Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Stop calling it student loan forgiveness and call it what it is, student lifestyle forgiveness. Majority of those loans are from students deciding to live alone or having roommates, living their “best college days” vs studying, “studying” abroad or close to home, etc etc etc. I have younger friends in dental school with loans that goes out and eat drinks trips more than someone like me with a solid career. They live like money is free.
Yes, there are extreme cases that would warrant consideration for bankruptcy.
For example, if someone’s business fails and is $200,000 in the red, they wouldn’t have to keep making payments if they filed bankruptcy long after the business was dead.
If someone fails their degree and doesn’t have the earnings boost, and all the cost, or never landed in their feild, how long is sufficient to punish someone? It could easily be reviewed by a financial expert or bankruptcy attorney to determine when people need relief just like they do in other situations.
Then let them make their case for relief before a bankruptcy court judge. If someone has a PhD in typewriter maintenance at a $500k price tag, and they're living on disability, and there's literally no way of paying off their loans, then maybe they have a case.
Like I said before, if they're going to blanket forgive X in student loans, I want X off my mortgage.
Then let them make their case for relief before a bankruptcy court judge. If someone has a PhD in typewriter maintenance at a $500k price tag, and they're living on disability, and there's literally no way of paying off their loans, then maybe they have a case.
Like I said before, if they're going to blanket forgive X in student loans, I want X off my mortgage.
What about renters?
Or people who went to trade school?
I agree that blanket forgiveness is wrong, however all policy has winners and losers. When some get breaks for kids, do you “demand” more as well?
Straight up cash and/or tax credit. Everyone should get something or no one should get anything. Same thing with paying taxes. Everyone should pay something or no one should pay anything. None of this shift the entire tax burden on some people crap.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thatsright19
Or people who went to trade school?
See above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thatsright19
I agree that blanket forgiveness is wrong, however all policy has winners and losers. When some get breaks for kids, do you “demand” more as well?
Yes. If parents get breaks for kids, I want a break of equivalent value. Otherwise, no one should get any breaks of any kind and taxes should be cut across the board.
Straight up cash and/or tax credit. Everyone should get something or no one should get anything. Same thing with paying taxes. Everyone should pay something or no one should pay anything. None of this shift the entire tax burden on some people crap.
See above.
Yes. If parents get breaks for kids, I want a break of equivalent value. Otherwise, no one should get any breaks of any kind and taxes should be cut across the board.
Parents don't get a tax break on kids just because. Kids are expensive and child labor laws prevent me from sending my child to work to recoup some of those expenses. The tax relief on parents is necessary and someone without children should not be entitle to the benefit as they have only themselves as dependents.
At a minimum you should be able to understand that parents have it pretty hard and the minimal tax break they get is well deserved. Moral obligations aside, you should understand that if the government won't allow me to send my kid to work then I should be able to write off the expenses that I incur due to having said child. It's no different than if the government shut down a business due to COVID and gave them PPP loans to cover payroll while they are out of operation.
Parents don't get a tax break on kids just because. Kids are expensive and child labor laws prevent me from sending my child to work to recoup some of those expenses. The tax relief on parents is necessary and someone without children should not be entitle to the benefit as they have only themselves as dependents.
I disagree. Why should someone with children be able to benefit then? What makes them deserving of anyone else's money?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGuy2.5
At a minimum you should be able to understand that parents have it pretty hard and the minimal tax break they get is well deserved. Moral obligations aside, you should understand that if the government won't allow me to send my kid to work then I should be able to write off the expenses that I incur due to having said child.
Yes, kids are expensive. And No, I don't care what tax writeoffs you get as long as 1) MY taxes don't go up to make up for the loss in government revenue (it does), and 2) I get some sort of benefit that is equivalent in value (I don't). And, if you're relying on tax breaks to fund the cost of raising your children, No, you can't afford them.
Perhaps people would have more money to put towards raising their kids if taxes were cut by 50% across the board instead of robbing a segment of the population blind to subsidize people's kids.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGuy2.5
It's no different than if the government shut down a business due to COVID and gave them PPP loans to cover payroll while they are out of operation.
Or....the government could stay out of people's business and NOT forcibly shut businesses down.
Last edited by albert648; 03-02-2022 at 04:34 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.