• mwguy@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    40
    ·
    11 months ago

    It’s fair to also blame Biden. He gave up the ability to further push back student loan payments for some concessions to keep the government open.

    • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      The 20k would have forgiven roughly 400 bil in loans. When that was shot down, Bidens admin kept quietly forgiven 5bil here, 8 bil there, which has now risen to 136bil and counting.

      It’s not the 400bil we hoped for, but 136bil forgiven is far, far more than any admin has ever done to relieve student loan debt.

      That doesnt even take into account how they doubled the minimum income limits that affect how much you have to repay on an income based plan, given a complete and free exit out of default, zero interest while making payments, retoractivly approved people who should have had them forgiven, on and on. They fixed so many bullshit aspects of repaying the debt and have gotten basically zero credit for it because its complicated and not sexy like “20k!”

      Read the fuck up on what good they have done and i think you’ll be suprised.

      • mwguy@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        Read the fuck up on what good they have done and i think you’ll be suprised.

        I understand what they’ve done. But Biden didn’t promise to “do something.” He promised broad forgiveness. And it was clear that many Dems were going to hold him to it. He shouldn’t be surprised he’s not getting credit for half measures, especially when he had the power to keep student loans deferred.

        • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Biden did not promise broad forgiveness on the campaign trail, he said he was open to it. He made no promise at all, much to the irritation of progressives. He stated that he agreed we should forgive 10k/person as suggested by several senators, but it wasn’t a campaign promise.

          What his admin did was 100% pushed for broad forgiveness anyway, in the only way possible. Since he couldn’t get it with a new law due to the GOP in the house and senate, he used the executive power he was granted by an earlier law, but the GOP supreme court found a flimsy excuse to stop it. How is that Biden failing?

          He did have the power to keep them deferred, but he had to give that up to prevent a ugly government shutdown. He made a concession, because in a divided government that is something you have to do to keep the government working. In basically every other regard he absolutely rolled McCarthy in that negotiation, preventing tons of fucked up thing the GOP wanted. It was a ugly choice, but the right one.

      • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        My loan that should have been forgiven was not I blame Biden because he just shurg and moved on like it never happen. Fuck him. If not for Trump or current gop runners he get my vote.

        • DoomBot5@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Ah yes, the horse blinders approach. Focus on on one issue and pretend the rest of them around you don’t exist.

    • TherouxSonfeir@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Wouldn’t that be blaming the republicans for making him give it up to keep the government open?

      • mwguy@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        Biden didn’t have to cave, he chose to. He said this thing that I said was a top priority for my campaign isn’t a top priority for my administration. And politically he’s going to pay a penalty to the faction of his coalition to whom forgiveness was a top priority.

        That’s what happens when you lie to gain support.

        • TherouxSonfeir@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Well, you’re not wrong. He could have allowed the country to shut down. And maybe he should have. He’s not playing hardball for sure.

      • Garbanzo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        52
        ·
        11 months ago

        The Constitution says we pay our bills, so Biden could have told Congress to get fucked and figure it out. He’d rather keep a generation of indentured servants though, so here we are.

        • TherouxSonfeir@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          27
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          The constitution says nothing about paying bills. I think this example of ignorance is the reason why you are blaming Biden. You have no idea what you’re talking about. Biden cannot overrule a Supreme Court decision, and therefore telling them to get fucked would just be words.

          The only people who want us to remain indentured are the Republicans, and the billionaires (usually the same thing).

          Please do not go around telling lies.

          • Garbanzo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            Nothing?

            Fourteenth Amendment, Section 4:

            The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.

            What the fuck is that then?

            • TherouxSonfeir@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              11 months ago

              This passage is from the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, specifically from Section 4. It addresses the issue of public debt, asserting that the debt of the United States government should be considered valid and unquestionable if it was authorized by law. This includes debts incurred for various governmental obligations, such as paying pensions and bounties related to services for suppressing insurrections or rebellions. This clause was primarily included in response to the debts incurred by the United States during the Civil War. It was meant to ensure that the debts the Union took on to finance its war efforts against the Confederacy would be honored, while simultaneously casting doubt on the legitimacy of the debts incurred by the Confederacy. Essentially, it was a guarantee that the United States would honor its financial obligations and a statement against the financial claims of the Confederacy.

              So, I’m not sure how this has anything to do with student debt, as it doesn’t relate to citizens at all. Or is this one of those Republican things where you interpret text to mean whatever you want it to mean, thump thump.

              • Garbanzo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                11 months ago

                It has nothing to do with student debt, it’s relevant to the Republicans trying to use not paying existing obligations as a negotiating tactic. The fact that you don’t get that demonstrates you have little to add to this discussion.

                • TherouxSonfeir@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  The post is about student debt. I assumed you were talking about the topic of the post. Are you just randomly blabbering?

                  Republicans using this to argue against forgiving student debt is ridiculous AS YOU SAID, it has nothing to do with student debt.

                  Are you handing me this win?

                  • Garbanzo@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    Handing you a win? Bro, you can’t even follow a thread with enough comprehension to grasp what’s being discussed.

        • sylver_dragon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          No, no it doesn’t. Feel free to quote the part you think does and I’ll be happy to explain why you are wrong. But, the US Constitution says nothing of the sort.

          • Garbanzo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Fourteenth Amendment, Section 4:

            The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.

            Your turn, explain how I’m wrong.

            Edit: Where’d you go Sylver?

            • everyone_said@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Agreeing that a debt exists and agreeing to pay back a debt are two different things. The budget doesn’t argue whether the debt exists, just how and when it will be payed back. It is the difference between “Yes, I owe you $100, you’ll get it back someday.”, and “Yes, I owe you $100, and I’ve budgeted to pay you $20 a week for the next 5 week until we’re square.”

              The consitution guarantees the first part, but doesn’t help much with the second. However, without the second part everything grinds to a halt.

              • Garbanzo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                It’s more like

                Yes, I owe you $100, and I’ve budgeted to pay you $20 a week for the next 5 week until we’re square, but I don’t like what you might do with that money so I’m closing up shop and going home, good luck with everything

                They can’t do that but Biden let them

          • Garbanzo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            11 months ago

            We tried (not really, lol) so you have to vote for us again so we can try some more (lol, we won’t really).

            -DNC

    • callouscomic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      And for this fiscal year, they STILL don’t have a federal budget, over a quarter of the way in.