Student Loan Forgiveness - US

[Scaff]

Wasn't trying to deflect.

And I have no family in any other country. Hell, I have no family in any other state. My entire family lives within 45 minutes of each other. So I just find it difficult to care about what happens in another country when what happens in that country doesn't affect me in the least. So the education system in another country is worse than the one in which I live (speaking generally, not particularly about THIS country). I should be concerned about that? Why? It's not something I can fix or do anything about.

Regardless of if you are aware of it, it does have direct and indirect impacts on your life. It is, for example, literally impossible to 100% 'buy American, so things you buy will be directly or indirectly the product of other people, from other nations. Do you think that the reason costs have risen so much, 'gas' (to use the Americanism for a liquid called Petrol) in particular isn't the result of what is happening on a global scale? Please tell me you aren't so naive as to believe that it is just because 'the president is a socialist' (keep it quiet, but he's not).

Some might say it makes me a bad person. So be it. I can't control what others think about me, nor do I care (outside of my family and true friends). I know nothing about the education system, the homelessness, the welfare, the social issues, or anything else in any other country. It's not something I can do anything about, nor is it anything that affects me, personally. So why should I worry about it?

without meaning this as rude, it doesn't make you a bad person, it makes you an ignorant person. Not in a throwaway insulting manner, but literally that you are ignorant of others, not just in the rest of world, but I suspect your own country...

Yes, people have said it's about decency. But it's not that I don't care about people. I just care about certain people (and, no, it's not just those that disagree with me). I'm of no importance to anyone and will do nothing important in my life that will impact anyone else. And I'm OK with that. And I have no quarrel with anyone who thinks that about me or holds me in a lower regard than someone else. That's their prerogative. I can't control the way people think or what they say. They're free to do both of those things.

...and I think it's had a profoundly damaging effect on who you are.

But to me, it's just odd to care so much about what goes on in another country on the other side of the planet.

Travel. Get a passport and go to another country, both Canada and Mexico are well within reach for the majority of the US. Meet people from other cultures, in their culture.


“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts.”
— Mark Twain,

 

[Danoff]

If I could, I'd move to the mountains and not talk to or interact with other people except maybe twice a month. I'm not a smart person. And that's fine with me.... I'm the LAST person anyone should call for anything important or for any advice on any subject of real importance.

Turns out that student loan forgiveness is a "subject of real importance". So why did you come in here blasting advice on the subject?

You're poorly adapted to society and you seem to understand that. You're ignorant, and you seem content with that. Great*. Why the big opinions about society that require being informed then?

To be truly, and probably overly, blunt, people with your particular attitudes toward society and education do not tend to make tons of money. So my guess, and again this is just a guess, is that you pay very little in tax, and so you probably don't need to be concerned at all with these questions, because you are probably minimally affected.

The following chart is already wrong, for several reasons. It does bad math by assuming one taxpayer per filing, and ignoring that corporations etc. are also filers. So take it with a huge grain of salt. That being said, it still seems like it's the best number out there. This is for the whole 10 years.

For a rough guess of annual cost, divide each figure by 10. So if you make 100k per year, about $200 of your taxes will go to student loan forgiveness (kinda). Will your taxes go up? No, that would take a tax hike. So the cost has to be made up by reduced spending elsewhere, increased revenue due to economic growth, or inflation ultimately.

If there is a tax hike specifically to pay for this, count on it being aimed at the rich (this is the democrats after all), so then $0 of your taxes would go to pay for the program.

Most of the recipients of forgiveness will be under 100k in income, so if you subtract $10k from this figure, you'll see that recipients are coming out ahead, but they contribute back some in tax. Recipients making over $200k can be estimated to not come out ahead overall.

*not really

 

[BloodRaven]

Having then clicked on your profile to check if you're the age you sound, you sure are. Finding it tough in an era where you can't just be a dick to everyone and have that deemed acceptable? It sure seems like you're getting pushback to your "I say and do what I want" attitude.

Sure I'm getting pushback. But it's from people I don't know. I don't know you, or anyone else on this board, personally. And no one on this board knows me, personally. Does that make it different? Better? Worse? I don't know. And I honestly don't care. (yes, I know you y'all know). Nobody on this board would give me the shirt off their back for any reason whatsoever. They don't know me. And people generally tend to not do things for complete strangers. At least, that's how I've seen the world. I'll help those I know, my family, my friends, my neighbors. But why would I help someone who wouldn't help me even in the most dire of situations?

Actually, part of being an adult is developing some empathy and respect for other people. Children are the ones who are generally accepted as being selfish and self-centred, because they haven't yet learned the value of community.

And what if those adult's have no empathy or respect for me? I was raised to respect people. I really was. But as I've gotten older, and seen a lot of the bad things in this world, I find it difficult to have empathy for those who won't even help themselves. And I'm not talking about those who CAN'T help themselves. I'm talking about fully capable people who simply won't help themselves because "someone else will do it for me".

