Yenrub
Footballguy
Regarding #2, I recall reading someplace that the Trump tax breaks for people earning less than 100K are set to expire in 2021 but the corporate tax breaks were permanent
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Biggest Fears of a Biden Presidency (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter TripItUp
- Start date
supermike80
Footballguy
Dickies
Footballguy
Make the student debt held by lenders dischargeable in bankruptcy, but give the option for a 0% interest non-dischargeable government student loan to reduce costs. Offer the same 0% non-dischargeable student loan to people attending public higher education institutions. I'm sure there are some pitfalls here as I just thought this up in 5 minutes.
One of my biggest issues with student loans is that I feel they are the biggest driver in the increased cost to attend college. I can see why people don't want to eliminate student loan debt, but I don't think anyone would disagree that the current state of student loans as well as the cost to attend college are huge ####### problems.
Dickies
Footballguy
To bring this back to the original topic and not student loans... this is a solid list that I'm struggling to add to.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
An 18 year old without a cosigner, without a credit history can get a $50K car loan with reasonable interest rates?
ETA- Not to mention with limited job prospects because they are going to college.
ETA2 - And I get that you want to make college loans just like any other similar loan, just that when you do this no one is getting a college loan without a credit history, a job, and/or a cosigner. Maybe that is good policy in terms of driving down the growth of college costs or ending the problems of student debt but it is horrible policy in a vacuum for providing opportunity to the 60% or so of jobs that require more than a high school degree. Sure there are other means to address those issues which could be part of a comprehensive plan, but in a vacuum of a standalone change this would be terrible.
Last edited by a moderator:
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
I agree, and would add:
6. Ramping up foreign military operations and/or starting new wars.
7. Ramping up Wall Street handouts and gifts to the banking industry in the guise of COVID relief or other programs.
I have no illusions that Biden's team will do anything meaningful to help the working class or protect the environment.
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
Aren't there other ways to address this issue without giving bankers massive government handouts via guaranteed non-dischargeable loans? What about grants, or direct funding of universities?
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
Yes, I was a fan of Bernie's plan to make all public universities tuition free. That strikes me as far superior to our current system.
Zow
Footballguy
DocHolliday
Footballguy
The price of going to college seems like a big problem and a big cause of the massive student loan debt. Sure, you can go to community college or small state schools but there is a difference between those schools and some of the other high priced universities. Control the costs. Control student loans. Maybe Covid will help young people see that they can attend local schools and be successful. That success may change the opinion of this supposed necessity to attend prestigious schools and end up $100k in the whole upon graduation.
I do hope whatever we do, it's not this way by Executive Order. From the article I linked to earlier.
DocHolliday
Footballguy
I’m not afraid of Biden installing massive tax hikes. I’m more concerned about the realistic possibility of a few small tax hikes that hurt small, medium, and large businesses enough that it hurts the economy enough to start a downward spiral. The economy is like dominos. Once some jobs are lost, those folks spend less which impacts other businesses. More jobs are lost and the dominos continue to fall. The two years before Covid were pretty great with increased job numbers and increased pay. Trump was an a hole but he had the economy going in the right direction.
DocHolliday
Footballguy
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
This is a very real possibility, but Biden -- a crusty old white guy -- was way ahead of Obama on gay marriage. He's not quite as fossilized as people sometimes make it sound like.
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
He said it out loud first when he wasn't really supposed to. I don't know if that makes him "way ahead" or just more willing to take political risks.
The Commish
Footballguy
Correct....if you keep reading, I make a brief comment about this.....THIS issue is not unique to loans and it persists across all loans. It's a symptom of a MUCH larger problem that will continue to exist regardless of the "patch" you put on loans. THIS issue is taken care of by addressing issues around opportunity and "the system" we have that is much more systemic in nature.
The Commish
Footballguy
Dickies
Footballguy
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
You probably know this already, but the average student who graduates with debt only owes about $30,000. That's no big deal and isn't even close to "crisis" territory.
Folks with student loans tend to fall into one of several buckets. Somebody who borrows ~$30K and graduates with an undergraduate degree in psychology or something isn't going to have any problem repaying that loan. Similarly, somebody who borrows a boatload of money to pursue a professional graduate degree like an MBA or MD is probably going to be fine. None of us should really be shedding any tears for freshly-credentialed cardiologists, for example.
There are really only two groups of people who -- as groups -- have a problem. One is folks who borrow a significant amount of money for school but never finish their degree. The problem in their case is that they have debt, but not the higher future income that allow for easy repayment. The other group is people who got ripped off by for-profit schools, some of which are not far removed from deliberate scam operations designed to rip off the government via the student loan program. I know a person who is walking around with over $100K in loans from Capella (the university, not our friendly FBG) for a graduate degree she earned in organizational behavior. It's a low-value degree that many employers won't accept as an actual credential. She's legitimately kind of screwed.
