3 ms·

Sure, but I know that YOU know that people talk about these items together. The general tone of this convo has been that nothing helpful has come from these act

Sure, but I know that YOU know that people talk about these items together. The general tone of this convo has been that nothing helpful has come from these actions, and that’s not true. It’s been stated it was all politics, and we know that’s not fair, as some good has happened as a result. Now, if we’re going to argue about the very specific loan forgiveness being effective, then sure, it has been currently struck down. But I have trouble believing that nothing good has come from it, if only by forcing this convo, and convos like these taking place. Sometimes you have to do something loud to get people’s attention; it certainly got yours.

tivert 3y ago
> Sure, but I know that YOU know that people talk about these items together. If I know anything, it's that "people" are often simply wrong about stuff. If a bunch of people wrongly thing two different things are the same, that doesn't make it so. > The general tone of this convo has been that nothing helpful has come from these actions, and that’s not true. I don't care about the general tone, I was only responding to the statement that A "did" good because different-thing B "did good." My understanding is this thread is specifically about the student loan forgiveness plan that was just ruled unconstitutional, not some amorphous larger thing (which may be how you personally think about it).
- oddtuple 3y ago
  I don’t know what more to say, so please read this and get back to me. Research shows this would actually be a good thing https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/rpr_2_6.pdf https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/rpr_2_6.pdf
  - Anticlockwise 3y ago
    You've written at least half a dozen comments linking to this study and claiming that it disputes everyone's opposition to the student loan cancellation plan. I'm skeptical that you've even read it. I just did. It says that the cancelation will not raise the deficit as much as naively would be expected (but will raise it some) because of the general economic benefits that will come from the people spending money on things other than student loan payments. It doesn't say anything about the moral hazard of paying off student loans for those who haven't paid them, while ignoring those who have. Or about the likelihood that a student loan cancelation will need to happen again. Or that those two things together will encourage people not to pay their student loans in the future, hoping for another cancelation. Or that universities will be able to raise prices even more because they expect further cancellations. Sure, the deficit may not go up as much as naively you'd expect it to. And we won't have to pay it off with taxes immediately. (we'll just have more debt instead). But you seem to not care about all of the reasons that people oppose this, and just throw a pdf in their face, hoping it'll shut them up even when it doesn't argue what you want it to argue. Please stop.

tivert 3y ago

> Sure, but I know that YOU know that people talk about these items together. If I know anything, it's that "people" are often simply wrong about stuff. If a bunch of people wrongly thing two different things are the same, that doesn't make it so. > The general tone of this convo has been that nothing helpful has come from these actions, and that’s not true. I don't care about the general tone, I was only responding to the statement that A "did" good because different-thing B "did good." My understanding is this thread is specifically about the student loan forgiveness plan that was just ruled unconstitutional, not some amorphous larger thing (which may be how you personally think about it).

oddtuple 3y ago
I don’t know what more to say, so please read this and get back to me. Research shows this would actually be a good thing https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/rpr_2_6.pdf https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/rpr_2_6.pdf
- Anticlockwise 3y ago
  You've written at least half a dozen comments linking to this study and claiming that it disputes everyone's opposition to the student loan cancellation plan. I'm skeptical that you've even read it. I just did. It says that the cancelation will not raise the deficit as much as naively would be expected (but will raise it some) because of the general economic benefits that will come from the people spending money on things other than student loan payments. It doesn't say anything about the moral hazard of paying off student loans for those who haven't paid them, while ignoring those who have. Or about the likelihood that a student loan cancelation will need to happen again. Or that those two things together will encourage people not to pay their student loans in the future, hoping for another cancelation. Or that universities will be able to raise prices even more because they expect further cancellations. Sure, the deficit may not go up as much as naively you'd expect it to. And we won't have to pay it off with taxes immediately. (we'll just have more debt instead). But you seem to not care about all of the reasons that people oppose this, and just throw a pdf in their face, hoping it'll shut them up even when it doesn't argue what you want it to argue. Please stop.