Check out the guy who has never faced true hardship in his life.

Really? And you know this for a fact? I've been hungry for days because I had no food to eat. I've actually been homeless because I had no place to live for longer than just being between residences while I moved. I've been without a car to get back and forth to a job that I didn't have. Granted, I wasn't hungry or homeless for years at a time like true homeless people are. But it was long enough to know that I NEVER want to be that way, again. It really sucked. So I made sure to never be that way, again. Being hungry and not knowing the next time you'll be able to eat is terrible. Being homeless sucks, but it's better than being hungry. You can find shelter in a lot of places to get out of the elements. But that won't put food in your stomach.

No it isn't. You used it in a way that was definitely not a term of endearment. You mean that when you said "there are WAY more pussies now than there were then" you meant that there are way more people you're OK with now than then?

OK, that's true. I did meant it in a different way than as a term of endearment. I'll agree to that.

You actually think being rude to other people counts as "not letting anyone walk all over you and standing up for yourself"?

Dude. What the ****. Do you actually accept that these other people are also humans? Or do you just have the world's worst case of Main Protagonist Syndrome?

I didn't start out that way. But being treated like a piece of **** because I was always so nice got to be tiresome. So I went the other way. I'm abrasive, I know that. I say what's on my mind. If people don't like what I have to say, then they can choose to not listen to me. I have no problems with that.

Yes, I accept that they are also humans. And I've seen humans be WAY worse than me on more than a few occasions. I'll be nice to someone, until it's time to not be nice. But if someone asks me a question, I'll give them my honest answer. And a lot of the times, they don't like that answer. Well, I'm sorry (not really). You (speaking in generalities) asked me for an opinion or for an answer on a subject. I gave it to you. But don't get pissed when you don't like my answer. I've gotten in trouble at my previous job because I gave customers honest answers. Then the customer would go fuss to the manager. Then I'd get a "talking to" about my attitude towards customers. And even if I told them what they asked, and what I answered, they still didn't care. If they wanted me to lie to them, then they needed to find someone else for that job (granted, they had to when I left to take a work-from-home job). THAT'S the kind of stuff that pisses me off about people. Why can't people be honest with each other about anything? Why do they need to tiptoe around their feelings and not say anything that might make them upset or piss them off. If I ask a question or for an opinion, I want a 100%, no ******** answer. I may not like it, but at least I'll (hopefully) get an honest answer. Yet when I do that, I'm seen as the asshole, or dick, or whatever other nomenclature people want to use. And I don't care. If you don't like my answers, then stop asking me questions.

No. You don't get to claim that you actually believe this after the last few posts of ranting about rugged individualism.

Actually, I do get the claim that. It IS OK to need help. We all need help. I just prefer to help myself than rely on others that could possibly let me down.

Apart from the fact that like it or not, America is seen as somewhat of a leader in the Western world, and so things that happen in legislation in the US are likely to at least provoke discussion and review in other countries?

I believe this country is seen as more a laughing-stock than an actual leader. I've read so many stories and news articles where people in other countries talk about our crime rates, our homelessness, etc. To me, that's not seeing it as somewhat of a leader; unless you're talking about a leader in crime.

Yeah, that's not how it works in most of the world. What goes on with our allies and the countries around us does actually have an effect.

There are probably things that go on in the world that affect you to, but you wouldn't know because you admit your own ignorance about anything outside your immediate sphere. You can't possibly know whether you're being affected or not if you don't know what's happening.

And I'm OK with that. It's not something I can change or do anything about, so why worry about it.

Yeah, it is. You've made that pretty clear. You don't want to be involved with anything that isn't directly benefiting you.

I should've been more clear, that's my bad. I meant in the sense of people I personally know; family, true friends, neighbors.

Travel. Get a passport and go to another country, both Canada and Mexico are well within reach for the majority of the US. Meet people from other cultures, in their culture.

That's the thing, though. I have no desire to visit another country.

I'm no racist or bigot or anything like that, I just have no desire to go to another country. I'm content with staying right where I'm at and being who I am. Also, there's the money thing. As another poster stated, I don't make, nor have, a lot of money. Granted, I'm working on that to maybe have more money when I retire than I do right now.

Ignorant (as another poster stated)? Sure. I'm ignorant of a lot of things. But that doesn't mean I have the will or desire to learn about them.

 

[BloodRaven]

To be truly, and probably overly, blunt, people with your particular attitudes toward society and education do not tend to make tons of money. So my guess, and again this is just a guess, is that you pay very little in tax, and so you probably don't need to be concerned at all with these questions, because you are probably minimally affected.

My tax rate is 22%. And that's just for federal income tax; that doesn't count state and county tax. So it may not be a lot, but it's enough to where I feel it.