I'm extremely skeptical that we need blanket loan forgiveness for these two groups.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
Well, either way is good. I don't care whether Biden legitimately gets it or whether he's just adopting the position out of cold political expediency.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Most of the changes to the individual taxes expire in 2025 and start phasing out in 2021. This is because to get the bill under reconciliation rules it had to add less that $1.5 trillion to the deficit over ten years and not add anything to the deficit beyond that ten year window. (Or something really close to that.)
Dr_Zaius
Footballguy
Not to derail, but is there any procedural way to stop nonsense like this? The GWB tax cuts and the ACA were packaged in the same patently dishonest way due to the reconciliation rules, and I'm sure there are other examples I'm not aware of. It seems like the OMB should be allowed to score based on the obviously popular benefits NOT suddenly stopping at the end.
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
I was about to post that this belongs in the ending the filibuster conversation that existed in one of these threads.
I have little worry that Biden will do something like forgiving student loans. He seems to listen to the competent expert advisors he surrounds himself with. I think it'd be hard to find a competent economic advisor to endorse something like that (though I suppose a competent political advisor may endorse it).
My main worry with Hillary would have been that she'd create a humongous backlash among the far-right-conspiracy-theorist crowd. (For that reason, I'm not entirely convinced that the country would be in a better position now if she'd won in 2016.) I think Biden is about the most anodyne candidate possible in that regard. The craziness should be muted as much as possible (with "as much as possible" being an unfortunately grave qualifier).
My main worry with Biden is his age. He seems to be in good physical health, but still. In terms of his mental clarity, he's no Pete Buttigieg, but he should be fine if he can maintain his present state. At his age, though, nothing is guaranteed.
Other than that, I think he's a very good fit for what ails our democracy right now.
My main worry with Hillary would have been that she'd create a humongous backlash among the far-right-conspiracy-theorist crowd. (For that reason, I'm not entirely convinced that the country would be in a better position now if she'd won in 2016.) I think Biden is about the most anodyne candidate possible in that regard. The craziness should be muted as much as possible (with "as much as possible" being an unfortunately grave qualifier).
My main worry with Biden is his age. He seems to be in good physical health, but still. In terms of his mental clarity, he's no Pete Buttigieg, but he should be fine if he can maintain his present state. At his age, though, nothing is guaranteed.
Other than that, I think he's a very good fit for what ails our democracy right now.
MAC_32
Footballguy
I don't think this is a derailment at all. This is a major issue that I...feared most would generally ignore until after it's too late. Looks like that's being proven right - and it absolutely should be included in a thread about 'fear.' Even though I won't hold the incoming administration accountable for it - and whatever they do to try and correct it will be graded on a curve. Fact is this administration overtly collaborated with a republican congress on a cash giveaway to corporations and the rich and okeydoked the rest of us. And we let them. Cause we're a nation full of fools.
Summer Wheat
Footballguy
I wanted to go to a nice 4 year university but could not afford it. I went to a community college, then transferred and commuted to a university. Payed my own way for everything. Took me a little longer but I graduated without any debt. Have friends who attended schools they could not afford, partied, got so-so jobs, are in debt and now they will get forgiveness?? That would piss me off.
So am I going to get a nice check for doing things the right way?
I voted for Biden so while we are at it why not forgive my home mortgage?
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr_Zaius
Footballguy
Not sure - I think it only tangentially relates to the filibuster. I'd be fine with going back to original "real" filibuster rules where you either keep talking or the filibuster's over, but even aside from reconciliation specifically, the way those things were packaged dovetails with the way these things are always sold - it's all unicorns and rainbows from the party in power and the end of America from the party out of power. If we need to debase common accounting practices on the road to ramming something through, can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs apparently.
If we had a media that actually functioned, the tradeoffs would be put in front of the American people to make informed decisions, rather than them regurgitating misleading talking points and winking to the camera while they watch the rubes fall for the con.
I know there are a ton of people who'd love the free money of erasing loans.
But I also know there are a ton of people that fit right in line with this post.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
The passage of the ACA didn't really depend on the CBO scoring in the same way as the tax bills, but there was plenty of procedural nonsense involved that this technicality doesn't change your original point. I also don't think it is really possible to "grade" those CBO and GAO analysis of the ACA because what was scored never actually saw the light of day. But mostly I don't think that the CBO and GAO "debase common accounting practices". I think they do the best job with the limited information they have making static projection in a very dynamic world. If the CBO and GAO had "looked the other way" with the tax cuts then I think that the tax cuts would have been permanent. So I don't think this is the problem.
Now if I assume that you wanted the Bush and/or Trump tax cuts to have been permanent from the get go then I think the elimination of the filibuster rules might have accomplished this as the GOP would have had the votes (I'd think). I'm not so sure that the ACA ever gets done if not for the crisis of Scott Brown's election. I could imagine that democrats would have kept on having hearings and discussions and such but never having enough of a consensus to pass anything. So while I'm not certain either way, it could very well be that the filibuster rules and the lost of the super majority was the trigger that made 2010 different from other attempts. Maybe!
sho nuff
Footballguy
Like many social programs...there is that balancing act.
