4 ms·

There's more than hurricanes, though. What of forest fires, floods, and tornadoes? You can't fault people for living within proximity of trees, rivers, and fl

There's more than hurricanes, though. What of forest fires, floods, and tornadoes? You can't fault people for living within proximity of trees, rivers, and flat areas.

qup 3y ago
Okay, how about California's forest fires? They've been in the news. I'm seeing a lot of fault being passed around like "hey, we should have been doing prescribed burns for hundreds of years". We've had lots and lots of forest fires. I won't be moving my family into the California wilderness. But I do live in a wild place, and a fire is a possibility. I pay for insurance to cover that, so I believe I'm footing my own bill as far as my own personal involvement. I wouldn't expect to receive a dime from anyone else; I never did during a hurricane.
- fullstop 3y ago
  > I wouldn't expect to receive a dime from anyone else; I never did during a hurricane. You did, though, indirectly. Federal funds were used in lieu of state funds (your taxes). In essence, I paid for some of your cleanup. I agree that you didn't receive a personal check from the federal government, but you did benefit from their action. Even your insurance is done with this method -- you pay an insurance premium which is far less than what would be paid out in the event that your house burned to the ground. If we're using the same insurance company, my premiums go toward that as well.
  - qup 3y ago
    Okay, but does that come back around and lead you to believe that's the same as paying back loans that individuals took of their own volition? I walked into your trap, you got me--my region received hurricane funds. So now we should pay Chad's student loan back even though Chad said he'd do that himself? Huh?
    - fullstop 3y ago
      I'm saying that it's hypocritical to tolerate federal assistance in one case but not in another. I live in a safe area, away from forest fires, tornadoes, flooding, and hurricanes, but I'm okay with sending federal aid to other states as a cost of living in a society. On the other hand, we have a lot of people, about 20% of borrowers, who are in default and in dire financial situations. They will likely end up homeless or destitute, which has obvious negative impact to the community. For these people, forgiveness would be life changing. If you look into the program, it wasn't going to forgive 100% of the loans, but rather a smaller amount and it was income limited. Does it really hurt you because someone else is helped? I certainly didn't feel hurt when my tax dollars went toward your hurricane damage. I'm saying this as someone who saved for my children's education, and started doing so years before they were born.
      - qup 3y ago
        I never claimed to be hurt. I do not feel hurt when someone else is helped. I still don't think that absolves people of the responsibility they put upon themselves. You're totally ignoring that part of the argument, and it's really my only argument. And clearly we need to pick and choose where to spend our money; we can't aid every cause. That doesn't make everyone a hypocrite. I don't think you've even made a case that I am one; your alternative idea of "federal assistance to the state of Florida" doesn't really compare well to "helping individuals repay loans they directly benefit from"; it's not at all the same class of spending. Anyway no, people who are against this very specific form of federal aid are not hypocrites if they support some other very specific form of federal aid. That is not a logical conclusion.
        fullstop 3y ago
        It is not full loan forgiveness, they would still be responsible for the remainder. I find it funny that we tolerate fabricating billions of dollars to bail out banks with TARP, wipe out billions (trillions?) of dollars in tax revenue with the TCJA, but draw the line when it comes to actually helping the little guy. I'm even okay with being more strict with the income requirements so that those who are truly struggling can contribute more to society. Would you accept debt forgiveness for those currently in default? Keep in mind that declaring bankruptcy is not a viable option for these people as student loans are not discharged in that case.

There's more than hurricanes, though. What of forest fires, floods, and tornadoes? You can't fault people for living within proximity of trees, rivers, and flat areas.

qup 3y ago

Okay, how about California's forest fires? They've been in the news. I'm seeing a lot of fault being passed around like "hey, we should have been doing prescribed burns for hundreds of years". We've had lots and lots of forest fires. I won't be moving my family into the California wilderness. But I do live in a wild place, and a fire is a possibility. I pay for insurance to cover that, so I believe I'm footing my own bill as far as my own personal involvement. I wouldn't expect to receive a dime from anyone else; I never did during a hurricane.

fullstop 3y ago
> I wouldn't expect to receive a dime from anyone else; I never did during a hurricane. You did, though, indirectly. Federal funds were used in lieu of state funds (your taxes). In essence, I paid for some of your cleanup. I agree that you didn't receive a personal check from the federal government, but you did benefit from their action. Even your insurance is done with this method -- you pay an insurance premium which is far less than what would be paid out in the event that your house burned to the ground. If we're using the same insurance company, my premiums go toward that as well.
- qup 3y ago
  Okay, but does that come back around and lead you to believe that's the same as paying back loans that individuals took of their own volition? I walked into your trap, you got me--my region received hurricane funds. So now we should pay Chad's student loan back even though Chad said he'd do that himself? Huh?
  - fullstop 3y ago
    I'm saying that it's hypocritical to tolerate federal assistance in one case but not in another. I live in a safe area, away from forest fires, tornadoes, flooding, and hurricanes, but I'm okay with sending federal aid to other states as a cost of living in a society. On the other hand, we have a lot of people, about 20% of borrowers, who are in default and in dire financial situations. They will likely end up homeless or destitute, which has obvious negative impact to the community. For these people, forgiveness would be life changing. If you look into the program, it wasn't going to forgive 100% of the loans, but rather a smaller amount and it was income limited. Does it really hurt you because someone else is helped? I certainly didn't feel hurt when my tax dollars went toward your hurricane damage. I'm saying this as someone who saved for my children's education, and started doing so years before they were born.
    - qup 3y ago
      I never claimed to be hurt. I do not feel hurt when someone else is helped. I still don't think that absolves people of the responsibility they put upon themselves. You're totally ignoring that part of the argument, and it's really my only argument. And clearly we need to pick and choose where to spend our money; we can't aid every cause. That doesn't make everyone a hypocrite. I don't think you've even made a case that I am one; your alternative idea of "federal assistance to the state of Florida" doesn't really compare well to "helping individuals repay loans they directly benefit from"; it's not at all the same class of spending. Anyway no, people who are against this very specific form of federal aid are not hypocrites if they support some other very specific form of federal aid. That is not a logical conclusion.
      - fullstop 3y ago
        It is not full loan forgiveness, they would still be responsible for the remainder. I find it funny that we tolerate fabricating billions of dollars to bail out banks with TARP, wipe out billions (trillions?) of dollars in tax revenue with the TCJA, but draw the line when it comes to actually helping the little guy. I'm even okay with being more strict with the income requirements so that those who are truly struggling can contribute more to society. Would you accept debt forgiveness for those currently in default? Keep in mind that declaring bankruptcy is not a viable option for these people as student loans are not discharged in that case.