And I'll take someone being blunt rather than holding back. I can respect that. I'm a firm believer in being truthful with someone rather than holding back due to their feelings.

 

[Danoff]

My tax rate is 22%. And that's just for federal income tax; that doesn't count state and county tax. So it may not be a lot, but it's enough to where I feel it.

Marginal or effective? I'm guessing you mean marginal since 22% corresponds to a specific marginal tax bracket. If you're filing single, within that bracket, you pay anywhere from 0% to 17% at the absolute maximum in federal income tax*. Not 22%. To have an effective tax rate of 22%, you'd likely need to be somewhere near $200k annual income.

This corresponds in the breakdown I showed to about (and this could be a big over estimate) $177 of your taxes per year going to student loans debt forgiveness. Approximately 1% of your taxes. If you're saying... hang on, I paid way less than $17,700 in federal taxes last year, then the $177 is an over-estimate. If that sounds like a lot, compare to people paying well over $1k per year. The chart stops at $500k income, but the amount goes up from there.

*actually the bottom end is negative in this tax bracket, but I can't be bothered to figure out what the possible negative percentage is.


Edit:

The other taxes - state, county, social security, etc. all pay for other stuff, none of that goes toward loan forgiveness.

 

[BloodRaven]

Marginal or effective? I'm guessing you mean marginal since 22% corresponds to a specific marginal tax bracket. If you're filing single, within that bracket, you pay anywhere from 0% to 17% at the absolute maximum in federal income tax*. Not 22%. To have an effective tax rate of 22%, you'd likely need to be somewhere near $200k annual income.

This corresponds in the breakdown I showed to about (and this could be a big over estimate) $177 of your taxes per year going to student loans debt forgiveness. Approximately 1% of your taxes. If you're saying... hang on, I paid way less than $17,700 in federal taxes last year, then the $177 is an over-estimate. If that sounds like a lot, compare to people paying well over $1k per year. The chart stops at $500k income, but the amount goes up from there.

*actually the bottom end is negative in this tax bracket, but I can't be bothered to figure out what the possible negative percentage is.


Edit:

The other taxes - state, county, social security, etc. all pay for other stuff, none of that goes toward loan forgiveness.

I looked up the tax brackets for single filers for what I make in a year. It says my tax rate is 22% for my taxable income. I know nothing about marginal or effective. I just know that I get cut the maximum since I file singe with no dependents (which is what I am, unmarried with no kids).

I've never actually done the calculations with one of my pay stubs to see what my actual tax percentage is. That might be a bad thing, but taxes are way above my head so I just put down that I'm single with no dependents (which is true) and I get cut what I get cut. I usually get a refund, but it's not much.

 

[TexRex]

(which is what I am, unmarried with no kids)

 

[Danoff]

I looked up the tax brackets for single filers for what I make in a year. It says my tax rate is 22% for my taxable income. I know nothing about marginal or effective. I just know that I get cut the maximum since I file singe with no dependents (which is what I am, unmarried with no kids).

I've never actually done the calculations with one of my pay stubs to see what my actual tax percentage is. That might be a bad thing, but taxes are way above my head so I just put down that I'm single with no dependents (which is true) and I get cut what I get cut. I usually get a refund, but it's not much.

Ok, let me shed a little light on it, because it might change the way you view this whole thing.

You don't pay the marginal rate on all of your income, only the amount in the bracket. So here's the federal tax bracket:

Single Filing Status
Income	Tax Bracket
$9,950	10%
$40,525	12%
$86,375	22%

So if you have $86,375 of taxable income, you pay 10% on everything up to $9,950, 12% on everything between $40,525 and $9,950, and 22% on everything between $40,525 and $86,375. So, for example, if you make $40,526 in taxable income per year, you pay 22% on the very last dollar you make, and your effective tax rate would be something like 11%. That's even though technically you're in the 22% marginal bracket.

There's an additional issue here, which is that you're not actually taxed on your total income. There are deductions, especially the standard deduction, which is $12,950 for single filers. Additionally, any 401k contributions, healthcare premiums, and other items that might come off prior to your W2 are removed. So $12,950 is the absolute minimum that your total annual salary is reduced by for the purpose of calculating tax.

Someone who makes 53k per year still has no taxable income in the 22% tax bracket. If they pay $100/month in healthcare premiums and another $100/month in 401k contributions, they can makes 55k per year annual salary and still have no taxable income in the 22% tax bracket.


So if you make $86k annual salary (the max for lining up with that bracket the way you did), you still need to take at a bare minimum, $13k off for the standard deduction. You'll end up with 73k taxable income. So at the very most, you're paying an effective (actual) tax rate of (73,000-40,525).22+(40,525-9,950).12+9950*.1 in tax which is $11,808 or 13.7% of your annual salary in federal income tax.

