cwkoss 5y ago
> Similarly, the people with the largest student loan debt tend to be affluent. I question this. I'd assume the largest student loan debts are held by the middle class, because the affluent didn't take out loans because they paid for their education with cash.
- jkhdigital 5y ago
  > the affluent didn't take out loans because they paid for their education with cash Not if they didn't become affluent until after going to college and getting a high powered career... case in point, I took out almost $70k in student loans to get an MBA and paid it back within three years of graduation. I actually screwed up by paying it off so quickly, because the interest rate after refinancing was less than 3% and I would have been better off using that money to load up my IRA (which presumably would earn better than 3% on average, as well as provide a tax break).
throwawaycities 5y ago
> Canceling debt creates a taxable event for the person with the debt under the tax code. Under the current tax code, a forgiven debt isn’t always taxable. I have represented student loan holders and had their student loans forgiven (6 figure debts), and they had no tax liability. And if student loans were forgiven it would be through the passing of a law, and it would be pretty trivial to include a provision that would remove any tax liability from student loan forgiveness. And if people had a $10k tax bill due immediately (which you completely made up), they would not be mad if they had $100k or $200k in loan forgiven. It’s funny how the $10k tax bill is your concern on one hand then you shift to saying it would be deeply unfair because the people with the biggest loans tend to be affluent. Affluent people don’t have student loans because their parents pay for their school. Otherwise the people with the most amount of debt are the biggest victims of the poorly designed system intended to indebt them for their entire lives.

imtringued 5y ago

Student loans increase the supply of money. If those students don't take on loans then the government would have to do it. It's very deliberate. And no, someone has to take on those loans. It's just the way things are.

throwawaycities 5y ago
> It's just the way things are. No, it’s not “just the way things are”. Student loans are official government policy codified into law. There is certainly a much better way for the system to have been designed, instead it was designed to allow tuition to be completely unrelated to market conditions. The government could have easily placed a cap on tuition prices/increases to protect students, instead the government allowed universities to set any tuition they want while supplying the loans to the detriment of students.