4 ms·

I found out some years ago that certain kinds of tax-related federal student aid is cut off for people who've been convicted of crimes like, say, drug dealing.

I found out some years ago that certain kinds of tax-related federal student aid is cut off for people who've been convicted of crimes like, say, drug dealing. What. The fuck? A 19-year-old gets caught selling drugs so we... make it harder for them to get an education that might give them more attractive options than selling drugs? We... make it more likely for them to go deeper into debt, if they do try to get an education, so make certain kinds of alternative income more attractive to them? What possible sense could that make? I expressed, to the tax accountant who'd told me this, some confusion re: why we'd have a policy that would clearly tend to increase recidivism, hoping he'd be able to explain why this wasn't obviously stupid, and all he came back with was something like "I guess you're some kind of bleeding heart liberal then." Dafuq? I mean, on the one hand, sure, guilty as charged, but what does that have to do with preferring to have less crime happen?

Loughla 4y ago
Because it's legislating/regulating morality. That's the American Way©, in my experience. I'm not trying to be a cool edgelord kind, but really. It has appeared, over the course of my life, that most "unsolvable" political issues really amount to trying to do what's "right" instead of what's "good" for society. Gun control - knee jerk morality issue. Abortion - same thing. Education reform. Prisons and law enforcement. Drugs. The number just goes on forever. It's because we don't care to have less crime happen. We care that people are appropriately punished for being bad. It's very frustrating.
sokoloff 4y ago
There's a reasonable argument "if funding for 19 year olds' federal student aid is a limited resource, that it might be rationally prioritized, and in doing so, for priority to be given to people without a criminal record". Each of those three elements: not unlimited, needing priority, and prioritized thusly could be viewed by people as being sensible. Whether it should be unlimited is a different question from "given it's not unlimited, how should we prioritize it?"
notch656c 4y ago
Colleges are basically ground zero for drug sales. Why the hell would the public be in the business of actually funding dealers to set up shop? I couldn't care less about drugs and think everything up to and including fentanyl should be completely legal and sold at the 7-eleven, but fuck paying the bill for that. Sorry dealers, pay for your own college.
- TheSpiceIsLife 4y ago
  I'm in Australia so... Australian state and federal governments subsidised fossil fuels to the tune of a staggering $11.6 billion in 2021/22. Should student drug dealers receive state and federal funding for their education? Yep. Drug dealers are providing a public service, taking on a fair amount of risk to deliver a service the community requires. Nothing makes much sense. If all we've got is opinions, let's go with mine. P.S. I didn't down vote your comment, I up voted it because I engaged with it.

Loughla 4y ago

Because it's legislating/regulating morality. That's the American Way©, in my experience. I'm not trying to be a cool edgelord kind, but really. It has appeared, over the course of my life, that most "unsolvable" political issues really amount to trying to do what's "right" instead of what's "good" for society. Gun control - knee jerk morality issue. Abortion - same thing. Education reform. Prisons and law enforcement. Drugs. The number just goes on forever. It's because we don't care to have less crime happen. We care that people are appropriately punished for being bad. It's very frustrating.

sokoloff 4y ago

There's a reasonable argument "if funding for 19 year olds' federal student aid is a limited resource, that it might be rationally prioritized, and in doing so, for priority to be given to people without a criminal record". Each of those three elements: not unlimited, needing priority, and prioritized thusly could be viewed by people as being sensible. Whether it should be unlimited is a different question from "given it's not unlimited, how should we prioritize it?"

notch656c 4y ago

Colleges are basically ground zero for drug sales. Why the hell would the public be in the business of actually funding dealers to set up shop? I couldn't care less about drugs and think everything up to and including fentanyl should be completely legal and sold at the 7-eleven, but fuck paying the bill for that. Sorry dealers, pay for your own college.

TheSpiceIsLife 4y ago
I'm in Australia so... Australian state and federal governments subsidised fossil fuels to the tune of a staggering $11.6 billion in 2021/22. Should student drug dealers receive state and federal funding for their education? Yep. Drug dealers are providing a public service, taking on a fair amount of risk to deliver a service the community requires. Nothing makes much sense. If all we've got is opinions, let's go with mine. P.S. I didn't down vote your comment, I up voted it because I engaged with it.