To make matters more complicated, if you happen to fall under $51k annual income (same bracket here) but claim 3 kids (still single), you qualify for the earned income tax credit, further reducing your effective tax rate. So someone making 51k would take the standard deduction (13k) and pay tax on 38k of income. That's (38000-9950).12+9950.1 which is $4,361 in tax. But they also get the earned income tax credit which is $6,728. That means their effective tax rate is negative.

That's why I said that people in the 22% marginal bracket can have all the way from 0 (negative) to 17% effective tax rate.

 

[BloodRaven]

Ok, let me shed a little light on it, because it might change the way you view this whole thing.

You don't pay the marginal rate on all of your income, only the amount in the bracket. So here's the federal tax bracket:

Single Filing Status
Income	Tax Bracket
$9,950	10%
$40,525	12%
$86,375	22%

So if you have $86,375 of taxable income, you pay 10% on everything up to $9,950, 12% on everything between $40,525 and $9,950, and 22% on everything between $40,525 and $86,375. So, for example, if you make $40,526 in taxable income per year, you pay 22% on the very last dollar you make, and your effective tax rate would be something like 11%. That's even though technically you're in the 22% marginal bracket.

There's an additional issue here, which is that you're not actually taxed on your total income. There are deductions, especially the standard deduction, which is $12,950 for single filers. Additionally, any 401k contributions, healthcare premiums, and other items that might come off prior to your W2 are removed. So $12,950 is the absolute minimum that your total annual salary is reduced by for the purpose of calculating tax.

Someone who makes 53k per year still has no taxable income in the 22% tax bracket. If they pay $100/month in healthcare premiums and another $100/month in 401k contributions, they can makes 55k per year annual salary and still have no taxable income in the 22% tax bracket.


So if you make $86k annual salary (the max for lining up with that bracket the way you did), you still need to take at a bare minimum, $13k off for the standard deduction. You'll end up with 73k taxable income. So at the very most, you're paying an effective (actual) tax rate of (73,000-40,525).22+(40,525-9,950).12+9950*.1 in tax which is $11,808 or 13.7% of your annual salary in federal income tax.

To make matters more complicated, if you happen to fall under $51k annual income (same bracket here) but claim 3 kids (still single), you qualify for the earned income tax credit, further reducing your effective tax rate. So someone making 51k would take the standard deduction (13k) and pay tax on 38k of income. That's (38000-9950).12+9950.1 which is $4,361 in tax. But they also get the earned income tax credit which is $6,728. That means their effective tax rate is negative.

That's why I said that people in the 22% marginal bracket can have all the way from 0 (negative) to 17% effective tax rate.

When I looked it up, the chart looked different (different sites do things different, duh). The one I looked up said 22% for $41,776 to $89,075. So I took that to mean that if you made anywhere between those amounts, you were taxed at 22%.

But reading over what you posted, it makes a bit more sense; from what I can understand, which isn't much. I don't know a thing about taxes. I just know that they get taken out of my paycheck every pay day.

 

[BloodRaven]

No arguments from me. I feel the same way. I've never had a desire to be married or have kids. I know I'd be the worst husband and the worst father.

 

[Imari]

Sure I'm getting pushback. But it's from people I don't know.

Uh huh.

But some people I know, personally, allow their lives to run totally on their feelings. And I've given them **** for it. One of them got a little upset with me about it. "Oh well. Maybe don't be an over-sensitive pussy" (my exact words to her). Too harsh? Maybe. But I don't care. It's how I am. I was raised to not let anyone walk all over me and to stand up for myself. If that made me abrasive, so be it.

I wasn't even referring to the pushback you're getting on GTP, because you made it clear that people push back against your attitudes in real life as well.

Really? And you know this for a fact?

It's possible that I'm wrong. But the alternative is that you're well aware of how unpleasant struggling to survive is, and aware that sometimes the world just ***** on people for reasons that are not their fault, and you're still okay with watching them suffer.

Given that you've widely professed your ignorance in other areas, I chose to believe that you were ignorant in this one as well instead of believing that you're a sadistic psychopath. But only you know the truth, I suppose.

You (speaking in generalities) asked me for an opinion or for an answer on a subject. I gave it to you. But don't get pissed when you don't like my answer.

First, you don't get to tell people how to feel.
Second, your opinion is that you get to say what you want and people should just accept that as you being "honest". But then you're somehow suggesting that other people shouldn't "get pissed" when they do the same to you?

Sounds like you're happy to dish it out, but you can't take it. There's a word for cowards like that.

Actually, I do get the claim that. It IS OK to need help. We all need help. I just prefer to help myself than rely on others that could possibly let me down.

You're allowed to make whatever choices you like for yourself. If you don't want to ask for help, don't. But you don't get to claim that you actually believe it's OK to need help when you've got whole paragraphs about hating welfare systems in general.

