>

I don't know why people are pushing for the debt relief first. We need to totally reform the reason why people get into so much debt in the first place. Then fix the actual debt, or the colleges are just going to keep increasing the rates because hell it will just get written off anyway.
My school loans are paid off but I’m all about student loan forgiveness.  It’s not right to send young people into adulthood in crippling debt simply for getting educated.  
I’d much rather my tax money go toward helping people (and by extension, our country) than going into an already-bloated military budget or used to offset the loss of tax revenue from keeping billionaires rich.  Too many people don’t realize that raising the floor on the standard of living in this country makes life better for everyone - even if one specific policy doesn’t affect them directly.  Economics trickle up, not down. >

Why is the cause of the massive rise in tuition costs never addressed when we talk about the student loan crisis? College costs have increased at almost twice the rate of healthcare costs in the US. Instead of fighting about loan forgiveness, why aren't we demanding accountability from the institutions that are at the root of this mess? >

Exactly this! I'm also for loan forgiveness but for fuck sake tuition is raising at a rate detached from inflation and reality and no one is willing to blame the schools for anything.... Help the poor students struggling with debt, but do it while also fixing the system so FUTURE students don't also have the same problems. I don't understand sometimes >

They were included, they were just too dumb to realize.  What are all of those college kids going to do with that new disposable income now, put it in a mattress? Fuck no, they're going to buy things they need and want. That money goes back into the economy where people who make, and provide those goods and services are taxed on everything they do and buy then the money goes back into the government. >

Well. . . . that’s how benevolent capitalism ought to work, but if the proverbial 1% do not participate  in the “taxed on everything” then we end up in late stage capitalism sniping at student loan debtors as though individuals are responsible for species- & specifically corporate-driven climate change. >

regardless, the 1% skirting tax law is irrelevant 
Everyone in the 99% is taxed all the way down.  College kid buys a used car, there is tax on gas, sales (in many states), registration fees, inspection in some states.  Then the person the college kid bought the used car from buys a house and has it built, the carpenters, electricians, suppliers, etc all get paid and taxed - and they all buy things with that money.
Yes, it would be better for the 1% to pay their fair share, but it's not necessary for student loan forgiveness to pay dividends in the economy. >

I'm sure the two "plaintiffs" are being amply compensated by the billionaire sponsors of this suit. >

Conservatives whining about "responsibility" knowing full well they would be first in line for a handout >

They already were.  There was quite a. number of conservative politicians who had their PPP "loans" forgiven. >

That seems to be why a lot of people don't want benefits for the less fortunate. "I didn't have help so why do you get to have any? It builds character!"
Well, your character sucks. Maybe you wouldn't be so miserable if you did have help. >

It's not fair that they get 15k debt relief that they were essentially duped into getting when they were 17, when others have to fight tooth and nail to keep receiving their unemployment checks. >

And this is where Americans have lost their way. It's all me, me, me, and some more me nowadays. >

I mean it's also not fair now that I'm 40 and can afford my first home, that starter home prices in most cities have doubled, and a decent house in my area is 400-500k. My sister rjust bought her first home, 564,000$ and well over 3500$/month mortgage payment. 
I remember my parents buying a home 20 years ago for 120k, even 10 years ago 220k. Their home is now worth 720,000$ and I'm living in a damn apartment. They have a 1500$/month mortgage, while I'm paying over 2200$/month to rent a two bedroom. 
Doesn't mean I think everyone should have their houses taken away, ND no one should get a deal or assistance getting a house because I can't. 
I effing sucks, but that's the reality. If some people get help getting into homes and I can't, I'm not going to sue someone. >

Move away from the city. My home was half that and it's not a shack. There's home in my area that even cheaper, new builds. >

This really is the solution. Cities won't build because of nimbys, so we have to move elsewhere.
FWIW, I love it out here. >

So you're saying that those of us that worked our way through college in 6 or 8 years should have no opinion or thoughts on this matter?  You're an idiot.  Those that got loans thought they needed them to get to a better life.  Those that didn't still had a goal of having a better life.
The problem here is not those that got loans vs those that didn't.  The FUCKING PROBLEM here is the universally high cost of getting an education.  How about writing a story on the actual problem vice pitting the two sides against each other. >

Yeah I think there's a lot of people who aren't willing to admit this isn't a perfect program, even when there a lot of people who stand to benefit like me. >

We live in a system of political realities, and unfortunately one party is opposed to doing anything. If you wait for the perfect, it will never arrive. >

Agree.  But there should be equal priorities of lessening the debt owed by those that borrowed (or even eliminating it) and lowering the unacceptably high cost of college.  Doubt we'll ever see that.  But those priorities should exist as side by side continuous efforts. >

This program does that as well, fwiw. Again, it may not be in the manner you're looking for because we have to work with EOs, but it is there. >

I'm unaware of any politically organized effort to lessen the cost of college less the program Biden ran on to provide an Associates degree at a public college at no cost (which never ended up happening).  I'm confused why this can't happen.  It creates a more educated electorate.  It increases the GDP of the country as those getting an Associates degree would make far more money and subsequently pay far more in taxes.  It's a win across the board.  Yet we still don't have it. >

It can't directly subsidize tuition because that would require appropriations and Congress controls those. In this case that largely means working within the administration of the federal loan program. 
The program does work to lessen the burden on future borrowers by halving the required payments and income driven repayment plans. >

I'm generally not for cost caps.  But in this case there is no reasonable explanation for the consistently rising cost of college which is many times the pace of inflation for decades now.  
I appreciate the government working to provide lower cost loans, but this is just putting a band aid on the symptom (perhaps a large one as I read (somewhere)  - which is the overwhelming cost of a college education.
I think we need to deal with that directly as an institutional problem.  Perhaps even as a matter of National Security. >

The Child Tax Credit is unfair. I can't collect it because I don't have children. Guess I have to sue the federal government. >

So the most privileged among us, want their debts paid for by creating more inflation? And they want more money than what American's received as covid stimulus? 
That's ridiculous. Go pay your debts. >

"The most privileged among us" aren't the ones with student loan debt, I assure you. >

They most likely have a degree and tend to earn more than those without one, so yes, they would be more privileged than others. >

"Privileged" isn't the same thing as "most privileged," though. I don't disagree that those that are allowed to, and graduate from, college are privileged. >

You play you pay!  No debt relief! >

Then they have no standing so big deal 
I'm dubious about the relief myself but I'm not suing people over it.