If we went to government healthcare in many forms...would the same argument not happen..."I paid for X number of years...why should so and so now get it "free"?" Im sure is a struggle to deal with and understand that much of what they do will come with complaints of unfairness from somewhere.
Its up to them then to sell the public on it...if they feel it is beneficial to us as a country. Show us how...if there are studies or numbers...even better. Market the idea in a way to minimize such complaints.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
The problem you originally described was 100% attributable to the filibuster. The only reason that all this CBO scoring of reconciliation bills matters is because such bills can pass with a simple majority rather than 60 votes. If every bill could pass with a simple majority we wouldn't need to do that stuff any more.
Dr_Zaius
Footballguy
You're correct, but I was trying to shift to a broader argument by drawing a parallel between the scoring process and the way things generally get sold to the public.
I think the ACA still would have happened without reconciliation as the Democrats were all-in on getting something passed. Now, whether the pound of flesh a Republican 60th vote would have demanded would have made the final thing substantially different, I have no idea.
You are correct, what I would like is for no funny business of sunsetting things that you have no intention of actually sunsetting, or having temporary revenues hide the net cost of a bill. If the policy you're advocating for is so great, you should be able to admit its net fiscal cost without losing people's support.
Maybe. Aren't news ratings tanking? Some of it is probably cord-cutting, but most people I talk to express displeasure with their news choices. Although how representative my circle is of the rest of the country, I have no idea.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
There wasn't a taker in 2010. I've posted before that the most powerful person in the Senate in 2010 would have been the 60th vote from a GOP member. They could have had just about any bill contain whatever [semi reasonable to democrats] amendments they believed in enough to cast that "bipartisan" vote. Now I'm not arguing one lone GOP senator really makes a bill bipartisan, just that the democrats were desperate on more than one occasion to make that claim in 2009 and 2010 no matter how weak the foundation for the claim. But no one took the opportunity.
Last edited by a moderator:
Summer Wheat
Footballguy
Everybody wants "free" money. We all know nothing is really free.
Deciding who gets what is going to be as difficult as it gets and I assume there will be tons of fraud as well.
Will all the people who gave up things like vacations, driving better cars, living in a nicer home, people who planned and saved get a rebate of some sort?
Why not make whatever is owed interest free?
Capella
Footballguy
America summed up in one post. Screw everybody else what can I get out of it.
Last edited by a moderator:
MAC_32
Footballguy
I'm not surprised I haven't received a response since I think sabotaging the economy is the republican strategy, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
rockaction
Footballguy
No way. That's unfair to impute that to his argument. I personally paid $100,000 back in student loans and I don't expect the government to allow free riders, either. And much like the poster you're quoting, I had to sacrifice things to even get through school. I did it without incurring about $200,000 in debt. And then the market for legal jobs just tanked when I was graduating.America summed up in one post. Screw everybody else what can I get out of it.
No way should people that financed educations they couldn't afford get relief when I've certainly worked my ### off to pay my fair share of a debt. That's ludicrous.
Dr_Zaius
Footballguy
You're probably right. I don't remember a huge push for a token R for bipartisan purposes until the Brown election forced this issue, at which point maybe the well had been poisoned by the rancorous debate. But, I'll defer to your memory as it was a long time ago and the details of the timeline are getting fuzzy to me. Party discipline being what it is these days I'm sure there would have been a huge price for said Republican - might have had to switch parties as they probably would have been stripped of committees and seniority.
rockaction
Footballguy
No takers in my recollection, either. The Scott Brown win in Massachusetts told everyone what even more liberal areas thought about the lie about keeping your doctor.
Dr_Zaius
Footballguy
Yeah, this would be my objection as well, and why giving a blanket gift of money to a certain subset seems inherently unfair. I know several people personally who chose a less prestigious/desirable (in their eyes anyway) school for financial reasons. And people who put off a nicer car or home to prioritize paying off student loans. To me any sort of restitution needs to be universal, not tied to how fiscally irresponsible you were.
In my limited thinking on the subject, putting the accredited institution on the hook makes the most sense - if Ivy League State convinces Johnny to take out $150K of loans for their product, then they can make the government whole 15 years later when Johnny is destitute.
JAA
Footballguy
I paid $400/mo for 9 years to repay my student loans. It taught me a good lesson.
Last edited by a moderator:
JAA
Footballguy
GroveDiesel
Footballguy
Agreed. One of the best things long term for our nation would be to get away from the use of Executive Orders. The President’s role is not to create rules, regulations and programs, it’s to enact the ones that Congress passes.
Capella
Footballguy
Similar threads