It's one thing to disagree with specific implementations of welfare systems, but when you say stuff like:

Paying taxes to fund someone else's life choices is something I REALLY don't like. Why should my taxes go to pay for someone else's mistakes/choices/stuff? I hate that there's a welfare system. That system just allows people to keep not working and be lazy and a drain on society, not a help.

Not only is this a profound misunderstanding of welfare (not everyone on welfare is there just because they are lazy and they chose to be, probably not even a majority), but it just shows that you do not want other people helped. At all. You do not want any of your money to fund anything that goes to anyone else.

That's what help is. You clearly don't want to do it, but you balk at actually saying it in clear terms. Which is odd, considering your general obsession with "honestly" and "saying what you mean".

I believe this country is seen as more a laughing-stock than an actual leader. I've read so many stories and news articles where people in other countries talk about our crime rates, our homelessness, etc. To me, that's not seeing it as somewhat of a leader; unless you're talking about a leader in crime.

Socially it may be a laughingstock in many ways, although I'm not sure most people are laughing when they see Americans suffering. It's sad to see so many people struggling to get by, it's sad seeing citizens being killed by those who should have protected them, it's sad seeing people in horrendous working and living conditions, it's sad to see those in power using that power to take more and more for themselves. It's only moderately amusing when Americans try to claim that they live in the greatest country in the world with the most freedoms, and even that kinda isn't that funny any more because it just reminds you of the misery.

But economically and militarily, America is still very central to the Western world and the world in general. Less so than it once was perhaps, but it's still a staggeringly large power and has an effect on world events that is far out of scale to the size of it's actual population. Whether you want to call that a leader or not, America is incredibly influential and will continue to be so for a long time.

And I'm OK with that. It's not something I can change or do anything about, so why worry about it.

You admit your ignorance, and you admit you don't care, but you cared enough to write several sizeable posts in which you expressed yourself in pretty emotional language.

I'm not sure you're as apathetic to this as you claim. This seems to be becoming a theme. You claim that you speak honestly and truthfully to a fault, but what you write has some wildly mixed messages in it. Either you're not consistently truthful, or you just don't have a well-formed and consistent opinion to express.

I should've been more clear, that's my bad. I meant in the sense of people I personally know; family, true friends, neighbors.

So you would help these people? Why? Just because someone happens to live next to you doesn't have anything to do with how lazy they are. People are lazy, mean and cruel. They don't deserve help, they should do what you did and help themselves. You've been very clear on this.

Why should these people be treated differently?

 

[UKMikey]

So you would help these people? Why? Just because someone happens to live next to you doesn't have anything to do with how lazy they are. People are lazy, mean and cruel. They don't deserve help, they should do what you did and help themselves. You've been very clear on this.

Why should these people be treated differently?

Quit being so honest. Can't you see it's hurting his fee-fees?

My guess is that he doesn't mind helping people in need who are in his immediate field of view because he can see the direct result of his alleviating their suffering, but he's either unable to or doesn't want to extrapolate their situation to other people in the country because out of sight, out of mind. Those strangers probably all vote Democrat anyway, so they deserve it.

 

[Rich S]

So those that took out loans for degrees they either got or quit trying to get. They don't
pay back those loans. But, everyone else has to pay for their poor choice. Those that got their degrees are probably making enough to pay back their loans, and probably did. So they get screwed too. Btw, Biden doesn't have the authority to do this anyway. But that doesn't matter to someone that want to cripple the country. We don't have this money, but that doesn't matter to liberals either.
Also, understand that all this does is drive up tuition more. Like any tax rebate .gov gives out. Think the $7500 tax credits for EV cars. Car manufacturers rised prices by the same amount just days later. Lol
I always think of the statement from AOC. who complained that she struggles to pay back her loan. Someone that buys a $60k Tesla and rents a DC condo for $2000 a month!
Remember all debts are paid. Either by the debtor or the creditor.

I AGREE.... And to the leftists millennials who who claim republicans have increased the debt, does this then make two wrongs into a right? So both lanes are red, so let's go right on through! LOL This assumption also assumes that the president has control of all spending which any American 8th grader knows isn't true. I'm sure over the course of time, democrats spend significantly more money and much of it is based on crapola if you ask me. And to the British on here complaining about lack of Biden support blah blah blah, you don't live here so how would you know what's right here in the USA! All I see each night is higher debt, breakdown of the economy I live in and higher prices on everything.

That's what happens when people spend money. If you don't want inflation, then by all means give money to rich people who won't spend it on anything. Seems kinda ineffective at the whole helping the country get along in a tough time thing though.

What does that even mean? Sounds like something Biden would say LOL. I mean, I don't have a problem with left wing people but common, at least make SOME sense. Even Bernie sanders makes more sense lol

 

[McLaren]

Boy, I love watching ignorant conservatives try to tell others, “You don’t live here!” Y’all just love telling on yourselves with comments like that.

