'Biden's Education Department just wiped out $1.74 billion of student debt for 22,000 borrowers...'

[clearspira]

Abusing statutory authority to transfer the debt of people with relatively high paying, secure jobs to the general taxpayer. Yeah, great job.

Taxes don't fund federal spending. Read some Modern Monetary Theory.

That is more like Modern Magical Thinking.

However, if taxes do not fund federal spending then the federal tax code should be eliminated, as that is the only just argument to have federal taxes.

There are plenty of good reasons to have federal taxes. To incentivize or disincentivize certain practices is one. To keep a check on inflation is another.

If we want to pretend taxes fund federal spending, however, then can I ask what dog you have in the fight and exactly how you think it will materially affect you?

To incentivize behaviors is social engineering to justify theft. It also tends to create black and grey markets. It ultimately also results in police choking out a guy for doing things like selling loosie cigarettes.

I have a dog in that fight because I pay taxes, because other people and institutions paying taxes has an effect on their behavior that will have an effect the economy which has an effct on me.

So what is your magical alternative to taxes?

[CharlesPhipps]

The federal government cannot remove debt. All it can do is socialize it, if it even has the legal authority to do so.

That's fucking ridiculous because the debt is TO the federal government.

If I can say say to someone who owes me $20, "No, don't worry about it" then you're fucking right the federal government can about the loan program IT initiated.

And the federal government loaning money is stupid anyway. It should be giving.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

The federal government cannot remove debt. All it can do is socialize it, if it even has the legal authority to do so.

That's fucking ridiculous because the debt is TO the federal government.

If I can say say to someone who owes me $20, "No, don't worry about it" then you're fucking right the federal government can about the loan program IT initiated.

And the federal government loaning money is stupid anyway. It should be giving.

I’m fairly certain that federal loans use 3rd party financing to issue debt. By legal obligation, there is still a public financial liability in terms of money owed when the borrower has been relinquished of it.

[CharlesPhipps]

And as we've seen, it is possible for the Federal Government to end said liability. Which is parasitic on the very people that it is meant to help.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

And as we've seen, it is possible for the Federal Government to end said liability. Which is parasitic on the very people that it is meant to help.

Yes, by either raising taxes or by printing more money, both of which incur cost on the public.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Half of all politics is blind tribalism. Biden does this so it's good/bad, Trump does this so it's good/bad. That is just the way it is. You assume too much of the public if you think the country at large votes on policies or actions.

And that is the greatest weakness of democracy. It is a system that works only as well as the people whom vote in it.

Your the one assuming, and then you cite the assumption as evidence to prove your point right. If you want to die on this hill, and you honestly, really believe what you're saying, then you have to actually do more than just assert "people would be complaining if Trump did this".

Just about everyone with student loan debt will be estatic over this. People who care about them will be happy for them. That encompasses nearly an entire generation and their loved ones.

Heck, I'll even give you a case study. I wouldn't piss on Donald Trump if he caught fire, but I was happy about the stimulus check, although maybe "relieved" is the better word. I certainly wanted a bigger one, but I was glad to get it, and I didn't accuse Mr Drumpf of squandering federal money on vanity projects by doing so.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Abusing statutory authority to transfer the debt of people with relatively high paying, secure jobs to the general taxpayer. Yeah, great job.

Taxes don't fund federal spending. Read some Modern Monetary Theory.

That is more like Modern Magical Thinking.

However, if taxes do not fund federal spending then the federal tax code should be eliminated, as that is the only just argument to have federal taxes.

There are plenty of good reasons to have federal taxes. To incentivize or disincentivize certain practices is one. To keep a check on inflation is another.

If we want to pretend taxes fund federal spending, however, then can I ask what dog you have in the fight and exactly how you think it will materially affect you?

To incentivize behaviors is social engineering to justify theft. It also tends to create black and grey markets. It ultimately also results in police choking out a guy for doing things like selling loosie cigarettes.

I have a dog in that fight because I pay taxes, because other people and institutions paying taxes has an effect on their behavior that will have an effect the economy which has an effct on me.

Wow. You really went there, huh?

Taxes didn't cause police to murder a man for selling loosies. That was a little thing called police brutality.

What, you think if they shave the money it costs for public services and social programs they'll give you the extra hundred-something-odd dollars back? They'd just buy another umpteenth of a combat fax machine or a few more bullets that will be dumped directly into a river because the army doesn't need them.

[Mickey_Rat15]

Abusing statutory authority to transfer the debt of people with relatively high paying, secure jobs to the general taxpayer. Yeah, great job.

Taxes don't fund federal spending. Read some Modern Monetary Theory.

That is more like Modern Magical Thinking.

However, if taxes do not fund federal spending then the federal tax code should be eliminated, as that is the only just argument to have federal taxes.

There are plenty of good reasons to have federal taxes. To incentivize or disincentivize certain practices is one. To keep a check on inflation is another.

If we want to pretend taxes fund federal spending, however, then can I ask what dog you have in the fight and exactly how you think it will materially affect you?

To incentivize behaviors is social engineering to justify theft. It also tends to create black and grey markets. It ultimately also results in police choking out a guy for doing things like selling loosie cigarettes.

I have a dog in that fight because I pay taxes, because other people and institutions paying taxes has an effect on their behavior that will have an effect the economy which has an effct on me.

So what is your magical alternative to taxes?

Whatever mechanism Fuzzy thinks actually funds the federal government.

[Mickey_Rat15]

Abusing statutory authority to transfer the debt of people with relatively high paying, secure jobs to the general taxpayer. Yeah, great job.

Taxes don't fund federal spending. Read some Modern Monetary Theory.

That is more like Modern Magical Thinking.

However, if taxes do not fund federal spending then the federal tax code should be eliminated, as that is the only just argument to have federal taxes.

There are plenty of good reasons to have federal taxes. To incentivize or disincentivize certain practices is one. To keep a check on inflation is another.

If we want to pretend taxes fund federal spending, however, then can I ask what dog you have in the fight and exactly how you think it will materially affect you?

To incentivize behaviors is social engineering to justify theft. It also tends to create black and grey markets. It ultimately also results in police choking out a guy for doing things like selling loosie cigarettes.

I have a dog in that fight because I pay taxes, because other people and institutions paying taxes has an effect on their behavior that will have an effect the economy which has an effct on me.

Wow. You really went there, huh?

Taxes didn't cause police to murder a man for selling loosies. That was a little thing called police brutality.

What, you think if they shave the money it costs for public services and social programs they'll give you the extra hundred-something-odd dollars back? They'd just buy another umpteenth of a combat fax machine or a few more bullets that will be dumped directly into a river because the army doesn't need them.

The police were enforcing compliance with the punitive vice taxes on cigarettes in New York when they killed Eric Garner. When you create a law against something you give law enforcement a license to use violence against people, even lethal violence to enforce that law. Which is why you do not use the law frivolously and ought to be damned sure whatever goal you are trying to accomplish is worth potentially getting someone killed over it.

[CharlesPhipps]

And as we've seen, it is possible for the Federal Government to end said liability. Which is parasitic on the very people that it is meant to help.

Yes, by either raising taxes or by printing more money, both of which incur cost on the public.

Or, you know, saying the people don't owe money which Biden has done in tiny amounts but could do in much-much more.

Like I said, the vast majority of money is owed to the government who has been imposing ridiculous punitive fees.