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.
I honestly thought it was a better solution because it is just a loan. IF there were piles of cash or a bunch of zeros on a screen, my idea would have been at least worth a chat.
But it isn't a loan. It is taking an interest bearing vehicle and simply transferring the interest from the owner of the investment to the government. Basically, outlawing interest on investment.
Even if only 5 years, think for a moment what the government declaring that they will be essentially outlawing investment interest on large/rich portfolios would do to the stock market. Not just in the US, but global markets as well.
The moment they even declared their intent to consider thinking about possibly proposing to maybe ponder it, there would be a massive disruption as big investors sought to protect themselves. And given the government's glacial pace of actually implementing anything, by the time they got around to raiding the stock market cupboard, it would already be bare and picked clean. Now what?
You want free college, trade school and professional licensures? Cool, go tell all those union members that their industries are being nationalized because everyone deserves those products for free. Tell all those licensed trades that you are opening the flood gates to newly minted apprentices and journeymen, without all their guild requirements and fees...that should be a smooth political process.
Tell all those university admins who make like $600k annually to do nothing that their services now fall under the DoED and their salaries are part of the House/Senate budget committees. Yeah, they'll take it well.
You don’t need to get fancy about it. If it was really that important the gov would have the money.
But… just like healthcare the problem is we have corrupted for profit models already ripping off taxpayers. What do you think colleges would do if gov started paying it all? Price would go up even faster than it is…
Given things now better to address current costs. Best way to do that IMO is people wake up and realize there’s plenty of ways to make money without some over priced piece of paper.
Your approach requires a company to agree to lower their prices, which isn’t different than taking from what they have (not what I was proposing anyway, for the record).
But it isn't a loan. It is taking an interest bearing vehicle and simply transferring the interest from the owner of the investment to the government. Basically, outlawing interest on investment.
Even if only 5 years, think for a moment what the government declaring that they will be essentially outlawing investment interest on large/rich portfolios would do to the stock market. Not just in the US, but global markets as well.
The moment they even declared their intent to consider thinking about possibly proposing to maybe ponder it, there would be a massive disruption as big investors sought to protect themselves. And given the government's glacial pace of actually implementing anything, by the time they got around to raiding the stock market cupboard, it would already be bare and picked clean. Now what?
IF
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian
You want free college, trade school and professional licensures? Cool, go tell all those union members that their industries are being nationalized because everyone deserves those products for free. Tell all those licensed trades that you are opening the flood gates to newly minted apprentices and journeymen, without all their guild requirements and fees...that should be a smooth political process.
Tell all those university admins who make like $600k annually to do nothing that their services now fall under the DoED and their salaries are part of the House/Senate budget committees. Yeah, they'll take it well.
Your approach requires a company to agree to lower their prices, which isn’t different than taking from what they have (not what I was proposing anyway, for the record).
No.
When governments make payments for stuff for everyone; they negotiate the price. They do not just pay whatever the company wants. Theoretically anyways. US has issues with that.
That is a big difference between US and European healthcare and why an MRI here is thousands and there it is hundreds.
But this also goes back to the fallacy that a college education is expensive. It's not expensive because educators are expensive... Educators will work for cheap, they do work for cheap. it's all the admin ripping people off.
Let’s start with the financial illiteracy that makes one think they have more than a few billion amongst the whole lot of them in cash to begin with.
If the US wanted free education it could find it.
The problem is it would need constraints.
I personally like the idea the gov pays for half. That gives people skin in the game. And if the government wants the increased tax revenue from theoretical increased earnings it can help out as well.
But there also needs to be limits on tuition. The rate it currently goes up is asinine. I’d rank the inability to discharge the debt as a leading problem there.
you're not nearly as liberal as you pretend to be
I don't know whether the it's true "If the US wanted free education it could find it". Right now, that # is $1.5 Trillion. Could we do this mythical $75B a year the OP suggests? Sure, that's a drop in the bucket.
Heck, we all already fund over $300B a year to US colleges/universities through Federal Pell grants and loans.
But the problem is, the Progressive Dems want NO constraints, as you rightfully put it. They don't want a "you pay for half". They want every $ of student loan debt wiped out.
First, thanks for being willing to participate in this thought experiment.
The thing is, when you have the kind of wealth that these top 40 wealthiest people have, it doesn't even mean anything anymore. We're not talking about millionaires. We are talking about the kind of money that humans can barely grasp.
Example:
If you had a million dollars and spent $1,000 a day, you would run out in 3 years.
If you had a billion dollars and spent $1,000 a day, you would run out in 2,740 years.
And all this money is not doing anything but just sitting there.
It's not a helpful comparison at all to suggest I liquidate 80% of my miniscule wealth to make a tiny difference in the world.
Regarding rate of return, since 1926, the average annual return for stocks has been 10%.
well, you need to go back to your google that you mentioned in the first post. All your "if you spent ..." is 99% meaningless.
Because somehow, you seem to believe these folks have it laying around in cash or liquid assets.
For a very basic example, let's say Bezos is "worth" $200B (though he's not per Friday's stock price). That's "all" in Amazon stock, and he'd pay a minimum 20% in taxes to sell it (capital gains). And then you have to *********r brain cells tight and consider - if Bezos sold 50% of all of Amazon ... would he be able to get Friday's stock price?
Bezos owns 54 million shares of Amazon. The average daily volume of shares traded is about 3MM shares.
Do you understand supply (his shares) vs demand (he has to sell them all NOW)?
in short, get rid of EVERY lofty ideal you have of "charging" the billionaires to educate everybody. The "government" is already responsible for doing this, K-12. Don't try some whacko Progressive/Socialist idea of wealth distribution/confiscation like the #Squad wants.
No, your car, your checking account, your bank account, your retirement account, the furnishings in your home, and the very clothes on your back are also assets.
Nothing is stopping you from setting up a 5 year $80K trust fund to pay for post secondary education for unknown, unrelated individuals.
How much is enough for these billionaires? They made their money off us using PayPal, Amazon etc. One would think they would be delighted to educate the masses. In the long run it's an investment.
The op is not suggesting depriving the richest of food, shelter and transportation to school the masses..
When my momma went to public school it stopped at 8th grade in her town. Anybody wanting high school had to pay for it. And in the olden days the rich paid higher taxes. Or donated libraries and performance halls.
I'd go back to the same taxes we had before Reagan.
...
Regarding rate of return, since 1926, the average annual return for stocks has been 10%.
PS - you've said you're dealing in 5 yr increments. Go look at the Dow - the "safest" of the indexes" - over 5 year periods.
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.
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.