 

[Scaff]

I AGREE.... And to the leftists millennials who who claim republicans have increased the debt, does this then make two wrongs into a right? So both lanes are red, so let's go right on through! LOL This assumption also assumes that the president has control of all spending which any American 8th grader knows isn't true. I'm sure over the course of time, democrats spend significantly more money and much of it is based on crapola if you ask me.

Republicans have increased the deficit and historically have done so to a significantly greater degree than Democrats.

Presidential Data 2020

And to the British on here complaining about lack of Biden support blah blah blah,

I'm not aware of anyone from the UK complaining about that at all.

you don't live here so how would you know what's right here in the USA!

Given that I have friends, family, and colleagues who live in the US, it seems quite a bit, and more than quite a few Americans.

All I see each night is higher debt, breakdown of the economy I live in and higher prices on everything.

Let me guess what news you watch....

 

[Joey D]

I AGREE.... And to the leftists millennials who who claim republicans have increased the debt, does this then make two wrongs into a right? So both lanes are red, so let's go right on through! LOL This assumption also assumes that the president has control of all spending which any American 8th grader knows isn't true. I'm sure over the course of time, democrats spend significantly more money and much of it is based on crapola if you ask me. And to the British on here complaining about lack of Biden support blah blah blah, you don't live here so how would you know what's right here in the USA! All I see each night is higher debt, breakdown of the economy I live in and higher prices on everything.

Democrats haven't contributed more to the national debt, it's been a bipartisan effort, with Republicans being slightly worse when it comes to spending willy-nilly.

Fact-check: Are Democrats responsible for the growth of the national debt?

In nominal dollars, since World War II, just over 60% of the growth in the debt took place under Republican presidents.

www.statesman.com

Which party adds more to deficits?

Hint: it’s the Republicans

towardsdatascience.com

How the past five presidents affected the deficit

This article was updated Aug. 2 to include a graph with the annual federal deficit in constant dollars. A viral post por

www.politifact.com

Also, "leftists Millennials"? Ok, boomer. Let me guess, you think Millennials are currently the ones in college instead of the cohort of people who are in their 30s, raising a family, and doing the normal middle age stuff.

 

[Danoff]

This post has been tree'd a bit, but I like my chart more so there.

I'm sure over the course of time, democrats spend significantly more money and much of it is based on crapola if you ask me.

The biggest deficits over the last 40 years have come from economic crises and have been bipartisan. Bush spent hard on the real-estate crash right into Obama's admin which continued the spending. Trump admin spent hard going into covid right into Biden's admin which spent hard on it as well.

I find it odd that people such as yourself seem to completely forget about the deficit when a republican is in the whitehouse. You pretend that it's the democrats that are doing this, but the only ones who cry hard about the deficit are the republicans, and they only do it when it's someone is assumed to spend on "crapola" like climate change.

There is one hypocrite in the room when it comes to deficits, and it's the republicans who whine about it until the moment they get a chance to do something about it.

 

[TexRex]

leftists millennials who who

 

[wheelhp]

I think there's a bit of a difference between, "Don't be a pUsSy, pay back your loans" & the simple fact that the cost of college with the current loan system in the US needs to be heavily addressed. Student forgiveness may not be the ideal scenario, but it's a start in some aspects.

What most people don't realize is why inflation exists, to start... Student forgiveness is good for the common man and also irrelevant to the asinine ways in which hold the economy together and make it profitable for business and real estate first and foremost. Anyone who defaults to senseless complaints about some students debt being wiped... I always assume the worst of them

 

[Pupik]

I paid back all my student loans about 20 years ago. But I didn't owe nearly as much as the average today.

I've made up for my $10,000 difference I'm not getting back by holding onto all those class textbooks I paid for. By my calculations, they ought to be worth...let's see, adjusting for inflation, use those differential equations from the class I failed...yes, at least $12,347 by now.

 

[UKMikey]

I paid back all my student loans about 20 years ago. But I didn't owe nearly as much as the average today.

I've made up for my $10,000 difference I'm not getting back by holding onto all those class textbooks I paid for. My may calculations, they ought to be worth...let's see, adjusting for inflation, use those differential equations from the class I failed...yes, at least $12,347 by now.

How are the june calculations?

 

[Pupik]

How are the june calculations?

I hate these new progressive lenses...

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

So a Lawyer for a Libertarian non-profit law firm in Indiana is suing the federal government because if he forgives his debt via the new program, he has to pay taxes on that forgiveness (because Indiana has decided to tax it on a state level) whereas he was hoping to run out the clock on an alternate forgiveness scheme that was tax free.

First - As far as I know, participation in the student loan forgiveness is not mandatory
Second - Indiana doesn't have to tax this forgiveness - they are only doing it to blow things up

There isn't enough information in the article for me to fully understand what's happening, but it does seem like it's being done in stunningly bad faith.

 

[Keef]

So a Lawyer for a Libertarian non-profit law firm in Indiana is suing the federal government because if he forgives his debt via the new program, he has to pay taxes on that forgiveness (because Indiana has decided to tax it on a state level) whereas he was hoping to run out the clock on an alternate forgiveness scheme that was tax free.

First - As far as I know, participation in the student loan forgiveness is not mandatory
Second - Indiana doesn't have to tax this forgiveness - they are only doing it to blow things up

There isn't enough information in the article for me to fully understand what's happening, but it does seem like it's being done in stunningly bad faith.

Libertarians don't seem to know how things actually work. They want things to work the way they want things to work which is why they're always pissed off, because nothing actually works that way. I too was always pissed off until I gave up that tripe.

I will say one thing - I kind wish they just gave a bunch of money to my bank account rather than relieved my loans because I have a much more dire need for money right now that I do years from now, at which point I'll probably have made $100,000+ for multiple years and be doing just fine. Right now I'm damn near broke and $20k off a loan that was going to last another 20+ years anyway doesn't fix that.

 

[MonoTonouS]

I'm 100% for it if I get paid all of what I paid during college with interest back, why should I have to pay for others who refused to work during college? I came from a poor family and busted my ass off to afford college while everyone else was out partying.
Oh, and to rub salt in the wound, none of this proposed forgiveness BS pays my law school loan which is in the low 80 k's ( I got a scholarship due to my high LSAT score, and refused to list race just so no one would hold that against me) !
Not a penny should be forgiven, but I also believe with all my heart they shouldn't put interest on the loans, that's what makes these loans so predatory, you owe 40 but end up 70-80 k in the hole. Interest should only be charged when people fail to pay the loans back ( literally 20-dollar minimum payments).
Straight-up forgiveness truly rewards the scummiest people, I know a lot of folks who refuse to pay their loans because they MAY be forgiven, and behold they were to a degree rewarded for this BS while people who were paying them to get nothing.
At the very least I want tax credits or something to be given to folks who did pay, it's simply NOT fair we paid, were responsible, diligent, and to a degree sacrificed ourselves to be this way, and get nothing from it.
But I know I'm gonna get so white euro telling me I'm privileged when I'm half Hispanic / native American suffering from dyslexia in a field that does not tolerate typos.
So go ahead, justify f'ng over a bunch of people who did the right thing, seems a lot like what them dead whites did to my dead ancestors with them land treaties changing up the deal last second screwing good intentioned folks over. Justice and equality my booty.

 

[Exorcet]

I'm 100% for it if I get paid all of what I paid during college with interest back, why should I have to pay for others who refused to work during college?

Debt isn't automatically a result of irresponsibility. Even the most diligent person could have debt issues if they happen to be hit hard by bad luck. This obviously isn't about repaying people who refused to work. If it was, what would the point be? Money would be handed out to people who likely would not become productive from it. I know that people like to scrutinize the government and its spending (I'm one of them) but it at least tries to create programs like this for a reason.

Not a penny should be forgiven, but I also believe with all my heart they shouldn't put interest on the loans, that's what makes these loans so predatory, you owe 40 but end up 70-80 k in the hole. Interest should only be charged when people fail to pay the loans back ( literally 20-dollar minimum payments).

I don't understand this either. Interest makes complete sense. It's an incentive to give out a loan in the first place and makes it a win win for all parties potentially. The issue with it is that sometimes people can't pay back even the principle, let alone the interest. Charging them and only them makes no sense. They can't make the payment. A better idea would be to collect interest from the successful borrowers and use some of it as a safety net to cover the people who can't pay.

Straight-up forgiveness truly rewards the scummiest people, I know a lot of folks who refuse to pay their loans because they MAY be forgiven, and behold they were to a degree rewarded for this BS while people who were paying them to get nothing.

Certainly people may try to take advantage of it, but I don't really see anyone signing up for a university years ago, doing the bare minimum for 4 or whatever years, and then betting on their loans vanishing sometime in the future. What makes you so sure that these are the people benefiting?

At the very least I want tax credits or something to be given to folks who did pay, it's simply NOT fair we paid, were responsible, diligent, and to a degree sacrificed ourselves to be this way, and get nothing from it.

Isn't this contradictory to your stance? I paid my loans in full many years ago, and I prioritized those payments over everything except food and shelter. I basically existed to repay loans. I'm glad that I'm not receiving any forgiveness because I believe it's no one's business but mine how much debt I'm in. If you think it's right for you to get a tax break, what's the problem with loan forgiveness?

 

[McLaren]

I'm 100% for it if I get paid all of what I paid during college with interest back, why should I have to pay for others who refused to work during college? I came from a poor family and busted my ass off to afford college while everyone else was out partying.
Oh, and to rub salt in the wound, none of this proposed forgiveness BS pays my law school loan which is in the low 80 k's ( I got a scholarship due to my high LSAT score, and refused to list race just so no one would hold that against me) !
Not a penny should be forgiven, but I also believe with all my heart they shouldn't put interest on the loans, that's what makes these loans so predatory, you owe 40 but end up 70-80 k in the hole. Interest should only be charged when people fail to pay the loans back ( literally 20-dollar minimum payments).
Straight-up forgiveness truly rewards the scummiest people, I know a lot of folks who refuse to pay their loans because they MAY be forgiven, and behold they were to a degree rewarded for this BS while people who were paying them to get nothing.
At the very least I want tax credits or something to be given to folks who did pay, it's simply NOT fair we paid, were responsible, diligent, and to a degree sacrificed ourselves to be this way, and get nothing from it.
But I know I'm gonna get so white euro telling me I'm privileged when I'm half Hispanic / native American suffering from dyslexia in a field that does not tolerate typos.
So go ahead, justify f'ng over a bunch of people who did the right thing, seems a lot like what them dead whites did to my dead ancestors with them land treaties changing up the deal last second screwing good intentioned folks over. Justice and equality my booty.

It's bizarre how you recognized the real issue w/ student loans, yet choose to be just jealous a younger generation is getting a benefit towards choosing a higher education.

 

[MonoTonouS]

It's bizarre how you recognized the real issue w/ student loans, yet choose to be just jealous a younger generation is getting a benefit towards choosing a higher education.

I'm 25 , try harder .

Debt isn't automatically a result of irresponsibility. Even the most diligent person could have debt issues if they happen to be hit hard by bad luck. This obviously isn't about repaying people who refused to work. If it was, what would the point be? Money would be handed out to people who likely would not become productive from it. I know that people like to scrutinize the government and its spending (I'm one of them) but it at least tries to create programs like this for a reason.

I don't understand this either. Interest makes complete sense. It's an incentive to give out a loan in the first place and makes it a win win for all parties potentially. The issue with it is that sometimes people can't pay back even the principle, let alone the interest. Charging them and only them makes no sense. They can't make the payment. A better idea would be to collect interest from the successful borrowers and use some of it as a safety net to cover the people who can't pay.

Certainly people may try to take advantage of it, but I don't really see anyone signing up for a university years ago, doing the bare minimum for 4 or whatever years, and then betting on their loans vanishing sometime in the future. What makes you so sure that these are the people benefiting?

Isn't this contradictory to your stance? I paid my loans in full many years ago, and I prioritized those payments over everything except food and shelter. I basically existed to repay loans. I'm glad that I'm not receiving any forgiveness because I believe it's no one's business but mine how much debt I'm in. If you think it's right for you to get a tax break, what's the problem with loan forgiveness?

Because I paid my loans and will see a tax hike vs the person who did not pay at all , I pay twice they pay once. No one is asking for a tax break for people who did pay. Also not being able to pay your student loan is 100% irresponsability , you CHOSE to go to college! The whole you don't go to college or you are poor thing is some BS Too. My BA is worthless more or less.
Your stupid idea is once again to punish people who do pay to cover for those who choose not to pay. Explain to me how it's fair a poor person like me paid but some one who grew up middle class and doesn't pay gets a free ride. Pay your fair share.

Also as for the interest . These loans are not unpayable , they are a average car bill note but have predatory interest . They go from affordable to unafordable real quick .

 

[McLaren]

I'm 25 , try harder .

Not sure I have to. Like the post before, you seem completely unable to focus on the key issue & would rather cry foul like you're a victim of mistreatment by this, esp. with this asinine thought you decided would get you ahead of the curve of criticism to your view.

But I know I'm gonna get so white euro telling me I'm privileged when I'm half Hispanic / native American suffering from dyslexia in a field that does not tolerate typos.

 

[MonoTonouS]

Not sure I have to. Like the post before, you seem completely unable to focus on the key issue & would rather cry foul like you're a victim of mistreatment by this, esp. with this asinine thought you decided would get you ahead of the curve of criticism to your view.

Sorry you're ethnic group has a long history of " changing the deal " , you want loan forgiveness pay me back my money , you can't just con people into paying and then go " you know what guy's it's all free now ". Like yeah you probably do feel good making young responsable college kids fork out 10 grand a year and then go " well you could have just not paid !" and then make ignorant assumptions that A . I was rich B. I'm old so I paid peanuts for college C. That I'm against free college or loan forgiveness D. That I'm somehow jellous .

If you are going to forgive loans , forgive them retroactivley too , federal loans have only been a thing for 20 ish years.